…Lots of noise out there…Take a side and speak your piece. That’s our right. But keep it civil.
vsmith
If Amtrak is allowed by the government to run out of cash, which is guaranteed to happen if 550 M is the funding, all operations nationwide will shut down. That is what happens to any company when they no longer have the ca***o make a payroll. The authorizing sub-committee makes it sound as if the $550 million can be allocated to specific trains such as the NEC operation and regionals-Those that have a small operating profit or a very small loss. That can not be done without some very big changes in the law. For example, the $550 M would not be sufficient to pay the severance costs for the workers layed off. The only way that the severance expense might be avoided, would be for congress to pass some sort of law that would retroactively make the severance agreements null and void. It would be that, shut down with bankruptcy, or, when pigs fly, the unoin gives up the severance.
That is just one of many legal financial obligations on Amtrak. In fact, I believe it has been estimated that such obligations would be around the $10 billion, Of course the government could renig on their promises. The current administration problem wouldn’t have any problem with that.
NO COMMENT!
Redirect some of the Gas Taxes we Pay for Gas say 5 or 10 cent to Amtrak , Congress wanted to do that 6 or 7 years ago give Amtrak 2 cent of that tax, but didn’t pass with red tape in congress.
The american public is far to interested in Michael Jackson and the late Scott Peterson trial to worry about Amtrak, Iraq, or anything important
Okay, here’s the solution: Give Amtrak’s assets and rights of passage onto the proprietary rail network to the highest bidder. If no one bids for it, then give it away to the first person who wants it, with the caveat that they must provide regular passenger service. Allow them to haul anything they want in addition to passengers, and let them set their own routes and schedules. Let them hire and fire whomever they want, and let them set their own wages. Let the severence package go unfunded, it’s just a form of blackmail intended to keep Amtrak hoisted onto the taxpayers.
Then we’ll see who really supports rail passenger service.
Thank you , futuremodal! An original (even if tongue in cheek) solution!
Also, UPTRAIN. There are plenty of things to burn in hell for, but I doubt not supporting amtrak is one of them…
mike
Whoa! Hold On! This is only a subcommittee vote. The House Appropriations has to vote on Amtrak’s appropriations, and then it goes to the House floor. The corresponding Senate committees and the full Senate also have to act on Amtrak’s appropriation. Then the differences (if any) in the House and the Senate appropriations have to be reconciled before a final bill is enacted, and sent to the President.
Anything can happen between time an appropriations subcommittee acts and a final bill is produced. Chances are Amtrak might end up with more than$550M, but it won’t get the $1.8 B it requested.
Let’s face it Amtrak must make cuts. While Amtrak serves cities or towns with little or no air or even bus service, how many people are involved? I am sure there must be a cheaper way to find public transportation for them, and that is called the BUS!
Another problem with many of Amtrak’s long distance trains is there might only be enough business forone train a day each way on each route. so they are not convenient. They often leave or arrive in major cities in the middle of the night or in the wee hours of the morning, and the Sunset Limited eastbound or westbound into or out of San Antonio, TX is one example. Or some trains like the Cardinal, and the Sunset Limited might only run three days a week.
Most of the Amereican Public could care less about passenger rail service. If they cared, or if they felt it was important, more people would be riding trains. The public is more concerned about the more important contemporary issues such as Social Security reform, the high cost of medical care, (including prescription drugs), the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and tererorism, to name a few.
It’s easy to understand why they don’t want to fund Amtrak. Bush’s buddies aren’t getting big contracts where they can overcharge the government and rip off the American people. Just another example of the short sighted or “don’t give a crap about the little guy” attitude that is pervading Washington since this last November.
Besides, Halliburton doesn’t want to run Amtrak.
What the heck is wrong with thease minions of stupidity? Do thease folk actually think about the big picture or do they just think about opinion polls, hunting lodges and other shallow, self-serving like aspects of their worthless job?
Really serving ALL the voters are they?
What is their idea of alternative transportation within short distance. They are quick to complain about gridlock, smog and other pollution from autos and yet they do crap like this. Who wants to take a plane between Philadelphia to Washington? Is the plane more enjoyable then the Sunset Limited?
Bunch of Gomers with ties and bleeding hearts if you ask me.
Cool …another blast the government/Bush/Cheney/Congress thread…don’t get enough of these here at all. Blah blah blah Bush…blah blah blah Cheney…Blah blah blah Congress…
Lets go ahead and fund Amboat also. It’s efficient slow vacation …uhh I mean transportation. Other than high density cooridors…NEC, CA, etc…where it is a viable means of efficient transportation, it is a luxury. It doens’t move large masses of folks across country in less than a day. It has no intrinsic national security value to move men and material. If at such time that the cost of fuel becomes so expensive that RRs find they can make money by getting back in the passenger business (that is people want to spend a week to get from LA to NY, see Aunt Millie for a day and the get back on the train to go home) then they’ll do it.
and just a couple of more points for the poli-sci majors out there…
1…I’m not sure that all of the voters can be satisfied all the time…that is the unfortunate reality of the democratic experiment.
- It is a sub-committee not the floor, as mentioned above…
Is Amtrak worth saving? With a heavy heart I vote no…pull the plug. If efficient high speed rail serving a wider market and extended cooridors is the dream, then let this patient die and focus on a system that is seperated from the freight carriers who are trying to be profitable and actually do have a role in the economy. If the need/desire is there it will come. But it has to be a REALISTIC alternative to airlines, not a dream to return to the days of named trains and Pullmans…
Puleeze dont be dragging medical costs and other things into this thread… Those costs are so high to the individual family, it is unlikely that they will be traveling on a passenger train.
People the Polls 70% of the Amerecian Public wants Amtrak around here in US. Thats alot of people 70%. Plus Bus Service is going down hill for Years Now. GreyHound Cuting alot this year 150 to 200 stops in Jan of 2005. We have Amtrak, Airplanes, and Cars. We need Amtrak more than ever before.
Great News! Another $40 Billion for the “war” effort. Hmmmmm…maybe a real railroad could have been placed into service had we focused more on the USA and not “over there”. I saw a bumper sticker the other day on a car that read:
“When Clinton Lied, No Body Died”
Outside of the northeast corridor, regarding some of the posts here, the lack of having rail service, or, poor service, what is the real bottom line for those situations? Is it because of a lack of funding, no public interest, or, what?
We can fund everything else outside of the USA, but, lets go ahead and let our national rail trains die, along with our health care, retirements, jobs, etc., etc. Kind of brings back memories of lines from a song David Bowie once sang:
“This is not America, sha, la, la la, a little piece of me, a little piece of you…” and that’s exactly what is happening. Slowly , but surely, a little piece of you keeps getting taken away. I read so far we, the USA, have spent over $200 Billion on the so called “war on terror”, and, how quickly that was approved. Money for this war, noooooo problem! Amtrak!!! No way! Wake up!!!
Ask a Serbian their views on that comment.
Dan, how can you always be the voice of common sense?
Rudy R. brings up a point that is important for me. IF Amtrak went where I want to go (it doesn’t), I’d have to load up and drive an hour and a half to San Antonio to catch a train in the middle of the night, IF it’s even close to being on schedule. And that’s not the most wonderful part of town to be in late at night.
Guys, I love watching Amtrak come by just like everyone else, but it’s just not viable transportation option for a lot of us who don’t live in the East or far West. As I’ve said before, I-10 runs about a mile from my house, and Amtrak runs about a block and a half from my house, but it doesn’t stop here so I can’t ride it anyway. So I end up going to I-10 and driving anywhere I want to go. Not necessarily because I want to, but it’s all I have.
I guess the point I’m trying to make is -look at this situation as it applies to you. If you live where you can ride the train and get to where you go, that’s great! It just doesn’t work for me.
mike
Lets not go there…I dont want to see this devolve into an aurgument over who’s worse the Shrub or Slick Willie, stick to the subject[V]
Plain and simple the general public voted with their dollars and their choice and move to air and highways for the majority of their transportation needs over 5 decades ago. Like most other things in life, things change, things get replaced by something better, faster, more convenient and what was once the norm fades away. Yes it is sad but other than a comparative handful who ride passenger trains any longer, long haul passenger trains became a novelty in American Society long ago, and have fallen out of public thought decades ago.
If enough people wanted to ride them there would be more service to more places with more frequency and there would be enough revenue from ticket sales to make government subsidization un-neccesary.
Lets fund the short haul high ridership density moved that come closer to breaking even without propping up by the taxpayer and let the rest die. It amazes me why this outrageous waste of public funds was not killed off 25 years ago.
What does it cost the U.S. tax payers when people fly on the airlines? Transportation is part of our infrastructure, period, and, regardless of the mode of transportation, we the tax payers pay for it. I really don’t know what the impact of eliminating the long distance trains would have for those who ride them. I know what the impact would be in the northeast.
And, yes, I know we’ll see it again here how “my tax dollars support Amtrak but it doesn’t serve me”. Well, how many plane rides “our” tax dollars spent have personally served you? I just think any form of mass transportation, especially fuel efficient (sorry, that’s electric-speak on the northeast), deserves funding.
I feel the airlines and highways deserve their fair share of funding, and, I also believe that all U.S. railroads should receive fair funding to maintain state of the art safety aspects for the public in whole.
As the newspapers have said, funding levels being proposed will only serve the northeast and California corridors, along with the high speed line in Niles, MI. That does keep a lot of drivers off of the roads and reduce gasoline consumption.
Just look at what happened the day Amtrack took all the Acela’s out of service and the disruptions that caused, can you imagine what will happen when the whole system goes down for good? CHAOS! . At $550M, thats what will happen because Amtrack is not structured to fund specific, individual lines. (see what Jeaton said above) Not to mention what happens to all the Amtrack employees nationwide, will the Goverment just say “Thanks, now get lost” ?
I still think a one day demonstration shut-down would be very educational to our Congress.