Ever since President Nixon nationalized passenger rail service into Amtrak in 1971, it has never been the priority it should be, but not under the threat it is now. I recently became aware of how under threat is has become recently. While past administrations both Democrats and Republicans have not realized the great use of a good passenger rail service across the country, ever since Bush came to office in 2001 Amtrak has been under greatest threats. He has cut it and cut it and is pretty much working to do away with it. I will explore a few realities here.
What has happened to Amtrak to ruin it in the past five years.
1. Amtrak director David Gunn was working hard to get funding for Amtrak and to improve it. It was under him that Acela was launched. Then he criticized Bush's policy toward Amtrak and so he got fired.
2. The board of directors the fired Gunn was made of of people who Bush appointed during recess without Senate confirmation, he did this again and again. His directors have no experience in railroading and one admitted to Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) that hed had never ridden Amtrak. The only thing that "qualifies" them for Bush is that they have each given hundreds of thousands to Bush and the RNC's campaigns.
3. Under the tenure of the so-called "Amtrak Reform Board" the Amtrak has cut much of its overnight service and was also cutting short distance trains. The Grand Rapids-Chicago run that makes a stop in my hometown on the way was almost cut but a few local politicians thankfully stepped in.
My theory about why they want to cut Amtrak.
I believe the reason Bush is working to cut Amtrak is not because he wants to save money, considering that he has given the green light to nonstop pork barrel spending the past, but because he wants to help his interests. If we actually had a working national rail passenger service (or even several regional ones) like countries in Europe have people would be driving and flying less. Since Amtrak is a public company, there is no reason to worry about profit, but car companies and airlines, as well as oil companies who supply fuel, have something to lose. It has been proven that people in countries with good rail service drive and fly less, using less oil, less cars, and less planes. These companies want Amtrak cut because they don't want to compete with something like that.
Why we need Amtrak today more than ever.
1. Increased use of Amtrak would mean less people out on the roads and that would mean fewer fatalities. We could save perhaps thousands of lives with a good passenger rail system.
2. Increased use of Amtrak (especially electrified trains) would mean that there would be less fossil fuels going off and it would mean that there would be less pollution.
3. For those who still drive, Amtrak would help too because it would relieve a lot of the congestion.
4. For frequent flyers, more use of Amtrak would mean that the airports would be less congested and there would be fewer flight delays.
What I want to see done with Amtrak.
I believe that Amtrak needs full funding and it needs to operate efficiently. Though this would cost more there are other areas of the Federal budget that we certainly could cut leaving room for Amtrak. My goal is to eventually see high-speed passenger service become as common in America as in Europe. I want to see several regional lines like in the Northeast, the Midwest, the South, California, and the Pacific Northwest. I want to see efficient trans-national passenger service.
Now that I have commented on Amtrak's state I want to hear what you think about it. I don't want to see this evolve into a broader political debate because I do not see this as a liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican, us vs. them type of issue, I see it as an Administration vs. passengers and railfans issue. I believe it has national importance and I think that in an election year, this SHOULD be an issue out with all the others. For more info see http://www.saveamtrak.org
What has happened to Amtrak to ruin it in the past five years.
1. Amtrak director David Gunn was working hard to get funding for Amtrak and to improve it. It was under him that Acela was launched. Then he criticized Bush's policy toward Amtrak and so he got fired.
2. The board of directors the fired Gunn was made of of people who Bush appointed during recess without Senate confirmation, he did this again and again. His directors have no experience in railroading and one admitted to Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) that hed had never ridden Amtrak. The only thing that "qualifies" them for Bush is that they have each given hundreds of thousands to Bush and the RNC's campaigns.
3. Under the tenure of the so-called "Amtrak Reform Board" the Amtrak has cut much of its overnight service and was also cutting short distance trains. The Grand Rapids-Chicago run that makes a stop in my hometown on the way was almost cut but a few local politicians thankfully stepped in.
My theory about why they want to cut Amtrak.
I believe the reason Bush is working to cut Amtrak is not because he wants to save money, considering that he has given the green light to nonstop pork barrel spending the past, but because he wants to help his interests. If we actually had a working national rail passenger service (or even several regional ones) like countries in Europe have people would be driving and flying less. Since Amtrak is a public company, there is no reason to worry about profit, but car companies and airlines, as well as oil companies who supply fuel, have something to lose. It has been proven that people in countries with good rail service drive and fly less, using less oil, less cars, and less planes. These companies want Amtrak cut because they don't want to compete with something like that.
Why we need Amtrak today more than ever.
1. Increased use of Amtrak would mean less people out on the roads and that would mean fewer fatalities. We could save perhaps thousands of lives with a good passenger rail system.
2. Increased use of Amtrak (especially electrified trains) would mean that there would be less fossil fuels going off and it would mean that there would be less pollution.
3. For those who still drive, Amtrak would help too because it would relieve a lot of the congestion.
4. For frequent flyers, more use of Amtrak would mean that the airports would be less congested and there would be fewer flight delays.
What I want to see done with Amtrak.
I believe that Amtrak needs full funding and it needs to operate efficiently. Though this would cost more there are other areas of the Federal budget that we certainly could cut leaving room for Amtrak. My goal is to eventually see high-speed passenger service become as common in America as in Europe. I want to see several regional lines like in the Northeast, the Midwest, the South, California, and the Pacific Northwest. I want to see efficient trans-national passenger service.
Now that I have commented on Amtrak's state I want to hear what you think about it. I don't want to see this evolve into a broader political debate because I do not see this as a liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican, us vs. them type of issue, I see it as an Administration vs. passengers and railfans issue. I believe it has national importance and I think that in an election year, this SHOULD be an issue out with all the others. For more info see http://www.saveamtrak.org
( I Whole-heartedly Agree!)
