FY2017 Federal budget news is good!

[John Bredin]

Do you really think ANY of the 571 billionaires in the USA are concerned enough about Amtrak spending damaging their wealth status that would make an effort to have it cut from the Federal budget so that might save $5 on their tax liabilities?

If Amtrak is below any billionaire's notice, you'd think bus rapid transit in one city -- not even rail, just improved bus service -- would be even farther below their notice. That would be wrong: http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/31/koch-brothers-group-works-stop-nashville-amp/7100469/ http://www.salon.com/2014/04/01/why_are_the_kochs_trying_to_stop_a_transit_project_in_nashville/ http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/01/23/the-koch-brothers-win-nashville-abandons-amp-brt-plans/ It has little to do with saving tuppence on their* taxes, they're agin' it because they're agin' it, and they have the $$$ to make that opposition matter.

*They= the Koch brothers and their ilk. Not all billionaires.

 

[A Voice]

Do you really think ANY of the 571 billionaires in the USA are concerned enough about Amtrak spending damaging their wealth status that would make an effort to have it cut from the Federal budget so that might save $5 on their tax liabilities?

If Amtrak is below any billionaire's notice, you'd think bus rapid transit in one city -- not even rail, just improved bus service -- would be even farther below their notice. That would be wrong: http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/31/koch-brothers-group-works-stop-nashville-amp/7100469/ http://www.salon.com/2014/04/01/why_are_the_kochs_trying_to_stop_a_transit_project_in_nashville/ http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/01/23/the-koch-brothers-win-nashville-abandons-amp-brt-plans/ It has little to do with saving tuppence on their* taxes, they're agin' it because they're agin' it, and they have the $$$ to make that opposition matter.

*They= the Koch brothers and their ilk. Not all billionaires.

Those news articles are three years old.

The Koch brothers (and related groups) stated goals of lower taxes and less government spending are generally speaking worthwhile and admirable goals which virtually everyone would support. The problem arises when blind ideology and selfish pursuit of policies which support your own interests conflict with government programs which are desirable or even necessary - such as passenger rail and mass transit.

Has it ever been stated what precisely is the Koch brothers's specific opposition to transit, beyond ideology and the fact it costs taxpayer dollars? As we are all aware, such programs consume (at most) a marginal amount of state or federal level spending. There are larger and more significant portions of the budget to attack; Why transit?

 

[cirdan]

Those news articles are three years old.

The Koch brothers (and related groups) stated goals of lower taxes and less government spending are generally speaking worthwhile and admirable goals which virtually everyone would support. The problem arises when blind ideology and selfish pursuit of policies which support your own interests conflict with government programs which are desirable or even necessary - such as passenger rail and mass transit.

Has it ever been stated what precisely is the Koch brothers's specific opposition to transit, beyond ideology and the fact it costs taxpayer dollars? As we are all aware, such programs consume (at most) a marginal amount of state or federal level spending. There are larger and more significant portions of the budget to attack; Why transit?

I do't know and I won't speculate.

But independently of this, transit systems have a huge transformational effect on cities. If you look at say Houston as it was say 20 or even 10 years ago and what it's like today. Not long ago much of downtown was just flat land with parking lots all over it. Because of Metro Rail, more people are coming downtown and that is pushing developers and investors to do something with that underutlizied real esate. Lots of new buildings have gone up where previosuly there was nothing, and lots of abandoned buildings have been renoavted and finding tenants.

This type of investment has a huge multiplicative power. For every dollar the government puts into projects, the private sector is putting up a multiple of that to cash in on the opportunities.

So one dollar of government money might in time bring about maybe 50 dollars of other people's investments. That is 50 dollars of changes.

Independently of political persuasion, there are people who are wary of change. And if change happens out of its own dynamics, then I suppose they understand they can't stop it. But if somebody is actually pulling the strings and making change, that may be unconfortable.

Turn this around. If something you feel comfortable about and are accustomed to were to suddenly change, how would you feel?

Every change benefits somebody but also harms somebody. If we extend our hand out to the guy who is losing out and help him, rather than abandon him to his fate or even mock him, a lot of things would be quite different and a lot of senseless opposition would go away.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Setting aside that there is no such thing as Purgatory, nobody has suggested people should "sit on their hands and do nothing". What some of us have stated is that there is a proper time and place for the most effective communication with legislators. There was simply no need to get all worked up over the initial DOA Trump budget document (that he likely didn't personally author). When the Amtrak FY2018 - and not just another Continuing Resolution (CR) - budget numbers come up for active consideration, and particularly if the legislation and numbers aren't kind to Amtrak in general or the long-distance trains in particular, then that will likely be the best and most effective time to contact your Representatives and Senators.

Americans are already some of the least civically/politically engaged citizens among industrial democracies. Rather than overwhelming our representatives by expressing our views too often we instead deafen them with perpetual silence. Regardless of your particular views or affiliations the gold standard in political advocacy in the US is the NRA. Does the NRA recommend holding off until the time is "just right" to act? No. They call their members to action over each and every little threat, no matter how vague or minuscule. And they benefit from this hyper-vigilance by punching way above the size of their membership. In other words, your erroneous warnings against too much action are both misplaced and spurious.

The Koch brothers (and related groups) stated goals of lower taxes and less government spending are generally speaking worthwhile and admirable goals which virtually everyone would support. The problem arises when blind ideology and selfish pursuit of policies which support your own interests conflict with government programs which are desirable or even necessary - such as passenger rail and mass transit.

The Koch family's pro-pollution activism, funding of climate change deniers, union-busting, voter suppression, lopsided tax code lobbying, and history of racist sympathies is hardly admirable. Nor are those positions supported by "virtually everyone." The problem arises when these groups are free to undermine genuine grassroots initiatives by establishing, funding, and promoting divisive astroturf surrogates with alternative facts and dishonest conclusions.

Has it ever been stated what precisely is the Koch brothers's specific opposition to transit, beyond ideology and the fact it costs taxpayer dollars? As we are all aware, such programs consume (at most) a marginal amount of state or federal level spending. There are larger and more significant portions of the budget to attack; Why transit?

It's not that complicated. The Kochs are tightly integrated into nearly every layer of the fossil fuel industry. This includes refining, shipping, processing, distribution, and consumption. They're generally against anything that restricts their ability to pollute as much as they like, pressures them to clean up facilities and communities they've already polluted, or seeks to limit their ability to manipulate and undermine our democracy however they please. The only way they'll support mass transit is if you can find a way to make it even less efficient and even more wasteful of fossil fuels than forcing everyone to drive private vehicles.

 

[WICT106]

The Koch brothers (and related groups) stated goals of lower taxes and less government spending are generally speaking worthwhile and admirable goals which virtually everyone would support. The problem arises when blind ideology and selfish pursuit of policies which support your own interests conflict with government programs which are desirable or even necessary - such as passenger rail and mass transit.

Has it ever been stated what precisely is the Koch brothers's specific opposition to transit, beyond ideology and the fact it costs taxpayer dollars? As we are all aware, such programs consume (at most) a marginal amount of state or federal level spending. There are larger and more significant portions of the budget to attack; Why transit?

One issue is that there is a large number of citizens in the United States who have never had any reason to ride transit or ride trains. This segment of society sees no value in spending money on something neither they nor anyone they know uses. I encounter one version of this when I advocate for train service in Wisconsin & the Great Lakes area -- people are against trains because they cannot envision any instance why they, or anyone else, would take a train trip.

 

[Lonestar648]

Too many people want their personal car with them 24x7, but complain loudly when there is heavy traffic due to so many cars with only one person in the car. A family of five will have five cars these days. They leave with no extra time and complain when they are late that it wasn't their fault. These are the people who see no need for mass transit or intercity rail.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

One issue is that there is a large number of citizens in the United States who have never had any reason to ride transit or ride trains. This segment of society sees no value in spending money on something neither they nor anyone they know uses. I encounter one version of this when I advocate for train service in Wisconsin & the Great Lakes area -- people are against trains because they cannot envision any instance why they, or anyone else, would take a train trip.

&

Too many people want their personal car with them 24x7, but complain loudly when there is heavy traffic due to so many cars with only one person in the car. A family of five will have five cars these days. They leave with no extra time and complain when they are late that it wasn't their fault. These are the people who see no need for mass transit or intercity rail.

I've tried to explain to people like this that expanding passenger rail can benefit everyone, including people who have zero interest in trains, by getting cars like mine (and thousands of others) off the road and out of their way. It makes sense to them for a while but eventually they get roped back into the Fox News / Hate Radio bubble that preaches all mass transit is secretly communistic and vaguely evil and before you know it they're against it again. Hard to compete to a constant drum beat of casual hatred and perpetual misinformation.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Ditto to what Chris said about Fake Noise and Hate Radio Dittoheads!

 

[jis]

Some interesting tidbits from Schumer regarding passenger rail investment and additional info about the Southern Rail Commission ...

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Schumer-Congress-must-get-serious-about-passenger-rail-investment--51327

 

[WoodyinNYC]

Schumer tidbit regarding passenger rail investment ...

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Schumer-Congress-must-get-serious-about-passenger-rail-investment--51327

Well, at least we've got Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on our side.

From that Progressive Railroading article.

A plan exists to make investments in transit and passenger rail, but it has not yet made traction in Congress, [schumer] noted. Specifically, he has called for an investment of $180 billion over the next 10 years to repair aging rail and transit systems, and specifically $5 billion a year to Amtrak, which would help alleviate delays.

Oh, $5 Billion a year would do more than alleviate delays. It would pay for another 50-70 Viewliners IIs, 700 new single-level coaches, 700 new bi-levels coaches, and a big batch of new locomotives.

Not clear how money to Amtrak would go to infrastructure; under Obama it was the FRA that doled out the grants. But with $50 Billion ($5 Billion a year x 10 years) in the pot, the money could be put to good use.

Make a to-do list? New Potomac Long Bridge; restored 'S' line Richmond-Petersburg-Raleigh; extend service Lynchburg-Roanoke-Bristol; upgrades New Orleans-Orlando to speed up the extension of City of New Orleans service to Florida; upgrades to speed up the extension of a split Crescent ATL-Meridian-Dallas-Ft Worth; whatever upgrades needed to take the Cardinal and Sunset Ltd daily; more CREATE projects to finish untangling the knot of Amtrak, commuter, and freight routes in Chicagoland; more work to finish the 110-mph route St Louis-CHI; more work South of the Lake in Indiana and Illinois to finish the 110-mph route Detroit-CHI; new 110-mph or even 125-mph corridors Cincy/Louisville-Indy-CHI, Cleveland-Toledo-CHI, St Cloud-Minneapolis-St Paul-CHI, Memphis-Carbondale-CHI (maybe 79-mph top speed), and possibly Lincoln-Omaha-Des Moines-Iowa City-Quad Cities-CHI; further time-saving upgrades Seattle-Portland, Portland-Eugene, and Seattle-Canadian border. And roughly $50 Billion for California, LOL.

With only $5 Billion a year to work with, there won't be enuff to expand that list by much. Higher speeds and more frequencies NYC-Albany-Syracuse-Rochester-Buffalo anyone? I hesitate to advocate the needed upgrades Philly-Lancaster-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh for fear another route might get cannibalized. (Just kidding, Philly.)

But surely $50 Billion spread over 10 years could transform Amtrak's national system.

It could be more. When Schumer talks of $180 Billion for "aging rail and transit", does he mean commuter routes and also aging lines like Spokane-Pasco-Yakima-Ellensburg-Seattle? Or does he mean mostly subways and light rail? Of course, investing in routes like MARC and VRE lines that overlap Amtrak routes could help with many time-shaving projects. If it's all one big pot, the $50 Billion could be Amtrak's guarantee, but not its cap.

Sorry. Guess I've transformed this into another fantasy thread.

 

[Don Newcomb]

One issue is that there is a large number of citizens in the United States who have never had any reason to ride transit or ride trains. This segment of society sees no value in spending money on something neither they nor anyone they know uses. I encounter one version of this when I advocate for train service in Wisconsin & the Great Lakes area -- people are against trains because they cannot envision any instance why they, or anyone else, would take a train trip.

A corollary is that when people go places they often need to carry a great deal of stuff with them. It's one thing to take a train to your vacation spot. Now add a kayak or surfboard to the mix. Even if the kayak fits on the train, how do you get it into a taxi at the other end? When you go to Japan, you see people traveling with very small luggage. The luggage the average American carries doesn't even fit in a Japanese apartment. It requires not only a change of travel modes, it also requires a change of mindset.

 

[dogbert617]

Schumer tidbit regarding passenger rail investment ...

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Schumer-Congress-must-get-serious-about-passenger-rail-investment--51327

Well, at least we've got Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on our side.

From that Progressive Railroading article.

A plan exists to make investments in transit and passenger rail, but it has not yet made traction in Congress, [schumer] noted. Specifically, he has called for an investment of $180 billion over the next 10 years to repair aging rail and transit systems, and specifically $5 billion a year to Amtrak, which would help alleviate delays.

Oh, $5 Billion a year would do more than alleviate delays. It would pay for another 50-70 Viewliners IIs, 700 new single-level coaches, 700 new bi-levels coaches, and a big batch of new locomotives.

Not clear how money to Amtrak would go to infrastructure; under Obama it was the FRA that doled out the grants. But with $50 Billion ($5 Billion a year x 10 years) in the pot, the money could be put to good use.

Make a to-do list? New Potomac Long Bridge; restored 'S' line Richmond-Petersburg-Raleigh; extend service Lynchburg-Roanoke-Bristol; upgrades New Orleans-Orlando to speed up the extension of City of New Orleans service to Florida; upgrades to speed up the extension of a split Crescent ATL-Meridian-Dallas-Ft Worth; whatever upgrades needed to take the Cardinal and Sunset Ltd daily; more CREATE projects to finish untangling the knot of Amtrak, commuter, and freight routes in Chicagoland; more work to finish the 110-mph route St Louis-CHI; more work South of the Lake in Indiana and Illinois to finish the 110-mph route Detroit-CHI; new 110-mph or even 125-mph corridors Cincy/Louisville-Indy-CHI, Cleveland-Toledo-CHI, St Cloud-Minneapolis-St Paul-CHI, Memphis-Carbondale-CHI (maybe 79-mph top speed), and possibly Lincoln-Omaha-Des Moines-Iowa City-Quad Cities-CHI; further time-saving upgrades Seattle-Portland, Portland-Eugene, and Seattle-Canadian border. And roughly $50 Billion for California, LOL.

With only $5 Billion a year to work with, there won't be enuff to expand that list by much. Higher speeds and more frequencies NYC-Albany-Syracuse-Rochester-Buffalo anyone? I hesitate to advocate the needed upgrades Philly-Lancaster-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh for fear another route might get cannibalized. (Just kidding, Philly.)

But surely $50 Billion spread over 10 years could transform Amtrak's national system.

It could be more. When Schumer talks of $180 Billion for "aging rail and transit", does he mean commuter routes and also aging lines like Spokane-Pasco-Yakima-Ellensburg-Seattle? Or does he mean mostly subways and light rail? Of course, investing in routes like MARC and VRE lines that overlap Amtrak routes could help with many time-shaving projects. If it's all one big pot, the $50 Billion could be Amtrak's guarantee, but not its cap.

Sorry. Guess I've transformed this into another fantasy thread.

Speaking of that post, it started to make me wonder if the talk to bring back the Amtrak Blackhawk(Chicago-Dubuque, with intermediate service to Rockford among other places) will ever happen? Or talk about restoring train service from Chicago to the Quad Cities area? Sadly I worry these plans won't happen, because of IL's budget impasse.

 

[Eric S]

Speaking of that post, it started to make me wonder if the talk to bring back the Amtrak Blackhawk(Chicago-Dubuque, with intermediate service to Rockford among other places) will ever happen? Or talk about restoring train service from Chicago to the Quad Cities area? Sadly I worry these plans won't happen, because of IL's budget impasse.

There are threads on here about those projects that will have more specific information but, in general, the Quad Cities project, which had a significant portion of federal funding, is moving along while the Rockford/Dubuque project is largely dormant at this point.

 

[jis]

Maybe the title of this thread needs to have a date put in to provide context for when the "Federal budget news *was* good".

My recommendation is that the word FY2017 be prepended to the title, to clearly separate this thread from FY2018 Budgetary woes discussions. Mods?

 

[neroden]

Yes, mods, please do that

 

[PRR 60]

Topic title has been changed. Sorry I missed the suggestion. it took a "tickle" from jis to wake me up.