RailForum.com
TrainWeb.com

RAILforum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» RAILforum » Passenger Trains » Amtrak » Rep Sessions tries to kill the Texas Eagle

   
Author Topic: Rep Sessions tries to kill the Texas Eagle
Mike Smith
Full Member
Member # 447

Member Rated:
4
Icon 8 posted      Profile for Mike Smith     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
One of our Representatives in Texas doesn't want to return to Congress. This bozo decided to attempt to pass a stupid amendment, specifically: http://www.house.gov/sessions/Press/03.09.04.Amtrak.htm
Washington, DC - U.S. Congressman Pete Sessions (R-Dallas) today will offer
an amendment to limit Amtrak funding under H.R. 2989, the Fiscal Year (FY)
2004 Transportation, Treasury, and independent agencies appropriations
bill. If agreed to, the amendment will prohibit funds appropriated in the
bill from being used to operate any Amtrak route that fails to generate at
least 50 cents in revenue for every one dollar in cost. "This amendment is more than reasonable. With it, Congress simply says that any passenger route that fails to generate just 50 cents in revenue for
every one dollar in cost is a route not worth keeping. Taxpayers should not
be asked to shoulder a loss of more than 50 cents on the dollar, nor should they be asked to foot the bill for service that the market fails to support," said Sessions.


Fortunately this was shot down by more rational members. Perhaps he should pay a little attention to his/our Senator. She means it when she stated "National or Nothing" regarding Amtrak.

Using Sessions "logic", he should shut down DART (Dallas Area Rapid Transit). They only recoup 10 cents on the dollar. (well below his 50% standard) Taxpayers provide 90 cents of every dollar fare on DART's buses and light rail.

You can write him and attempt to educate him at:
Washington, DC Office
Congressman Pete Sessions
1318 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-4305
(202) 225-2231
(202) 225-5878 fax
mailto:PeteS@mail.house.gov

[This message has been edited by mikesmith (edited 09-12-2003).]


Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mr. Toy
Full Member
Member # 311

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Toy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I wonder if Mr. Sessions thought it through far enough to know that his amendment would apply to fully allocated costs instead of direct costs. It would sure be fun to watch his reaction when someone asks him if he even knows the dfference.

If his amendment specified direct costs I think most, if not all of the LD trains would easily pass his test. Unfortunately, according to NARP, the amendment indicated that the basis for deciding which trains met the standard was to be the fully allocated costs shown in a 2001 Amtrak Reform Council report. In other words, the amendment was to use obsolete data, not current operating costs, as the basis for eliminating routes! What's more, most of those costs are overhead which won't go away when the trains are eliminated. How much stupider can it get? Somebody needs to send this guy to a basic math class.

Anyway, cooler heads seem to have prevailed. see how your representative voted here: http://www.narprail.org/house1.htm

------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy

The Del Monte Club Car

[This message has been edited by Mr. Toy (edited 09-12-2003).]


Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mike Smith
Full Member
Member # 447

Member Rated:
4
Icon 9 posted      Profile for Mike Smith     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks for the information, Mr. Toy. It inspired me to write my Representative. Here's what I sent him, today:

Dear Congressman Brady:

This month you voted for Rep. Sessions amendment to kill the Texas Eagle and the Sunset Limited, our State’s only two long distance Amtrak trains. Why?

This month you voted for Rep. Kennedy’s bill to eliminate $320 million from Amtrak’s budget and give it to several other programs. This would have the direct effect of killing Amtrak, based on Mr. Gunn’s statements that Amtrak needs $1.8 billion to cover their operation and maintenance this year. (Yes, I know they are getting less) Why?

This month, you voted for Rep. Tancredo’s bill to cut $320 million from Amtrak’s funds and give it to the highways. Why?

You are taking an extremely shortsighted approach to Amtrak and our Nation’s transportation needs. When we hit 500,000,000 people, are the roads adequate enough to transport us around this Nation? Or will we need a viable rail system? The answer is; of course we will need rail, and air, and roads to move our citizens around our great Nation.

Fully fund Amtrak or, as our population increases, we will pay the consequences by expending 100 times more money when we desperately need other transportation alternatives. Look to our future needs, instead of reacting to the “live for today” wants.

Respectfully,
Michael W. Smith

Write your congress critters. It's the only way we can have a slight chance to counter the paid lobbyists.


Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mr. Toy
Full Member
Member # 311

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Toy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Excellent letter. I only wish the majority of Congresscritters were as far-sighted as you. Perhaps we could have avoided a lot of problems, not just with Amtrak.

------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy

The Del Monte Club Car


Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CoastStarlight99
Full Member
Member # 2734

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CoastStarlight99   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What a great letter really! only if everyone would send one liek that.HOW can we get people to write him?????
Posts: 1082 | From: Los Angeles, CA. USA | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mike Smith
Full Member
Member # 447

Member Rated:
4
Icon 3 posted      Profile for Mike Smith     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks.... My intentions are to write my Congress critters regularly, once I retire (in 12 years), on all manner of matters.

Coaststarlight99, you want to write your own Congressman and ask him similar questions.

There is a formula for each letter they receive. I believe it represents 1000 people's thoughts ( 1 in a thousand bother to write). I could be wrong on the actual number, but your letter means more than just 1 dissatisfied customer.....

The only Congress critter that did not respond to my letters is the Queen... Sheila Jackson Lee. I was in her jerrymandered district for 4 years. I wrote her 5 times and never received anything from her or her staff. I think her staff is comprised of her illiterate relatives.


Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mike Smith
Full Member
Member # 447

Member Rated:
4
Icon 8 posted      Profile for Mike Smith     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I received a response from Representative Brady. I'll try to scan it and post it later today, along with my response to his response. Take your blood pressure medicine before you read his letter (you've been warned). I'll try to have it posted by this evening.
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mike Smith
Full Member
Member # 447

Member Rated:
4
Icon 4 posted      Profile for Mike Smith     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well.... Let's see if this works:

This is my Representative's response to my above letter:

Dear Mr. Smith:
Thank you for your continued interest in Amtrak. I appreciate you taking the time to contact me and share your thoughts.

The National Rail Passenger Corporation, Amtrak, was established by Congress in 1971 to operate a national rail system. Despite being a for-profit enterprise, it has had an average annual loss of $600 million per year. Amtrak has never been profitable.

In recent years, legislation has been introduced to provide Amtrak with billions of dollars in federal loan guarantees, bonds and tax credit. The Amtrak Reform Council, established by Congress to oversee Amtrak operations, issued a report in November of 2001 concluding that, under current management plans, Amtrak would not achieve profitability without federal assistance. Accordingly, I have concluded, along with some of my colleagues, that Amtrak must dramatically improve service and begin operating at or near profitability or risk losing its federal funding.

I will continue to closely monitor the situation and the funding proposals associated with Amtrak. If Amtrak does manage to get its books back in the black, or even moving in that direction, I will reconsider voting to support their efforts in some way. However, at this time, I think we have much greater transportation needs that can be funded.

Once again, thank you for sharing your views. If I may be of assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,

Kevin Brady


Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dnsommer
Full Member
Member # 2825

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for dnsommer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You should have added that he and his silly statesmen colleagues had hamsters for mothers and fathers who smelled like elderberries.

Dave


Posts: 284 | From: Ithaca, NY USA | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mike Smith
Full Member
Member # 447

Member Rated:
4
Icon 8 posted      Profile for Mike Smith     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No Dave..... But here is my response to his letter:

November 7, 2002

Representative Brady
428 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Re: Amtrak

Dear Congressman Brady:

I strongly disagree with your position regarding Amtrak. I do not believe Amtrak is capable of being self-sufficient, nor should it try to become “profitable”. No rail/mass transit system on this planet is self-sufficient or profitable.

Our Federal Government subsidizes air, road, and waterway transportation, and there is no reason why rail transportation should not be funded. You would not demand that roads be profitable, airways are not profitable, and waterways and canals are not profitable. Why would you set such a high bar for Amtrak?

Mass transit, including extremely expensive light rail, is being partially funded by the federal government, and you do not expect them to “get their books into the black”. Why would you expect that from Amtrak?

You stated in your October 22, 2003 letter, that there were much greater needs for transportation funding. Where are the “much greater needs” for transportation funding?

I am enclosing a bureaucratic letter from J M Loy, an administrator with the TSA. While there are factual errors in his letter and he does not accurately describe my “inspection” before being allowed to board an airplane, the letter does describe the “procedure” if I want to travel by air. Being a 53 year-old native Texan, I do not appreciate the “inspection process” I endured to get back to Texas.

The bottom line is the fact that some of us do not like the requirements necessary to fly. Some of us are not capable of flying, due to hearing problems. Some of us do not like waiting over 6 hours for our ears to “pop” or return to normal after we land. Some of us are handicapped in a way that prevents us from flying. Driving and Greyhound are not good alternatives when you are talking about a trip to the Grand Canyon, Glacier Park, Salt Lake City, Seattle, or any other destination beyond an 8-hour drive.

Please reconsider your opposition to fully funding Amtrak.

Respectfully,

Michael W Smith
...end of letter...

I'm wondering if the "handicap" argument might work. After all, government is dictating to private business that they have to spend billions of dollars to allow handicap people access, and there are handicapped people that cannot fly........

I wonder if that would work?

[This message has been edited by mikesmith (edited 11-13-2003).]


Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dnsommer
Full Member
Member # 2825

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for dnsommer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You see, he's basing his argument on Amtrak's original charter. He said Amtrak is a for-profit concern. Is that right? I've never read the original charter, so I don't know if his statements are facts or interpretations.

Maybe the issue is that the charter needs to be ammended.

Dave



Posts: 284 | From: Ithaca, NY USA | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Home Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2




Copyright © 2007-2016 TrainWeb, Inc. Top of Page|TrainWeb|About Us|Advertise With Us|Contact Us