Amtrak President David Gunn yesterday said that President Bush's proposal to give Amtrak just over half what it is seeking in federal subsidies would shut the railroad down just as more passengers are taking the train, according to a report by the Associated Press.
For fiscal year 2005 starting in October, Amtrak asked for $1.798 billion, or about $300 million more than it had available for 2004. The new request includes a $570 million operating subsidy, repayment of a $100 million government loan, and $791 million for replacing rails and ties, repairing bridges, and overhauling major equipment. Bush proposed giving the railroad $900 million in the new budget year.
"The president's number is a shutdown number," Gunn said during a meeting with reporters.
The Bush administration acknowledged Amtrak's improved performance but said more change was needed. "The administration would support funding of up to $1.4 billion if the significant reforms included in the president's plan were enacted," a statement said.
Gunn, who took over Amtrak at Amtrak 20 months ago, said he expects more than 25 million will ride Amtrak during the current budget year, which began last Oct. 1, breaking the previous record of 24 million.
well gang what is your reaction?
panamaclipper Member # 3058
posted
As has been pointed out, it's Congress that provides the cash. And I'm betting they won't kill Amtrak in a federal election year. But I also don't think he'll get the full amount of money he's asking for. It will be somewhere in between.
M190 Member # 3009
posted
I gotta say I like ole Mr. Gunn, he tells it like it is. Every time I hear this budget thing with Amtrak all I can do is shake my head and maybe smack myself in the forehead. As if any president's administration knows more about running a railroad than a railroader!! They want to see more improvement but with no extra funding?!? That's just plain ridiculous whether you're talking passenger trains or Mr. Toy's movie theatre. Don't forget folks, it's the airline and highway (auto industry) lobbies who are strangling Amtrak via pet congress-people. We have the best elected representation money can buy! Maybe Mr. Gunn should change his name to Preston Tucker.
CG96 Member # 1408
posted
I've written it before, and now I'll write it again: if you want there to be passenger rail service in the United States, you need to write your member of Congress. It is Congress that has final say over the budget, and many members of Congress are unaware of how the transport fnding is skewed against passenger rail, and skewed towrds highways (via bonds and a Trust Fund) and air (via the Essential Air Services subsidy, a Trust Fund, and several bonds and matching funds and no property taxes on airports).
Amtrak will get funding, its just that Mr. Gunn (and NARP, and others) have their work cut out for them, as usual.
norse62 Member # 2490
posted
I wrote Senator Grassley a letter requesting adequate funding for Amtrak after a Zephyr trip in 2003.
He responded back with a three page letter expressing support for the Midwest Rail Initiative, and looking at ways to improve funding for Amtrak consistently.
He was nothing but positive.FYI.Class guy
sutton Member # 1612
posted
I've got a question: Does Bush have the authority to veto a congressional spending bill for Amtrak?
Even if 'no', I'm worried that unless some momentum is built, Amtrak will have to close in 2005. Perhaps AFTER the election, or in early 2006 at the latest.
One thing is very clear: there is only so much money to go around. The nation needs to make a choice: it's going to support Bush in fighting foreign wars OR develop our own country. No way are you going to have both!
Think about that when you vote!
Mike Smith Member # 447
posted
Sutton, there are numerous Senators and Congressmen that would not allow Amtrak to die. They may starve it, but taking Amtrak away would tick off 25 million people, and reduce the amount of funds going to their state/district.
The US Congress really doesn't want to do that.
Besides, running a near 500 billion deficit has not detered Congress or our President from spending money. What makes you think a billion dollars for Amtrak would make any difference?
posted