hi55us wrote:Which is our Banks! So keep your money with Bank of America!
A. P. Giannini appreciates your plug for his Bank of Italy. Youngsters, do a little giggling and you'll know from whence I cometh
But more to the point, I accept Mr. Weaver's position that LD's do provide a greater public service when routed through regions that have fewer alternative transportation resources, such as Interstate highways as well as available - and affordable - air transport. That would suggest 3-4, Chief, should stay on the existing route. Our new member, Mr. Backshop, also suggests that the "Transcon" is 'not ready for prime time' with regards to handling a scheduled passenger train. Additionally there remains the matter of how to provide economic and efficient service to Albuquerque in the event of a reroute.
But, on the flip side, as several here who like myself put the pocketbook before the passion have noted, the possibility that Amtrak could be burdened with the incremental cost of maintaining some 355 miles, Newton-LaJunta, at FRA Class 4 (psgr 80mph) over the apparently existing Class 3 (psgr 60mph) as well as the entire La Junta-Lamy segment (try all the way to Albuquerque if NM elects some Tea Party governor and Railrunner is gone with his inauguration) is simply economic madness - especially when BNSF is "openly receptive' to handling The Chief over the Transcon.
Regarding service to Albuquerque in the event of a reroute, the only reasonable way to handle such is Ambus - QED.
Finally, it is a safe assumption that at 60 Mass, Government Affairs, which is hardly staffed by a cadre of dummies, will carefully weigh the political impact of the reroute. If the Mayor of Hutchinson KS blows his wind to a local media reporter who, enjoying the access and would like to continue having such, will write whatever he wants, that will be weighed against showing the 'Amtrak haters on The Hill" that we are attempting to serve the public, but we also have their pocketbook in mind.