Join the discussion on the following article:
Amtrak issues 2015 funding request
Cool photo!
Where would Amtrak be nationally without the drain of the NEC?
Be nice if Boardman asked for money to replace the Amfleet I cars.
Mr Norton, IMHO without the NEC there would be no Amtrak. Our VIA Rail arrangement up here is no better either when it comes to real service demand.
It seems to me that Joe Boardman is putting his eggs in one basket and that is the NEC. C’mon Mr. Boardman, don’t shortchange the other two segment! People other than the NEC need trtain service as well.
Make long-term strategic moves? Take effective steps to avoid a future crisis? That doesn’t sound like something that would interest Congress. Shouldn’t we be more concerned about what they’re serving in the dining cars?
Amtrak perpetuates the Great Fiction: the “profits” of the NEC. That is a massive accounting fiction, resulting from Amtrak’s failure to charge the NEC’s massive fixed costs against NEC train revenues. If they did so, the NEC would show a loss of about $600 million a year, covered by its annual federal subsidy.
Measured by transportation output–not mere transaction volume–the NEC is the smallest and weakest of Amtrak’s three divisions, as well as the most heavily subsidized. (Any two of the daily western long hauls outproduce the entire Acela operation.)
Putting more capital into the NEC is throwing money into a black hole. The NEC’s 52% load factor proves that Amtrak is already hugely over-invested there, and its sub-2% true market share for intercity non-commuter transportation (rather than its meaningless modal split as against airlines) suggests that its social relevance is nil.
We need order of New Superliner car order 500 cars and more Viewliners cars too.
The NEC can make money, however much of Amtraks “upgrades” and repairs are to Rails also used by freight and some are owned by other Railroads. Amtrak paid for upgrades all the way to Brunswick, ME. This is Pan Am ( ex B&M) territory and as a freight carrier had no need to update the track, but Amtrak pushed hard, and well Amtrak paid…( the people paid). THis route will grow, and was probably a worthy investment, but there are many like it with many bridges in New England alone slated for high speed updates and repairs. The BEST way to improve ridership at the start is ON TIME. The wine and cheese can come as needed down the road. ON Time > 1st class on the NEC anyways…
As time goes by, I’m becoming a bigger fan of Boardman. This “unbundled” Amtrak budget makes it much harder for foes to attack Amtrak. Any of the past, typical “broad brush” attacks is easily deflected by asking “which part of Amtrak?”
The budget makes it clear “what it costs” and “what you get” for it.
The memo to Boehner spells this out clearly and in great detail.
I just hope Boardman is attacking the liaise-fair culture inside of Amtrak with as much energy.
It seems that Boardman has realized that he’s the CEO of the
“National” Railroad Passenger Corp. and there are two other
“Amtraks” - the state/regional corridor services and the long distance trains - that deserve his attention. I agree with Selden’s comments about the NEC. The situation begs the question should the US Government transfer the NEC infrastructure from Amtrak to a neutral authority to manage it like a toll way or canal. Then Amtrak becomes just another customer.
Andrew -
There are two, great hidden subsidies at work here. One is Amtrak cross-subsidizing NJT, MN, MARC, MBTA. They are not paying their share of full NEC costs.
The other is the frt RR cross subsidy for the “slot” used up by LD Amtrak trains. The value of these slots is far greater than the approx $10 per train mile Amtrak pays in rent.
So, if you want to explode myths, be careful what you expose in the process.
This feeble attempt at “transparency” is a bit too late, and perhaps, an act of desperation by Amtrak, given its past dissing of the Long Distance Routes, and games deciding what corridor services under 750 miles were exempt from their inspired PRIIA2008.
In law, there is the “doctrine of unclean hands.” If Amtrak had "clean hands” in the funding, operation, and maintenance of Long Distance Routes, why was Amtrak attempting to create a template for states to subsidize Long Distance Routes routes, starting with the “Southwest Chief?” Why did Amtrak elect to allow over the years the downgrading of BNSF trackage between Newton, KS-Albuquerque, NM? Why did Amtrak tolerate this, making no effort to work it out through the auspices of the STB?
Why does Amtrak continue its disdain for non-NEC operations by including in its FY15 budget the losses of state services, when it dumped 100% of its alleged, opaque costs (non-GAAP) upon the states last October?
Does this “Beltway” maneuver by Amtrak to seize NEC revenues now explain why Amtrak’s 14th Street Chicago yard was tolerated for so long not to fulfill its mission for M&R of Superliners & their power? At least now we can understand why Amtrak avoided approaching Congress with any proforma for replacing the Superliners.
Who in Congress, perhaps even in a different FRA from the one that killed Amtrak Reform Council recommendations, (i.e., separating NEC from Amtrak, creating private product categories for Long Distance and state services, etc.) will realize this dead-end political maneuver by Amtrak for its real meaning?
Why allow Amtrak to continue its fantasy story how the NEC is “profitable…above the rails," despite the reality that Amtrak is responsible for capitalizing costs to maintain & operate the NEC; yet, does not include such costs against its alleged profitability? As in, “mind the GAAP"? (Only MegaBus is profitable above the rails!)
Who in Congre
Id like to see Warren Buffett invest in a passenger service on BNSF. Put up the money, use bnsf equipment, put that train as a high priority and see how it does vs current amtrak service. BNSF Chicago express! Heck, make your own bnsf chicago terminal along property outside of the chicago clog.
If Amtrak’s long-distance service is going to survive for the long term, they need to order more rolling stock.The demand is there on the exisiting trains, and numeorus requests have been made to restore previous services that were lost. Loss of daytime frequencies and route cuts hurt the most, along with aging rolling stock that is waiting to have its wheels fall offuntil new car orders are taken seriously. Some of the long-distance routes do have potential to run a second frequency or have daytime corridor services in certain segments.Until then, Amtrak is missing out on a wonderful opportunity to work towards self-sufficiency on an expanded system which probably could amke Amtrak profitable.
It’s interesting to note that Amtrak’s long distance trains return 89% percent of it’s operating cost. I doubt the airlines even come close even with their austerity moves such as: dinging their customers for everything piece of luggage; charging more for window seats; taking away those skimpy bags of peanuts; ad nauseum. (keep in mind; the airline receive about 300 billion per year.