Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brooklynite

(94,727 posts)
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:12 PM Sep 2014

House bill cuts Amtrak funding 40 percent

Source: The Hill

The House is proposing a 40 percent funding cut for Amtrak in a new passenger rail bill that was unveiled on Thursday by the chamber’s Transportation Committee.

Amtrak has received about $1 billion per year from the federal government since its inception in 1971. But Republican leaders on the panel said the long-overdue rail funding measure would force the company to streamline its operations and survive mostly on the money that is generated by ticket sales.

The bill is unlikely to be approved by lawmakers before this year’s elections.

...snip...

Amtrak’s subsidies have been a source of contention for years in Congress. Republicans have pushed in the past to privatize service on its heavily traveled Northeastern U.S. routes, which are the most profitable in the company’s network.

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/217411-house-rail-bill-cuts-amtrak-funding-40-percent



Not going to pass the Senate.
69 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
House bill cuts Amtrak funding 40 percent (Original Post) brooklynite Sep 2014 OP
Need to get rid of the GOP house majority Iliyah Sep 2014 #1
That's no way to run a railroad you morons underpants Sep 2014 #2
I didn't even know Amtrak received tax payer money yeoman6987 Sep 2014 #3
How much are you willing to pay on your plane ticket for Air Traffic control? brooklynite Sep 2014 #9
Look something has to give yeoman6987 Sep 2014 #18
Aren't you the one bragging about fleeing to Florida to....... wolfie001 Sep 2014 #33
We're all sinners I suppose. yeoman6987 Sep 2014 #44
Sorry, didn't mean to call you. wolfie001 Sep 2014 #60
Airlines get subsidies in airport facilities upaloopa Sep 2014 #12
No its not ridiculous charliea Sep 2014 #16
I'm sure "everyone" on FreeRepublic does agree. ForgoTheConsequence Sep 2014 #20
Your gone. I don't have time for childish remarks yeoman6987 Sep 2014 #21
*You're ForgoTheConsequence Sep 2014 #25
Absolutely correct. There IS no debate on that subject. Kingofalldems Sep 2014 #26
And privatizing everything. NT passiveporcupine Sep 2014 #41
Boom. Kingofalldems Sep 2014 #23
How often do you agree with republicans? Kingofalldems Sep 2014 #22
Not at all. Chan790 Sep 2014 #24
If they had their way they would run oil tankers and people together. glinda Sep 2014 #30
Don't give them the idea. Historic NY Sep 2014 #39
All modes of transportation get some subsidies as essential pieces of our national infrastructure. pinto Sep 2014 #34
Disagree completely, actually. /nt October Sep 2014 #52
No-- that is not in fact, the case. LanternWaste Sep 2014 #58
Because the Koch media says so. It's been planned for many years: freshwest Sep 2014 #62
They need more federal funding to develop broader infrastructure for high traffic corridors. Gormy Cuss Sep 2014 #67
Oh boy... Agschmid Jun 2015 #69
The reason there is Amtrak is because upaloopa Sep 2014 #4
good point KurtNYC Sep 2014 #27
They're idiots. SheilaT Sep 2014 #5
Tejana Susana is anti-train? KamaAina Sep 2014 #14
That did not happen under her watch. SheilaT Sep 2014 #56
I was wondering if she'd gutted it KamaAina Sep 2014 #57
Why We Can't Have Nice THings example #9,375 arcane1 Sep 2014 #6
put privatized prison rail cars on amtrak trains, repubs (and many dems) would give $$ for that nt msongs Sep 2014 #7
if they want to cut service to red states, that's what they get CreekDog Sep 2014 #8
Another big hit for Amtrak is Wellstone ruled Sep 2014 #10
WTF, do they want NO passenger rail in the US RoccoR5955 Sep 2014 #11
This Is Just Another Example Of How The Repubs Are Destroying America.... global1 Sep 2014 #13
They want them to take cars=gas/oil. glinda Sep 2014 #31
I had to travel from Austin, TX christx30 Sep 2014 #68
I'm reading this while on... dhill926 Sep 2014 #15
Meanwhile, China spending billions on high speed rail... americannightmare Sep 2014 #17
Not only China, but also South Korea and Japan davidpdx Sep 2014 #64
I understand. I live in Portland... americannightmare Sep 2014 #65
Morans! JCMach1 Sep 2014 #19
I guess planes use more fuel. nt valerief Sep 2014 #28
We're rationally for it BeyondGeography Sep 2014 #29
They (Repugs) want to privatize everything .. look at the Postal Service YOHABLO Sep 2014 #32
Republicans would like to take us all back to the horse-and-buggy times. blkmusclmachine Sep 2014 #35
No surprise. Rail cuts into their oil profits. jillan Sep 2014 #36
No it doesn't...most Amtrak engines run on diesel. brooklynite Sep 2014 #42
As in the words of Roseanna Anna Danna ..... Never mind. jillan Sep 2014 #43
Actually, it does. Picture how much more oil would be needed Thor_MN Sep 2014 #55
Love Amtrak. Sienna86 Sep 2014 #37
This country is so fu*ked up. mnhtnbb Sep 2014 #38
"Cars are so 1%" Sen. Walter Sobchak Sep 2014 #47
Wouldn't it be nice to get to DC or florida in a shorter period of time. Historic NY Sep 2014 #40
I'm okay with the regional service, but shut the rest down. Sen. Walter Sobchak Sep 2014 #45
Where's your line on subsidizing all modes on national transport? pinto Sep 2014 #48
Most modes of transportation have a scope in which they make sense Sen. Walter Sobchak Sep 2014 #49
No doubt. BlueEye Sep 2014 #53
Most "Cross Country" Rail service is regional service. happyslug Sep 2014 #54
Just think how safeinOhio Sep 2014 #46
BTW... Sequestration is still in effect. Hugin Sep 2014 #50
These idiots need to INCREASE subsidies forty percent, and make them contingent upon finding MADem Sep 2014 #51
How else are we going to pay for wars? J_J_ Sep 2014 #59
good move--a couple of reports of global warming being much worse than expected... yurbud Sep 2014 #61
"Northeastern U.S. routes, which are the most profitable" wordpix Sep 2014 #63
Dear Congressperson Omaha Steve Sep 2014 #66
 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
3. I didn't even know Amtrak received tax payer money
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:15 PM
Sep 2014

This seems ok to me. I wish we had a list of everything we paid for. Not just major areas. Everyone must agree Amtrak getting federal funding is ridiculous.

wolfie001

(2,265 posts)
33. Aren't you the one bragging about fleeing to Florida to.......
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 06:31 PM
Sep 2014

.....save all your big bucks from Maryland taxes? You've moved to a state run by a heartless, corporate cyborg. Congratulations.

wolfie001

(2,265 posts)
60. Sorry, didn't mean to call you.
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 09:36 PM
Sep 2014

I'm a Marylander as well and I work in a Mont. Co. grocery and the visiting Floridians are always complaining about the .05 per bag fee....."Blah blah blah". I want to remind them of Gov. Voldemort but it's just not worth it. Cheers

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
12. Airlines get subsidies in airport facilities
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:39 PM
Sep 2014

and controllers ect.
Trucking has the interstate and state highway system

charliea

(260 posts)
16. No its not ridiculous
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 05:01 PM
Sep 2014

I consider assuring access to safe, efficient, and reliable transportation something that's in everyone's best interest, a function of good government for all, like spending money on roads and air traffic controllers. As I tell my Congressman every time it comes up for some kind of vote.

I'm sure you must have meant that: Everyone must agree that giving an unknown amount of money to the CIA, and its private contractors is ridiculous, as is paying government contractors after they've already failed to meet contractual goals and violated federal law.

You can look up a lot concerning the Budget and where the money goes. Here's a good place to get started:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=BUDGET&browsePath=Fiscal+Year+2014&searchPath=Fiscal+Year+2014&leafLevelBrowse=false&isCollapsed=false&isOpen=true&packageid=BUDGET-2014-BUD&ycord=0

Note that 'black' budget items are intentionally hidden. Which is why when people tell me that we should treat the budget like a family would I ask what family throws uncounted buckets of money down a black hole and expects to know how to balance their checkbook?

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
21. Your gone. I don't have time for childish remarks
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 05:42 PM
Sep 2014

If you begin debating an issue later, I may change you back. Your post is derogatory and has a huge lack of substance. No time at all for it.

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,869 posts)
25. *You're
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 05:53 PM
Sep 2014

Sorry I called you out on right-wing talking points. I should have mentioned how public transit and infrastructure are important and how those are CORE beliefs that liberals and those who lean center-left share.

Kingofalldems

(38,475 posts)
26. Absolutely correct. There IS no debate on that subject.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 05:57 PM
Sep 2014

Republicans are the only ones that favor cutting public transportation.

 

Chan790

(20,176 posts)
24. Not at all.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 05:49 PM
Sep 2014

I'd gladly strip funding from the Federal Highway System to redirect more funding to mass-transit initiatives and Amtrak. There is little in the federal transportation budget that gets the bang for the buck of Amtrak.

glinda

(14,807 posts)
30. If they had their way they would run oil tankers and people together.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 06:04 PM
Sep 2014

And have the public pay for everything.

pinto

(106,886 posts)
34. All modes of transportation get some subsidies as essential pieces of our national infrastructure.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 06:37 PM
Sep 2014

Yes, federal tax payer money. AMTRAK funding isn't ridiculous. What's your reasoning on that?

(on edit) There is a list of what gets funded by taxpayer funds. It's called the federal budget. A little unwieldy and cumbersome, but the details are there.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
58. No-- that is not in fact, the case.
Fri Sep 12, 2014, 11:19 AM
Sep 2014

" Everyone must agree Amtrak getting federal funding is ridiculous..."

No-- that is not in fact, the case.

However, what are the objective and precise reasons that lead you to believe that anyone who disagrees with your unsupported premise is holding a ridiculous position?

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
62. Because the Koch media says so. It's been planned for many years:
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 02:01 AM
Sep 2014
“We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”

“We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”


If you can pay a toll, fine, if you can't you'll be SOL. They're doing fine on this with media help, and with a win this year they'll finish their bucket list:

http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/1014833821#post10

Gormy Cuss

(30,884 posts)
67. They need more federal funding to develop broader infrastructure for high traffic corridors.
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 11:06 PM
Sep 2014

Privatizing is exactly the wrong thing to do. From a public policy perspective, encouraging rail travel in high population corridors makes sense.

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
4. The reason there is Amtrak is because
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:16 PM
Sep 2014

privatized passenger service was a losing proposition after mail contracts went to the airlines.

KurtNYC

(14,549 posts)
27. good point
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 05:59 PM
Sep 2014

and one billion is nothing in a budget that is $4 trillion annually. 1/4000th of the budget.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
5. They're idiots.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:17 PM
Sep 2014

Public transportation cannot survive on ticket sales and needs to be subsidized. As, for instance, the highways are hugely subsidized.

Too many cars, THAT'S the problem.

Last month I took Amtrak from Lamy, NM (it's the Santa Fe stop) to LA, and then the Coast Starlight to Portland. I booked sleeper cars on both trains and it was a wonderful trip. It's bad enough that our idiot governor doesn't think there's any point in helping maintain the tracks that the Southwest Chief runs on through NM and we may lose service, but for our Congress to be even more shortsighted is truly depressing.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
56. That did not happen under her watch.
Fri Sep 12, 2014, 01:34 AM
Sep 2014

Last edited Fri Sep 12, 2014, 02:05 PM - Edit history (1)

When I first moved to Santa Fe in 2008, I'd occasionally hear (usually professionals of some sort) complaining abut the coming RailRunner, how it was a total waste, no one would take it, and so on. I usually stop those people and say, "I first moved to Washington DC in the fall of 1968 (which was generally before these people had been born), just when they'd started tearing up Pennsylvania Avenue for the Metro. There were lots of editorials, lots of letters to the Washington Post complaining about how stupid this was, how no one would take the Metro. And I was back in DC in 2001, in downtown, at 16th and K to be precise, and on a Friday afternoon there was less traffic on the streets than there had been some forty years earlier."

People take public transportation. And yes, I've known people who have very virtuously said, "I'd NEVER take public transportion" and those people are total idiots. Okay, don't take public transportation if you personally don't want to, but trust me, many people take it. Many people depend on it.

Before I moved to NM, I seriously thought about returning to the DC area, in part because if I'd done so I'd have been able to give up owning a car and just take public transportation. But I decided to move here, and I'm quite happy with the choice. If I ever do relocate, it will absolutely be to a metro area that has a strong public transportation infrastructure.

Oh, and just earlier this week I took the RailRunner to ABQ to meet a friend. We spent several hours together, she dropped me back off at the station and I took the train back to Santa Fe. Too bad I couldn't take a public bus from the train station to my home.

(edited to fix a typo)

 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
57. I was wondering if she'd gutted it
Fri Sep 12, 2014, 10:58 AM
Sep 2014

the way her buddies in Congress are planning to do with Amtrak.

CreekDog

(46,192 posts)
8. if they want to cut service to red states, that's what they get
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:33 PM
Sep 2014

the most heavily used Amtrak corridor is in the blue state Northeast and really doesn't need a subsidy at all.

 

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)
10. Another big hit for Amtrak is
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:36 PM
Sep 2014

the little known thing pertaining to rail accidents and derailments. If there is a Amtrak service on a line and there is a wreck,Amtrak pays the tab not the carrier of origin. Thank you Rethugs. Defund choke it till it dies. BTW,all the class one roads want to get rid of Amtrak and take their assets free.

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
11. WTF, do they want NO passenger rail in the US
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:38 PM
Sep 2014

What a bunch of fools.
Why do they hate America so much?

global1

(25,270 posts)
13. This Is Just Another Example Of How The Repubs Are Destroying America....
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:45 PM
Sep 2014

first the Post Office and now Rail Travel. What will they target next?

christx30

(6,241 posts)
68. I had to travel from Austin, TX
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 11:38 PM
Sep 2014

to Manchester, NH last year for family stuff. I checked out ride sharing, Amtrak, flight, and bus. Air was, by far, the winner. It was half as much as rail, took 1/5 of the time to get there. There wasn't much of a contest. I mean, check them out and you'll see.
I'm not saying to defund Amtrak at all. I'm just saying that it's not the greatest way to travel.

dhill926

(16,355 posts)
15. I'm reading this while on...
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 04:56 PM
Sep 2014

The Pacific Surfliner. Clean, comfortable, free wifi, outlets at seats, but not always punctual. I fly a lot and this beats flying or driving. Repubs are a bunch of nihilistic assholes.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
64. Not only China, but also South Korea and Japan
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 09:48 AM
Sep 2014

I've been on high speed rail in all three countries.

I hope they save the funding for Amtrak because it is one of the last ways to get to the part of the state in Oregon where I grew up other than flying (which is expensive).

americannightmare

(322 posts)
65. I understand. I live in Portland...
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 10:45 PM
Sep 2014

and grew up in Grants Pass, and of course you can't get there by train. It is great to be able to get to Eugene or Salem by train. Now if we could get Amtrak out to the coast...

 

YOHABLO

(7,358 posts)
32. They (Repugs) want to privatize everything .. look at the Postal Service
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 06:18 PM
Sep 2014

Anything that is government subsidize, other than the subsidies that corporations receive, must be drowned in the bath tub. High speed rail is the answer to cutting fuel costs. I don't know of one airplane that flies on electricity.

brooklynite

(94,727 posts)
42. No it doesn't...most Amtrak engines run on diesel.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 07:47 PM
Sep 2014

Simple matter of not liking "discretionary" Government spending.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
55. Actually, it does. Picture how much more oil would be needed
Fri Sep 12, 2014, 12:11 AM
Sep 2014

to move the people and cargo by roads. Rail is much more fuel efficient.

mnhtnbb

(31,402 posts)
38. This country is so fu*ked up.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 07:21 PM
Sep 2014

High speed rail should be highly subsidized by the government.

Oil is so dinosaur.

Cars are so 1%.

It's so far past time to develop reliable and efficient public transportation in this country.

 

Sen. Walter Sobchak

(8,692 posts)
45. I'm okay with the regional service, but shut the rest down.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 08:32 PM
Sep 2014

Subsidizing cross-country trains in this day and age seems like the government subsidizing a hospital that performs amputations for only twice the price of a cast.

pinto

(106,886 posts)
48. Where's your line on subsidizing all modes on national transport?
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 08:50 PM
Sep 2014

Is it just rail? Or air transport, auto transport? All the allied economic structures that support all of them them? Do you have a coherent approach to advocate?

 

Sen. Walter Sobchak

(8,692 posts)
49. Most modes of transportation have a scope in which they make sense
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 08:55 PM
Sep 2014

If something doesn't make sense anymore, let it go.

I flew from Long Beach to JFK in less than six hours for less than $500 a couple weeks ago. I think on this front the free market really has worked it's magic.

BlueEye

(449 posts)
53. No doubt.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 09:09 PM
Sep 2014

A transcontinental high-speed passenger railroad is pretty absurd. But on regional routes, the airlines are frequently not competitive. I frequently drive from Ohio to Chicago. It takes me six hours and is a boring drive that takes a tank of gas and lots of tolls. I could fly, but the fares are rarely lower than $200 round trip. If there was a train that could get me there in 4 hours for maybe $60 each way, I would routinely use it. The airports on both ends are a good distance from the city center, plus airports are a pain in the ass for a flight that's only 55 minutes.

So that's where America lacks trains. 200 to 500 mile sectors between large cites. Other than the northeast corridor, Amtrak does a pretty shitty job serving those markets, due mostly to funding problems (thanks GOP).

 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
54. Most "Cross Country" Rail service is regional service.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 11:42 PM
Sep 2014

For Example, in my Home State of Pennsylvania, we have the Pennsylvania Train run by Amtrak. It connects Philadelphia to Pittsburgh via the old Pennsylvania Railroad Main line (now run by Norfolk Southern). It is used mostly by people going from one of those cities to someplace in between. This it is more then regional for by connecting two regions its served both regions.

The Capitol Limited does the same between Washington and Chicago, providing service to Frederick Maryland, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Toledo and Chicago AND various small cities in between.

The Cardinal, runs from Washington to Chicago via Charleston and Huntington West Virginia, Cincinnati, Indianapolis and Chicago and various cities in between.

There is a demand for this service, given the price of oil it has increased in recent years.

No one is suggesting high speed rail east and west in the US, for what ever service that would provide Air travel can do it faster and at less cost. It is these "Regional" trains that can go 60-100 mph (if the tracks permit) that people want, so they can pick them up at their local small city and go to another small city on the route OR to a large city. That is the service has been providing since it was formed in the early 1970s.

Yes, people can go from New York City to Los Angles by train, but plane is much faster and you do not have to stop in Chicago for a lay over. On the other hand, most riders are traveling within their region or on a train that goes between two regions (Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, DC, Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Chicago for example).

Many of these routes would be more heavily used if Amtrak could put more then one train a day on these routes. Most people who have studied such routes say you really need at least four trains in one direction each day to have a viable route, but Amtrak has NEVER had the funding to provide such service except in the North East do to budget problems (Amtrak can run the trains, but they do NOT have the trains to run, for example the present Train to Pittsburgh is an old DC to New York City train that Amtrak replaced with its Acela on that route and thus had a "Train" to run to Pittsburgh).

I hate to say this, High Speed Rail is NOT the Answer, what is needed is more trains of the 60-100 mph types, that Amtrak is running today, Congress needs to break down and buy them (i.e. provide the money). These should be on the order of what use to be called "Hoddlebugs" diesel one to two car passenger trains. If you get more passenger then those can handle go to a larger train.

US Railcar (formerly Colorado Railcar) has been pushing for adoption of its cars by Amtrak for over ten years, and Amtrak has supported those efforts. The problem is Congress refuses to embrace the concept that such cars would provide the needed "regional" train service needed. Amtrak can justify improvements in the Northeast Corridor for it is profitable, but if Amtrak wants to improve service elsewhere it needs money to buy the trains needed.

Outside of the Northeast, Amtrak is in many ways in a "Chicken or egg" situation, it needs new trains to increase service so it can get more riders, but it need more riders to pay for the new trains those riders want to ride.

What Amtrak needs to more "Doodlebugs" to provide more frequent service. Here is a picture of a Colorado Railcar 100 passenger rail car:




Here is the single and bi level designs (the bi level can hold over 200 passengers)


More on the Philadelphia to Pittsburgh Corridor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Corridor

The problem right now is a refusal to fund these "Doodlebugs" for use as passenger trains with one or two operators (a driver and a Conductor). These trains are design to connect back to back so you can double the passengers with the same crew.

The problem is no one will take the train today, for one train in each direction a day is just NOT usable by most people. Four trains a day would be usable by more people and once the service is established people will use it.

As I said above, it is a Chicken and Egg Situation, people will not take the train for the train service is rare, but the reason it is rare is because no one takes it. You have to provide the service before people will take the service, i.e. you have to have more trains per day and make that permanent (or at least commit to it for a year or two) and then people will slowly start to use it as they become aware of it.

This is what is needed, these smaller trains on "National lines" connecting regions and providing service to those regions. That is what Amtrak has been providing with its "Coast to Coast" trains since the 1970s. Amtrak needs to keep its present rolling stock, for some inter regional travel is best done in a Sleeper, but it should concentrate of the above Doodlebugs to provide more frequent service on most of its "National Lines".

safeinOhio

(32,715 posts)
46. Just think how
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 08:33 PM
Sep 2014

much we'd save if we cut funding to big farms and oil companies and how it would force them to streamline their operations.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
51. These idiots need to INCREASE subsidies forty percent, and make them contingent upon finding
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 09:03 PM
Sep 2014

specific efficiencies.

AMTRAK does ZERO marketing that sticks.

They need to create cars consisting of old sleeper cars (with linoleum floors for easy cleaning) that are designated for PETS. There should be a luggage car between two "pet" cars so people can either keep their pets in carriers, or keep them in one of the sleeper roomettes.

I'd pay out the nose for that opportunity to bring my dog in a roomette on the train.

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
61. good move--a couple of reports of global warming being much worse than expected...
Sun Sep 14, 2014, 10:12 PM
Sep 2014

and they cut one of the most energy efficient travel options.

wordpix

(18,652 posts)
63. "Northeastern U.S. routes, which are the most profitable"
Mon Sep 15, 2014, 09:31 AM
Sep 2014

They may be the most profitable routes but that's only b/c they aren't maintained well or upgraded. I've traveled the NE on trains for decades and in all that time, have rarely seen work ongoing along the rail lines, and what work was taking place was in small bits and pieces and not for miles or for a system. Last month I was on Amtrak and not one project was ongoing between northern CT and southern PA, despite the obvious need.

Any business can be profitable for awhile if you have enough customers and keep milking the business and never upgrading or improving. At some point, though, the need for maintenance and upgrades arise, and money needs to be invested.

That's when corporate raiders like Rmoney step in and take over, fire people, sell off assets and the business, and make their personal million$.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»House bill cuts Amtrak fu...