posted
OK volks, I'm sure all concerned know that a "bipartisan deal" has been reached in the Senate to appropriate $1T for infrastructure.
Now we are still a long, LONG, way from enacted legislation, but at least this means that two legislative branches, plus an executive, all want to see something in the $1T range enacted.
Mr. Pullman's oft noted around here 218+51+1 apparently will prevail.
The Times reports that if the T is enacted, Amtrak can expect to be looking at $66B, or 6.6%. No Fair Use quotation as the article only mentions this tangentially.
Now how does it get spent wisely?
I can only hope that the debacle of the Obama ARRA09 legislation is avoided, for so far as I'm concerned, the only tangible result is a rebuilt line (Alton) for the UP to access Chicago ("uh, not exactly" for a reincarnated Domeliner "City of St. Louis") - and paid for with funds allocated for passenger trains!!
Anything else? feed to throw in the trough for the Consultants.
I'm not sure if $66B, considering the pressures there will be to "spread it around", will be enough for the Gateway Tunnels, which to me is the top priority Amtrak infrastructure project.
But that is why we have a Forum to discuss all sides here with maturity and respect.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
"According to a 57-page GOP summary obtained by The Associated Press, the five-year spending package would be paid for by tapping $205 billion in unspent COVID-19 relief aid and $53 billion in unemployment insurance aid some states have halted. It also relies on economic growth to bring in $56 billion."
Still a 21-28% increase in corporate taxes?
Richard
Posts: 1909 | From: Santa Rosa | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Richard, I think all around here know I'm hardly the "World's Greatest AmFan" (someone's handle at another site), but I do hold that $66B could be well spent on improvements.
As I immediately noted, it's time to "finish the job" on the Alton and relay the double track - just as was there until the GM&O yanked it during '69. Perfected signalling and train dispatching will then enable the "twelve a day" @ 110mph IDOT once envisioned and UP to have their freight (containers and autos consigned to Global Intermodal @ Elwood).
Likewise, I hold that the IC should be redoubled (hope we're not playing Bridge; that can get expensive) Chicago to Edgewood (the freights diverge there to X the Ohio at "Padooky") to enable the "five a day" and 90mph that was there when I was at University of Illinois.
Now so far as the "Commonwealth of Train Lovers", I'm pretty sure they already had Federal (obtained during the Trump administration: WOW) and Local funding lined up for those projects. Long Bridge over the Potomac and and restoring triple track RF&P sound great; so would a reroute of all trains to serve Main Street, plus "do something about Ashland" (sorry, Mr. Palmland). So far as Westward expansion, Christianburg and VPI, "far enough".
All told my thoughts are tracks and signaling on the ground, and not consultants feeding at the trough.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Being overseas at the time (and with print Journal European Edition now extinct), I was unaware of this Journal editorial until today when a Letter by Messrs. Coscia and Flynn (Bill and Tony; no less) in response was printed:
Fair Use:
But here’s the rub: The bill also pours $16 billion into Amtrak’s national network, which is a financial sinkhole. Some 4.5 million riders in 2019 took Amtrak’s long-distance routes that traverse the country—about a third as many as in the Northeast Corridor. Many of them are travelers nostalgic for the days of sleeper cars as glamorized in classic films.
Low-trafficked routes through rural regions make it harder for Amtrak to increase intercity trains that generate a larger economic benefit. Yet the Senate bill would prohibit Amtrak from changing or reducing service on long-distance routes, no matter how few riders they draw or how much money they lose. Amtrak won’t be allowed to lay off workers on these routes.
If all this weren’t bad enough, the Senate bill would also require Amtrak to employ at least one ticket agent at each station where there were at least an average of 40 passengers per day in 2017. Passengers nowadays can buy tickets on Amtrak’s website or at station kiosks. Employing ticket agents sucks up money that could be used improving service.
Now I'd be concerned that Joe's Senate passed infrastructure legislation initiative, and for that matter his Presidency, are in considerable jeopardy, these concerns of the Journal could well be moot. The history of any Amtrak management attempting to make reasonable changes to the LD System, such as eliminating BOS-CHI through cars, making the "temporary COVID frequency reductions permanent, Simplified Dining, and initiating the Newton-Albuquerque busteetoot thereby enabling BNSF to remove 400 some miles of solely passenger train trackage - all get the "axe" by successive Congresses.
Finally volks, again I reiterate; while hardly "high up", "I was there on A-Day" and the consensus was that "they'd be gone in five years". But alas, how many other non-rail "temporary" programs enacted through the years have somehow lost sight of that word "temporary"?
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
