THE WAR ON AMTRAK

THE WAR ON AMTRAK

PROGRESSIVE REVIEW - The arguments for the war on Amtrak are the equivalent of arguing that all highways in the Boston area should be closed because of the cost overrun on the Big Dig. As a matter of fact, here's something the Amtrak bashers won't tell you: you could run Amtrak for more than a decade on the subsidy that went into the Big Dig, Boston's corrupt monument to bad transportation planning. Or, if you prefer, you could close down Amtrak and run the Iraq war for another six days. Or you could replace Amtrak's eastern corridor with more highway lanes between Washington and Boston. That would only cost you 59 times the annual federal subsidy to Amtrak nationwide.

Here are some other points that get lost in the shuffle that were noted
by Deborah White:

- Subsidies for Amtrak since it began in 1971 are less than "loans"
given to US airlines since 9/11.

- Amtrak uses just 54% of the energy per passenger mile that airlines
consume.

- Many smaller communities are poorly served, or not served at all, by
other forms of public transportation. Many people. . . elderly,
disabled, those with medical conditions. . . cannot fly, and need trains
as a travel option.

- Trains create less pollution because they use less energy. Also, one
rail line can carry the equivalent of 16 highway lanes, thus
additionally reducing both gas usage and air pollutants.

http://usliberals.about.com/od/environmentalconcerns/a/AmtrakBudget.htm