Trump and Amtrak/Budget cutting funding

[seat38a]

How will the private operation of the FAA ATC generate enough revenue to be reasonably profitable? Is the Fed going to guarantee a minimum revenue to attract bidders? If so where is that money coming from.

Nav Canada does it in Canada without needing any extra tax money.

 

[Rover]

I love trains as much as the next guy, but I just don't see the purpose of using them for long distance travel in the US. NYC to LAX on the train takes three days and is $291 for a seat in coach. A direct flight on United costs $219. I don't understand why we need to use tax payers money to fund unprofitable routes when there are plenty of alternative methods of transportation.

By your reasoning, the National Parks & Monuments should be done away with, and put to better use, since they don't turn a good enough profit, and take up taxpayer dollars.

There is a quality of life issue with having National parks, whether they are profitable or not. It's called recreation.

I say being able to ride a LD train should be supported with taxpayer dollars. You get to see the USA, the land that your tax dollars are defending through Defense spending, unless one's idea of the USA, is only the "big city" they exist in...

It's a spiritual thing. It's really a sad statement, that America won't invest in LD rail. Instead funding the "glory" of air travel.

I say cut a big way all of the student loan funding. College is way over-priced, mainly because they know about the Govt.'s willingness to bankroll their over-priced scheme.

Other nations have National Rail, why can't the US???

Maybe if Trump can pack the Supreme Court in the next 4 years, then things can get done for the National interest, over the objections of who knows what..

 

[Dakota 400]

The presented Budget is a figment of imagination. Once the Congress gets done with it, if it ever does, the reality will be different.

For the benefit of Amtrak, I hope sanity will prevail.

Now that Vice-President Biden is off the National scene, are there others in Congress with whom we ought to be communicating in support of Amtrak?

 

[jis]

Now that Vice-President Biden is off the National scene, are there others in Congress with whom we ought to be communicating in support of Amtrak?

Your Congressman and your two Senators of course. Biden couldn't do much as Vice President as far as passing a budget goes anyway unless there was a 50-50 tie in the Senate holding things up.

 

[Lonestar648]

Biden was a major supporter who campaigned for Amtrak throughout his career, showing his love of trains by taking the Acela home to Delaware in January, just like he used to do when he was a Senator..

 

[RSG]

Now that Vice-President Biden is off the National scene, are there others in Congress with whom we ought to be communicating in support of Amtrak?

Your Congressman and your two Senators of course. Biden couldn't do much as Vice President as far as passing a budget goes anyway unless there was a 50-50 tie in the Senate holding things up.

That's true as long as you know where they stand on rail & transportation issues. For me, my newly-installed congressperson is a tabula rasa, but given personal history and personal economic situation, I'm going to say that there's no knowledge and little interest of rail issues. My junior senator loves to brag about "Working in Washington, and living at home" so he spends the majority of his time outside of Capitol Hill in the air or traveling to/from the arrival/departure airports. Does he give an airborne rodent's behind about something as backwards [to him] as passenger rail service? Not bloody likely. On the other hand, my senior senator is chair of one of the money committees, so his committee will have a say in writing the budget. He's also known for being thoughtful and realizing the impact that Federal dollars have "back home". So yes, I feel that contacting him would definitely be worthwhile--at the appropriate point in time.

"Are there others in Congress with whom we ought to be communicating in support of Amtrak?"

To further answer that question, since the current issue is funding in the budget, start paying attention to who sits on the committees that control the budget and the appropriations process. Since all funding bills originate in the US House Of Representatives, one of the first stops is the House Committee on Appropriations. The Chair and Ranking Member are both from passenger rail-infused states (NJ & NY), but there are also members from KY, AL, TX, CA, ID, FL, PA, GA, CT, NC, IN, OH, AR, KS, MN, NE, TN, MD, FL, ME, NV, UT, IA, WV, WI, MS, VA, and MA. The Appropriations Committee also has a Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies chaired by Mario Diaz-Balart of FL and Ranking Member David Price of NC. Members on that subcommittee come from PA, OH, IA, CA, GA, IL, MA and TX, in addition to NC and FL.

Most of the states listed are affected by long-distance rail service so if anyone has a representative who sits on the committee at large or the transportation subcommittee, now is the time to start developing a relationship with them. How does that work? By calling their regional office and finding out who the staffer is that deals with appropriations-related issues. Often they will have someone who deals with specific areas of interest; other times it they will have a generic person who deals with all the contact from the Little People (often the case with largely-populated districts). That staffer may be in the home state, or they may be in DC. If your rep represents a large number of people (such as is likely in states like CA, NY, or FL), it will be harder to break through the gatekeepers set up to filter out the noise but with persistence and effort, it can be done. If you live in a more sparsely-populated state, you will have better chances of getting through, generally speaking. If you can reach someone via phone and are comfortable doing so, start by asking them about the appropriations process and what the deadlines are for funding requests for the budget-writing process. They may or may not immediately know that information. Briefly explain why you're calling and what your interest is. State that you understand that the budget submitted by the White House cuts a significant amount of funding for NPRC [Amtrak] and see what the response is. If they seem knowledgeable and receptive to the inquiry, you can drill down a bit further. If the response is dismissive or patronizing, thank them for their time and end the call. If you feel better about putting it in writing, do so. If you feel you are developing a rapport, continue the contact as it relates to the timeline, if one is given.

Easter Recess is fast approaching so most Members of Congress will be home for a week or so. Find out where they will be during their time away from DC and drop by one of their local appearances. This could be Town Meetings, but the last few years (and particularly the last few weeks) has started to be the beginning of the end of that type of event for most congresspeople. More likely they can be found at various group meetings, such as Rotary, Chamber of Commerce, Junior League, etc. Sometimes their appearances will be listed on their official WWW site, but due to the tenor of the times, most meetings will likely not be publicized very far in advance. Often it is easier to scour local listings of club and organizational meetings to see who the speakers are. When at a personal appearance, look for any familiar staffers. If you've had previous contact with any and they happen to be in attendance, approach them first and (re-)introduce yourself. Briefly mention your issue and request that they bring it to the attention of the member at their earliest convenience. If you can get 'face time' with the real deal, all the more the better as long as you can cogently present your concerns. To this end, practice giving an "elevator speech" beforehand with all the relevant points in one brief outline. (To those not familiar, an Elevator Speech is a sales pitch which can be delivered in the average amount of time it takes for a ride in an elevator. Think of it as information presented in lieu of small talk.)

Conduct: this can't be stressed enough. Be constructive and positive. This goes double and triple if the representative you are trying to interact with is a Republican and you are something else. Using terms like "the Orange Menace in the White House" will get you nowhere and will be counterproductive, even with Members of Congress who might privately agree with the sentiment. Be brief and organized in your thoughts and comments, both to members and staffers. You might think that the trip you took in college on the Sunset Limited was the highlight of your life and that everyone should have the benefit of your memory, but it's irrelevant to the matter at hand and there are better ways of communicating your enthusiasm for rail travel. Similarly, if you go to a personal appearance and the rest of the crowd is hostile and angry, ask a staffer what is the best way to communicate a message to the member on an issue and leave. Legitimate concerns will get drowned out in any drama-laden presentation which winds up on the local news and social media due to its contentiousness.

Summary/TL;DR: Funding is the current issue; that process starts in the US House and the Appropriations Committee is key to the process. Representatives who sit on the larger committee or the subcommittee which deals with transportation issues will have a greater impact than the 'Average Joe' member who does not. Learn to communicate effectively with a representative via a staff member, and know the issue you are trying to get across while respecting their limits of availability and time constraints. Be brief, be positive, be polite, and be enthusiastic. Use congressional recesses to interact with representatives and their staff, but only if it can be done constructively. Follow up with any contact, but not too frequently. Get interested family and friends to also do likewise if willing.

 

[RSG]

I don't think it's ever too early to contact Congress and express support for Amtrak services.

As long as it's done with forethought and a game plan, that's generally true. A generic "I :wub: Amtrak!" message to your representative today probably isn't the most effective way to get the message across, however---particularly if they do not sit on a budget- or transportation-related committee.

Also, contacting them just because you can isn't an effective use of time or resources either. A woman on Twitter the other day mentioned that she had contacted her representative 20 times over the past two months. I will guarantee you after the fourth point of contact or so, everyone who came in contact with her stopped listening to what she said, even if the representative they work for is sympathetic to her issues. She got labeled with the "whiner" tag and at most, her position got marked on a tally sheet and that's as far as anything went.

Your singular voice can be powerful and effective, but only if it's used wisely and not overused or used just to vent frustration with the gub'mint, the opposite political party of yours, your life, or the world in general.

 

[RSG]

Our viewpoints will have far more of an impact while Amtrak's budget is actually under consideration than it will now, only to be forgotten by the time anything important happens.

Passenger rail supporters would do well to remember history, particularly the line (paraphrased) about those who do not learn from history being doomed to repeat it. We've been down this road too many times before; A Presidential budget proposal which omits major Amtrak funding is almost 'business as usual'. All these "the sky is falling" posts would be amusing if it weren't for the fact some people will actually fall for it. This actually does a disservice to the advocacy of passenger rail. We need to keep the hyperbole in check.

Could not agree more; the pointless anger and name-calling (and not just here) will not accomplish anything, other than make a few people feel good (temporarily). The budding John Micas who may be yet-to-be-identified are counting on a misplaced outrage approach by their opponents to accomplish their own mission.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Just keep in mind that Actual Facts and Common Sense don't exist for the Dittoheads and Zealots that make up Trump World!

We've gone through the Looking Glass and down the Rabbit Hole!Hang on to your hats folks, you ain't seen nothing yet!

 

[jis]

I think it is even more important to engage your reps in a conversation if they have been anti-Amtrak. If they have been pro-Amtrak it is more than likely that they will continue to be so. What we need is to get those on the fence or near it to flip to pro-Amtrak or lean that way, rather than be committed anti-Amtrak. Without them we will lose the battle. These battles are won at the edges, not just sitting in the support bubble.

 

[Ziv]

RSG, you make a lot of very good points! One thing that I take away from this is that it may be worth it for me to donate money to any politician who is on the fence with regards to Amtrak. They may not be the person I voted for, but a simple $20 donation will put me on their email list and will probably mean that any emails I send them will be tagged as a donor and therefore, perhaps, my comment/request may receive a bit more consideration.

Now that Vice-President Biden is off the National scene, are there others in Congress with whom we ought to be communicating in support of Amtrak?

Your Congressman and your two Senators of course. Biden couldn't do much as Vice President as far as passing a budget goes anyway unless there was a 50-50 tie in the Senate holding things up.

Summary/TL;DR: Funding is the current issue; that process starts in the US House and the Appropriations Committee is key to the process. Representatives who sit on the larger committee or the subcommittee which deals with transportation issues will have a greater impact than the 'Average Joe' member who does not. Learn to communicate effectively with a representative via a staff member, and know the issue you are trying to get across while respecting their limits of availability and time constraints. Be brief, be positive, be polite, and be enthusiastic. Use congressional recesses to interact with representatives and their staff, but only if it can be done constructively. Follow up with any contact, but not too frequently. Get interested family and friends to also do likewise if willing.

 

[neroden]

RSG, you make a lot of very good points! One thing that I take away from this is that it may be worth it for me to donate money to any politician who is on the fence with regards to Amtrak. They may not be the person I voted for, but a simple $20 donation will put me on their email list and will probably mean that any emails I send them will be tagged as a donor and therefore, perhaps, my comment/request may receive a bit more consideration.

I was told by the office of one of my politicians that they were prohibited from knowing who was on the donor lists, to avoid conflicts of interest.
Of course if you're talking to a *Republican*, I wouldn't count on them following that rule. But they might.

 

[Ziv]

Nero den, I think graft is pretty much an equal opportunity employer!

 

[Ziv]

Argh, spellcheck rears it's ugly head again!

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Contact to Senators and Representatives is premature at this point. Over the coming months the respective committees will begin to craft a budget, and only then will we have a (real) idea of just how much money they intend to appropriate to Amtrak. The likely outcome is that it will be barely - and just barely - enough to keep everything (including long-distance) running for one more year, but far less than the company really needs. That will be the time to write letters and make phone calls; Our viewpoints will have far more of an impact while Amtrak's budget is actually under consideration than it will now, only to be forgotten by the time anything important happens.

Passenger rail supporters would do well to remember history, particularly the line (paraphrased) about those who do not learn from history being doomed to repeat it. We've been down this road too many times before; A Presidential budget proposal which omits major Amtrak funding is almost 'business as usual'. All these "the sky is falling" posts would be amusing if it weren't for the fact some people will actually fall for it. This actually does a disservice to the advocacy of passenger rail. We need to keep the hyperbole in check.

I don't disagree with you that the Trump budget is just the beginning of a long process, and the omnibus passed this year, if such happens, will have little resemblance to that budget.

But it is never to early to remind your various congress critters that they have a supporter of passenger rail. Start early, and repeat often. It doesn't hurt if you do it articulately and politely.

 

[Larry H.]

I love trains as much as the next guy, but I just don't see the purpose of using them for long distance travel in the US. NYC to LAX on the train takes three days and is $291 for a seat in coach. A direct flight on United costs $219. I don't understand why we need to use tax payers money to fund unprofitable routes when there are plenty of alternative methods of transportation.

In reality out here in the small town USA there is little other choices other than driving if you don't want to fly, which I don't. And that is hours away here an way more in many other isolated routes. I agree that the NE Corridor shouldn't be given priority over all the rest of the country. For one thing if we had the net work that Amtrak was given when it took over and the cars to haul the people like up east, things would possibly be much different. When they eliminated many of the connecting hubs and routes they started the death of long distance. When I do use the train to chicago any more I usually find the station to be very filled with passengers. And that is with many people being turned away constantly from the sleeper class cars. One reason to me they are down some lately is they have pushed the fares to pretty unreasonable heights (yes some will pay it anyway) but that doesn't help to keep the trains full overall. And they need more cars to bring on the passengers. Once on board they need diners that actually still function as diners not microwave light. Most people I know are not thrilled to pay a thousand or more for rooms only to have pretty sad food and service.

 

[seat38a]

I think we should call Amtrak for what it really is. It is a Federal Job's program. Here in California, the fact that our State tax dollars while funding public transportation also funds jobs is never lost in advertisement when requesting higher taxes from the voters. I can't find the pdf anymore but couple years ago the number of direct and indirect good paying Amtrak jobs funded through Amtrak California and Metrolink was eye opening. One of the many factors that drove the creation of Amtrak was the freight rails could not operate passenger rail profitably due to labor costs and work rules, which were all dumped onto Amtrak.

Without Amtrak, there would be many current employees out of the job and probably on unemployment or another job that does not pay a decent livable wage. While I personally think 1 coach attendant per coach car is absolutely ridiculous from a for profit perspective, but it makes perfect sense when thought of as a job program. Unfortunately the GOP loves to scuttle job programs unless it is in their own congrestional district.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Amtrak doesn't have 1 attendant per coach? Why are you making statements like that when they have no basis in reality?

As to the federal jobs program... Like it or not Amtrak is providing a service. Ridership continues to increase so people are using that service.

You can argue if you think that service is needed... and the answer is no it's not. This country would go on without any rail service. It would also go on without daily subsidized mail service. And many other services we don't need.

 

[seat38a]

Amtrak doesn't have 1 attendant per coach? Why are you making statements like that when they have no basis in reality?

As to the federal jobs program... Like it or not Amtrak is providing a service. Ridership continues to increase so people are using that service.

You can argue if you think that service is needed... and the answer is no it's not. This country would go on without any rail service. It would also go on without daily subsidized mail service. And many other services we don't need.

Could have fooled me on the last 4 LD train rides. The employees opening the doors were not the conductors or the dining car staff on the coach cars.

 

[A Voice]

I think we should call Amtrak for what it really is. It is a Federal Job's program. Here in California, the fact that our State tax dollars while funding public transportation also funds jobs is never lost in advertisement when requesting higher taxes from the voters. I can't find the pdf anymore but couple years ago the number of direct and indirect good paying Amtrak jobs funded through Amtrak California and Metrolink was eye opening. One of the many factors that drove the creation of Amtrak was the freight rails could not operate passenger rail profitably due to labor costs and work rules, which were all dumped onto Amtrak.

Without Amtrak, there would be many current employees out of the job and probably on unemployment or another job that does not pay a decent livable wage. While I personally think 1 coach attendant per coach car is absolutely ridiculous from a for profit perspective, but it makes perfect sense when thought of as a job program. Unfortunately the GOP loves to scuttle job programs unless it is in their own congrestional district.

Were Amtrak actually a jobs program, it really wouldn't be a very good one, considering that staffing levels have already been cut to the bone. But Amtrak isn't a jobs program; It's purpose is a transportation service, providing greater options for mobility to communities across the nation.

 

[KmH]

Could have fooled me on the last 4 LD train rides. The employees opening the doors were not the conductors or the dining car staff on the coach cars.

According to Amtrak's Service Manual, a single TA-C (Train Attendant - Coach) can be required to care for as many as 4 coach cars if the total coach passenger count is less than 150.

The west of Chicago Superliner LD trains never seem to pull more than 4 coach cars.

The Service Manual then allows for adding a 2nd TA-C for 3 or 4 coach cars only if the passenger count exceeds 150 for at

least four (4) hours of daylight travel.

A Superliner coach car has 76 seats. A Superliner coach/baggage car only has 62 seats (none on the lower level).

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Amtrak doesn't have 1 attendant per coach? Why are you making statements like that when they have no basis in reality?

As to the federal jobs program... Like it or not Amtrak is providing a service. Ridership continues to increase so people are using that service.

You can argue if you think that service is needed... and the answer is no it's not. This country would go on without any rail service. It would also go on without daily subsidized mail service. And many other services we don't need.

Could have fooled me on the last 4 LD train rides. The employees opening the doors were not the conductors or the dining car staff on the coach cars.

Are you sure? Typically the conductor or assistant conductor each open a door. Sometimes one is in the baggage car.

 

[Philly Amtrak Fan]

Unfortunately the GOP loves to scuttle job programs unless it is in their own congrestional district.

And you don't think the Democrats think the same way? Does Robert Byrd ring a bell?

 

[Carolina Special]

California HSR? Trump administration has recently halted the federal grant funding, which seems to have a more immediate impact than the proposed budget. With the failure of the cap and trade auctions which was supposed to be the state revenue source, the California Democrats need another very large funding source to keep the HSR building going.

 

[BCL]

California HSR? Trump administration has recently halted the federal grant funding, which seems to have a more immediate impact than the proposed budget. With the failure of the cap and trade auctions which was supposed to be the state revenue source, the California Democrats need another very large funding source to keep the HSR building going.

That wasn't even a grant for HSR. That was guilt by association since they tapped into the state HSR funds for part of the money to pay for Caltrain electrification. To stop that project is almost pure spite to get at anything remotely associated with HSR.

California HSR is nearly all state funding.