Depends on what comparison is made...next to last paragraph can't be argured with though. B
http://www.thedailyreview.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=2276 <http://www.thedailyreview.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=2276&dept_id=465724&newsid= 19144188&PAG=461&rfi=9> &dept_id=465724&newsid=19144188&PAG=461&rfi=9 Publicly supported rail service is good As Congress and the administration have debated over the last decade about how best to kill Amtrak, the traveling public has sent a much different message that lawmakers finally have begun to hear. It is not surprising that Amtrak set a record during the last fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, with 25.8 million passengers, 1.5 million more than for the previous fiscal year and the fifth consecutive year of increased ridership. Clearly, airport and highway congestion, coupled with volatile gasoline prices, have made rail travel much more attractive. Yet, over that same period, the federal government has failed to address a host of the railroad's infrastructure needs. Fortunately, Congress appears to be following the lead of passengers in turning a corner relative to Amtrak. This fall, the Senate voted, 70-22, for an $11.4 billion, six-year Amtrak authorization bill that finally would create a viable budget to pay for physical improvements. It would provide about $815 million a year for improving tracks, bridges and tunnels and for the purchase of new rail cars - a $320 million annual increase over current funding. It also would create matching federal grants for state governments that undertake local passenger rail improvements. Although critics complain that Amtrak does not turn a profit, its operating subsidy of about $1.3 billion a year is not outrageous when compared with federal outlays for airports and highways, which facilitate use by private entities but do not return profits to the federal government. Passenger rail has the potential to help the nation improve its transportation fuel efficiency, environment and productivity. Congress is smart to increase the investment. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
