Some sober thinking about Amtrak...

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

It would appear that interstate rail passenger service in the United States is at something of a cross roads.

As in so many political things, there are two points of view: interstate passenger service by rail is a legitimate function of the Federal government, and should be subsidised (as are other forms of interstate transportation of people – ALL other forms of interstate transportation of people) or, conversely, that it is not a legitimate function of the government and thus, while it might properly be regulated, it should not be subsidised. We have seen both points of view expressed in these forums, as well as in the wider world.

What is a given is that no form of passenger transportation will make a profit on its own, at least at present costs to the passenger. Please don’t debate that; it’s just there. The amount of the subsidies is debatable, and depends on how you count the money; the fact of subsidy is not.

OK.

It would appear from recent events that the political view that interstate transportation of passengers by rail is not the proper business of the Federal government has, at least for the time being, won. Just where does that leave us?

I would like to make some hopefully reasonably informed predictions, and get peoples’ reactions.

First, California intrastate rail will probably continue more or less as is, but there will be no linkage between San Francisco area services and LA/ San Diego services.

Second, it is possible, but unlikely, that Seattle area commuter rail will continue. I suspect, however, that that will end, and it is highly unlikely that any service will remain to Portland. Nor will there be any heavy rail sevice in the Portland area.

Third, in the Chicago metropolitan area, it is unlikely that any service other than that run by the commuter authority will continue; specifically, the Hiawathas will go. Why? Because, although it is possible that Wisconsin will pony up the ca

2

At the worst, I think you’ll see the NEC survive pretty intact including branches to Springfield, Albany, Harrisburg and Richmond.

That’s the minimum. Even the hashest Amtrak critics think that the NEC is important - beyond commuter service. Acela makes money - above the rail, after all, and the conv. service comes pretty close.

Despite the current silliness, I really don’t think you’ll see Amtrak dismantled. There are too many supporter in Congress.

I predict a sacrificial killing of a LD train or two, and some superficial “free market” ideas tossed about, but other than that, status quo.

3

The current regime is probably aware of the unlikeliness of regional interstate compacts and is using it as a cover for attempting to kill Amtrak. I agree with Don’s post that a few long distance trains will probably be sacrificed (probably the Sunset and the Cardinal) and most of the rest of the system will continue. Although Amtrak does not have strong support in Congress, it does have enough support to keep it limping along as it has since 1971.

Metropolitan suburban operations will continue pretty much intact since they tend to be locally funded. New operations or expansions of existing operations may be unlikely beyond those already in the pipeline.

4

I agree withthe above that a couple of long distance trains will be cut. I think the Sunset Limited will go. The disruption from Katrina will be the last straw. I think some of the “silver service” trains will go. I think most of the western LD trains will continue at least for the next five years or so.

It is good to see some quiet, sane discussion here. Thanks to all for keeping it this way.

5

All of Amtrack will go as far as actually operating trains and the right-of-ways will be donated (for large and mandatory sums of $$) to the several states and/or commuter authorities. And the Board will do this absolutely ASAP with no regard to any law, agreement or contract that does not speed along the process.

Since Bush has 3 more years (as far as appointments to AMTK is concerned) by the time a new administration comes to office, the system will have been destroyed to the point it will be VERY expensive to rebuild.

I hope I am wrong.

6

Killing Amtrak has long been part of the national Republican agenda, but when it comes right down to killing trains, Republican Congressmen and Senators are all for it as long as the train doesn’t serve their state.

Firing Gunn may be part of a plan to force a crisis on Congress in the form of bankruptcy. Bush’s popularity is pretty low right now and the deficit provides a good excuse for killing Amtrak. However, next year is a mid-term election year and the Presidential races will get going in '07, so IMO it’s now or never for the rest of his term. Considering the lack of progress on the current deficit reduction bill in the House within the Republican party, it doesn’t seem likely Amtrak will see major cuts.

Regarding regional co-operation between the states, I suspect the current attitude is why pay as long as someone else is. At least in Illinois the governor seems willing to tell the Feds to take a hike on certain issues. I think Wisconsin just might change it’s tune if Amtrak were to end. Chicago to Milwaukee is becoming one giant suburban area with all kinds of regional issues. The two states already have regional agreements on water usage, sewerage treatment, lake pollution, commercial fishing. etc.

7

Here’s my take.

The general public won’t be much interested one way or the other as most don’t take Amtrak.

Members of Congress will be responding to interests which impact their potential for remaining in office.

The freight rairoads will be largely silent on the issue but active behind the scenes. It stands to reason they would not want a system where they have to deal with multiple operators having access to their already congested lines. They, in my opinion, want either some single entity or none operating passenger trains on their lines.

Thus whatever happens will be decisions largely made by special interests.

Dale

8

The whole AMTRAK affair will probably stagger along in rumor and inuendo until the politics of the situation will kick in in an election year [2006] and as previously stated, the politicians whose constituancies are effected will scream like gut shot animals and what will happen will be a crazy quilt of service to various political constituancies[ ie Robert Byrd’s in West Virginia] and just enough funding to preserve the body, but not bury it… Rather than a national passenger service, it will be a national disservice.

9

I agree, post Katina Bush is a lame duck untill his term ends. Congress and foreign leaders know that they can ignore Bush in any area requiring legislation.

10

That may not be as important as it seems. The frt RRs already do business with multiple passenger operators:

Metro North
MBTA
NJT
SEPTA
MARC
VRE
Metra
TRE
Sounder

et.al.

American Orient Express
Ski Train

et. al.

Having a few more is not such a big deal.

11

Once AMTRAK is forceed, via whatever means, to stop long distance passenger service it is gone FOREVER. All the entities you have listed are either Commuter operating authorities or very narrowly defined special interests and are not subject to expanding serivces beyon their specific service areas.

12

I agree with you. But, the statement was the frt RRs only want one point of contact for all passenger ops. That isn’t true now and it would remain so even if Amtrak was somehow chopped up. (which I doubt will happen)

13

So, in post-amtrak, post-LD train America, what are we to do if we want to ride trains somewhere? Should we take American Orient Express? I wonder if there will be more services like that to crop up? Should we plan our vacations such that we visit major metropolitan areas, like Chicago, that have commuter agencies and just ride anywhere and everywhere they go? I have thought about doing that. Just parking in a Chicago suburb somewhere and riding METRA with no thought as to where I was going. Should we plan vacations to visit museums and tourist railroads like the Durango and Silverton? What are you going to do?

George

14

That’s actually a pretty good deal- a weekend pass with unlimited riding costs only $5!

15

I think there is a significant difference between the operators whom Don mentioned and Amtrak. On the one hand, many of them are local commuter operations; most of them are in-state and serve only one major city. The other group are flat-out luxury operations, and are not intended to go from point x to point y, with service in between. Amtrak is the only one which is a public transportation, interstate, operation intending to go from point x to point y, with service in between.

I think he is quite right – it is not so much a matter of having a single contact. What it is a matter of is that we have only one operation which is long distance for the general public. This type of operation – like all the commuter operations he mentions – must be subsidised; I see no future for it whatsoever if it isn’t.

16

Jamie
I agree most multiple state or regional train service compacts are not tenable although there are some exceptions where there are successful operations such as the Downeaster (Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts) the Cascadia services in Washington and Oregon, and the Hiawathas in Illinois and Wisconsin; granted the last two are bi-state passenger rail compacts which are less clumsy.

With all respect I believe your assessment of the prospects for intercity passenger rail may be too gloomy. Many of Amtrak’s services are subsidized by the states (403b trains) so it would be difficult to cut these trains off. Moreover the Northeast Corridor passenger rail service is an absolute necessity because heavy traffic congestion on the other modes of transportation would occur without it.

I also feel some of the long distance passenger trains will have to be removed
as an economy measure, and the most vulnerable trains would be the Cardinal, the Sunset, and possibly one of the two “Silver Service” Florida trains.

As much as I am in favor of high speed rail (trains averaging 150 + mph) I don’t see that happening in the near future even on an intrastate basis.

17

In a post Amtrak era, special runs like the AOE or the private passenger car groups may be out as well. Last time i looked, AOE used Amtrak equipment to pull the train. The big question comes to the crews that opeate them.

Who would be qualified to operate the train??? Don’t engine & conductors belong to Amtrak, not the freight RR? How many of them become unemployed?? Could they bump freight crews to keep a job?? Who would be left that would be able to operate from point A to point B??

18

AOE contracts with AMTK and where the train operates and there is no AMTK service, the host road supplies crews with one AMTK employee to make sure the HEP operates properly. AOE would simply lease whatever number of units they need (there would be an AMTK still, it just would not be operating trains) or purchase them from AMTK.

AMTK employes would be on RRR U/A and would have to begin looking for another job.

And nobody would be left to operate interstate and/or intercity passenger trains. As the AMTK authorization stands, ONLY AMTK can operate regularly scheduled intercity service, so if AMTK lays off their operating employees, no intercity trains. Just commuter operations which do not have to use AMTK crews and such operators as the Ski Train and AOE which would have to use host RR crews.

WITH ONE EXCEPTION … … … depending on how AMTK is restructured, there may be an operating company to operate trains that are supported by someone else. AMTK would be a contractor just like anyone else would be albiet with a legislated monopoly.

One of the things that Bush/Mineta and Company have as a weapon of mass distruction for passengers trains is that part of the authorization law that stipulates that only AMTK can operate intercity passenger trains.

19

My earlier point may have not been clearly stated. I think the freight railroads are concerned that multiple intercity, not commuter, operators would be legislated access in the same manner which is now accorded Amtrak.

Say three companies decide they can make money running between Chicago and St Louis, now the freight lines have three passenger operators instead of just one with legislated access to their line(s). Now the freight railroads would have to deal with three operators. Don’t think they’re interested in multiple operators getting access.

It’s what’s happened in the UK.

Dale

20

Sober thinking at Amtrak, impossible, I’ll believe that when the line actually owns trackage. That is sober thinking at Amtrak.