Obama: more investment in rail (Labor Day)

[Donctor]

Maybe if the Pentagon were able to account for its spending we could support America. What did Donald Rumsfeld say on 9/10/2001? This 2.3 TRILLION of unaccounted funds was soon to be overshadowed. See

Amtrak funds will always be questioned. Despite the minuscule (in relative terms) amount of funding Amtrak requires, people have always found (or created) a reason to pitch a fit.

 

[rrdude]

OK, I admit it.

Donctor, I don't "get" your ticker at the bottom of your postings? Can to illuminate an ole fart?

 

[City of Miami]

What is inherently objectionable about higher taxes on energy to fund more efficient uses of that energy? At least the tax would fall proportionately more heavily on folks who heat/cool mcmansions and drive hummers etc in wilful blithe ignorance. European countries seem to have waked up to this long ago - and they enjoy much better passenger rail service too!

 

[had8ley]

...Say what you will about Obama, he's certainly the most rail/alternate transportation-friendly president in the modern era.

He talks a good game, but the actions appear to suggest otherwise.

- Amtrak had to purchase the new Viewliners using internal funding because the expected funding was not forthcoming from the administration and Congress. This with a veto-proof majority in Congress: a luxury that few administrations have had (and this one will not have it for much longer).

- Amtrak is operating with essentially the same budget as they did in the Bush administration. The operating and capital subsidy increases promised in the five-year reauthorization have not materialized.

- The "high speed rail" program is, so far, little more than studies and reports. Maybe something will pan out there, but for now, it has produced lots and lots of expensive paper.

- The $2 billion + investment in the Acela and Boston electrification project during the Clinton administration far eclipses anything tangible provided by the Obama administration, and Clinton was working with a hostile Congress. That $2 billion + was special funding provided over and above the regular operating and capital funding. Amtrak did get a piece of the "stimulus" funding, but much less than Clinton provided some 12 years ago.

- For that matter, the actual formation of Amtrak under Nixon eclipses anything done under Obama. Now, that was despite Nixon, not because of Nixon, but he still signed on, and Amtrak was formed and funded under his watch.

Support of Amtrak by Obama: real or imagined?

Don't give any credit to Nixon. Anyone who was an insider at the time would tell you that Amtrak was formed with the idea that it would die rather quickly, but it has somehow persevered.

Exactamundo !!! If it wasn't for people like Graham Claitor Amtrak would have sunk lower than the Titantic.

 

[George Harris]

From Reuters on where the money will come from:

The tax breaks, estimated to be worth $36.5 billion over 10 years, include a manufacturing tax deduction and a percentage depletion on oil and natural gas wells. The petroleum industry wants to keep the tax breaks.

Anytime you see a quote involving money that is stated in multi-year amounts, you should be smelling a rat. Whenever you see this done, they are trying to make it more impressive by inflatiing it. In order to see what is going on, convert everyting to the same time frame, and in governments, and a lot of other areas, you should be looking at dollars per year unless it is a one time only expense. So, for this, call it 3.65 billion per year, which is not much in relation to the total dollar amounts being quoted.

Give that talk is cheap, I will hold my opinion on this until I see something that looks like construction going out to bid, or at least the start of definitive plans. General studies have been done on almost every conceivable and many completely rediculous rail projects imaginable in this country.

Even after serious work toward construction starts, any project is still subject to death either suddenly or by the one thousand cuts method of picking at all the small issues up to the point that the dirt starts moving and the concrete being placed.

 

[DET63]

A couple of questions:

1.  
   
2. If McCain had been elected instead of Obama, what do you think would be the status of Amtrak and HSR in this country today? Would it be noticeably different?
    
   
3. For those who want to tax oil, would fuel destined to pull diesel trains be exempt from such a tax? An across-the-board tax on fuel will ultimately affect all transportation options, not just private cars. Remember that, outside of the NEC and a few other places, virtually all Amtrak trains are powered by diesel fuel, not electricity.
   

 

[AlanB]

For those who want to tax oil, would fuel destined to pull diesel trains be exempt from such a tax? An across-the-board tax on fuel will ultimately affect all transportation options, not just private cars. Remember that, outside of the NEC and a few other places, virtually all Amtrak trains are powered by diesel fuel, not electricity.

There has been a 4.3 cent fuel tax on the diesel fuel that the RR's use for years now. A few years ago there was a move in Congress to either cancel that tax or at least direct it into a fund that benefits the RR's. I'm not sure if that bill ever passed. Last I knew that 4.3 cents went into the General Fund and has been doing so since George H W Bush was president, but for years prior to that point the tax went into the Highway Trust Fund. That's one of the reasons that the RR's were so hostile towards passenger service, is that they were being taxed to fund their primary competition, the truck; while still having to subsidize passenger rail.

 

[jis]

• If McCain had been elected instead of Obama, what do you think would be the status of Amtrak and HSR in this country today? Would it be noticeably different?

Yes.

• For those who want to tax oil, would fuel destined to pull diesel trains be exempt from such a tax? An across-the-board tax on fuel will ultimately affect all transportation options, not just private cars. Remember that, outside of the NEC and a few other places, virtually all Amtrak trains are powered by diesel fuel, not electricity.

I don't think anything should be exempt, more importantly, including aviation fuel. The money thus collected should be targeted towards legitimate activities that increase overall energy efficiency of our society (which includes railroads incidentally!). The core problem that we face is that we consume way more units of energy per unit of GDP (even though we manufacture less as a percentage of said GDP) than most of the countries that we are in competition with in the world market. At the end of the day we need to fix that problem. One of the primary sinkholes for our budget is the defense department, which is necessary to some extent to secure energy sources, the need for which will be reduced if we consume less energy for producing the same amount of wealth. And that wealth then will be available for more constructive use, rather than in low return use such as in being better and better at blowing up things.

 

[makai1976]

[*]If McCain had been elected instead of Obama, what do you think would be the status of Amtrak and HSR in this country today? Would it be noticeably different?

Granted, this is eight years old and Senator McCain seems to change positions quite often, but...

McCain Proposes Abolishing Amtrak

 

[tp49]

Amtrak is exempt from paying sales tax on fuel.