Anti-Amtrak Editorial in Chattanooga

[lepearso]

CHATTANOOGA TIMES FREE PRESS Editorial January

3, 2007

Wrong track on Amtrak

It appears that hope for slashing unconstitutional taxpayer subsidies to the Amtrak rail service is evaporating.

With Amtrak's subsidy-friendly Democrats taking control of Congress (and aided by some equally irresponsible Republicans), talk of cutting Amtrak's annual taxpayer bailout has mostly halted. In fact, it has been replaced by proposals to squander many more tax dollars.

Alexander Kummant, new president of Amtrak, wants to boost ridership on the railroad with extra federal and state investment, meaning your tax dollars.

The few economically viable Amtrak lines, mainly in a corridor from Boston to Washington, will remain under Amtrak's control, though the Constitution makes no provision for federal involvement in rail service. And there will be no elimination of other, notoriously unprofitable long-distance lines, Mr. Kummant told The New York Times, though Congress' General Accounting Office declared in November that those lines are the biggest Amtrak money pits and should be scrapped.

And hold onto your wallets: Mr. Kummant wants Congress to roughly double spending on Amtrak for each of the next 10 years. That would just throw more good money after bad. In a minor concession, he said low-tech duties such as trimming trees may be outsourced rather than continue to be performed by costly union

labor.

Amazingly, the talk of expanding Amtrak comes despite the fact that it is nearly $4 billion in debt and has regularly been a money loser over its more than 35 years of existence.

Expansion may be welcome news for the few Americans, mostly in the urban Northeast, who routinely use Amtrak. But it should trouble the vast majority of Americans who never set foot on an Amtrak train yet, through federal subsidies, help pay for every ticket sold.

Does that restore your confidence that Congress is serious about cutting spending?

Chattanooga Times Free Press

www.timesfreepress.com

400 East 11th Street Chattanooga, TN 37403

 

[Guest]

Most of it is the standard junk, but unconstitutional? They didn't even have the steam engine until 1784, and I can think of nothing that forbids governments from subsidising a useful buissness. God knows they do it enough to things like oil companies.

 

[Irv]

But it should trouble the vast majority of Americans who never set foot on an Amtrak train yet, through federal subsidies, help pay for every ticket sold.

The vast majority of Americans wouldn't ever want to set foot in the dinky little town of Chattanooga, either, so why should they help pay for the airport? Maybe we should shut down I-75, as well. No reason the federal gov't. should subsidize highways that don't go where I want to go.

 

[George Harris]

The vast majority of Americans wouldn't ever want to set foot in the dinky little town of Chattanooga, either, so why should they help pay for the airport? Maybe we should shut down I-75, as well. No reason the federal gov't. should subsidize highways that don't go where I want to go.

Hey, Irv: No reason to insult the whole population because somebody writes an editorial you don't like that gets printed in their newspaper. Chattanooga is NOT a "dinky litte town." Chattanooga is a really nice place, and also a very interesting place from a railroad perspective. It also has the very unique incline up the side of Lookout Mountain.

Take a deep breath, calm down, and try to say something nice about the place.

Despite the editorial writer, there have also been studies for passenger service Nashville - Chattanooga - Atlanta about which there was a good deal of enthusiasm.

George

 

[PennCentralFan]

Don't put too much stock into this. The vast majority of papers that really matter like the New York Times, Boston Globe, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune are not that reactionary. You have to figure that editorial writer at that paper is a Rush Limbaugh wannabe who got the text from some standard boiler plate press release from the Heritage Foundation or Club for Growth--both of which are reactionary and quasi-racist.

 

[Guest]

If Amtrak went to Chattanooga, they'd have a different opinion entirely.

 

[Guest]

If Amtrak went to Chattanooga, they'd have a different opinion entirely.

Actually, the tracks that connect Atlanta and Chattanooga are owned by the State of Georgia and leased to Norfolk Southern. There is already a good deal of bus traffic transporting people from Chat. to Atlanta to use the Atlanta airport and there is a good deal of traffic on I-75 traveling back and forth for shopping, medical needs, etc, so there is a potential for good rail passenger traffic. The State of Georgia just needs to make it happen.

 

[EmpireBuilderFan1976]

Like most people that seem to write these "Anti Amtrak" editorials, the person who wrote the article in question has probably never set foot on an Amtrak train and probably spends a great deal of time searching the internet for websites with consumer complaints about a late train or a rude employee. It doesn't matter what method of travel is used, those types of complaints are generated against Airlines and Bus Service as well.

 

[rmgreenesq]

My reply to this editorial

January 6, 2007Harry Austin

Chattanooga Times Free Press

400 East 11th Street

Chattanooga, TN 37403

RE: Your January 3 Editorial “Wrong Track on Amtrak”

Dear Mr. Austin:

This letter is written in reply to your January 3 editorial on Amtrak. Although there is much I could take issue with, I will confine my response to two issues: The constitutionality of Amtrak’s taxpayer subsidy and Amtrak’s status as a profit-making entity.

In your editorial, you state that the US constitution makes no provision for federal rail service and therefore the money Amtrak receives from the federal coffer is unconstitutional. This statement is absurd. There are a myriad of things that the federal government is involved in that are not mentioned in the constitution. Take the regulation of prescription drugs, the Tennessee Valley Authority, labor-management relations, the regulation of the airwaves, or automobile safety standards. None of these things appear in the constitution, so by your standard, the federal government should not be involved. That’s absurd.

Not only is your statement absurd, it is also incorrect. Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution permits Congress “… to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” Amtrak is clearly an organ of interstate commerce and therefore is a proper activity for the federal government.

Secondly, you state that increasing funding for Amtrak is a waste of money because it has lost money for the last 35 years. Amtrak was never intended to turn a profit. Amtrak was created as a means to assume the money loosing and legally mandated passenger rail service from the private railroads. Loosened of it obligation to carry passengers, private railroads flourished hauling freight.

The interstate highway system does not turn a profit. The air traffic control system does not turn a profit either. The federal government subsidizes these things because they make life in America easier and directly contributes to the American economy and our standard of living.

You state that subsidizing Amtrak is a waste because every tax payer in the country is subsidizing a service that a vast majority of Americans do not use. Should I and most Americans be troubled that our tax dollars were spent to build Interstate 75 through Chattanooga? Although I’m sure it is lovely, I have no desire to step foot into Chattanooga or drive on I-75. Is I-75 a waste of money? Should I be troubled that my tax dollars go to develop Lovell Field or indirectly subsidize flights to a place I don’t want to go? I am not. Interstate highways, and safe, reliable, cost effective air and rail service are the stuff America is made of. It is a worthy use of our tax dollars.

Richard M. Green

Should I mail it?

Rick

 

[MrFSS]

I'll pay for the stamp!!!

 

[jphjaxfl]

If Amtrak went to Chattanooga, they'd have a different opinion entirely.

[Actually, the tracks that connect Atlanta and Chattanooga are owned by the State of Georgia and leased to Norfolk Southern.] There is already a good deal of bus traffic transporting people from Chat. to Atlanta to use the Atlanta airport and there is a good deal of traffic on I-75 traveling back and forth for shopping, medical needs, etc, so there is a potential for good rail passenger traffic. The State of Georgia just needs to make it happen.

The right of way between Atlanta and Chattanooga that the State of Geogria owns is the former Western and Atlantic Railroad which has been leased to the Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis which merged with the Louisville and Nashville which became part of the Seaboard System that eventually became part of CSX. The Norfolk and Southern does operate a right of way between Atlanta and Chattanooga, but their line is not owned by the State of Georgia.

 

[saxman]

Mail it! It'll let the editor know that there's two sides to the spectrum.

But the way author wrote sounds to me like......blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Just another whiner about how his taxes are too high who has probably never riden a train.

 

[AlanB]

My only thought Rick would be the bit about Amtrak not being created to make a profit. While the sensable intelligent people knew that it would never happen, nonetheless the plan for Amtrak was indeed sold to Congress and especially to President Nixon that Amtrak would indeed make a profit.

Hence that oft used tag line that Amtrak has never made a profit.

 

[rmgreenesq]

My only thought Rick would be the bit about Amtrak not being created to make a profit. While the sensable intelligent people knew that it would never happen, nonetheless the plan for Amtrak was indeed sold to Congress and especially to President Nixon that Amtrak would indeed make a profit.
Hence that oft used tag line that Amtrak has never made a profit.

My understanding is that Amtrak was a favor to the railroad industry to get rid of passenger service (and the attendant losses that come with passenger service) without the national shock and withdrawl symptioms of the disappearance of passenger trains. I also understand that President Nixon (had he remained in office) was going to quitely kill Amtrak a few years later.

It is also my understanding that President Regan and every Republican president since has not allocated Amtrak a single red cent in the budgets they send to Congress. Somehow Amtrak lives on.

Anybody who believes that private industry (whose whole raison d'etre is profit) cannot make money at something but believes that goverment CAN make money doing the same thing is smoking crack. Maybe that's what Nixon was smoking!

Rick

 

[haolerider]

If Amtrak went to Chattanooga, they'd have a different opinion entirely.

Actually, the tracks that connect Atlanta and Chattanooga are owned by the State of Georgia and leased to Norfolk Southern. There is already a good deal of bus traffic transporting people from Chat. to Atlanta to use the Atlanta airport and there is a good deal of traffic on I-75 traveling back and forth for shopping, medical needs, etc, so there is a potential for good rail passenger traffic. The State of Georgia just needs to make it happen.

If you go to this website: http://www.dot.state.ga.us/DOT/plan-prog/i.../railmaps.shtml

you will see that the NS line goes through Smyrna and Marietta on its way to Chattanooga and if you go down that same page you will find a "sample map" that shows that line being owned by the State of Georgia. There is also a CSX line that goes North out of Atlanta, but it is not state owned.

 

[Irv]

Hey, Irv: No reason to insult the whole population because somebody writes an editorial you don't like that gets printed in their newspaper. Chattanooga is NOT a "dinky litte town." Chattanooga is a really nice place, and also a very interesting place from a railroad perspective. It also has the very unique incline up the side of Lookout Mountain.
Take a deep breath, calm down, and try to say something nice about the place.

Despite the editorial writer, there have also been studies for passenger service Nashville - Chattanooga - Atlanta about which there was a good deal of enthusiasm.

George

Sorry, George, but I've been to, and thru Chattanooga many times.

If you took a good look, you'd have to admit that it has an unimpressive skyline, and the downtown is still cluttered with old buildings which appear to be abandoned. There are some nice restaurants, at least, and a pretty good aquarium.

I applaud their efforts to fix up downtown, but they have a long way to go yet.

 

[rmgreenesq]

The letter is in the mail. I tweaked the letter abit to clean up the grammer.

Anybody out there read this paper and could tell me if the editor publishes it?

Rick

 

[AlanB]

The letter is in the mail. I tweaked the letter abit to clean up the grammer.
Anybody out there read this paper and could tell me if the editor publishes it?

Rick

I'm not sure but Bill Haithcoat might read it or know someone who does.

 

[MrFSS]

The letter is in the mail. I tweaked the letter abit to clean up the grammar.
Anybody out there read this paper and could tell me if the editor publishes it?

Rick

Rick - I haven't looked at this closely, but try this web site and see if they have letters to the editor.
FREE TIMES

 

[George Harris]

If you go to this website: http://www.dot.state.ga.us/DOT/plan-prog/i.../railmaps.shtmlyou will see that the NS line goes through Smyrna and Marietta on its way to Chattanooga and if you go down that same page you will find a "sample map" that shows that line being owned by the State of Georgia. There is also a CSX line that goes North out of Atlanta, but it is not state owned.

I have gone to the website, and still do not know how you came to this conclusion.

The CSX line, ex Seaboard, ex Louisvillie and Nashville, ex Nashvile, Chatanooga nad St. Louis, is the original pre - War between the States built Western adn Atlantic, owned by the state of Georgia. It has been under lease but the above named list of successor companies since sometime in the late nineteenth century. This is a fact so well known in the southeast as to not need reference to source. This line is mileposted from Atlanta to Chattanooga, and runs Atlanta, Smyrna, Marietta, Kennesaw, Acworth, Emerson, Cartersville, Kingston, Adairsville, Calhoun, Tilton, Dalton, Tunnel Hill, Graysville, Chattanooga. The CSX - ex L&N line to Knoxville and Cincinatti connects just north of Cartersville. Despite its ownership by the state, it is usually shown as a CSX or predecessor line.

The NS line is ex-Southern Railway and is longer. It connects with the Chattanooga to Knoxville line at Ooltewah and then turns south through Cohutta, crossing the CSX line at Dalton. From Dalton it goes through Oostanaula, Rome, Rockmart, Austell to Atlanta. Austell is the junction with the line to Birmingham. This line has never been in state ownership. More or less parallel to this line between Atlanta and Rockmart is the abandoned ex - Seaboard Airoline Railroad right of way. This is in state ownership.

The NS line does not go through Smyrna and Marietta.

There are any number or railroad histories that could clarify this for you. There is a prticularly thorough history of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad that will tell you this, I have it, but not at hand and I do not recall the author. There is a history of the NC&St.L called Grandpa's Road that I have not read, but am sure will give you information on the nature of the state ownership and the lease arrangement.

George

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

The vast majority of Americans wouldn't ever want to set foot in the dinky little town of Chattanooga, either, so why should they help pay for the airport? Maybe we should shut down I-75, as well. No reason the federal gov't. should subsidize highways that don't go where I want to go.

Hey, Irv: No reason to insult the whole population because somebody writes an editorial you don't like that gets printed in their newspaper. Chattanooga is NOT a "dinky litte town." Chattanooga is a really nice place, and also a very interesting place from a railroad perspective. It also has the very unique incline up the side of Lookout Mountain.

Take a deep breath, calm down, and try to say something nice about the place.

Despite the editorial writer, there have also been studies for passenger service Nashville - Chattanooga - Atlanta about which there was a good deal of enthusiasm.

George

Thanks, Mr. Harris. (from somebody who lived the fist 29 years of his life in the "dinky little town". .

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

My reply to this editorial

January 6, 2007

Harry Austin

Chattanooga Times Free Press

400 East 11th Street

Chattanooga, TN 37403

RE: Your January 3 Editorial “Wrong Track on Amtrak”

Dear Mr. Austin:

This letter is written in reply to your January 3 editorial on Amtrak. Although there is much I could take issue with, I will confine my response to two issues: The constitutionality of Amtrak’s taxpayer subsidy and Amtrak’s status as a profit-making entity.

In your editorial, you state that the US constitution makes no provision for federal rail service and therefore the money Amtrak receives from the federal coffer is unconstitutional. This statement is absurd. There are a myriad of things that the federal government is involved in that are not mentioned in the constitution. Take the regulation of prescription drugs, the Tennessee Valley Authority, labor-management relations, the regulation of the airwaves, or automobile safety standards. None of these things appear in the constitution, so by your standard, the federal government should not be involved. That’s absurd.

Not only is your statement absurd, it is also incorrect. Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution permits Congress “… to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.” Amtrak is clearly an organ of interstate commerce and therefore is a proper activity for the federal government.

Secondly, you state that increasing funding for Amtrak is a waste of money because it has lost money for the last 35 years. Amtrak was never intended to turn a profit. Amtrak was created as a means to assume the money loosing and legally mandated passenger rail service from the private railroads. Loosened of it obligation to carry passengers, private railroads flourished hauling freight.

The interstate highway system does not turn a profit. The air traffic control system does not turn a profit either. The federal government subsidizes these things because they make life in America easier and directly contributes to the American economy and our standard of living.

You state that subsidizing Amtrak is a waste because every tax payer in the country is subsidizing a service that a vast majority of Americans do not use. Should I and most Americans be troubled that our tax dollars were spent to build Interstate 75 through Chattanooga? Although I’m sure it is lovely, I have no desire to step foot into Chattanooga or drive on I-75. Is I-75 a waste of money? Should I be troubled that my tax dollars go to develop Lovell Field or indirectly subsidize flights to a place I don’t want to go? I am not. Interstate highways, and safe, reliable, cost effective air and rail service are the stuff America is made of. It is a worthy use of our tax dollars.

Richard M. Green

Should I mail it?

Rick

Well---before you send it to Harry Austin, you had better double check which side of the editorial page it came from. The Times side or the Free Press side. It was probably written by Lee Anderson. I worked for the Times part of the now Times- Free Press for 12 years and still get the paper but do not have the Jan. 3 edition yet.

Now---this is what is unique--the Times (a largely liberal Democratic paper ) and the Free Press( a largely conservative Republican page) combined some years ago. They have a long tumultous history off and on together and apart back and forth.

They really do maintain two completely distinct editorial pages, the former Times(with Harry Austin ) on the "left" page (the symbolism is deliberate) and the former Free Press, headed by Lee Anderson, on the right.

I will be very surprised and hugely disappointed if it was Harry who wrote this.I strongly suspect it was written by Lee Anderson or somebody who assists him on the right hand side of the editorial pages.

It would represent a complete policy shift as any editorials in the past have been with The Times in favor, the Free Press against.

When I say I would be diaapointed if Harry wrote this, I am not just mouthing words, I truly mean that in real human terms, not just as part of an argument. My stakes, in being an ex-Chattanoogan as well as in being a lifelong railfan, are, in fact, much higher in this than for any of the rest of you.

By the way, I am assuming this was an editorail itself, not merely a "letter to the editor"? Again, I have not seen it.

Thsi policy of two distinct editorial polices in the same physical paper is quite unique, I understand. Apparently they chose this method of merging rather than one of them going oui of business altogether. All in all, I think it has worked rather well. There are many features in each newspaper which I miss from the past, but it is kinid of like Amtrak compared to so many railroads in the past---- we have to be happy with what we have while we have it.

NOTE:I would assume that the two distinctly different editorial writers do not even confer with each other---you will note that they do not, say, each write on the same topics each day, each giving their own view. Instead, there is usually little similarity in the topics they choose to speak on.

As a secretary, I handed Harry Austin his paycheck every week for years. I don't for a moment think I was "subsidizing" a "Rush Limbaugh wannabee".

 

[rmgreenesq]

Bill:

Thank you for your insight into the editorial policies of the Times Free Press. This item appeared as an editorial and not a letter to the editor. I'm not sure what side of the page it appeared on as I am working from an electronic copy.

I mailed my letter to Mr. Austin because the paper's web page listed him as the editorials editor. By mailing it to Mr. Austin, I did not mean to state that he wrote it. Editorials are traditionally the only written pieces in a newspaper that are not signed. I sent it to Mr. Austin becasue the web page said that he is responsible for that part of the paper.

Do you know who chooses which letters get published? I think I have a snowball's chance you know where getting this letter published. Face it, I tell the author that he knows nothing about what he is writing about (either the constitution or Amtrak), and that I am a Yankee New Englander or urban northeast (ha) Amtrak user that has no desire to go to Chattanooga. If Mr. Austin picks the letters, then sending it to him might be somewhat fortutious.

Rick

 

[AmtrakWPK]

Bill - I couldn't pass up the opportunity to point out the perfect typo in your post. At one point you called that article an " editorail ". Perfect! :lol: :lol: :lol:

It's here: " By the way, I am assuming this was an editorail itself " ...

 

[jphjaxfl]

Here is a link that has the history of the Western and Atlantic Railraod between Atlanta and Chattanooga which was built and is stilled owned today by the State of Georgia and leased to CSX. It does travel through

Symrna and Marietta and was the last of the two lines between Atlanta and Chattanoogs to have passenger trains through April 30, 1971. Western and Atlantic