Erik -

E-mails sent out tonight to both Indiana senators; Lugar and Bayh. Easily done. Took about 5 minutes using their websites. Hopefully each Senator will hear from RyPN readers on this subject; pro or con.

Les

"transportation museums" covers all museums involved in transportation whether aviation, marine, automotive, railroad, or all of the above. So saying it only targets railroad museums is not 100% true.

"Oh, I am against pork barrel spending except for (fill in the blank) pork barrel spending that benefits what I am interested in".... and so goes the reason why pork is NEVER reigned in. I am opposed to FEDERAL funding of anything not spelled out in the Constitution (remember the 10th amendment?). Our country has a very skewed sense of priority. 1/4 of our bridges are deficient, roads need maintenance, a few dams are in danger of failing, but never any money to fix them. My god folks, that is what government by definition is here to do! Not make sure some rinky dink town can restore a train depot or some hike bike trail is built somewhere. What little bit of money that ends up in the latest TEA legislation needs to go to fixing the transportation infrastructure that we NEED.

Having worked on three successful Enhancement projects at National Capital Trolley Museum, I can say this is a well-managed and effective program for its requirements and rewards. We were able to fund the restoration of the now-gone and much beloved JTCo 352, and the construction of a portion of our new campus. I recall that our projects were one of only a few transportation museum projects funded in Maryland. The amount funded represents a small percentage of all enhancement projects in our State.

From my perspective, the enhancement program (TEA-21, ISTEA, TEP) was the ultimate challenge in fund raising. I believe that our awards were the payoff for many years of hard work behind the scenes on collections management, strategic planning, community relations, and improved governance (by-laws,etc.).

I do not think NCTM will seek additional TEP funding in the near future. But because of the benefits that TEP offers to our collective section of the greater museum community, I would be sad to see Coburn's amendment prevail.

Wesley

It appears the vote will be tomorrow (Wednesday the 15th) according to the following link: http://www.senate.gov/galleries/pdcl/ The amendment in question is #2372.

The following form letter is going around. I sent it to both of my Senators. If you haven't contacted your senator yet, please feel free to cut and paste:

Dear Senator
I am writing to ask you to oppose Sen. Coburn’s amendment #2372 to H.R. 3288, the Transportation Appropriations Bill. The amendment seeks to make transportation museums ineligible for FHWA Transportation Enhancement grants. I understand the vital necessity of reducing the federal deficit, so I applaud the spirit in which Sen. Coburn has made this proposal. However, I’m afraid that prohibiting Transportation Enhancement grants to transportation museums won’t yield much in the way of savings. According to the National Transportation Enhancement Clearinghouse, only 1.2% of programmed Transportation Enhancement funds went to transportation museums in FY 2008. Contrast that with 18.3% of funds going toward “Landscaping and Scenic Beautification,” which includes “native wildflower planting.”

Native wild flowers don’t do much to improve life in small town America. However, a transportation museum does. Consider the North Carolina Transportation Museum in Spencer, NC. It has brought as many as 129,597 visitors a year to this community of 3355 people. Consider remote Ely, NV, population 4041. It is home to a sporadically producing copper mine. The recent crash in commodities prices has idled its 40 miners. It is also home to the Nevada Northern Railway Museum, which attracts visitors from all over the world. This museum is truly the town of Ely’s last best hope. I could go on, but I think you get the picture. America’s transportation museums are little economic stimulus packages scattered all over the country. To kill support for the museums is to kill the small towns that rely on them. Please vote no on amendment #2372 to H.R. 3288. Thank you for your consideration.

-Chris

I wonder how many museums have received funds from this source and then never did a cotton-picking thing with the money?

I can think of a few "shops" that thrive on this money but never seem to finish projects.

It's a tough call.

T7

None that I am aware of. These grants - when awarded under the FHWA rules - are reimbursement grants. That means you have to spend YOUR money, prove the work has been done, apply for reimbursement, then wait 30 - 45 days for the money. If the total is more than $250,000, there will be an audit at the end of the project so you have to be careful about following the rules.

--Richard

Gentle Termite,

I can vouch for one Museum that has done something constructive with it's ISTEA Grant. www.rmli.org and click on the Engine 39 pages, check the archived reports to see the work that is possible with ISTEA money. Please note that it keeps craftsmen working.

Here's my letter to our two U.S. Senators from the "Great State of New York."

I am writing to ask you to oppose Sen. Coburn’s amendment #2372 to H.R. 3288, the Transportation Appropriations Bill. The amendment seeks to make transportation museums ineligible for FHWA Transportation Enhancement grants.

The Railroad Museum of Long Island was a recipient of a $640,000.00 ISTEA Grant in 2005. We are nearing successful completion of the first two contracts let by the County of Suffolk from this grant to restore Long Island Railroad Steam Locomotive #39. We look forward to the opportunity to apply for further funding in the months ahead. It will be of no service to the people of Long Island and New York State to deny us the ability to apply for and receive funding for our historic restoration and preservation efforts.

Railroads, particularly the era of steam railroading, built the United States. They brought our shores and our people together as one nation. They successfully provided rapid transit of materials and men for our fight during World War II. They provided steady and gainful employment for millions of Americans throughout their history.

Specifically, the Long Island Railroad was instrumental in the settlement and development of this Long Island. It was the enabler of the suburbs and it played a vital part in the history of aviation, radio technology and scientific research. The LIRR opened up new markets for the Island’s agricultural industry, transporting potatoes, cauliflower, fish and Long Island Ducklings to the masses.

In these hard economic times, are we to further limit the ability of New York State and American Museums to interpret this vital, expansive piece of American History? Are we to set aside support for the important roles our Museums play in the education of our young people and celebrating the hard work and sacrifices of our elders? I certainly hope not, and I hope you agree with me.

In closing, according to the National Transportation Enhancement Clearinghouse, only 1.2% of programmed Transportation Enhancement funds went to transportation museums in FY 2008. Contrast that with 18.3% of funds going toward “Landscaping and Scenic Beautification,” which includes “native wildflower planting.” I ask you to defeat amendment #2372 to H.R. 3288 and further support our Nation’s transportation heritage by reversing these percentages of funds spent on landscaping and wildflowers to transportation museums. Our American history should not be lost!

Respectfully yours,
Donald G. Fisher, President

AAM ADVOCACY ALERT UPDATE: Wednesday, Sept. 16, 9:00 AM

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) have filed three amendments to the FY10 Transportation Appropriations bill (H.R. 3288) that would block funding for transportation museums and threaten historic preservation efforts.

The amendments:

Amendment No. 2372, as filed, says, "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for a museum."

Amendment No. 2370, as filed, says, "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for...the reduction of vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or the maintenance of habitat connectivity; transportation museums; scenic beautification projects; and pedestrian or bicycle facility projects."

Amendment No. 2371, as filed, says, "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to implement section 133(d)(2) of title 23, United States Code." Note: This section of law requires states to set aside 10% of funding from this bill for a range of "Transportation Enhancements," which include historic preservation and museums.

These amendments are expected to be debated and voted on by the Senate Wednesday morning, beginning at approximately 11am, so it is URGENT to contact your Senators TODAY to urge a NO vote.

"Historic preservation efforts and transportation-related museums should be a priority for this nation," said AAM President Ford W. Bell. "These museums and projects record and teach about our history and help to revitalize communities struggling in this economy. I urge the Senate to reject these harmful amendments."

You can help today by CALLING 202-224-3121 and asking for YOUR U.S. SENATORS. Please ask them to "reject any amendment that threatens transportation enhancements, especially historic preservation and museums - such as Amendments 2370, 2371, and 2372."

If possible please call rather than email--emails to Congressional offices can take days to be read and routed to the correct staff member.

The votes have been held, and all the Coburn Amendments have been withdrawn or defeated. Here's the tally:

Amendment No. 2372, as filed, says, "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for a museum."
Defeated, 41 Aye, 57 Nay

Amendment No. 2370, as filed, says, "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for...the reduction of vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or the maintenance of habitat connectivity; transportation museums; scenic beautification projects; and pedestrian or bicycle facility projects."

Withdrawn by Sen. Coburn
Amendment No. 2371, as filed, says, "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to implement section 133(d)(2) of title 23, United States Code." Note: This section of law requires states to set aside 10% of funding from this bill for a range of "Transportation Enhancements," which include historic preservation and museums.
Defeated, 39 Aye, 59 Nay

A thousand thanks to everyone who wrote or made calls. You really made a difference for railway preservation today.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/r ... vote=00278


Roll call on the vote. With a few exceptions, pretty much fell along party lines.

Even if this had passed (which it wasn't going to--Coburn hasn't that many allies), it would have had to be reconciled with the House version of this budget bill in conference. A budget conference committee isn't likely to pick this kind of a fight, and the House loves this program even more than the Senate. So the "establishment of transportation museums" category was never seriously at risk. This week.

Nonetheless, this was a good dry run for the next two times this program may come under fire. The first one is the week after next, when the entire federal-aid highway program, including STP Enhancements, turns into a pumpkin at midnight on Sept. 30th unless it's reauthorized or extended. Congress has only barely begun to discuss reauthorization, so the major bill will be punted ahead, probably into the next Congress. At the insistence of the Obama administration, the program will probably be extended for at least 18 months (after the election). It remains to be seen whether the extension will be "clean," or whether small or large adjustments will be made to federal programs. The administration intends to promote at least some changes, so it's possible that the Republicans could try to attach theirs as well. If so, look for a repeat of this week's events.

Serious redesign of the federal highway program will wait for the reauthorization debate, probably in 2011. Apart from the Coburn amendment, I have heard no indication that anyone intends to repeal the Enhancement program.

Incidentally, if you saw NKP 765 being turned on the turntable at SRI in Owosso, you were seeing two Enhancement projects at once.

Aarne H. Frobom
Unclean Hands, Michigan

My emotions are truly mixed. It's like watching Osama bin Laden and all of his leaders drive my new car off a thousand-foot cliff to their deaths.



What I dread is the likes of "60 Minutes" or "20/20" (but more likely John Stossel, who just left ABC for Fox) showing up with a TV crew at Owosso (or any other such place), pointing at 765 on the turntable, and saying "Exactly how is this a prudent use of taxpayers' transportation funding when Interstate bridges are falling down?" It may not have been your fault that some percentages of the TEA funds went to heritage and preservation, it may even have been the case that if you didn't apply for it, some Laker ore ship or buggy museum would have gotten it....... but it's still a tough spot to find yourself in.

Not a problem at all. The simple reply is, since our pork pokers in Congress have made this the law of the land, this is where railway preservation has to apply for its share of gov't support. To further expand on that, the Federal Gov't supports all sorts of museums and displays, much of it through the National Endowment for the Arts. But those folks don't have any appreciation for historic mechanical things, while the state transportation officials do. Since our preservation organizations work with the state DOT officials all the time (supposedly) identifying historic items that need to be removed intact from the path of progress, Congress, in its great wisdom, made the state DOTs the conduit for our funding.

I don't know if any of this is true, but it's no less plausible than all the rest of the drivel that pours out of the idiot box every night.

That's when you show them the attendance numbers from Trainfest, and calculate how much money several thousand out-of-town visitors pumped into the mid-Michigan economy in July alone, and how much of that will go back to the federal government in tax revenue.