quote: Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, the only Democrat in President Bush's Cabinet, will step down next month
quote: Snow credited Mineta with cutting regulations and red tape to liberalize the commercial aviation market, establishing the Transportation Security Administration, helping to shape the highway bill and injecting "sound economic principles" into the nation's passenger rail system.
Good riddance..
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
YAY!
But I'm not really expecting that Bush will replace him with anyone better.
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Toy: YAY!
But I'm not really expecting that Bush will replace him with anyone better.
You never know. 50/50 chance of better or worse.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
First, let us note that the departure of Secretary Mineta and the appointment and easy Senate confirmation of his successor will not alter any transportation policy set in place by the Bush administration.
Ask Paul O'Neill and Colin Powell about the consequences of disagreement with the "inner circle'.
Secondly, for those who have vision of a "pro passenger rail' successor, forget it. Tommy T is doing quite well for himself in the private sector, thank you.
David Gunn clearly showed while at Amtrak he knows little about 'following orders'; in short forget that one as well.
Karl Rove is likely now carefully reviewing the "favor book'. The best the railroad industry, could hope for is Gerald Grinstein.
Somehow, I think Mr. Grinstein is looking for an "exit strategy" from Delta Air Lines. One can be certain that organized labor will oppose such an appointment, but somehow there has not been much to suggest the incumbent administration has been too concerned about those interests any more than they have of passenger train advocates.
Posted by Jerome Nicholson (Member # 3116) on :
I'd shout 'HALLELUYAH!!" if I thought Bush would put in someone better.
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jerome Nicholson: I'd shout 'HALLELUYAH!!" if I thought Bush would put in someone better.
Ole Stiff-upper-lip Norman is right. I doubt we see any huge changes. States getting involved with Amtrak is the key to a successful Amtrak. Texas needs to follow California in creating Amtrak-Texas. Texas has a $6 billion surplus.
Posted by Boyce (Member # 2719) on :
quote:Originally posted by gp35: Texas needs to follow California in creating Amtrak-Texas. Texas has a $6 billion surplus. [/QB]
Don't hold your breathe.
Posted by TALKrr (Member # 683) on :
I would not be surprised if Bush appointed Mineta's "second-in-command."
Who IS this guy and what might HE be like heading the department. I don't think he could possibly be any worse.
Posted by Kairho (Member # 1567) on :
Grinstein! ?????
He certainly doesn't know how to run an airline so I doubt he knows any more about running rail...
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
quote:Originally posted by TALKrr: I would not be surprised if Bush appointed Mineta's "second-in-command."
Who IS this guy and what might HE be like heading the department. I don't think he could possibly be any worse.
Well we did manage to dodge one bullet, Mineta's 'second-in-command' Jeffrey Rosen is leaving DOT July 3 to assume a new position at OMB......the Office of Management and Budget.
This news is pretty neutral though. I felt that Rosen was probably a more competent anti-Amtrak bulldog than Mineta. Rosen was certainly more annoying with evasive answers before congress.
So......while I'm delighted to see Mineta, who had become little more than cardboard replica of a statesman blindly promoting administration policy, going, I have no hope that this administration is going to give us anyone better. Just someone else to toe the company line.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
I think the best we can hope for out of this administration is someone who doesn't care about Amtrak one way or the other. Someone who won't take the time to attack it, but just leave it on the back burner for the next guy. Not a good scenario, but better than the last five years.
But one can wish for...Kay Bailey Hutchison. Not too far fetched, since she has an "R-TX" after her name.
Posted by Amtrak207 (Member # 1307) on :
Please not Boardman. Please not Boardman. Please not Boardman. One needs to look no farther than the flawed-from-the-start mired-in-litigation NY State Where-are-my-turbos? deal to figure out he doesn't know a thing about how the system works. Using Amtrak to leverage federal funds when there's no matching statute? Good luck. States won't invest in intercity or even corridor services seriously until (even only 50%) matching fed funds are approved for rail. As with Gunn, I admire him if only for not shutting up and blindly following orders. Anyone familiar with Claytor's military record sees a pattern emerging here. The entire federal DOT's mindset "More Roads Are The Only Solution!" needs to be shifted. Perhaps that could begin from the top up, perhaps not. I agree with Geep 35 with the odds. As is the case with Amtrak, pin your hopes on this, screw on the smile and keep the trains running safely. We'll see.
Posted by Jerome Nicholson (Member # 3116) on :
Anyone notice the mainstream news releases on this? All they seem to mention is that Mineta is a Democrat.
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jerome Nicholson: Anyone notice the mainstream news releases on this? All they seem to mention is that Mineta is a Democrat.
Token Democrat because Bush had promised during the 2000 campaign to include both parties on his cabinet.
Norm got the DOT nod only after North Carolina's Democratic governor James Hunt turned down an offer to be the Secretary of the Department of Education. Bush then had to go find another democrat willing to play along with administration policy in return for a cabinet position. Mineta was willing and I suppose DOT is where they figured he could do the least damage if his allegiance wavered........which it apparantly did not.
Call me cynical.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mr. Mineta led his department through the Sept. 11 crisis and helped oversee creation of the Transportation Security Administration, which later became part of the Department of Homeland Security. He also helped lay the groundwork for privatizing highways and other transportation assets. Commercial airline safety has greatly improved during his time in office, and the death rate on the highways has fallen.
Two goals that he did not achieve, however, were a restructuring of Amtrak and government permission for a higher level of foreign investment in airlines. His proposal to allow foreign control of airlines was decisively defeated in the House last week, although the issue remains before Congress.
There have been past reports that Secretary Mineta has health issues to address; that could well translate to the "other challenges' noted in the article.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kairho: Grinstein! ?????
He certainly doesn't know how to run an airline so I doubt he knows any more about running rail...
Lest we note, Mr. Kairho, running a railroad is a 'been there done that' for Mr. Grinstein. Biography
As I noted earlier, my greatest concern regarding Mr. Grinstein is the extent he has alienated organized labor at Delta. It is one thing to do so at a carrier in bankruptcy proceedings, where a judge is empowered to not only void a labor agreement but also to "shut the whole thing down". But it is a whole other thing to bring this alienation track record to bear over the formulation of Administration, even a lame duck one, transportation policy. Lest we forget, the only major "non-union' segment of commercial transportation is independent trucking.
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
Some people just do not understand.
There are three rules of appointments during the current Administration:
1) Loyalty to the President is demanded up front, and expected downstream.
2) Stay on the Administration message.
3) When in doubt, refer to rules 1 and 2.
The source of the message is 1600 Pennsylvania.
Anyone who expects a pro-Amtrak Secretary of Transportation between now and January 21, 2009 is in for a big disappointment. It isn't going to happen.
The other side of this is the Administration only has 2 years, six months and 27 days to effect any more changes.
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
Pressure is growing to expand the nations rail capacity. Pro-Amtrak or not, the new secretary will over see the beginning of expansion which will benefit Amtrak.
Posted by CHATTER (Member # 1185) on :
quote: Some people just do not understand.
There are three rules of appointments during the current Administration:
1) Loyalty to the President is demanded up front, and expected downstream.
2) Stay on the Administration message.
3) When in doubt, refer to rules 1 and 2.
The source of the message is 1600 Pennsylvania.
Were previous administrations any different?
While I have little love for Mineta or the administration's Amtrak policy, I simply do not understand the invective against Mineta's carrying out the Bush administration's policies.
As with any job, when an indvidual is chosen by a President for a cabinet position, said individual is expected to tow the line and adhere to the President's ideas and goals, regardless of whatever differences of opinion that may exist. (When your employer hired you, the same expectations were likely made.) How can Mineta be faulted for carrying out his boss's policies and, more to the point, how can the above post imply that this expectation is unique to the current administration? Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
Chatter,
I've been participating in the political process for over 30 years now.
This Administration is the most focused ever at keeping the loyalty button on and the message consistent. They are truly disciplined at it.
As far as Administrations go... Nixon's founded Amtrak. Ford had other problems Carter was anti-Amtrak. Reagan, in spite of being a conservative, saw Amtrak have good things happen Bush 41 was just there. We got Warrington under Clinton We got David Gunn and Mr Laney under Bush 43
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
The difference between this administration and previous administrations is....
Previous administratins looked at all the facts and used them as a foundation for policy. This administration sets policy then creates "facts" to back them up. Mineta was especially bad at creating his "facts." Not even Republican loyalists on Capitol Hill could swallow them.
Posted by CHATTER (Member # 1185) on :
My point, which was neatly sidestepped, which was that a cabinet secretary is expected to execute the policies of the Chief Executive who hired him. He cannot be expected to do anything other than that which the President expects him to do. Mr. Mineta was the same as all other cabinet members, past and present, in this regard.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
Ultimately, the president has the final word, yes. But a competent cabinet secretary would not just blindly follow the President's orders. He would be actively involved in making policy, by providing reliable information and offering sound opinions.
Competent presidents hire people who are skilled and knowledgeable, not "yes men" who only do what they're told. Good presidents take their advisor's advice under consideration, even if it contradicts his own views, and learn from them.
Sadly, that is not the case today.
Posted by CHATTER (Member # 1185) on :
Democrat or Republican, politics is politics. This administration is no different than any that preceded or will follow it.
It is wonderful to construct an imaginary world, where one naturally admires cabinet officials who mirror his own beliefs. In such a scenario, the pro-Amtrak secretary (if we are to believe that Mineta was truly such in a past life) is expected to stand firm and offer unencumbered counsel; it is up to the President to accept this counsel accordingly--which he will naturally do, if he is a good policy manager. Of course, the onlooker will endorse this scenario--if he happens to share the policy views of the advisor and not the President, in this case.
However, if the reverse is true and, say, the President appears to be pro-Amtrak (has there even been such a President, one who was really and truly so?), and the secretary renders counsel that is not conducive to the survival of the National Rail Passenger Corporation, then naturally, in this fantasy, the onlooker would criticize the secretary for undermining the President's policies and would eventually call for his resignation--since, after all, that is the usual outcome when cabinet officials become seriously at odds with the policies of the administration. In this fictional story, the onlooker does not expect the President to take the secretary's advice or even consider it, since that advice is at odds with the onlooker's own views, whereas in the original fantasy presented here, the President is expected to show good management skills and heed the counsel of his cabinet member.
Moral of the story: Politics is politics, regardless of party or person. We all tend to agree with those who support our positions. In most cases, cabinet officials will execute the policies of the President, because that is their function. They may privately express disagreement, and each President may or may not listen to said objections, depending on a myriad of variables--of which few outsiders are ever aware--but at the end of the day, the cabinet member must go along with whichever policy the White House selects, or ultimately resign.
It is incongruous to suggest that a certain President and/or his cabinet official are honorable or dishonorable, simply because one agrees or disagrees with certain positions. And that is what is occurring here; the rest is a fantasy construct, made after the fact and replete with subjective observations, each making various claims, depending on one's views. Many people made similar observations concerning the previous admiminstration (several of which resulted in impeachment, but ultimately little more than that). I am not a supporter of this administrations's Amtrak policy, but I do not engage in fantasizing about how the President would or should act, because I know that if the persons and situations were different, I would likely take the opposite view, if it reflected my own opinions. I am asking that we refrain from such demonizing partisan politics in this forum.
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
quote:Competent presidents hire people who are skilled and knowledgeable, not "yes men" who only do what they're told. Good presidents take their advisor's advice under consideration, even if it contradicts his own views, and learn from them.
Sadly, that is not the case today.
Too bad you are totally wrong on this assumption, Mr Toy. You are buying into the myth/fantasy of the left wing loonies and main stream media types. Just because you do not hear his cabinet stating that he's the worst thing since mosquitoes doesn't mean they are parrots. Look at the people whining about "yes men". They are not exactly the pillars of our society.
I read an article just recently that expressed Bush's insistance on hearing diverse opinions and ideas from his cabinet. However, they all know he has the final decision.
Posted by Tanner929 (Member # 3720) on :
Beside Richard Nixon, who signed off on the whole monstrosity, Presidents shouldn't be in the train business. I don't understand why states and regions set up and run a usable rail system. If states had more usable and efficient commuter lines connecting between major cities. perhaps a Long Distance train system could flourish. Trying to revive the glory days of the 20th Century Limited ain't gonna happen while they use the frieght lines. With so little train schedule options for passangers most travelers while opt for the automobile for short distances and Airplanes for longer trips.
Posted by dfwguy (Member # 3082) on :
I have to agree you with you Mr. Toy- This Prez has surrounded himeslf with "yes men". The mantra amongst the loyalists is: "even when he (the Prez)is wrong- he's still right" . On all levels this incompetence has produced disastorous results - American's (some 70% now) - believe this country is seriously on the wrong track- As of late- a more humble Bush is appearing- insiders say -Bush Sr. is responsible for this and Sr. is now directly involved trying to salvage the remaining 600+ days of the Presidency.
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
DFWguy, is your last name Ivins?
Posted by transient (Member # 3682) on :
Don't be too surprised if Mineta's replacement is Tom Osborne, the ex-Nebraska football coach. After serving six years in the House he opted not to run again. Three House members last week wrote a letter of recommendation to Bush urging him to consider Osborne for a position in the administration. Rep. Lee Terry suggests that he could replace Mineta. He pointed to Osborne's membership on the House Transportation committee. Osborne did interview for a job in the Bush administration 18 months ago but then withdrew his name. As Terry says, "Now there's an incredible talent with lots of experience on the free agents list."
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
I hope George senior is a big influence. Even if you don't agree with his politics you have to respect his intellengence and dignity.
Posted by zephyr (Member # 1651) on :
Gee, dfwguy, thanks for sharing with us your deep thoughts and political insights.
Have you shared your brilliance and worldly views with moveon.org and dailykos?
Posted by dfwguy (Member # 3082) on :
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)