Suppose a few congressmen wanted to start a high speed AMTRAK line from Washington, DC to Los Angeles. The only stops would be Charleston, WV; Louisville, Ky; St. Louis,MO; Oklahoma City; Amarillo, Tx; Albuquerque, NM, Phoenix,AZ and LA. If this was approved - only residents in nine States/Commonwealths would be affected. For arguments sake, lets say that would be 12% of the US population. On the positive side - the defenders would say we need a national rail line in the event that planes are again grounded ( either mechanical or another "11 Sep), trains can be more cost efficient, thousands of jobs will be created for the building of the rails, as well as the impact on the local community, and then the employment of those to work on the train, ect, ect, ect..... Lets say the only disadvantage is that this train would only be of value to a small number of people. So, how should a congressman vote? ( as listed in the poll) NOTE: THIS DISCUSSION IS NOT WHETHER THIS ACTION IS CONSTITUTIONAL OR NOT. I was just trying to find a good example about the reasoning behind the way a congressman should vote.