Acela = Place under the first floor

I love trains. It's one of the few civilized ways to travel, so I'm naturally concerned whenever the administration suggests zero funding Amtrak's budget. The role of government is to build and sustain infrastructure. When was the last time roads were required to break even or make money? European countries recognized decades ago that moving people around inexpensively, quickly and efficiently benefited everyone and helped to push economic growth. I'm afraid that President Bush seems to want only to fund initiatives that benefit his friends and family. I suspect that if he had a financial stake in railroads, his position would be much different.

I'm also a fan of privatization, but it seems to me that some form of compromise similar to aviation and highways would be in order. The land under the rails was given to the railroads. I suggest the government take over maintenance of the rail system as it does with roads and lease it to whatever company provides the best service, even competing services be they passenger or freight.

There is a well-researched article in today's New York Times that details some of the mistakes and problems in the implementation and design of Amtrak's high speed line that runs between Boston and Washington and that was just taken out of service because of cracks in the brakes. It was a classic case of trying to do too much with too little and too much political interference. The federal mandates for crash worthiness required the builder to make the cars much heavier than European counterparts which may have cause the over-stressing of the suspensions and brakes.

There have been humorous missteps along the way. One Acela ad campaign showed a man with an overcoat around his head and the caption, "Depart from your inhibitions." Viewers thought it was a flasher.

Originally, the train was to be branded, "The American Flyer," which, of course, conjured up images of a little boy with a little red wagon in front of a white picket fence; not a particularly speedy vision. They settled on Acela, a combination of "accelerated" and "excellence." Regretfully, the president of American now begins speeches by asking, "What is Acela? "The floor place under the first floor."

Too bad. We'll just keep falling further and further behind.

Patriots

Several companies have begun producing university level lecture courses on a series of topics. The Teaching Company, Recorded Books and Barnes and Noble all have superior products. B&N's Portable Professor has recently released Patriots taught by Joseph Ellis, author of Founding Fathers and American Sphinx. It's excellent.

Focusing on the years between 1760 and 1826, Ellis examines the reasons for the success of the new nation. It's the first war of a colony for its independence that was successful. Our revolution differed in many respects from others. Typically, the overthrow of the government was followed by a bloody purge of those who had been power and their supporters. This did not happen in the United States.

Many of the potentially divisive issues were settled by debate, not bloodshed -- although the one issue they were unable to resolve, slavery, was to cause massive loss of blood in less than a century later.

The population of Virginia at the time of the revolution was barely that of present day Wilkes-Barre, PA, yet we would be hard pressed to find as many people of the character as came out of Virginia. There might be several reasons for that. One is that we were isolated. Europeans could not have traveled as widely or consorted as easily. Class was not as dominant as in Europe. People could rise from the "bottom" on their merits more readily.

The Founders were aware of their place in history and took great efforts to preserve their thinking. John Adams asked Abigail to buy a binder to store all his letters, Thomas Jefferson invented a machine that would make perfect copies of what he wrote down, and Washington hired numerous people to record events. Most of them were agnostics who had little hope for immortality other than through a written record of their actions. Their place in history was important.

Some interesting trivia. The words American and democracy were considered pejorative. People identified with regions, e.g., one was a New Englander, and those who espoused democracy were seen as advocating mob rule.

Some interesting tidbits

Thomas Fleming's acerbic, but very readable and fascinating, history of Woodrow Wilson's part in World War I, is filled with delightful little pieces of trivia. For example:

1. The word "creeling" was synonymous with government lying, a situation that is not unknown today. George Creel was Chairman of the Committee on Public Information, i.e., the Wilson government's propaganda arm. He got caught in a big lie when he released all sorts of stories of how American troops sent over to fight against Germany had had to defend themselves against numerous U-boat attacks and other dangers. These were completely false, and soldiers who had been on the voyage laughed when asked about the trip by British journalists.

2. Progressives, perhaps the forerunners of today's liberals, were unstinting in their public morals campaigns, something associated today more with the right-wing. Wilson placed Raymond B. Fosdick in charge of military camp morals. Bars and brothels anywhere near a base were summarily closed down and some 15,000 prostitutes interned in detention centers, i.e. concentration camps, until 1920.

3. The British and French had a different approach, supplying the troops with approved brothels for their amusement. Clemenceau's gesture of solidarity was to offer to set up brothels for the newly arrived Americans. When Secretary of War Baker heard of this, he was overheard to gasp, "For God's sake. . . don't show this to the president or he'll stop the war."

High Cost of Gasoline

As you fork over more money for gas at the pump, here are some numbers to ponder. They relate directly to why gas costs more. (All from the May 2005, Atlantic Monthly)

1. U.S. troops in Iraq are consuming more than 1.7 million gallons of fuel a day.

2. Each of the ground soldiers requires nine gallons per day to keep all the electrical devices and vehicles going.

3. All the fuel as to be convoyed in, making them especially rich targets for insurgents. Convoys are getting more armored, but that leads to a need for more fuel because an armored vehicle weighs much more and requires much more fuel, which requires more tankers, which offer more targets, which requires more armor and support, etc., etc.

4. Fuel is crucial for modern warfare: Patton's Third Army had 400,000 troops and used about 400,000 gallons per day in his charge across France in 1944. He ran out of fuel and had to stop. Today's army uses four times that amount per soldier. Rommel was stymied in North Africa because his tanks ran out of fuel.

5. The Pentagon has purchased weapons with little regard to fuel efficiency; thus, today 70% of supplies that have to be moved to the front consists of fuel. The number used to be 30%. The M1 tank gets less than 1/3 mile to the gallon; the Bradley fighting vehicle, less than 2 mpg.

If you offend easily don't read this

I am astonished by the hordes of people that have descended on Rome to view the Pope's body and funeral. I got to thinking how much more sense it would make to take his body on tour around the world. They could charge admission, give everyone a chance to see the body and perhaps recoup enough to pay all the fines and judgments awarded in the pedophilia scandals. Better yet they could chop him up into little pieces and charge admission to view the relics. What a deal!