I'm looking at the Department of Agriculture budget right now and spending on commodity programs rose to $25 billion in 2003 and then back to $21 billion in 2004. I expect that market conditions account for the differences.
Other budget items in 2004: $8.3 billion in loans and grants for the Rural Utility Service, $3.5 billion in Farm Loan and Grant Programs, $6 billion in Rural Housing Service loans and grants.
How much was the Amtrak subsidy for one year, again? $1.2 billion or thereabouts? How many people live in the NEC?
I'm not even intending to defend Amtrak. I only take issue with the idea of a northeastern money pit when we've been bailing out the rest of the country for years.
The problem is that this isn't true to a significant extent. Again, have a look at any of the websites which debunked the "Red Welfare State" myth. Incidentally, both California and Massachusetts did very well on federal dollars until the end of the Cold War, owing again to defense spending. The fundamental problem with these kinds of comparisons, however, is the differential in prevailing wages around the country is now pretty substantial.
As for Amtrak, their funny accounting is entirely politically motivated -- the NEC gets them votes in the House, the long distance trains in the Senate. They've received about $27 billion in subsidies over 30 years (of which $19 billion went for NEC capital improvements); for perspective, the Big Dig ran $15 billion (and counting), and typically, highway subsidies run about $32 billion per year.
Having said that, there are a lot of things that could be done better at Amtrak, and it would be helpful to start over. Notably, the on-board personnel do a marginal job and are extremely well-paid for it; this could and should be privatized to Marriott or something similar. Unfortunately, it's a real racket for the federal unions, and it would cost billions more in payments to the Railroad Retirement System to get rid of them (payout was $160 million last year).