From a NARP [post:
This should bring out the opponents because if it should pass even close to request AMTRAK SHOULD BE IN A MUCH BETTER POSITION ? note that it actually is a 10 year plan but funds only for 5 years/
The Obama Administration released its budget request for Fiscal Year 2014 today, and the President has once again put forth a bold plan for transforming and expanding train service in the United States, with $40 billion in passenger rail investment over the next five years.The Administration’s budget allocates $6.6 billion to the Federal Rail Administration for fiscal 2014, with increasing amounts each subsequent year through 2019, then decreasing amounts to 2023. The request will be a boost for Amtrak, coming a day before the House Committee on Transportation holds a hearing on the railroad’s FY 2014 budget. The hearing, Amtrak’s Fiscal Year 2014 Budget: The Starting Point for Reauthorization [which will be streamed live], will address Amtrak’s funding needs, as well as the coming rail reauthorization (the current law will expire at the end of this September). Amtrak announced yesterday it had set a new ridership record during the first half of this fiscal year, and will be looking to translate its steady increase in popularity into an increase its funding for badly needed equipment purchases and infrastructure upgrades.Passage of a reauthorization bill this year is uncertain, but the appropriations committees will determine how much federal funding each program gets. Secretary LaHood is scheduled to appear before the House Appropriations transportation subcommittee on Tuesday, April 16, at 10 AM ET. No date is available yet for the usual Amtrak-specific hearing. Because the Administration’s funding structure is new, it’s hard to provide a direct comparison to past passenger rail funding. Broadly, however, President Obama’s $6.6 billion request breaks down into the following pots:
President Obama has put forth similar proposals in the past, and the biggest obstacle to implementing the program remains identifying new sources of funding. The Administration identifies the “peace dividend”—money saved from drawing down the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq—as a major source of funding. However, House Republicans have rejected this proposal in its previous iterations.The new structure of the rail program could also be a tough sell on Capitol Hill. The Administration is proposing that rail funding become part of the Highway Trust Fund (it would be repurposed into a "Transportation Trust Fund"). This would eliminate Amtrak’s dependence on the annual appropriations cycle, moving it a grant structure similar to highways and transit. However, the Highway Trust Fund is already struggling, requiring bail-outs from general revenues totaling over $50 billion since 2008.
No doubt President Obama can get his bill introduced in the House. It will then be referred to a committee where the Chair is a Republican. How does he prevent his bill from getting bottled up in committee?
John WR No doubt President Obama can get his bill introduced in the House. It will then be referred to a committee where the Chair is a Republican. How does he prevent his bill from getting bottled up in committee?
C'mon John, our government is a model of efficiency where they are only concerned with the well being of all the heh... nah, sorry I couldn't finish it.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmannC'mon John, our government is a model of efficiency where they are only concerned with the well being of all the heh... nah, sorry I couldn't finish it.
Surely you jest.
blue streak 1The new structure of the rail program could also be a tough sell on Capitol Hill. The Administration is proposing that rail funding become part of the Highway Trust Fund (it would be repurposed into a "Transportation Trust Fund"). This would eliminate Amtrak’s dependence on the annual appropriations cycle, moving it a grant structure similar to highways and transit. However, the Highway Trust Fund is already struggling, requiring bail-outs from general revenues totaling over $50 billion since 2008.
It sure could be a tough sell. A tough, tough sell.
John WR zugmannC'mon John, our government is a model of efficiency where they are only concerned with the well being of all the heh... nah, sorry I couldn't finish it. Surely you jest.
People think this is funny. People think that the government in a system where people of widely differing opinions from one's own are heard, that such is somehow corrupt or captured by narrow special interests.
Given that Amtrak requires (some) public money to operate, it no longer operates strictly in the marketplace but it then operates in the public square. Not everyone shares our views of the inherent goodness of trains, or even of the inherent necessity (Amtrak carrying 1 out of every 1000 U.S. passenger miles). Not everyone who disagrees with us or is not persuaded by our arguments in favor of trains is venal, evil, or corrupt are maybe even necessarily wrong.
Amtrak needs to compete with all manner of budget priorities -- old-age pensions, health care, and yes, even national defense. Sure there may be waste in government, even in national defense, especially in national defense, but go present arguments about the frivilous nature of spending money so our men and women at arms are best equiped to some of our remaining WW-II veterans. We probably overspend on defense but there was a time when we underspent on defense and our people paid with their lives.
I am not in any way saying that Amtrak is not a good way to spend what President Obama is proposing, but there are many competing priorities for government support. It speaks to a lack of seriousness to somehow suggest that money spent on Amtrak is virtuous whereas every other demand on government money represents waste.
Why yes, my parents were naturalized citizen refugee immigrants to this country leaving relatives back behind the Iron Curtain, and indeed yes, from my point of view our government is a model of efficiency in meeting the collective concerns of this diverse and great people of ours. Disrespecting it does not further the cause of advancing Amtrak, however worthy it may be.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Ummm. Thank you for your Civics lesson, Paul. But as a person who was born and educated in the U. S. I am not sure that all of my teachers would agree with you.
John
John WRNo doubt President Obama can get his bill introduced in the House. It will then be referred to a committee where the Chair is a Republican. How does he prevent his bill from getting bottled up in committee?
where the chairman is Shuster, who just found money for HIS state's train.... Hmmm.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Although i dislike the premiss of this article in all fairness it probably is true unless some congress men change their mind ?
Edit to list proper article sorry ! !
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blogs/frank-n-wilner/amtrak-budget-reality-enough-to-make-a-preacher-cuss.html?channel=
blue streak 1unless some congress men change their mind ?
Am I missing something here? This article is about British trains.
John WR blue streak 1unless some congress men change their mind ? Am I missing something here? This article is about British trains.
OK. But Frank Willner's article seems to me to be, well, wrongheaded.
No doubt Congress will scale back President Obama's proposals. But Amtrak is a lot better off with a President who is optimistic, perhaps even overly optimistic, about trains and with a President who wants to kill Amtrak. An that gets overlooked.
Also the talk about Gucci and tourists may be amusing to some readers. It has nothing to do with the issues.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.