Candidate Positions on Amtrak/HSR

I would strongly suggest the brand and quantity of cars you own has no bearing on your use of transit, rather the destination and traffic density does. I know a few forum members here who drive some darn nice cars and they use transit because their respective big cities are a PITA to drive around. I also know people who drive jalopies that would never consider transit.

morris&essex4ever wrote:Gotta love it when he says:

I like those things, I just think they have to be paid for by private funds, not by funds from China,” he said, referring to the national debt.

Does Mitt not realize that the funding for Amtrak and PBS is a drop in the bucket considering what other parts of the budget are? The private sector doesn't do everything better than the government. Isn't that why Amtrak was created in the first place?? Even if Congress zeroed out Amtrak funding, it would not make a dent in the budget or the debt.

Well thought out comments and laying out of plans in speeches are not part and parcel of the presidential primary process in the modern era. Verbal attacks, going negative, over-simplistic statements, distorting the heck out of the opponent's position and record beyond recognition are. Especially this year as PAC money increasingly drives the process to new lows. Romney knows full well that Amtrak and PBS barely qualify as a drop in the bucket of federal expenditures. But when he is speaking in states and areas where public transit barely exists, he is going to pander and throw meat to his audience by attacking Amtrak, PBS, and any other federal program that his audience don't see as useful to them. What Romney really thinks is another matter. At this point, I suspect Romney doesn't know what he really thinks and believes either.

Here's the pro-transit right-wing organization:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/cpt/

The American Conservative Center for Public Transportation, headed by Bill Lind. It's about time.

Thanks for that link Southern!

And to show the flip side, here's a Democrat who's trying to kill a system in Hawaii (of all places): http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 0#p1021830

Mitt wants to save a few million by cutting Amtrak and PBS - saying he wants private money spent, not Chinese money. Yet he's also talking about multi-billion dollar increases for the military.

I work in the Air Force in the state Romney used to govern and I just can't make sense of this guy.

You'd think he'd know the value of rail transportation since he led a state that is so heavily dependent on it.

Rick Santourm is no friend of Amtrak or anything else with a steel wheel that carries people.

Most of the Republican candidates oppose Amtrak/Mass Transit because President Obama supports it. The "Romantic Reaganite" concept of privatizing these services fails to mention that is precisely what the railroads operated for well over a hundred years, and they clamored to get out of the business.

So, what company would use private resources to run a passenger service (and do not confuse private companies who have a contract with a state or entity to operate commuter services)?

4behind2 wrote:Rick Santourm is no friend of Amtrak or anything else with a steel wheel that carries people.

I've read that he's actually been transit friendly; pretty sure I put up a link earlier.

4behind2 wrote:Rick Santourm is no friend of Amtrak or anything else with a steel wheel that carries people.

Most of the Republican candidates oppose Amtrak/Mass Transit because President Obama supports it. The "Romantic Reaganite" concept of privatizing these services fails to mention that is precisely what the railroads operated for well over a hundred years, and they clamored to get out of the business.

So, what company would use private resources to run a passenger service (and do not confuse private companies who have a contract with a state or entity to operate commuter services)?

The dogma of privatization ignores the reality of it's frequent higher cost than the bad ole' govmint. See Haliburtin and the soldiers of, um, fortune.

4behind2 wrote:Rick Santourm is no friend of Amtrak or anything else with a steel wheel that carries people.

Most of the Republican candidates oppose Amtrak/Mass Transit because President Obama supports it. The "Romantic Reaganite" concept of privatizing these services fails to mention that is precisely what the railroads operated for well over a hundred years, and they clamored to get out of the business.

So, what company would use private resources to run a passenger service (and do not confuse private companies who have a contract with a state or entity to operate commuter services)?

Santorum's voting record, and speeches, have been pretty Amtrak-friendly.

Even when Barack was just a state senator a few years ago and nobody much had heard him, the GOP was even then split between pro- and anti-Amtrak factions. Reagan constantly tried to zero out Amtrak spending, for example. (The worst cuts measured by reductions in route-miles came under Democrat Carter, however.)

SouthernRailway wrote:Here's the pro-transit right-wing organization:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/cpt/

The American Conservative Center for Public Transportation, headed by Bill Lind. It's about time.

thats quite interesting . but i found it strange that kept saying that Amtrak has consistently claimed it could be profitable if it had enough capital . i dont recall Amtrak having claimed that , except when having too during the Warrington era .

SouthernRailway wrote:

4behind2 wrote:Rick Santourm is no friend of Amtrak or anything else with a steel wheel that carries people.

Most of the Republican candidates oppose Amtrak/Mass Transit because President Obama supports it. The "Romantic Reaganite" concept of privatizing these services fails to mention that is precisely what the railroads operated for well over a hundred years, and they clamored to get out of the business.

So, what company would use private resources to run a passenger service (and do not confuse private companies who have a contract with a state or entity to operate commuter services)?

Santorum's voting record, and speeches, have been pretty Amtrak-friendly.

Even when Barack was just a state senator a few years ago and nobody much had heard him, the GOP was even then split between pro- and anti-Amtrak factions. Reagan constantly tried to zero out Amtrak spending, for example. (The worst cuts measured by reductions in route-miles came under Democrat Carter, however.)

Santorum has been on talk radio (Sean Hannity) lambasting Amtrak. The candidate still has that "private sector" myth regarding passenger rail.

I'm very pleased to note how this "political" topic has moved forth with maturity and respect.

Over this past decade where $5/ga has become reality, a 'remigration' to urban areas has occurred, and environmental concern has risen, Amtrak has gained so much traction as a provider of needed passenger transport that no politician would dare cast it asunder.

"Kill Amtrak", "kill PBS", put The New York Times out of business, "drill baby drill", "church and state are one", is simply party line that appeals to the largely rural Red State constituency the Republican party harbors as its base. Regarding Amtrak, so much of that constituency is served by the "one a day at oh dark thirty" that there is no way Amtrak has relevance for transportation, but that "one a day' is simply part of "the Washington way". Republican pols may talk the talk on Amtrak, but I doubt if they would walk the walk.

Should the "appears inevitable' occur and Gov. Romney is the Republican nominee and with the 'reasonable possibility' he could defeat President Obama ("probably' if something resembling a "double dip' occurs or 'we get hit'), the services that count, i.e. the Corridors, would be unscathed, although somewhere, to keep his Red State constituency happy, there would likely be a "pruning' of a vulnerable LD route, or consistent with what occurred during the Bush administration with the Three Rivers and the Silver Palm.

I hear your concerns Mr. Norman and I would just like to point out during the 2nd Bush years we also lost New Orleans to Florida for the sunset limited and we lost my favorite which I rode every other month the International. With a Republican in office I agree they would not dare get rid of Amtrak but severe cuts and some loss of service would be expected. bottom line is with gas rounding $5 a gallon we (America) dropped the ball on our public transportation system decades ago, when will we ever learn from that mistake.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:I'm very pleased to note how this "political" topic has moved forth with maturity and respect.

Over this past decade where $5/ga has become reality, a 'remigration' to urban areas has occurred, and environmental concern has risen, Amtrak has gained so much traction as a provider of needed passenger transport that no politician would dare cast it asunder.

"Kill Amtrak", "kill PBS", put The New York Times out of business, "drill baby drill", "church and state are one", is simply party line that appeals to the largely rural Red State constituency the Republican party harbors as its base. Regarding Amtrak, so much of that constituency is served by the "one a day at oh dark thirty" that there is no way Amtrak has relevance for transportation, but that "one a day' is simply part of "the Washington way". Republican pols may talk the talk on Amtrak, but I doubt if they would walk the walk.

Should the "appears inevitable' occur and Gov. Romney is the Republican nominee and with the 'reasonable possibility' he could defeat President Obama ("probably' if something resembling a "double dip' occurs or 'we get hit'), the services that count, i.e. the Corridors, would be unscathed, although somewhere, to keep his Red State constituency happy, there would likely be a "pruning' of a vulnerable LD route, or consistent with what occurred during the Bush administration with the Three Rivers and the Silver Palm.

I think it's worth noting in this context that there is a greater-than-zero chance that the House, the Senate and the White House *all* flip control this November. The electorate is more disgusted with DC than they've been in a long, long time. Something to ponder with regard to any declaration on the part of any presidential nominee.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:I'm very pleased to note how this "political" topic has moved forth with maturity and respect.

...

...put The New York Times out of business...

1. As am I. Our faith as moderators has been rewarded!

2. They don't need any help; they're doing it to themselves.

Back OT: keep in mind, many if not most of the LD routes are in "fly-over" country, which is mostly red. Mssr. Norman, I believe in the past you've posited an opinion that one more of the "Silver" services could be at risk. While I agree that route is vulnerable, I'm not sure how they'd serve the "middle" of the route, one which is coastal, one which is inland. I would think the Meteor would be most at risk, since it serves the same stations as the Palmetto.

The other route I think is at risk is the Sunset. We'll see.