posted
The originating posting appears to be quite short on specifics, Mr. Ohlemeier.
I fail to see any "ground broken" there, the issues are no different than those discussed at the several railforums at which both you and I participate.
But regretably, I am becoming quite pessimistic regarding the future of "off corridor' Amtrak. Previously I have contended that the LD network was safe insomuch as it represents the catalyst for ensuring Federal level funding of the only thing that really counts - the NE Corridor.
I think this exit from the Mail business as simply history repeating itself. Turn back the time machine to 1967 - that essentially represented "The End' to railroad operated intercity trains; it also was when the railroads made a wholesale exit from handling US Mail.
Whether Amtrak lost the business or kicked it out matters not; all I know is that here in Chicago, there is a lot of unused boxcars and roadrailers sitting in full view for anyone leaving to the South on either METRA or Amtrak, or for that matter driving accross Roosevelt Road viaduct.
The loss of this Mail is simply going to make justification of the LD's, regardless of how many people want to ride them, even more difficult over the Class One's "saturated" ROW's. I'm sure CSX is counting the days until they are relieved of providing a dispatchment "slot" for the Three Rivers; lest we forget the B&O, the 3R's route West of Pittsburgh, now has not only its former traffic to handle, but also what was NYC "Water Level Route" traffic West of Greenwich, Ohio.
Quite simply, continuing the Three Rivers is simply deterring CSX from what it is all about - moving freight.
Many other examples abound such as the UP Sunset Route.
Somehow someway, I think there are "under the table" assurances "out there" that the indispensable NEC will continue to get the needed Federal level funding - with or without LD's operating through one Legislative District or the other. As such, "Thanks for the memories'; let's just keep a 'stiff upper lip' (as we Anglophiles were trained to do) and "deal with it".
In closing, allow me to note I was employed within the railroad industry on A-Day. The "water cooler bets' gave Amtrak, as in the National System, a five year life expectancy. Come what may, it has long exceeded that.
[This message has been edited by Gilbert B Norman (edited 09-21-2004).]
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yikes, that thread you linked to is a monster - 7 pages! I don't have time to read it all and catch up. But judging from the first page, it seems to be a calm discussion, with nothing out of the ordinary debate. But therein lies the problem. There are no new ideas there. Everyone is still riding the same merry go round that is found on every other rail forum (this one included), and in the halls of Congress.
I'm tired of watching the merry go round. My goal is to pull the plug and get everyone focused on moving in a straight line. I've posted something there to that end.
[This message has been edited by Mr. Toy (edited 09-20-2004).]
quote:Originally posted by MOKSRail: Thought I'd alert you to some narrow-minded so-called "railfans" that twist statistics and whine about how bad Amtrak is...
I dont see it as narrow minde, it see it as open minded. I believe that most people would agree that I fall into the category of railfans who dont like amtrak. However, I am not oppossed to nation rail systems (such as the former BR). Rather I'm open minded enough to see that the current national rail system (Amtrak) just doesn't work!. Furthermore, I think being blinded to the failures of Amtrak because of a love of trains would be very narrow minded.
quote:Originally posted by polarbearucla: I dont see it as narrow minde, it see it as open minded. ..I think being blinded to the failures of Amtrak because of a love of trains would be very narrow minded.
Then you didn't read enough.
There's a couple of posters there that blame Amtrak for poor timekeeping on the NYC-CHI lines.
I asked, and never really recevied any real answer, how Amtrak controls dispatching, track conditions, freight congestion, etc.
They complain constantly about things that aren't in Amtrak's control.
I repeated to them that Amtrak RIDERSHIP IS AT AN ALL-TIME HIGH. That's good news, right? Not to them. Even if ridership increased 1000% they would still find sometihng to complain about.
One, in discussing Amtrak's market share, said Amtrak didn't serve enough of the population, when it clearly serves 85% of the largest cities. He said he didn't care if Amtrak's market share was 30%, 20% or 50%. He was mad at Amtrak for something in the past.
So the facts meant nothing to him. End of story. He only wanted to berate Amtrak and my calling him on his falsification only made him madder.
Many of the so-called railfans there hate Amtrak and try to blame it for every evil known to mankind.
REAL railfans don't hate trains. I'm tired of the moaning, whining and b----ing about Amtrak that spews out of those so-called railfans' mouths.
I'm calling them on their lies.
BTW, pointing out lies hurled against Amtrak isn't blind love of Amtrak.
[This message has been edited by MOKSRail (edited 09-21-2004).]
[This message has been edited by MOKSRail (edited 09-21-2004).]
posted
I was impressed by the intellectual calibre of the discussion on trains.com. However, that's where it ended. I quickly became frustrated with the long-winded diatribes whose essence can be summed up in a few brief sentences, i.e.:
1) Amtrak ain't what it used to be and 2) Amtrak is a waste of money
Armchair Republicans, I mean philosophers, tend to feel that anything is a waste of money that doesn't directly profit them. In the meantime, they spend untold billions of dollars on pork barrel projects that make the meager needs of Amtrak seem miniscule.
I am not alone when I say that Amtrak is an extraordinarily useful means of transportation. And I don't just mean that in an abstract sense: I use it to get all over the country.
Amtrak gets me to where I want to go quickly, cheaply and safely. No other means of transportation even comes close to the quality of service that I receive from Amtrak. If Amtrak were discontinued tomorrow, my only alternatives would be the bus or my car because I am unable to fly.
Romantic allusions to the way Amtrak used to be are irrelevant. Or maybe I should say they are as relevant to me as discussions about buggy whips and Linotype machines. The current ridership of Amtrak is ample testimony of its worth and most of us are not climbing aboard because we think it is a novelty.
There are few organizations that can pinch a penny as well as Amtrak. Amtrak may not make a profit but they probably pull in more money than anybody else could. Unfortunately, they are seldom acknowledged for this extraordinary accomplishment.
My Governor, the Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson, and our congressional delegation would probably not take kindly to the elimination of The Southwest Chief. They understand its economic impact to New Mexico. Nor are they inclined to use our tax dollars to support the NEC.
Bottom line is that the Amtrak we all know and love is as good as its ever going to get for the 1.2 or so billion dollars that Congress throws its way. Absent this money, Amtrak will cease to exist.
I would be greatly saddened if Amtrak ceased to exist. Not because of some romantic longing but rather because Amtrak delivers an excellent value for the five bucks a year that Uncle Sam takes out of my income tax every year.
I make about $18K a year. I'm not complaining when I have to give Amtrak $5 of my meager income. Tell me why oh why do these six or seven figure big shots cry like little babies when they are asked to shell out $5 for Amtrak?
I bet you that most critics of Amtrak barely even climb aboard the train. I bet you that most critics of Amtrak are directing our attention to it in order to distract us from more pressing (and far more expensive) issues, like the war in Iraq.
Amtrak is a government entity that works, and works well. It is fast. It is timely. It is cheap. It is what the little guy in America wants and needs.
Don't mess with the little guy.
[This message has been edited by Chucky (edited 09-21-2004).]
[This message has been edited by Chucky (edited 09-21-2004).]
Posts: 324 | From: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really think that anyone looking for ammunition to counter some of the points put forth by the anti-passenger rail crownd should search for the articles titled "Debunking Common Myths About Amtrak." Also look at www.midwesthsr.org .
posted
It's intersting that no one ever seems to complain about the govt bail-outs of airlines again and again and again- but they sure whine about Amtrak
Posts: 23 | From: dallas, tx USA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Part of that attitude stems from the fact that for most USAmericans, taking the train isn't all that common an experience. travelling by car, and by air, have been influenced in part by the pro-highway and pro-airline federal policies. For decades, the federal policies have encouraged state and local decisions that foster reliance on the car. Some of these policies were wise when first concieved, as they helped to develop the nation's economy, however, these same policies have encouraged what some consider to be an over-reliance on cars, and also encouraged urban sprawl. Just imagine what our nation's roads would be like if there was no federal Highway Trust Fund, or no federal matching funds. You'd see more trains, to be sure, but it would be a challenge to get around in the fashion we're accustomed to right now. Try and imagine what the level of airline service would be like for any place but the largets size cities if there was no Airline Trust Fund, complete with federal bond-issueing authority and federal matching funds. Include in this imaginary situation the requirement that all airlines must buy and maintain their own airports, completely at their own expense. How many airports would places like Chicago, or St. Paul, or L.A., or NYC, have? How many airports would places like Madison, WI, or Duluth, MN have? Would they look any differnt than they do at present? What if the airlines had to pay for their own traffic control with only their own company funds (i.e. no FAA-provided traffic control) How expensive would it be to fly then? The levels of service in many markets wwould probably resemble the number of frequencies and level of service that Amtrak offers at present. I guess what I'm trying to write here is that you get what service levels you fund (IOW, pay) for. What do people expect when Amtrak is shortchanged, relative to the highways & airlines?
Many folks will complain, sometimes bitterly, about Amtrak, without comparing the amount of money that routinly flows through the various Airline & Highway Trust Funds, and they refuse to recognist that (a) comparisons of that nature are the proverbial apples-to-oranges comparison, and (b) you get what you pay for. When passenger rail gets its own Trust Fund, and the gov't decides to issue bonds to assist in financing said Trust Fund, and when the Congress finally steps up to the plate and gives a respectable amount of adequeate capital to Amtrak, then the comparisons will become more valid. Until that time, we need to continue to point out, every time it is mentioned, that Amtrak can't be compared to the airlines or the highways, and has never really had the funding to get into a state of good condition. I also think that people percieve the airlines as providing something of essential nationwide value, while Amtrak is seens as providing a service of value in only a limited number of locations.
My attitude: Amtrak provides a valuable service everywhere it goes, across the entire nation, even when it serves some locales only once per day in either direction. An investment in passenger rail is as much an investment in the economy as the investments in the local highways or airports.
[This message has been edited by CG96 (edited 09-21-2004).]
posted
Fear not, Amtrak isn't going away, and here's why.
First, it is an election year. Elections occur every two years, so if Amtrak dies, politicians will have to account for it. No elected official in his or her right mind will want to admit that they voted to kill Amtrak on their watch. They read the polls. They know 70+% of Americans support Amtrak. Rail travelers may not be a large percentage of their constituents, but in a close election a few thousand or even a few hundred angry rail travelers may be sufficient to make or break the career of an incumbent. (Mind you, there are a few politicians who are NOT in their right mind, but they are the exceptions.)
Second, as mentioned, while Congress may be dumb as soap on this topic, many states are fully aware of the value of long-distance trains to their economies. They're not going to roll over and play dead if their services are threatened. It will only take a few angry Governors on the nightly news to get Congress to back down.
Third: I don't subscribe to the belief that long-distance trains exist soley to provide political support for the NEC. But the fact is that without them the NEC's funding would not have enough political support from other areas of the country to get the level of federal funding it enjoys now. The NEC states would then have to start putting up the money for NEC services themselves. They ain't gonna let that happen.
Fourth: Amtrak is just the most visible problem with American railroading. The same problems that make Amtrak trains late are making freight shipments late as well. The freight railroads do not have the capital to make all the necessary capital improvements to meet projected demand. Sooner or later there will be public-private infrastructure partnerships on the national level, as is already being done in many states. The public contribution will come with strings attached to benefit public transportation, just as it already has in California and a few other states.
The problem is, while Amtrak isn't going away, it also isn't going to get any better until the Congresscritters realize that the light at the end of a tunnel is an oncoming passenger train.
posted
First, Mr. Toy, I hope you are right. I ride 'em; this year to the tune of three trips and $1858.05 in the hopper.
If, as I fear, this is the beginning of the end for LD's, it will hardly be because "people don't ride 'em". The likely reason will be that the Congressmembers loosing service as a result of the LD's phase out (it won't happen overnight) have been assured that the lost economic benefit will still flow to their District in exchange for their support of a Federally funded NE Corridor, presumably still operated by a government agency using the trade name Amtrak.
Further, we simply must acknowledge that Class One track capacity is at saturation levels. Look at the stats that i do not have handy such as Miles or Road operated and Ton Miles hauled comparing A-Day with today. To have a Class One, needlessly tied up account a passenger train operation is an unneccessary restraint on commerce.
Do I think capacity should be added to the Class Ones particularly in the Southwest, of course I do. But to the questions of adding capacity and revising existing freight operations so as to better accomodate passenger trains, no way.
Do I think that any "action" ought to be taken against Class Ones for declining performance bonuses thereby resulting in unreasoinable delays to Amtrak trains, once again no way.
I acknowledge this represents a complete reversal of a position I held untill Gunn came to town, namely that the LD's were needed to ensure support for the only thing, then as now, that really counts - the NECorridor. But it just seems with the "pruning" of LD's, the abandonment of ancilliary services (another board reports that Amtrak and Metrolink could be history next year), the funding requests clearly focused towards Corridor infrastructure, and even the reduction of on board service amenities, all point to the inexorable conclusion that for the LD's it's time to "turn out the lights, the party's over".
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
1) The states already provide significant operating and capital funding for the NEC, as I have pointed out before. I was unable to quickly find the 1998 GAO report via a Google search, but IIRC states provided about 45% of total capital investment in the NEC during the 1990s.
2) I concur with Mr. Norman that it's about time to end the party as far as the LD trains are concerned. The problem is not really Amtrak's, it's a lack of network capacity that has been happening for years and will take years to fix. Nobody can regard a train that's NEVER on time as serious transportation.
3) The public/private partnerships are starting to happen, and the pace may be accelerating. On Sept. 2 I was at a luncheon to celebrate the completion of rehab on the Shellpot Bridge in Wilmington, DC. The state paid for the work; NS will pay a per-car fee to use the bridge -- and as a side benefit, the state gets the right to run passenger trains on any NS track in DE. Yesterday I was in Texas for the kick-off of a study of how best to alleviate a serious rail bottleneck in Beaumont, TX (Sunset Route). The solution will certainly involve government money, at least as a loan.
But all this will take years to develop. Amtrak LD trains are chronically late NOW. I think it's time we end them.
Posts: 614 | From: Merchantville, NJ. USA | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just wanted others to provide ammo on that forum, since it gets monotonous hearing from only one or two sides.
Thanks to those that have responded.
Interesting, if you read some of the latter posts, the ones on page 10, how some people still won't change their minds even if contrasting evidence is presented to them.
I'm talking about national polls showing an overwhelming public support for Amtrak - from all regions, incomes and walks of life.
Still, one conservative poster didn't believe in its accuracy, even though conservative icon George Will agreed with the poll. --
I'm also getting a bit tired of all this bellyaching and antagonistic attitudes from so-called railfans.
I'm going to start calling these so-called fans on their lies or misleading information.
You can't be a REAL railfan if you hate trains.
[This message has been edited by MOKSRail (edited 09-22-2004).]
[This message has been edited by MOKSRail (edited 09-22-2004).]
quote:Originally posted by rresor: Amtrak LD trains are chronically late NOW. I think it's time we end them.
rresor, With all due respect, that's not a valid reason to end service. Sure, it should be improved and UP should be held accountable for the way it treats passenger trains.
Public investments should be made in Class I tracks, as are - or have been made - between SAC and Oakland. Still, UP has trouble, even on double track, running the Capitols on time.
Urging discontinuance because SOME trains are often late is like urging gutting of funding for improving certain highways that are clogged with cars and full of potholes.
To urge discontinuance because of tardiness is going extreme and doesn't make any business, stragegic or passenger travel sense.
[This message has been edited by MOKSRail (edited 09-22-2004).]
quote:Originally posted by zephyr: "I quickly became frustrated with the long-winded diatribes..." Chucky says at the beginning of his. Ironic.
'Taint long-winded if he makes valid points.
On the other hand, the poster on the other board that said it would be cheaper to buy every rail passenger a Volkswagon instead of subsidizing rail service, now that was a long-winded point, especially when relying on the hackneyed "it would be cheaper to" cannard.
posted
To say trains are chronically late is a general statement that pretty much runs counter to my experience.
The trains that I have *regularly* patronized in the last seven years have been the Southwest Chief, Hiawatha and the Surfliner. The Chief, 80 percent of the time, gets me to my destination an hour or so *earlier* than its posted time. The Hiawatha is usually pretty dependable. You can set your watch by the Surfliner.
The Coast Starlight has never let me down. The Targos in the Northwest are also very reliable.
I really don't like riding on east coast, single level trains. They feel like commuter trains to me and leave a bad taste in my mouth, but they seem to be pretty reliable as well.
So then, what's all this talk about late trains? Planes get cancelled all the time. Buses can only be relied upon in the morning before traffic screws things up. Cars get in traffic jams.
This is not Germany or Japan and all the money in the world will not make it so. Amtrak does a great job. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Posts: 324 | From: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Methinks some are giving up too easily. I refuse to be a quitter. I've been hearing the same gloom and doom arguments every year at budget time, yet the trains keep rolling along, Energizer Bunny style, for reasons I have already stated.
------------------ Decisions are made by those who show up. VOTE on Nov 2! The Del Monte Club Car
posted
Trains aren't the only things that are late. Our whole public transport system is fast becoming "third world" On the other hand it is actually so bad sometimes that that is an insult to some places that are usually referred to as "third world"
Try the usual airline service. My last US experience being return to Taiwan. Theoretically Memphis to Dallas, a few days in Dallas, the Dallas to Los Angeles, to Eva Air to Taipei.
5:30 pm flight to Dallas canceled, no explanation. Either wait a while for a connection via CHICAGO that gets me to Dallas at midnight, take my chances on a 10:00 pm or thereabouts flight, or they can send me to Northwest who has a 7:00 pm flight, but it will be late. Go to Northwest, spend 50 minutes standing in line because they have only two counters open for domestic cattle car class. They have two or three for international, but since this is just Dallas, that ain't me, and one operating on virtual walk up and go for first class. The flight finally leaves at 10:45 pm. Looking at their board, there are a lot of delayed flights of an hour or more, including about 6 evening flights actually rescheduled to the next morning, and announcements that Jackson Mississippi passengers for flight (can't remember number) go to baggage claim for "your ground transportation to Jackson". Pay for a flight and get a bus!! Meanwhile, between 9:00 and 9:30 all shops in the concourse close, because the last scheduled flight is at 9:00 pm. However, there are still several hundred people in the concourse waiting for delayed flights.
Dallas to Los Angeles almost turned into another fiasco, and is was not the Airline's fault that it did not. What was to be 3.5 hours in LA with the plane supposedly leaving Dallas on time turned into a 4 hour late flight while we ate supper in the airport. We managed to get on another AA flight, which got us to LA with 1.5 hours to spare, which is just about as close as you can make it since LAX loads out about 7 747's to Asian points between midnight and 1:00am. Our baggage did not make it. Eva had a representative meet us in Taipei and delivered our baggage to our door the next day.
This may be a little long and off the subject, however, I am saying this to say my personal knowledge is that ALL public transportation in the US is turning into a mess.
Made a domestic flight here one week after returning. Get to domestic airport about 30 minutes ahead, check in after less than 10 minutes standing in line, walk through security, have to get the wand treatment because I am wearing steel toed work boots, go to gate, sit a few minutes, go get on plane. Yes we do have to show a picture ID. Could have made the same trip in 3 hours by train but the company has an ownership interest in the airline, so their policy is that we fly on that particular airline if it can be made to fit with where we need to go. And the trains, go to counter, get a ticket with a car number and seat number, and know that baring truly unusual events you can virtually set your watch by it and the train and stations will be clean and everything will work like it is supposed to work. Yes, the railroad is subsidized, but that is only occasionally an issue. It appears to be considered a reasonable part of the function of government.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blah, blah, blah. All the mindless banter by Amtrak critics, is depressing me. I don't even want to think about an America with no LD service! I just suggest we get past the doom and gloom and move forward. I'm not as learned about the subject matter as others who've posted. I don't have the time, nor patience to stay up-to-the minute informed, so can I make some very simple points, some of which have already been said:
1. Freight traffic is at (I believe) an all-time high, while the money needed for capital improvements (more track)is simply not there. Compound this with labor shortages that are causing trains and the crews to go dead without relief (The Sunset Route situation) None of this is Amtrak's fault. 2. If Amtrak serves all of these large urban areas, it's safe to say that they run through some pretty POLITICALLY affluent areas. Why don't these politicians stop giving Amtrak a simple thumbs up, and start putting up their fists: PUT UP A FIGHT YOU PEN-PUSHING PANSIES!!! Amtrak has got to be taken off this starvation diet. One of the problems with dialogue on Amtrak is it is not a very impassioned topic. Because the Congressfolks don't openly squabble about it on the house floor, voters really don't care. Let's face it, outside Foamerland, I don't think many people know much about the politics behind passenger rail. Many people don't even know Amtrak is a government entity that is dependent on subsidies!!! I feel the fight would be a lot more even if: a. If the politicians stopped simply passively supported it, and started putting up a fight. b.the public was better informed of the issue. How to go about this? Hell if I know.
3. Besides all the other handouts the airlines get(FAA, terminals, trusts funds), how successful would they be if they had to run their whole system flying twenty-year old aircraft with limited resources to keep them maintained? Imagine an airline industry that would still be flying DC-10's, 727's, and turboprop aircraft. This is the condition of Amtrak's fleet, and Beech Grove, is all they have.
4. All in all, Amtrak has no breathing room. It has to pull a rabbit out of a hat just to get by. I would say that Amtrak does a pretty darn good job with what little they are given by the government, the railroad companies, and the public.
In closing, I think it will be an absolute embarrasement on a global level if we become the ONLY modern industrialized country in the world without a National passenger rail service. I shall observe a period of mourning and consider moving to Europe.
..............
------------------ Patrick
[This message has been edited by amtraxmaniac (edited 09-23-2004).]
[This message has been edited by amtraxmaniac (edited 09-23-2004).]
Posts: 387 | From: Bakersfield, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
To reiterate my salient point above, Patrick, I am quite certain the NE Corridor is safe. Likewise, unless Arnold does a 'hasta la vista, girlie men" the California Intrastate services are safe as well, even though the State may well contract with an operator other than Amtrak.
Your first point is all too relevant, Class One freight traffic is at a level much higher than it was on A-Day; system route miles have been considerably reduced - track miles even further considering the single tracking of formerly double track routes.
Presently, it is simply too great a burden on many a Class One (UP)to provide a dispatchment slot for a nine car, albeit well patronized, passenger train (Sunset). If "somethings gotta give", it will be the passenger train.
Somehow, I think the wailing of a five year old that didn't get their "must have" toy this X-Mas because "Rudolph the Yellow Reindeer" could not deliver what Santa's Chinese Elves made, would be heard in the Halls of Congress long before that of a displaced Amtrak passenger.
Class Ones are adding capacity, October TRAINS is testament to that. But be assured they are not adding capacity solely to handle passenger trains, and as a shareholder of one, I would have "my words" if I learned they did so (absent public funding, of course).
Once again "thanks for the memories".
[This message has been edited by Gilbert B Norman (edited 09-24-2004).]
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Railroads didn't exit US Mail in 1967. The US Mail left the railroads. Gave notice and dumped their RMS/RPO contracts.
The train-offs then started to flow.
To Mr Toy,
I'm not so sure. Amtrak has political constituencies in:
NEC California MAYBE ... IL/WI/MI
Is that enough votes?
We're mutual members at another forum, where we recently talked about the Representative for SE Denver. He's an Amtrak basher. Why? He doesn't have service; he's not getting his share of the pork.
One reason military procurement programs are so successful over time? The prime contractor finds folks in as many Congressional districts as he can to spot component and part manufacture.
John
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Toy: Fear not, Amtrak isn't going away, and here's why.
First, it is an election year. Elections occur every two years, so if Amtrak dies, politicians will have to account for it. No elected official in his or her right mind will want to admit that they voted to kill Amtrak on their watch. They read the polls. They know 70+% of Americans support Amtrak. Rail travelers may not be a large percentage of their constituents, but in a close election a few thousand or even a few hundred angry rail travelers may be sufficient to make or break the career of an incumbent. (Mind you, there are a few politicians who are NOT in their right mind, but they are the exceptions.)
Second, as mentioned, while Congress may be dumb as soap on this topic, many states are fully aware of the value of long-distance trains to their economies. They're not going to roll over and play dead if their services are threatened. It will only take a few angry Governors on the nightly news to get Congress to back down.
Third: I don't subscribe to the belief that long-distance trains exist soley to provide political support for the NEC. But the fact is that without them the NEC's funding would not have enough political support from other areas of the country to get the level of federal funding it enjoys now. The NEC states would then have to start putting up the money for NEC services themselves. They ain't gonna let that happen.
Fourth: Amtrak is just the most visible problem with American railroading. The same problems that make Amtrak trains late are making freight shipments late as well. The freight railroads do not have the capital to make all the necessary capital improvements to meet projected demand. Sooner or later there will be public-private infrastructure partnerships on the national level, as is already being done in many states. The public contribution will come with strings attached to benefit public transportation, just as it already has in California and a few other states.
The problem is, while Amtrak isn't going away, it also isn't going to get any better until the Congresscritters realize that the light at the end of a tunnel is an oncoming passenger train.
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Presently, it is simply too great a burden on many a Class One (UP)to provide a dispatchment slot for a nine car, albeit well patronized, passenger train (Sunset). If "somethings gotta give", it will be the passenger train.
On the other hand, the elimination of one try-weakly passenger train isn't going to help the situation, either. If Amtrak goes away, the problems for freight traffic will remain. It will, therefore, still need to be solved. And if they manage to solve it, it will also mean better service for the handful of passenger trains. If they fail to solve it, the passenger trains will be the least of their troubles.
I'm not so sure. Amtrak has political constituencies in:
NEC California MAYBE ... IL/WI/MI
You're referring to states with regional services. I'm talking about states that only have long-distance service, like Montana, New Mexico, etc. Nor am I referring to their federal representatives. I'm referring to state leaders who know more about how these services affect them than their own reps in Washington do. To repeat my earlier comment: "Congress may be dumb as soap on this topic, many states are fully aware of the value of long-distance trains to their economies." Montana even conducted a study to determine what the economic impact would be if the Empire Builder were eliminated. State officials there are very concerned, indeed.
quote:Is that enough votes?
The question in my mind is whether there are enough votes to kill Amtrak or not. Again, I ask, what elected official wants to be the one who voted to kill Amtrak on their watch? We can both probably name a few, but can anyone name the necessary 51 Senators and 218 Congresscritters who would actually vote to kill Amtrak's national network?
quote:We're mutual members at another forum, where we recently talked about the Representative for SE Denver. He's an Amtrak basher. Why? He doesn't have service; he's not getting his share of the pork.
Like I said, as a Congresscritter this guy is dumb as soap on this matter. Denver does have service (Trains 5 & 6). The city and state are working to expand Denver Union Station to serve as an intermodal transportation hub. I have relatives in Denver, so I am aware of the issue, but I'm not follwing local thinking on that very closely, since I am in California. But I believe the CZ is considered to be an essential component of that Denver hub.
Oregon transportation officials (Along with Oregon Congressman Ron Wyden), are actively seeking to restore the Pioneer. They know they've got an uphill battle, but the state recognises its importance enough to make the effort.
The US Conference of Mayors has, on several occasions, endorsed full federal funding for Amtrak.
So, yes, at the state and local government levels, the people who are on the front lines in dealing with transportation planning, there is ample support for Amtrak. Its just that little isolated island between Virginia and Maryland that seems to have trouble grasping these concepts.
------------------ Decisions are made by those who show up. VOTE on Nov 2! The Del Monte Club Car
[This message has been edited by Mr. Toy (edited 09-24-2004).]
Note on the "vision and goals" page that one of the stated goals is: "Provide the opportunity for connections to and between local, regional, statewide, and national transportation systems and networks."
posted
If eliminating LD service can affect Corridor service, as it has been previously suggested, it can be said that the California corridor trains may be affected too.(especially by the elimination of the Starlight and Zephry)
------------------ Patrick
Posts: 387 | From: Bakersfield, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
From what I saw of the Denver Union Station site, I'm not that sure they plan future mainline rail for it. My read of the plan documents is they want a place to support a reinvestment in intra- or inter- urban rail. I've been in and out of Denver since 1963. That back-down movement to put a train into the station has not changed in 41 years. I have to wonder how long that will last.
Next, Congress will not vote to "kill" Amtrak. When the time comes, it will be a vote to "re-authorize" it, only the language will be such that either the LDs are in, or they are explicitly out.
I used the selection of states with malice aforethought in my post. The states with regional services provided by Amtrak, as I read the list, do not have 51 Senate and 218 House votes. That is the one place I hold optimism for the LDs. Absent some pork that becomes a swap, Amtrak may well limp along.
At the same time, all politics is local. That is a truism, but I've rarely known it to be wrong. Congressmen have to be able to see the value added IN THEIR DISTRICTS. This means money and jobs flushing into districts. If Amtrak and its partisans cannot articulate that, shame on them.
Amtrak is a creature of Congress. It had jolly well better know how to play the game at least as well as every other agency.
John
[This message has been edited by PullmanCo (edited 10-04-2004).]
quote:Originally posted by MOKSRail: narrow-minded so-called "railfans" <snip> how bad Amtrak is.
I have occasionally run into anti-Amtrak railfans. They are opposed it it because (a) the trains all look alike and are uninteresting to photograph or (b) they get in the way of freight trains or (c) they don't like their tax dollars being used for trains.
While I don't mind the tax subsidy I don't think you will change many railfan opinions regarding LD trains. I think the effort is better spent getting the general public interested in rail.
Posts: 874 | From: South Bay (LA County), Calif, USA | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
