I'll jump in with both feet on this one. I'm sure that some have seen the graphic with the president-elect's face next to a bullet train (forget the series), his running mate (so-called "D-Amtrak") next to the familiar F40PH, his (now-vanquished) opponent's face next to a derailed steamer and so on. But fiscal realities are fiscal realites, and Obama's administration is looking like a carbon copy of Carter's; I see a lot of promises evaporating, myself, and even if the economy were on an upswing combined with doing well, I would not expect to see the Phoebe Snow rolling past the Army Depot in my home town either, nor tilt-trains running between New York and Scranton/Binghamton (which would be the ideal scenario for me at least). So what are we in for?
Posted by smitty195 (Member # 5102) on :
I agree with you a thousand percent. Anyone that thinks Amtrak will do SO much better with this new Administration, well.....I've got some really nice oceanfront property in the Mojave Desert to sell you.
The good thing is, this will be easy to prove/disprove. Within a rather short period of time (a year or two), we'll have our answer.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Well thanks for outing yourself to the extent you now reside in Tobyhanna, PA; Mr. Chieftain.
I do recall on a 1960 ride on Miss Phoebe noting a string of heavyweight Pullmans parked there. Reportedly they were part of a wartime reserve fleet (analagous to the evacucars parked nowadays at NOUPT), but were never used for much of anything beyond likely a vagrant hotel.
As I noted over at that "other site', yet in concurrence with both you and Mr. Smith, the 44th President has many more front burner issues to address than whatever is to happen to Federally funded rail passenger service; it is not going away anytime soon - nor should it.
But on January 21 and for a long time after, our President will be earning his $400K a year addressing other issues; and I would hope that mature members of ANY "niche" advocacy group (Amtrak, Save the Whales, whatever) will accept this little, and I guess at times inconvenient, "factoid of life".
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
"doom and gloom doom and gloom" Why don't we wait and see what hapopens before we start to complain. Gil I agree with you .If something good doesn't happen with the economy we won't have the money to ride Amtrak.
Posted by amtraxmaniac (Member # 2251) on :
At worse he'll do nothing which means service levels stay about the same. The president has, admittedly bigger fish to fry and no party has enough of a mandate to push any controversial agenda. If given the opportunity to sign or veto, I am only confident that he won't veto, which couldn't be said with certainty about McCain.
Posted by amtraxmaniac (Member # 2251) on :
At worse, he does nothing. Service levels stay the same. Neither house has enough of a mandate to push an agenda. I can say with some confidence that given the opportunity to sign or veto any legislation dealing with Amtrak, we won't veto, which cannot with certainty be said about McCain.
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
Still sticking with that red herring, eh? McCain would have had to face Congressional reality just as much, had he been victorious. Bush was only slightly friendlier to Amtrak than McCain, and the funding never shrank to (as threatened) $550 million per year or zero.
Posted by TwinStarRocket (Member # 2142) on :
Obama wants to create a bipartisan administration. My suggestions for a short list for Sec. of Transportation:
Ex-Gov. Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin Ex-Sen. Trent Lott Ex-Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison
All Amtrak advocates. All accomplished Republicans.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
"Bi-partisanship"? they all talk the talk on that point.
Best guess for the new SecTrans; look to someone in any of the Swing States that went Obama's way. Trans has a way of being a 'reward"; public or private sector transportation experience not required.
Posted by TwinStarRocket (Member # 2142) on :
Norm Mineta was a 'reward'?
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Bush also talked the talk on bi-partisanship, Norman Mineta of course was a Democrat and that was just about the extent that Bush "walked the walk". I can't recall if Mineta had been defeated and I guess, as Mr. Twin Star notes, how much of a reward can a minor Cabinet chair be?
Likely I was most focused on Frederico Pena; Clinton's first SecTran. He was quite helpful to "Big Dog" during 1992 in the delivery of Colorado.
Finally, lest we forget Trans is "uh not exactly" Defense, State, or Treasury on the President-Elect's radar screen.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
For real bipartisanship and keeping one brilliant person in place, how about keeping Rice as Sec. of State? Or is that too political for here?
Posted by notelvis (Member # 3071) on :
Norm Mineta did one thing quite well.
He kept my now deposed Senator Liddy Dole from being remembered as the least effective DOT secretary ever!
Seriously though - I don't expect great things but I do expect an atmosphere that is less-hostile to the idea of intercity passenger trains.
That and some new and/or rebuilt passenger cars would be a good start.
And NJT trains to Scranton? Been talked about for years. Maybe Amtrak Joe can grease the axles on that a little. I'd buy a ticket for that ride.
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
quote:NJT trains to Scranton? Been talked about for years. Maybe Amtrak Joe can grease the axles on that a little. I'd buy a ticket for that ride
The way "D-Amtrak" is hyped, you'd think he would have been bucking for trains such as the old Interstate Express for example (Philly to Binghamton and beyond via Scranton), or maybe all these as well...?
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
I think we will see the money appropriated for the recently passed Amtrak funding /rail safety bill.
With that, based on recent Amtrak comments, we should see repairs for the mothballed Amtrak Amfleet cars. I think we will also see a design for the new low level sleepers and diners. After that it will depend on how bad the economy is.
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
Every year at New Years the Washington Post runs a double column in the style section called "what's in and What's out". Well they just ran one several days ago. I was amazed to see in the "what's in" column Amtrak. That is the first time I can think of that transportation has been mentoned. (just an interesting tid bit)
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
An underlying assumption that seems prevalent here is that "politics as usual" will prevail. Given that this country has elected a president that doesn't fit any previous mold, I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
Consider, Obama is from the city that is Amtrak's largest hub that extends routes out to more than 30 other states. And unlike most other candidates from either party, Obama actually published a transportation policy in his campaign documents. It included funding Amtrak and developing high speed rail. The incoming VP rides Amtrak regularly, and his son currently serves on the Amtrak board of directors.
And Obama has stated on many occasions that rebuilding our transportation infrastructure is essential to rebuilding the economy. Thus I'm thinking BHO is going to look like a hybrid of FDR and JFK, though it is as yet an open question as to whether he can put together anything as grand as a WPA or TVA. However, the last thing I expect is a repeat of either JEC or W(B)JC, and certainly nothing like GWB.
Posted by TwinStarRocket (Member # 2142) on :
From what I read in the news lately, the prevailing wisdom among economists is that job creation needs to take priority over deficit reduction, for the short term at least. And they say the Republicans will be willing to go along with it for the "honeymoon". Investments in infrastructure and clean energy will probably be Obama's preference for where jobs are created. He also appears to think long term, which is refreshing for a politician.
Rail fits into this very neatly, with opportunities for a socialist plan that can create private sector jobs. Obama's transportation policy statement (thanks, Mr. Toy) makes me very hopeful. Of course I realize that expansion of passenger rail is no more likely than a black one-term senator becoming president, or a Republican governor of California wanting to raise taxes.
I'm siding with the optimists on this one. I think "that one" is going to look at Amtrak and say "yes we can".
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Toy:
An underlying assumption that seems prevalent here is that "politics as usual" will prevail. Given that this country has elected a president that doesn't fit any previous mold, I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
Consider, Obama is from the city that is Amtrak's largest hub that extends routes out to more than 30 other states. And unlike most other candidates from either party, Obama actually published a transportation policy in his campaign documents. It included funding Amtrak and developing high speed rail. The incoming VP rides Amtrak regularly, and his son currently serves on the Amtrak board of directors.
And Obama has stated on many occasions that rebuilding our transportation infrastructure is essential to rebuilding the economy. Thus I'm thinking BHO is going to look like a hybrid of FDR and JFK, though it is as yet an open question as to whether he can put together anything as grand as a WPA or TVA. However, the last thing I expect is a repeat of either JEC or W(B)JC, and certainly nothing like GWB.
There's a few things missing in that assessment:
This country has never been as badly off in terms of lack of heavy industry and condition of remaining infrastructure. We're highly dependent on other countries for most of what is needed not only to rebuild a passenger rail network, but just about everything else related to transportation.
Financially, the USA is utterly broke. This is a uniquely bad situation in that respect. Not even in 1929 had we faced a similar crossroads. Not only no manufacturing and rotting infrastructure, but also a dearth of raw materials, a fiat currency based on faith and nothing else, a national debt in fourteen figures, and again the goodwill of nations that are not necessarily our allies to rely on. (One such "ally", the European Union, is leaning on Obama already to induce him to agree to a "new Bretton Woods"; and if such results in a shift of the world's reserve currency away from the dollar and into the euro, that would not serve our country well.)
As for the Chicago rail services (there are a lot of them, sure, but not with the same frequency per line or average speed as the northeast), I haven't been made aware of instances where BHO has been particularly involved in the welfare of the CTA, Metra, Amtrak or other transportation feeding into Urbs Ventosum. His history is more that of a community organizer; his focus is more populistic.
We've never had someone with politics so far left attain the highest office in the land. BHO would not be like any other chief executive, especially if the legislature follows him in the same capacity. Ultimately, going far left has the concern of social program pandering (such as delving deeper into Great Society-like programs) and the like. If we deviate from "politics as usual" in such a direction, then there are indeed greater priorities than a national rail service on the agenda.
As for Biden, all he does (seemingly) is ride the train. That perhaps serves Amtrak well, but what about MARC? There's an outstanding demand to extend MARC commuter service beyond Perryville MD into the state of Delaware; this would mean cheaper and high-capacity rail service for DE passengers bound for BAL and WAS. (And again, what of his birthplace?)
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
Irishchieftain, You forgot the Obama's top priorities, reversing the ban on embryonic stem cell research and preventing our top employers from drilling our own oil, will be his first executive orders. After all, we MUST be dependent on other countries for our oil... and eventually, someone, somewhere may find a use for embryonic stem cell research, even though no one has found any benefit from using embryonic stem cells, yet. http://tinyurl.com/6cnf5m
I believe we are well and truly screwed. The people this Obamination has around him are extremely idealistic, devoid of any known common sense or logic, and do not live in the "real" world.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
Yes, well after the royal screwing we got for the past eight years, it's time for you all to bend over for a while. To paraphrase a famous conservative, "Idealism in the pursuit of justice is no vice."
P.S. Look for Obama to reverse Executive Order 13233 real soon.
Posted by amtraxmaniac (Member # 2251) on :
Mike-a matter of opinion. We can discuss whether or not Obama's policies will lead to armageddon somewhere else. I've been accused of being over political myself, but I try hard to relate it DIRECTLY to how it affects Amtrak. So, Mike, HOW DO YOU FEEL AMTRAK WILL FARE UNDER OBAMA?
We know this much (thanks Mr Toy and TwinStar). Obama's home state is the hub fro Amtrak. Not just that, its the hub for the majority of LD trains. We also know that Obama has mentioned Amtrak in his actual campaign documents. That being said, I think we can assume that Obama supports Amtrak. THAT DOES NOT mean he will make it a priority.
My money is on Obama to sign any bill that comes his way that involves funding for Amtrak. Amtrak will not be an agenda item, however if a bill reaches his desk, I trust he will sign it. I don't believe there is anyone in here that honestly believes he will make Amtrak a priority. More likely than not, it will be part of an omnibus bill, as it has been in the past. My bet is, at worse, service levels remain the same. At best we may see moderate improvements, but few to no expansions of service.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
Patrick, I'm not the one that originally diverted the thread. I believe, like you, that the Obama/Biden philosophy regarding Amtrak will be a "first, do no harm" philosophy. They will do as much AS POSSIBLE given the budgetary constraints (probably not much).
Posted by amtraxmaniac (Member # 2251) on :
Not you, Ocala, Smith. Sorry for the confusion.
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
quote:To paraphrase a famous conservative, "Idealism in the pursuit of justice is no vice."
That's not a paraphrasing; that's a butchering. And Barry Goldwater was no conservative; he was a Libertarian.
Posted by TwinStarRocket (Member # 2142) on :
Sorry guys but the real quote is: "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!" ...Sen. Goldwater's 1964 acceptance speech as nominee.
I would argue that Barry Goldwater was more of a true conservative than W., but a Libertarian as well, which W is not. Think fiscal responsibility and keeping government out of people's lives.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
Has anyone noticed that whenever a certain individual shows up in a thread that the topic rapidly disintegrates into a petty right-left political squabble?
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
Mr Toy, you can name names... It won't offend me. When I see a feel-good do-nothing politician, I do not have a problem denigrating him or her.
As far as Amtrak is concerned, I do not think it is anywhere close to being on the Socialist's radar. His primary objective is to move us from a capitalist society to a socialist society. Amtrak will not be useful in that endeavor, therefore Amtrak is not important. In the grand scheme of things, I do not see Amtrak benefiting more than they did under Bush {I agree with TwinStarRocket's assessment of Bush}.
Y'all do know Bush signed HR2095, right? {Safety Improvement Act} And Biden did not vote for it. {He didn't vote}
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
Mike, I'm sure you are aware that we are neither a pure capitalist society or a pure socialist society, and movement from the former to the latter takes place and has taken place under many administrations. I suppose, by Theodore H. White's definition, Mr. Obama could be construed as a Socialist, but then so could many other 20th-century presidents. "Socialism is the belief and the hope that by proper use of government power, men can be rescued from their helplessness in the wild cycling cruelty of depression and boom."
Anyway, I respect your views, and I believe we should all at least give the new administration a chance to succeed or fail before we ascribe ideological "objectives" to it. Now, about Amtrak...
Posted by amtraxmaniac (Member # 2251) on :
So whataboutthem Cowboys?!?!?!? LOL LOL-sorry-couldn't help myself.
More likely than not, Amtrak will either stay the same or end up a little better off than under the previous administration. I, for one, would like to take the angle that Amtrak is a major employer in Obama's home state and that he will keep that in mind. Increased funding also means putting more people to work at a modest price tag compared to other budgetary items.
Posted by MetSox (Member # 6035) on :
Getting back to the original post in this thread, I have seen the graphic mentioned. The bullet train next to Obama is a West Japan Railway 500 series, used in "Nozomi" service from Tokyo to Hakata on the island of Kyushu. When I was in Japan about a year and a half ago, I had to buy a separate ticket to ride the 500 because the Japan Rail Pass isn't accepted on the Nozomi. I had to ride the 500 because it's the coolest looking of the 12 different types of bullet trains in Japan.
I would have put an Acela Exp. next to Biden instead of the F40PH. After all, he rides it every day. The derailed pre-school push train next to Palin was classic!
As far as the election was concerned, when McCain said that cutting off all federal funding for Amtrak was a "non-negotiable issue", that was all I needed to know. The Democtrats could have nominated a goat and I'd have voted for it.
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
quote:As far as the election was concerned, when McCain said that cutting off all federal funding for Amtrak was a "non-negotiable issue", that was all I needed to know
So you are a one-issue voter? Technically, this is a one-issue forum, but translating that one issue to the rest of life's matters, and what a presidential candidate might or might not do in office, does not happen so smoothly. McCain has already demonstrated flexibility and, dare I say it, inconsistency in regards to his positions, making him much more like his former opponent than he himself would confess to. To borrow a talking point from the 2004 election, although the phrase stayed out of the media this time, this was indeed the "year of the flip-floppers" on both sides.
If anyone has been looking at the newswires, the president-elect is being pounded by our "allies" from a whole host of directions, from Russia, Iran, China and the EU, the last of whom is insisting on actually renegotiating the Bretton Woods agreement. If Obama is even given any time to think about domestic infrastructure, never mind Amtrak, and where to get the money to pay any for it, then that will be a triumph for his handlers and himself, although I myself expect the pressures to only escalate and take away time from much of those matters.
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
quote:Originally posted by MetSox: As far as the election was concerned, when McCain said that cutting off all federal funding for Amtrak was a "non-negotiable issue", that was all I needed to know. The Democtrats could have nominated a goat and I'd have voted for it.
You actually believed a politician????
McCain has had 25+ years to cut off all Amtrak funding in the US Senate, and you believed he would do it as President, but not as a Senator?
OK...
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike Smith:
McCain has had 25+ years to cut off all Amtrak funding in the US Senate, and you believed he would do it as President, but not as a Senator?
Not that he didn't try. McCain consistently voted against funding Amtrak, and will probably continue to do so. But as one vote, he was swimming against the current so his influence was minor. As president, he would have power of the veto, which he threatened to use against any Amtrak bill.
Ii might add that McCain was the one who introduced the Bush Amtrak "reform" plan in the Senate, but the bill died a mercifully quick death when nobody would join him in supporting it. It is an excellent example of how out of touch McCain has been in regards to Amtrak.
Posted by amtraxmaniac (Member # 2251) on :
McCain is out of touch with transportation in general. The roads in his own home state are crumbling because of his aversion to what is demonized as 'pork barrell' He has done little or NOTHING to address infrastructure needs (other than sinking federal dollars into Sky Harbor Airport) of his home state. He has an almost perverse relationship with the airline industry. While Amtrak is a major employer in Chicago. US Air and Southwest are major employers in PHX.
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
The just passed HR 2095 was passed by a veto-proof margin. I'm thinking a McCain veto would have been overturned rather easily.
Oh well... we shall see what's happening around February of next year.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
Patrick, in McCain's defense, Arizona's roads, as in all states, are the responsibility of the state DOT. If the roads are crumbling, I suspect state policies would be more to blame than the Senator. Or has McCain managed to convince the rest of the state's congressional delegation to block federal funds for Arizona highways? Seems unlikely.
Posted by amtraxmaniac (Member # 2251) on :
True. However, even a senator of 25 years mirrors the attitudes of his constituents...and a good number of his constituents and those who fund his campaign are connected to the airline industry, or an industry that is not as dependent on interstate commerce that would benefit from better transportation infrastructure. Point being this, the same voters and their politics that mandate a 25 year senator dictates their state officials' agenda's too. McCain's politics could be the same as the DOT's. If the state needed federal funds, McCain could work to secure such funds, but he REFUSES because he has always been anti-spending/anti pork. If he won't vote for Senator So-So's project in Timbucktoo, why would Senator So-So vote for McCain's bill to fix AZ's roads? Its the old 'I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine' logic. Conservatives call it pork barrell, I call it wheeling and dealing. Wheeling and dealing is what keeps the money flowing, but one thing we know about McCain: DOES NOT PLAY WELL WITH OTHERS.
Obama is a uniter. A collaborative attitude is what will help amtrak in the long run in terms of securing federal money. If I have to vote to spend tax dollars on a bridge I'll never cross, I'll vote yes, if I get money to build a high speed train in my state. Its politics, yes, but it yields benefits. I trust Obama and his democratic colleags could broker such deals and get the job done without all the partisan bickering.
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
Gotta love the one-issue posters. If a "senator of 25 years mirrors the attitudes of his constituents", transportation policy is not a large piece of that puzzle, especially when it comes to a state with an average population density of 56 people per square mile. (McCain, as noted before, does not control this.)
I reiterate that the most important item on Obama's plate is going to be foreign policy. China is already pressuring Obama to hold off on balancing the budget and investing in domestic industry in the US; the EU is pressuring him to renegotiate the Bretton Woods agreement; Iran is holding him to the "no preconditions" terms of negotiation and is warning him to back off on his rhetoric opposing the development of a nuclear weapon; Russia is not being very subtle about not proceeding with a US missile shield in Poland and other former Soviet-bloc countries.
Once (if) Obama gets beyond that, then he will most likely work on the many other agendas of himself and his party, and there are a plethora of those unrelated to transportation; indeed, if so-called "partisan bickering" (or in-party bickering) is dispensed with, then a lot of these agendas can be rammed through, and then we'd have to worry more about social upheaval than if we can get a train from one city to the other.
(FTR, Timbuktu is in Mali, West Africa. It would be surprising if the US Senate had jurisdiction there.)
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
quote:Biden himself brought up passenger rail in a conversation during a campaign stop in Milwaukee, said Wisconsin Transportation Secretary Frank Busalacchi, a Democrat who backs more intercity train service.
``He said, `Frank, if we're elected, we're going to have a first-class passenger rail system in this country,''' Busalacchi said in an interview.
quote:Biden's presence in the White House will help Amtrak gain ``a much better shot at someone treating it seriously,'' Gunn said. ``You've got a vice president now who actually depended on it. He understands what you can do with good rail service.''
quote:Biden's presence in the White House will help Amtrak gain ``a much better shot at someone treating it seriously,'' Gunn said. ``You've got a vice president now who actually depended on it. He understands what you can do with good rail service.''
As opposed to him being a Senator for a hundred years? You do know that Congress allocates the money, right? You do know that Biden, being an influential, tenured member of the Senate could have "treated it seriously" at any given time during his stint in the Senate, and as VP he has absolutely NO POWER to accomplish his "pledge".
Posted by train lady (Member # 3920) on :
Isn't the house of representatives the body responsible for the allocation of money?
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
Mike, some VPs have more power than others (witness Cheney vis a vis Iraq). Joe the VP will have Obama's ear, and may prove to be a very influential, powerful VP.
Posted by Mike Smith (Member # 447) on :
Ocala... You do know it is Joe Biden as VP, right? He didn't do much as a Senator and I do not expect much as a VP.
Train Lady, right. However, Senators have a tremendous amount of influence over what their State Representatives propose. Usually, if a Senator wants it, a Rep will propose it.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
I certainly expect that the firing of Mr. Kummant should be a signal that it will be "politics as usual" with regard to Amtrak affairs.
Elsewhere, it is established that Mr. Kummant was "not totally on board', and this $275K patronage position he has held could best be filled by someone more "in tune".
Posted by RRCHINA (Member # 1514) on :
GBN once more is right on about politics, even though the Board does the hiring and firing.
At the other site I suggested Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's unemployed exec's be considered because of their "skill" with finances, especially with regard to their personal wealth accumulation. And they are of the current political persuation having helped the President Elect's campaign.
Posted by Henry Kisor (Member # 4776) on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)