Obviously, ink.  That's why Ohio is the most economically competitive state in the nation.  It's gotta be all the gas stations, cheap motels, and fast food joints springing up along the interstates.  Woo hoo!

^LOL.

 

I'm not talking about gas stations, although they bring in the gas tax from anyone using our roads, out of state or not, or hotels, which generate big tax dollars and usually lead to people eating at our resturants or fast food joints, which also generate tax dollars and jobs. However I am speaking primarily of industry.

You don't think that building rail lines spurs investment???  Why do you think places like Atlanta and Los Angeles exist? 

 

KJP, I love the quotes that you highlighted in the previous articles.  I only hope that more people...especially legislators...share those opinions and acknowledge those facts.

One could argue that the interstates merely displace investment--not create it.  If interstates were truly the engine of economic growth that some claim they are, then we wouldn't have hollowed-out cities like Cleveland, Cincinnati, or Detroit, among others.  Surely, Houston and Atlanta would have far-outpaced New York as the economic powerhouse of the nation instead of becoming the traffic-clogged smog havens they are.

 

I'm sure you are aware that Amtrak carries over 50% of the combined air-rail market between Washington and New York (including the highly profitable airline shuttles).  Imagine what would happen, then, with the elimination of train service.  You're talking about increased air congestion, which would ripple through the rest of the nation.  You're talking about adding multiple lanes onto I-95 and the New Jersey Turnpike, all of which would quickly become congested.

 

I think its laughable that the current Administration wants to turn Amtrak over to the states.  Many states already DO operate their own rail service, and others heavily support additional Amtrak service within their state.  New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, California...all of these states have seized the opportunity to support passenger rail beyond what Amtrak provides.  For all the strict-constructionists in the Administration, the Constitution specifically gives Congress (NOT the States) the power to regulate INTERstate commerce.  How about Congress taking responsibility that lawfully belongs to them? 

 

Not all of what is being proposed for Amtrak is all bad.  A rail trust fund with 80/20 funding is pretty much dead-on what rail passengers have been lobbying for all these years.  Considering how well the airline model has been working, though, I don't think it's appropriate to follow that lead.  The Northeast Corridor trackage (as well as a section in Michigan), signaling, power, catenary, and many of the stations (including Union Station and Penn Station) are all owned by Amtrak.  The federal government needs to ensure these properties are, at minimum, brought to a state of good repair if it seeks to divest of them. 

 

This is just irritating to me.  FDR once said that a conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who refuses to learn how to walk forward.  If the "free-market" ideologues would just go back 35 years into history, they would understand that their dream of for-profit passenger rail is never going to happen.

That's pretty much what happened. Bush & Co. have such a hard-on to get rid of Amtrak, it's drained all the blood away from the head they should be using to make informed decisions. But they won't support anything that doesn't pay to play in Washington's "sound policy-making."

 

Sometimes, I want to start the revolution over again. But I'd settle for a third party that actually cares about people.

You don't think that building rail lines spurs investment???  Why do you think places like Atlanta and Los Angeles exist? 

 

I didn't say that. I think both interstates and rail spur development. I disagree that interstates don't generate development.

No one said interstates don't generate development.  The problem with interstates is that the development they do generate is haphazard in nature, and generally of a low quality.  The new development generated often is parasitic of existing development, absent population growth (see Greater Cleveland, Metropolitan Detroit), and the money funneled to the interstates diverts money that could otherwise be earmarked for maintaining existing infrastructure. 

 

A big plus for improving passenger rail is that much of the infrastructure is already built, so the capital improvement costs are far lower than if you were to build an interstate highway with equivalent capacity.  All pro-rail folk are asking is to effectively utilize the limited resources we already have, which is TRULY the conservative point of view. 

 

If Bush wants to cut a subsidy--cut the $400,000 annual presidential salary, 'cause he sure as hell doesn't need it.

I will acknowledge that interstates do create value for the municipalities that they are gifted to...but I will agree with Dan that they don't necessarily create new investment, but rather draw it away from other, existing areas.  This is particularly true in the NEO, where regional population growth is stagnant.  I will also say that the public expenditure for interstate and other public infrastructure improvements is not justified in the exurbs where the majority of these significant investments are made, as these municipalities really contribute very little to the overall tax picture and as I said before, the tax revenue they end up producing is really just displaced from somewhere else that once had it (again, in no or slow-growth areas).

 

This is why the reluctance by some of our elected officials to invest in major infrastructure improvements in existing areas is so baffling to me.  Why continue to expand and spread out investment when you can build on what you already have in place and make it better and more sustainable?

 

 

Monte asked what the interstate system ever made the government money. It certainly has. Rail makes the goverment movey. Interstates spur all levels of development, low quality to high end. Rail does the same. No one wants an interstate in their back yard. No one wants a train station in their back yard. But they do want them nearby. While I agree that we need to look at funding rail, I have never seen economic developent numbers on it. So many times I see the state decide to do this or that road project because someone believes that it will bring 100's of jobs. Passenger rail would help pollution, help bring improvement to our rail lines, give Ohioans another form of transportation, relieve our interstates a bit, among other positives, but do they spur jobs? Do companies take that into account when they locate somewhere?

Look at some numbers, make comparisons, and report back with what you've learned. 

^You kill me.

I think we have experts on here for that sort of thing...not that I don't encourage due diligence!  Remember kids, research is fun!

Hell, if building and operating roads is profitable, I'm going to have to quit my job and start my own road network.

Whats important is getting that data out there. People sit down and ponder how to bring jobs. Building more roads sounds like a pretty good idea.

 

The problem is I have no clue what I am even looking for.

Real simple:  expenditures on road projects versus increase in revenue directly attributable to said road projects. 

 

Ohio has been building ever-more roads for 50 years without a corresponding increase in income or employment.  Building roads is probably the most expensive way to increase employment, and even then, it's not a guarantee--refer to the discussion above on displaced investment.

roads, sewers, water lines, expanding fire and police coverage, etc. etc...very expensive for the public!  very profitable fo the private investor!

I would agree that the investment by government always yields all too much and that the private developer many times makes out. This is why I favor impact fees of some kind.

Congressman Steve LaTourette, who cahirs the House Syb-Committee on Railroads, has called for a Congressional hearing on David Gunn's dismissal, and Gun has been invited to testify.  The hearing is at 10:00 a-m on Tuesday, the 15th.  It will be in front of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

 

Check C-Span to see if they will televize it on the web.

David Gunn: “I did the honorable thing”

(Includes a great quote from Gunn)

(from railwayage.com)

 

When he came out of retirement to accept the position as Amtrak’s President and Chief Executive Officer little more than three years ago, David L. Gunn—a highly respected career railroader with more than 40 years’ experience operating freight trains and running transit systems in the U.S. and Canada—said he didn’t need the job, and if his superiors didn’t like the job he was doing, they could fire him. He’d return to his home in Nova Scotia.

 

 

http://railwayage.com/breaking_news.shtml

Looks like next Tuesday will be interesting on the Hill.  Gunn has pretty wide bipartisan support in Congress.  Time to set the TiVo to CSPAN!

The reform that's really needed can best be accomplished by firing Laney and the rest of the Amtrak Board and Norman Mineta, and then impeaching Bush.

What is happening is disgraceful. Some are now calling for Mineta's resignation and Gunn's reinstatement.

What a lot of people don't realize is that Mineta has a seat on the Amtrak Board and has never beento a single board meeting in the 52 months he has been DOT Secretary.  Instead, he would send one of his underlings.

 

The ironic thing is that Mineta used to be a fairly strong supporter of Amtrak when he was in Congress.  His credibility, after this, is entirely in the commode.

 

The firing of David Gunn is clearly a case of a superior feeling threatened by a subordinate.  Gunn is someone who will tell the boss what he or she needs to know instead of what they want to hear. How that ever became a bad thing is beyond me, but Mineta must have put his hands over his ears and yelled "la-la-la-la" whenever he was being told that Gunn was actually doing what he was hired to do... run a railroad and run it well.

 

Mineta is a disgrace.  But consider who hired him.... the same guy who said the FEMA director did a great job after Katrina.

 

 

Agreed, noozer.  Gunn's firing was entirely political.  I, for one, have been quite pleased with Amtrak since he took over, but the ridership gains speak for themselves. 

 

 

Yeah.... it says a lot about the Bush Administration when they fire a guy who succeeds (Gunn) and hire and hangs on to one who is unqualified and and utter failure (Brown at FEMA).

Does this mean Gunn is available to come back and run the Washington Metro system?  :-)

 

Mike "heckuva job" Brown is apparently off the federal payroll now, despite being fired several weeks ago.

Two views... KJP

______________

 

 

A L L  A B O A R D  O H I O

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                       Contact:   Bill Hutchison, President

November 11, 2005                                                                          (614) 882-1716

 

Amtrak president’s firing threatens Ohio’s trains, plans for future

 

All Aboard Ohio, a nonprofit association, is calling for the immediate reinstatement of Amtrak President David Gunn, and for the resignation of U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta. All Aboard Ohio considers Gunn’s firing earlier this week as a direct threat to Ohio’s passenger trains, and to the future of the proposed Ohio Hub System. Gunn was fired by Amtrak’s board of directors who were appointed by President Bush at the behest of Mineta.

 

 

Gunn's a great and fearless railroad/transit man -- this is totally disaster, but completely expected by those spineless Bush yeahoos.  Norm Mineta, who's otherwise a stiff, should be 1st out the door.  Let’s see how this plays out and whether seeming rail-friendly Repub congressmen/senators like La Tourrette and Lott are really going to push the very weakened Bush on this one (who just had his spending/Alaska drilling bill pulled in the wake of jittery mod Repubs looking at their own futures as well as Bush’s anemic polling numbers.  :whip:

 

On the local front, we have a chance to make a dent. Our old friend, Sen. DeWine's up for election next year w/ Sherrod Brown going after him.  Brown's record around Akron seems pretty transit/Amtrak friendly.  If Ohio’s Amtrak future, particularly the Midwest direct hub plan are in danger, then we need to pressure the candidates to make it not to be – or, in other words, let’s write/e-mail to Sherrod to make this a centerpiece issue – esp to the expense of stupid stuff like the blogging/plagiarism non-issue the Repubs are pumping.

 

NOW IS THE HOUR!

 

btw, I also thought Gunn helmed Philly's SEPTA and NJ Transit, too.

 

Actually, Senator DeWine has been very supportive of both the Ohio Hub and Amtrak.  He and his family are regular users of Amtrak as well.  But it would still be good to see both candidates step up and elevate the issue of passenger rail and improving mobility for all of us.

 

Where the debate really needs to be raised is in the Governor's race.  None of the candidates on either side have taken a position.

That's good, noozer.  Glad to see some Amtrak support on both sides of the aisle.  But I'm just saying, let's get some dialogue going in the election year.  Will a loyal Repub like DeWine be ready to rock the machine by criticizing Bush even though it seems like a no-brainer; Gunn has deep and loyal support, obviously.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/bal-ed.gunn11nov11,1,4857811.story?coll=bal-opinion-headlines

 

Railroaded

 

November 11, 2005

 

The nation's beleaguered passenger rail system lost one of its most valuable assets when Amtrak's board fired David L. Gunn on Wednesday. During his three years as Amtrak's president, Mr. Gunn had worked wonders with a perpetually dysfunctional organization. Even Amtrak Chairman David M. Laney described Mr. Gunn's performance as "splendid" a matter of weeks ago. Apparently, that wasn't good enough.

 

 

Thanks for the national editorial outcry.  I really dig the "reverse FEMA" spin... Just shows to go ya that Bush can't do anything right, in either acts of omission or commission.  What a jerk!!

Gunn's firing is incontrovertible evidence that this Administration is completely out of touch with the people of this nation.  Pretend folksiness aside, of course.  I think the CEO of our country has a real problem with competence....

^I don't agree with that. I agree there are many factors that show the Bush administration is out of touch with the nation, but I don't think that more than 10% of the people of the country care about Amtrak's head or would even know who Gunn was. That position just isn't in the mainstream limelight.

^ That's not the point. The point is that a competent man was in charge of a federal corporation which Bush & Co. would rather see just go away. It doesn't matter to them what the corporation's potential is, with proper federal support. It on'y matters that the corporation has a history of failure, without federal support or reform, but they don't care to understand those complexities.

 

And, by the way, during the Reagan years, when Amtrak routinely faced a zero budget request by the Reagan administration (and also threatened to cut Social Security), the most letters Congress received on any one subject was regarding Social Security. Number two? Amtrak.

That was Danic's point. The whole thread reflects your point.

 

Also, I would agree that you would get alot more people riled up if you threatened Amtrak's future, but the head isn't someone they are firmilar with. Look at Kmart, the nation was in outcry when they filed bankruptcy, but I bet only a handful would get upset over the board firing a competent CEO.

They would get upset if there were no other discount retailers and the firing led to the closing of numerous stores. That's the distinction.

Yes, so when America sees that Amtrak is failing or in trouble because Gunn was fired, then I would agree with Danic's point.

Then instead of jumping to an uninformed conclusion, keep your eyes and ears open.  Those of us who ride Amtrak on a semi-regular basis are well aware of the positive changes that have happened under David Gunn, and are thus understandably skeptical about the administration's plan for disposal of Amtrak.  IMO, Gunn made Amtrak more professional and raised the bar quite a bit as far as customer service is concerned.  Granted, this is only my perception, and merely based on my experiences riding the train.  It will be interesting to see if there are any negative changes.  I'll see if I can pick the brains of the train crews when I go up to Boston next week.

 

For those who don't ride the trains much, if at all, and are interested in the outcome of this, I would suggest keeping an eye on the New York Times and the Washington Post, both of which usually cover Amtrak news pretty well.  I would imagine the Philadelphia Inquirer and the paper in Wilmington, DE will carry news on this too. 

^Now I feel like Michael. I am not discounting what you are saying. I don't know either way what Gunn has done. My point is that firing the head of Amtrak is not a move that necessarily shows the president is out of touch with the people of the nation. He sure is on many things and obviously he is out of touch with most Amtrak riders, but I don't think it shows he is out of touch with the whole nation. The only reason you could argue that it that Bush surely has bigger fish to fry than Amtrak, a lot bigger.

from trains.com

http://www.trains.com/Content/Dynamic/Articles/000/000/006/301zmiut.asp

 

House of Representatives explores actions of Amtrak Board

 

WASHINGTON — The vote last week by the Amtrak board of directors to fire the railroad's president, David L. Gunn, has created intense interest in Congress in the board itself, which some legal experts say has been operating for years using untested legal principles, according to a story in the New York Times. The concerns come as the board faces new questions about its future.

 

Lawmakers Berate Amtrak Board Over Firing

 

 

By MATTHEW L. WALD

NY Times

Published: November 16, 2005

WASHINGTON, Nov. 15 - Days after Amtrak's board of directors fired the railroad's president, the chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees Amtrak said Tuesday that the board might have acted illegally because it lacked a quorum.

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/16/national/16amtrak.html

 

Nice that the New York Times had the story, since the PD didn't bother mentioning it all -- even though LaTourette, the chairman of the subcommittee, is from the PD's coverage area. Geez, at least an abbreviated version of the story...

 

Reminds me of the time the PD business page had a blurb about Singapore Airlines buying some 747s. Yet, a month later, when Amtrak ordered 100 new rail cars, the PD said nothing, even though Amtrak serves Cleveland and Singapore Airlines never will. If it was a question of informing the region's suppliers about an opportunity, a number of railroad industry manufacturers are located here. If it was to inform investors, I thought those who bought stock in Timken (which supplies Amtrak with ball bearings) would be particularly interested in the rail car order.

I think KJP and possibly others have already pointed out that the freight railroads now recognize that they can benefit from Amtrak's growth and prosperity. It's not likely that the U.S. will have major long-distance rights-of-way dedicated solely to high-speed passenger trains any time soon, and the growing public sentiment in favor of fast, reliable, frequent passenger rail service is motivating some transportation experts and congressional figures to discuss public investment in the existing rail infrastructure to increase capacity.

 

Some of the improvements to facilitate better passenger service, like double-tracking, longer sidings that will accomodate today's freight trains, advanced signaling and train-control systems and eliminating grade crossings or providing four-quadrant crossing protection, would also benefit freight haulers by allowing them to run more trains faster with greater safety. The people who run the freight roads know that publicly-supported incremental improvement of rail passenger service using existing technology and rights-of-way is a win-win for both freight and passenger service, and they recognize that Gunn has the operational and business skills to help bring it about.

That is exactly the aim of the Ohio Hub Plan.  Bravo.  Couldn't have put it better!

“You couldn’t think up a case this loony if you tried”

railwayage.com

 

Ohio Republican Congressman Steven LaTourette, chairman of the U.S House Subcommittee on Railroads, opened a hearing on governance issues at Amtrak on Nov. 15 with scathing criticisms of the Bush Administration and the Amtrak board. The hearing addressed questions that have been raised about the “legality” of the board that fired Amtrak President and CEO David Gunn on Nov. 9.

 

 

http://www.railwayage.com/breaking_news.shtml

 

November 18, 2005

Mineta Tries to Reassure City on Amtrak

By PATRICK McGEEHAN

New York Times

 

Norman Y. Mineta, the secretary of transportation, came to New York yesterday to talk about Amtrak, and though he certainly did not praise the national railway, he did not shovel much dirt on it, either.

 

Read more at:

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/18/politics/18amtrak.html

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

 

Mineta's full of shit.  Gunn WAS the turnaround CEO.  He just didn't share the pipe dreams, i.e. absolve the federal government of its responsibility.  How dare a lifelong railroad man tell a group of non-Amtrak riders how to run the railroad.  Why does David Gunn hate America?  LOL

 

Four to five hours at either end???  That blows my mind.  They want to fix Amtrak, but don't even know how long it takes to get to New York.  Read the damn schedule, genius!  The regional trains take, at most, 3-1/2 hours between New York and DC.  Acela comes in around 2-3/4 hours.  I wonder how much work Mineta got accomplished on the cab ride to and from the airport.

 

Fuzzy Math Administration strikes again.

Remember, this is the same administration that gave us a FEMA Director with no actual emergency management qualifiactions.  What galls me is that the media doesn't pick up on statements like Mineta's.  It's no small thing to mis-state the travel time between DC and NYC and then pass it off as fact.  This exposes Mineta's thorough grasp of ignorance.

Hey Norm!

 

http://www.amtrak.com/timetable/oct05/W02.pdf

 

Man, that took all of 30 seconds to find that information.