House Rejects Cuts in Amtrak Budget Thank heavens the House bumped the Amtrak buget back up to $1.17 billion.
Posted by CoastStarlight99 (Member # 2734) on :
Yes, thank heaven...I hope Amtrak can truly find a way to reform itself so this same marygoround does not happen every year.
Posted by jgart56 (Member # 3968) on :
Hi All,
A regular reader who has decided to join.
Thank goodness for the news alert above. I had the feeling this was coming as I received a letter yesterday from the Speaker of the House (Dennis Hastert)...who is my congressional representative. In it he stated that he supported full funding for Amtrak (even though he would like to see some reform...he didn't mention what that would be though)and didn't want to see jobs lost, especially in Illinois.
My Wife said my jaw hit the floor while I was reading the letter. Now I can look forward to our vacation in September via Amtrak to Springfield, Ma and then on to New Hampshire by car!
By the way, I've hooked my jaw back on now.
Posted by Grandma Judy (Member # 3278) on :
I'm relieved, too. I'm hoarding my Guest Reward points for a trip next spring.
Posted by Pojon (Member # 3080) on :
VICTORY! The House members came to their senses! What a relief this good news is.
Posted by 20th Century (Member # 2196) on :
Good Grief......it definitely is a "mary"goround CoastStarlight. "Mistress Mary quite contrary." Thank goodness. I also hope Amtrak can reform itself. First, some employees (not all)should begin with a service oriented work ethic, courtesy, and consideration of their fellow hardworking employees as models for improvement. I do worry that the long distance routes are still at risk.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Oh well, looks like the "bullet has been dodged" for another Fiscal Year.
What remains unaddressed is that the Class Ones simply do not have the capacity to handle anybody's Long Distance trains; like it or not, that deliver scant economic value and are evidently quite disruptive to operations, ie freight, that butter the Class One bread.
I still think it is a case of "enjoy 'em while you got 'em".
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
I told you this would happen. Committees do not have the same power as the full House.
According to NARP, House members said they got a "loud and clear" message from constituents that Amtrak needs to be funded. Good work everyone.
Posted by JONATHON (Member # 2899) on :
Yay!!!
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
It ain't over yet. Rejoicing may be premature. It has still got to get through the senate and a signature. By the end it may be more or less, but it iis almost certain it will not be the same as now.
Posted by Robkno (Member # 3722) on :
quote:Originally posted by George Harris: It ain't over yet. Rejoicing may be premature. It has still got to get through the senate and a signature. By the end it may be more or less, but it iis almost certain it will not be the same as now.
That's true, George, but a lot of us felt like getting through the House would be the toughest hurdle. The Senate is perceived to be friendlier turf, with powerful leaders on both sides of the aisle being strongly pro-Amtrak. I would be shocked if the Senate reduces the House-approved appropriation by anything other than a most nominal amount. Hopefully, the House/Senate conference won't have much of a difference to split unless it INCREASES Amtrak funding to what might be a larger Senate amount. We'll see.
As for the President, I assume that any Amtrak funding that reaches the President's desk would be part of a larger appropriations bill on which a veto would be highly unlikely.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
Robknw:
Agreed. Hopefully the Senate will even increase the amount. But, things do have a habit of sneaking up and biting you in the butt when you least expect it.
I would love to see the congress decide that funding capacity related and passsenger related (read increase speed) imporvements on the long distance routes, even if low interest loands, was a legitimate function of interstate commmerce, but somehow I do not see it happening.
George
Posted by mikesmith (Member # 447) on :
Write your Senators and ask them to add $200 million to the $1.17 Billion as a suppliment for the repair of broken and damaged equipment/sleepers/coaches/diners at Beech Grove.
This weekend would be a good time to do that!
Posted by CoastStarlight99 (Member # 2734) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr. Toy: [QB] I told you this would happen. Committees do not have the same power as the full House.
Amen to that Mr. Toy, I am really glad the house has come to its senses...I was really worried.
All Aboard the LD trains folks!
Posted by vline (Member # 1132) on :
Clearly that Joe Knollenberg Republican from Michigan has no idea of the vital community service the Empire Builder performs on its journey across the northern states. Anyone care to send him a link on its importance & necessity for many of the isolated communities it serves? Mike in Australia.
Posted by B.T.Rider (Member # 3975) on :
CoastStarlighter99. Amtrak has no need to "reform." The service cannot be run at a profit. The railroads got out of the business 30 years ago because they said they couldn't make money in passengers.
No other country -- not even Canada -- operates its system at a profit. Britain is paying more to its "privatized" operators for lousy service than the government paid when it was government owned.
Amtrak needs more trains, routes, and services to provide service for Americans. You don't make a horse faster by cutting off a leg. You don't make a restaurant profitable by removing most of the tables. You don't make Amtrak profitable by removing routes and selling off assets. Simple economics. But hard for demagogues to understand.
Posted by jgart56 (Member # 3968) on :
Thanks B.T. Rider,
For the last paragraph...it makes a lot of sense.
I wonder when the last time was that some of these demagogues actually rode a train? Have any of them even been to the local station to see how many ride and ask why they ride?
Norman Mineta claims no-one rdies the LD Trains: He doesn't see the passenger lounges at Chicago Union Station when I ride in on Metra in the Mornings or leave in the Evenings. Amazing how many non-riders there are waiting to board the trains!
Posted by jgart56 (Member # 3968) on :
Sorry,
It should be "rides" in that last paragraph...my browser burped before I could correct it!
Posted by mikesmith (Member # 447) on :
jgart56; Mineta was at Beech Grove when he made his infamous statement. It's not his fault. He was staring at all those broken passenger cars and engines and made a typical bureaucratic assumption that nobody was riding those trains that go nowhere.
{Anyone have a better explanation?}
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
quote:Originally posted by B.T.Rider: Amtrak needs more trains, routes, and services to provide service for Americans. You don't make a horse faster by cutting off a leg. You don't make a restaurant profitable by removing most of the tables. You don't make Amtrak profitable by removing routes and selling off assets. Simple economics. But hard for demagogues to understand.
They SHOULD understand it. After all, they keep saying Amtrak should be run in a more businesslike manner. I'd like to ask them how many successful businesses they know of that make a profit by NOT selling their product.
Anyway, that's what I've been saying for years. What I find most disturbing are the railfans, particularly those in the Northeast, who are perfectly willing to sacrifice routes they don't use to save the ones they have, in order to apppease Amtrak's critics.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
quote:Originally posted by mikesmith: jgart56; Mineta was at Beech Grove when he made his infamous statement. It's not his fault. He was staring at all those broken passenger cars and engines and made a typical bureaucratic assumption that nobody was riding those trains that go nowhere.
{Anyone have a better explanation?}
LOL, Mike! It is as good an explanation as any I've heard. But clearly, Mineta didn't look as closely when he went to Chicago, for by then he already had his mind made up.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Anyway, that's what I've been saying for years. What I find most disturbing are the railfans, particularly those in the Northeast, who are perfectly willing to sacrifice routes they don't use to save the ones they have, in order to apppease Amtrak's critics. [/QB]
Absolutely agreed! Who was it among the founding fathers that said something like, "If we do not all hang together, it is quite certain that we will all be hanged separately."
Posted by mikesmith (Member # 447) on :
quote:Mineta didn't look as closely when he went to Chicago, for by then he already had his mind made up.
Mr Toy... Think like a bureaucrat... This is what Mineta said when he got to Chicago... "Trains?? You want me to see more trains??? No, I've already seen enough trains... Where's the food? What kind of wine are they serving?"
That's why he didn't see any "active" trainsets....
{You know I'm right!!!}
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
George, I think the author of the quote you asked about is Ben Franklin. Whatever it certainly is appropo in these days isn't it?
Posted by jgart56 (Member # 3968) on :
Mike,
He could have at least walked down and looked in the Amtrak boarding areas to see the people getting ready to ride. Yes his mind was made up and he didn't want to be confused by all those air-line challenged people who want to ride trains instead and are wasting the governments money doing so.
Sorry, I'm being sarcastic here!
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
George Harris, That is Benjamin Franklin.
Speaking as a northeastern rail fan, Mr Toy, I am not sure who exactly you mean. Certainly not moi! And I have to say, people in the Northeast that I know, rail fan or no, generally support long-distance trains and see the need for funding them. Are you perhaps referring to some politicians or state governments???
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
Sojourner, on this board most everyone is of the same mind, but there's another board out there which is dominated by folks in the Northeast, and among them are folks as I described.
Mike, you are absolutely right. Posted by mr williams (Member # 1928) on :
That's good enough for me! If Amtrak are almost certain to get another year's funding I'm starting to make plans for a trip next year.
Washington - Chicago - Portland - San Luis Obispo on the Capitol, Empire Builder and Coast Starlight!
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Anyway, that's what I've been saying for years. What I find most disturbing are the railfans, particularly those in the Northeast, who are perfectly willing to sacrifice routes they don't use to save the ones they have, in order to apppease Amtrak's critics
Sojourner, on this board most everyone is of the same mind, but there's another board out there which is dominated by folks in the Northeast, and among them are folks as I described.
If Mr. Toy is thinking of the board I think he is thinking of, let it be noted its Moderator resides in Chicago and whose Amtrak travels will, as a result, always involve an overnight LD.
Meanwhile, it is interesting to note that Norm simply will not throw in the towel, the roadshow has moved to Alaska: Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman:
Meanwhile, it is interesting to note that Norm simply will not throw in the towel, the roadshow has moved to Alaska:
I see USDOT is now claiming "....the Alaskan railroad has demonstrated a willingness to innovate, running long distance trains that combine first-class travel cars owned and operated by cruise lines, while continuing to serve commuters and local residents across the state."
Long distance???? The longest route on the Alaska Railroad is only 470 miles!
And then he goes on to claim that Amtrak's long distance trains lose $900 million a year.
Perhaps Amtrak could learn a thing or two from the Alaska people, but to compare a tour operation to a national network makes as much sense as comparing 17 Mile Drive in Pebble Beach (which is privately owned) to the Interstate Highways system.
Posted by jgart56 (Member # 3968) on :
Mr Toy,
Did you note the last line in the DOT announcement? "Amtrak has failed to turn a profit...so what else is new, when lately has the Interstate Trucking System?..or failed to provide quality service...I'm not sure how they define quality service?????
I would point out that the Alaska Railroad owns the track and dispatches it's own passenger trains. I'd have to figure how many freight trains they run on their lines as I surmise it is much less than comparable size railroads in the 48 contiguous states and thus negates the possibility of passenger trains being held for freight trains.
Nothing like comparing apples and oranges Mr. Mineta!
Posted by mikesmith (Member # 447) on :
quote:And then he goes on to claim that Amtrak's long distance trains lose $900 million a year.
Didn't I read somewhere that the actual subsidy for passengers was only $400 million a year? And Amtrak takes in $2.2 billion in passenger revenue?
Who has the Amtrak budget?
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:I see USDOT is now claiming "....the Alaskan railroad has demonstrated a willingness to innovate, running long distance trains that combine first-class travel cars owned and operated by cruise lines, while continuing to serve commuters and local residents across the state."[/QB]
How about just outright lies?
First, there is ownership, by the state of Alaska of a line that was built and operated for many years by the Federal government (correct me if I am wrong there) There are NO commuters on the Alaska Railroad. There is a study for some commuter service around anchorage, but there is no Chicago style, or even the under-development Albuquerque or Nashville style commuter service. But at this time there is no commuter service on the Alaska railroad.
The local service is, if I recall correctly, state mandated and state supported. For some of the area, there is no alternative transportation at all except a long cross-country hike.
Yes, their freight service is only a few trains per day.
The cruise related trains are run full only on demand and the costs covered by the cruise ship fares, and so far as I know do not also carry local passengers.
george
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Although anything that made the "thump on the porch' this morning was already "yesterday's news", the Wall Street Journal ran a quite predictable editorial:
For those with access to their subscription site "here you go", for the rest, here is a 'brief passage:
Ronald Reagan once described Amtrak as a "mobile money burning machine." Since then another $15 billion of taxpayer subsidies have gone up in smoke. Now the allegedly tight-fisted Republicans in Congress are poised to toss Amtrak its seventh emergency bailout, this time $1.2 billion to keep the trains running next year.
Since the ill-fated day in 1971 when Uncle Sam took over control of rail passenger service as a "temporary" experiment, Uncle Sam has spent almost as much money bailing out Amtrak as it cost to put a man on the moon. All of this money for a train service that doesn't reduce traffic congestion, doesn't cut pollution levels, doesn't save energy, and isn't integral to inter-city travel, because so few people ride the trains.
President Bush could do taxpayers a service by vetoing this blank check for Amtrak, or at least using his rescission authority to pare back the appropriation as a sign that he's serious about restoring fiscal responsibility in Washington.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
The more I read the WSJ opinions, the less respect I have for it. I understand the paper thinks the communist Chinese takeover of Unocal would be perfectly OK because it promotes global free market capitalism.
jgart, yes I did see that line, and noted the service part. All I can say is I disagree with the fellow, which is nothing new.
Posted by Pojon (Member # 3080) on :
When I was a kid I was fascinated watching the WSJ presses running at high speed through their front "display" window on the corner of Wall Street and Broad Street. When I got older I was not so fascinated by their stupid unimaginative "in-line" editorials which showed a stupid adherence to what they thought was the "to-the-right" conservative view of the western world. What would you expect after a pro-Amtrak vote in congress---a rational reaction!!??
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
quote:I understand the paper thinks the communist Chinese takeover of Unocal would be perfectly OK because it promotes global free market capitalism.
Let's see, take over of a large private company by an agency of a government that is opposed to capitalism and private ownership of the means of production as a basic tenant of their existence is supposed to promote free market capitalism. If they believe that, then you have an excellent opportunitity to sell them your Arizona ocean view property!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
VICTORY! The House members came to their senses! What a relief this good news is.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)