posted
Anyone knew about this.... "Permits infrastructure-owning railroads to bid to operate any 1 Amtrak route in FY 2008 and any 2 Amtrak routes in FY 2009. Amtrak is required to make available its reservation system, stations, and facilities to any railroad that is awarded a contract under this provision."
posted
The original post here is misleading, in that the provision cited is just one minor issue in a very comprehensive pro-passenger rail bill. I suggest reading the entire summary posted by NARP before passing judgement.
As I read it, the cited passage would simply allow a host railroad to take back responsibility for passenger service operations, should it so choose, while keeping Amtrak's coordinated ticketing and station management. Though I consider it unlikely that there would be any takers, except maybe BNSF.
The bill also calls for a long range federal rail plan (something I have been advocating for a quite awhile); provides an 80% federal match for rail projects, just like highways; defines the national rail system as including both corridor and long distance trains; requirements for on time performance with penalties for the host railroads; requires that the Amtrak board have members who actually know something about rail transportation; and provides for a study to consider reinstatement of the Pioneer.
Doesn't sound like silly season at all.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, Mr. Toy, I should have read before talking. What can I say? brain spasm, maybe, I ought to know better. I just killed my previous, but given your last line, felt I had to add something to make it understandable.
On the other hand, I know congress moves at a glacial rate, but the last activity in Thomas is listed as
Latest Major Action: 10/18/2005 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 235. Senate Reports: 109-143
The entire bill runs to 64 pages, which should be good for preventionof insomnia for several nights.
George
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr Toy, I think a few railroads might bite. How much is the lost for running 1 LD train? I would estimate about $9 million per year. That is not much for a multi-billion dollar profit corporation. Plus the railroad could schedule the passenger service at a time of their liken.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Toy: The original post here is misleading, in that the provision cited is just one minor issue in a very comprehensive pro-passenger rail bill. I suggest reading the entire summary posted by NARP before passing judgement.
As I read it, the cited passage would simply allow a host railroad to take back responsibility for passenger service operations, should it so choose, while keeping Amtrak's coordinated ticketing and station management. Though I consider it unlikely that there would be any takers, except maybe BNSF.
The bill also calls for a long range federal rail plan (something I have been advocating for a quite awhile); provides an 80% federal match for rail projects, just like highways; defines the national rail system as including both corridor and long distance trains; requirements for on time performance with penalties for the host railroads; requires that the Amtrak board have members who actually know something about rail transportation; and provides for a study to consider reinstatement of the Pioneer.
Doesn't sound like silly season at all.
Why would you think BNSF would do it?
Posts: 62 | From: North Carolina | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because BNSF is the one freight operator that still thinks there is a place for long distance passenger trains. But I said "maybe" not "would."
Mr. Harris, I understand. Happens to me sometimes, too. I might add that the cyincal side of me says the bill hasn't got a chance because it actually makes sense and doesn't pander to right or left wing ideology.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lot is one of Amtrak's hottest supporters in the GOP-and well respected within his party. He might be able to pull some votes within his own party. It seems to me that the GOP has been the MOST hostile of the two parties to Amtrak.
-------------------- Patrick Posts: 387 | From: Bakersfield, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you sure CSX doesn't want to take over the Florida runs, or at least the Autotrain?
Do you think that after Frist retires this November that Lott will be Senate majority leader again?
Posts: 2642 | From: upstate New York | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by amtraxmaniac: Lot is one of Amtrak's hottest supporters in the GOP-and well respected within his party. He might be able to pull some votes within his own party. It seems to me that the GOP has been the MOST hostile of the two parties to Amtrak.
I disagree. Both party are hostile to Amtrak. Democrats is also guilty of cutting routes. However if not for supporters on both sides, Amtrak would have died years ago.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just curious, but has CSX or BNSF mentioned anywhere the possibilty, however remote, of taking over responsibility of any routes?
Posts: 62 | From: North Carolina | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Judging only by campaign contributions to Senator Lott, none of the railroads are interested in the proposal. KCS has donated $10,000 to Lott, CSX $5000 and BNSF $0. If there is an interested railroad, you would think they'd be a little more "helpful" to their benefactor.
Posts: 78 | From: Seattle | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Beacon Hill: Judging only by campaign contributions to Senator Lott, none of the railroads are interested in the proposal. KCS has donated $10,000 to Lott, CSX $5000 and BNSF $0. If there is an interested railroad, you would think they'd be a little more "helpful" to their benefactor.
Where are Iliinois Central and Norfolk Southern on this list? These companies also operate in Mississippi, with their in state milages (in 2002) being 844 - Illinois Central (Memphis-New Orleans & Jackson-Mobile) 605 - Kansas City Southern (Vicksburg-Meridian & ex GM&O lines north thereof) 213 - Norfolk Southern (Meridian to New Orleans 182 - BNSF (Memphis to Birmingham & Columbus MS) 94 - CSX (Gulf Coast line)
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Norfolk Southern doesn't give money to Lott and Illinois Central doesn't show any contributions. But isn't IC owned by Canadian National? Union Pacific (Dick Cheney) is a big contributor, as is KCS.
Posts: 78 | From: Seattle | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
UP has no track in Mississippi, so they could hardly contribute money as a corporate citizen of the state he represents.
Apparently S1516 was passed by the Senate 93-6, but has not gotten through the House.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Toy, maybe I am suffering from a senior moment but could explain further? Does this mean Amtrak would have competition as do the airlines or would there still be only one rail company?
Posts: 1577 | From: virginia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
* Let's say UP would be interesting in taking over the Coast Starlight. I guess they would take over reservations, station management and facilities. Would the train crew be hired by the host RR or would the train employees still be paid by Amtrak?
* The proposal says that Amtrak would monitor on-time performance. If a freight company took over a route, would they monitor themselves, or would Amtrak?
* The question by GP35 is interesting. Let's say UP took over the Coast Starlight. Would UP have to maintain the same timetable, or could they change it. What if they cut the CS back to 3x/week?
* I thought the part about possible reinstatement of the Pioneer was interesting. I have long been interested in a sort of "Rocky Mountaineer", in this country, to run from Seattle and Portland over to Glacier Parks and the west end of Yellowstone (I know "Grandluxe Rail Journeys has runs to both parks, but they cost an arm and a leg). I can't help thinking a seperate run to the parks, upscale but at reasonalbe cost, would be very popular. If they brought back the Pioneer, would it have to follow the old route, or could they follow the old route but have additional routes to the parks and still recieve govt subsidies and infastruture support?
Richard
Posts: 1909 | From: Santa Rosa | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
If a railroad...and that is a huge if...decides to run a passenger train, is there a way to back out and give control back to Amtrak?
I doubt very much though if any railroad would bite. Even BNSF is unlikely...but I do agree with Mr. Toy that BNSF is the most probable of any railroad. However BNSF appears content, for the moment, with earning on-time incentives from Amtrak.
Either way, good to see a pro rail related congressional bill.
-------------------- Matt Visit gallery for photos of our train layouts Posts: 579 | From: San Bernardino Subdivison | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Train Lady & Yukon, as I understand it, based only on the NARP summary, is that any railroad that owns tracks could take over operation of an Amtrak route on those tracks, but Amtrak would still provide centralized ticket sales. The train would not compete with Amtrak, as Amtrak trains would not run on that route anymore. For example, if BNSF took over the Southwest Chief, BNSF would operate the train, including locomotives, coaches, sleepers and food service (including their French Toast) and on-board staffing. But Amtrak reservation agents would still sell the tickets so passengers could have one stop shopping for all routes on their itinerary.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
