smitty195 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And by the way, it really doesn't matter who is
> President of the United States. A simple look back
> on history shows that Amtrak loses routes and has
> funding problems no matter who is elected into
> office.

This is very true. Nixon frankly viewed Amtrak as a way station on the trip to anihaltion of passsenger trains (hence the SDP40Fs, which could easily be sold to freight railroads).

I don't remember Ford's POV on Amtrak, but he wasn't in office all that long.

Carter was a virulent Amtrak hater, and wanted to shut it down.

Reagan and Carter may have not liked each other much, but their view on Amtrak was pretty much the same. Reagan would have eliminated it if he could.

First George Bush was simply anemic on Amtrak, as I recall.

And so was Clinton, who never did anything to help the railroad.

Second George Bush was more along the lines of Carter and Reagan, wishing to do away with it.

The present administration, honestly no matter what you think of it otherwise, has given lip service to Amtrak and has spent money fixing moribund equipment. But to me, Amtrak needs a massive, massive investment that would introduce a lot more lines like LOSSAN if there is real intent to make it work.

Spitting out a little money here and there will keep it going, will keep its advisaries able to say how it doesn't work, and will keep first time passengers away ("the train leaves at 3 in the monring? are you kidding?)