Did the President sign the bill today

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.

Bill Haithcoat

Engineer
Honored Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
4,031
Location
atlanta, georgia
I ate lunch at the CNN food court today and briefly heard somethiing about the President going to sign the transportation bill today.

Anybody know the details on that?

What are the implications? Do we still have an Amtrak?
 
This what he signed.

MONTGOMERY, Ill. (Reuters) - President Bush signed a $286.5 billion highway bill on Wednesday that he said would create new jobs but which critics contend is stuffed with billions of dollars worth of lawmakers' pet projects.
The legislation funds road and mass transit construction for six years, but also contains $24 billion in "pork" -- special add-ons initiated by members of the Senate and House of Representatives to curry favor in their home districts.

"The bill ... is going to help give hundreds of thousands of Americans good paying jobs," Bush said. "Our economy depends on us having the most efficient, reliable transportation system in the world and if we want people working in America we've got to make sure our highways and roads are modern."

Bush said it accomplished the goals of upgrading roads, bridges and mass transit and ensuring safety in "a fiscally responsible way" without raising gasoline taxes.

But the measure contains more than 6,300 special projects.

They include $231 million for a bridge in Anchorage to be named Don Young's Way after Republican Rep. Don Young of Alaska, who heads the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and $2.3 million for landscaping along the Ronald Reagan Freeway in California.

Alaska, the third-least populated state, got the fourth most money for special projects -- $941 million -- according to an analysis by the government watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Keith Ashdown, the group's vice president, said Bush should have vetoed the "fiscally irresponsible" bill.

"It leaves the nation stuck in traffic gridlock, but greases the wheels of powerful politicians," Ashdown said. "This bill is by far the most expensive, wasteful highway bill in the nation's history."

California, Illinois and New York received the largest amounts. Ranking 10th was Oklahoma -- the home state of Republican Sen. James Inhofe, the bill's chief Senate negotiator, who was at the bill signing ceremony.

At a Caterpillar plant that builds highway construction equipment in Montgomery, part of Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert's Illinois district, Bush promised there would be "more jobs created around places like this."

Tieless, his shirt-sleeves rolled up, Bush, who came to the event from his 33-day vacation at his Texas ranch, told the Caterpillar employees: "There's a Cat working on the ranch right now, and I'm not driving it."

White House spokesman Trent Duffy defended the bill, pointing out that Bush had set a spending cap, rejecting efforts in Congress to pass a package that was originally closer to $400 billion.

"This is a balanced transportation bill that funds our infrastructure needs while not breaking the bank," Duffy said.

The legislation was delayed for 22 months as Congress wrangled with the White House over cost.

Lawmakers also wrestled over allocation formulas for states. Gas tax receipts contributed by states go to a federal trust fund that pays for highway programs. Some states put in more than they get back in construction grants. They sought and received a bigger payout.

Among key safety provisions, Congress would reward states with grants for passing tough seat belt laws. The bill also would allow private companies to raise up to $15 billion for highway projects with bonds that are exempt from federal income taxes. It expanded the ethanol excise tax credit to include alternative fuels and authorized the government to crack down on fuel tax evasion.
 
They should have explained that it's called a Transportation bill because it transports billions of dollars from the everyday citizen to the GOP politicians' home districts, for things to make those voters happy about so they'll re-elect the bandits back to Washington. And that pork-barrel bill also DOES NOT do anything at all to require the vehicle manufacturers to increase the fuel efficiency of the vehicles they manufacture. While on the news there was a story about how GM manufactures a minivan in China, for Chinese consumption, that gets something like 43 mpg in the CITY, and sells for $5,000. Yes, it has poor acceleration, but for 45 mpg in the CITY, I'd settle for poor acceleration. Thanks for NOTHING, Congress! Thanks for NOTHING, W! Bend over - here comes the GOP again.
 
OK, so as gas prices continue to rise, it is disgusting to me that someone would be allowed to make vehicles that got less than 30 mpg.
 
AmtrakWPK said:
They should have explained that it's called a Transportation bill because it transports billions of dollars from the everyday citizen to the GOP politicians' home districts, for things to make those voters happy about so they'll re-elect the bandits back to Washington.  And that pork-barrel bill also DOES NOT do anything at all to require the vehicle manufacturers to increase the fuel efficiency of the vehicles they manufacture.  While on the news there was a story about how GM manufactures a minivan in China, for Chinese consumption, that gets something like 43 mpg in the CITY, and sells for $5,000.  Yes, it has poor acceleration, but for 45 mpg in the CITY, I'd settle for poor acceleration.  Thanks for NOTHING, Congress!  Thanks for NOTHING, W!    Bend over - here comes the GOP again.
Please: lets knock off the political BS. The highway bill has been a pork provider for both sides of the aisle for years. Republicans do not have a monopoly in this game. Take this quote from CNN:

The highway bill is one area where the minority Democrats aren't forgotten. Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota, top Democrat on the Transportation Committee, listed 57 projects totaling $121 million he won for his district, from $8 million for a highway project to $560,000 for the Paul Bunyon State Trail.
Rep. Nick Rahall, D-West Virginia, said in a press release that he had "used his seniority" on the Transportation Committee to gain $16 million for the eponymous Nick J. Rahall II Appalachian Transportation Institute at Marshall University.
That is why the bill passed the Senate 91-4 and the House 417-9. Last time I checked, the GOP does not hold 91 Senate seats and 417 House seats. And lets give the White House some credit here. The two year delay in passage of this bill was because the Bush administration made it clear that the original proposal for a $375 billion dollar five year authorization was dead on arrival.

Geez: not everything in life is red and blue. There are all shades of colors in between. And remember: there are even some people who do not share your political bent but somehow still like trains and participate in these discussions.
 
Well, I can certainly understand that once they realize that the majority isn't going to do anything really intelligent about "transportation", they might as well have SOMETHING to take back to their own constituency. I don't commend them for it, but I can understand it.

But how on earth can anybody justify, with the current obscene gas prices, (and still heading upward), and with the fact that we, all of us, with each tankful, are supporting islamic terrorism by the untold billions of dollars we are paying for arab oil, the fact that NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING is in that bill to require manufacturers to increase the gas mileage of their vehicles and that at the same time they want to kill a means of transportation that is so efficient (Amtrak)? That's INSANE! Go ahead, defend that.

Amtrak (well, trains in general, including Amtrak) is a VERY efficient transportation medium. That and commuter rail both should be pushed like crazy to reduce the number of cars on the road. But we seem to see the opposite from Washington, at least as far as Amtrak is concerned. I can remember several times riding the Silvers (Trains 91-92-97-98) down in SE Florida, where the tracks frequently parallel I-95, passing the thousands of cars and trucks on I-95, thinking "this sure beats the heck out of driving", and marveling that even though the local traffic on I-95 down there rivals a race track, with the drivers usually paying no attention at all to whatever the speed limit is, we were comfortably moving faster than they were. And of course SE Florida also has the Tri-Rail commuter system. Somebody obviously had a sanity attack down there.

I've seen some things indicating that locomotive manufacturers have been pretty actively working on cleaning emissions from, and increasing fuel efficiency of the new engines they have been developing. At least that sector of transportation machinery seems to be operating responsibly.

I hope that you are sending your administration friends a barrage of "WHAT were you THINKING?!?!" emails and letters to get some reality injected into what they do. I hope we are ALL doing that. Otherwise this may well end up as a historical forum, as all of our efforts turn to remembering what Amtrak WAS because it no longer exists. If there was ever a time for getting involved, for getting off the sidelines, this is it. And one good way to do that is to keep pointing out (always truthfully) how bad, how insane, the current situation is. Otherwise, the casual reader isn't going to be pushed far enough to do anything.
 
Back
Top