Petition to restore Sunset East now on WhiteHouse.gov

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
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.
Texan Eagle said:
Anyone fancy an international train ride on Sunset Limited passing through The Republic of Texas?
Click to expand...
If Texas secedes from the Union, that might help keep the SWC on Raton Pass, as it would avoid the train becoming international and hence slowed down by border security etc.

So another reason to sign?
 
[Moderator's Note]

Even though the elections are over, the political guidelines of AU still remain. It appears that this thread may be getting off topic and too political with some posts. Please let's stop the future political comments and stick to the original topic only!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Texan Eagle said:
MrFSS said:
This is also the site where a number of petitions have been started for states to be allowed to succeed from the union. I think Texas wants to try again.
Click to expand...
That would be this petition-

Peacefully grant the State of Texas to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government

As of now 115,000 people have signed this petition (I have a feeling quite a few among these are the people from other states who'd prefer to see Texas to just go away, good riddance!)

Anyone fancy an international train ride on Sunset Limited passing through The Republic of Texas?

P.S.: BTW on that site there is also a petition asking "City of Austin to Secede from Republic of Texas if Texas decides to secede from the United States". It would be fun to see how deep someone goes. Would there be one asking "7th Street to secede from City of Austin if it secedes from State of Texas if it secedes from the United States"? :giggle:
Click to expand...
I thought this was "interesting"

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/delays-version-of-texas-secession-at-odds-with-history-the-constitution.php

First, Texas did not join the Union by treaty. It joined by joint resolution of Congress. According to Dr. Felix D. Almaraz, a professor of Texas history at the University of Texas, San Antonio, DeLay is correct that Texas can, in theory, divide into as many as four additional states (five total) and has tried and failed to do so from time to time. But if it did, it would result in eight (not 10) senators, and they wouldn’t be from Texas, except, perhaps, by birth. They’d be the two senators from each of the (up to) four new states.

But there’s a problem with that. According to Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, “[n]ew states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.”

NAVYBLUE
 
NAVYBLUE said:
Texan Eagle said:
MrFSS said:
This is also the site where a number of petitions have been started for states to be allowed to succeed from the union. I think Texas wants to try again.
Click to expand...
That would be this petition-

Peacefully grant the State of Texas to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government

As of now 115,000 people have signed this petition (I have a feeling quite a few among these are the people from other states who'd prefer to see Texas to just go away, good riddance!)

Anyone fancy an international train ride on Sunset Limited passing through The Republic of Texas?

P.S.: BTW on that site there is also a petition asking "City of Austin to Secede from Republic of Texas if Texas decides to secede from the United States". It would be fun to see how deep someone goes. Would there be one asking "7th Street to secede from City of Austin if it secedes from State of Texas if it secedes from the United States"? :giggle:
Click to expand...
I thought this was "interesting"

http://tpmdc.talking...onstitution.php

First, Texas did not join the Union by treaty. It joined by joint resolution of Congress. According to Dr. Felix D. Almaraz, a professor of Texas history at the University of Texas, San Antonio, DeLay is correct that Texas can, in theory, divide into as many as four additional states (five total) and has tried and failed to do so from time to time. But if it did, it would result in eight (not 10) senators, and they wouldn’t be from Texas, except, perhaps, by birth. They’d be the two senators from each of the (up to) four new states.

But there’s a problem with that. According to Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, “[n]ew states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.”

NAVYBLUE
Click to expand...
Sir:

I feel you must be holding something back here ... too modest... didn't you at some point serve as a constitution expert in some high level government job?
 
Come on people, there are more than 90 members of AU. At least sign the petition to get a response, even if you may not agree with its contents.
 
Even if it does get a response, it's going to boil down to "write your representatives". Congress is the one that has to appropriate the money; the White House has little to do with it.
 
alanh said:
Even if it does get a response, it's going to boil down to "write your representatives". Congress is the one that has to appropriate the money; the White House has little to do with it.
Click to expand...
I guess you've never heard of the bully pulpit? Saying the White House has little to do with funding passenger rail is a bit like saying the transmission has little to do with moving your car.
 
Another petition on whitehouse.gov. This one is nearing the 25,000 signature threshold for response, and it was only started on December 14.

MODERNIZE THE RAIL NETWORK INTO A HIGH-CAPACITY, GRADE-SEPARATED, ELECTRIFIED SYSTEM TO SERVE FREIGHT AND PASSENGERS

The U.S. freight rail system needs to be brought up to 21st century standards, so that it can serve the public interest of the American people in efficient, competitive, and reliable rail transportation for freight and passengers. The core, consisting of approximately 40,000 route miles, should be modernized to permit rail traffic operation in the range of 60 to 150 mph. This can be achieved though multiple tracks, grade separation, automatic train control, and electric motive power. Benefits would include economies in freight transportation, reduction in need for highway construction, less environmental impact, and much expanded access to passenger rail at lower cost. The government should lead this effort through planning and sponsoring private-government partnerships for financing.
Click to expand...
 
CHamilton said:
Another petition on whitehouse.gov. This one is nearing the 25,000 signature threshold for response, and it was only started on December 14.

MODERNIZE THE RAIL NETWORK INTO A HIGH-CAPACITY, GRADE-SEPARATED, ELECTRIFIED SYSTEM TO SERVE FREIGHT AND PASSENGERS

The U.S. freight rail system needs to be brought up to 21st century standards, so that it can serve the public interest of the American people in efficient, competitive, and reliable rail transportation for freight and passengers. The core, consisting of approximately 40,000 route miles, should be modernized to permit rail traffic operation in the range of 60 to 150 mph. This can be achieved though multiple tracks, grade separation, automatic train control, and electric motive power. Benefits would include economies in freight transportation, reduction in need for highway construction, less environmental impact, and much expanded access to passenger rail at lower cost. The government should lead this effort through planning and sponsoring private-government partnerships for financing.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Looks like it has 44 signatures to me?
 
Texas Sunset said:
Here in Texas many residents remain convinced that the state really has a perfectly valid option it can exercise to leave the union at the time and place of it's own choosing. Leaving the union has already been tried once, and when it came back together any hint or doubt about what would happen was settled both in a legal and practical sense.
Click to expand...
I doubt that anything like secession will occur.

But with all respect, I don't agree with your arguments. I believe secession will not occur because there are too many mutual benefits that make changing those an unnattarctive propoistion. That is the maion and only major reason it isn't going to happen.

The other reasons you state don't convince me at all. Why should a independent Texas fear war with Mexico? There are many countries on the globe that are much smaller than Texas and they haven't been invaded yet. I guess Texas wouild still be part of NATO or whatever military alliance would be responsible. As for what the constition say or does not say, does it matter? We have over the period since the end of WW2 seen close to 100 countries secede or gain independence. In most cases the relative constitutions didn't allow for that. But if there is a will, laws can be changed, constitutions can be changed and things can and will happen. Laws ultimately serve the will of the people rather than vice-versa, and laws that have outlived their usefulness are abolished.
 
jis said:
cirdan said:
Laws ultimately serve the will of the people rather than vice-versa, and laws that have outlived their usefulness are abolished.
Click to expand...
All that I can say in great admiration is that you sir are an incredible starry eyed optimist :)
Click to expand...
And if enough of the stars gather up enough power that is just and within reason, we can make a constellation that shines! After all, one of the things that unite us is our love of moving by train. Amtrak has said the service is suspended, not discontinued. So, I call a demand on Joe Boardman to axe the damn thing once and for all, or, unsuspend the service by mid-January. I/we are being more than patient and judicious in my/our demand that have been lawfully revealed and acquired though the petition.
 
CHamilton said:
Drat, I read the wrong box. Sorry about that. It did seem a little surprising.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was too good to be true. :(

The SL East petition that started this thread is now up to a whopping 146 signatures, only 4 shy of becoming visible to the public as an open petition. And it expires tomorrow. Yep, more sad :(

The new petition for HSR is now up to 49 signatures. Only 24,951 to go!
 
The White House Currently Has 48 Successful Petitions Waiting on Responses, Further Ensuring the Site’s Legacy as a Total JokeThe We the People White House petition site opened up in the fall of 2011, as a place for Americans to rally other Americans behind causes that the U.S. Government could then respond to. It’s been in the news lately for some interesting petitions, including secession petitions from all 50 states, and one successful plea to build a functioning Death Star.

Unfortunately, the site is a joke. And not even because of the aforementioned petitions. It’s actually because the White House has let four dozen petitions, that by its own rules deserve responses, languish in obscurity. Yes. 48 petitions with over 25,000 signatures, and zero responses.

Below are all 48 petitions that have already crossed The White House-set threshold of 25,000 signatures. That means that in theory all these petitions, on topics ranging from secession to South Korea and from pot to premium cigars, are slated for an official response from the White House.
Click to expand...
 
That peition site is basically useless.

Remember, the first thing the Obama White House did with the Internet in 2008 was to open a big website crowdsource ideas on a number of topics -- do you remember that website? I forget what it was called. In *huge* numbers, everyone said "LEGALIZE AND TAX MARIJUANA!"

The White House's response? They shut down the website and said "We're going to continue to imprison people for marijuana possession."

Hmm. So, a few years later, this petition site. The White House outright rejects most of the most popular petitions, including the one to legalize marijuana and the one to abolish software patents. What quickly becomes one of the most successful petitions on the site?

“Actually take these petitions seriously instead of just using them as an excuse to pretend you are listening.”

http://blogs.wsj.com...ions-seriously/

Let's be blunt: the Obama White House has proved that it is completely uninterested in popular ideas. I'm not claiming that any of the previous White Houses were interested in popular ideas either; I don't think they were. But by setting up these sorts of sites and then flatly rejecting the demands of the public, it's become really blatant.

Once the petition site was obviously a joke, the Death Star petition was put through. 'Cause why not? The White House doesn't take citizen petitions seriously, why should citizen petitions take the White House seriously?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top