Bennett Supports Ending Amtrak Service in Utah

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

OGDEN, Utah (AP) -- Sen. Bob Bennett has supported ending Amtrak service in Utah and using those federal subsidies to support the railroad in areas that have heavier passenger demand.

"I will be happy to contribute that portion of Amtrak's budget that goes to maintain rail service in Utah to the state of New Jersey where they need it," Bennett said during a floor debate Tuesday.

"If necessary, in Utah we can come up with one bus per week which has enough capacity to handle all of the Amtrak passengers that come through our state," said Bennett. A copy of his taped remarks was obtained by the Standard-Examiner's Washington office.

My Webpage

 

[Guest]

Smart man, that Senator Bennett.

 

[Midland Valley]

someone may have have bennett, but Bob broke it.

 

[Midland Valley]

Seriously, Bennett must have a conflict of interest. He has played a great part in bringing 6.2 million dollars to the Brigham City municipal airport and 2.5 million to 7 other Utah airports.

 

[AlanB]

Smart man, that Senator Bennett.

No actually it wasn't very smart of Mr. Bennett since he forgot about all the other buses he'll need to provide for the passengers who aren't detraining or boarding within his state, but are still nonetheless passing through his state.

So he's going to need to provide at least another 10 buses just for that. And according to the White House way of thinking, each state must pay for their share of the operating costs of Amtrak. So whether it's 10 to 15 buses or one train, he's still going to end up paying more than the State of Utah contributes to Amtrak right now.

Reason: That's a lot of money for both the buses and the needed drivers, mechanics, and to buy those buses. Then factor in the cost of road repairs from the damage that those buses create. The State of Montana estimated that it saves $7.6 Million a year in highway costs because of the Empire Builder, which takes people off the road. And that number was a very conservative estimate.

That same number can easily be applied to the State of Utah, which like Montana sees only two Amtrak trains per day. Start running 10 or more extra buses per day with no Amtrak and you'll see highway that 7.6 M in savings disappear and probably even more than that number.

By the way that same study from Montana found that the state benefited to the tune of $18.9 Million per year from Amtrak. And again that's a conservative number. It also doesn't include secondary benifits, things like someone who got a job, because someone who works for Amtrak in that state is able to go shopping and buy things thanks to their salary paid by Amtrak.

Bottom line from that study was, Montana gets more monetary benefits from Amtrak than it contributes to Amtrak via the Federal suplement.

You can find that study paid for by the State of Montana here.

 

[SavetheCZ]

He has played a great part in bringing 6.2 million dollars to the Brigham City municipal airport

I thought this was odd too. I actually live in Utah and Bennett is one of my "representatives". Having been to the thriving "metropolis" of Brigham City I wondered about why they would need 6.2 million when I saw the article in the newspaper last week. I sent Senator Bennett a letter supporting Amtrak over a month ago. Now I know why he didn't bother to reply. the thing that gets me is there is another large general aviation airport 15 miles south in Ogden. I'm guessing that Brigham City got thsi money because of it's close proximity to Thiocal corp as they are almost exclusively a government contractor and the big wigs want to be able to fly closer to the manufacturing plant. FYI Thiocol makes the solid rocket boosters for the space shuttle among other things.

One thing I've learned about most national level politicians in Utah is that it is much better to support the president and the party (but only the GOP) rather than actually standing up for the folks that actually live in their district.

A perfect case in point is the recent decision to "temporarliy" store spent nuclear fuel rods about in Utah. Hatch, Bennett et al went to the administration and said that they don't want the waste in our state. They used the arguments of why move the stuff twice ( once to Utah and then on to Yucca Mountain in Nevada). Does anyone thinks once the stuff gets stored in Utah it will ever move again? No way.

In reality I'm convinced that the administration really doesn't give a rats behind about Utah as we are ALWAYS a red state. Nevada on the other hand can swing back and forth between blue and and red. So it's a calculated risk to screw Utah rather than Nevada as no matter what the state stays red. So Nevada I don't think you have to worry about the stuff coming to you, at least you have Sanator Reid to stand up to the non-sense.

 

[steve_relei]

The California Zephyr is one of Amtrak's most popular trains and most scenic routes, including parts through Utah--albeit trains pass through at night or early morning. The cllimb over Soldier Summit (as the sun is coming up eastbound) is a prime example.

 

[scott]

no one ever said politicians were smart. I go along with the conflict of interest theory. sounds like it.