posted
I'd delete the comma in the "No, Amtrak Long Distance train or manned Amtrak station is safe from being pulled off or unmanned." sentence. It reads quite differently with it in.
But I wish you (or Amtrak) luck.
Geoff M.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is anything special going on here, or is this just the usual fiscal appropriation fight? I haven't heard of anything new being done by the admin to kill long distance trains, aside from a "generous" offer of 900 mil for next year's budget. That's the same figure as all the other years except for last year, when it was zero, and the trains were in far more danger then than now. Also, I shy away from leaflets that would pass off as "scare tactics" because they turn people away. And finally, I'm afraid I tend not to fall in line and refrain from asking "where do you get this information." Not in this case (I wholeheartedly agree the long distance network is in grave danger) but in so many other causes around the country people bend information to suit their needs and pass it off as unadulterated fact. I tend to ask that question regardless of the situation because I need to know that and other details before making a decision on something, it's just how I operate.
quote:Originally posted by Amtrak207: Is anything special going on here, or is this just the usual fiscal appropriation fight?
The Amtrak board, such as it is, decided to do a complete performance review of the long distance trains this summer, and then look at the data and determine if any changes are warranted. If I understand correctly, they plan to establish a standard of performance metrics and see how the trains measure up.
Chairman David Laney has said that nothing is off the table in regards to what to do. The result of the study may involve removing trains, or adding them, or re-routing them, or changing their schedules, etc. etc. etc. Some have interpreted this as a way to eliminate them entirely, but Laney indicated that would be the last resort, only after other measures have been taken to improve a train's performance.
Personally, I prefer to distribute the NARP leaflets referenced above, with a NARP membership form on the flip side. I try to keep the Salinas station stocked with same.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The trains are probably not going away, but if the Amtrak attack continues one will have the opportunity to sit on a wooden bench seat or stand subway style all the way cross country while stopping at a 7-11 for meals and beverage.....and also enjoy a clean it yourself bathroom.
Posts: 498 | From: New Hope, PA, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's an election year. Trains aren't going away in 2006. And no train-off notices will be posted before the November elections.
Posts: 72 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see why it is such a big deal to fund Amtrak. We waste billions and billions. What is an extra $1.5 billion.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Amtrak, to the incumbent Administration, is what the US Department of Education was to the Reagan Administration: A symbol of Federal waste, which can best serve the Nation by disappearing from the scene.
Whether we agree with this POV or not, I believe this is a realistic assessment of what the folks at 1600 Pennsylvania want.
Now, what happens when we change Administrations (either by person or by party)? Anyone's guess. Amtrak has *not necessarily* been befriended by Democratic administrations either.
Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can anyone tell me a government program that been discontinued since the Truman administration? Did we miss it? I have begun receiving the same emergancy type e-mails with alerts of the administration defunding and closing down NPR.
Posts: 516 | From: New Haven, CT USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Amtrak, to the incumbent Administration, is what the US Department of Education was to the Reagan Administration: A symbol of Federal waste, which can best serve the Nation by disappearing from the scene.
Whether we agree with this POV or not, I believe this is a realistic assessment of what the folks at 1600 Pennsylvania want.
Now, what happens when we change Administrations (either by person or by party)? Anyone's guess. Amtrak has *not necessarily* been befriended by Democratic administrations either.
President Bush is a bold in your face President. If he wanted Amtrak dead, it would be dead. The President approach seem to be a game of chicken to scare Amtrak and states into reform.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by gp35: President Bush is a bold in your face President. If he wanted Amtrak dead, it would be dead. The President approach seem to be a game of chicken to scare Amtrak and states into reform.
Wrong one one count. President Bush does not have it within his power to dissolve Amtrak. That would require an act of Congress.
But I think you're right that the administration is playing a game of chicken. Take last year's zero budget for Amtrak. Mineta himself said they would fund Amtrak if Congress adopted the Bush plan, but not otherwise. But it was a bad way to play chicken. Bush didn't blink, and Congress ran Amtrak funding right over him. Congress 1, Bush 0.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tanner929: Can anyone tell me a government program that been discontinued since the Truman administration? Did we miss it? I have begun receiving the same emergancy type e-mails with alerts of the administration defunding and closing down NPR.
The Office of Economic Opportunity bit the dust under the Nixon administration. As I recall, they got an appropriation, then blew it with splashy PR telling the world about all the great things they were to do.
They got cut.
Posts: 9977 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by gp35: President Bush is a bold in your face President. If he wanted Amtrak dead, it would be dead. The President approach seem to be a game of chicken to scare Amtrak and states into reform.
Wrong one one count. President Bush does not have it within his power to dissolve Amtrak. That would require an act of Congress.
But I think you're right that the administration is playing a game of chicken. Take last year's zero budget for Amtrak. Mineta himself said they would fund Amtrak if Congress adopted the Bush plan, but not otherwise. But it was a bad way to play chicken. Bush didn't blink, and Congress ran Amtrak funding right over him. Congress 1, Bush 0.
I'm not sure it was a congress victory because bush is yet to veto a bill. If someone in congress would introduce a multi-year funding bill, Bush would probably not veto it.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by gp35: I'm not sure it was a congress victory because bush is yet to veto a bill. If someone in congress would introduce a multi-year funding bill, Bush would probably not veto it.
It just means Congress called his bluff.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
