"Scamtrak"???

CNJ wrote:There is a rather big problem with the thinking of our current Congress, if they insist on doleing out money for failing domestic airlines (United, US Airways et al), while allowing without regard to let Amtrak wither on the vine.

Hello Congress People!!! You can't have it both ways......Fund airlines and intercity rail equally!

Sounds like a very great idea, too bad it will never happen, even the New York Congressmen argue over what to fund on Amtrak.

I don't feel that because there is so little service, that Amtrak lacks economic validity. Take the AmVan Kansas City - Omaha route cited in a previous post: What if that were replaced by a Sioux City-Kansas City TRAIN with stops in Missouri Valley IA, Omaha NE, Nebraska City NE, and St. Joseph, MO ? (Note: If possible, you could even make it leave from Fargo as a connection with the eastbound Empire Builder in the middle of the night. The important thing would be getting it into Omaha at a decent hour to allow for day trips.) How much more mobility and economic activity would that generate for a relatively modest outlay of public funds? Keep in mind that these would be "living wage" Amtrak jobs, as well as business for small business: caterers, cleaners, newsstands, Motels, restaurants, etc. It's putting tax money back into the local economy rather than KCI (not that KCI isn't a vital economic link - there's just no reason it has to be a case of either/or.)

If you added a twin cities - Kansas City run via Des Moines (if possible), that would open up another corridor for even more economic growth.

There is a real need for ground transport in the midwest, particularly given the aging demographic there. If we could stop looking at transit as an econimic drain rather than an economic engine, we would be better off.

Thanks again rmadisonwi for your input. I found this site http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.html I entered HR5025 where requested and then the section on the National Rail Passenger Corp. (NRPC)


It seems that Judy Biggert (R-IL) forgot to mention in her news letter the measly sum of $900m being alloted to Amtrak. Its sad since 6 Amtrak trains run through her district and Chicago is the Midwest hub for Amtrak.

Alas, she only votes the way the majority leader tells her to like so many there to represent their district but ignore their constituents and vote the way they are told!

Play it safe and remain "Congresswoman for Life" - just the way her two predecessors, Erlenborn and Fawell, did.

Also helps that "us here in the 13th' really don;'t know there is another party out there.

Lastly, I did have occasion to meet Rep Judy Biggert (R-13th-IL) once upon a time. She was out picking up election signs along with her daughter. No armada of Black SUV's anywhere in sight! I simply said :'congratulations Congresswoman", shook hands, and walked on.

CNJ wrote:At least I can take small comfort that one of my Senators, Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas ...a Republican at that....takes a very proactive approach to Amtrak.

I have a good friend in Houston who knows Kay Bailey, and declares her a solid citizen. Texas is now one of the most populous States in the Union, and needs passenger rail connecting DFW, Houston, San Antonio and Austin, not to mention the oil patch and El Paso.

I understand what you were saying Mr. Perkowski....in short what you have described is a classic example of "pork barrel politics."

You would think that some more of these "mental giants" we have elected and sent to Washington, would have the intelligence to step back and look at the big picture of just how our transportation infrastructure is being contracted.

Those mental giants are elected by people who are focused on bread and circuses. We have become Rome...

Yes, we need a coherent national transportation policy: Maritime, surface, and air. Yes, passenger rail properly should be part of the mix.

Amtrak is a service...a federally funded service that plays a vital role in this country.

Its time we as a nation support it, nurture it and allow it to grow and succeed to that it can continue to provide needed transportaton to many parts of this country.

Outside the coastal corridors, passenger rail isn't, right now, a vital service. It needs to be. We need creative thinking that will get line haul passengers, and their autos, from A-B. I can think of three routings from my own home town that could justify auto-rail, but the economics are not there to support it now.

Those mental giants are elected by people who are focused on bread and circuses. We have become Rome...

Yes, we need a coherent national transportation policy: Maritime, surface, and air. Yes, passenger rail properly should be part of the mix.

First thing to do is to get people to vote. Second would be to elect someone whose platform contains more than just tax cuts and increased military spending. Bush's 2000 campaign was centered around tax cuts, and had little other substance. Now, add to that several billion dollars for military budgets, and you will find that past budget surpluses have been eaten up and you have to start cutting appropriations, for example, for Amtrak.

This being an election year, I think a lot of Republican members of Congress feel some pressure to vote along party lines and to accept Bush's plan for $900 for Amtrak. I think we should send those Senators and Representatives a message and vote them out of office.

Mr Kwok,

I can vote for exactly two people: My Representative and my Senator.

If this is my State's out-year, I could only vote for my Representative.

Unfortunately, Amtrak and pasenger rail funding is not a single-issue that will sell. You have to merge enough single-issues to get momentum of votes. That, kind Sir, is the problem of a certain American political party. It's platform is an aggregate of single-issues, without a coherent vision of our Nation for the future.

Do also remember, both political parties have done their full share of shorting Amtrak through its history. Merely because one party seems to be "friend of Amtrak" now does not mean it still will be five years from now.

John

Although support for, or opposition to, adequate Amtrak funding has strong elements of the Liberal vs Conservative political philosophies ( at least in so far as those philosophies are described as " it is government's responsibility to secure a certain quality of life level for those who cannot do so themselves" vs "less government spending on domestic or social programs"), I think we will find that this support-- or opposition, crosses party and ideological lines, depending on whether the Congressman or Senator involved represents an area which has, or sees the need for, significant intercity passenger rail service, or represents an area where the only train comes through town at 3:00am doing 80 MPH. And while there may be some from the latter type of area, who understand the national significance of a fully national passenger rail system, and can therefore be counted among those who support adequate funding, there are probably many more who are not convinced, and who resent funding service which they see as only benefiting the Northeast or California.This is the group which must either be convinced, or defeated---- and I agree--- it probably cannot happen, if opposition to Amtrak funding is the major reason seen for defeating them.

How can I be more effective in getting the message to senators? In my case, if I write to the senators in my state (New Jersey), I'd just be singing to the choir?

...or do I just do my homework and create an effective pro-rail argument with facts, then send it to Honorable Sens Corzine and Lautenberg??

fairlane57 wrote:How can I be more effective in getting the message to senators? In my case, if I write to the senators in my state (New Jersey), I'd just be singing to the choir?

...or do I just do my homework and create an effective pro-rail argument with facts, then send it to Honorable Sens Corzine and Lautenberg??

You'd be preaching to the choir. Both Senators Corzine and Lautenberg are very much pro Amtrak.

For all others, the best advice in dealing with denizens of the Hill still comes from Mark Twain:

Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.

And when you've successfully made your point, remember:

Fleas can be taught nearly anything that a Congressman can.

Oh, my. All this dissatisfaction with democracy!

I'm straying a bit from this thread, but bear with me for a moment.

1) A recent study found that 48% of the adult workforce in the US is "barely literate" (can hardly read and write at all).

2) Less than half the people in this country even show up to vote.

So we get the Congress and the president we deserve. No reason for calling them names. They're the people's choice!

What's that? You don't like the people's choices? You don't have a chance to vote for your favorite programs? That's an easy problem to fix. Strip the Federal government of authority and divest all functions to states and localities. That's what we do with eduction (to see the results, refer to (1) above).

The centralization of government power was started in the early 20th Century by reformers hoping to take power away from the political hacks at the local level. Local control, apparently, equaled corruption. So now we complain that we don't have a way to make our voices heard about our favorites programs. And local governments remain corrupt.

Well, Winston Churchill once said, "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others."

We don't have a "pure" democracy----- If we did, Al Gore would be your President!

Politicans are political animals , they will do whats neceessary to stay in power .

Writing to them does help . ( every letter is counted as an indicator to how 10 - 100 people feel ) . But it needs to be something more than "save Amtrak cos I like riding trains " . Try to say how it benefits the nation as a whole , and as if you are spaeking for how a large number of people feel .

Quite true Walt - we live in a republic, not a democracy!

I'm very skeptical about the adult literacy statistic. What is your source?

The voter turnout numbers are accurate - and the percentage of eligible voters that participate in local elections is even lower than the numbers of Presidential elections! The fact that millions have risked life and limb to start a life in the USA - with the right to vote being one of the primary reasons to come here - but so few actually vote should be criminal. Then again, look at our limited choices.

Is this a forum to discuss trains??