I’ll slightly revise my suggestion of a sale to an experienced, able and qualified passenger operator.
My opinion remains the same - Amtrak will only work in the hands of an operator who actually understands what they’re doing.
However, I have to slightly transgress the political boundary. Many States have a clear understanding of the importance of passenger rail and a willingness to underwrite it. Your Congress does not.
So - the only caveat is that once sold it should not be subject to CENTRAL Government interferance. State input should be encouraged, and would doubtless be more readily forthcoming for a demonstrably cogent and pro-active system.
Show me a European model where this supposition does’nt work to prove my model flawed.
The main thing that needs to happen is to get leadership of Amtrak out from under the government. Having worked in a federal agency I can tell you government does not know how to run a business as a business.
I agree that we need to get the Class 1’s involved in the process more directly than they are now. It should be considered that maybe the class 1’s or whoever should own and run the trains. A ferderal subsidy will still be needed no matter what (show me a country that doesn’t have to subsidise rail) but the money will be going to the componies running the route to pay for upkeep and to help offset any losses or what ever they want to apply it to.
This could be a good way to start getting the railroads good PR, you think of them getting you to and from places instead of just blocking a crossing for 1/2 hr or if the NY Times decides to start their stuff again.
Let me expound a bit on my previously posted items #3 and #4. There is little benefit to the Federal government from Amtrak. However, there are large local, regional, and community benefits. Some states have recognized these benefits and assist with funding. Other local and regional areas need to be shown these benefits. Some of the ones I have observed are:
reduction in highway traffic using commuter rail
reduced pressure on the highway infrastructure - saving tax dollars
Any effective plan to make passenger rail an effective player has to address the above. The political issues are to change the playing field so rail option is truly viable.
Amtrak or rails strengths include:
Potential for the most fuel effiecent service point to point.
Comfort
Scenery
Weaknesses:
Speed and reliablity
Inflexible route structure
Route structure overcapacity from freight trains
Excess baggage of various protectionest labor contracts
Required subsidy for both operations and capitalization
Threats
Freight rail does not want the hassle and liability of sharing track without profit
Taxpayer = congress & president resent paying subsidy
Opportunity
Revisit express service… but price to make a real profit
Auto ferry service… Must be able so serve intermediate points, not just ends
Global Warming & Rising Oil Prices… If we are serious about slowing use of fossil fuels, tax laws (oops politics here) changed to penilize oil and coal use would favor rail. Rail (including freight) could benefit both by increasing costs to road and air and by electrifing using wind, solar, and hydroelectric power which are very difficult for road and air.
Most likely rail would be the travel of choice 150-500 miles, road 0-100 miles, and air 750+. Long distance rail would be for nuts like us who like to go by rail and would link intermediate distance trains.
An honest question: Is there enough constant traffic in that area to neceesitiate high speed? I’m thinking the West Coast might be the next logical spot.
Good thinking, but I’d evaluate first before buying.
That would be wonderful.
I would sy not necessarily remove Chicago, but increase hub facilities. I agree that having to go to Chicago to get to DC is counterproductive. Why not uses Memphis as a hub? Seems more logical to me.
Evaluating the current system and making changes based on the data seems to be a common idea so far. Redistribution of resources also seems to be a big belief. Good. Now we’re getting somewhere. Keep it coming!
[:)]
Mike
Well, there is truth to that. My thinking on starting this topic was to remove the political aspect that has helped to make Amtrak a convoluted business in the first place. Not an easy task and not likely to ever happen in reality. Still take that away and it could be run as a real business. Perhaps even with real profit.[:D]
As for the zombies, don’t they feed on brains? Let’s not get into speculating any further as to whether those currently in control would provide solid nourishment or not. That would have to be a stand alone topic on another forum altogether.[}:)][:-^][swg]
I’m not sure how it would be possible to leave politics out of this. Many posters have mentioned continued or new subsidies as part of their plan. Unfortunately, many people lose sight of the fact that any such subsidy is not government money, it is my money and your money, which we, as voters, have allowed the government to take from us and further allowed politicians to decide how to spend.
If I were King, I’d end the subsidies altogether - rail, highway, air, river, etc. Let each mode of transportation be priced for users according to what it needs to survive and let each user pay (or decide to not pay) the true cost of what they are using. Stop having everyone pay part of everyone else’s costs. Sure, it’s something that probably won’t happen, but it’s certainly an alternative that no one seems to consider.