amtrak funding

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.
S

suzanne

Guest
this is a great site.....we all need to remember Amtrak when we vote this November,...and we need to let our elected officials know that funding for Amtrak needs to be a top priority. Otherwise, we are all free to take our votes elsewhere and we should. :p
 
Steve4031 said:
Egggxactly!!!!!.  Adios Bush league Chump.  Go the heck back to Texas and play with the cattle.     :D
Not to start a political fight, but tell me exactly what Clinton did for Amtrak other than give us George Warrington. And wasn't the biggest cut in service on Jimmy Carter's watch?

Last time I checked the numbers, Amtrak federal funding for FY03 is as high as it has ever been, and over twice the funding of the last year of the Clinton administration.

Maybe, the political side of the Amtrak equation is not as "D=good and R=bad" as many think?

Just an observation.
 
Bush is just an idiot - with and about EVERYTHING, and always will be until the cows come home!!! :p
 
Though his domestic policies are somewhat weak, I am happy with his progress for peace in the Middle East. When it comes to running a country there is much more than funding passenger rail (though it has it's major importance to the econonmy).
 
Egggxactly!!!!!. Adios Bush league Chump. Go the heck back to Texas and play with the cattle.
By Steve4031
I agree. It is just that right now, with Amtrak having a good president, Bush is being a complete idiot about Amtrak funding.
By Steve4031
Bush is just an idiot - with and about EVERYTHING, and always will be until the cows come home!!!
By jccollins
I agree about the Amtrak funding, but I do agree with Amfleet, he has done well on the Mideast Crisis.
 
PRR 60 said:
Not to start a political fight...
I agree with PRR60, in that this is one of those topics that could easily deteriorate into a heated political discussion. I'm pleased that so far everyone has kept their wits about them.

It's easy to blame a President of any political party for the negatives that occurred under his watch. He is, after all, the most visible member of his party. But consider the following:

* Cuts to Amtrak's route structure have occurred under Presidents of both parties.

* Our government is a system of checks and balances; therefore the actions of a President are backed up by a majority vote in the House and Senate. Remember Congress creates the bills, and the President then chooses to sign or veto them. And on the same note...

* Not always but often our sitting President has had a majority in either the House, the Senate, or both, of the opposite party.

* A man who has been arguably Amtrak's worst enemy, and who ran for President against George W. Bush in the Republican primary, John McCain, has as of late expressed sentiments in favor of Amtrak. A lot has to do with having David Gunn at the helm; but the John McCain of today is not the John McCain of several years ago. His position on a major Senate committee is perhaps more important that the role he would have played had he become President.

As was mentioned before, while funding for Amtrak is an issue that is near and dear to rail advocates, it is not the only issue facing voters. How our President will handle foreign affairs, the environment, the economy, etc. are all factors involved in choosing the next leader. If the President we pick in 2004 ultimately funds Amtrak sufficiently (so that all trains run on time, there is sufficient available equpment, etc.), but he also starts World War III or sends us into a Depression, have we voted for the right person? A lot more has to be considered, and for that reason I don't think that a forum for discussion of trains is the proper place to endorse any political candidate of any party for any office.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top