Well, an author from the Cato Institute and the Washington Times thinks we should kill Amtrak. What a surprise! I couldn't have seen that coming!
The same tired arguments we've heard since 1971 and no more convincing today than then.
The 2016 election will be about parties and their ideology, not personalities. One party wants to support Amtrak. The other doesn't. This article represents what's in store for Amtrak, its customers and the country, if the party that draws strength from the likes of the Cato Institute and the readership of the Washington Times should win.
The Washington Times gives the bird droppings that end up on it a bad name.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Well, it's an opinion piece, and Mr. Rahn's certainly entitled to his opinion.
Plain fact of the matter is, if the railroads thought they could make money hauling passengers, they'd do it. But they can't, so they don't.
On the other hand, let's see how that higher-speed private enterprise passenger train they're trying to get started in Florida works out. Could change the whole dynamic.
NKP guy Well, an author from the Cato Institute and the Washington Times thinks we should kill Amtrak. What a surprise! I couldn't have seen that coming! The same tired arguments we've heard since 1971 and no more convincing today than then. The 2016 election will be about parties and their ideology, not personalities. One party wants to support Amtrak. The other doesn't. This article represents what's in store for Amtrak, its customers and the country, if the party that draws strength from the likes of the Cato Institute and the readership of the Washington Times should win.
+1
Amtrak has its faults, some created by creaky management, but most caused by a combination of chronic underfunding (primarily from the political group that supports the quoted rag, aka, Washington Times and mandated routing (bipartisan). It is a pretty safe bet that if the group aligned with the Washington Times wins in 2016, it will be mostly "bye bye Amtrak" soon after in 2017.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Firelock76 Well, it's an opinion piece, and Mr. Rahn's certainly entitled to his opinion. Plain fact of the matter is, if the railroads thought they could make money hauling passengers, they'd do it. But they can't, so they don't. On the other hand, let's see how that higher-speed private enterprise passenger train they're trying to get started in Florida works out. Could change the whole dynamic.
But remember the Flordia thing is about real estate, not about making money on trains!
Amtrak was proposed and created by the Nixon Administration as part of Richard Nixons domestic policy. It was not created by Congress, although Congress modified the legislation before passing it.. So stating Amtrak was created by the more general term "Federal Government" in the article skips past that important piece of information.
Is there any reason we should think this guy knows anything about the realities of rail transportation in the real-life USA? He is identified as a member of the Cato Institute, whose policies seem to always be dictated by a predetermined political agenda, rather than dispassionate, independent thought. I see no indication that he has any other credentials or qualifications to comment on the subject, other than that he's a doctrinaire conservative with an opinion.
I wish I had a parrot. I could line the bird cage with this stuff.
Tom
NKP: I think you exaggerate. Not all Republicans want to end Amtrak, and there may be enough who wish it to get better and be better funded to work with similarlyl-minded Democrats to improve matters.
The Cato Institute is well-known as a libertarian think tank, which puts it somewhere to the right economically of most of the American populace.
Libertarianism is similar to Marxism in one regard, it sounds a lot better as a theory than as a practical economic philosophy.
I agree with Dave that Amtrak-bashing is not necessarily a Republican agenda. Amtrak-bashing represents a government-hating agenda fostered by a certain conservative element which does include the Cato Institute. Ironically, these government-haters want to govern. This element seems to have taken the headlines away from the very many Republicans with a more balanced view. I know who is most vocal, but I haven't figured out which element represents the majority of Republicans. Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Eisenhower were all Republicans and they had a healthy understanding that there are some things better left to Private Enterprise and some things more appropriately left to Government and its designated agencies. In many cases, a healthy cooperative arrangement between the two is the best approach. The segment of the Republican Party that seems to capture the headlines nowadays is the bunch who have forgotten, or never understood, the part about the usefulness of Government involvement in problem solving. Hopefully, saner voices will emerge in the G.O.P. and change the party's direction. If not, the party is doomed to failure by its own intransitigence. Or the party will win more elections and allow this government-hating philosophy to take over the country completely, in which case I fear for our collective future.
I want to apologize if anyone believes I am injecting a political viewpoint into a forum that is supposed to be free of politics. My intention was to put the Republican/libertarian/extreme conservative situation in a historical and practical context. In the process, I realize that I have revealed my own opinions on the subject. I hope nobody is offended.
(edited)
ACY I agree with Dave that Amtrak-bashing is not necessarily a Republican agenda. Amtrak-bashing represents a government-hating agenda fostered by a certain conservative element which does include the Cato Institute. Ironically, these government-haters want to govern. This element seems to have taken the headlines away from the very many Republicans with a more balanced view. I know who is most vocal, but I haven't figured out which element represents the majority of Republicans. Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Eisenhower were all Republicans and they had a healthy understanding that there are some things better left to Private Enterprise and some things more appropriately left to Government and its designated agencies. In many cases, a healthy cooperative arrangement between the two is the best approach. The segment of the Republican Party that seems to capture the headlines nowadays is the bunch who have forgotten, or never understood, the part about the usefulness of Government involvement in problem solving. Hopefully, saner voices will emerge in the G.O.P. and change the party's direction. If not, the party is doomed to failure by its own intransitigence. Or the party will win more elections and allow this government-hating philosophy to take over the country completely, in which case I fear for our collective future. I want to apologize if anyone believes I am injecting a political viewpoint into a forum that is supposed to be free of politics. My intention was to put the Republican/libertarian/extreme conservative situation in a historical and practical context. In the process, I realize that I have revealed my own opinions on the subject. I hope nobody is offended. Tom (edited)
I would like to believe the party of Lincoln still has members in the tradition of TR, Ike, and closer to home in the Land of Lincoln, people who share the views of Chuck Percy, Ev Dirksen, Richard Ogilvie and Jim Thompson. But they seem to have been silenced by the loud groups mentioned above, sadly.
Those people on the right seem to have little concern that the expression of their political views offends or not.
ACY Ironically, these government-haters want to govern.
Yes! ...and my laugh for the day! Thanks!
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
CSSHEGEWISCHThe Cato Institute is well-known as a libertarian think tank, which puts it somewhere to the right economically of most of the American populace. Libertarianism is similar to Marxism in one regard, it sounds a lot better as a theory than as a practical economic philosophy.
+1 Both fail because they have to work with actual humans.
I don't see Amtrak going anywhere after 2016 election. My local rep who is very conservative, and is now in Schuster's sub-commitee, is all giggly about how important the LD trains are (particularly the Crescent) and crucial the NEC is, and how they are funding Amtrak "the right way" now!
"We now know that a socialistic, government-regulated, -taxed and -operated passenger rail does not work."
How do we know that? And what part of Amtrak doesn't work? What other government programs "don't work"? Prisons, welfare, education? Europe's railroads are heavily subsidized. Do they also "not work"? And what does the shrinkage of railroad miles have to do with Amtrak? Nice to see the article never got into the facts.
Agree, the Heartland Flyer to OKC from Ft Worth was saved by Governor George W Bush after persuasion in Ausitin by a coalition of passengers. Likewise Governor Walker in Wisconsin will not touch the Chicago to Milwaukee service because he knows it has strong backing via Milwaukee Rotary, Chamber of Commerce and the business community as a whole that uses the service heavily.
If you organize a grass roots effort and broad support network, Amtrak trains won't get cut. It is a bipartisan issue and generally politicians do not want to tick off large political blocks.
There is a lesson in there for both NARP and Railfans. I trully believe they have the political support in Wisconsin for more than once a day service between Chicago and the Twin Cities. Minnesota is ready to pay. All we need is a working bipartisan coalition in Wisconsin to make it happen. Wisconsin DOT is on the fence on the proposal for 2-3 trains between Chicago and the Twin Cities....it is not adamantly opposed to it. So we are getting closer there.
I agree that the coalition building is the secret sauce of some routes in red states. However, how to do you keep a coalition together for a multi-state route? Decisions have to be made on the Federal level.
There the issue as I see it is the amount of money that the ATA spends on lobbying (about $10-15 million/year). The death of intercity passenger rail would just be a side consequence of fully adopting the ATA perspective on pricing truck use of highways far below Average Total Cost, while pushing for even larger weights all the while claiming "they paid for the highways". Once you turn a blind eye to the Financial reality of highways, either conventional rail or high speed rail will never be supported by these types.
The really out there Republicans seem to be in the ATA/Cato camp. My Senator I know best thankfully is not one of this type of Republican. He probably represents more of the will of the people where many professional polls have demonstrated 70-80%ish approvals ratings for more investment in intercity passenger rail.
V.Payne However, how to do you keep a coalation together for a multi-state route?
You can always follow NH's example (w.r.t. the Downeaster) "Live free(loading) or die!"
V. Payne: Excuse my ignorance or slow wit, but I don't quite follow how the ATA's lobbying effort threatens Amtrak's or anyone else's passenger rail service? Could you explain? It seems irrelevant or at best a minor component in the long history of difficulties and obstacles in getting a decent passenger rail network and services in the US.
V.PayneHowever, how to do you keep a coalition together for a multi-state route?
Regional Compact and in fact research the Thalys and who funds that High Speed Train in Europe.....Jointly operated HSR train between three countries National Systems. We can do the same here in the states with Long Distance trains or even Cooridor Trains. And in fact, we do. Illinois and Wisconsin jointly fund the Hiawatha Service between Chicago and Milwaukee for example.
"Thalys reaches Amsterdam and Cologne, and its system is operated by Thalys International. Its capital is divided up between SNCF (62%) and SNCB/NMBS (28%) Deutsche Bahn (10%)."
Thalys even have a compensation policy to refund part of the fare to passengers when a train delay causes a inconvienence to the passenger. Think of the jaws that would drop if Amtrak implemented something like that in the Northeast Corridor.
All you Democrats on here need to realize two things:
1. Lots of Republicans, including reps in Congress, support Amtrak, including LD. How else do you suppose Amtrak has lasted all these years, including through Republican administrations and Republican congresses?
2. To the extent there is partisan, Republican, pressure on Amtrak, that's at least partly because, after you Democrats are done throwing sweetmeats to your various tax-money consuming constituencies, there isn't much left for our old heroic endeavers like infrastructure, space and lots of other stuff that used to make us special.
Instead of blaming Republicans, how about blaming yourselves?
Fred: I'm not sure whether your comment was aimed at me or not, but I'll take a shot at it. If I thought the Cato Institute represented the heart of traditional Republican thinking, or that it represents all of the Republican Party, then I might blame the Party. But I don't, so I don't.
dakotafred All you Democrats on here need to realize two things: 1. Lots of Republicans, including reps in Congress, support Amtrak, including LD. How else do you suppose Amtrak has lasted all these years, including through Republican administrations and Republican congresses? 2. To the extent there is partisan, Republican, pressure on Amtrak, that's at least partly because, after you Democrats are done throwing sweetmeats to your various tax-money consuming constituencies, there isn't much left for our old heroic endeavers like infrastructure, space and lots of other stuff that used to make us special. Instead of blaming Republicans, how about blaming yourselves?
Fred: I think Tom's and my point concerned the more recent, ultra-conservative faction in the GOP, which has stated its intention is to privatize Amtrak. The GOP and the Democrats have funded it throughout its history. And after all, Amtrak was started by the GOP.
A few facts:
1. In all eight budgets of Ronald Reagan, Amtrak subsidies were all eliminated.
2. Geo. W. Bush zeroed out the Amtrak subsidy in his 2005 budget.
3. Candidate Romney proposed elimination of any subsidy for Amtrak.
Elimination of the Amtrak subsidy would mean elimination of all Amtrak services beyond the NEC.
I think you may have answered your own question in regards to the ATA, but let me expand on my comment. All of the recent actions to zero out Amtrak come during periods where the ATA is trying to push for expanded weight or size limits on trucks.
To get there you have to lobby that trucks and consequentially automobiles pay their full way for the use of highways, incrementally that is revenue per mile traveled. Of course they ignore the leverage from taxes on the use of the local road system, particularly for trucks as they don't pay for the local road system in the same way automobile users do through property taxes unrelated to roads.
Once you make this jump to ignore the HTF leveraging from taxes on road assets not paid for by the HTF there is nothing to say that National Network (Long Distance) routes should get any subsidy. Unfortunately, highways run a large deficit on an incremental cost to revenue basis, which is why the ATA has good lobbyists I suppose.
Let us recognize one glaring fact: with regards to the one thing Amtrak needs most, that is, a stable source of funding that is predictable, both parties have failed miserably.
A McIntosh Let us recognize one glaring fact: with regards to the one thing Amtrak needs most, that is, a stable source of funding that is predictable, both parties have failed miserably.
schlimm A McIntosh Let us recognize one glaring fact: with regards to the one thing Amtrak needs most, that is, a stable source of funding that is predictable, both parties have failed miserably. The false equivalence logical fallacy strikes again! And the consequence of some cognitive dissonance.
As does the great potato masher - plan your next capital purchase without knowledge that your funding exists past next week.
Most recently, H.R. 749: the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015, passed the House on 3/4/2015. The vote: 316 For, 101 Opposed, 15 Not Voting.
By party: GOP: 132 For, 101 Opposed, 11 Not Voting.
Dem: 184 For, 0 Opposed, 4 Not Voting.
The GOP appears to be very divided on funding Amtrak.
There was also the amendment to stop funding Amtrack by Republican Tom McClintock from central California. 147 Republicans voted with McClintock including some who had long distance trains which served their district. Fortunately, 90 Republicans and 182 Democrats defeated the amendment. Later, McClintock and 45 other Republicans changed their minds and voted for H.R. 749 to fund Amtrak. It is hard for me to understand how they could be for Amtrak funding and against Amtrak funding at the same time. Perhaps, that is what it takes to get elected these days.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.