Amtrak & Sequestration

shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
What is wrong with making cuts to a very bloated budget (not necessarily Amtrak's)? Our country is coming closer and closer to second rate or third rate status with our deficits. Don't say I am making this political, the person before me (Anderson) made it so; and please do not backtrack by saying it was "a joke."
 
But let us please not discuss the general politics here. Preferably keeping this focused on the effect of sequestration on Amtrak would be more desirable than having a series of diatribes about the politics behind the sequestration. Just IMHO of course.

In that spirit, as Shanghai, I am sure would be happy to explain to us all, as far as day to day operation is concerned, the thing of greatest importance is "Cash Flow". Since whatever happens with Sequestration is unlikely to immediately affect cashflow severly enough to cause disruption, Amtrak should be able to continue operating for quite a while, even more so if its cash flow is bolstered by higher revenue recovery. Yes there will be long term effects eventually, but in the the short run things should not be terribly disruptive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chenoweth said:
What is wrong with making cuts to a very bloated budget (not necessarily Amtrak's)? Our country is coming closer and closer to second rate or third rate status with our deficits. Don't say I am making this political, the person before me (Anderson) made it so; and please do not backtrack by saying it was "a joke."
Click to expand...
First of all, note that my initial post (unedited, I would point out) ended with a ":p", a fairly common indication for someone making a joke or other humorous remark. Second, I would point out that I was playing off the OP's tongue-in-cheek remark as well.

But as to the substance of your remarks, since my comment, while humorous in intent, belies a certain truth: There are places that I would like to see cuts in the budget, but you'd get further by slashing military bands (a fun ceremonial relic of a time when drummers and so forth were used for battlefield communication, but which somehow gobble up nine figures in the DOD budget) than getting rid of any two LD trains or by eliminating all losses in state-supported trains. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out which option I prefer. Basically, there are places I can see plenty of cutting happening without any functional damage occurring to anything, and the hits Amtrak is likely to take are, blessedly, likely to get swallowed up in spikes in ridership and revenue.
 
jis said:
But let us please not discuss the general politics here. Preferably keeping this focused on the effect of sequestration on Amtrak would be more desirable than having a series of diatribes about the politics behind the sequestration. Just IMHO of course.
In that spirit, as Shanghai, I am sure would be happy to explain to us all, as far as day to day operation is concerned, the thing of greatest importance is "Cash Flow". Since whatever happens with Sequestration is unlikely to immediately affect cashflow severly enough to cause disruption, Amtrak should be able to continue operating for quite a while, even more so if its cash flow is bolstered by higher revenue recovery. Yes there will be long term effects eventually, but in the the short run things should not be terribly disruptive.
Click to expand...
Yes, let's do our very best to pretend politics has absolutely nothing to do with Amtrak in general or sequestration in particular. That way people who hold mutually exclusive goals won't have to be inadvertently reminded that their dueling positions make no logical sense. I guess coddling emotional absurdity is more important than recognizing honest reality.
 
Devil's Advocate said:
jis said:
But let us please not discuss the general politics here. Preferably keeping this focused on the effect of sequestration on Amtrak would be more desirable than having a series of diatribes about the politics behind the sequestration. Just IMHO of course.
In that spirit, as Shanghai, I am sure would be happy to explain to us all, as far as day to day operation is concerned, the thing of greatest importance is "Cash Flow". Since whatever happens with Sequestration is unlikely to immediately affect cashflow severly enough to cause disruption, Amtrak should be able to continue operating for quite a while, even more so if its cash flow is bolstered by higher revenue recovery. Yes there will be long term effects eventually, but in the the short run things should not be terribly disruptive.
Click to expand...
Yes, let's do our very best to pretend politics has absolutely nothing to do with Amtrak in general or sequestration in particular. That way people who hold mutually exclusive goals won't have to be inadvertently reminded that their dueling positions make no logical sense. I guess coddling emotional absurdity is more important than recognizing honest reality.
Click to expand...
Could you elaborate a bit on what you define as mutually exclusive goals here?
 
Anderson said:
Devil's Advocate said:
jis said:
But let us please not discuss the general politics here. Preferably keeping this focused on the effect of sequestration on Amtrak would be more desirable than having a series of diatribes about the politics behind the sequestration. Just IMHO of course.
In that spirit, as Shanghai, I am sure would be happy to explain to us all, as far as day to day operation is concerned, the thing of greatest importance is "Cash Flow". Since whatever happens with Sequestration is unlikely to immediately affect cashflow severly enough to cause disruption, Amtrak should be able to continue operating for quite a while, even more so if its cash flow is bolstered by higher revenue recovery. Yes there will be long term effects eventually, but in the the short run things should not be terribly disruptive.
Click to expand...
Yes, let's do our very best to pretend politics has absolutely nothing to do with Amtrak in general or sequestration in particular. That way people who hold mutually exclusive goals won't have to be inadvertently reminded that their dueling positions make no logical sense. I guess coddling emotional absurdity is more important than recognizing honest reality.
Click to expand...
Could you elaborate a bit on what you define as mutually exclusive goals here?
Click to expand...
I was primarily referring to people who ride Amtrak and support Amtrak but who also vote for vehemently anti-Amtrak platforms. It is my belief that these are the folks who primarily take it upon themselves to report anyone who dares to connect the dots or draw any obvious conclusions in public. I'm sure it's not easy to be both staunchly for AND against something by virtue of your various affiliations, but I also don't see how that's the forum's problem. Why should we self-sanitize reality for the benefit of folks who have painted themselves into an ideological corner and are thus left with little or nothing to say of their own? That's an honest question. I also want to make it clear that this is not intended to include Jis or anyone else who has posted in this thread. However, my educated guess is that these folks represent the motivation for Jis to preemptively caution against discussing the causes and results of sequestration outside of an apolitical vacuum.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anderson said:
Devil's Advocate said:
jis said:
But let us please not discuss the general politics here. Preferably keeping this focused on the effect of sequestration on Amtrak would be more desirable than having a series of diatribes about the politics behind the sequestration. Just IMHO of course.
In that spirit, as Shanghai, I am sure would be happy to explain to us all, as far as day to day operation is concerned, the thing of greatest importance is "Cash Flow". Since whatever happens with Sequestration is unlikely to immediately affect cashflow severly enough to cause disruption, Amtrak should be able to continue operating for quite a while, even more so if its cash flow is bolstered by higher revenue recovery. Yes there will be long term effects eventually, but in the the short run things should not be terribly disruptive.
Click to expand...
Yes, let's do our very best to pretend politics has absolutely nothing to do with Amtrak in general or sequestration in particular. That way people who hold mutually exclusive goals won't have to be inadvertently reminded that their dueling positions make no logical sense. I guess coddling emotional absurdity is more important than recognizing honest reality.
Click to expand...
Could you elaborate a bit on what you define as mutually exclusive goals here?
Click to expand...
I interpret that to mean, "Someone who loves Amtrak, and wants to see more passenger rail in the USA, but is generally on the "right" when it comes to other political ideology.

However, I disagree that we can "pretend" to exercise our thoughts, while putting politics aside, when it comes to Amtrak.

Amtrak is (however unfortunate it may be), deeply ingrained in politics. It has only survived because of politics. it is a political entity.

I think the mods, and most of the postesr here, desire that political discussion be limited as to how it relates to Amtra.

Not veering off to side views of any particular party or party members views, like, "...Well Joe Blow, that asshat Tea Party Senator, is also against Gun Control, and wants to tattoo a national ID number on every imigrents wrist........And, demands Universal Health Care for all people born after 1991........." kind of thing.
 
Yeah, I fall into that category. With that said, some of the discussions I've had have been...er...interesting at times. I've also made it pretty close to no secret that this is my big issue with folks and that it's something I'm prepared to lose over.

Of course, VA is a bit odd in that both parties seem to have very pro-rail elements (a number of the more libertarian/tea party types in the northern part of the state want to see the Richmond-Washington HSR project go forward, for example)...but we've also had the dog catch the car, too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jimhudson said:
Dick for CEO, not CFO!!!! ;) (An Honest, Competent Guy from New Jersey, WOW!!! :giggle: )
Click to expand...
I'm retired!! But I do have a board position on a financial institution and treasurer of

a volunteer organization. And then there is my Google daughter that requires

some strong financial supervision. As I said, I am retired. My main duty is to

care for Prince Archibald!!
 
Shanghai said:
jimhudson said:
Dick for CEO, not CFO!!!! ;) (An Honest, Competent Guy from New Jersey, WOW!!! :giggle: )
Click to expand...
...As I said, I am retired. My main duty is to

care for Prince Archibald!!
Click to expand...
But think of the fun you and Prince Archibald could have commuting to WAS in Beech Grove! :)

(Okay, there is the work part of the job -_- , but ignore that :rolleyes: , and think of the perks! :wub: :lol: )

Hey, its never too late to have a happy childhood! :p
 
Shanghai said:
jimhudson said:
Dick for CEO, not CFO!!!! ;) (An Honest, Competent Guy from New Jersey, WOW!!! :giggle: )
Click to expand...
I'm retired!! But I do have a board position on a financial institution and treasurer of

a volunteer organization. And then there is my Google daughter that requires

some strong financial supervision. As I said, I am retired. My main duty is to

care for Prince Archibald!!
Click to expand...
In that case I vote for Prince Archibald as CEO. In the act of taking care of the Pricne Shanghai will do a great job taking care of his responsibilities too :giggle: :hi:
 
I agree with the posters who understand that sequestration will be no picnic for Amtrak. :eek:

For those on this forum who will take a moment to contact their legislators :help: about supporting Amtrak as the sequestration looms, here are some thoughts to get you going:

"Amtrak has a complex personality. I think of Amtrak as the scrawny stepson of aged, jaded, and once-wealthy parents who must make his way through the streets in an out-of-style and awkwardly fitting suit. Yet, despite constant ridicule from bullies, he keeps his chin up and smiles. When he has to, he stands and fights for his right to live. He has the will to survive and, more importantly, friends to help him. He's just been waiting for someone to give him the resources to do the job he was born to do. Then, Amtrak will be a hero.

"Amtrak was created because although the American people wanted passenger trains as a transport option, American freight railroads could no longer afford to subsidize the operation of passenger services from freight profits. Amtrak was hastily planned and poorly financed from the very beginning and it has struggled ever since because, unlike all other transport modes, it does not have a secure source of funding. In fact, Amtrak presents a funding anomaly. With most American transport, government funding supports basic infrastructure while private industry provides services. Under Amtrak's legislated structure, local, state, and federal governments make up the deficit between the costs of service and fare-box revenue, while most of the infrastructure outside of the NEC is privately owned and managed. Amtrak has to pay for the use of the tracks, in effect making Amtrak a customer of railroads.

"Long-distance passenger trains are a valuable resource. When all costs are weighed, trains provide one of the most economical transport solutions. Furthermore, passengers are afforded a more comfortable, less stressful journey than is possible with automobiles, buses, or airplanes. Riding a train has long been considered one of the best ways to experience America. Trains are also one of the safest means of ground transport and are vastly safer than automobiles. ... " (from Brian Solomon's excellent book, "Amtrak," MBI Railroad Color History, published 2004 by MBI, an imprint of MBI Publishing Company, St. Paul MN)

I have taken the liberty of quoting this brief passage of this wonderful hardcover book for two reasons. For one, it is a real must-have book for your library at home if you love Amtrak. :wub: This 160-page book has some really beautiful photographs of Amtrak trains, stations and routes. It provides a thorough understanding of the history and creation of the agency. And even though the book is now 9 years old, Amtrak faces the same types of funding battles as when the book was published. Mr. Soloman is a wonderful writer, and I like his metaphor of Amtrak as a scrawny, picked-on, scrappy kid who needs his friends--that would be US! :) :) :) The other reason for quoting this passage is that the sequestration is looming like a meat-axe over our already-fragile passenger train system. :help: :help:

Thanks :hi: everyone for taking a few moments to contact your congressional representatives and senators, on behalf of keeping Amtrak alive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Long-distance trains are more likely to get cut, but they are also more important. The SDTs make few losses but many routes have lots of frequencies. If Amtrak has to save money, I'd prefer them cutting a few frequencies on SDTs than cutting an LDT which would destroy the whole route. JMO.
 
Swadian Hardcore said:
Long-distance trains are more likely to get cut, but they are also more important. The SDTs make few losses but many routes have lots of frequencies. If Amtrak has to save money, I'd prefer them cutting a few frequencies on SDTs than cutting an LDT which would destroy the whole route. JMO.
Click to expand...
The near term damage to Amtrak from the sequestration, if it happens, should be limited. Amtrak has been keeping the operating losses comfortably under the federal operating subsidy and using that surplus in effect to pay for the 130 car Viewliner II order. If the sequestration kicks in and stays that way, the damage is more significant to the capital funding. Some maintenance and upgrade projects may have to be suddenly halted if there is not enough money to pay for them.

I don't think LD trains will be dropped because of the sequestration. The question is what will the final FY2013 budget allocations be and what the heck will happen to FY2014 appropriation levels.The other hit could be to the US DOT and the FRA (and the FTA. FAA, etc) because FRA and DOT staff will get furloughed and work only 4 days a week. Anything that is waiting for FRA approval or funding is going to be delayed.
 
Swadian Hardcore said:
Long-distance trains are more likely to get cut, but they are also more important. The SDTs make few losses but many routes have lots of frequencies. If Amtrak has to save money, I'd prefer them cutting a few frequencies on SDTs than cutting an LDT which would destroy the whole route. JMO.
Click to expand...
If you understand how Amtraks' funding works after PRIIA that is not a possibility. The corridor routes will from next year be funded by the states, and not subject to the sequester. If you cut them the only thing that happens is that the state subsidy for the route goes away (and the revenue from their passengers), and you are left with the same deficit in funding. If cuts will be necessary, Amtrak can only cut LD's or on the NEC. But the latter is turning a profit, so unless you are really careful in your trimming, cutting service here will end up widening the deficit.

Funding technicalities aside I also disagree with the importances. One train a day on as many routes as possible is basically only good for looking nice on a map and for foamers who want to do as much mileage as possible. As for solving most peoples' transportation needs, frequencies are much more important, and fewer routes with more frequencies are the way to go, if you can't afford it all.

(I realise that there is also the matter of regional politics and that all parts of the country needs to have some service in order to maintain support, but that has much more with politics to do than what is sensible transportationwise...)
 
Sequestration Week: Will Congress Find a Solution By Friday? Does It Matter?

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood was the administration’s spokesperson this weekend, tasked with publicizing some of the cuts that will hit hard. More than $600 million of the $1 billion DOT will need to cut is set to come out of the Federal Aviation Administration, which LaHood said will lead to furloughs for the vast majority of FAA personnel, who will lose one or even two days per pay period. That will mean delays for travelers and probably canceled flights, since air traffic controllers will only allow the amount of traffic they can manage safely.

The cuts to air travel are certainly the most dramatic, but surface transportation will suffer some wounds as well. As we reported last month, the Federal Transit Administration is facing painful cuts to an already bare-bones staff. Amtrak funding and New Starts grants for transit expansion will also get an 8 percent slice taken out of them. The popular TIGER grant program for innovation transportation projects will also be cut. Highway programs will be safeguarded since their funding comes out of the Highway Trust Fund, but other modes will have a much harder time.

No one likes the sequester – well, almost no one. But it’s possible that the “meat cleaver” approach to budget trimming is saving transportation from even worse cuts.

Despite the White House’s current focus on the FAA, transportation doesn’t have the kind of constituency fighting for it tooth and nail that some other programs have – say, defense, or Medicare. So if a new round of cuts – made with a scalpel, not a cleaver – protected those programs, it’s possible transportation could get hit even harder to make up the difference.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top