Now that the Democrats have regained control of the House, does that mean that the chances of securing better funding for AMTRAK have improved? As of this posting (8 AM EST Wednesday), the Senate results are still not certain.....
Posted by rresor (Member # 128) on :
No. Just remember, the first large route cutback for Amtrak occurred in 1979. Democratic president, Democratic Congress (funny, I don't recall anybody at the time referring to "King Jimmy").
The second cutback occurred with a Democratic president and a Republican Congress (1996).
So don't count unhatched chickens.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
I would hardly expect that we are on the brink of a new 'Golden Age of Passenger Rail'.......especially if that 'Golden Age...' is more precisely defined as Long Distance rail.
Posted by wayne72145 (Member # 4503) on :
It's hard to imagine tax payer support to a Corp that can't figure out how to make a profit on a $9 hamburger. I love LD trains and hope for the best.
Posted by PullmanCo (Member # 1138) on :
Gotta agree with Mr Norman and Mr Resor.
Posted by gp35 (Member # 3971) on :
Democrats cut routes, Republican cuts funding. The only good news is it will be harder for dems to route cut and Repubs to fund cut. Amtrak future is the continuing growth in states getting involved. Texas is finally joining the game.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
I think there is a good chance of repealing the micromanaging language from recent appropriations bills. Things like requiring food service to break even and limiting promotional fares. These provisions were slipped into bills at the last minute by a handful of Republicans.
I also think the election offers a much greater chance to pass pro-Amtrak bills like S.1516, which has been languishing under Republican control.
The message of this election is to get it done right. Democrats are now in a position where they must demonstrate they can deliver the goods where the Republicans failed. They'd be crazy not to give Amtrak, which polls consistently show has 60-70% popular support, a boost.
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
We really don't have that much to celebrate and we certainly cannot relax.
Locally I have hope of seeing some pro-Amtrak votes for the first time since 1990. Our eight-term Republican incumbant was among those swept aside amid whisperings of scandal and general dissatisfaction.
Over-all I hardly expect the battle to suddenly become much easier. Maybe there will be a few more small and moderate gains but without constant vigilance we could still lose the whole Amtrak thing.
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
You know, 1979 is a long time ago, so I don't know that looking at what happened then gives you much of a basis for considering what happens now. Currently, Democrats are quite supportive of Amtrak, particularly those in the NE, so the new Dem power in Congress, which has come with more NE Dems (in PA, CT, NYS), seems helpful to me.
But I agree with David, we have to remain VERY vigilant. We have to make sure congressional budget-cutting--which desperately needs to be done--doesn't include cutting back service on Amtrak. We have to make sure the Dems know how many people want good train service, not only in the NE but across the country, and esp in places like Montana and Minnesota, where the Dems will be trying to make more and more inroads and so trying to please the constituency. I plan to phone my legislators frequently and talk about how taking cross-country trains is patriotic, lets people see the heartland, connects all Americans, and so on. I will also point out how older single women and other Democratic constituencies make use of the trains. And how more trains mean less congestion on the roads and reduce fuel consumption (and car pollution).
On the down side, I think this election may make it more likely that John McCain and Hillary Clinton will be the presidential nominees in 2008. Since he is an Amtrak enemy and likely to win, I don't think that would be very good.
Posted by Tanner929 (Member # 3720) on :
Hillary hasn't ridden in anything less then a limosine since she arrived in Little Rock, I doubt she could find Penn Station. In CT our re elected governor Rell made rail service in the state as part of her campaign. Of course know that gas prices has dropped down around $2 a gallon its back to the SUV.
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
My congressman is John Spratt (D-SC) and he was re-elected last night and is assistant to the Nancy Pelosi and is thought to hold a senior position in her new reign as majority leader in the House. He is also ranking democrat on the House Budget Committee and presumably will be Chairman now.
In response to a letter I wrote him last year, he replied that "I have signed a letter advocating full funding for Amtrak at $2 Billion a year and will contiue to push for as close to this funding level as possible...". Also "Rest assured that I will continue to be an active supporter of Amtrak in the coming years and that I will do whatever I can to maintain a vibrant passenger rail system in this country."
While my politics are generally to the right of Mr. Spratt, I did get a chance to meet him in Washington and I believe he sincere and a career politician in the best sense of the word. So I think the election will certainly make it easier for him to help Amtrak.
Posted by Liberty Limited (Member # 4300) on :
One things for certain, Politics and Amtrak only lead to one thing - uncertainty.
Interestingly, Amtrak is one issue where there seems to be bipartisan support both for and against Amtrak. With two very different services with Corridor Services and Long Distance, its interesting to see the variance.
Dems may look at the Corridor Service as vital public transportation, while viewing the LD network as "pork," while rural Republicans may view their LD services as essential, and view the denser areas, with their multiple options, as a wasteful subsidy. I guess it all comes down to party politics and geography regarding how you sit.
I guess we'll find out in the coming months how our favorite carrier will fare in its seemingly never ending battle.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
Turn off the sound and watch the action. Usually the sound is used only to hide the action. I ahve no hope whatsoever for Dem support for funding for anything outside the NEC. To the majority of them the long distance trains are empty rattletraps serving places that voted against them. Remember where the Carter cuts were, for example despite his supposed Georgia base.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
You guys sound like the pundits who decreed Clinton a failed president before he was even inaugurated.
I agree with sojourner that what happened almost 30 years ago does not amount to a forecast of what will happen next year.
Posted by RRCHINA (Member # 1514) on :
We have selected the Democrats to effect changes even though they have not yet, to my notice, said what they plan to do. They were just critical of the past, with some justification certainly, but now they must be for something more than having the power.
The President was forthcoming in asking Speaker to be Nancy P.to advise him what the Democrats wanted to do. Lets hope that they have some plans, ideas or goals that will be clearly articulated. Thus far all we have heard is there will be investigations with the potential of impeachment.
Lets hope for the positive!!!!
Posted by Jerome Nicholson (Member # 3116) on :
My friends, we elected a different breed of Democrats. My new Democrat Senator, Jim Webb, is a former Republican who worked in the Reagan administration. Keep your powder dry.
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
Tanner how many people in the administration or Congress do you think have used Amtrak especially for long distance trips? So what difference does it make if Hillary Clinton does or doesn't know where Penn Station is. Actually isn't Madison Square Garden on top of it/ If I am right about that she would most likely know where Penn station is. I am curious about your comment.
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
Hillary is all about Hillary. If it doesn't personally benefit her wealth or power, she simply doesn't care.
Pelosi is a socialist, so I have no idea what her opinion on Amtrak is. The Democratic Socialists of America does not address trains on their website.
One of my Senators, Hutchison, has been pro-Amtrak for years. The other one {Cornyn} just sent me a luke-warm response to my request for support of Amtrak. He used weasel-words, like "I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this matter." and "You may be certain that I will keep your views in mind as relevant legislation is considered." I'll keep after him...
Republicans lost because they failed to act like Republicans. They spent like drunken sailors, ignored our border security, and played nice with the liberals. They deserved this loss. Democrats won because they were not Republicans. They did not have a "plan". We shall see how that shakes out for Amtrak. I'm not holding my breathe in anticipaton...
Posted by RRRICH (Member # 1418) on :
Ms. Sojourner - Hilary vs. McCain in '08? AAAAAAAHHHHHHHH -- what a nightmare!! If that happens, I probably won't even vote.
David Gunn for President!!!!!!
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
Yes, Train Lady, Penn Station is quite prominently placed below Madison Square Garden-- where, in fact, the Democrats held one of their conventions when Bill Clinton was nominated for president. And campaigning NYC and NYS politicians often shake hands with commuters in Penn Station and Grand Central Station--I remember seeing on the news Hillary Clinton doing so at the latter. Also, Hillary Clinton was the senator who sponsored the amendment to the Safe Ports Act to obtain funding to make the Amtrak tunnels that lead in and out of Penn Station safer.
As for actual Amtrak travel, I don't know about security considerations when former first ladies travel, but I imagine many NE politicians have taken the ACELA to and from Washington.
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
I can understand why some men feeel threatened by Hilary Clinton's ovbious intelligence and ability. What I don'tunderstand is what the vitriolic remarks have to do with Amtrak. especially since she is a supporter of Amtrak. There are forums for political expression, this isnt one of them and I strongly feel we should stick to our subject...passenger rail.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Ms. Sojourner, former First Lady Hillary Clinton is afforded US Secret Service protection - that is no secret!
Are incumbent US Senators afforded such? That I know not.
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
My next door neighbor is retired from the Secret Service. When they return from a trip I shall ask him and will report back if no one has the answer by then.
Posted by MDRR (Member # 2992) on :
TANNER 929 speaks without knowing any facts, Mrs. Clinton was known to hop on a train on a regular basis when she was in the White house. Have not been aware of her riding as much lately.
Senators Biden and Lautenberg are two who ride regularly in the corridor. Neither are accompanied by secret service when they ride.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by train lady: I can understand why some men feeel threatened by Hilary Clinton's ovbious intelligence and ability. .
Why bring in this? It is equally irrelevant to the issue. One of the standing jokes about Hillary C. becoming president is that she is disqualified because she already has held the office for 8 years. There are a lot of people that felt that she had at least 80% of the brain power in that couple. I would be quite happy with a woman president, just not her. In fact, C. Rice would have my vote in a heartbeat. (I am afraid to try to spell her given name without looking at it.)
George
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
George, the latest rumor I've heard is Cheney resigns in time for the lame duck Congress to approve Newt Gingrich as VP. Sometime after January 21, Bush resigns {so Newt can serve 2 more terms} and Newt nominates Condi as his VP. There is no way the democrats can deny Condi the position without giving Newt a HUGE 2008 campaign slogan {campaign slogan = The democrats do not want any black women in positions of power}.
The bad news is that Newt does not appear to be very friendly to Amtrak {I did a brief google search, he put wendell cox on the Board}. I'm thinking I should start writing Newt now, before he is inundated with letters... What do you think?
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
quote:Originally posted by train lady: I can understand why some men feeel threatened by Hilary Clinton's ovbious intelligence and ability. What I don'tunderstand is what the vitriolic remarks have to do with Amtrak. especially since she is a supporter of Amtrak. There are forums for political expression, this isnt one of them and I strongly feel we should stick to our subject...passenger rail.
First, I don't "feel" threatened, and this discussion is related to Amtrak. {As a side issue, if Hillary is "so intelligent" why does she allow her husband to have affairs and why did she allow him to get away with raping Juanita? Doesn't she care about women's issues?}
Hillary voted against providing an additional $550,000,000 for Amtrak for fiscal year 2007, probably because Santorum put forth the amendment. This vote happened this last March. Is she just giving lip service to her "support" for Amtrak?
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
I do not intend to get into a battle of wits with you. I never attack those who are unarmed. Nor will I "allow" my husband to do so.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike Smith: George, the latest rumor I've heard is Cheney resigns in time for the lame duck Congress to approve Newt Gingrich as VP. Sometime after January 21, Bush resigns {so Newt can serve 2 more terms} and Newt nominates Condi as his VP. There is no way the democrats can deny Condi the position without giving Newt a HUGE 2008 campaign slogan {campaign slogan = The democrats do not want any black women in positions of power}.
Mr. Smith, why don't you carry your fiction one step beyond?
Newt steps down as President during '15 or thereabouts so Condi succeeds as President sufficiently in time to run as an incumbent during '16. Or would more novels be sold if Newt was conveniently popped?
Of course, Hillary would be age 69 in '16; it is one thing to elect "Big Sis' as our first woman President (Condi would be age 62), but something else to elect 'Grandma".
In addition to a novel, this tripe has the makings of an Oliver Stone film. But then I guess what counts to you is that such a scenario will make for continuous glory of Republican rule until '24.
Posted by abefroman329 (Member # 3986) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Ms. Sojourner, former First Lady Hillary Clinton is afforded US Secret Service protection - that is no secret!
Are incumbent US Senators afforded such? That I know not.
Only the ones that are prominent in the line of succession (definitely the Majority Leader, not sure about anyone else).
Mr. Norman seemed to imply as such, but Mrs. Clinton has Secret Service protection because she is the former First Lady, as do all spouses and close family members of former Presidents.
Posted by RRCHINA (Member # 1514) on :
Anyone here concerned with our issues about Amtrak?
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
YES ; allow me to x-post material I submitted to Railroad.net at a similar topic over there:
Interesting discussion could develop and here at our Forum, such will move forth in a mature and respectful manner.
But the topic title essentially has three sub titles and I think the discussion should recognize such;
"What will the new Congress mean to Amtrak?"
1) The quasi-public corporation incorporated as the National Railroad Passenger Corporation dba Amtrak? (or otherwise the masquerade for simply another agency funded by Congress and under the administrative control of the President).
2) Corridor services (let's not quibble - those clearly recognized as such)
3) Other services (generally referred to both here and other railfourms as LD's) Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Mr. Smith, why don't you carry your fiction one step beyond?
Fiction... Rumor... They are both about the same thing, aren't they Mr Norman?
Besides, you did a great job of carrying the "storyline" further. Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
OK Mr. Smith Posted by HopefulRailUser (Member # 4513) on :
You all have reduced Mr. Norman to using Graemlins. I fear the bagpipes and ponies are coming.
Posted by TwinStarRocket (Member # 2142) on :
Bagpipes and ponies, like Amtrak, have bipartison support, but also evil bipartison enemies.
Posted by dfwguy (Member # 3082) on :
I'm with you Train Lady-the R's lost because extremists hijacked their party- Their obsession with "Guns-God & Gays" - "Iraq"- the rampant hypocrisy of the self-proclained arbiters of all thngs moral , etc. the whole culture of corruption , etc...Mainstream America wants moderates not neo-con nut cases - which is why we saw this mandate Tues. nite.
Posted by Beacon Hill (Member # 4431) on :
Looking around at the election results, it looks like most transportation related issues on the ballots were approved--many by overwhelming margins. Here in Seattle, where everything--except the sky--is blue, we raised the local sales tax to fund additional transit service. Transportation seems to be a popular issue with most citizens and something that could be a beneficiary of the bipartisanship that we're going to be seeing in Washington DC from the new congress. At least if they act fast.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
And Californians passed a transportation bond issue that our kids will buy for us. It includes $400 million to buy intercity rail equipment.
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
What I would like to see is 2 cents from that 4.3 cent a gallon gas tax we got in 1993. Every cent of that tax increase went into the general fund so our congress critters would have more money to spend on their boondoggle projects. I'd like to see those congress critters give some of that money back to transportation. A 2 cent a gallon dedicated fund for passenger rail would eliminate this yearly fight for funds.
Posted by Tanner929 (Member # 3720) on :
Hillary didn't become a New York resident until she threw her Pant Suit into the ring. Many pols in the tri state area do use the Acela, former Sec of Tres Snow said he enjoyed taking the train up to Wall Street as well.
When politicians do their meet and greets at Penn and GCT there meeting commuters on from the LIRR, NJTransit and Metro North commuter trains.
These train riders would like to see improvements on their commuter trains not improving service on the Sunset Limited.
I think a much of our last election was a vote against the republicans wasteful spending habits, basically trying to pay off voters for their bad behavior. I think even the good people of Alaska are abit embarressed by Ted Stevens' Bridge.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
I have to make a correction to my earlier post. California's bond measure has $400 million for intercity rail, $125 million is for equipment, the rest is for track capacity improvements.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
that we're going to be seeing in Washington DC from the new congress. At least if they act fast.