posted
The UPI has picked-up the following Rail Travel Center release as an "Outside View" Op Ed on the Amtrak issue.
125 Main Street, PO Box 206 Putney, Vermont 05346 (800) 458-5394 USA/Canada, (802) 387-5812 Anywhere (802) 387-4350 FAX www.railtravelcenter.com
March 4, 2005
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ALL ABOARD FOR THE TRAIN TO NOWHERE
Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta proposes a zero budget for Amtrak for FY 2006. Under Mineta’s “Amtrak Reform Plan” the carrier will be forced into bankruptcy, and would discontinue “running trains nobody rides between cities nobody wants to travel between”. Mineta claims a better Amtrak will emerge, focused entirely on short-distance corridors. He hints that the Bush administration might provide 50/50 Federal matching dollars to help the states with capital costs, but there will be no Federal money for actual operations. This plan assures there will be no interstate train service in the United States.
The Mineta plan will be a debacle for many reasons. Its greatest weakness is that it is based on the false assumption that Amtrak should function as a series of isolated corridors. Essential to this view is Mineta’s belief that Amtrak’s long-distance trains are unused. The facts eloquently prove this to be false. These trains produced the majority of Amtrak’s 2004 passenger miles, 2.7 billion, compared to the Northeast Corridor’s 1.7 billion. (A passenger-mile is one passenger traveling one mile.) More importantly these trains provided essential connecting traffic to the very short-haul routes that Mineta favors. Typically 30-40% of the riders on Chicago’s corridor trains connect from the long-distance routes.
Amtrak carried an all-time record ridership of 25,000,000 in FY 2004. The long-distance trains did particularly well. The New York-Florida route served 738,200 passengers; the Chicago-Seattle/Portland EMPIRE BUILDER 437,200; the Seattle-Los Angeles COAST STARLIGHT 415,600; the Chicago-San Francisco CALIFORNIA ZEPHYR 335,800 and even the much maligned Chicago-San Antonio TEXAS EAGLE carried 234,000. Typically only 10-20 % of passengers are on-board for a train’s full run. Most ride between the countless intermediate cities and towns, or connect to other towns Mineta sees as “nowhere” at Amtrak’s hubs. Amtrak’s trains provide the only public transportation at hundreds of communities.
The Mineta plan fails all tests. The multi-state compacts required to subsidize actual operations will prove unimaginably difficult to reach. In order to continue the vital Boston to Washington Northeast Corridor eight states and the District of Columbia will have to agree on a subsidy formula. Mineta cynically says if a state refuses to pay trains should pass through with the doors locked. If Pennsylvania, with only 50 miles (10%) of the NEC refused to pay, would the trains skip Philadelphia? How will costs be allocated—by mileage, population, past patronage or a coin toss? And we know the states are already broke!
Costs will explode when the states have to pay all expenses not only for operation, but also for reservations, ticketing and equipment maintenance. Under the most optimistic possible outcome, trains would run in no more than 8-12 states, with all surviving routes completely isolated from each other. Anyone with a basic knowledge of the political process knows that such a “network” would never win a vote in Congress. This is, of course, exactly what Mineta really intends.
Nor will “land-cruise” trains rise from the ashes to provide a token long-distance service. The economics of such trains are already very tight. The wonderful private “Montana Daylight” died this year because of exploding costs. Once Amtrak’s regular services are gone the freight railroads will require immensely increased insurance and track-access charges, as they will no longer need to routinely maintain 79mph passenger trackage. This will put “commercial” cruise train services out of the question.
Texas Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson has eloquently framed the reality of the Amtrak debate by stating that Amtrak will either provide a nationwide service or it will cease to exist. We have a Federal government because there are issues like Amtrak which transcend state lines. Amtrak is remarkably well-used. Patronage is growing despite virtually no Federal capital support, and the case for properly funding Amtrak is overwhelming. The carrier is pleading for less than 2 billion dollars per year, in contrast with highway spending of over $145 billion (40% of which is not recovered from gas taxes). The Mineta plan must fail, or it will truly be “All Aboard for the train to nowhere”!
Carl H. Fowler
About the author: Carl Fowler is Vice-President/General Manager of Rail Travel Center. He has worked full-time promoting travel on Amtrak and other railways since November 1982. Mr. Fowler served for over a decade on the Board of Directors of the National Association of Railroad Passengers and was a member of Amtrak’s Travel Agency Computer Advisory Committee. He has addressed the National Press Club on Amtrak and train travel and has ridden over 350,000 miles by train. Rail Travel Center is located in Putney, Vermont. Its web site is www.railtravelcenter.com.Posts: 10 | From: Putney, Vermont USA | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
But like the current debate on Soc Sec. there is the "kill it all" v. "leave it as is." Agreed that we need train service but it can not continue to bleed money. AMTRAK needs to set up an "On the train Survey" to find out who rides the train, when, where and reasons they are on the train, complaints, compliments etc. How many tickets are lost because of sell-outs. Then go over to the airports talk to people getting on a shuttle, ask why not the train? Heck this way you got talk to people not telemarket them. Get some Business School Students, put on a train, its the governments train set give free tickets and meal money gotta cost less them hiring a consultant who you would have to send a car for.
Posts: 516 | From: New Haven, CT USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's great news. I hope many papers will pick it up.
BTW, I sent this earlier to one of our local weeklys. I also sent a commentary of my own to my local daily, and I drew on a couple points from this piece for inspiration, and tailored it to our own area.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tanner929: Very good piece,
But like the current debate on Soc Sec. there is the "kill it all" v. "leave it as is." Agreed that we need train service but it can not continue to bleed money.
Amtrak's spending since 1971 has been less than 3% of all federal transportation spending.
If we're truly looking to reform transportation programs that bleed money I'd suggest that we close some interstate highways (unless inter-state compacts can be formed to relieve the federal government the asphalt burden......if a state won't ante up we'll just jackhammer their on-ramps!!!!) and privatize air traffic control for starters.
I'm not trying to attack your post at all; you've made valid points here and in other posts.....I'm just trying to be ironic.
My point is that the dialogue about Amtrak has been so loaded with rhetoric for so long that what most developed nations in the world regard an essential public service (a national rail passenger system) is something that too many people (Mineta for instance) view as totally expendable here.
David Pressley
Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Living here in CT where highway projects never end. Be the time the road is finished its obsolete. During last year's senate and congressional elections the challengers hit the incumbents on the poor shape of the commuter trains, the new governor talked about the problem. Even saw an increase commuter/Amtrak line from the exsisting Springfield MA to NH line. But alase the only upgrade on the rail line is the buying of some old rail cars from the Washington BTA lines, and this was only done because of LAST years bitter cold winter. But still they want that road money i just don't see local politicians getting serious about Mass Transit.
Posts: 516 | From: New Haven, CT USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
David, I like the part about tearing up the ramps. Drive straight through without stopping. Let's hope nobody needs a bathroom.
Maybe it time to fire up my proposal for the Transportation Free Market Act. Require all transportation systems to be 100% self-sufficient by 2010. Instead of raising our butter knives against the hatchet men, lets steal their hatchet, use it on everything else, and see how they like it.
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Toy: David, I like the part about tearing up the ramps. Drive straight through without stopping. Let's hope nobody needs a bathroom.
So let's see........if we're driving north-south through Tennessee (about 100 miles)I think I could make it without that bathroom stop.
East-west at about 450 miles though........ouch. I hope Tennessee pays their share in the 'Transportation Free Market Act' or I'll just have to fly........no way I'm driving 450 miles without a potty stop!
David Pressley
Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
