Amtrak Stats from Senator Roberts

[Midland Valley]

I just received a response from Kansas Senator Roberts. He uses the following statistics. 2003 Amtrak losses were 1.3 billion and 2002 were 1.1. He also says that Amtrak's monthly performance reports reveal that ridership gains are declining. Are these accurate or is he getting his information from Mineta? Either way, it sounds like Roberts is in Bush's pocket too.

 

[haolerider]

Rather than losses, he needs to be focusing on ridership increases of 1 million each year for the past three years.

Ridership has slpped on some long distance trains in the past months, based primarily on hurricane/storms in FL and the recent mudslides in CA.

 

[Guest]

I just received a response from Kansas  Senator Roberts.  He uses the following statistics.  2003 Amtrak losses were 1.3 billion and 2002 were 1.1.  He also says that Amtrak's monthly performance reports reveal that ridership gains are declining.  Are these accurate or is he getting his information from Mineta?  Either way, it sounds like Roberts is in Bush's pocket too.

Why is it just because you see information you don't like, the source must be wrong or "in Bush's pocket"?

 

[Guest]

Rather than losses, he needs to be focusing on ridership increases of 1 million each year for the past three years.
Ridership has slpped on some long distance trains in the past months, based primarily on hurricane/storms in FL and the recent mudslides in CA.

I used to work at a place with this philosophy:

"We lose money on each individual item but we make up for it in volume."

I can't understand why they're not in business anymore.

 

[Midland Valley]

I just received a response from Kansas  Senator Roberts.  He uses the following statistics.  2003 Amtrak losses were 1.3 billion and 2002 were 1.1.  He also says that Amtrak's monthly performance reports reveal that ridership gains are declining.  Are these accurate or is he getting his information from Mineta?  Either way, it sounds like Roberts is in Bush's pocket too.

Why is it just because you see information you don't like, the source must be wrong or "in Bush's pocket"?

My letter to the Senator asked for his support of the Burns/Lautenberg Letter being signed by a bipartisan group of senators to the Senate Budget Committee. His response indicated no support of Amtrak period.

 

[lepearso]

Why is it just because you see information you don't like, the source must be wrong or "in Bush's pocket"?

Because the explanation he provided is vague, one-sided and lacking any real substance.

Yes, Amtrak's cost per passenger went up, but the Senator obviously does not consider Amtrak's smaller budget combined with greater expenses associated with higher costs that result from regulations, the economy, and other factors beyond our control relating to 9/11 and the war in Iraq.

Yes, Amtrak's growth was slower last year than it was the year before, but he fails to understand that a passenger rail system can only grow so much when it is prohibited from expanding and has minimal capital investment. Amtrak's growth will eventually stagnate because capacity will reach its absolute limit if there is no meaningful expansion.

And, for that matter, the Senator is playing a game of not liking the information he sees. Rather than credit Amtrak for growth, he tries to create an opposite effect on the numbers. Rather than credit Amtrak management for trimming costs, he runs a different set of numbers to discredit them.

Indeed, the source is wrong in this case.

 

[Guest]

Indeed, the source is wrong in this case.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

If the guy was honest, and actually interested in telling the truth, then instead of saying "ridership gains are declining", he would have admitted that the number of Amtrak passengers continues to increase year after year. Rather than do that, he had to be convoluted to find a way to say it was "declining". Typical of W's brownnoses. They are all spinning so fast it's surprising (and unfortunate) that they don't drill themselves into the ground and disappear. On the other hand, we'd probably get too many complaints from China about polluting their groundwater.

 

[Guest]

Typical of W's brownnoses.

This is typical of ALL politicians. Your complete hatred of Bush doesn't make it any more applicable to him.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

No, actually an ethical, responsible leader seeks and seriously considers contrarian views honestly held, in order to at least try to arrive at balanced, fair decisions based on objective data and having seriously considered all points of view and all available evidence. This one, in contrast, fires anybody that doesn't simply nod his/her head and say "Yes, SIR!!", and who, when asked for an opinion on something, first asks what W's opinion is, and then simply locksteps with it. While the prevailing description of an honest politician may be (in Tom Clancy's words) one who, once bought, stays bought, there ARE honest and ethical politicians out there. Whether there are enough of them remains to be seen.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

And by the way... There may be great disappointment and disgust, and a certain amount of scorn. Not hatred. Reading a few posts doesn't make you an expert on the person posting. You need a lot more evidence and a longer track record. Like Trillions of dollars' worth of evidence. And ex- administration staff members whose personal integrity didn't allow them to continue on that staff. Like Colin Powell..

 

[rile42]

I sent emails to both of Ohio's Senators about not signing that letter. I asked both of them to explain why they didn't sign it or advising them to write a news release explaining their support of Amtrak. So far, I haven't heard from either of them.

In case anyone is interested in trying to help, the senators are named Voinovich and DeWine from Ohio.

 

[Guest]

And by the way...  There may be great disappointment and disgust, and a certain amount of scorn.  Not hatred. Reading a few posts doesn't make you an expert on the person posting.  You need a lot more evidence and a longer track record.   Like Trillions of dollars' worth of evidence.  And ex- administration staff members whose personal integrity didn't allow them to continue on that staff.  Like Colin Powell..

That's nice.

 

[Amtrak Watcher]

At first glance, the senator, like many in government, doesn’t seem to understand that growth in a project like Amtrak comes with investments. This is not the case in many government projects. For example, as worthy as getting poetry back into the schools may be, no amount of subsidy for poetry (through the National Endowment for the Arts) will put rhetoric and poetry back into American life; the culture changed 50 years ago: it’s not going to happen. On the other hand, the senator probably understands that Amtrak-like projects will grow with investments (subsidies). We can suspect he understands this when we see the Congress has no problem with highway and airline subsidies. The problem with Amtrak is that the government has made a higher level decision borne of popular American culture and politics; that trains are old-fashioned, bad and need to go. We shouldn’t be surprised that this bias is uniquely American, because our complete dependence on speed, independence, cars, tires and fuel is uniquely American as well. Amtrak will die a slow and painful death. Those who will miss it (those who can’t fly (oxygen bottles), those who live in certain towns (Springfield, IL), those who will not fly (fear), and those who prefer a different way of life (civilized) don’t have the political power to change this.

The Congress is nothing if not responsive to the people.