What would it take for amtrak to go private? Would they benefit from private and not government run?
Billions with nope of profitability or return on investment.
An Act of Congress
It would require an entirely different competitive environment. This brand new environment would take many factors into account, and would adjust for environmental impact, plus cost to the economy. It would create extra environmental charges (taxes) to be paid by single drivers of large automobiles, and would penalize anybody who travels by a mode that is less efficient than Amtrak. Right now we can’t seem to agree on any of that stuff, and there’s no reason to think we’ll do so in the future, so the whole idea is a non-starter.
Tom
In addition to an Act of Congress, which is very unlikely, a credible buyer which is about as likely as the earth getting hit by an asteroid before you can read this.
If stripped down to NEC only and with a trust fund of many billions of dollars for capital expenditures, you might find a few entities willing to take it at a very low price.
Mac
It would have to make money. So far, it doesn’t, so no private operator would be remotely interested.
I think the best Amtrak can ever hope to do is break even. So far, it hasn’t even done that.
Don’t get the wrong impression, I am NOT anti-Amtrak.
“Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth!”
President Reagan probably hit the nail on the head. Amtrak has been around for more than 40 years. Eliminating it or making serious changes to it is unlikely. Having said that the Australian’s have a model that might be workable for the long distance trains in the United States.
The Great Southern Rail (GSR) operates three of the country’s long distance trains: Indian Pacific, The Ghan, and The Overland. The federal government covers the losses and ensures that the company gets a return for its shareholders. The people who work on the trains are employees of GSR. They know that if they don’t meet the government’s standards for the services, GSR could lose the contract, and they would lose their jobs. The service that I received on all three trains was a cut above what I experienced on most of the Amtrak trains that I have ridden.
The Australian Federal Government has given GSR considerable flexibility in its operations. For example, the Indian Pacific runs from Sydney to Perth two days a week d
While the former two services are profitable, the operation of The Overland is subsidised by the Victorian and S. Australian governments.
You are quoting a Wikipedia article I presume. Specifically, there is a link to a letter written in 2001 regarding the profitability of the service. The letter was retrieved in 2012. Unfortunately, the link is not operative, so it is impossible to read the letter. Moreover, to say that it is dated would be a bit of an understatement.
I downloaded the Serco Asia Pacific Annual Report for 2013. Unfortunately, the financial information for the segment that operates the three aforementioned trains is not broken out in sufficient detail to determine if the Indian Pacific and Ghan are profitable. Without access to that information, it is impossible to know how well the trains are performing financially.
It has been a while since I lived in Australia. When I was there the losses on the
The new “private” operator would have to own (their own) right of way. The physical plant would have to be “owned”, much like the FEC which is starting their “own” Florida service. Then and only then will we have privately owned train service.
It would take a visionary like a railroad version of Elon Musk to make it happen. Passenger trains can be run profitably.
Elon Musk may be visionary but beyond his overpriced luxury electric car, most of his visions are decades into the future and seem to involve a certain amount of as yet undeveloped technology. To date, he hasn’t had to deal with the risks and setbacks (see Virgin Space) that will take the bloom off of his rose.
It would take an Act of Congress signed into law by the President. Highly unlikely.
H-h-h-m-m-m, I seem to remember Conrail being privatized…if I am not mistaken.
That is quite true, but it is also quite probable that Conrail would not have been privatized if de-regulation never passed.
…and (still) a boat load of subsidy.
Completely true! All dressed up and ready to go, Conrail did not make enough money to sustain itself until the effects of deregulation were felt.
And that also required two “Acts of Congress” one to start Conrail, the 2nd to permit its privatization and split up.
-
Conrail’s beginnings trace to the Regional Rail Reorganization Act Act of 1973. The “3R Act,” as it was called, provided interim funding to the bankrupt railroads and defined a new Consolidated Rail Corporation under the AAR’s plan. The 3R Act also formed the USRA, a government corporation, taking over the powers of the ICC with respect to allowing the bankrupt railroads to abandon unprofitable lines.
-
After considerable debate in Congress, the Conrail Privatization Act of 1986 was signed into law by R
remind us: how much money did the federal gov. put into conrail in total and how much did it receive from ns and csx?
if the congress and senate really wanted to get creative they could investigate privatizing amtrak on the basis of:
corridors supported and subidized by local state and other regionanl governments
long distance servicee contracted to freight railroads on a subsidy per passenger mile - passenger number basis.
My guess is that the Federal Government might even or even save money on this change but that the overall cost to taxpayers in general would be far higher than present arrangement overall, assuming minimal change in current long distance routes.
If Congress wanted to do something usefull they would zero budget ATK, require free and fair negotiation of price for use of freight lines for passenger service rather than the gross subsidy ATK now gets due to forced access, repeal ATK labor protection, and offer to sell NEC.
Mac