U.S. House votes to cut Amtrak funding, allow pets

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.
crabby_appleton1950

crabby_appleton1950

OBS Chief
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
652
Location
Albuquerque, NM
The Dream Of Dogs Riding On Amtrak Is Tantalizingly Close

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed by voice vote on Thursday the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act.
The bill applies some fairly far-reaching policy changes regarding trains in America. It would reduce the money Congress authorizes for Amtrak ....
Under the bill, profits from Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor would go toward improving the Northeast Corridor lines and not the rest of Amtrak’s operations.
The bill also would require that Amtrak eliminate ... the operating losses it currently has from its food and beverage carts.

... tucked into the bill is the language requiring that Amtrak develop a pilot program to allow dog and cat owners to ride certain trains with their pets.
 
We go through this budget cutting game every year and nothing ever comes of it; so I am not concerned about that part of the Proposal. What I am concerned about is Cats and Dogs possibly being allowed in the Coaches or Sleepers; if they want to carry animals, keep them in the Viewliner Bags which if I recall are temperature controlled. Then when the logistics becomes an issue, mainly feeding, watering and emptying out the pets, folks will come to their senses and realize it is not practical. Check me if I am wrong but I believe no one in Congress has much experience with actually running a railroad, especially one that carries passengers.
 
What about service animals? Don't they kind of moot the whole issue?

Yes, I know the whole service-animal thing is fraught with petty fraud. You don't even need to show papers. Why? There's no state standard anywhere, let alone national, for certification of service animals. All conductors can do is ask what service the animal performs. In my experience they just throw up their hands and mutter under their breath while the car attendants roll their eyes.
 
The dogs riding the train deal was discussed in the past. There are some here who want to allow pit bulls to ride the train, since they are so sweet and cuddly.

IMHO, allowing dogs that are not service animals will cost riders. And I believe that is intentional on the part of the current congress. They want Amtrak to disappear.

The funding cuts USED to work themselves out, back when there was a divided Congress. With the current Congress, I am not so sure. Not sure at all....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Kisor said:
What about service animals? Don't they kind of moot the whole issue?

Yes, I know the whole service-animal thing is fraught with petty fraud. You don't even need to show papers. Why? There's no state standard anywhere, let alone national, for certification of service animals. All conductors can do is ask what service the animal performs. In my experience they just throw up their hands and mutter under their breath while the car attendants roll their eyes.
Click to expand...
The Service Animal classification of the ADA changed a while ago.

Animals who's primary purpose is to provide companionship or comfort, are no longer protected. In addition, service animals now have to have been trained by a recognized facility (for example, a seeing eye dog needs to have been trained by a place like Guiding Eyes, and not by your neighbor's kid) in order to be protected by the ADA.
 
crabby_appleton1950 said:
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed by voice vote on Thursday the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act.

The bill applies some fairly far-reaching policy changes regarding trains in America. It would reduce the money Congress authorizes for Amtrak ....

Under the bill, profits from Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor would go toward improving the Northeast Corridor lines and not the rest of Amtrak’s operations.

The bill also would require that Amtrak eliminate ... the operating losses it currently has from its food and beverage carts.
Click to expand...
1. This thread has a misleading title. The House committee did not vote to cut actual Amtrak spending, the 2015 PRRIA bill has lower total annual authorized spending levels than the 2008 PRIIA act. But Congress never funded Amtrak in any FY appropriations at the authorized amounts in the 2008 act, If, by some miracle, Congress funded Amtrak at or near the circa $1.7 billion in the 2015 PRRIA bill, Amtrak would get an increase over the circa $1.4 billion total it has received in the past 3 FYs.

2. We already have a thread on the 2015 PRRIA bill. I do not see a reason to have a second one, unless it is discuss specific separate items such as pushing Amtrak to allow passengers to bring pets on-board. Which Amtrak has already implemented on 2 Midwest routes as an experiment. I've been thinking about posting to the 2015 PRRIA thread about the $14 billion RIFF loan component, but have not been inclined to write a lengthy post in the past several days.
 
it would be so nice to have a lot of dogs on the train. just like those dedicated dog parks are so nice. and by nice i mean fetid and disgusting.
 
I'm sure the animals will have to be in carriers, just like the airlines.

Amtrak specified this in their pilot pet program when it was rolled out many months ago.
 
Authorizes. Not appropriates. As afigg mentioned, Amtrak was authorized to receive far greater funding under the previous authorization than it actually received.
 
Eric S said:
Authorizes. Not appropriates. As afigg mentioned, Amtrak was authorized to receive far greater funding under the previous authorization than it actually received.
Click to expand...
To add to this:

Authorization = policy

Appropriation = spending

Auth acts can recommend an amount, but this isn't binding to the appropriation committee.

For instance, a NASA auth act could say "Go land on the Moon and also here's a billion dollars for that," but the appropriation looks at that and says "ha a billion no way that's going to work" and they appropriate ten billion instead to actually achieve the policy defined in the auth act.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FormerOBS said:
I'm curious about the rights of passengers and crew who are allergic to pets/pet dander.

Tom
Click to expand...
What do they do now? Service dogs are allowed on trains.

(I'm not being argumentative, I swear.)

The Amtrak pet trial allows no more than four pets per train (not including service animals). The trains have a designated pet car, and the pets have to stay in carriers under the seats.

It's fairly hard to spread dander when an animal is kept in a crate under a seat. I probably transfer more cat dander from my clothes when I travel. :)
 
Alexandria Nick said:
For instance, a NASA auth act could say "Go land on the Moon and also here's a billion dollars for that," but the appropriation looks at that and says "ha a billion no way that's going to work" and they appropriate ten billion instead to actually achieve the policy defined in the auth act.
Click to expand...
Technically, that isn't supposed to happen - the appropriation committee isn't supposed to appropriate more than was authorized for a particular line item. But they're also allowed to break their own rules whenever they want.
 
Sarah, you make an excellent point. I can honestly say I've never encountered a serious problem of this kind with legitimate service animals. I think service animals are far more than pets. They are working partners with their human companions. I think they are loved and cared for far more than the typical pet. I have never encountered a dirty or misbehaving service animal. This is not true of the many fake "service animals" that have been brought onto the train under false pretenses. On the train, we have always bent over backwards to accommodate passengers and their service animals. In an extreme situation, a SCA who is allergic could trade cars with another SCA so that the allergic person doesn't have to deal with the situation. Grownups deal with problems in a grownup way.

I have said before that genuine service animals were always among my favorite passengers.

Tom
 
I've seen people with poodles and lap dogs many times on Amtrak trains, usually in the Sleepers, and not a word was said about it by the crew!

I agree with Tom about true service animals, they're the best!!!
 
Amtrak has to follow the law, like all transportation companies.

There are only two questions allowed:

Is this a service animal?

What service does this animal provide?

I believe only dogs and miniature horses may be service animals, following the most recent rulings and regulations. It is very hard to get a well-trained service animal--over $10,000 for a Seeing Eye dog--and there is quite a bit of fraud, including on the breeder/trainer side. (For example, exaggerated claims that dogs can "alert" on seizures.) For the record, only the VA has a strict credentialing requirement for service animals. Comfort animals are not service animals.

Service animals are not required to wear bibs or collars and not required to be papered. Nor does the person have to disclose the nature of their disability. (And if you pry, they may sue.) Animals may be removed from transportation if they are:

Not under the control of their owner

Pose a threat of harm to other passengers

Allergies are not considered a threat, nor a disability, so people with severe allergies to dogs should take precaution in areas where dogs are present. Some transportation workers have alleged that this is discrimination against them because they are not being covered by ADA and therefore they are not subject to reasonable accommodation (and some can and have lost their jobs), but so far this argument has not held up in court.

Note: I have allergies (not to animals) and can confirm that severe allergies can be severely disabling.

Henry Kisor said:
What about service animals? Don't they kind of moot the whole issue?

Yes, I know the whole service-animal thing is fraught with petty fraud. You don't even need to show papers. Why? There's no state standard anywhere, let alone national, for certification of service animals. All conductors can do is ask what service the animal performs. In my experience they just throw up their hands and mutter under their breath while the car attendants roll their eyes.
Click to expand...
 
Guest said:
Henry Kisor said:
What about service animals? Don't they kind of moot the whole issue?

Yes, I know the whole service-animal thing is fraught with petty fraud. You don't even need to show papers. Why? There's no state standard anywhere, let alone national, for certification of service animals. All conductors can do is ask what service the animal performs. In my experience they just throw up their hands and mutter under their breath while the car attendants roll their eyes.
Click to expand...
The Service Animal classification of the ADA changed a while ago.

Animals who's primary purpose is to provide companionship or comfort, are no longer protected. In addition, service animals now have to have been trained by a recognized facility (for example, a seeing eye dog needs to have been trained by a place like Guiding Eyes, and not by your neighbor's kid) in order to be protected by the ADA.
Click to expand...
That's not true. You're thinking of the VA.
 
I've never seen a big problem with a legitimate service dog, although there was that story about the service dog on a flight that just had some elimination problems. It's owner took the pup off the plane when it was obvious the dog was having some kind of problem. Inconvenient for the flyers, but it's not like those stories crop up every day. Generally I don't have a problem with small dogs or cats in carriers as long as they're not overly yappy. And bigger dogs if well trained and generally well behaved can be a joy, but I'm a pet person. That said, I wouldn't subject my high strung dog on the passengers of a train, nor the potential stresses of that environment on my dog -- because it could go a variety of ways, a lot of which could be stressful on my dog, stressful to me and potentially stressful to others. That just doesn't sound like fun for the dog, the passengers or me. A two day trip when we moved from Indiana to Texas in our private car, with limited interaction with others caused my dog significant stress... so yeah... train travel with my pooch won't happen, even if allowed. That said, the problem is really about people not considering their pets temperament and how their pet's behavior effects others.
 
Mods, please delete my previous post if you see this. I didn't mean to come off so harshly. I'm as disappointed as anyone in how the courts have ruled on the allergy issue.
 
jimhudson said:
I've seen people with poodles and lap dogs many times on Amtrak trains, usually in the Sleepers, and not a word was said about it by the crew!
Click to expand...
If they say it is a service animal the crew does not want to get into an argument. Amtrak won't back the crew up. Also supposed you discover an animal that is a pet en route already onboard. Many crew would be hesitant to take action against the fait accompli if the animal is behaved because they would have to call the police, put the person off, probably cause a delay of the train to the inconvience of the rest of the passengers.
 
Not this topic yet again. The horse is not merely dead, it's most sincerely dead. Let it decay in pieces.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top