Passenger Trains > Boardman response to proposals for budget-cutting

Message From Joe Boardman
Dear Co-workers,

> It is being reported in news accounts that a Republican study
> committee has released its vision for reducing government spending by
> $100 billion dollars now, and $2.5 trillion dollars over the next 10
> years. I’m sure many of you are not surprised that Amtrak is listed
> for being eliminated.
>
> I know that raises anxiety for many, if not all of you. I believe the
> first thing all of us have to understand is that this is born from
> the fear that pervades our nation on the heels of what has been
> tagged as the “Great Recession.” There has been a major shift in the
> House of Representatives, and there is a sense on their part that
> they must do some big things in order to fulfill what they believe
> their mandate is. I believe that very little time was used in actual
> study by this committee, but rather, Amtrak and other programs such
> as National Public Radio are on the list simply because they have
> appeared on past lists.
>
> So here is what I’m asking you to do. We are a very unique* company,
> in the sense that we see our nation everyday from coast to coast and
> border to border. Many of us can see the reasons for the fear that
> may be in the hearts and heads of those within communities where we
> live. Help reduce those fears to the extent you are willing and able
> to do so. Being active in doing so will also help you control your
> own fears.
>
> We will take action. First, we have already started to educate the
> new members of Congress — and existing members — on the issues and
> benefits that Amtrak brings to our nation. You have a Government
> Affairs staff working for you on the Hill that is second to none in
> Washington, D.C. That office is filled with not only those who know
> how to present our message, but also with people that strongly
> believe in what we do. Further, your union leadership is already
> working to educate and inform new members of Congress and old friends
> of the importance of Amtrak to our nation.
>
> While somewhat ironic, we will celebrate our 40th anniversary in May
> of this year. That further gives us an opportunity to tell our story,
> and it’s a great story with great people who have supported this
> company and continue to do so. Join in the telling of our story, and
> join in the celebration all summer long. We will kick that
> celebration off on May 7 in conjunction with National Train Day.
> Become a part of the celebration of what we do. Amtrak will prevail
> and prosper to celebrate many more anniversaries, because we are
> critical to this nation.
>
> I will communicate more as the boundaries of this issue are better
> known. There will be a tense spot in early March as Congress needs to
> act on a continuing resolution for funding the remainder of our
> fiscal year ending Sept. 30. Please don’t be distracted from what we
> know we must deliver for our customers and for each other. I wish
> each of you peace and freedom from fear for yourselves and your
> families.
>
> Sincerely,
> Joe Boardman
> President and CEO


* Please excuse Mr. Boardman's improper use of the English language here. There is no such thing
as "very unique" or "one of the most unique" or "quite unique". Unique is unique...ONE OF A KIND. Amtrak is, indeed, unique.

Also, Mr. Boardman states "Amtrak is listed for being eliminated."
Amtrak isn't listed for being eliminated, its subsidy is. Of course Amtrak would not exist
were it not for its subsidy and among Government programs it is hardly unique, in that.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/11 19:39 by GenePoon.

Joe's PR scribe needs a new muse.

Good response by Boardman. Never mind the nit-picking on use of English. I'm glad he's fighting back.

We, as passengers and general public should do likewise. Two best things to do: 1) Call, write or e-mail your 2 Senators and Congressional Representative and urge them to support Amtrak and oppose the irresponsible Republican budget cutters. 2) Join NARP and donate $ to help them fight off this threat to Amtrak. NARP is at: narprail.org.

John Webb
Trinidad, CA



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/11 19:41 by Winnemucca.

I also noticed:

> ...we will celebrate our 40th anniversary in May of this year....Join in the telling of our story, and
> join in the celebration all summer long. We will kick that celebration off on May 7 in conjunction with National Train Day.

Critics of Amtrak will say that like their trains, they're going to be six days late for their own anniversary; National Train Day or not.

Nicely stated Mr. Boardman. Arlen

And, the same can be said about every piece of "pork" or every program (i.e. NPR) cited in the Republican budget proposal. We can argue that each and every program produces jobs but government funded jobs that are not defined by the duties prescribed in the Constitution need to go.

Marty Harrison
Knob Noster, MO

Interesting...I don't see subsidies above and beyond taxes collected for the interstate highway system targeted. Lets be fair. Sell off ALL the highways to private, for profit companies. Same for the FAA. Then target evil rail subsidies. Tried of the double standards. Having said that, Amtrak could be MUCH more efficiently run, and I don't think there is anyone who would be opposed to that. Look at the Chicago breakdown every Winter. I'll leave it at that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/11 07:25 by cashfare.

It's funny that Boardman's in charge of Amtrak now, because it was the Turboliner debacle that put me more into the "stop feeding the unaccountable, corrupt government machine with taxpayer dollars" crowd. I remember Boardman's cry of "Amtrak stole my trains and I want them back" when he was with NYDOT, and yet now he does nothing to return them to service in New York.

That nobody was fired, nobody went to jail, and taxpayers ultimately got nothing for their $70 million investment to me was outrageous, and I now view all high speed rail proposals with extreme skepticism. Granted, it's peanuts compared to other examples of government waste, and shenanigans among our financial institutions, but the Turboliners sitting in Delaware (for "safekeeping" per David Gunn - an outright lie as he just let 'em deteriorate) to me provide a stunning example of why throwing more tax dollars at a corrupt organization will only lead to more waste.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/11 20:44 by hsr_fan.

Why do I get the feeling that the only people concerned about the New York turbo train demise seem to be certain Trainorders members. If no officials objected and no media picked up a complaint, then what is all the fuss about?

Business decisions are made every day that baffle people but are not necessarily criminal!

stone23 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Business decisions are made every day that baffle
> people but are not necessarily criminal!

Criminal or not, no accountability and no consequences for wasting taxpayer dollars is a problem, imo.

I wish the media had picked up on it - would've made a good "fleecing of America" segment.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/11 21:20 by hsr_fan.

Sell off the Dept. of Defense, one of the largest money pits. Then more would be available for programs that are good for the nation and its citizens like Amtrak.

Lurch_in_ABQ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Joe's PR scribe needs a new muse.

Definitely!

Pork is any program the speaker doesn't like....

Crucial spending is any program the speaker does like....

Simple as that.

And, if we want to start the atrict construction Constitutional argument, which the "We're REAL Patriots and you're NOT!" Tea Party loves to sling around when most of them appear to have never actually studied the document and its history, a whole lot of programs, departments and actions of our government, both liberal and conservative, would fall into grey areas.


Z

cashfare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting...I don't see subsidies above and
> beyond taxes collected for the interstate highway
> system targeted. Lets be fair. Sell off ALL the
> highways to privet, for profit companies. Same
> for the FAA. Then target evil rail subsidies.
> Tried of the double standards. Having said that,
> Amtrak could be MUCH more efficiently run, and I
> don't think there is anyone who would be opposed
> to that. Look at the Chicago breakdown every
> Winter. I'll leave it at that.

I think you meant "private." But that said, I agree completely. Amtrak's subsidy is necessary only because of the federal government's meddling in the transportation marketplace over the last century. State, county, and municipal roads and streets are the province of their respective governments, but the interstate and federal highways are more than just "post roads" as prescribed by the Constitution and as such should be in most cases privatized. While we're at it, let's cut the federal fuel tax. Although there are defense issues that need to be addressed, privatization of the airports and air traffic control systems should be a priority - the Canuks have done it very successfully and their air traffic control system is much more efficient (not to mention up to date) than is ours.

Perhaps using Amtrak to haul more mail would be beneficial (I'm not talking about re-visiting the mail and express debacle, either). Railroads tried doing this to meet their common carrier obligations pre-Amtrak, but were often overridden by the ICC, state laws, and/or union agreements, thus most died quick deaths.

Bottom line - until we level the playing field, I concur that conservatives (and I'm about as conservative as they come) should stop using Amtrak as a whipping boy. Eliminating the Public Broadcasting subsidy pays for nearly a third of Amtrak's annual bill - I am sure that there are countless others. How about a 10% cut to the federal workforce or severely cutting the top-heavy brass ranks in the military (why do we still have a WWII sized officer corps for an active duty enlistment of about 12-14% of WWII troop levels?), or elminating entire departments of the federal bureaucracy (education, energy, HUD, EPA, and that's just for starters)?

zephyrus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pork is any program the speaker doesn't like....
>
> Crucial spending is any program the speaker does
> like....
>
> Simple as that.
>

I agree.

Pork is a grossly overused term. Its use often implies a consensus on spending which is wasteful, when in many cases, no such consensus exists.

Just to give a counter-point to the nitpicking of "very unique" :)

http://sethoscope.net/spew/veryunique.html

stash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sell off the Dept. of Defense, one of the largest
> money pits. Then more would be available for
> programs that are good for the nation and its
> citizens like Amtrak.

Seems to me that the concept of "provide for the common defense" (Defense Department) is found in the Constitution.

AnNd, furthermore, I served for 20 years in the Air Force and was told year after year that we needed to "do more with less".

Now read the Air Force Times, The Army Times or the Navy Times and just see how many cuts are being made year after year. The Air Force just announced the shutting down of 3 air operations centers and are combining 6 numbered Air Forces--a loss of more than 700 jobs--officer corps to be cut by 10% and the enlisted corps taking the cuts also; they are flying bombers built in 1952 (B-52) and tankers built in the 60s--just ask SECDEF Gates

I don't see Amtrak running 60+years equipment!

Marty Harrison
Knob Noster, MO



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/11 07:10 by livesteamer.

livesteamer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sell off the Dept. of Defense, one of the
> largest
> > money pits. Then more would be available for
> > programs that are good for the nation and its
> > citizens like Amtrak.
>
> Seems to me that the concept of "provide for the
> common defense" (Defense Department) is found in
> the Constitution.
>
> AnNd, furthermore, I served for 20 years in the
> Air Force and was told year after year that we
> needed to "do more with less".
>
> Now read the Air Force Times, The Army Times or
> the Navy Times and just see how many cuts are
> being made year after year. The Air Force just
> announced the shutting down of 3 air operations
> centers and are combining 6 numbered Air Forces--a
> loss of more than 700 jobs--officer corps to be
> cut by 10% and the enlisted corps taking the cuts
> also; they are flying bombers built in 1952 (B-52)
> and tankers built in the 60s--just ask SECDEF
> Gates
>
> I don't see Amtrak running 60+years equipment!


There has been an ongoing discussion about article 1, section 8, which enumerates the power of Congress, as it applies to "maintaining an Army" or Air Force. There's a clear authorization to maintain a Navy in times of peace or war, but that authority doesn't include maintaining an Army in times of peace. The Constitution very clearly, in the next sentence, prohibits authorizations for the Army in excess of two years. That could whack a lot of weapons plans, too.

<http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec8&gt;

Many years ago we (Army brass) let the Air Corps out late one night and they did not return. Now it is time to make the children come home and grow up.

RSK (Major, US Army, retired).

stash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sell off the Dept. of Defense, one of the largest
> money pits. Then more would be available for
> programs that are good for the nation and its
> citizens like Amtrak.


As others have pointed out, the Constitution (Article 1 Section 8) give Congress the authority to "raise and support Armies" and "to provide an maintain a Navy." Missing in all that document is any authority to provide similar support to an Amtrak, or even a C&O canal.

If this upsets you, you could emigrate to India or China -- I hear they have lots of trains and not nearly so many cars there! :-)
-- Hazegray (USN, Ret)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/11 14:35 by hazegray.