posted
Amtrak Long distance trains are in danger of being pulled off by the Bush Administration The date i have been given for the studies of what trains that are to be taken off is June 30th 2006 Then you will see the 180 day notices come out after that.
No, Amtrak Long Distance train or manned Amtrak station is safe from being pulled off or unmanned.
Now is the time to contact your elected officials and tell them to
Fund Amtrak
Keep all Long distance trains running
Keep all Manned Amtrak Ticket offices Staffed and opened
posted
What is the source of this rumor? A nearly identical rumor was circulating a couple years ago that had no basis in fact.
Given the administration's current poor standing on Capitol Hill, where Amtrak has fairly strong support among both parties, I doubt Mr. Bush is willing to further increase his political capital deficit.
posted
Hi, did you check the date? I assume you have 'April fools day' over there too? Mike in Australia.
Posts: 60 | From: Ballan, Victoria, Australia | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Show me the news release and the service-elimination petition. Such a change in service, from my understanding of the law, is within STB authority to grant or deny.
Can you? Or is this "blowing sunshine?"
Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
The hyperlink above is nothing more than a link to THE SAME BLOODY POST on amtrak unlimited.
Hard data? I think not.
-------------------- The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Front line managers and certain clerical employees got the word that the Board has approved the train-offs of multiple routes effective June 30. However, due to the "secret" nature of this agenda, the details of the plan will not be publicly announced.
-------------------- Matt Marderosian Director Of Save Our Trains Michigan www.saveourtrainsmichigan
posted
Like I said, this rumor is almost word for word identical to the one a couple years ago.
I might note that the most recent issue of Trains quotes David Laney as saying they are seriously looking at adding one or two LD routes.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
given the track record of the last few months, I find the proposed train-off's a lot more believable than the addition of LD routes.
It is also worth remembering that BNSF 1088 is an "insider" and in the couple of years I have been following his posts both here and elsewhere, he has never shown himself to be a scaremonger, nor an "April Fool" jokester.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
So is libel and slander. I have corresponded with this person elsewhere for a couple of years and have no reason to consider him a rumor-monger.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
i dont know. Bnsf might be right. I just have suspicion when people use anonymous sources to make statements. im not going to panic unless i hear specifics through the media.
Posts: 416 | From: St. Albans, Vermont | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is the thing it won't come out into the media this issue is to be done under the table until the last min to where it is to late to save the trains and stations.
-------------------- Matt Marderosian Director Of Save Our Trains Michigan www.saveourtrainsmichigan
posted
The following message is adapted from that I posted at another board. At that board, a Member noted:
As a taxpayer, I would love to see that black hole waste of taxpayer dollars put out its misery once and for all.
The "Black Hole' to which he refers is obviously Amtrak.
I'm not sure the issue is the maybe $300M a year the T/P's would save; but rather the LD's have had their 'fifteen minutes of fame' over Amtrak's soon to be 35 year life.
Even though there is enough demand to fill up 'one a day' with 'faces and fannies', the S-I and A-II equipment fleets are approaching the end of their economic life. The P-42's S-II's, and V's are all approaching a major shopping.
But the underlying reason the LD's should say "Adios' is that the track capacity on the Class Ones is needed for other purposes - that of course is to move the freight. As our economy has converted from one of making our own consumer goods, of which we continually want (not necessarily need) more and more, to one of "let Deng and Xiao do it', the need for railroad transportation has grown exponentially. There just plain isn't room to accomodate any train that often is required to move against the flow of traffic, move faster than other traffic on the line, and have to adhere to a schedule more demanding than required to move carload freight.
There is a need for passenger rail, but that need is within the Corridors, namely Northeast and to a lesser extent Southern California. Here trains move at speeds making them 'drive competitive' over lines predominately dedicated for their use. As such, they operate "more or less' on time.
I do not believe the current Bush administration 'reform' initiative is simply a blanket effort to "kill Amtrak". It is simply an effort to have, and maybe even expand, rail passenger service, whether operated by Amtrak or successor agencies, where it can make a meaningful contribution to the passenger tranport needs of a region.
Unfortunately a service handling a "planeload' a day and that can be targeted by opponents, whether founded or otherwise, as a "taxpayer funded land cruise for WOOF elitists' has outlived its day.
Sic transit gloria.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Unfortunately a service handling a "planeload' a day and that can be targeted by opponents, whether founded or otherwise, as a "taxpayer funded land cruise for WOOF elitists' has outlived its day.
I am always amazed at people who refer to this as a "Land Cruise". People -- Amtrak is NOT the American Orient Express !! I have to assume that those who make such statements A. - have not taken an Amtrak LD train in many, many years or B. Have watched too many PBS videos of American Orient Express (or smaller tourist trains) and assume that is what Amtrak is. Trust me -- no "elitist" would ride Amtrak under its current operating conditions. But many of us who can not drive long distances, or fly safely or comfortably because of age or medical restrictions will.
Posts: 460 | From: North Central CT | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is 1 other part of an e mail i have received.
My understanding is that this gentleman is looking for reasons to discontinue long distance trains and perhaps close some stations. Lets not give him reason for that. Please make certain everything is neat and clean and that you are in proper uniform - long sleeve white shirt and uniform slacks.
-------------------- Matt Marderosian Director Of Save Our Trains Michigan www.saveourtrainsmichigan
posted
What Bush may or may not want to do is one thing. What Bush can do is another. His party is struggling to retain a majority in the House and Senate come November, largely as a result of the failure of his policies. Why on Earth would Republicans in Congress, many of whom support Amtrak, willingly make their situation worse by going along with any such plans?
I might also note that Amtrak's FY budget request includes $438 million for long distance operations.
Page 2 makes reference to a review of LD services to "identify a route structure that makes sense for the future," which implies a market based approach to the LD network (sonething I have long advocated). Page 8 makes mention of improving performance and service on LD routes.
These, combined with Mr. Laney's comment about possibly adding routes doesn't sound like a company that is planning to eliminate LD trains. Being as these are a matter of public record, they would seem to have more cedibility. "Insider" rumors of a LD system shutdown have been spreading for years. NONE of them have proven to be true.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
My question on the fact that none of the "rumors of a LD system shutdown" have happened true because they were unfounded rumors or because the opposition raised by the news getting out caused the powers that be to back off? No political animal likes to get letters from unhappy constituients and as government programs go, Amtrak is peanuts. Keep it is an easy answer.
Think about the continued survival of totally useless if not counterporductive functions like the "National Endowment of the Arts". It continues to live despite providing absolutely no real benefit to anyone except those that manage to extort money from it because it has some noisy proponents.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I support the National Endowment of the Arts. I think it has lots of benefits, and I don't think it gets lots of money.
Posts: 2642 | From: upstate New York | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amtrak must continue with its LD service. Some changes might be needed, but they shouldn't include curtailing on board service. And yes, Sojourner, the National Endowment of the Arts is a VERY worthwhile organization to keep funding and to contribute to.
Posts: 498 | From: New Hope, PA, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I enjoy a symphony concert or a visit to an art gallery and I think that is a great benefit to the public and their culture. Of course I don't like the work of every artist they fund, especially some of the really controversial artists. Even though a few might "abuse" the funding we give them, though, I don't think that means the program isn't worthwhile.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: But the underlying reason the LD's should say "Adios' is that the track capacity on the Class Ones is needed for other purposes - that of course is to move the freight.[QUOTE]
I agree, the Class Is may need their increased freight capacity. I don't think that should come at the expense of us rail passengers who want expanded and improved intercity service.
On the question of whether long distance trains are economical or not, I think we passenger rail supporters could put that to rest. Compare the operation of one of these "money losing" train routes to what we pay to keep car passengers going on the interstates. Factor in gas, 41 cents per mile vehicle operating costs, insurance, accident costs, air/water/noise/light pollution, highway construction and maintenance, delays to truck traffic. Compare how much money per passenger is lost to all of these, versus how much is lost per passenger on a given long distance train. I think the LD trains would come out as more cost efficient than driving. But say they cost similar amounts per passenger. As long as we are spending billions to subsidize auto travel, I fail to see how subsidizing and expanding our puny Amtrak long distance is going to hurt us economically.
Posts: 144 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
LD trains not "drive competitive"? Let's cite one example: Chicago-Kansas City over BNSF's very heavily travelled freight route. This line is not on anyone's corridor list.
Amtrak's westbound run is given as 6:56. By comparison, Rand McNally lists the fastest route for driving (via Springfield and Hannibal) at 9:02.
No doubt there are other runs where Amtrak LD trains already are faster than driving.
-------------------- John Pawson Posts: 137 | From: Willow Grove, PA | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why fund the arts? The arts are a part of the culture of a country. You want ways to save money? How about starting with Congress. With every holiday they zip off home for 2 weeks to a month.We pay the transportation. Also paid for are the uselss junkets they take overseas complete with wives and staff. How about the pork barrel projects that are a constant. One example is the bridge to no where in Alaska. Then you have the president flying all over the country for political reasons. Who pays for all of this? We the tax payers. The airlines are subsidized by the gov't.Amtrak pays for its own people and stations. It seems to me that we should have the choice of what transportation we want to use and not be forced to fly ( if its available) or drive, What about the people in small towns where there is no air or bus transportation?
Posts: 1577 | From: virginia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 4020North: Well, I enjoy a symphony concert
So do I; I attend Chicago Symphony at both Orchestra Hall and Ravinia several times during the respective seasons.
quote:Originally posted by 4020 North: I agree, the Class Is may need their increased freight capacity. I don't think that should come at the expense of us rail passengers who want expanded and improved intercity service.
I'm pleased that we both note that the railroad's mission is first and foremost to move the freight - lest we note, that is where 98% of the "copper in the hopper" comes from. If railroads are "obligated', be such either arising from a "pro bono publico' vision or by the law of the land and the freight is to be moved, then there must be additional track capacity. It is unfair and contrary to our capitalist doctrine to expect investors to take a stake in a project that has an expectation of nothing other than breaking even.
If public funds were to be expended so that railroads could expeditiously move passenger trains in addition to the existing levels of freight traffic, then it is "all bets off' from my earlier statement that LD's maybe cost the T/P's "chump change' in the rage of $300M per year. They would fast become absurdly expensive and Hertiage Foundation's favorite AmDoc (some may say AmQuack around here), Dr. Ronald Utt, PHD, would have many more unrefutable criticisms to direct at Amtrak than at present.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
here is my response: 1) How much money is appropriated for the Nat'l endowment of the arts? answer: I don't know - but I'm sure numbers are out there somewhere (and I'm guessin' it's peanuts)
2. What are its benefits - just a few examples will suffice? answer: one example- it funds summer music programs for children ( I witnesses a concert by said children a couple of Summers ago in smalll town, New Mexico)
3. Why should this be a federal government function? answer: because the majority of Americans when asked- ant and support this sort of thing- despite the myth perpetuated by it's detractors that the Nat'l endowment for the Arts is some sort of institution run by lesbian-witch-pornographers-white slavers, etc....btw-there are plenty of ridiculous (and unpopular) programs that we as taxpayers fund (don't get me started on this multi-billion fiasco someone got us into half way around the world-.
Posts: 23 | From: dallas, tx USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dfwguy: here is my response: 1) How much money is appropriated for the Nat'l endowment of the arts? answer: I don't know - but I'm sure numbers are out there somewhere (and I'm guessin' it's peanuts)
January 29, 2004
Washington, D.C. - Mrs. Laura Bush announced today that President George W. Bush is requesting an $18 million budget increase for the National Endowment for the Arts to fund a major new initiative, American Masterpieces: Three Centuries of Artistic Genius. This ambitious three-year program will combine arts presentations with education programming to introduce Americans to the best of their cultural and artistic legacy. American Masterpieces will sponsor presentations of the great American works across all art forms, and will reach large and small communities in all 50 states.
The President's request would raise the Arts Endowment's budget by $18 million from $121 million in FY 2004 to $139.4 million, the largest increase since 1984. Fifteen million dollars of the increase would fund the American Masterpieces initiative, with the remainder going toward other grantmaking and administrative costs. The new budget also includes more than $53 million in support for state arts organizations and underserved local communities.
Posts: 149 | From: Joliet, IL USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Posted by Gilbert B Norman:there must be additional track capacity.
I also would like to see freight railroads free to operate as efficiently as possible. Passenger transportation is a different animal. It does not seem to make a profit; therefore, it is supported by the government. For better or for worse, our whole passenger transport system relies heavily on government subsidies. Alongside free enterprise, government spending on public welfare is also an established part of American tradition, and I submit that long distance trains should not be excluded.
It will require substantial capital funding to improve Amtrak without hurting the freight railroads, but to my view that expenditure is warranted, and doesn't give an excuse for calling long distance trains inefficient or money losers.
Posts: 144 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
