Patterico's Pontifications

5/16/2015

My E-Mail to Steven Ginsburg of the Washington Post, Regarding That Error-Filled Post About Amtrak Funding

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:52 pm



I just sent this to Steven Ginsberg at The Fix at the Washington Post, copying Philip Bump (whom I had previously written about the same topic) and Sean Davis.

Mr. Ginsberg,

Philip Bump recently wrote a piece that was ostensibly about Amtrak funding, but which contained a raft of inaccurate statements. The inaccuracies were well explained by Sean Davis in this piece:

http://thefederalist.com/2015/05/13/why-is-the-washington-posts-philip-bump-lying-to-readers-about-amtrak/

First, Bump claimed, wholly inaccurately, that “Congress has delayed passing legislation to fund Amtrak since 2013.” Davis showed that to be entirely false, noting that a December 2014 spending bill had appropriated $1.4 billion in funding for Amtrak. After Davis published his post, Bump issued a “clarification.”

Here’s the problem: as Davis explains, the “clarification” itself contains several errors and/or misleading statements which still stand uncorrected on the Washington Post’s Web site.

For one, Bump says Congress “repeatedly reauthoriz[ed] existing funding levels” — which Mr. Davis showed Congress did not, in fact do. (This demonstrated that Bump, after writing about a piece about Amtrak funding, and even after being forced to correct that piece, still had not looked up the numbers regarding Amtrak funding.)

Additionally, Mr. Bump’s terminology “reauthorized” was inaccurate and misleading, as the correct terminology was “appropriated.” I admit to being unfamiliar with the distinction before reading Mr. Davis’s post — but then, I don’t cover political funding issues for one of the nation’s largest and most well-respected newspapers.

Also, Bump implies that that there is some “long-term legislation to fund Amtrak” that Congress is “delaying.” Davis says that is misleading, because there is no such long-term bill in existence that could be “delayed.” I don’t personally know the truth about that, but Davis has been as accurate on every other point as Bump has been inaccurate, so I’m guessing Davis has this right as well.

I think these factual issues cannot be simply shrugged off. I previously wrote a post about it on my blog, and wrote Mr. Bump to ask whether he planned to address the continuing errors. He did not respond (although he did “favorite” a tweet of mine about it, so I know he knows about the continuing errors). And so, I am writing you directly to ask you whether you plan to address these issues in any way.

I will be perfectly frank: I have a political point of view, one that prizes liberty and principles of limited government. I know that many in the media will dismiss me out of hand for holding these views — views that once were quite mainstream, but now are viewed as laughable and extreme by a certain segment of the political elite, on both sides of the aisle.

However, the facts are the facts, and regardless of who brings them to your attention, the fact is that Bump got it wrong, and is still getting it wrong. I therefore encourage you to do something about it. Thanks.

Patrick Frey
patterico.com

I will let you know if I hear anything in response.

33 Responses to “My E-Mail to Steven Ginsburg of the Washington Post, Regarding That Error-Filled Post About Amtrak Funding”

  1. Don’t hold your breath.

    Gazzer (c1d25a)

  2. Gazzer beat me to it.

    Steve57 (820638)

  3. Prepare to spend an hour deciphering phantasmic diversions

    steveg (fed1c9)

  4. You are such Debbie Downers. I am sure that that a premier newspaper organization such as the Washington Post will want to correct the record.

    elissa (ba544e)

  5. If you don’t get a response, then perhaps the Post should just change its name to “The Washington Narrative”.

    norcal (8bcc59)

  6. The Georgie SnuffaluffaGUS caper, ought to teach us all a vital lesson. LIBTARDS, don’t play. THe EXPECT you and I to PLAY. They are “in it” to “win it”. SnuffaluffaGUS and most all LIBTARDS, have NO SCRUPLES, NO PRINCIPLES and NO MORALS. The LEFT shytes on us, and WE TAKE IT.

    Gus (7cc192)

  7. Ben Bradlee must be doing the funky chicken in his grave. They do this shoddy, dishonest stuff because they can.

    Colonel Haiku (39d859)

  8. Hope they never encounter my dear friends Ben Dover and Phil McCavity!

    Gazzer (c1d25a)

  9. Course, if it was Banggays They’d be all over it like a cheap suit.

    Gazzer (c1d25a)

  10. You assume WaPo wants to correct their record. I see no reason for this assumption.

    In fact, they were perfectly positioned to replace the New York Times as the “national paprer of record” after Pinch Sulzberger took over and destroyed whatever integrity remained in the news columns of the Old Gray Lady. Instead, they opted to follow Pinch down the road to pure propaganda organ, worthy of Pravda or Trud in the good days of the USSR.

    They only care about accuracy where it does not contradict The Narrative. And it shows.

    Estragon (ada867)

  11. Course, if it was Banggays They’d be all over it like a cheap suit.

    And that — along with the story in general linked by Steve57 — is merely another illustration that liberalism truly is a form of mental illness, perhaps even more so when combined with the likely ultra-liberal “we’re here, we’re queer!” instincts of the offended couple.

    most well-respected newspapers.

    I trust that Patterico was snickering and rolling his eyes when he wrote that.

    Mark (cc1c30)

  12. Mark, it’s the same people who think the word niggardly is racist or any reference to a black hole. It’s all grievance theater. The problem is, they are so well organized that it works. It’s why they win…

    Gazzer (c1d25a)

  13. Gus and Estragon nailed it.

    NJRob (d36337)

  14. Patterico,

    Say hello to Sancho Panza for me.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  15. do they ever stop to think that going into full-on balls-in-your-face sweaty perverse propaganda slut mode might actually make people less eager to pay pay pay pay tax monies so some over-privileged east coast amtrak trash can ride their lil choo choo trains?

    happyfeet (831175)

  16. Peak government has been surmounted.

    It’s undivided FAIL from here on out.

    DNF (208255)

  17. You assume WaPo wants to correct their record. I see no reason for this assumption.

    The WaPo is the house organ for government employees. Once you accept that, everything else falls into place.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  18. I think there are also some honesty issues with Davis’s piece. He implies that Amtrak federal appropriations have not decreased. But he shows numbers that decrease by 4.3% per year, not counting inflation. Counting inflation, that means that Amtrak’s appropriation has been cut by about 6% per year in terms of spending power.

    It should also be noted that the Boston-NYC-Washington corridor makes money. This is not true of the long-distance routes that run West-East across the US. So the Northeast Direct line’s revenues are being used to prop up unprofitable routes.

    For these reasons, it is not unreasonable to say that support for Amtrak is being cut fairly dramatically. Obviously, many here think that’s a good thing…but those facts should also be acknowledged honestly.

    Sam Wang (ecd5aa)

  19. how much profit did the Boston-NYC-Washington corridor make last year Mr. Wang?

    happyfeet (831175)

  20. It should also be noted that the Boston-NYC-Washington corridor makes money

    Stop repeating that lie. That’s like one of my restaurants looses money on everything but selling soda so some idiot says “soda keeps my restaurants going”. Bull! If everything is loosing money but one small thing makes money YOU GOT A LOOSER! Sell it, close it, sell the assets. Put it and the assets and capital to better use you socialist fools! I swear these a-holes would be subsidizing buggy whips if they could.

    Hoagie (3877ae)

  21. BTW Mr. Wang, if I actually believed the lie that that “corridor” is making money (which I don’t) would that not be a great reason to sell off all the losers and concentrate on making this wonderful corridor even more profitable? Because every dime Amtrak puts into the loser is one more dime denied the winner who itself will need upgrading, rebuilding, renovation, innovation, new trains, nicer interiors , promotion and more. Or will you wait for the Profitable Corridor to run down then scream we need more taxes and appropriations to “save” Amtrak? Sink or swim b!tch, just like my businesses have to do.

    Hoagie (3877ae)

  22. @Sam Wang:He implies that Amtrak federal appropriations have not decreased.

    Nowhere does he say or imply that Amtrak appropriations have not decreased. He’s not responsible for your misreading of his column.

    Bump initially said that Congress had not given Amtrak funding since 2013, Davis showed that to be false. Next Bump’s “correction” said that Amtrak has been reauthorized at existing levels, which Davis also showed to be false.

    The point of Davis’ article is not that Amtrak gets too much money, which he plainly believes, but that Bump did no research whatever to write the original story, and then when called on the errors, made even more errors because he’s not a making a good-faith attempt to get it right.

    Gabriel Hanna (ed733c)

  23. @Hoagie: Amtrak is not allowed to shut down those corridors. Every Congressman whose districts those lines run through wants them kept open.

    This is why government-run businesses don’t make money: serving the actual market is at best a secondary consideration.

    Gabriel Hanna (ed733c)

  24. Mr. Wang did you say “not counting inflation”? So now the amount of my hard earned money they steal from me to give to Amtrak depends on inflation? So if a pickpocket steals $100 off me but does the same again tomorrow, I owe him an additional $6 so as to make sure I keep his “spending power” even? I do hope you’re kidding. Just because they managed to piss away 1.3 billion last year in now way means we should allow them to do it again this year. After all, by your own admission, they spend 95% on LOSERS.

    Hoagie (3877ae)

  25. Every Congressman whose districts those lines run through wants them kept open.

    So what? How many can that be? Oh, I forgot. That’s the crony/corrupt libtard democrat corridor. But that’s okay Gabriel Hanna. That corridor somehow mysteriously manages to produce profit so let it stay. I’d be willing to bet if Amtrak closed every line but the profitable Northeast Corridor the entire line would suddenly be in the red in 6 months. Wanna bet, Wang?

    Hoagie (3877ae)

  26. Verisimilitude is unnecessary when governing the unwashed.

    Report what should be true that by magic will somehow obtain.

    If it never does we’ll have moved on.

    DNF (208255)

  27. “Democrat operatives with a byline.” –Instapundit

    A_Nonny_Mouse (2cc9b6)

  28. A long time ago, when I was in graduate school, it was taught that a critical measure in evaluating transportation alternatives was the time spent in transit. If the time was 90 minutes or less, consumers would choose among offerings based on price, safety, conform and service, time spent, etc., and they wouldn’t pay a huge amount for a small decrease in time spent traveling given other benefits. Over 90 minutes, they wanted to minimize travel time above all, and they would choose much more expensive modes if they could get to their destination in less than 90 minutes.

    The 90 minute rule has probably changed in the upward direction with the availability of internet and cell phone communications, because the time isn’t totally wasted. But there is probably a pretty well-defined critical time of travel that changes consumer priorities in favor of the least time spent traveling.

    We live in a wonderful new age where all airline travel has an extra hour or two tacked on to the start of all airline trips thanks to TSA. This should make railroad, or taxi, or private vehicle, a preferred mode for distances of less than 200 miles. So it’s no surprise that the DC-NYC Amtrac route would be well patronized. But for longer trips, the railroad offers little over the airlines, and those who might prefer ground-based transportation will find many reasons NOT to use the railroad except as a novelty.

    It is also likely that the Amtrac fare for the DC-NYC route could be raised above that of the equivalent air fare if the trip time was less than the new magic number. Those using the service might scream, but the net result might be an increase in revenues for Amtrac. Since those using the service are all pretty well connected, this is not likely to happen. We would certainly learn that the low fares were needed “for children” in a hundred different ways.

    bobathome (4dc6e9)

  29. http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/fred-frailey/archive/2011/05/13/is-the-northeast-corridor-really-profitable.aspx

    “refer to page 4 of the 2009 report titled, “Northeast Corridor State of Good Repair Spend Plan.” There, it estimates the NEC’s annual, normalized capital needs the next 15 years as $368 million for infrastructure and equipment. Last fiscal year’s NEC operating profit of $61 million covers only one-sixth of that capital need.

    Then the thought occurs to me: Has the NEC in recent times ever covered both its total operating and capital costs from revenues? Amtrak.com today cannot provide the answer. But the Wayback Machine, an internet archive at http://www.wayback.org, takes you to Amtrak.com as it existed at various points in time years ago. And in the monthly report covering fiscal 2008, which ended just as the economy topped out prior to the Great Recession, I make a remarkable discovery.

    That year, the Acela Express cleared all its costs with $220 million to spare, and the other NEC trains cleared their costs as well, with $149 million left over. That adds to $369 million, or a million bucks more than the corridor’s normal capital needs. That’s an important fact and worth remembering. In a sparkling business environment, the Northeast Corridor is capable of making a profit, any way you want to state it. Maybe that will be one year in five or 10, but it’s possible. Take heart, folks. — Fred W. Frailey”

    steveg (fed1c9)

  30. Sam Wang – your Ivy leftists buddies at Princeton will high five you for your dishonest defense of statism.

    JD (3b5483)

  31. Hello, everyone. I’m here to debunk a claim nobody has made, also known as a public straw man burning. And I am better than all you nobodies who don’t have an overpriced Ivy League indoctrination education. Sincerely, Mister Ivy League.

    John Hitchcock (6bf2d0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0854 secs.