Politicians Are Gearing Up To Kill Passenger Rail Projects

[dlagrua]

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]

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]

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.]

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.

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]

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]

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.]

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]

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!

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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?

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]

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?

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]

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:

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.

“Once again, as the Republican leader of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I remain committed and ready to talk, work and take action with these folks when they return to planet Earth with both feet on the ground.”

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

 

[Ryan]

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]

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]

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]

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.

Get used to working with and lobbying Republicans as come Nov 2nd, they are returning bigtime.

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]

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.

Get used to working with and lobbying Republicans as come Nov 2nd, they are returning bigtime.

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.

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]

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.

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]

Ok, we're way off topic here.

 

[AlanB]

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]

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.