posted
I watched the Congressional hearing on Amtrak via tape delay on C-Span. A few quick comments with more to come. 1. The Congressional members of both parties were all extremely supportive of Amtrak with the lone exception of John Mica of Florida, a long time critic who makes no sense whatsoever. 2. David Gunn was forthright though a bit flippant in some ways...easy to understand given the situation. 3. Amtrak's two board members who appeared, David Laney and a Mr. Rosen, were an embarrassment. They had no clue what they were talking about and they lied through their teeth saying they want the company to succeed and that splitting off the NE Corridor is a sound move. Laney painted Amtrak equipment as "dirty" and employees as "surly" which is occasionally true but by and large false. The dirty equipment comment seems to harken back to the old Penn Central days not the Amtrak I ride. 4. It clearly is the mission of President Bush and his board appointees to destroy long haul service. 5. The other two board members and Norm Mineta did not show up. Why should they? We need to mobilize and work to prevent this hostile takeover which is exactly what this is.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
Did anybody ask either of these turkeys how much train riding they did, and if any when and where was the last time? If the answer is none or none recently, then their credibility is zero, zip, nada, none.
This is a good question for any politician when he want to be part of running something.
CoastStarlight99 Member # 2734
posted
quote:Originally posted by SilverStar092: The Congressional members of both parties were all extremely supportive of Amtrak with the lone exception of John Mica of Florida, a long time critic who makes no sense whatsoever.
Listening to John Mica talk on C-SPAN as I have a few occasions is just terrible. I fully agree.
Mr. Toy Member # 311
posted
So far I've watched about three hours of it on my trusty VCR. My impressions were similar, but slightly different.
1. Mica's theatrics were an embarrassment to his party, but he did make an interesting point when he noted that the Senate was negligent in failing to vote on board nominees, hence the need for Bush to make recess appointments.
2. Another Republican who was clearly pro Amtrak (I forget his name, but he had a southern accent and I think he was from Alabama) started by trying to tackle some serious questions. But much to my dismay he quickly got sidetracked over demanding a yes or no answer from Rosen, and wasted most of his time in the process.
3. Gunn was a little flippant at times, agreed. Understandable, but it looked unprofessional. When asked questions about operations, however, he was more composed.
4. Laney was actually the calmest and most professional panel member in this discussion. But he had some credibility problems. He denied the board was planning to spin off the NEC, saying only that the board had authorized a study of the matter to see if it was feasable. However, when the board's resolution was read back to him, it clearly stated the intent was to begin the actual process, not begin a study. Laney was also called on the contradictions in his current testimony compared to testimony at previous hearings.
5. Chairman La Tourette had the best manners on the committee. He was professional and respectful throughout. If most Republicans were like him, I'd still be one. There was a black Democratic congressman (name?) who was similarly thoughtful. The rest of the committee was more emotional than helpful in fact finding (as of the first 3 hours, anyway). In all, it is easy to see why Congress never gets anything done on this or any other subject. Committee members of both parties had too much emotion and not nearly enough thinking!
6. Everyone on the committee except Mica expressed outrage that Gunn had been fired. Some were more vocal than others.
7. Several members of the committee wondered why Bush hadn't yet appointed a full board of 7 members.
8. Several members wondered why Mineta never showed up to board meetings. So far there hasn't been a clear answer to that one.
9. I do think Laney was right when he said that one of Amtrak's problems is inconsistent quality of service. He did not say all trains were dirty, or that all employees were bad, but that problems do exist and need to be corrected.
While I am disgusted with the Bush administrations' handling of Amtrak, I see some hopeful signs as well. It is clear that Congress as a whole just isn't buying the administration's line. There is growing bi-partisan support for Amtrak, in both the House and Senate, and a growing recognition that this country really does need a national passenger train system (even Mica said so). As evidence we see both houses ignoring the Bush zero budget, and they are very close to increasing Amtrak's funding for next year. A pro-Amtrak bill passed the Senate 93-6, and a similar bill is pending in the House. This is just one example of how Bush's influence over his own party, not to mention the country, is waning.
A couple more points to remember. Very soon the recess appointments on the Amtrak board will expire, and it will be down to 2 members. Bush will then be forced to appoint new nominees, and this time you can be sure the Senate, given its current mood, is sure to give them a good going over.
TBlack Member # 181
posted
8. Several members wondered why Mineta never showed up to board meetings. So far there hasn't been a clear answer to that one.
TO: Silverstar and Mr. Toy, Rosen is Maneta's stand-in on the AMTRAK board. This is quite standard procedure in the public sector, but it means that Maneta doesn't personally have to show up.
Laney is the only legitimate guy on the board, having been confirmed by the Senate. Maybe some slack for him?
RRCHINA Member # 1514
posted
These Congresspeople always put on a "*** and pony show" so they can have quotes and film clips for their constituents. If they are truly wanting to have a first class railroad passenger service in this country they should pass legislation with the funds allocated to make it happen. They are always attaching special spending items to other legislation so that it cannot be vetoed or turned down by the Senate so why not take that approach. I feel that they are not sincere when they put on these public displays and I offer as substantiation the lack of action with funding.
TwinStarRocket Member # 2142
posted
I agree with Mr. Toy's observations. The Congressman from Alabama was Spencer Bachus(R). He impressed me so much with his grasp of rail issues that I remembered his name. Republican Chairman La Tourette was one of the most intelligent and articulate politicians I have ever heard. My favorite moment was when he told David Laney he might be in need of legal counsel, after reading him the law stating that the committee must be consulted before Amtrak hires outside consultants. Laney hired a marketing firm to handle the fallout from Mr. Gunn's dismissal.
These kind of people could turn me into a Republican.
As for Rep. Mica and Mr. Rosen, I share the expressed sentiments of my wife (who knows nothing about who anyone was, or what they were advocating): -"Do we have a barf bag?"
For those in the Bush administration who claim the opposition has no plan, I have a simple one: 1. Fire Mineta (obviously!) 2. Hire someone qualified like Tommy Thompson. 3. Populate the board with relevant people instead of cronies. 4. Rehire David Gunn. 5. Get rid of people like Mr. Rosen who cannot grasp the concept of simple things like 'yes', 'no', and zero!
Pojon2 Member # 4048
posted
America's democratic process at work! Let's hope they have the guts to re-hire David Gunn!
posted