I would like to know why is he wanting to Slash Amtrak funding by 400 Million dollars and give it to the Highway people. President Obama's should be Amtrak Best Friend after 8 years of Bush. What does Cheerleader Joe Amtrak Biden sleeping at the wheel again?
OK where did you see/hear this "news"??
He just campaigned to get support from those that are pro rail. Anyone that actually put any thought into it didn't fall for his campaign statements concerning Amtrak.
Its on the Friday newswire about Amtrak.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Obama may be a typical politico that says one thing & does another.
Cutting Amtrak $400M while the Clunker for Cash program gets $2Bil fits.
don't forget the Highway Fund is going broke as we speak. They even cut the Grade Crossing fund.They wanted to divert $Bil from the High Speed Rail fund to the Highway Fund.Congress & Obama could be getting an earful for their summer vacations. They may need it.
This is the first I have heard of that, and an attempt to search for it turned up only articles about President Bush trying to cut Amtrak funding and being fought by Congress.
Where can I find the source of this news?
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Mr. Oberstarr must really be in a dither. After his work to add the extera amount it suddenly gets cut. Of course the final outcome may be different?
conrailman Its on the Friday newswire about Amtrak.
I still cannot find anything anywhere to support your claim that President Obama is taking money from Amtrak to support highways.
Can you post a link?
Let's see....does the highway trust fund operate at a profit? Hmmm....must not be profit but return on investment....so I suppose it is measured not in money but rather in votes and other support.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Phoebe VetCan you post a link?
Johnny
Thank you for the link, but it's a subscriber only link, so I cannot open it. I only subscribe to Model Rail Roader, not to Trains.
Can you pass on some of the relevant parts of the article?
Sorry, I should have condensed the news on this topic from Friday's Newswire.
I do not recall seeing any statement from Mr. Obama calling for reduced support of Amtrak, but, from the report on Newswire, he is calling on both the House and the Senate to reduce the money going to Amtrak for both capital and operations. Both bodies would shortchange Amtrak $27 million (from the requested amount) for operation in the next fiscal year, and the House would approve $453 million less than Amtrak requested for capital, and the Senate would cut only $381.4 million from that grant.
I am not sure how my current representative thinks, but I know my senior senator has no use for Amtrak. He should travel in civilized comfort between Salt Lake City and Washington instead of getting there yesterday.
Deggesty I am not sure how my current representative thinks, but I know my senior senator has no use for Amtrak. He should travel in civilized comfort between Salt Lake City and Washington instead of getting there yesterday.
The only person who seems to be making any sense today on this thread is Phoebe Vet, who is asking us "Hey wait a moment, folks. Why don't we find out exactly what it is that the President is proposing and Congress is voting on before taking our characteristic trolling positions pro and con on Amtrak."
Civilized comfort. That is a phrase that evokes images of Simpler Times, when the sun never set on the British Empire and all that.
The British built a prototype of an airliner called the Bristol Brabazon. The thing was the size of an Airbus A-380 Super Jumbo, but it was somewhat lighter in weight, powered by 8 of the radial piston engines of the size where 4 powered a DC-7 or a Super Constellation. It carried only 100 passengers on its two decks, but it carried them (slowly) in the civilized comfort of private rooms and berths.
Do we really want a United States Senator from the Mountain West commuting between the home state and DC on Amtrak sleeping cars, with a train change and possible layover in Chicago? Is that a proper use of time for someone who has to be in DC for votes and committee meetings and in the home state to serve constituents? OK, maybe to do this once a term, to get out among the denizens of fly-over country, but are you really serious that this is how such a person, essentially with the breadth of responsibility of the CEO of a major corporation only serving the people in an elected office, should spend their time?
Are people around this forum really serious about getting some kind of passenger train revival going to meet the challenges of a resource-constrained world, or are we a bunch of romantics who think that people who need to cross this vast country of ours several times a year in the service of the people they are working for should take weeks out of the year to make those trips? That they should do this because we, personally are rail romantics and airline travel offends our personal tastes?
While we are at it, I find that Diesels offend my sensibilities and steam power better suits my tastes. I think that the Amtrak long-distance trains should be steam powered. Actually, were we to do this, it would probably boost ridership considerably given that the long-distance train market has a strong railfan/rail romantic contingent. This would draw steam train tourism from all over the world.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
henry6Let's see....does the highway trust fund operate at a profit? Hmmm....must not be profit but return on investment....so I suppose it is measured not in money but rather in votes and other support.
Paul Milenkovic Are people around this forum really serious about getting some kind of passenger train revival going to meet the challenges of a resource-constrained world, or are we a bunch of romantics who think that people who need to cross this vast country of ours several times a year in the service of the people they are working for should take weeks out of the year to make those trips? That they should do this because we, personally are rail romantics and airline travel offends our personal tastes? While we are at it, I find that Diesels offend my sensibilities and steam power better suits my tastes. I think that the Amtrak long-distance trains should be steam powered. Actually, were we to do this, it would probably boost ridership considerably given that the long-distance train market has a strong railfan/rail romantic contingent. This would draw steam train tourism from all over the world.
Paul, in one of my rants concerning passenger travel on another thread here, I make a point that we cannot be thinking choo choo trains of the past century but look to the future technologies and social needs. We cannot have a "romantic" or nostalgaic approach to passenger rail service but a realistic application of new technologies serving new economic, environmental, and social needs properly marketed and serviced. I get very dismayed when people, especially railfans, wax nostalgic or just want a train to run because they want a train to run.
Paul
I remember years ago traveling wstbound on the real Canadian and sitting in the lounge on the first evening listening to four gentlemen who were sales peolple for an eastern Canadian Company. They were relaxing having a few drinks befor going to bed, likewise I was doing the same. I was soon part of there conversation and I aked why they were traveling by train when the plane was so much faster and more convenient. They said there Company did not allow there sales people to travel only by train as there sales figures beat the competition by 50% year after year and the Company owner felt that his sales people arrived more relaxed and ready to do business. Two of these sales people were going to Vancouver and two were going to Calgary they would spend a week covering there territory and then fly back to Toronto, they had the option of returning by train if they so wished and most usually did. Always thought that was a very civilized way to do business in the jet age. .
Often the most efficient (i.e., cheapest) path to progress is to start over. Perhaps it would be best to scrap Amtrak and start a real passenger rail net that can use 21st century technology rather than dwell in the nostalgia of the first half of the last.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I even looked on the Senate website without being able to find anything that fits this newswire story.
I hope that someone who subscribes to that newswire will keep this thread updated.
Maybe this was part of the same story about Jeff Goldblum dying in New Zealand (or was it Australia) a couple weeks ago??
henry6 Let's see....does the highway trust fund operate at a profit? Hmmm....must not be profit but return on investment....so I suppose it is measured not in money but rather in votes and other support.
The Highway Trust Fund (HTF) does not have a financial objective to earn a profit. It is supposed to recover its costs through a variety of taxes and user fees. The commercial users of the highways are expected to earn a profit by their owners, and they are likely to go out of business if they don't.
In FY07 the HTF required an intergovernmental transfer from the general fund of $3.4 billion. In FY08 it was approximately $8 billion. The need for these transfers arose because the Congress has refused to raise the federal fuel tax, as well as associative fees, since approximately 1993, thereby depriving the HTF of the funds needed to maintain and expand the system.
The HTF could run out of money and, thereby, be unable to fund any maintenance or expansion of the highway system. But it cannot go bankrupt. A sovereign government does not go bankrupt; however, it can default on its financial obligations.
Phoebe Vet even looked on the Senate website without being able to find anything that fits this newswire story. I hope that someone who subscribes to that newswire will keep this thread updated.
even looked on the Senate website without being able to find anything that fits this newswire story.
Sam1 In FY07 the HTF required an intergovernmental transfer from the general fund of $3.4 billion. In FY08 it was approximately $8 billion. The need for these transfers arose because the Congress has refused to raise the federal fuel tax, as well as associative fees, since approximately 1993, thereby depriving the HTF of the funds needed to maintain and expand the system.
Perhaps a better fund bailout would be to stop wasting billions of HTF dollars on Bicycle paths, scenic walking trails, transportation museums, and million dollar bus stops. It is earmarks that are bleeding the fund dry.
Sam1 Congress has refused to raise the federal fuel tax,
Phoebe VetPerhaps a better fund bailout would be to stop wasting billions of HTF dollars on Bicycle paths, scenic walking trails, transportation museums, and million dollar bus stops. It is earmarks that are bleeding the fund dry.
oltmanndSam1 Congress has refused to raise the federal fuel tax, Did anyone (i.e. DOT) ask them to?
If I remember correctly, there have been several proposals to raise the federal gasoline tax. Former Senator Bill Bradley, whilst he was in the Senate, as well as after he left the senate, has proposed raising the federal gasoline tax by as much as 50 cents to a $1 a gallon. Part of the idea was to provide additional funds for highway construction and maintenance, but the major thrust was to encourage Americans to move to more fuel efficient vehicles. As a part of his proposal, he suggested reducing the payroll tax by a corresponding amount to neutralize the tax burden on Americans. Needless to say, it did not fly.
Likewise the Texas motor fuel tax has not been increased since 1992. There have been several proposls to raise it, the most recent being during the last session by Senator John Carona from Dallas. He wanted to increase it a nickel a gallon. It did not pass.
Sam1oltmanndSam1 Congress has refused to raise the federal fuel tax, Did anyone (i.e. DOT) ask them to? If I remember correctly, there have been several proposals to raise the federal gasoline tax. Former Senator Bill Bradley, whilst he was in the Senate, as well as after he left the senate, has proposed raising the federal gasoline tax by as much as 50 cents to a $1 a gallon. Part of the idea was to provide additional funds for highway construction and maintenance, but the major thrust was to encourage Americans to move to more fuel efficient vehicles. As a part of his proposal, he suggested reducing the payroll tax by a corresponding amount to neutralize the tax burden on Americans. Needless to say, it did not fly. Likewise the Texas motor fuel tax has not been increased since 1992. There have been several proposls to raise it, the most recent being during the last session by Senator John Carona from Dallas. He wanted to increase it a nickel a gallon. It did not pass.
oltmanndPhoebe VetPerhaps a better fund bailout would be to stop wasting billions of HTF dollars on Bicycle paths, scenic walking trails, transportation museums, and million dollar bus stops. It is earmarks that are bleeding the fund dry.It hasn't be adjusted for inflation in decades. It can't help but be a small fraction of GDP compared to what it was in the 50s and 60s. The gas tax was 4 cents in 1960. Inflated, it would be 28 cents now, but it is only 18 cents. If you factor in GDP growth - GDP was about $2.5 trillion in 1960 - it is about $12 trillion now, you can see we are spending a far, far lower percentage of our GDP on highways than we did in 1960.
I would not go so far as to say that money from the HTF for transit or other non-road uses is wasted.
On the other hand, to the extend that HTF is viewed as a pot of money to be used for whatever purpose under the sun, the more the gas tax is no longer a "user fee" to support users of highways and the more it is just another consumption tax (on energy usage) that is used to fund whatever. To the extent that perhaps the gas tax has become "just another tax" means it is no longer viewed as a user fee -- let's raise the gas tax to have better roads. As such, the resistance of raising it, even to keep up with inflation or to counteract increase auto fuel efficiency.
We need to keep this in mind when we think "Why does all the gas tax money go to roads and why can't even a thin slice go to HSR or Amtrak or whatever?" It could, if the average highway-using not-particularly-a-railfan voter saw some utility to it, either in substitution for grinding along the highways through traffic or getting the "next guy" to take the train the motorist can cruise down an uncongested road.
But again, we need to step into the shoes of this average highway-using non-railfan voter, to understand their concerns and perhaps make a case for trains. That voter may not share the view of many around here that cars and planes are barbaric, and all of the discussion that trains are more civilized or that driving is a white-knuckle experience or I hate flying or that Americans need to feel shame about the HSR going into countries by implication are not our peers, all of this is spinning our wheels as it were in terms of advancing the cause of trains. That we feel a certain way about trains does not make it automatic that others do, or even would feel that way if they had more experience with trains.
Phoebe VetI even looked on the Senate website without being able to find anything that fits this newswire story. I hope that someone who subscribes to that newswire will keep this thread updated.
Took a while to locate it.
You guys have a somewhat (IMO) bizarre budgeting process with both the house of representatives and the senate being involved, but if you go to http://thomas.loc.gov/home/c111query.html and search for Bill H.R.3288 (which is entitled "Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010"), you will be able to see both the house version and the senate version.
Good search term for Amtrak related stuff once you have the bill up on screen: "passenger".
Smile, Stein
A French diplomat stationed in America pointed out a few years ago that all of America's problems could be solved at once by putting a 50 cent per gallon tax on gasoline.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.