"Answering a reporter’s question about the future of Amtrak, Mineta said there is room for a national passenger train system in general -- and, specifically, the Cardinal -- if Congress passes the reform bill that the Bush administration proposed last year."
These idiots (and I have no better word for them) didn't even consult with Amtrak, the freight railroads or the states when they put together their plan, yet they expect all three agencies to carry it out without question. Just who appointed them dictators?
Frank in SBA
It's up to us to convince our congress critters to properly fund Amtrak.
The Bush team at least brought us a guy that knows his job. With Gunn we do have a man at the top of Amtrak that knows how to run a railroad. That certainly could not be said of Warrington. He was simply a bureaucratic kingdom builder. Multiple vice presidents of mushy thinking do not make anything run better. Ask any New Jersey Transit person who is in a position where he is unafraid to give an honest answer if they are better off with Warrington than they were before him.
It must be tough to be in congress, trying to keep your constituents happy so you can keep your job while not alienating the lobbyists who line your pockets and pave your career path.
quote:
Originally posted by M190:
...the Clinton administration was no better in dealing with Amtrak. For my buck, that is even wierder. I expect conservatives to go gunning for Amtrak as an "entitlement", but not the Dems.
I have a theory about this. Democrats support Amtrak in general, but they don't really understand the issues any better than the Republicans do. This leaves the Democrats unable to adequately defend Amtrak. Thus when a conservative bean counter comes at them with numbers that only show losses, the Democrats roll over and play dead so as not to be labeled as fiscally irresponsible.
This concludes my theory.
------------------
Sing to the tune of Humoresque:
Passengers will please refrain,
From flushing toilets while the train,
Is standing in the station,
I love you.
There are some rather strong supporters of Amtrak in the Republican Party. Several politicians understand that we will need rail transportation as our population grows and are willing to support rail travel and Amtrak.
Let's face the facts. A few Billion dollars in a 2.4 Trillion dollar ANNUAL(!!!) budget is rather small. Hell.... HUD as "misplaced" more money than that (HUD cannot find 4 billion dollars)
We need to hammer the need for rail in our growing population as a viable alternative to more concrete and more congested airways.
Write your congress critters; especially the ones that are anti-Amtrak!
All Congress has to do is just omit funding for Amtrak in the FY05 appropriation legislation for DOT.
I would pay careful attention to the House and Senate Transportation subcommittees of the respective Appropriations Committees.
John
------------------
The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations
quote:
Originally posted by mikesmith:
Mr Toy, your theory is full of holes.There are some rather strong supporters of Amtrak in the Republican Party.
The critical word here being "some." I was specaking in general, so I was not referring to any specific Republicans. Generally speaking, the vast majority of Amtrak's critics are Republicans. Yes, there are some Republicans who support Amtrak, and they are the few (the very few) who actually comprehend the issues. The rest don't have a clue, and they are the ones who are out to kill Amtrak.
There are also a few Democrats who are not friendly to Amtrak, such as Norman Mineta. But he is a minority among Democrats.
I'm not bashing Republicans or conservatives per se. But one cannot deny that the majority of Amtrak's critics are Republicans, and the majority of Republicans in Congress are critics of Amtrak.
------------------
Trust Jesus,Ride Amtrak.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A huge transportation construction bill -- deemed a critical election-year jobs bill by Republicans and Democrats -- cleared the House with a veto-proof margin on Friday, setting up a potential showdown with President Bush, who says it is too expensive.
The six-year $275 billion bill, which would fund construction and repairs of highways, bridges and transit systems, passed by a vote of 357 to 65.