# Politicians Are Gearing Up To Kill Passenger Rail Projects



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 5, 2010)

*Link to Full Story...*



> In Wisconsin, which got more than $810 million in federal stimulus money to build a train line between Milwaukee and Madison, Scott Walker, the Milwaukee County executive and Republican candidate for governor, has made his opposition to the project central to his campaign. In Ohio, the Republican candidate for governor, John Kasich, is vowing to kill a $400 million federal stimulus project to link Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati by rail. In Florida, Rick Scott, the Republican candidate for governor, has questioned whether the state should invest in the planned rail line from Orlando to Tampa. The state got $1.25 billion in federal stimulus money for the project, but it will cost at least twice that much to complete. And the nation’s most ambitious high-speed rail project, California’s $45 billion plan to link Los Angeles and San Francisco with trains that would go up to 220 miles per hour, could be delayed if Meg Whitman, a Republican, is elected governor. “In the face of the state’s current fiscal crisis, Meg doesn’t believe we can afford the costs associated with new high-speed rail at this time,” said Tucker Bounds, a campaign spokesman. With recent polls showing all of the anti-rail Republican candidates leading or within striking distance of their pro-rail Democratic rivals, it is possible they could be elected and try to stop the train projects.


Face it rail fans, in many cases a vote for the GOP is a vote _against_ passenger rail. I know Amtrak has survived many attacks in the past and some AU members apparently think they always will, but that's frankly an absurd position. Eventually the GOP will get their way and Amtrak will be gone. And you can still keep chatting about what might have been, but it won't matter any more. 2010 is a critical year for passenger rail, so put your vote where your mouth is!


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 5, 2010)

This has been frustrating to deal with, especially here in Wisconsin. Many who are against the train, particularly those "average man- or woman- on the street," have rationalized this by thinking that, "well, I'll never take the train, so why should I have to pay for it?" Arguments such as other folks taking the train for their own trips, or the fact that driving costs a lot more than simply gas money, or that it is an investment in the future, and Amtrak's current results are due to an utter lack of investment, are lost on them. Member AlanB may support me on this. It is as if the opponents are saying that they would rather shell out money that pay for 30 years of operating costs, in order to "save" $ 7.5 to 10 billion per year.

A member at Trainorders.com put the rail opponents' position this way:



> "Anti-rail politicians (Kashic, Christie, McCaine, etc) are a bunch of hypocrites because they want to deny their Country the real benefits of HSR on the pretense of "saving" money for the Government which they dislike so much. What heroes! They want to benefit the "Government" and deny benefit to "their constituents".
> Or, how about this one:
> 
> "These dopes haven't a clue how to create jobs and increase State revenues, so they look for the easiest "cost" to cut--like HSR. They're too blind to sea HSR creates jobs."


----------



## dlagrua (Oct 5, 2010)

daxomni said:


> *Link to Full Story...*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This sounds like a very partisan oriented post by someone who trusts one corrupt party over the other. The reality is that two parties combined create all of the same problems. If you believe that you have a choice, you don't. You have no choice.

First off, Amtrak was created under a Republican administration. Now we have a democratic administration. Has that helped Amtrak thrive? Lots of lip service but the answer is no.

Like all other government owned businesses, Amtrak, the post office, social security, medicare and even the local education systems are BROKE. In todays political climate it's nice to get on the soapbox and proclaim that we can save money but the bottom line is that politicans themselves have driven this country into bankruptcy. Theswe type of suggested cuts are just soapbox points to gain votes. Politicans don't care about you or me. They just care about getting re-elected so that they can continue to have license to steal.


----------



## Ryan (Oct 5, 2010)

That's nothing but a bunch of political ranting with no bearing on the topic at hand.

The only thing that matters is now, and if you look at the politicians that are campaigning on killing rail projects, they all have an "R" after their name. The fact that Amtrak was created by a Republican administration 40 years ago is orthogonal to what is happening in these states today.


----------



## saxman (Oct 5, 2010)

daxomni said:


> *Link to Full Story...*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't think the GOP is out to "get" Amtrak still. Sure there are some GOP members who want it gone, but just because we may get a Republican ruled Congress does not mean Amtrak is going to just shut down. I've been following Amtrak for a while now, and we get caught up in this partisan politics that all GOP members want to kill Amtrak and all Dems. support it. When the Bush Admin. tried to kill Amtrak back in 2005, it was a Republican controlled Congress that voted to keep it around. There are still many members of the GOP that still support Amtrak such as Kay Bailey Hutchinson of Texas. I don't know why we're getting all worked up because only two or three GOP gubernatorial candidates have spoke out against it. If they get what they want, sure I'll be pretty disappointed, but it doesn't mean the world is going to end, or that Amtrak is going to shut down. There are many other parts of the country that are going full steam ahead with their rail projects.

I'm not saying don't stop fighting or don't stop writing letters. I'm just saying don't get worked up over a couple of ignorant people. There's always going to be NIMBY's and BANANA's for anything that is planned to get built, but again that what makes America great!


----------



## Shanghai (Oct 5, 2010)

I don't believe Governor Christie (NJ) is opposed to rail transport, what he wants to know is the

real cost of transportation projects at hand and the financing arrangements for the funding.

The most recent issue was the failure of the NJ Assembly and Senate to approve the proposed transportation

bond issue. Christie also stopped spending for the ARC tunnel between NY and NJ until an accurate

estimate of total cost was obtained to ensure there was enough money for the project. New Jersey along

with the Port Authority of NY & NJ is funding the tunnel. New York is not paying for any of the costs.

As a resident and taxpayer of NJ, I'm glad the Governor is investigating the costs. It started at a

figure of 5 billion, then 7.5 billion and then 8.2 billion. Now the estimate is nearly 10 billion.

A comprehensive investigation is in order!!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 5, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> This sounds like a very partisan oriented post by someone who trusts one corrupt party over the other. The reality is that two parties combined create all of the same problems. If you believe that you have a choice, you don't. You have no choice. First off, Amtrak was created under a Republican administration. Now we have a democratic administration. Has that helped Amtrak thrive? Lots of lip service but the answer is no.


Just because you _assume_ that if I don't trust and support the GOP I must support and trust the Democrats doesn't make it so. I don't trust either party to be perfectly honest. I'm simply pointing out that voting for the GOP is in large measure a vote _against_ Amtrak.



dlagrua said:


> First off, Amtrak was created under a Republican administration. Now we have a democratic administration. Has that helped Amtrak thrive? Lots of lip service but the answer is no.


I think if you take a deeper look you'll find that the Republicans of the 1970's were a completely different breed than the Neo-Cons we have now.



saxman said:


> I don't think the GOP is out to "get" Amtrak still. Sure there are some GOP members who want it gone, but just because we may get a Republican ruled Congress does not mean Amtrak is going to just shut down.I've been following Amtrak for a while now, and we get caught up in this partisan politics that all GOP members want to kill Amtrak and all Dems. support it.


It's certainly true that not every Republican is actively working to dismantle Amtrak, but if a given politician is advocating the dismantling of passenger rail it's generally a Republican. I'm concerned that if we continue to vote for the GOP we will eventually vote Amtrak right out of existence. If we accept that Amtrak does not have a mythical guardian angel and can therefore only survive a finite number of attacks we must also accept that at some point Amtrak funding can _and will_ be defeated so long as we keep voting for politicians who are likely to be against it.



saxman said:


> When the Bush Admin. tried to kill Amtrak back in 2005, it was a Republican controlled Congress that voted to keep it around. There are still many members of the GOP that still support Amtrak such as Kay Bailey Hutchinson [sic] of Texas.


 Kay Bailey Hutchison makes for exactly _one_ GOP candidate that is still in support of Amtrak (we hope). Got any others? You also mention that individual states are still moving ahead, but aren't those the very states where passenger rail is under attack by the GOP/TP crowd?



saxman said:


> There's always going to be NIMBY's and BANANA's for anything that is planned to get built, but again that what makes America great!


I've never understood the whole anti-NIMBY argument. Where exactly have the NIMBY's prevented Amtrak from running in recent memory?


----------



## saxman (Oct 5, 2010)

daxomni said:


> Kay Bailey Hutchison makes for exactly _one_ GOP candidate that is still in support of Amtrak (we hope). Got any others? You also mention that individual states are still moving ahead, but aren't those the very states where passenger rail is under attack by the GOP/TP crowd?


California, GOP governor. Florida, GOP governor. Our own Rick Perry of Texas has stated he's not against high speed rail in Texas. Tommy Thompson was at one point but seems to have changed sides for GOP political gain. And former Sen. Trent Lott was always a big supporter. I'm sure there are more, but I'd have to do some digging.



saxman said:


> There's always going to be NIMBY's and BANANA's for anything that is planned to get built, but again that what makes America great!





> I've never understood the whole anti-NIMBY argument. Where exactly have the NIMBY's prevented Amtrak from running in recent memory?


I was talking about NIMBY's in a more general sense, not just Amtrak, but light rail lines, commuter rail, subways, even highways.


----------



## jphjaxfl (Oct 6, 2010)

Amtrak was formed under a Republican Administration, but it was formed with the idea that within 10 years it would be gone and here we are nearly 40 years later and Amtrak is still around. yet some of Amtrak's problems go back to it roots. It should have been given some designated funding, but hasn't so every year they have to beg Congress for funds to barely survive, but can never really live up to the full potential.


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 6, 2010)

Rails' scarce service in so many, many parts of the nation has made it easy for the non rail enthusiast to think, "why should I pay for something which I'll never ride on, and doesn't directly benefit me ?" I strongly suspect that this thought has passed through a great many rail opponents' mind as well -- and they are using it to characterize rail projects as "wasteful Government spending." This is one way in which Amtrak's scarce, bare-bones service across much of Fly-Over country returns to haunt Amtrak.

Read the two books listed above, folks, and also get involved! Speak up, and write letters to the editors of your local newspapers! Start countering the anti-rail comments being listed on the "comments" sections of many of your area's news websites. I think we will be playing defense for Amtrak after the upcoming election, as there are many candidates running on a platform of anti-spending. Believe me, Amtrak is on the chopping block, because it is so easy to characterize it as non-essential to large sections of the nation.

I also fear that many of the Improved rail projects will come too late to make a difference.


----------



## jis (Oct 6, 2010)

Shanghai said:


> New Jersey along
> 
> with the Port Authority of NY & NJ is funding the tunnel. New York is not paying for any of the costs.
> 
> ...


Here is a more or less non-partisan take on what is going on in NJ.

IMHO there is little difference between the Dems and the Reps on matter of substance on the issue of transportation. While Christie is stuck dealing with a situation not of his own making, and some of his decisions appear to be leaning towards roads and away from rails, he is also on record being supportive of DLRT for Glassboro and LRT for Tenafly, both of which would require the TTF to be solvent to fund them.

As far as I can tell, NJ never had any intention of spending too much of their own money on ARC. They have direct funding from PANYNJ and FTA. Then they are proposing to use a pile of CMAQ fund which is originally federal money, masquerading around as state money. And then of course NJ Turnpike Toll money, which is user fee paid by users of the Turnpike and the Parkway and has nothing to do with NJ Taxpayers, and a little bit from the non-existent stash from the TTF which is broke. So as NJ Taxpayer, we have very little to complain about either way - provided there is no cost overrun  .

The present issue is that cleverly, they refrained from identifying who would be responsible for covering the cost overruns, hoping that no one will notice, and then once the project is 2/3rds done and out of money, the crisis will somehow get resolved - typical bureaucratic thinking. Notice that even there they had not yet committed the NJ Taxpayer to anything  . Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on ones leanings), the Federal DoT, having run into that issue with the Big Dig, have explicitly capped what they will fund. Moreover they even noticed that NJ had not designated an agency that will pick up the cost overrun tab, and asked for clarification and the name of one such. That is when the proverbial scatology hit the proverbial fast rotating set of blades for pushing air.

Irrespective of what posturing various sides go through, and god knows you put bureaucrats and politicians together and you never know what will come out the other side, the fact that projects occasionally have cost overruns won't go away, no matter how much we investigate, and I am glad that FDoT will not give money without knowing up front what the contingency is for covering such.


----------



## RailFanLNK (Oct 6, 2010)

When someone who is anti-rail starts the "it's never made any money" I throw out the line, "how can something thrive when its been funded to barely survive". Also, when they also say how it never making a profit, I just shrug my shoulders and say, "neither have the highways or interstates". That usually shuts them up.


----------



## jimhudson (Oct 6, 2010)

When it comes to Government subsidies, NO subidized means of transportation ever has, nor never will make a true free enterprise profit! Even in the days of the RailRoad Robber barosn the Government basiclly picked up the tab to make them rich!

Those that live in areas where so called "private business" control the utitlities and other necessities of life dont realize just how much they are subsidized by tax breaks, free infrastrucxte etc. If people that actually pay the taxes were made aware of just how much it truely costs to subsidize the transportastion Industries (with the exception of the freight roads that do pay taxes and make profits!), they would get out the rope and torches and pitchforks and mob up! This is true, all you non-wealthy defenders of so called "private sector" need to to study up! Just saying!


----------



## Karl1459 (Oct 6, 2010)

Right now we have a bunch of ranting and raving to get voters attention to get the ranters elected. Once (if) elected most of them are going to look at the true costs and options. Without seeing the underlying studies I think the widespread desire in many places to put a rail option in place suggests that the total costs of rail vs road vs air do favor rail. Road is heavily subsidised not only from general fund taxes (I think the national average is around 50% user taxes / 50% general fund) but the tremendous costs from auto crashes and injuries. MUCH less by rail and almost nonexistant by commercial air. Note the wannabe California Govnr statement "... we do not have the money to spend at this time..." Not a blanket against rail, just a recognition that the money is not there today. Christy (NJ) is the type of GOP guy to get elected, and talk to because he appears to listen about the true costs. EVERYTHING INCLUDED. If we can get the true comphrensive costs out in the open I think a very good case for investing in rail can be made to even the most conservitive.


----------



## oldtimer (Oct 6, 2010)

I would like to add my .02 from a point of view as a student of politics (I got hooked with the 1956 conventions being televised) and a former Amtrak employee from the Nixon era to the Obama Administration.

First of all Nixon would not be able to call himself a republican today he was far too liberal for todays GOP. Even with a view of a short life Amtrak was able to attract some very good management in its infancy.

Under Ford and Carter Amtrak did grow and ordered and received new equipment, converted to HEP, tried some experimentation with High-Speed Rail Equipment IE TMT turbotrains and RTG & RTL Turboliners, expanded service and tried to maintain most of the original routes that were run on Amtrak day one. (May 1, 1971) Ford even used a campaign train in Michigan in 1976. The company took over the former PennCentral mechanical facilities and employees and labor relations were at least cordial and polite, not friendly but able to handle disputes and negotiate in good faith.

It is my opinion that Amtrak may have taken too big a bite and had to retreat in 1979 with reduction in service and forces maybe this was an omen of the times to come as the political winds were shifting to the right.

The election of Reagan was a dire point in time for Amtrak, the mechanical employees were forced to take a reduction of 12% when compared to the freight carriers mechanical employees. At the same time that craft employees had their wages reduce it was announced that management would take a DEFERRAL of the same proportion. Did this happen? No, it was also the time that management bonuses were established. This caused a great rift in employee management relations, As many of those employees are still with the company that may still be a factor in the attitude of some employees today. They trust nobody. The management union relationship faded greatly in this time frame (all unions seemed to be demonetized by some politicians) and the distrust extended to the unions who had their hands tied by the Railway Labor Act calling for the NMB to be involved and the NMB appointments were partisan and the board were very under funded bringing its actions to almost a halt.

This period of union-employee unrest continued in the mechanical department for the Reagan and Bush I administrations. The next craft employees contract took almost 11 years and resulted in a 3% raise while the cost of living rose almost 50%. Amtrak lost many great mechanical employees in this period and the equipment suffered from both fewer employees to service it and the talent drain.

The Clinton administration's attitude toward Amtrak was very different, Superliner II's and Viewliners came and a better view in negotiations prevailed and by 1999 wages were equal to the national freight carriers again. These were substantially lower than most commuter line wages but still an improvement the past. The NMB backlog was cut way down. This improvement was only temporary as the 2000 election brought in Bush II and the conditions deteriorated fast.

Bush II also underfunded the NMB and tried to stack the deck again. and again Amtrak stalled the negotiation process. This only ended In GWB's lame duck period when he appointed a Presidental Emergency Board to prevent a strike after almost 9 years of fruitless talks. Again the union presented a case that only asked for the equality with the freight carrier crafts and Amtrak made some outlandish demands (restricting the use of seniority among others). The PEB rejected all of Amtrak's demands for lack of justification and gave the unions just what they asked for. (On a side not the VP of Labor Relations for Amtrak ouickly retired.)

The Obama administration has seemed to be more Amtrak friendly. Most of us are aware that VP Biden was a commuter from Wilmington to DC when Congress was in session and as a senator had two mechanical facilities (Bear and Wilmington) and the National Operation and training center located ing his home state. The current Amtrak administration offered a contract proposal to all of the unions that some quickly accepted and others had to turn down when their membership did not ratify. Those that did not ratify are still currently in the process of meeting to find something that is aceptable to both sides.

I think that the current shift to the right is being very over publicized by the media.(who have more to gain from the right than the left) The few people are being exposed for their lack of common sense and very partisan views. Where were they when GWB took Clinton's surplus budget and spent like a drunken sailor for 8 years? Of the money spent on Defense budgets in the world the USA spends 49% of it and there always has been a history of "Black Budget" item that are not accounted for there. I think that the Chinese probably have the "titles" to almost all of the US Navy's supercarriers and half of the USAF aircraft. I wonder what we will do when they come to collect. That would make a great "Repo Man" show. At least we know they would not want Amtrak's equipment as it is took antiquated for their system!

I guess this is more than .02 worth, Alan B. please send the bill to the other Alan B.






Have a great time in St Louis, A 60th Anniversary in the family will keep me away, hope to make it next year!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 6, 2010)

saxman said:


> California, GOP governor. Florida, GOP governor. Our own Rick Perry of Texas has stated he's not against high speed rail in Texas. Tommy Thompson was at one point but seems to have changed sides for GOP political gain. And former Sen. Trent Lott was always a big supporter. I'm sure there are more, but I'd have to do some digging.


1. Governor Schwarzenegger was never a bellwether for the GOP at large and will soon be out of power regardless. The GOP's follow-up is Meg Whitman, who has called for a moratorium on passenger rail spending.

2. Governor Crist is no longer with the GOP and is running a losing battle for the Senate as an independent.

3. Rick Perry has directed virtually all state funding to roads and has not competed for any federal rail money.

4. Tommy Thompson has dutifully followed the rest of the GOP toward anti-rail positions.

5. Trent Lott hasn't been a force in Washington politics since 2007.

Basically, the only person you mentioned who is in any way wired-in with today's GOP is staunchly against passenger rail. Are there any others you've dug up?



saxman said:


> I was talking about NIMBY's in a more general sense, not just Amtrak, but light rail lines, commuter rail, subways, even highways.


That really doesn't answer my question. If they have had virtually no impact in modern times then why do people keep bringing them up so often?



jis said:


> IMHO there is little difference between the Dems and the Reps on matter of substance on the issue of transportation.


I read through your entire post and never saw anything that explains how you came to this conclusion.


----------



## jis (Oct 6, 2010)

daxomni said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > IMHO there is little difference between the Dems and the Reps on matter of substance on the issue of transportation.
> ...


In NJ at least they have not shown any particular propensity to support rail more than road in general. The Dems tried as hard as they could to kill MOM, kill the RiverLINE and gum up the LRT to Tenafly with silly ideas like DMU to the middle of nowhere. They had every opportunity to fix the financial problem of the TTF by raising the gas tax, and considering they lost the election anyway, they would have gone down having fixed a problem instead of having perpetuated it even further. They came up with grand plans with really no idea on how to actually fund it without due application of smoke and mirrors. And in all those years when they had full control of the state assembly, senate and governorship, they could not bring themselves around to fund even one full project, the only achievement being 9 miles of the cutoff to Andover.

The Reps when it comes to their turn are working to still not fix the TTF problem with a guaranteed source of ongoing funding and trying to apply their own form of smoke and mirror to it. I understand by this time tomorrow they may have killed the tunnel already, instead of right-sizing it, for which they have a chance. OTOH they have been on record in support of the LRT to Tenafly and DLRT to Glassboro.

And so far neither of them through multiple governorships have managed to come up with a real plan to fix the operating subsidy funding source problem. They keep pissing money away on Capital Projects knowing fully well that they do not have the funds to operate those new lines should they be built. This happens irrespective of whether the Dems or the Reps are in ascendency at the moment. Quite disgusting overall actually! 

Frankly I am more disillusioned by the non-performance of the Dems than the silliness of the Reps, because I expected better of the Dems.


----------



## afigg (Oct 6, 2010)

daxomni said:


> Basically, the only person you mentioned who is in any way wired-in with today's GOP is staunchly against passenger rail. Are there any others you've dug up?


Congressman Mica (R-FL), who would be the House Transportation committee chairman, if the Republicans take back control of the House, should be considered pro-transit and pro-rail to some extent. See http://dc.streetsblog.org/2010/10/06/if-republicans-take-the-house-what-happens-to-transportation-reform/. A committee chairman has much more influence and power than any 10 freshman congresspersons.

Meg Whitman is now trailing Jerry Brown in the polls for the CA Governor's race, which may be the one Governor's race in the US that really matters for true HSR in the short term. The way I see it, if California can get their HSR system far enough along under construction - say a year or two after major work has actually started and thus beyond the cancellation point (see the ARC project) - other more populated states and regions of the US that currently have some rail service will start to ask why are we not working towards HSR and improved passenger rail?

The other corridor that may matter is Chicago to St. Louis. If they can show that 110 mph improved service with greater frequency in the mid-West results in a big increase boost in ridership, that should change the political landscape in the wavering states of the mid-West towards building passenger rail. If Wisconsin gives their $800+ million HSIPR money back, I say give it to Illinois & Michigan for the Chicago - St Louis and Chicago - Detroit corridors. The funding Illinois got does not fix up the entire Chicago - St. Louis corridor, just most of it.

This is one of those crazy election years with a lot of clamor and yelling. This one may be the craziest in some decades. The economy has begun to recover, it is just taking a while because of the huge amount of money lost in the crash of 2008 and the fall in real estate prices. In a year or two, the political climate should be calmer. I sure hope so.


----------



## BigBlueBuddha (Oct 8, 2010)

daxomni said:


> In Wisconsin, which got more than $810 million in federal stimulus money to build a train line between Milwaukee and Madison, Scott Walker, the Milwaukee County executive and Republican candidate for governor, has made his opposition to the project central to his campaign.


Analysis of the Wisconsin situation here Link.


----------



## Guest (Oct 8, 2010)

I don't think that most of these politicians actually give a crap one way or the other about trains. It is just a tool to get their voters fired up about something. Politics is all marketing and this is just one way for them to sell their snake oil. I don't thing that most politicians actually give a crap about much of anything besides getting re-elected and feeding their lust for power.


----------



## JayPea (Oct 8, 2010)

Guest said:


> I don't think that most of these politicians actually give a crap one way or the other about trains. It is just a tool to get their voters fired up about something. Politics is all marketing and this is just one way for them to sell their snake oil. I don't thing that most politicians actually give a crap about much of anything besides getting re-elected and feeding their lust for power.



Cynical view of our politicians! But very accurate, for the most part, in my opinion.


----------



## daveyb99 (Oct 9, 2010)

Given the opportunity, a Republican controlled House would KILL AMTRAK. Do not kid your self. We already have seen what a "zero budget" proposal looks like.

Just look at what the Republican Whip put up recently: End Sleeper Subsidies on AMTRAK

This has been debunked time after time, yet they continue to rant.


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 9, 2010)

daveyb99 said:


> Given the opportunity, a Republican controlled House would KILL AMTRAK. Do not kid your self. We already have seen what a "zero budget" proposal looks like.
> 
> Just look at what the Republican Whip put up recently: End Sleeper Subsidies on AMTRAK
> 
> This has been debunked time after time, yet they continue to rant.


Agreed. DaveyB is correct, folks. It really does look like Amtrak's tiny, miniscule market presence in most parts of the Nation, will result in its' defunding. It is not enough to sit around at home. If you want to have trains as an option, then I suggest that you get involved in the local rail passengers association.

Also, write, and continue to write, your Elected Representatives in Congress. Remember, _they_ are supposed to work for _us_.


----------



## AlanB (Oct 10, 2010)

WICT106 said:


> daveyb99 said:
> 
> 
> > Given the opportunity, a Republican controlled House would KILL AMTRAK. Do not kid your self. We already have seen what a "zero budget" proposal looks like.
> ...


With respect, please don't kid yourself.

It was a Republican controlled Congress that got those "zero budget" proposals from the Bush White House and restored the Amtrak funding to the budget for those 2 years sending the Bush White house a message "we're not defunding Amtrak."


----------



## Larry H. (Oct 10, 2010)

I just made a round trip to chicago last friday from southern illinois. Both the local day train and the City on the return were filled and larger than the previous trips I have taken the past number of years. It sadly shows that rail support from the public is trending upward, and really for small towns all along the routes that any major long distance train travels its the only way many have the ability to get anywhere without driving very long distances to airports and then ending up outside the cities they want to go to in many cases. I don't know how to convince republicans of the importance of a viable rail service including sleepers and diners. I wish every congressman and senator had to travel cross country on amtrak once a year. That would open a lot of eyes to the need of the very services somehow they seem to feel are unneeded and wasteful spending.

I also agree 100% that the fact that the Amtrak map was so sharply cut right after it started was a huge problem for keeping it foremost in the minds of politicians and riders that we need this service. I have always felt that we would be seeing huge ridership increases over what we have today with the right routes and cars. Neither party has been particularly good at that one. I voted for Clinton because he said he would expand and improve service, I voted for Obama for the same reason. In truth I have voted against my gut feelings of how the country should be run to help save amtrak. But I don't know that I can do that again. No matter what I think, the country is going to speak its mind and that will be that. I just hope that some sense of obligation will prevail when it comes to support for rail services. I just don't know where the politicians heads are that think we don't need it. I would think we have tons of expenses we could cut before ruining such a basic service as rail. To me it should be like the highways and air support we give, they don't ever seem to think they should be cut. Maybe some museums or research on potatoes or fish or what ever should go first?


----------



## dlagrua (Oct 11, 2010)

Amtrak will continue regardless of which party is in power. Amtrak trains are a vital part of the US transportation system, especially routes like the NE corridor that carry the majority of travelers. At slightly more than 1% of the total US transportation budget, Amtrak is a TINY expense for the federal government and its a service that's energy efficient, convenient, safe and affordable. If Amtrak wer ever defunded then the 20,000 employees that are employed there and the several thousand others that are employed by their private contractors would be put out on the street. Its just not going to happen.

What might be defunded and well that it should be is the $8.7 billion new Hudson river tunnel project that was somehow dumped entirely on NJ. NJ is broke and can't afford such an expensive project. Amtrak can still run quite well without it and regardless if you could get Superliners though it; you still couldn't use them on the NE corridor route North of WAS.

This opinion was brought to you by a Tea Party member who believes in fiscal responsibility. Our fiscal probelms are going to be solved by cutting out the fat and not by cutting into the lean. Amtrak is the lean!


----------



## alanh (Oct 11, 2010)

The problem is that Amtrak is a convenient target for politicians that want to pretend they're for big cuts in federal spending. A large percentage of Americans don't ride Amtrak, so it's an easy pitch.

The reality, of course, is that the majority of the budget is military, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest on the debt. In the budget... well, it's not really a plan, but whatever the Republicans are calling it... they promised not to touch any of those categories. So much for actual budget cuts.

There's 67% of the budget right there; everything else falls into the remaining 33%. It's not mathematically possible to balance the budget without either raising taxes or cutting those "untouchable" categories.

Of course, Libertarians would do exactly that -- eliminate the social programs and pretty much all of the military outside the US borders. They're at least honest about it, but that's also why they have trouble winning elections.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 11, 2010)

AlanB said:


> It was a Republican controlled Congress that got those "zero budget" proposals from the Bush White House and restored the Amtrak funding to the budget for those 2 years sending the Bush White house a message "we're not defunding Amtrak."


One Republican congress can be substantially different from another. They are not all identical copies of each other. Just because one former group of Republicans had lukewarm support for our skeletal rail service in the past does _not_ mean the next Republican congress won't do their best to kill it now. This time they may very well have the motivation and the votes to make it happen. I'm not sure how you missed this, but today's GOP has been busy ostracizing many of their more moderate members and adopting anti-rail positions. Just a year ago many of us were looking forward to a new and improved Amtrak with better funding and support. Now we're potentially on the cusp of yet another series of cuts that could leave Amtrak weaker than ever. I'd like you to tell us who among the current batch of Republican candidates is _still_ pro-rail enough to go against their own party to _stand with Obama_ and lobby for continued funding for Amtrak?


----------



## Larry H. (Oct 11, 2010)

alanh said:


> The problem is that Amtrak is a convenient target for politicians that want to pretend they're for big cuts in federal spending. A large percentage of Americans don't ride Amtrak, so it's an easy pitch.
> 
> The reality, of course, is that the majority of the budget is military, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest on the debt. In the budget... well, it's not really a plan, but whatever the Republicans are calling it... they promised not to touch any of those categories. So much for actual budget cuts.
> 
> ...


I don't think this is quite right? Republicans have long tried to get a dialog about ways to trim the cost of social security. Not eliminate it for those who need it most. Democrats pounce at any type of improvement in cost while doing nothing to fix it them selves. But I agree that the Amtrak monies are chump change in the days of trillion dollar expenses for make work projects that don't make work. Favoring the North East Corridor may seem good to those who get the services, but to those of us left with a few trains at best a day going one direction more or less, its a failure to provide the country the service it needs. The huge increases in ridership in the midwest when lines were increased to more daily round trips proves that its not only those who live in the northeast that desire service. They just haven't been provided the equipment or improvements that the east has had showered on them. Not my idea of a national system.


----------



## alanh (Oct 11, 2010)

The problem with cuts to Social Security is that much of its spending is offset by FICA taxes. We're assuming that if the government stops paying Social Security checks itself, it's also going to stop collecting FICA. There's still a net benefit because the payments will start exceeding the taxes in a few years. That also means that at the moment, Social Security is a net positive on the balance sheet -- if it stopped tomorrow, the deficit as a percentage of the budget would actually increase.

The primary issue with Social Security is when payments start exceeding receipts. It's been a cheap source of borrowing for the government, and will have to be replaced by other more expensive borrowing. But it's not a deficit problem until at least 2030.

If you can convince the public to continue to pay FICA while still funding their own retirement funds on their own, yeah, the budget would dramatically improve. Good luck with that.

Medicare is the much bigger problem, made worse by Part D passed under the Republicans a few years ago. It was totally unfunded, and has little in the way of cost controls. The Medicare problem is just part of the US spending way, way more for healthcare than any other industrialized nation, regardless of how you measure it (per person, % of GDP, % of income), without dramatically better health.

And there's the military. The US spends vastly more than any other western nation. You can say it's justified, but that doesn't make it any cheaper and you still have to collect taxes for it if you want it.

Edit: this is actually getting way off topic. But the point is that Amtrak and other spending not in the above categories is not where you're going to find big savings -- certainly not enough to balance the budget.


----------



## mfastx (Oct 11, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> This opinion was brought to you by a Tea Party member who believes in fiscal responsibility. Our fiscal probelms are going to be solved by cutting out the fat and not by cutting into the lean. Amtrak is the lean!


Well I'm glad to hear that, but what do you think about investing in high speed rail? It has extremely expensive initial cost, but it is by far the most convienient mode of transport between medium-length cities. It also has shown to attract the majority of the air/rail passenger share. I know that most Tea Party members are shortsighted on this issue, and only focus on initial cost. I hope you understand the benefits of high speed rail before you vote for a politicion that will attempt to kill it.


----------



## Larry H. (Oct 11, 2010)

I think this is where it gets so difficult politically speaking. The parties have both become so entrenched with left or right wing ideas that a middle ground, which Amtrak should be is hard to find. Sadly for some the left side is too far for comfort and for others the right equally as distasteful. It makes voting that considers things like Amtrak get lost in which way do we want the country to veer. At the moment the majority of people appear to not wish to go where the Obama crew is leading, if Amtrak is caught in the cross fire its very sad. But sometimes you have to do what you have to do regardless of the outcome if you think you have no choice. That again probably represents both sides at this divisive time in american politics. I guess we can just hope that some common sense prevails, but so far its hard to find.


----------



## mercedeslove (Oct 12, 2010)

daxomni said:


> *Link to Full Story...*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The key word to this is republicans they are always against moving forward. For them it's always backwards. And not just with the rail issue either but sexual and gender equality, health insurance, and educational issues. It's really scary what they want to do and how they think.


----------



## rtabern (Oct 12, 2010)

Here in Wisconsin, it is critical that TOM BARRETT wins over SCOTT WALKER for governor. I live in Milwaukee County -- and have seen the two of them first hand -- as Barrett was the Mayor of Milwaukee since I lived here in 2003 -- and Scott Walker has been our County Executive for about the same amount of time. For those of you who don't know, it was Walker who virtually killed the KRM plan which would have basically extended the Metra line from Chicago to Kenosha out to Racine and Milwaukee. While the county executives of Kenosha and Racine Countines agreed on a way to fund the line, it was Walker who screwed around so much on how to fund it that it's virtually dead in the water. While, yes, we already do have a rail line from Milwaukee to Chicago (Amtrak's Hiawatha) -- the KRM line actually would be more convienient for a lot of people as the ex-C&NW (now UP) line goes through MUCH more populated areas than the ex-Milwaukee Road (now CP/Amtrak) line does. Walker WILL try and do the same with the MKE-MAD line. The only good thing is our current governor and legislators were smart enough to pass the bill now to fund the line -- and about 75 percent of the funds are already locked up in contracts -- meaning Walker will have to face an ugly mess with breaking contracts and paying penalities and returning millions to the federal government if he tried to mess with the rail line.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 12, 2010)

rtabern said:


> Here in Wisconsin, it is critical that TOM BARRETT wins over SCOTT WALKER for governor.


Tom Barret only has a 13% chance of winning this battle while Scott Walker has an 85% chance of winning, at least according to Nate Silver. This election cycle is likely to be very troubling for Amtrak fans. After the _Citizens United_ ruling by the Roberts Court I would expect future election cycles to just as bad if not _worse_ for Amtrak fans. Still, it's heartening to see that _some_ folks do realize that politics does matter and are willing to admit that Amtrak is *not* invincible against today's anti-rail GOP.


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 12, 2010)

daxomni said:


> rtabern said:
> 
> 
> > Here in Wisconsin, it is critical that TOM BARRETT wins over SCOTT WALKER for governor.
> ...



Then it looks as though we may have to act as passenger rail advocates. Time to start planning right now. There has been a lot of misinformation broadcast about the proposed addition of Madison to the existing Hiawatha service. For example, many in the general public think that the train is only MKE to Madison. They are totally ignorant of the fact that it is proposed to go from Saint Paul, through Madison and Milwaukee, to Chicago. In my walks and talks with folks about Madison, I have found that mentioning this tends to reduce the opposition, somewhat. There continues to be the impression that it will serve only a couple of folks, and that it is a "slow speed," or "cow speed" train. When faced with these comments, I have said that one must walk before one can run.



> "The only good thing is our current governor and legislators were smart enough to pass the bill now to fund the line -- and about 75 percent of the funds are already locked up in contracts -- meaning Walker will have to face an ugly mess with breaking contracts and paying penalities and returning millions to the federal government if he tried to mess with the rail line."


I know that the amount of funds that will be contracted for is supposed to be in the neighborhood of $ 300 million. I might be wrong. Where did you hear about it being almost 75 percent of $ 810 million ?

Note: on the Prorail site, Prorail, There are some electronic copies of flyers that someone can hand out to people, or post on community bulletin boards.


----------



## daveyb99 (Oct 21, 2010)

Want to know just how much Republicans in charge of the House Transportation Committee feel about AMTRAK (and other federal transportation issues?)

Sitting On Our Assets: The Federal Government's Misuse Of Taxpayer Owned Assets


----------



## Ryan (Oct 21, 2010)

Those idiots have no idea what they're talking about.



> Reprogramming funds that were awarded to states for slow-speed passenger rail projects to true high-speed projects that can attract private sector participation and run at an operational profit: Estimated savings of up to $6 billion.


Transportation is not profitable. Any mode. Why is that so difficult to understand?


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 21, 2010)

Ryan said:


> Those idiots have no idea what they're talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



These individuals are too wedded to Cato- and Reason Institute thinking. There are other, pro-rail think-tanks out there, notably the Free Congress Foundation, which promote use of rail. Unfortunately, The members of Congress are more enamored with Reason and the Cato foundation than the Free Congress foundation. It is up to us, the voters and constituents and the citizens, to correspond with these congress folk, and enlighten them. It will be up to us to make our voices and viewpoint heard, either through NARP, or some other organization, or individually.


----------



## bretton88 (Oct 21, 2010)

Ryan said:


> Those idiots have no idea what they're talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The way I interpreted this statement was to transfer funds to projects like Florida's HSR, California HSR, and the NEC, all of which will run/ already run at a profit. Not to kill HSR completely. John-Mica, the ranking republican member is supportive of HSR, as long as its true HSR (150mph +).


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 21, 2010)

Ryan said:


> Transportation is not profitable. Any mode. Why is that so difficult to understand?


What about toll roads and bridges? Don't some of those make a profit? If not maybe we need bigger trolls at the tollbooth. :lol:



bretton88 said:


> The way I interpreted this statement was to transfer funds to projects like Florida's HSR, California HSR, and the NEC, all of which will run/ already run at a profit. Not to kill HSR completely. John-Mica, the ranking republican member is supportive of HSR, as long as its true HSR (150mph +).


I'm not sure you can claim any of those make a true profit if the government didn't subsidize any of it. Same goes for US airlines. If they had to pay for their own airports and traffic control they'd all be completely bankrupt (not half-bankrupt like we often see, but completely liquidated). As for John Mica...



> Washington, DC – U.S. Rep. John L. Mica (R-FL), the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s Republican leader, released the following statement today in response to a report by the Treasury Department and the White House on the Administration’s $50 billion infrastructure spending plan:
> “Unfortunately this last minute report is a pitiful and tardy political excuse for the Administration having killed last year any chance for a long-term transportation measure.
> 
> “Even more astounding is their regurgitation and attempted justification of a $50 billion spending proposal while more than 60% of the stimulus infrastructure dollars remain unspent.
> ...


I thought the bulk of unspent stimulus funds were the result of GOP threats and foot-dragging?


----------



## Ryan (Oct 21, 2010)

daxomni said:


> I thought the bulk of unspent stimulus funds were the result of GOP threats and foot-dragging?


Don't you go clouding the issue with all of your facts and logic and stuff.


----------



## dlagrua (Oct 21, 2010)

daveyb99 said:


> Want to know just how much Republicans in charge of the House Transportation Committee feel about AMTRAK (and other federal transportation issues?)
> 
> Sitting On Our Assets: The Federal Government's Misuse Of Taxpayer Owned Assets


The report is critical of Amtraks misappropriation of funds but in general is very pro rail, especialy high speed rail. This should illustrate that the politicising and charges that Republicans are against Amtrak is incorrect. As an independent Tea Party member I am all for fiscal responsibility, controlling government waste and holding Amtrak accountable for how they spend OUR tax money but I'm also very supportive of passenger rail travel as it provides a vital U.S. transportation link saves fuel and gets 1000's of motorists off the road.


----------



## John Bredin (Oct 21, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> As an independent Tea Party member I am all for fiscal responsibility, controlling government waste and holding Amtrak accountable for how they spend OUR tax money but I'm also very supportive of passenger rail travel as it provides a vital U.S. transportation link saves fuel and gets 1000's of motorists off the road.


You personally are supportive, but as shown by the Republican candidates for governor in Ohio, Wisconsin, and California, "you" collectively (the Republican party as a whole) maybe not so much.

Counterpoint for the sake of fairness: the conservative Republican gubernatorial candidate in Illinois is pro-rail. Also, I'm not going to lump the governor of New Jersey into that group automatically, as the potential of a billion-dollar (or more) overrun on the ARC tunnel is a different ballgame than, for instance, Ohio having to pony up $10-20 million annually to run the 3C corridor, equivalent to ODOT's spending on mowing the grass alongside state-maintained highways.  That said, while pro-rail Republicans undoubtedly exist, the anti-rail ones are both more prominent and more vocal.


----------



## saxman (Oct 21, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> daveyb99 said:
> 
> 
> > Want to know just how much Republicans in charge of the House Transportation Committee feel about AMTRAK (and other federal transportation issues?)
> ...


I've mentioned this several times in this forum, but a book every person interested in trains and transit needs to read is "Conservatives and Public Transportation." It pretty much makes the case why those who consider themselves conservative why it makes sense to support passenger rail, and has some great tools to use if you ever get to speak with a conservative person or politician who may not quite "get it" when it comes to transportation.

Here's a link to an interview with one of the author, William Lind.

And here's the weblink to the book and website Reconnectingamerica.org which published the book.


----------



## Big Iron (Oct 21, 2010)

saxman said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> > daveyb99 said:
> ...


Saxman, thanks for the link to the website. Did a quick look around, I'm a big fan of mixed income housing, even bigger fan if it involves mass transit. I'm on a steering committee that is working with an organization that is redevloping older, crime ridden neighborhoods into mixed income development. Going quite well even in this environment. Mass transit was somewhat of an afterthought but Fed stimulus money built a new bus station in town that will benefit this type of development.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 21, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> The report is critical of Amtraks misappropriation of funds but in general is very pro rail, especialy high speed rail. This should illustrate that the politicising and charges that Republicans are against Amtrak is incorrect.


If you're going to make the claim that the bulk of the GOP is not anti-rail then please give us a list of current Republicans who are demonstrably pro-rail by virtue of their voting record. If you cannot do that then please stop repeating this unsubstantiated claim.



dlagrua said:


> As an independent Tea Party member I am all for fiscal responsibility, controlling government waste and holding Amtrak accountable for how they spend OUR tax money but I'm also very supportive of passenger rail travel as it provides a vital U.S.


You might as well be telling us that you're an anti-gun Tea Party member since that would make about as much logical sense.


----------



## AlanB (Oct 22, 2010)

Ok, we're way off topic here.


----------



## AlanB (Oct 22, 2010)

Ok, I've cleaned up/deleted some posts that got way off our focus of Amtrak and ventured into pure political discussion. While politics does play a role in Amtrak and it's discussions, please let's try to keep things focused on how politics affects Amtrak and not get into discussions about which parties did what and how one might be better or worse than the other.

If we cannot, then I may have no choice but to lock this topic permanently, something that I don't really want to do and something that I know the OP would prefer not to have happen.

Many thanks!


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 23, 2010)

I'm uncertain where to post this, but I think it should provide some enlightenment to the members here. It looks like those of us AU members who are Wisconsinites have our work cut out for us if we want this rail service improvement to have enough public support and go forward. I'm disappointed to learn of the opposition in the MIlwaukee area, but I wonder how much of that is due to the train being misrepresented and deceitfully labeled a Madison - Milwaukee train, instead of a Chicago to Saint Paul train. Almost every single news report I encounter fails to mention that the train is Chicago to Saint Paul. I think the Wisconsin DOT really harmed its' project when it named the project "Madison - Milwaukee" as this gave considerable ammunition to the opponents, and gave the wrong impression to the general public.

I mean, there have been several local toalk radio shows who have always made it a point to call this a "Madison - Milwaukee" train. Within the past week, one local talk radio show ran six hours of bashing local support for the service, and _*never, not once*_ did the host indicate that the train was Chicago - Saint Paul. It was referred to, and has always been referred to, as a "Madison - Milwaukee" train. :angry2: :angry:

Public Support for the Wisconsin rail service improvements: in the 608 area code ( that's Madison and surrounding area ) 50 percent in favor, 48 percent opposed. In the 414 area code ( Milwaukee ) 52 percent opposed, while in the suburbs immediately west of Milwaukee, 67 percent opposed  Meanwhile, in the 715 area code ( northern and northwestern WI ) 52 percent in favor. See link: Poll shows tepid support for "high speed" rail.


----------



## dlagrua (Oct 23, 2010)

AlanB said:


> Ok, I've cleaned up/deleted some posts that got way off our focus of Amtrak and ventured into pure political discussion. While politics does play a role in Amtrak and it's discussions, please let's try to keep things focused on how politics affects Amtrak and not get into discussions about which parties did what and how one might be better or worse than the other.
> 
> If we cannot, then I may have no choice but to lock this topic permanently, something that I don't really want to do and something that I know the OP would prefer not to have happen.
> 
> Many thanks!


Despite the rhetoric, I can't see that either party will vote to defund Amtrak but you are correct, we should get the discussion centered about factual statements and bills that are being introduced that can affect passenger rail travel.

Rail passengers are but a small portion of the total travlers in the USA and it is important that our voice be heard. IMO what we can do is to instruct our employees (the politicans) to vote to continually support Amtrak as "Green Efficient Transportation". When there is talk of defunding or a bill is introduced that would be adverse to Amtrak lets post it here and start writing letters to our politicans. They must not forget that they work for us and that our taxes pay their salary


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 23, 2010)

Well, on the state level, it looks like it will be more difficult for those of us who like trains and want improved service. Here in WI, you can see the lack of support for the trains, and I have made efforts to convey how the opponents are mischaracterizing the service. One would think that Madison and environs would be excited about the new train service, but that is not the case - There are quite a few vocal skeptics and opponents, and only half of the population supports it. In the MKE, area, the support is even less - and even more misinformed. If one goes right down the WI Republican State ticket, every single candidate is opposed, and says that they see no need for it, no one rides trains, why should they pay for something that no one will ride that was forced upon us, etc., etc. Those of us who are pro-rail conservatives are in the minority. When I've told people on the streets I support the train, they ask, "Why ?"

We can imagine who will need and ride trains, but it is proving difficult to win over those who see otherwise. We have to do some organizing at the individual State levels, because the State legislators will be as ignorant and uninformed ( or worse ) as the Federal ones have been. Scott Walker has outlined part of his strategy: De-fund the WI train effort, or name a Transportation Secretary who isn't pro-rail, or (what he is starting to do ) tie the train up in court, with fights over the EIS ( or any excuse to tie the service up in court), or veto the spending when it comes up in the state budget.

It is proving difficult to garner additional public support for the train service, as those who are opposed do not see any use for it. Think about this: every single Republican running for State office is opposed to the Hiawatha extension to Madison. The next election has been turned into a referendum on rail, and the opponents are quite loud, misinformed - with significant public support. This is what we are facing. Get active, and get involved on the State level gang.

To the earlier poster: where are these pro-rail Republicans / conservatives ? I seem to be the only pro-rail conservative here in WI.

When you look at the candidates, and the political predictions for the next election, better believe that Amtrak and rail are on the chopping block.


----------



## dlagrua (Oct 24, 2010)

> To the earlier poster: where are these pro-rail Republicans / conservatives ? I seem to be the only pro-rail conservative here in WI.


and to the poster that made this comment please point out the pro-rail Democrats and their achievements helping Amtrak?. Some Democrats talk pro-rail but its all B.S. They haven't done anything to help Amtrak of late either. I cannot point to any stimulus funds that have been alloted to Amtrak, can you?.

Both parties are put there to make you feel as though you have a choice and each has its ignorant obiedient following. Fact is that you don't have a choice as big businesses, the banks, the financiers and the crooks on Wall Street run this country.


----------



## stonesfan (Oct 24, 2010)

Its catch 22 whichever way you look at it.

Believe it or not, the biggest problem we face here, is that people have become 'wedded' to their cars regardless of the fact that theres generally a World class, if slightly pricey train service operating over most of the country. However, and purely hypothetical, if you were to force 15% of the country's motorists out of their cars and on to trains, the system simply wouldnt be able to cope and 'intercity' trains would run full and standing and still leave passengers on the platform. This is despite having an extremely intensive service.

So you manage to convince people nicely to leave their car at home, promise to build more trains and increase track capacity. Then comes the bad news, that prices, and govt subsidies will have to go up to build these new toys! Mr Motorist turned train rider then goes back to his car in disgust. And then you tell him you are going to build a nice new high speed line, so he can get from his large 4 bed house 50 miles out of Town to his place of work in just 20 minutes. He's right behind it, think of the extra time he can either spend in the office or at home with the kids. Then comes the bombshell, its gonna run 100 yards behind his back garden. So to hell with that idea.

I could be wrong here. But I get the feeling the US system is a bit 'too far gone' in both political and cultural terms to ever really get the cash injection it needs to really give the most influencial country in the world a railway is deserves. Theres some very positive aspects to US railroads, but whether the train will once again capture the public's imagination is open to debate.


----------



## Ryan (Oct 24, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> I cannot point to any stimulus funds that have been alloted to Amtrak, can you?.


You can't be serious, can you?

Amtrak has rebuilt stations and restored both Superliner and Amfleet cars with stimulus funding.


----------



## PRR 60 (Oct 24, 2010)

Ryan said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> > I cannot point to any stimulus funds that have been alloted to Amtrak, can you?.
> ...


Amtrak received $1.3 billion in stimulus funding. Aviation also got $1.3 billion. Transit got $8.4 billion. Highway $27.5 billion.


----------



## afigg (Oct 24, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> and to the poster that made this comment please point out the pro-rail Democrats and their achievements helping Amtrak?. Some Democrats talk pro-rail but its all B.S. They haven't done anything to help Amtrak of late either. I cannot point to any stimulus funds that have been alloted to Amtrak, can you?.


I don't know if you are serious either. But in case you are, the last 21 months have been pretty good for Amtrak.

Amtrak got $1.3 billion directly from the stimulus package, which they have been busy spending on many backlog projects across the system besides the higher profile projects such as the refurbishment of the Wilmington DE station and the $105 million for the replacement of the Niantic River bridge in CT. Visible improvements have been the ROW clean-up, tree cutting, and repair along the NEC and the other tracks owned by Amtrak. And a bunch of Superliners and Amfleets in storage are being overhauled and returned to service. A long list of the projects completed or underway can be found on the Reports & Documents page at the Amtrak website.

Of the $8 billion of stimulus for HSIPR (High Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail), $4.5 billion was awarded in late January to corridor upgrades and projects that will directly benefit and expand in several places Amtrak service. That money is only now just starting to be spent on some of the projects. Ohio and Wisconsin may give their money back because we have campaign promises being made in a overheated election year, but it can be put to use for passenger rail elsewhere. Amtrak also benefited from some of the Tiger transit grants which went to freight and commuter rail improvements for lines used by Amtrak. Just have to remember that it takes years to get transit projects going and for the construction, so it will be several years before the improvements from the HSIPR and Tiger stimulus really start to take effect with expanded service and faster run times.

There are $2.3 billion of FY2010 HSIPR funds to be awarded which might be announced this week. Not nearly as much money as is needed to get serious about improved intercity passenger rail, but a lot more money than there was under the last administration. Even if a Republican controlled congress tries to put a squeeze on future passenger rail funding, the Obama administration is going to support rail and transit, so expect a lot of back and forth and hue and cry on it. I'm confident that we will see funding for HSIPR in the next 2 fiscal years, just not as much as it should be.


----------



## dlagrua (Oct 24, 2010)

I guess that there was some stimulus spending as I remember a while back that Beach Grove was hiring. Yes they did restore a few dining cars. You'd have to admit though that the improvements have been pretty few. Rail cars are routinely rebuilt so that's really nothing new. Stations like the AutoTrain Sanford terminal were started way before stimulus was ever appropriated. When I've traveled I have not seen many new improvements or refab'd sleepers so I wish that Amtrak would post a list of all the projects that they were able to complete as a result of stimulus funding. It would be nice to know that Uncle Sam is at least doing something for passenger rail.


----------



## PRR 60 (Oct 24, 2010)

afigg said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> > and to the poster that made this comment please point out the pro-rail Democrats and their achievements helping Amtrak?. Some Democrats talk pro-rail but its all B.S. They haven't done anything to help Amtrak of late either. I cannot point to any stimulus funds that have been alloted to Amtrak, can you?.
> ...


Technically speaking, the High Speed Rail funding is not "stimulus" funding. Stimulus money was for quick injection projects, and HSR does not meet that criteria. Of course, with a few exceptions, it is not "high speed" either, but that's another issue.


----------



## AlanB (Oct 24, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> I guess that there was some stimulus spending as I remember a while back that Beach Grove was hiring. Yes they did restore a few dining cars. You'd have to admit though that the improvements have been pretty few. Rail cars are routinely rebuilt so that's really nothing new. Stations like the AutoTrain Sanford terminal were started way before stimulus was ever appropriated. When I've traveled I have not seen many new improvements or refab'd sleepers so I wish that Amtrak would post a list of all the projects that they were able to complete as a result of stimulus funding. It would be nice to know that Uncle Sam is at least doing something for passenger rail.


We're not talking about routine rebuilding of cars. We're talking about cars that were so badly wrecked that Amtrak couldn't afford to restore them. However, many of them have now been restored to service easing the strain on the system just a bit.

And Amtrak has a wonderful document on their website that details where they are spending every dime they got from the Stimulus. I haven't noticed a list of what's completed, but some of that can be gleaned from reading stories here and press releases.


----------



## mercedeslove (Oct 25, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> > To the earlier poster: where are these pro-rail Republicans / conservatives ? I seem to be the only pro-rail conservative here in WI.
> 
> 
> I cannot point to any stimulus funds that have been alloted to Amtrak, can you?.


Uhm where have you been for like the past two years? They got stimulus money and they did

Rome wasn't built over night.

I needed this laugh though, thank you.


----------



## saxman (Oct 25, 2010)

WICT106 said:


> Well, on the state level, it looks like it will be more difficult for those of us who like trains and want improved service. Here in WI, you can see the lack of support for the trains, and I have made efforts to convey how the opponents are mischaracterizing the service. One would think that Madison and environs would be excited about the new train service, but that is not the case - There are quite a few vocal skeptics and opponents, and only half of the population supports it. In the MKE, area, the support is even less - and even more misinformed. If one goes right down the WI Republican State ticket, every single candidate is opposed, and says that they see no need for it, no one rides trains, why should they pay for something that no one will ride that was forced upon us, etc., etc. Those of us who are pro-rail conservatives are in the minority. When I've told people on the streets I support the train, they ask, "Why ?"
> 
> We can imagine who will need and ride trains, but it is proving difficult to win over those who see otherwise. We have to do some organizing at the individual State levels, because the State legislators will be as ignorant and uninformed ( or worse ) as the Federal ones have been. Scott Walker has outlined part of his strategy: De-fund the WI train effort, or name a Transportation Secretary who isn't pro-rail, or (what he is starting to do ) tie the train up in court, with fights over the EIS ( or any excuse to tie the service up in court), or veto the spending when it comes up in the state budget.
> 
> ...


You've probably already seen this, but here's a group of Wisconsin businesses forming a coalition in support of this train. WISPIRG


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 26, 2010)

saxman said:


> You've probably already seen this, but here's a group of Wisconsin businesses forming a coalition in support of this train. WISPIRG


Only time will tell just how much influence WISPRIG and that coalition will have on the next Wisconsin Governor. Scott Walker has vowed to terminate the train, no matter how far along the project is under construction. Pointing out that each WI resident pays on the order of $ 360 for highways, while this service would be no more costly than $ 1.50 per resident, falls upon deaf ears in conservative circles. Same with pointing out that interest rates are low, and construction costs are low as well. What other options am I left with ?

*crosses fingers, hoping Walker is stymied in his efforts**


----------



## hemitlit exceeding (Oct 26, 2010)

Maybe the stimulus money is written with hot checks, ever thought of that?


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 26, 2010)

hemitlit exceeding said:


> Maybe the stimulus money is written with hot checks, ever thought of that?


Then maybe we should start with those trillion dollar _war debts_. Ever think of that?


----------



## WICT106 (Oct 27, 2010)

Here's an update from the Wall Street Journal: Racing to build Midwest Rail Line. Still no indication as to how the route is going to survive a Scott Walker gubernatorial administration -- which is looking pretty likely. Wisconsin AU members, go to the Prorail.com webpage and make copies of the appropriate flyer for your area, then get out there and post them on community bulletin boards, supermarkets, public library bulletin boards, etc. Get out there are advocate for trains, guys !


----------



## BigRedEO (Nov 2, 2010)

BREAKING - Wisconsin Governor quietly signs bill over the weekend advancing the High Speed Rail Line between Madison and Milwaukee!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704462704575590550329340266.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


----------



## mfastx (Nov 2, 2010)

BigRedEO said:


> BREAKING - Wisconsin Governor quietly signs bill over the weekend advancing the High Speed Rail Line between Madison and Milwaukee!


Dodged THAT bullet. *wipes sweat off forehead*


----------



## WICT106 (Nov 3, 2010)

mfastx said:


> BigRedEO said:
> 
> 
> > BREAKING - Wisconsin Governor quietly signs bill over the weekend advancing the High Speed Rail Line between Madison and Milwaukee!
> ...



Think again. Now the action will be to make certain the rail service gets built, and that Mr. Walker doesn't play any games with stalling the project in some way, or stalling it through a court injunction, or de-funding it. Walker can still keep the train from getting to Madison. Keep the pressure up!


----------



## rtabern (Nov 3, 2010)

Let's hope that Walker can't un-do this like the article says... HOWEVER... I am EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED how this election turned out yesterday with our state now getting both a Republican senator and a Republican governor. I am sad to see Doyle and Feingold go... besides being rail supporters... I have interviewed both men several times when I worked in television news here in Milwaukee... and can say both were among the most genuine, family-centered people I have met. Walker, on the other hand, always came across as a "slick" politican... someone who always had his assistants and Blackberry at his side... always dodging directly answering the tough questions. He bragged about how he balanced the budget as Milwaukee County Executive... while our bridges and road were in ill-repair (just drive over the Hoan Bridge sometime and look at the bridge railings!) -- and important jobs with the county like Sheriff's Deputies... are not getting filled.

But, WISCONSIN... you get what you vote for... I hope you will enjoy the Metra line continuing to end in Kenosha instead of Milwaukee where it needs to go... and I hope you'll enjoy rickety old Horizon equipment with dirty windows going from CHI to MKE... instead of high speed state-of-the-art new trains cruising between our state's 2 biggest cities!!! Shame, Shame!!!


----------



## Steve4031 (Nov 3, 2010)

So what happens to the talgos if this doesn't go through? My god!! This country is going to fail if voters continue to be ignorant. The republicans talk about cutting spending. But trillions are spent On military stuff. And nothing that benefits the country.


----------



## Kurn (Nov 3, 2010)

Well,Kasich won in Ohio,so the Cleveland-Cincinatti project is toast.And I think overall,Amtrak will be in serious trouble.There seems to be a mentality that says "I don't ride the train,so nobody else should".But I still think the 3C corrider was a good idea.As a truck driver of over 30 years,I can tell you I-71 is one of the worst ways to get anywhere.


----------



## mercedeslove (Nov 3, 2010)

I was just coming here to see what the disaster of yesterdays election might mean for Amtrak. I guess it is going to be a lot worse than I thought. I am beyond upset that yesterday failed the way it did. Nothing good will come out of this. We can just hang in there until 2012 and save this country from the idiots who are going to destroy it.

For this in Ohio and Wis. sorry about the failure of your voters *hugs to all*


----------



## BigRedEO (Nov 3, 2010)

mercedeslove said:


> I was just coming here to see what the disaster of yesterdays election might mean for Amtrak. I guess it is going to be a lot worse than I thought. I am beyond upset that yesterday failed the way it did. Nothing good will come out of this. We can just hang in there until 2012 and save this country from the idiots who are going to destroy it.
> 
> For this in Ohio and Wis. sorry about the failure of your voters *hugs to all*


I was really anticipating the 3C train. To be able to hop onboard a train and head to Columbus or Cinci for the weekend would have been so nice!


----------



## Eric S (Nov 3, 2010)

rtabern said:


> Let's hope that Walker can't un-do this like the article says... HOWEVER... I am EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED how this election turned out yesterday with our state now getting both a Republican senator and a Republican governor. I am sad to see Doyle and Feingold go... besides being rail supporters... I have interviewed both men several times when I worked in television news here in Milwaukee... and can say both were among the most genuine, family-centered people I have met. Walker, on the other hand, always came across as a "slick" politican... someone who always had his assistants and Blackberry at his side... always dodging directly answering the tough questions. He bragged about how he balanced the budget as Milwaukee County Executive... while our bridges and road were in ill-repair (just drive over the Hoan Bridge sometime and look at the bridge railings!) -- and important jobs with the county like Sheriff's Deputies... are not getting filled.
> 
> But, WISCONSIN... you get what you vote for... I hope you will enjoy the Metra line continuing to end in Kenosha instead of Milwaukee where it needs to go... and I hope you'll enjoy rickety old Horizon equipment with dirty windows going from CHI to MKE... instead of high speed state-of-the-art new trains cruising between our state's 2 biggest cities!!! Shame, Shame!!!


Not only that, but Walker's party now controls both houses of the legislature as well. Sigh.


----------



## Cristobal (Nov 3, 2010)

mercedeslove said:


> I was just coming here to see what the disaster of yesterdays election might mean for Amtrak. I guess it is going to be a lot worse than I thought. I am beyond upset that yesterday failed the way it did. Nothing good will come out of this. We can just hang in there until 2012 and save this country from the idiots who are going to destroy it.
> 
> For this in Ohio and Wis. sorry about *the failure of your voters* *hugs to all*


???

I think that your blame is completely misplaced here.


----------



## eagle628 (Nov 3, 2010)

Sigh...in one night all of the progress made in the past few years comes to a screeching halt.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Nov 3, 2010)

eagle628 said:


> Sigh...in one night all of the progress made in the past few years comes to a screeching halt.


It's halted for now, but the next question is how much this new wave of anti-rail politicians will be able roll back funding to pre-Obama levels. On the plus side, can you imagine where we'd be if McCain had been elected instead?


----------



## Kurn (Nov 3, 2010)

I think they will try to defund or severely curtail Amtrak as a "feel good" measure.How far this gets is anyone's guess.Betcha they shovel tons of money to the airlines,though.


----------



## Gratt (Nov 3, 2010)

eagle628 said:


> Sigh...in one night all of the progress made in the past few years comes to a screeching halt.



I can more than understand that attitude but if we don’t keep moving forward we will always get held back.

Now let’s get to a bad scenario the WI and OH rail plans are scraped. Where will the money go? The last set of rounds went to blue or swing states. Maybe we can find a Red state to put some real HSR money in? Texas…maybe… h34r: The other alternative is plowing it in to projects in CA FL and in the north east, but it is hard to change hearts and minds with the latter.


----------



## afigg (Nov 3, 2010)

eagle628 said:


> Sigh...in one night all of the progress made in the past few years comes to a screeching halt.


The election yesterday was bad news for passenger rail and transit, but let's not overreact. There is $10.5 billion of HSIPR funding that has been awarded and while I expect some Republicans will try to rescind the funds, I expect Obama will prevent it and the state representatives & Governors who are spending the money will fight to keep it. The $8 billion of stimulus funding has only just started to flow to actual construction projects with the big ramp-up of work to start in many places next spring. If the new Governor of Ohio cancels the 3C project, the $400 million goes back into the HSIPR stimulus pool. However, in Wisconsin, despite the $800 million being fully obligated, I could see it playing out where Gov Walker refuses to spend the money and the $800 million goes into limbo for a year or 2.

Some of the critical parts of the $10.5 billion that hopefully will go forward are the $100s of million for Preliminary Engineering and Tier II EIS efforts. These are critical because this stage has to be done before a decision to proceed with funding and construction can start. Some people bash these as more studies, but these are more than feasibility studies which are a dime a dozen, but critical engineering and design steps that have to be done before construction can begin. Since these are typically 2 to 4 years efforts, get them done and provided there is a more favorable climate for HSIPR in 3-4 years, then the funds can be allocated and work can start.

Amtrak got $1.3 billion of stimulus funds which they are using to clear a backlog of long standing need to fix items including wrecked cars. Amtrak revenue is up which helps a lot. Amtrak has placed orders for 130 Viewliner II cars and 70 electric locomotives to address the most critical equipment issues in their fleet. Some Republicans may try to kill those orders, but there will be factories in NY and CA building the Viewliners & ACs-64 locos which the state Congressional delegations are going to fight to keep the jobs. The FY2011 transportation funding was stalled in Congress before the election, but the House did authorize over $1.7 billion for Amtrak, $1.4 billion for HSIPR, and IIRC, $400 million for Tiger (3?) funding. The pending Senate bill has higher amounts for Amtrak and Tiger grants. So, once the FY11 bills are taken care of in the lame duck session, Amtrak and HSIPR should get decent funding to cover the next year.

Yes, what happened was bad news for transit for the next 2 years. But there is a $10.5 billion backlog of HSIPR funds along with several hundred million of Tiger grants to work through the next few years that will improve Amtrak service and take major steps towards true HSR in California & Florida. The Obama administration has made enough of a public commitment for improved passenger rail that I don't see them walking away from it over the next 2 years. Just expect a lot of shouting and posturing by the various groups in Congress over the next 2 years. Which pretty much describes a typical session of Congress.


----------



## transit54 (Nov 3, 2010)

Afigg, thanks for the detailed and well informed post. While I agree that the climate for rail and transit is not looking great on a national basis, I'm not predicting a return to the environments of the last thirty years. For one, the Obama administration (and Biden in particular) understands the importance of funding Amtrak, whereas previous administrations of either party didn't, or simply were willing to pull support for parts of Amtrak for political purposes. Additionally, as you pointed out, there's still a lot of money on the table and it will take some time to catch up on these projects. Ridership numbers are better than ever, so there's a strong case to keep funding Amtrak.

That being said, if any governors feel the need to cancel their rail projects, we'd be happy to take your funds here in Vermont. By a small margin, we elected Peter Shumlin last night, to replace Jim Douglas, who was at best indifferent about rail. I saw Shumlin speak a few weeks ago at a rail advocacy meeting and he's very pro-rail and one of the few politicians that has realistic views about our energy situation (he spoke at length about how we're going to be facing higher energy prices in the future - which few politicians will acknowledge - and how that makes investing in efficient infrastructure like rail and transit a necessity now).

We could use another $50m for the western corridor (extending the Ethan Allen to Burlington) and there's far off talk about eventually running the Vermonter to Montreal. And I'm sure we could dig up some more projects if the money was available.

But I wish members in other states the best of luck. I still think there's a bright future ahead for passenger rail in the US, now that there's some momentum behind the issue.


----------



## NE933 (Nov 3, 2010)

What are your thoughts and/or theories why progress at Amtrak crawled? Is it because Obama didn't yell loud enough when confronted? Joe Boardman too comfortable or distracted? So much deterioration that it robbed them of energy? Too dumb to know the time of day?

Thanks for your input; i'll be following this thread tonight to see the answers.

rje


----------



## transit54 (Nov 3, 2010)

Has progress at Amtrak crawled? I wouldn't agree with that statement.

I can't speak for most projects out there, but most of the $8b of funding is only being released now. Part of that is that things in government move slowly, part of that is that the FRA has really had to transform from a safety based agency to take on the responsibilities of a grant-making agency. With only a handful of exceptions, there hasn't been anything in the way of national grants to improve passenger rail in decades. Things take time to ramp up.

Vermont's improvements to the Vermonter line was the second project to have money awarded (after the Downeaster improvements for Maine) and that took place only about a month ago. Already welded rail is being delivered and installed starting in St Albans and working south. The NECR hopes to have 24 miles installed be Thanksgiving. I know Maine is also getting rail shipments and installing rail in and north of Portland.

So I'd have to disagree - I wouldn't say Amtrak is crawling. Besides, most of the projects are in the hands of states or other entities and are not directly being completed by Amtrak.


----------



## AlanB (Nov 3, 2010)

afigg said:


> However, in Wisconsin, despite the $800 million being fully obligated, I could see it playing out where Gov Walker refuses to spend the money and the $800 million goes into limbo for a year or 2.


Actually he can't do that. The Stimulus monies have a time line by which they must be fully spent. If he fails to spend the money and have the service up and running, then he defaults on the conditions of the grant and he must repay the entire $800+M to the Fed.



afigg said:


> Amtrak has placed orders for 130 Viewliner II cars and 70 electric locomotives to address the most critical equipment issues in their fleet. Some Republicans may try to kill those orders, but there will be factories in NY and CA building the Viewliners & ACs-64 locos which the state Congressional delegations are going to fight to keep the jobs.


Actualy both those projects would be pretty easy to cancel, since at least last I knew Congress had not funded either one. Amtrak placed those orders using a bit of spare cash for the downpayments. So at best only design work is currently underway on the Viewliners and I doubt that anything much has been started on the locos. So again, sadly killing those two projects would be pretty easy.

However, with a split Congress, my bet is that Congress won't kill that funding. It's not worth the political fight for either party.


----------



## mercedeslove (Nov 3, 2010)

Cristobal said:


> mercedeslove said:
> 
> 
> > I was just coming here to see what the disaster of yesterdays election might mean for Amtrak. I guess it is going to be a lot worse than I thought. I am beyond upset that yesterday failed the way it did. Nothing good will come out of this. We can just hang in there until 2012 and save this country from the idiots who are going to destroy it.
> ...



How so? Had those two states voted blue things would be different.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Nov 3, 2010)

Kaisich can't do anything, thankfully. His plan for the $400 million3C grant is, and I'm not making this up... _to give it to the freight railroads_

Yes. The people and the government will LOVE the idea of giving $400 million to a corporation. Unlike other government programs at least this one has strings attached to it, silly people can't just throw it around.


----------



## Cristobal (Nov 3, 2010)

mercedeslove said:


> Cristobal said:
> 
> 
> > mercedeslove said:
> ...


And if a frog had wings...

I feel that the results of this election were driven by things far, far greater than the flyspeck that is Amtrak. So, placing this "failure" squarely in the laps of the voters themselves is both simplistic and misguided.

IMHO of course.


----------



## Ryan (Nov 4, 2010)

The results of the election still fall at the feet of the voters, regardless of their motivation to decide.


----------



## jis (Nov 4, 2010)

Cristobal said:


> And if a frog had wings...
> 
> I feel that the results of this election were driven by things far, far greater than the flyspeck that is Amtrak. So, placing this "failure" squarely in the laps of the voters themselves is both simplistic and misguided.
> 
> IMHO of course.


So your HO is that the people that were elected got elected because something other than the way the voters voted? Amazing!

No matter what motivated the voters to vote the way they did, nothing other than their votes determined the results, or at least I believe that the state of affairs in the US at present is not so bad as to have election results not be correlated very strongly with the votes cast. Of course you or anyone else is free to believe whatever.


----------



## PRR 60 (Nov 4, 2010)

AlanB said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> > However, in Wisconsin, despite the $800 million being fully obligated, I could see it playing out where Gov Walker refuses to spend the money and the $800 million goes into limbo for a year or 2.
> ...


The HSR program is not the "stimulus" program. There is no hard deadlines. Repayment is limited to any actual funds spent.


----------



## PRR 60 (Nov 4, 2010)

jis said:


> Cristobal said:
> 
> 
> > And if a frog had wings...
> ...


I think what was meant was that the reason people voted as they did had very little or nothing to do with Amtrak or rail. The reasons for the election "shellacking" were far more fundemental than liking or not liking Amtrak. The votes made were reactions by the voters to the behavior of the party in charge over the last two years. If you agree with the judgement of the voters, then the fault was not the voters but the behavior of the majority party. If you disagree with that judgement, then the voters were simply dumb.


----------



## AlanB (Nov 4, 2010)

PRR 60 said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > afigg said:
> ...


The initial $8B was indeed part of the Stimulus package. The subsequent grants given out this year are not.

And yes, by repaying the $800M I meant that they would send back any unspent funds that they were still holding as well as repay any funds that were actually spent.


----------



## dlagrua (Nov 4, 2010)

The world isn't going to end with the Nov 2nd election. Amtrak will live on, & civil rights won't be recinded. The criminals on Wall Street will continue to get government money and wars will rage on. Its all business as usual for the banks, corporate interests and financiers that own this country. Now if passenger car manufacturer CAF was smart they would start greasing the pockets of and making campaign contributions to the candidiates right now. That would guarantee that the Viewliner order is completed. Amtraks existence or fate will be decided not by either party but by how much money the passenger car manufacturers can put in the politicans pockets. Corporations buy off the politicans every day and no one says anything about it. Thats the game. Sad but true.


----------



## EB_OBS (Nov 4, 2010)

AlanB said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> > However, in Wisconsin, despite the $800 million being fully obligated, I could see it playing out where Gov Walker refuses to spend the money and the $800 million goes into limbo for a year or 2.
> ...


Don't forget to mention that both those orders are creating jobs, which most exit polls listed at the #1 priority for most voters.


----------



## Railroad Bill (Nov 4, 2010)

Newly elected Ohio Governor John Kasich had his first press conference yesterday and among his many statements was this one, when asked about the future of the 3C Corridor train from Cleveland to Cincinnati

" THAT TRAIN IS DEAD!" With a cocky smile on his face. :angry:


----------



## PRR 60 (Nov 4, 2010)

AlanB said:


> The initial $8B was indeed part of the Stimulus package. The subsequent grants given out this year are not.
> 
> And yes, by repaying the $800M I meant that they would send back any unspent funds that they were still holding as well as repay any funds that were actually spent.


The initial $8 billion in High Speed Rail funding was appropriated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), but the spending of that money is governed by the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA), not ARRA. As such, it is not subject to the "shovel ready" scheduling requirements of the ARRA (the so-called Stimulus). I'm sure there are schedule milestones attached to each HSR grant, but they are not the same as those applied to ARRA proects like Amtrak's Lamokin Convertor and Wilmington DE station jobs.

When a state like Wisconsin gets a federal grant for any project, they do not get the grant as a lump sum up front. The grant funds are paid to the state incrementally more or less in line with the expenditures. Although Wisconsin has been granted $818 million for the Milwaukee to Madison rail project, most of that money remains in the federal treasury. If Wisconsin decides to cancel the rail project they will need to repay the federal treasury all amounts that they actually received. That amount will be far less than $818 million.


----------



## Kurn (Nov 4, 2010)

Ohio is one of the most anti passenger rail states there is.Former governor Taft once talked about getting Amtrak out of Ohio altogether.Could Kasich do that?Could a governor ban Amtrak from his state?


----------



## AlanB (Nov 4, 2010)

Kurn said:


> Ohio is one of the most anti passenger rail states there is.Former governor Taft once talked about getting Amtrak out of Ohio altogether.Could Kasich do that?Could a governor ban Amtrak from his state?


No, he can't do that. Amtrak is Federal and technically part of interstate commerce, which is the domain of the Fed and not the states.

He could pull any state funding of stations, but that would be about it.


----------



## LA Resident (Nov 4, 2010)

daxomni said:


> *Link to Full Story...*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


From NY Times Novembe4r 4

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/a-high-speed-derailment/?hp


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Nov 4, 2010)

This is absolutey outrageous. Wisconsin and Ohio, Kaisich is going to find no opposition besides the strings attached to it.

Sometimes I wonder if people get it. The federal government didn't just print money and give it to Ohio, for years we've paid taxes to the Fed and now the Fed is going to give some of that money back to create jobs and build infrastructure. That's our money! If Kaisich won't spend it on rail I expect him to come to my door and hand me and my mother the twenty two cents, our portion of the 400 million, as a refund. If he won't spend our money how we want it, then why should I be paying his salary?

Kaisich is a crook. He spent years making money on Wall Street and will now be stealing taxpayer money.

As a side note. Personally I don't like anyone blaming the voters. 48% of us voted FOR Strickland. Instead of blaming the voters on what has happened we need to do whatever we can to blue flag Kaisich and the like.


----------



## Kurn (Nov 4, 2010)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> This is absolutey outrageous. Wisconsin and Ohio, Kaisich is going to find no opposition besides the strings attached to it.
> 
> Sometimes I wonder if people get it. The federal government didn't just print money and give it to Ohio, for years we've paid taxes to the Fed and now the Fed is going to give some of that money back to create jobs and build infrastructure. That's our money! If Kaisich won't spend it on rail I expect him to come to my door and hand me and my mother the twenty two cents, our portion of the 400 million, as a refund. If he won't spend our money how we want it, then why should I be paying his salary?
> 
> ...


He'll be worse than Taft,who was the worst governor in Ohio history.


----------



## dlagrua (Nov 4, 2010)

If you like who was elected or not the election has ended. A new cast of characters is now in place. The American people have spoken and partisan politics won't change this. Positive change might result if we all send emails to our politicans in support of passenger rail travel.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Nov 4, 2010)

dlagrua said:


> Positive change might result if we all send emails to our politicans in support of passenger rail travel.


Emails are good. Phone calls are better. Letters to the editor are better still. And meeting in person as a group is probably best. Which is why I would like to propose that we consider adding more of an advocacy aspect to AU, so that future generations of Americans will continue to have passenger rail options like we have now. If we work hard enough perhaps they'll even have more modern passenger trains like other countries have managed to build.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Nov 4, 2010)

Getting media attention is the best way. Emails are ignored, phone calls only work en masse, protests are a last resort. I would welcome all of the AU members from Ohio to write letters on behalf of the 3C project to their local editors.


----------



## George Harris (Nov 4, 2010)

mercedeslove said:


> I was just coming here to see what the disaster of yesterdays election might mean for Amtrak. I guess it is going to be a lot worse than I thought. I am beyond upset that yesterday failed the way it did. Nothing good will come out of this. We can just hang in there until 2012 and save this country from the idiots who are going to destroy it.


you really need to understand that there are many people that absolutely disagreee with you on the nature of the "idiots who are going to destroy" the country, and that has a lot to do with who got voted in or out. News flash: There are many that believe that the people that were sent down the road and quite a few others of similar mindset that managed to stay in, are the ones that were the "idiots who are going to destroy" the country. For these people, even if they were aware of and considered passenger rail improtant, there vote was driven by things they considered far more improtant than the survival of Amtrak. They were seeng basic freedoms in danger. Whether you agree or not is your privledge, but just because you think something does not make it either real or the only allowable view on a subject. As someone else said, "I feel that the results of this election were driven by things far, far greater than the flyspeck that is Amtrak." Recognize that truth.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Nov 4, 2010)

***Original Comments Removed***

Just keep in mind that if the topic strays too far from Amtrak the thread will be locked again.


----------



## Kurn (Nov 4, 2010)

If any Ohio funds are used for Amtrak,under Kasich(R-Wall St.) they'll be gone.It really makes me angry about the 3C being gone.Since the election,Kasich(R-Fox News) has reinterated that at every opportunity.It would have been a pleasant way to get to Columbus,Dayton,or Cincinnati and avoid the horror of I-71.And air travel(besides being something I won't do),is not very convenient between these cities.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Nov 4, 2010)

I'm sorry, I'm not following you there...


----------



## Guest (Nov 5, 2010)

CNN's N.Y. to D.C., 96 mins., $117 billion


----------



## WICT106 (Nov 5, 2010)

daxomni said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> > Positive change might result if we all send emails to our politicans in support of passenger rail travel.
> ...



Concur with your efforts to advocate.


----------



## WICT106 (Nov 5, 2010)

As I have already typed on the Milwaukee Journal's website: Disappointment does not come close to encompassing just how I feel about the current situaion. If fellow members were to go and read some of the comments on the MKE Journal's site, you could all see the misinformation, et al, that we are up against.

Edited to correct spelling errors.


----------



## Kurn (Nov 6, 2010)

WICT106 said:


> As I have alreaqdy typed on the ilwaukee Journal's website: Disappointment does not come close to encompassing just how I feel about the current situaion. If fellow members were to go and read some of the comments on the MKE Journal's site, you could all see the misinformation, et al, that we are up against.



It's the same thing in Ohio.Some of comments in the Akron Beacon Journal even implied that passenger rail advocates were traitors and such.This is gonna be like an 0-4-0 pulling a 100 car coal drag over Sandpatch....


----------



## Nexis4Jersey (Nov 6, 2010)

Maybe we should push for privatizing the Intercity Services. They do it in parts Europe and Asia and it works out just fine , infact fares are lower and service is better.... I mean Amtrak would get so much more done if it were a private company. Would that be hard to do?


----------



## NorthCoastHiawatha (Nov 6, 2010)

Nexis4Jersey said:


> Maybe we should push for privatizing the Intercity Services. They do it in parts Europe and Asia and it works out just fine , infact fares are lower and service is better.... I mean Amtrak would get so much more done if it were a private company. Would that be hard to do?


I don't think it would work here, beyond the fact distances in Europe are smaller and the lack of reliable in roads in parts of Asia. Our culture is ingrained with air and car travel.


----------



## George Harris (Nov 6, 2010)

Nexis4Jersey said:


> Maybe we should push for privatizing the Intercity Services. They do it in parts Europe and Asia and it works out just fine , infact fares are lower and service is better.... I mean Amtrak would get so much more done if it were a private company. Would that be hard to do?


Read information from sources closer to the action on these things, and the picture is not always as pretty as you think. Not at all sure that the "fares are lower" in generally accurate. For some or most of these the privatization involves contracting the subsidy level, not generation of prifit.


----------



## rhonderouleau (Nov 7, 2010)

jimhudson said:


> When it comes to Government subsidies, NO subidized means of transportation ever has, nor never will make a true free enterprise profit! Even in the days of the RailRoad Robber barosn the Government basiclly picked up the tab to make them rich!
> 
> Those that live in areas where so called "private business" control the utitlities and other necessities of life dont realize just how much they are subsidized by tax breaks, free infrastrucxte etc. If people that actually pay the taxes were made aware of just how much it truely costs to subsidize the transportastion Industries (with the exception of the freight roads that do pay taxes and make profits!), they would get out the rope and torches and pitchforks and mob up! This is true, all you non-wealthy defenders of so called "private sector" need to to study up! Just saying!


Here's an idea. Why not pay people to rip up all the roads- thereby creating short term employment. We could also pull down all the carbon costly buildings - again more jobs. When all the infrastructure is gone, and people have to go back to living off the land, noone will be making money cause they'll be just growing what they need. Then there'll be no need for any taxes and it will be a perfect world again. "Just Saying".


----------



## Shanghai (Nov 7, 2010)

Nexis4Jersey said:


> Maybe we should push for privatizing the Intercity Services. They do it in parts Europe and Asia and it works out just fine , infact fares are lower and service is better.... I mean Amtrak would get so much more done if it were a private company. Would that be hard to do?


I'd like to know the "private passenger railroads" in Europe and Asia. I lived in these continents for 16 years and

did not know of any privatly owned and operated commerical railroads. I read an article a few years ago

stating that no passenger railroad business operates profitably. It would be interesting to invesigate his in greater depth.

Thanks.


----------



## eagle628 (Nov 7, 2010)

Shanghai said:


> Nexis4Jersey said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe we should push for privatizing the Intercity Services. They do it in parts Europe and Asia and it works out just fine , infact fares are lower and service is better.... I mean Amtrak would get so much more done if it were a private company. Would that be hard to do?
> ...



I imagine you could privatize the Northeast, California, and maybe the Cascades corridors, as well as the Auto Train (originally a private company), and they might survive, but beyond that, you'd be lucky if the trains lasted a year before the owners gave up trying to make a profit. Privatizing trains like the Sunset Limited or Cardinal would just be a disaster, those are two of the worst-performing trains in the system, you'd have to be completely mad to try and make a go of privately running services like that.


----------



## jis (Nov 7, 2010)

Shanghai said:


> I'd like to know the "private passenger railroads" in Europe and Asia. I lived in these continents for 16 years and
> 
> did not know of any privatly owned and operated commerical railroads.


Railroads that once upon a time were public are now privatized in some of those parts. For example JR East is now a private railroad with a dividend paying stock.

But there is certainly not a huge abundance of such outside of Japan in Asia.

I have no idea where people come up with these ideas about private railroads providing lower fare better service. The experience in the UK has been mixed. Attempts to privatize the infrastructure part of railroad was a complete and utter failure, and is now back in public hands. Privatization of train ops and equipment leasing has been a mixed bag, with some perceived successes. but people mostly forget that with the John Major privatization also came huge increases in subsidies across the board, which were written into conracts with the TOCs (Train Operating Companies) with a sliding scale of reducing subsidies over time. This has worked in some cases and failed miserably in other cases. For example what used to be GNER is now back in public hands. OTOH ScotRail with its subsidies from Scotland is indeed providing much much better service than Scotland has seen since the times of Beeching. But again big subsidies play a part in that success.


----------



## Nexis4Jersey (Nov 7, 2010)

jis said:


> Shanghai said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like to know the "private passenger railroads" in Europe and Asia. I lived in these continents for 16 years and
> ...


Well i think it would only work in the Northeast. I think all the Commuter Railways / Amtrak Northeastern lines should be merged into one Company. RailJet Northeast , also CSX and NS should be merged also. It makes sense , it would make things easier in this region.


----------



## Trogdor (Nov 7, 2010)

Nexis4Jersey said:


> Well i think it would only work in the Northeast. I think all the Commuter Railways / Amtrak Northeastern lines should be merged into one Company. RailJet Northeast , also CSX and NS should be merged also. It makes sense , it would make things easier in this region.


CSX and NS are private corporations that compete against each other. Why should they merge? How would it "make things easier" out there?

Further, the commuter systems and Amtrak all have different government authorities running and funding them. I don't see how it would really be of any benefit to have VRE and MBTA merged into the same company "just because."


----------



## George Harris (Nov 8, 2010)

eagle628 said:


> Shanghai said:
> 
> 
> > Nexis4Jersey said:
> ...


Nope. The Northeast Corridor is a huge sinkhole for money. Amtrak does a lot of financial manipulation to keep it looking reasonable. This manipulation has been fairly thoroughly documented in the past. The LA to San Diego service probably makes an operating profit, that is takes in more money on a day to day basis than the cost of running trains on a day to day basis, but does not cover the total cost of the investments necessary for the service. The rest of the California (and Cascades trains) services are not doing that good.

The Autotrain is an Amtrak train because the private Autotrain company went bankrupt. Again, the operation covers its direct costs, as did the private company, but not enough more than that to cover the full cost of operating the business.

When thinking passenger train privatization, don't forget they were a private operation for the first 140 years of their existence in this country. It was when the private operation became unsustainable that the government stepped in. One of the main reasons it because unsustainable was the huge subsidies given to the competition in the form of roads, airports, etc.

If we had to pay the true cost of transportation in this country out of the fees paid for transportation services, travel of all kinds would be significantly more expensive for most, if not all of us.


----------



## jis (Nov 8, 2010)

Trogdor said:


> Nexis4Jersey said:
> 
> 
> > Well i think it would only work in the Northeast. I think all the Commuter Railways / Amtrak Northeastern lines should be merged into one Company. RailJet Northeast , also CSX and NS should be merged also. It makes sense , it would make things easier in this region.
> ...


I think merging anything to make them viable is a nonsensical idea. What we need is more competition, and these bizarre ideas about merging stuff only creates monopolies. And monopolies behave exactly the same way whether they are run by a private outfit or the government.

Also privatization of existing entities that are undercapitalized and in a hole in their expense budget, is not going to automagically make more capital and expense budgets available to them. For that to happen something akin to what was done in the UK needs to happen, i.e. appropriate levels of subsidy and/or other means of capitalization, need to be guaranteed over a decade or so with a sliding scale of reducing such over that period.


----------



## Kurn (Nov 8, 2010)

Never happen,but how about corporate sponsorship?We could have the PNC Limited,the Progressive Flyer,or the Exxon Express. LOL


----------



## WICT106 (Nov 8, 2010)

Doyle has left the fate of the Wisconsin Rail extension up to Mr. Walker. Walker has repeatedly pedged to kill the train, if given the chance: MILW Journal: Canceling the train costs $ 100 million, 400 jobs. 

Words do not express my disappointment with this decision. This would have been the first time since 1971 that Madison, WI would have had regular passenger train service.  :angry2:


----------



## MrFSS (Nov 8, 2010)

WICT106 said:


> This would have been the first time since 1971 that Madison, WI would have had regular passenger train service.


Well - if it helps, here is some video I took in the 1950's in Madison. They didn't have much going on in those days, either.


----------



## ALC Rail Writer (Nov 8, 2010)

YOU took that? How old were you when you took that Tom, why, you'd have to been a real youngin!


----------



## MrFSS (Nov 8, 2010)

ALC_Rail_Writer said:


> YOU took that? How old were you when you took that Tom, why, you'd have to been a real youngin!


I was about 16 or 17.


----------

