Mediaboss Marketing

Christina Moffett met the love of her life, Alexander, in high school. But it would be several years before the couple would start dating.

"We knew each other through drama and music, plus his dad was my teacher and our sisters played together in the same special-needs baseball league. When we were in college, our high school drama program had an alumni get together at IHOP and we reconnected there. We continued talking and became best friends. That Christmas, in 2013, he asked me out," the 25-year-old told TODAY Style.

The couple dated long distance throughout college until Moffett moved back to Wisconsin in 2018. Her sweetheart proposed on their fifth anniversary. As she began to envision what she might wear on her wedding day, Moffett turned to a few of the most important ladies in her life for some guidance.

"I'm very nostalgic and love family heirlooms. My grandma, mother and future mother-in-law had all mentioned at one point that it would be fun to have me try on their gowns. I figured I'd get it all done at once, so I had a tea party with them, my future sister-in-law and two best friends to model the dresses. I was also hoping I could possibly wear one of the dresses for the wedding," she said.

Moffett began the fashion show with the gown her mom, Karen Spaeth, wore an elegant lace dress with a big train and "felt like a princess." Next came the dress her future mother-in-law, Anne Moffett, wore, which the bride said "was the comfiest thing I've ever worn; it felt like pajamas."

Last but not least came the dress that Moffett's grandmother, Shirley Ekstrand (fondly nicknamed "Mite"), wore back in 1956. And the third time was the charm.

Stuff We Love

Get a daily roundup of items that will make your life easier, healthier and more stylish.

"It was gorgeous, classy and timeless. It just worked. I twirled around in the hoop skirt and was beaming. I knew it was the look I wanted for my wedding. It was a very Grace Kelly look," she said. "I had seen photos of it on the mantle before but couldn't really imagine it until I wore it."

Naturally, Ekstrand was tickled pink to see her granddaughter all dolled up in the dress she once wore. "She was so thrilled and honored. She said the dress was all mine and I could do whatever I wanted to it," the newlywed said.

Luckily, the stunning dress didn't need a lot of altering.

"I only had it let out a bit, since Mite had worn a corset and I declined that. I also passed on the hoop skirt and instead wore an underskirt to give it some volume. Everything else about the dress was the same. I couldn't believe how good of shape it was in," Moffett said.

On her wedding day in October 2019, Moffet added another "something old" to her ensemble: earrings her grandmother had given her mother years before. Stepping into Mite's gown on that special day felt a bit surreal for the bride.

"It added to the whole experience and made it so much more special by adding deep family love to it. Mite is one of my favorite people and I was so happy to honor her 57 years of marriage. And, partly because of the dress, the theme of the wedding was vintage and books, so it matched," she said.

It was an equally special experience for Mite, who was happy that her granddaughter loved the gown so much.

"I was very honored that she asked me to be part of her wedding. And I was so sorry that Bada (Moffett's grandfather) wasn't with us, but yet he's in our hearts. I was so happy for both Christina and Alexander because they were meant for each other. And seeing her in the dress made me very happy," Ekstrand told TODAY.

Continue reading here:
Bride wears her grandmother's wedding gown from 1956 - TODAY

GILLETTE, Wyo. From behind the counter of his brother's auto-parts store, Bubba Miller looks out at the 2020 presidential race and worries about what will happen to his hometown if a Democrat wins. Not just a Democrat, but, based on the current frontrunners, a liberal Democrat. Or a Progressive. Or an avowed Socialist.

"I wish we could build a wall around Wyoming," he says with a laugh. "I think there's just something wrong in their heads to think you can get everything for free."

Shifting the wad of tobacco tucked in his lip, Miller, 24, lays out the case for re-electing President Donald Trump, from this coal town's booming economy to the president's protection of gun rights,to his tough border policies and efforts to reduce the size of the federal government. As far as Miller is concerned, Trump can do no wrong.

He's notalone.In 2016, then-candidate Trump won 86% of the vote here as he swept every Wyoming county but one, the wealthy liberal enclave of Teton County, home to Jackson Hole.Only once since 1952 has the state voted for a Democratic presidential candidate, and in 2016 Trump beat Hillary Clinton here by the widest margin of any state. And ahead of the November presidential election, none of the 2020 Democraticcandidates aremaking any inroads with these most conservative of voters.

"I've very concerned about the direction of the Democratic Party," says Robin Clover, a 20-year Wyoming resident and registered Republican who's voted for Democrats at the local level. "They're either past their prime or far too progressive."

Here in Wyoming, where every other car is a pickup, and cowboy hats and boots are a working man's uniform, the 2020 election worries voters, who fear the election of a Democrat will upend their way of life, force the coal mines to close and the oil wells to stop pumping. Force them to pay higher taxes, force them to give up their AR-15 rifles and high-capacity magazines. Force them to subsidize the health care of immigrants. Force them to pay for college loans for city kids. Force. Force. Force.

"That's the problem," Miller says. "I'm an adult. You can't make me. It's just taking away from letting people grow up."

A sign on the outskirts of Gillette, Wyoming, offers residents health care options.(Photo: Trevor Hughes, Trevor Hughes-USA TODAY NETWORK)

Like his neighbors, Miller says he wishes Trump could lead the country the way he was elected to, without being second-guessed or attacked by what he considers a "corrupt" class of politicians and bureaucrats. The way Miller sees it, the fact that Trump is being so forcefully opposed perfectly demonstrates that the president ison the right track in drainingthe swamp in Washington, D.C.

The state Republican Party officially endorses a slew of other conservative positions, from disarming forest rangers, to returning to aDont Ask, Dont Tell policy for the military and banning birthright citizenship. The party has also called for banning the acceptance of any international refugees unless they are vetted Christians, defining marriage as only between a man and a woman, abolishing the EPA and the U.S. Department of Education, and strictly enforcing all immigration laws.

But for most voters here, coal and the jobs it provides are the biggest drivers of decisions. And that means Trump is their guy.

Because Wyoming has only three Electoral College votes, there's little chance a Democrat will even bother campaigning here, and even Trump is considered unlikely to visit, since most voters across the statewill back him regardless if they see him in person shaking hands and holding babies. That leaves Wyoming's voters in a uniquely powerless situation: Ignored by both parties, they are effectively sidelined despite the critical role federal policy plays in their future. And they're facing Democratic candidates who all see a bigger federal government as a solution to the nation'sproblems.

Polls suggest their worst nightmare could come true in November. Former Vice President Joe Biden,Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.,Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts andformer South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg are all narrowly leading or in a close tie with Trump in recent polls.The president's supporters in Wyoming, however, point out that polls showed Clinton winning the presidency in 2016, so they don't put much stock in them.

Wyoming's approximately 578,000 residents, most of them white and living on land seized from Native Americans,have long prided themselves on a frontier spirit of rugged individualism and independence.They also see themselves as a world apart from the nation's big coastal states, all of which tend to vote Democrat. For generations, they've voted Republican and arguedthat big-city liberals can't possibly understand what life is like where there's just six people per square mile. New York City, by contrast, has 27,000 people per square mile.

But the outside world is increasingly moving in a different direction, where global warming is settled science, inclusivity, diversity and tolerance are honored,and access to health care is seen as a fundamental human right. The United Nations even has set a 2030 goal for achieving universal health coverage internationally. That's setting up an increasingly stark contrast for Wyomingites who see a Trump victory as essential to preserving their freedoms and independence.

"Our way of life here is threatened by a Democratic administration," said state Rep. Dan Zwonitzer, a Republican who represents a portion of the largest city, Cheyenne, where Trump won 60% of the vote in 2016. "Every Republican in Wyoming you'll talk to would agree that Wyoming is better off under a Republican administration. No one liked Hillary. They just knew that she was the enemy. And whether it's Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders, I don't think thevote totals would change by 5%. There's just this attitude that you have to maintain control of the presidency at all costs."

Coal-fired power plants next to the WyoDak mine east of Gillette, Wyoming, provide electricity for millions of homes.(Photo: Trevor Hughes, Trevor Hughes-USA TODAY NETWORK)

To understand Wyoming, you have to understand a little bit about coal,the state's backbone, both physically andfinancially.In Gillette, which calls itself the "Energy Capital of the Nation," coal is inextricable from daily life. The mines outside of town set the pace, explosives blasting the windswept groundto free the coal. Many of the workers are no longer fulltime employees but work as contractors, missing out on the benefits but still keeping the same 12-hour shifts they used to before repeated bankruptcies prompted many mine operators to restructure.

In town, restaurants proudly display "coal keeps the lights on" and "friends of coal" stickers, and the diesel-equipment repair shops and heavy machinery repair yards line the approaches to the historic downtown, where the Gillette Brewing Company's bar is supported by pieces of drilling rigs.

Taxes levied on the vast trainloads of coal hauled to power plants across the Westmeans the state has never had an income tax, and its sales taxes are among the nation's lowest. While Eastern coal states like Kentucky and West Virginia get the president's attention, Wyoming leads the nation in coal production, with its approximately 5,500 miners digging more than the next six states combined.

Virtually all of that coal is mined from land owned by the federal government, whichleases the property to conglomerates to mine and then burn the coalfor electricity. That quirk of geology has long helped Wyoming maintain its financial independence, but even coal's strongest backers worry that times are changing. The federal government plays a key role because slowing down new coal leases or restricting coal-powered generating plants almost immediately impacts the miners themselves.

During the 2016 election, Clinton declared "we're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, a statement that infuriated Wyoming residents who already dislikedher for reasons ranging from Benghazi to her work with the Clinton Foundation. While Clinton then went on to explain that she planned to offer job retraining to coal workers, Wyoming's voters -- who weren't going to supporther anyway -- hardened their opposition further.

A loaded hauler ferries freshly dug coal from the Eagle Butte mine outside Gillette, Wyoming. Wyoming's coal mines are open pit, which means workers blast and dig away the top layers of dirt to reach the coal seams below, and then cover the area back up once the coal is gone. (Photo: Trevor Hughes, Trevor Hughes-USA TODAY NETWORK)

They saythere's still life in coal, and that Clinton would have harmed an already struggling industry. And they say the Democrats running for president in 2020 have a similar playbook.

"I think Hillary would have killed our economy. And I think any of the people running on the Democrat side would absolutely eviscerate our economy. The Democrats seem to do everything they can to squash business," says Vicki Million Hughes, a Cheyenne real estate agent whose grandparents moved to Wyoming in 1920.

Hughes says she's 100% behind the president, aside from offensive tweets attacking specific people, because his focus has been creating a strong economy, growing industry and "jobs, jobs, jobs."

The strength of the national and local economy is a major factor for Trump's ongoing support in Wyoming, even though coal mining jobs have been on the decline for decades. Voters here believe four more years of his administration will keep the economy humming and extend the life of the coal mines for the foreseeable future.

"If God is good enough to give us a natural resource, we should use that resource wisely," says Hughes, who like many Wyoming voters, says she believes the planet naturally warms and cools, and that humans have little to do with it. "Why waste what God has given us?"

About 70% of Americans sayclimate change is occurring, and a majority -- 55% -- say it's mostly human-caused, according to an April 2019 study by Yale Universityin New Haven, Connecticut, scientists. In Wyoming, voters like Hughes and Miller say they have the right to disagree and worry that their voices will be shouted down by the modern-day shaming mobs populating social media.

An American and Trump 2020 flag wave in the evening wind outside Gillette, Wyoming, a small city with some of President Trump's most ardent supporters.(Photo: Trevor Hughes, Trevor Hughes-USA TODAY NETWORK)

"I have lots of friends who live on the coasts and they tell me it's time to evolve, that Wyoming needs to get past fossil fuels. But we make our living and livelihood off oil and gas and coal," saidZwonitzer. "You've got people who have been involved in these industries for generations."

That singular focus on coal and federal land management means Wyoming's voters spend littletime worrying about the nuances of immigration or health care reform, although many shake their heads at what they see as the entitlement culture of the Democratic candidates and their supporters.

Wyomingites pride themselves on their low-tax, work-focused culture, and the idea of erasing student loans or giving everyone government-run health insurance runs counter to their deeply held ideology of taking care of their own problems and being responsible for their own decisions.

A giant mural on the side of a building in Gillette, Wyoming highlights the state's two sources of income: Coal mining and cattle ranching.(Photo: Trevor Hughes, Trevor Hughes-USA TODAY NETWORK)

Miller, for instance, is paying off medical debt accumulated when he crashed his dirtbike and blew out his knee. He didn't have health insurance at the time, and instead paid the Obamacare tax because it was cheaper than paying for health insurance. While having to pay the bills "sucks," Miller says, he accepts that it was his decision to forgo insurance.

"Everybody in Wyoming would love to have the best college education,the best health care, and for it all to be done for free. And that's just impossible," saidCarl "Bunky" Loucks, a Republican state representative from Casper. "I just don't understand the mentality that you can get everything for free."

Loucks, 52, said he and many other Wyoming residents support both an audit of the federal government and a balanced budget amendment that would limit government spending to what it can actually afford, instead of adding to the ballooning national deficit. Loucks said he's frustrated the national debt has increased under Trump but saysitwould have been worse under a Democrat.Trump won Louck's county with 70% of the vote.

Miller says Wyoming has flourished under Trump, and none of his neighbors regret their 2016 votes. If anything, he says, Trump's support has increased.

"How can you hate someone who is so good for the United States?" Miller says. "I think his mouth gets him in trouble, but sometimes what he says is well-needed."

The license plate on a Wyoming resident's car pays homage to his father's long career as a coal miner in one of the mines surrounding Gillette, Wyoming.(Photo: Trevor Hughes, Trevor Hughes-USA TODAY NETWORK)

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/01/19/2020-democratic-candidates-bogeymen-voters-who-back-trump/4463037002/

Originally posted here:
When Democrats are the bogeymen: A possible Trump loss has these voters very worried - USA TODAY

Media darling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her fellow squad members have never been shy about their plan to shove the Democratic Party toward adopting socialist principles. And now that were more than a year and a half into the AOC era, its clear that theirtwo-partplan is working.

The first component of their plan is to reshape the Congressional Progressive Caucus(CPC)into a powerful political force in Congress. Historically, thecaucus,which began in the 1990s, has beenprimarilya club for left-wing congressional Democrats. But it hadlittle political power because of itsmembersunwillingness to vote as a bloc.

AOC, Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and other radical Democrats have been working to reform the CPC so that the socialist left has the ability to controlor, at the very least, heavily influencethe agenda for the entire party.

NEWT GINGRICH: TRUMP IMPEACHMENT WILL BRING PELOSI AND HOUSE DEMOCRATS CONDEMNATION BY HISTORY

Although the CPC hasnt totally adopted this approach, socialists havein recent monthsmade significant progress towardachievingtheir goal. The caucus was initially one of the primary drivers of the effort to impeach President Trump, and their demands for a government takeover of health care, increasing the federal minimum wage to $15, and the creation of a radical Green New Deal all made significant progress in 2019, laying the groundwork for 2021, when CPC members hope to have friendlier forces controlling the White House and Senate.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER

But perhaps the biggestvictoryfor the CPC came in December when it won a widely publicized battle with House leadership over the detailsof drug-pricing legislation.

Thebill, titledtheElijah Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act,would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices directly with pharmaceutical companiesfor a set number of drugs. Of course, it wouldnt be much of a negotiation. The White House Council of Economic Advisersnotedthat those who fail to meet the pricing standards set by the federal government would face an excise tax of up to 95 percent of sales.

The CPC supported the legislations framework, but it demanded that SpeakerNancyPelosi and House leadership expand the number of drugs covered by the legislation from 35 to 50, along with several other fairly sizeable changes. Pelosi initially refused, but once the CPC threatened to vote against thebill, House leadership was forced to cave and theconcessions were made.

After winning the battle with Pelosi, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a socialist andCPCco-leader, said onTwitter, This is a huge victory for the American people! When we stick together, fight hard and with principle, we help improve lives for millions of people.

Sticking together is exactly whatOcasio-Cortez and her allies have been demanding of the caucus from the moment they arrived in Washington, and its looking like their efforts have paid off.

The AOC-backed group Justice Democrats is working with numerous candidates across the country to unseatmoderate Democratic members of Congress.

The second part ofAOC and her alliesplan to reshape the Democratic Party is to push out of positions of power and influence those who dont agree with their socialist platform.

In an interview earlier in January with New York Magazine, Ocasio-Cortez said that despite the gains made within the CPC, it still has far too many moderate members.

According to the New York Magazine profile,She [Ocasio-Cortez]said the Congressional Progressive Caucus should start kicking people out if they stray too far from the party line.Other caucuses within the Democratic Party in Congress require applications, Ocasio-Cortez pointed out. Butthey let anybody who the cat dragged in call themselves a progressive. Theres no standard,she said.

Laterin the interview, when asked about the possibility of Joe Biden becoming president, AOC groaned and then said,In any other country, Joe Biden and I would not be in the same party, but in America, we are.

Ocasio-Cortez isntjust passively complaining aboutthe alleged moderates in the party, either.In September,AOCendorsedsocialist congressional candidate Marie Newman, who is attempting to unseat an incumbent Democrat in Illinois.

In October, AOCendorsed Jessica Cisneros, a challenger to Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, yet another sitting Democratic member of Congress.

Further, despite the fact Ocasio-Cortez has raised more money than any other Democratic member of the House, she has refused to give any of her vast treasure trove of resources to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, choosing instead to independently help socialists and progressives that more closely align with her vision for the party.

And thats just the beginning. The AOC-backed group Justice Democrats is working with numerous other candidates across the country to unseateven moremoderate Democratic members of Congress.

The Democratic Partyhas been under the control of the left for more than a decade, butthepresent shift is even more extreme than many anticipated was possible at the end of the Obama era. Instead of preaching tolerance, AOC and her friends are demanding strict adherence to their brand of socialism. Anything short of putting the government in charge of virtually every aspect of society is now considered too moderatefor their party.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

There is simply no room left in the Democratic Party for anyone who believes in anything approaching responsible government spending practices or limiting the power of the ruling administrative state in Washingtoneven if that limitation is slight. Only those who agree to walk in lockstep with Ocasio-Cortez and the other de facto leaders of the party will be tolerated.

As Ocasio-Cortezrecently said,Democrats can be too big of a tent.Or, put another way, moderates are no longer welcome in the Democratic Party. It belongs to Karl Marx now.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE BY JUSTIN HASKINS

More here:
Justin Haskins: AOC's socialist takeover of Democrats is working here's why moderates should worry - Fox News

As the House casts its vote on forwarding the articles of impeachment to the Senate, we should pause to remember a timely lesson about submitting evidence to prove that the Holocaust occurred.

Though difficult to believe, the Holocaust still has its deniers people driven by anti-Semitism or ignorance seeking to plant the seed it was all a myth. It is not dissimilar to what Democrats are doing today with impeachment claims against President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump's newest Russia adviser, Andrew Peek, leaves post: report Hawley expects McConnell's final impeachment resolution to give White House defense ability to motion to dismiss Trump rips New York City sea wall: 'Costly, foolish' and 'environmentally unfriendly idea' MORE.

Concerned at World War IIs end there would be those in future generations questioning the Holocausts validity, the Allies collected as much evidence as possible. But Jewish historians have determined that just as important is to ensure that all evidence displayed about the Holocaust should lack any basis for deniers to challenge its authenticity, so that it cannot undermine that which it seeks to prove. A scrap of inauthentic evidence could be poison for the truth of the Holocausts occurrence.

The Museum of Jewish Heritage in New York opened in May 2019, housing a living Holocaust memorial in an exhibit covering three floors. Curators there soon realized they had just such a poison document on display. Although collected long ago, and despite references to it years earlier by many scholars, it still potentially could provide fodder for Holocaust deniers.

Titled SS Rentabilittsberechnung (meaning profitability calculation), it was somewhat of an obscure document, apparently authored to show a financial justification that slave labor camps were profit centers for the Nazis.

Most visitors to the Museum of Jewish Heritage listen to a 90-minute audio/video program that guides them through various artifacts and documents. But soon after the museums opening, to be safe, curators decided to delete a 13-second segment from the tape referencing the document in question. The sentence removed was: During World War II, the SS calculated that, after costs such as cremation, but not including the value of bones used in fertilizer, the profit made from each prisoner was roughly $745.

The SS Rentabilittsberechnung document provided every tidbit of minutia about various costs associated with running the camps, including feeding and housing individuals, costs of running crematoriums, etc. The data were so detailed, even the average number of calories prisoners consumed was factored into calculations to determine the anticipated average lifespan of laborers (nine months).

Against these costs appeared the average income each prisoner generated, either as a Nazi slave laborer or when rented out to German companies. Included, too, as an asset was the gold extracted from the teeth of deceased laborers, the value of their bones used in fertilizers, value of personal belongings, etc.

The SS Rentabilittsberechnung reduced to paper the frightening reality of the evil that man can render unto his fellow man. Although numerous historians, writers and rabbis long had referenced this document, research showed its origin could not be determined. Citation cross-references only cited each other, without linking the document to an original source. Every citation, it turned out, was a secondary source.

This very telling document could be real, but curators had to consider that their inability to prove its authenticity also raised the possibility it was not. Knowing Holocaust deniers would seize upon even a minor historical inaccuracy as ammunition to discredit the Jewish genocide, curators opted not to display the document.

This cautionary tale is one that promoters of Trumps impeachment totally ignore. The SS Rentabilittsberechnung document could be a museum curators evidentiary dream to support what happened in Nazi Germany, but why risk arming deniers with a way to undermine the Holocausts reality?

Similarly, it became clear early on in the House impeachment inquiry that Democrats would take an entirely different approach to authenticity concerning evidence with regard to Trumps July phone call with the Ukrainian president. His accusers had no firsthand evidence that Trump committed an impeachable offense; instead, they chose to rely on unvetted hearsay evidence sometimes as much as three times removed. One Democrat went so far as to outrageously suggest, Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct.

Democrats have demonstrated no concern about unsubstantiated evidence, giving impeachment deniers valid arguments. This strongly suggests House Democrats never were really interested in the truth, but only in marketing unsupportable claims that the president committed impeachable offenses.

The SS Rentabilittsberechnung document stands as a warning that relying on hearsay evidence opens the door to undermining the truth. The museum curators chose not to run this risk; the impeachment promoters wont be as careful.

Interestingly, the Democrats anti-Trump efforts date to the Steele dossier, opposition research from the 2016 campaign that was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham Clinton Democrats plot new approach to win over rural voters The Memo: Sanders-Warren battle could reshape Democratic primary Rosenstein says he authorized release of Strzok-Page texts MORE a dossier we now know was based almost entirely on hearsay. This document shows us how far down a road paved with untruths hearsay can take us.

There are many lessons about the Holocaust and its aftermath that teach us about the evils of mankind and the need to preserve truth for future generations. Pro-impeachment members of Congress should pay attention to the latter.

James G. Zumwalt is a retired Marine lieutenant colonel who served in the Vietnam War, the U.S. invasion of Panama and the first Gulf War. He heads a security consulting firm named after his father, Adm. Zumwalt & Consultants, Inc.

Excerpt from:
A Holocaust lesson lost on the Democrats impeaching Trump | TheHill - The Hill

Sen. Tammy DuckworthLadda (Tammy) Tammy DuckworthDemocrats request briefing on intel behind Trump's embassy threat claim Duckworth slams Collins's comments: 'I left parts of my body in Iraq fighting terrorists' The biggest political upsets of the decade MORE (D-Ill.), the top Democrat on the Senate Transportation Committee and the first disabled woman elected to Congress, called for a meeting with the CEO of Amtrak amid reports the railroad service charged a group of disabled passengers $25,000 for an in-state trip from Chicago to Bloomington, Ill.

It is outrageous that Amtrak asked a group of passengers with disabilities to pay $25,000 to ride from the City of Chicago to Bloomington, Illinois. It is also disappointing that Amtrak leadership appears to have failed to offer a public apology for its initial mistake, Duckworth, who lost both legs serving in the U.S. Army in Iraq, said in a statement.

The Americans with Disabilities Act has been the law of the land for 30 years. Yet in 2020, Amtrak believes it would be an unreasonable burden to remove architectural barriers that would enable a group with five wheelchair users to travel together, she added.

The Chicago-Bloomington route is priced at $16 one way, but two wheelchair users in question were told they would be charged $25,000, with an Amtrak agent telling a group booking transportation on behalf of the advocacy group Access Living that the cost was necessary to offset the cost of taking out extra seats.

"We will contact Access Living and suggest costs could be avoided by using the two separate trains on this route, with each train separated by about three hours and having three spaces for wheelchairs without any reconfiguration. We will also confirm the pricing for a railcar reconfiguration given to this important and valued customer, Amtrak said in a statement, according to NPR.

In a statement to The Hill, an Amtrak spokesperson said "We apologize for any inconvenience we caused our customers. Amtrak is complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act and is committed to meeting the needs of all of our customers. We will work with this group of passengers on an alternative plan to facilitate their upcoming trip.

See the article here:
Democratic senator asks for meeting with Amtrak head over alleged disability discrimination | TheHill - The Hill