• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

WOW

Help Support Ranchers.net:

VB RANCH

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
765
Reaction score
0
Location
leader minnesota
These are all the programs that the new Republican House has proposed cutting. Read to the end.

Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy. $445 million annual savings.
Save America 's Treasures Program. $25 million annual savings.
International Fund for Ireland . $17 million annual savings.
Legal Services Corporation. $420 million annual savings.
National Endowment for the Arts. $167.5 million annual savings.
National Endowment for the Humanities. $167.5 million annual savings.
Hope VI Program. $250 million annual savings.
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Eliminate duplicative education programs. H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually.
U.S. Trade Development Agency. $55 million annual savings.
Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy. $20 million annual savings.
Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding. $47 million annual savings.
John C. Stennis Center Subsidy. $430,000 annual savings.
Community Development Fund. $4.5 billion annual savings.
Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid. $24 million annual savings.
Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half. $7.5 billion annual savings
Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20%. $600 million annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.
Technology Innovation Program. $70 million annual savings.
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program. $125 million annual savings.
Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization. $530 million annual savings.
Beach Replenishment. $95 million annual savings.
New Starts Transit. $2 billion annual savings.
Exchange Programs for Alaska , Natives Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts . $9 million annual savings
Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants. $2.5 billion annual savings.
Title X Family Planning. $318 million annual savings.
Appalachian Regional Commission. $76 million annual savings.
Economic Development Administration. $293 million annual savings.
Programs under the National and Community Services Act. $1.15 billion annual savings.
Applied Research at Department of Energy. $1.27 billion annual savings.
FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership. $200 million annual savings.
Energy Star Program. $52 million annual savings.
Economic Assistance to Egypt . $250 million annually.
U.S. Agency for International Development. $1.39 billion annual savings.
General Assistance to District of Columbia . $210 million annual savings.
Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. $150 million annual savings.
Presidential Campaign Fund. $775 million savings over ten years.
No funding for federal office space acquisition. $864 million annual savings.
End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services.
Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act. More than $1 billion annually.
IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget. $1.8 billion savings over ten years.
Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees. $1 billion total savings.WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees. $1.2 billion savings over ten years.
Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of. $15 billion total savings.
Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress.
Eliminate Mohair Subsidies. $1 million annual savings.
Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. $12.5 million annual savings
Eliminate Market Access Program. $200 million annual savings.
USDA Sugar Program. $14 million annual savings.
Subsidy to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). $93 million annual savings.
Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. $56.2 million annual savings.
Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs. $900 million savings.
Ready to Learn TV Program. $27 million savings..
HUD Ph.D. Program.
Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act.

TOTAL SAVINGS: $2.5 Trillion over Ten Years

My question is, what is all this doing in the budget in the first place?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Oldtimer said:
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....

So,you want the rest of the country to pay for YOUR elderly to get medical care transportation? It's not our fault your state is sparsely populated.

Hint: Build your own local medical care centers, put your own citizens to work and quit spending OUR money!
 

VB RANCH

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
765
Reaction score
0
Location
leader minnesota
Faster horses said:
Because politicans LOVE to spend other people's money. :mad:

And until lately, no one questioned it.
Or if they did, they didn't make enough noise.
sure has got carried away, i live in one of the most liberal states in the union, and its hard to get a vote in edgewise. it really sucks that it all turned out this way from what this great country started out as
 

redrobin

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
1,189
Reaction score
51
Location
arkansas
Oldtimer said:
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....
Tell your old folks when they get older and sick to move closer to their medical provider. It's not the federal govt.'s responsibility to fund their transportation.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
redrobin said:
Oldtimer said:
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....
Tell your old folks when they get older and sick to move closer to their medical provider. It's not the federal govt.'s responsibility to fund their transportation.

But we should build Bridges to Nowhere in Alaska :???:

You missed the point again- WHOOSH- right over the head... :roll: :wink:

What I'm trying to impart is the difficulty in picking and choosing entire programs to fund/defund... What is Pork to some- is considered essential to others.....You will not find a politician in Montana (that wants to be reelected) that would come out opposing either of these programs....To do so would be political suicide...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Oldtimer said:
redrobin said:
Oldtimer said:
You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....
Tell your old folks when they get older and sick to move closer to their medical provider. It's not the federal govt.'s responsibility to fund their transportation.

But we should build Bridges to Nowhere in Alaska :???:

You missed the point again- WHOOSH- right over the head... :roll: :wink:

What I'm trying to impart is the difficulty in picking and choosing entire programs to fund/defund... What is Pork to some- is considered essential to others.....You will not find a politician in Montana (that wants to be reelected) that would come out opposing either of these programs....To do so would be political suicide...


I'm pretty sure there is a list somewhere you could reference....


"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"


:lol:
 

BRG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
North Western SD
Oldtimer said:
redrobin said:
Oldtimer said:
You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....
Tell your old folks when they get older and sick to move closer to their medical provider. It's not the federal govt.'s responsibility to fund their transportation.

But we should build Bridges to Nowhere in Alaska :???:

You missed the point again- WHOOSH- right over the head... :roll: :wink:

What I'm trying to impart is the difficulty in picking and choosing entire programs to fund/defund... What is Pork to some- is considered essential to others.....You will not find a politician in Montana (that wants to be reelected) that would come out opposing either of these programs....To do so would be political suicide...

If programs like these can't make it without help from the Gov - then they should be operating. I am pretty sure you don't get a subsidy on your ranch to buy the horse or ATV you use, but you have it because you made it work financially, not because the gov gives you a check to own it. Same goes for the guy that sold you that ATV - He never got a check from the gov to sell them. If he couldn't afford to sell them or you couldn't afford to buy them, then he/you would either cut some spending or go out of business, and that is the way it should be for all programs.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
redrobin said:
Tell your old folks when they get older and sick to move closer to their medical provider. It's not the federal govt.'s responsibility to fund their transportation.

But we should build Bridges to Nowhere in Alaska :???:

You missed the point again- WHOOSH- right over the head... :roll: :wink:

What I'm trying to impart is the difficulty in picking and choosing entire programs to fund/defund... What is Pork to some- is considered essential to others.....You will not find a politician in Montana (that wants to be reelected) that would come out opposing either of these programs....To do so would be political suicide...


I'm pretty sure there is a list somewhere you could reference....


"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"


:lol:

This is not an individual state or MT issue--its an interstate travel issue and affects a large amount of the states... I believe something like 15-20 states (not including the individual subsidy for Alaska) have locations that receive essential air service funding to connect them to the major hubs...

Brian- do any of your bull buyers fly to your sale? SD and NB are states receiving essential service money... Maybe you are close enough to a major hub that it would not effect you....But do you think SD politicians will want to vote to cut services to SD?

Almost every state in the Union receives Amtrak service of some kind....Do you think the politicians in all those states will want to explain why much of the Amtrak access to other parts of the country is no longer available?

I agree- its too bad these programs can't operate without some type of subsidy... But no different then all the farm/ranch subsidies/Equip programs and other rancher handouts that are hidden away as conservation funding (that apparently BRG never heard of)- which I think should go before the countries transportation system is interrupted...That alone would save a couple hundred Billion $...But again- that effects numerous states- and rich folks that stick large amounts of money in the politicians pockets-- so they will never get rid of that....

While Republicans of old were out building our transportation systems (like Ike building the interstate highway system knowing that a strong transportation infrastructure was a necessity for both the economy and defense)- the Republicans of today want to tear it apart :???: ...
 

BRG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
North Western SD
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
But we should build Bridges to Nowhere in Alaska :???:

You missed the point again- WHOOSH- right over the head... :roll: :wink:

What I'm trying to impart is the difficulty in picking and choosing entire programs to fund/defund... What is Pork to some- is considered essential to others.....You will not find a politician in Montana (that wants to be reelected) that would come out opposing either of these programs....To do so would be political suicide...


I'm pretty sure there is a list somewhere you could reference....


"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"


:lol:

This is not an individual state or MT issue--its an interstate travel issue and affects a large amount of the states... I believe something like 15-20 states (not including the individual subsidy for Alaska) have locations that receive essential air service funding to connect them to the major hubs...

Brian- do any of your bull buyers fly to your sale? SD and NB are states receiving essential service money... Maybe you are close enough to a major hub that it would not effect you....But do you think SD politicians will want to vote to cut services to SD?

Almost every state in the Union receives Amtrak service of some kind....Do you think the politicians in all those states will want to explain why much of the Amtrak access to other parts of the country is no longer available?

I agree- its too bad these programs can't operate without some type of subsidy... But no different then all the farm/ranch subsidies/Equip programs and other rancher handouts that are hidden away as conservation funding (that apparently BRG never heard of)- which I think should go before the countries transportation system is interrupted...That alone would handle $20-30 Billion...But again- that effects numerous states- and rich folks that stick large amounts of money in the politicians pockets-- so they will never get rid of that....

While Republicans of old were out building our transportation systems (like Ike building the interstate highway system knowing that a strong transportation infrastructure was a necessity for both the economy and defense)- the Republicans of today want to tear it apart :???: ...

Their are ag subsities out their, especially in the farming side, but we don't believe in them. I think our farm payment this last year was like $22. If I need extra money, I go get a loan. I think all subsidies should get cut in this time of needing to cut money. From Oil to farming, to whatever else is getting paid to operate.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BRG wrote:
I think all subsidies should get cut in this time of needing to cut money. From Oil to farming, to whatever else is getting paid to operate.

In many ways I agree with you- but I think its impossible unless we change many of our trade laws/practices (trading with countries that heavily subsidize/ or are government owned corporate entities- ex. China)-- and unless we want to throw out many of our longtime social standards where we as a community/country united provide for all- and start throwing our own people on the streets to starve or die for lack of care....
And I don't believe we will do either...

Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of. $15 billion total savings.

To play Devils Advocate--What does this mean? Do they mean like government owned land they now lease out? Pastureleases?

You'd have a lot of ranchers of both cults calling the Congressmen if they heard they were going to put their government lease land up for sale...

I know its a popular concept east of the Mississippi- where many landowners see govt leaseholders as being govt subsidized-But many around here also know that they as individuals would never be able to outbid the greeny weeny factions, Ted Turners, and International groups like the World Wilderness Fund that would love nothing better to get title and deed to some of these big open areas so they could run their prairie dogs and buffalo....

This doesn't affect me a bit BRG- as I have no government leases--But again I'll bet it would effect some folks that buy your bulls..
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
"Community Development Fund" definitely needs to go. And all the Community Organizers with it. (That's another subject.)

How could a community not be developed in the first place. If it were not, it wouldn't be a community. :roll:

Back to Amtrak:

I checked on 3 modes of transportation from Maryland to Orlando, Fl. (random)

1-Greyhound bus: Time-1 day - 45 minutes - cost - $164.00
2-Delta airlines: Time - 4 hours - 25 minutes - cost -$102
3-Amtrak train: Time 21 hours - cost - $280

Montana needs more buses and/or airlines.................................

Because Amtrak gets such a big subsidy, they do not need to be efficient or competitive.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Oldtimer said:
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....

"without any forms of transportation"
-- woopsey, wouldn't the truth be public transportation? and you forgot to mention the bus and friends and neighbors and family and the guy down the street that just wants to make a few bucks. you don't need a CDL or permitt or any kind of special equipment to give someone a ride---- YET! but if you statists have your way we will. :oops: :shock:

if there is a need, the private sector will and should cover it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lonecowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....

"without any forms of transportation"
-- woopsey, wouldn't the truth be public transportation? and you forgot to mention the bus and friends and neighbors and family and the guy down the street that just wants to make a few bucks. you don't need a CDL or permitt or any kind of special equipment to give someone a ride---- YET! but if you statists have your way we will. :oops: :shock:

if there is a need, the private sector will and should cover it.

What bus company travels across NE MT/Hi Line?

So do you believe we should keep the "local/community bus/transit" subsidies?

Do you think we should also drop Alaska's special air subsidy, since they have much of the state only accessible by airplane- or boat ?

Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, defended the program Wednesday when its elimination came up at the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Essential Air Service "is essential for a reason," Young said. "It's a means of survival and it is very important to our state."
 

redrobin

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
1,189
Reaction score
51
Location
arkansas
Oldtimer said:
redrobin said:
Oldtimer said:
You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....
Tell your old folks when they get older and sick to move closer to their medical provider. It's not the federal govt.'s responsibility to fund their transportation.

But we should build Bridges to Nowhere in Alaska :???:
unless you were drinking you know I never said we should.
You missed the point again- WHOOSH- right over the head... :roll: :wink:
I didn't miss your point. You showed sympathy to the folks in Mt who would be without any transportation which is rediculious. I addressed that issue.
What I'm trying to impart is the difficulty in picking and choosing entire programs to fund/defund... What is Pork to some- is considered essential to others.....You will not find a politician in Montana (that wants to be reelected) that would come out opposing either of these programs....To do so would be political suicide...
I'm not interested in politicians committing political suicide. They weren't elected to try to remain in office. If your politicians are worried about that you need new politicians. We've over spent. We have to stop. It looks as though our resident libertarian, independent has turned into a welfare queen.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Its not only MT- its many areas of the country, since this country is so diverse...
Do we exempt Alaska and Hawaii like this current Republican proposal? Or do you just cut all?

While I agree that there are huge wastes and cuts to be made in these programs- waiting until weeks before the country could default is not the time to be making decisions so important to certain areas of the country and the nations economy as a whole....

But as this article points out- neither party has been able to step up and do anything for years... In my opinion is because Congress for years has been made up of very few statesmen- and entirely of partisan politicians who would rather spend their time pocketing lobbyiests money.....

Politics give air travel subsidies staying power
By Ron Nixon
New York Times

POSTED: 12:25 p.m. HST, Jul 15, 2011


JOHNSTOWN, Pa. — It is called the airport to nowhere and for years taxpayers have footed the bill.

On the outskirts of this faded steel town, the John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County Airport boasts a modern runway, a high-tech security area and even a trendy restaurant. It lacks one thing: passengers.

Each year, Washington’s Essential Air Service program pays about $1.6 million for three daily flights between here and Dulles International Airport outside of Washington. Most flights have 10 or fewer people on board and the airport is virtually deserted. Many travelers drive two hours to Pittsburgh, Pa., where fares are often lower and flights are plentiful.

Governments have long financed wasteful or even unnecessary programs, but at a moment when both parties seem to agree that spending is out of control, the durability of small-town airport subsidies, which have outlasted four presidents who opposed them, underscores the political difficulties of cutting even the smallest projects.

Subsidies for little-used airports and roads, help for peanut and cotton farmers and a plethora of other programs have survived thanks to powerful interest groups and strong bipartisan support in Congress.

The Johnstown airport’s name honors the late congressman who made sure his hometown got its fair share of Washington money.

The subsidy programs are as varied as warehouses that allow farmers to store cotton and peanuts at government expense until prices rise and an estimated $100 million tax break for owners of NASCAR racetracks.

Various private and government studies show that nearly $1.8 trillion over the next five years could be saved by eliminating or reducing spending on some of the subsidies.

“You can’t blame the survival of these programs on just Democrats or Republicans; it’s both,” said

Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who has proposed cutting several of the programs. “But if we can’t cut small programs worth millions of dollars that benefit a few, how are we going to make serious cuts and get this country on the right track?”

A close look at two programs highlights the age-old politics protecting government spending.

The peanut and cotton storage program, which costs $1 million a year, has repeatedly survived cuts thanks to bipartisan support. Under the program, the government picks up storage costs for cotton and peanut farmers when they defer selling crops until prices rise. The peanut storage credits have been around since 2002. The cotton subsidy dates to the 1990s.

President George W. Bush tried to eliminate the storage credits in 2008, specifically mentioning them when he vetoed the farm bill. But his veto was overridden by a bipartisan coalition of rural lawmakers who supported farm programs and legislators from urban areas who backed food stamp and school nutrition programs.

The Obama administration has twice tried to kill the storage program, but the National Cotton Council and the American Peanut Shellers Association, as well as lawmakers from cotton and peanut producing states like Georgia and Florida, teamed up to save it.

The program’s biggest champion has been Rep. Sanford D. Bishop Jr., D-Ga., whose district has many of the state’s nearly 3,000 peanut farmers. Bishop, a member of the Appropriations Committee, has for five years blocked efforts to cut the program, taking to the floor last month to denounce amendments to eliminate the credits.

“I’m in favor of making the necessary cuts needed to reduce our debt,” he said in an interview. “But it shouldn’t be made off the backs of farmers, the people who produce our food.”

Bishop’s allies include Rep. Jack Kingston and Sen. Saxby Chambliss, both Republicans from Georgia. When the program was due to expire in 2007, Kingston, who is chairman of an agriculture appropriations subcommittee, pushed to continue it. After the White House tried to scrap the payments last year, Chambliss, a member of the Agriculture Committee, said the administration was “unfairly targeting farmers.”

But in an email statement last week, Chambliss indicated that the program might not escape the congressional ax.

“Everything must be on the table, and everyone must share in the budgeting pain,” he said.

Like the cotton and peanut payments, the Essential Air Service program is a survivor.

The program began in 1978 as a $7 million effort for 10 years to help small towns keep air service when airlines were deregulated. By 1996 it was a permanent program, and now costs about $200 million a year covering 150 mostly small and rural communities.

After President Ronald Reagan failed to eliminate it in 1985, presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush tried to cut or kill it, only to see Congress add money to the program. This year, Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, both Republicans, proposed ending the program, but the Senate voted it down by a wide margin.

A 2009 government report found that low-cost airlines gave travelers more options than they had decades ago. Surveys by the Transportation Department show that in more than 90 percent of the communities, travelers expressed a willingness to drive 150 miles or more for cheaper fares.

Still, William Polacek, vice chairman of the Johnstown-Cambria County Airport Authority, said the program was critical to growth and economic development in the area.

“Take away the flights and it would be really inconvenient for local businesses to get to other markets and for those who want to do business here,” Polacek said.

Airport and aviation groups have repeatedly rallied in opposition to any cuts in the program.

Roger Cohen, president of the Regional Airline Association, described the program as a modest government investment.

“It’s called essential for a reason,” Cohen said. “In many of these areas there is no other way to travel other than to drive for hours.”

A powerful coalition of rural and urban Democrats and Republicans agree and have managed to save the program, even increase its financing this year to $200 million, up almost 50 percent.

When McCain proposed ending the program, he faced opposition from rural Republican lawmakers in Kansas and Mississippi who joined Democrats from Nebraska and West Virginia. The coalition drew support from senators like Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., who said eliminating the subsidy would cost jobs and stifle growth.

The Senate did agree to scale back the program to fewer cities. A House-approved bill would reduce financing for the program until 2013, before eliminating it except in Alaska and Hawaii.

The House and Senate will work out their differences but already a bipartisan effort lead by Reps. Adrian Smith, R-Neb., and Michael H. Michaud, D-Maine, with 26 other lawmakers, is under way to preserve the program.

Robert L. Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan budget watchdog group in Washington, predicted the subsidies might yet survive.

“These programs are like vampires, you just can’t kill them,” Bixby said. “Just when you think there are dead, they manage to rise up.”
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Az.
Oldtimer said:
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....

At a cost of $41095 perday????????????????? :???: that is for essential air service alone!!


Population of 987689 in 2009

$$$$41000 per day oldtimer will buy a bunch of cars to care for 5% of the population in MONTANA that need them for transportation to and from!!!!!

Yep oldtimer likes to spend everyone's money as long as it is not HIS..

EH oldtimer???

U}OH VEY caught in another web of deceit
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hopalong said:
Oldtimer said:
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

You will find that all the MT Congressional delegation (members of both cults)- and a large part of the states population fought to save these two... Without them a large portion of this sparcely populated state would be without any forms of transportation that connect to the outside world...Particularly tough on seniors and the elderly that don't drive- but need to access the medical centers outside the area....

At a cost of $41095 perday????????????????? :???: that is for essential air service alone!!


Population of 987689 in 2009

$$$$41000 per day oldtimer will buy a bunch of cars to care for 5% of the population in MONTANA that need them for transportation to and from!!!!!

Yep oldtimer likes to spend everyone's money as long as it is not HIS..

EH oldtimer???

U}OH VEY caught in another web of deceit

And you can't seem to understand- Amtrak not only effects MT but almost every state... And if the trains don't run thru MT/Dakotas (northern route) it cuts train access to the entire northern half of the country in two...

As far as I can tell Essential Air Service affects 34 states (not including Alaska and Hawaii, that have special programs) and Puerto Rico....

http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/x-50%20role_files/NonAlaska010110.pdf

While much of this may not be necessary in some areas- and may be waste/pork (like the subsidizing of extra D.C. flights)--- in other areas the negative economic effect to the country may far override the cost it now is costing the country....But last minute picking and choosing (thru lobbying, politicking and stuffing politicians pockets) is not the way to make that decision....

Tell me why Alaska and Hawaii are more important than Montana?

Personally I've never rode Amtrak- and its been 20 years since someone in the family has...And I've never flown out of a subsidized airport- altho my wife has used the local airlines quite a few times for her continued training and work - and has a reliance on it when their medical equipment needs maintenance and the company (like G.E.) flys someone in from California or Texas to fix it... Also many of the doctor specialists use it to hold rural clinics...

But since you want to personalize it to me- it doesn't really effect me- as the only use I've had is to fly the grandkids back to their parents this winter when they came to visit for Christmas- and the weather was not compatable to ground travel...

This is the type of issue that should be put to a special commission (similar to the Base closure commissions) that decide what to cut by need and economic return- and the Congress just says Yea or Nay...
 
Top