Congress skeptical of Amtrak cutbacks

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

Rep. John Olver, D-Mass., a supporter of federal funding for the passenger service, called Amtrak "a fishbone caught in our throat," a reference to the disproportionate debate over a relatively small budget item in the U.S. Department of Transportation's overall $59.5 billion request for next year.

Olver complained that the administration's budget "irresponsibly uses the word 'bankruptcy"' when talking about Amtrak.

"Do you know of any transit system or a rail passenger system anywhere else in the world that breaks even or makes money?" Olver repeatedly asked Mineta, who had referred to a 1997 law that required Amtrak to stand on its own.

The Bush administration's 2006 budget calls for eliminating the subsidies that have kept Amtrak running for 34 years.

This year, the government provided one-third of Amtrak's $3 billion operating budget and has provided $29 billion in subsidies since the National Rail Passenger Corp. was created in 1971 when freight railroads abandoned their financially troubled passenger service.

Story

 

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

"Do you know of any transit system or a rail passenger system anywhere else in the world that breaks even or makes money?" Olver repeatedly asked Mineta, who had referred to a 1997 law that required Amtrak to stand on its own.

This year, the government provided one-third of Amtrak's $3 billion operating budget and has provided $29 billion in subsidies since the National Rail Passenger Corp. was created in 1971 when freight railroads abandoned their financially troubled passenger service.

Story

 

[Midland Valley]

Rep. John Olver, D-Mass., a supporter of federal funding for the passenger service, called Amtrak "a fishbone caught in our throat," a reference to the disproportionate debate over a relatively small budget item in the U.S. Department of Transportation's overall $59.5 billion request for next year.
Olver complained that the administration's budget "irresponsibly uses the word 'bankruptcy"' when talking about Amtrak.

"Do you know of any transit system or a rail passenger system anywhere else in the world that breaks even or makes money?" Olver repeatedly asked Mineta, who had referred to a 1997 law that required Amtrak to stand on its own.

The Bush administration's 2006 budget calls for eliminating the subsidies that have kept Amtrak running for 34 years.

This year, the government provided one-third of Amtrak's $3 billion operating budget and has provided $29 billion in subsidies since the National Rail Passenger Corp. was created in 1971 when freight railroads abandoned their financially troubled passenger service.

Story

Why can't Mineta, or the President just come out and answer the question plainly, stating that making money isn't the real issue?

 

[Amtrak Watcher]

...because they only want the position, not the ability to actually do something.

Political types pretty much stopped speaking in plane language decades ago; reflecting a national reluctance to speak clearly and honestly, and accept personal responsibility for anything. The death of common sense is the result. So, today we see law suites instead of action; we see national farces on TV such as the current circus conducted around the Schiavo situation in Florida in which even congress feels it’s okay to insert itself in the private affairs of a family – for votes and without regard for the facts. We shouldn’t be surprised, therefore, to see pointless posturing around funding things like Amtrak.

Meddling in privet affairs and invoking procedural mechanisms to get around basic principles of American law and tradition take precedence over attending to real matters deserving our attention: renewing our infrastructure, dealing with national security, and formulating an energy policy. Amtrak is a handy target, because (as we’ve heard) “nobody uses it,” and it only “goes places nobody wants to go.”

Considering the facts and speaking with honesty is hard work. Pointless posturing, idle politics, and looking for cash and votes is more fun.

 

[Guest_capltd29]

I have always wondered why the hell they make such a big deal about such a small fraction of the transportation budget.

 

[AlanB]

I have always wondered why the hell they make such a big deal about such a small fraction of the transportation budget.

Because it attracts attention. It's a lightening rod and if you are from the right state, it wins you votes. And that works both ways. Can't win in the NE if you don't support Amtrak and you may loose in the mid-west & south if you do support Amtrak.