Transportation secretary says states will have to

[Save Our Trains Michigan]

Transportation secretary says states will have to pay larger share of Amtrak costs

News story

 

[saxman]

Well sounds like Mineta is not really against Amtrak, he just doesn't really understand how it works. You'd think a transportation secretary would have some background in transportation. But thats politics for ya....

Sounds like he and Bush just jump to a what sounds like a good idea, without knowing anything about the subject. At least our Congressmen know a little what they're talking about when it comes to Amtrak

Chris

 

[Viewliner]

All I can say is

This dashes our hopes that Tommy Thompson could become the next Secretary of Transportation. I guess this means that it'll be another 4 years of this nonsense, where we have a starving rail system struggling to survive on the scraps we feed it. :angry: :unsure:

 

[AmtrakWPK]

I wonder if it ever occurs to anyone in Washington that their arguments of "States pay bigger share" always comes down to the same thing anyway. They are apparently not aware of it, but the same people that live in those "States" are the ones that pay through Washington anyway. They sound as if they think the "States" are populated by a completely different set of people than U.S. citizens. Go figure.

 

[AlanB]

This dashes our hopes that Tommy Thompson could become the next Secretary of Transportation.

I suspect that this statement coming from the Bush administration is one reason that Tommy Thompson resigned as one of Bush's cabinet members.

Mineta on the other hand I think does understand what he's saying, but he's obviously more into his job, than he is into doing what's right. He's simply the mouth piece for those who are pulling Bush's strings.

 

[Amtrak Watcher]

The U.S is entirely alone in the industrialized world in the way it manages and funds lots of things in the public interest. Aside from the odd and wasteful way transportation is managed and funded (the details of which we are all familiar), the U.S. is, for example, the only country that negotiates health care costs competitively, rather than collectively, as if people had the option of not being sick. What’s the result? Can we congratulate the American way of doing things for the relatively stable and robust U.S. economy, or is this merely a result of the tremendous size of the U.S. economy? On whom do we blame the astronomical illiteracy rate in the U.S., the migration of jobs off shore, the ballooning obesity rate, and our dependence on foreign oil? Are these problems in need of solutions?

Nothing is simple. Anyone who proposes simple solutions to complex problems doesn’t understand the problems.

Mineta, and everyone on the Bush team, can be counted on to automatically embrace some kind of free enterprise, competitive option rather than seek help in anything that smacks of socialism, collectivism, or central control – even if some kind of regulated solution makes sense. Solutions to problems that will work will likely be complicated and will not translate well into 20-second sound bites on TV. As Amtrak struggles with funding and controls, we watch state and federal transportation officials point fingers at each other, and almost all the airlines embark on profitless recoveries. Never mind that there has never been evidence anywhere that public transportation can pay for itself.

 

[capltd29]

I have an idea, why not hand the Iraq war to the states to pay for?