posted
Yes, Mr. Twin Star; what does that Opinion piece really put forth that is groundbreaking?
But I will readily acknowledge that the Register is one of the most highly regarded 'Mid-Market' publications out there.
Henry Kisor Member # 4776
posted
"A new poll of Iowans conducted by St. Paul, Minn.-based DFM Research shows that more than seven out of 10 residents in Polk County and the southwestern counties of the state want to increase federal government investment in Amtrak, or at the very least keep it the same."
Perhaps not "groundbreaking," but definitely significant, especially since Iowa is a conservative state.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
Henry: Politically conservative does not mean anti-rail. Never has. Generally if a "pro rail" candidate gets opposition from the politically conservative side, it is not his stance on the rail issue that is the reason. It is other things that cause the opposition.
Ocala Mike Member # 4657
posted
When the Cato Institute becomes pro-Amtrak, George, let me know. Amtrak is and always has been a favorite whipping boy for the right for as long as I can remember.
Henry Kisor Member # 4776
posted
What Ocala Mike said.
Liberal individuals can be anti-rail, too. Remember Jimmy Carter?
palmland Member # 4344
posted
Let's don't forget, in a functioning congress both sides can work together. This from Progressive Railroading on the death of Sen. Frank Lautenberg. I well remember the nightly news with both he and Lott talking about this.
"Lautenberg's crowning achievement was his introduction with [Sen.] Trent Lott (R-Miss.) of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008," NARP officials said in a prepared statement. "PRIIA, widely regarded as the largest bipartisan commitment to passenger-rail funding in Amtrak's history, has provided a framework for federal investment in the Northeast Corridor, acquisition of sorely needed new equipment for the NEC and the national network and improvements in overall service quality."
Gilbert B Norman Member # 1541
posted
PRIIA 08, which is actually Division B of RSIA 08 was one of these pieces of legislation that was not to be enacted - but it was.
Within a Congress controlled by liberal (Demmies) faction, PRIIA 08 was one of those pieces of legislation that was simply an election year 'feelie goodie'; both sides had now gone or record 'yeah for passenger rail'. It was just going to die in Committee.
Also in legislation was Rail Safety Improvement Act which was winding its way through Committees and not likely to be enacted anytime soon.
Then came Chatsworth.
Even though Chatsworth was not attributed to a fatigued crew, it certainly was to an inattentive crew. Therefore, the provisions mandating the railroad industry to install Positive Train Control, which would have prevented Chatsworth and for that matter Goodwell, came 'front and center'. However, the cost to the shipping community in the form of higher than otherwise rates has yet to be determined But the impetus to enact this legislation certainly increased manyfold.
In ways that only Congress knows how to do, PRIIA got tacked on to RSIA as Division B. By the time the legislation got to a lame duck president, Bush was likely aware of the outcry to 'do something' that Chatsworth had caused. So he did something knowing that nothing would be implemented, i.e. cost anyone anything, until his day job was chopping brush in Crawford.
posted