You forget that it was a republican President, that started the interstate highway system in the first place, Oh but it was a democrat that started the earlier Federal highway system. The next President subidized the biggest science project devised by man. The space program. It was also the mother of all stimulus packages.

But it was another republican that started the biggest federal re-distribution of wealth scheme of all time - Federal matching grants. After that another democrat upped it to 80% federal and even to 90%. But then another republican president (Bush W), by executive fiat in one fell swoop - gave twenty billon in raw blatant operating subsidy to a few airlines and repeated it for several years - long after profits were being made again - just because their operating ratios went over 100% for a couple of quarters.

And on and on and on!



It may be true that the grass roots of either party, often does not get the bigger picture. In the case of republican voters, they are often people who want to provide for themselves most everything they need, not wanting to be dependent upon government. And so they feel they're being pinched when they have to pay for something they don't specificly use; oblivious to the fact they benefit in other ways, as was meant by the "General Welfare Clause".

A little leadership could ease that problem, But there has been damn little leadership displayed by politicians or Presidents, in the last two decades. Most just cram their dogmas down our throats; believe in them or not. Just like any good power monger would do!

But as seen above, Repub politicians understand subsidies just fine. And like all other politicians, just plain don't like trains; Eisenhower especially, who had a personal vendetta against railroads from his time as a general. Instead, they mostly just like raw political power; but anymore in America, that comes only to those who pay for it, usually with somebody elses money if at all possible.

So what else is new - If railroads and passenger train advocates had put out the kind of political cash over the years, that the airlines and the highway lobbies have done, politicians would then love the trains instead. But since some of those subsidy dollars are obviously replacing other corporate dollars spent on lobbying; how could anybody without those subsidies ever manage to compete in buying up politicians.

The Amtrak problem ain't with either party per se; it is the political system itself! He who has the most subsidy, can better afford the most lobbying; and those who get the most lobbying, will get the most subsidy; even to the extent of freezing out the competition altogether. Thus the perennial attack on Amtrak, no matter who is in power.

On the politicians side of this equation, the more you corrupt yourself and give in to those filthy lobbyist dollars, the more you will get. And the more you get, the more air time you can pay for to get your message out. And the more the message gets out, the more votes you get - bettering the chance of getting elected.

So take no pac money and slam the door on lobbyists? You might remain pure and holy, actually voting your concience after righteous persuasion. But you WILL NOT get re-elected, because no one will hear your message. Worse yet, all the calumny and character assination that hell can muster (typical of today's politics) will drown out your already faint message. And if you don't get elected, what good will all that purity do us. John Q Public gets screwed either way.

The system itself is broken!

And I ain't got the ability, nor does any other citizen, to fix it without serious risk of breaking our representative democracy altogether.

So as usual, its the lesser of two evils here, at least until we voters seriously wise up and stop voting party lines, or ideology per se, but instead vote for un-biased leadership with no axes to grind.

OPB