Here we go again...........

From the Reuters newswire, this bit of news. Not the first time we've dealt with this in the States, but it's getting freaking old, IMO:

Bush Budget to Scrap Subsidy for Amtrak-Sources

44 minutes ago U.S. National - Reuters


By Caren Bohan and Adam Entous

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration will for the first time propose eliminating operating subsidies for passenger train operator Amtrak as part of a push to cut budget deficits, people close to the budget process said on Tuesday.

President Bush (news - web sites)'s fiscal 2006 budget, which he will send to Congress on Monday, will allocate no subsidy for Amtrak to run its trains. But it will offer $360 million for maintenance on the flagship Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston -- which Amtrak owns -- and for commuter services.

The proposal must be approved by Congress, and the administration faces a fight in getting approval for a budget that aims to nearly freeze the growth of domestic spending not tied to national defense.

An influential Democrat warned that if enacted, the Bush administration's budget would set the nation's only city-to-city passenger service "on a course to bankruptcy."

Last year, the Bush administration proposed $900 million in subsidies, but Congress increased that to $1.2 billion after the railroad said the administration's proposal would force it to shut down.

An Amtrak spokesman would not comment when asked about the possibility of the rail service losing the bulk of its federal allocation.

Senior administration officials declined to discuss the 2006 budget figures, but described the decision as part of Bush's broader push to restrain government spending and eliminate what they see as wasteful programs.

"The approach in the budget is to make clear that we cannot support an approach that does not work and calls for increasing burdens on federal taxpayers. But we'd feel differently if reforms are accomplished," an administration official said.

Another senior administration official added: "Amtrak should be treated like any other form of transportation and funded like any other form of transportation. The other forms don't get operating subsidies." (NOTE: Forget all the money the airlines got for covering losses after 9-11, and all the federal tax money that went into building the Interstate Highway system. Ignore the man behind the curtain over there....... )

An official said the Bush administration would continue to support commuter rail services, "if necessary, even in the absence of reform."


NEVER MADE MONEY

The administration has long hoped to wean Amtrak from federal subsidies, criticizing the state of its infrastructure and service. It wants to open its rail lines up to competition.

Amtrak employs 22,000 people and operates 265 trains a day, excluding commuter service, in 46 states.

The administration budget has proposed funding levels over the previous two years that the railroad said were unsustainable. Each year, Congress came through with extra money at the last minute to boost Amtrak's appropriation to levels the railroad said it could live with but still far below what it sought.

Amtrak has never made money in its 34-year history.

To get its subsidy in recent years, Amtrak has had to agree to much closer Transportation Department oversight of its books and its operations.


Sen. Patty Murray (news, bio, voting record) of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the appropriations subcommittee on transportation and a strong Amtrak supporter, said she was deeply concerned about the budget move.

"For four years they have played budget games and fought congressional efforts to keep Amtrak afloat," Murray said.

"Now, despite the fact that Amtrak has gone to great lengths to get their costs under control and run more efficiently, the president is again offering a budget that sets the rail service on a course to bankruptcy," she added.

Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation said the move was long overdue.

"The White House is saving money for the taxpayers and hopefully serving notice to other agencies that they must be efficient and effective in order to continue receiving tax dollars," Riedl said. (By shutting down an entire transportation system? Cure the patient by killing him?)

 

Having actually had some experience in these things........ Amtrak should never have been created.

The RR's pawned off their old, and most useless junkers on D-Day. Keeping their better stuff. Such as the Milw did in keeping their nearly new FP45's. So Amtrak had to immediately spend funds on new, and heavily rebuilt equipment. Money desperately needed elsewhere for a fledgling operation. Which started the mess.

Passenger service was dying anyhow. Having been competing for decades against incredibly heavily subsidized highways, and airlines.

Few routes were truly viable. And you cannot even try to compete, when forced to operate over tracks of another company. With it's own priorities.

It would be best to let it go away. Then start all over! A little at a time. The way it should have been done on May 1, 1971.



Boxcab E50

 

And if someone isn't working out as needed, he can utter those now famous words- "You're fired!"



Boxcab E50