Guys the trainsmag.com just reported that with Amtrak circling the drain, now is is the time for rail advocates to swing aboard the passenger rail bandwagon and let elected officials know that the United States needs a passenger system that's truly national, fast, and well-funded.
In other words, everything that Amtrak isn't. Outside the Northeast Corridor and perhaps California, Amtrak's system is now skeletal, relatively slow, and many cities offers only a single departure per day. And it's anything but well-funded.
You guys need to Contact your representative and senators. Since states may play a larger role in preserving and expanding passenger service, don't forget your state lawmakers and governor. E-mail them. snail mail them. Just contact them.
They will even make it easy. To contact your Senators,go to the internet connection and type http://www.senate.gove/contacting/index.cfm. For representaves in the House, type http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html.
Now that the Amtrak Reform Council has did pulled the sunset trigger and did concluded thatAmtrak won't and will not meet the December 2002 deadlinefor reaching operational self-sufficiency, the fate of the entire intercity passenger system is now on the line.
By mid-January, Congress will receive the Reform Council's plans for restructuring passenger rail, and Amtrak's own liqidation proposal.
That Congress will be at the throttle isn't exactly reassuring. It was Congress, after all, that did adopted the shortsighted self-sufficiency deadline as part of the 1997 Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act.
But since Ccongress now bears responsibility for creating the mess, it's Congress that should clean it up. It's long past time to correct the mistakes of the 1997 reform act and the original 1970 law that created an Amtrak that could barely survive, not thrive. The self-sufficiency deadline was as irresponsible as it was ill-advised, serving only to make a bad situation worse.
In its unwavering determination to starve Amtrak of operating support, Congress did ignored the lessons of history.
Every railroad deprived of cash and faced with rising costs has done exactly what Amtrak is doing now: Making decisions that make sense in the short term but not in the long term. Deferring maintenance. Idling equipment in need of overhauls or that was damaged in wrecks. Selling everything it can, and mortgaging what it can't We've seen this before with the Southern Pacific, Penn Central, and countless other down-on-their-luck railroads.
What we're left with now is an Amtrak in worse shape than it was in 1997-finacially, operationally, and in terms of its rolling stock. Even the sleek, new 150-mph Acela Express trains are held to a trot by the Northeast Corridor's aging, outdated, and increasingly unreliable infrastructure.
Congress isn't the only institution to blame, however. There's plenty to go around, and much of it points to Amtrak itself.
The Amtrak Reform Council did conluded that Amtrak's management didn't move aggressively to cut costs, raise revenue, or become more efficient. If you boil down the Reform Council's conclusions, the panel basically says Amtrak management did nothing but twiddle its thumbs while the deadline clock ticked its way toward midnight.
The head of the United Transportation Union says thatAmtrak's management lacks the vision nd marketing savy necessary to advance passenger rail in a transportation marketplace that's *** -eat-*** competitive.
Other Amtrak critics point that states-not Amtrak-have been driving route expansioins, such as what California has undertaken. Where's the leadership, they ask.
Finally, Amtrak has done little to improve its relationship with freight railroads, who often delay passenger trains unacceptably, thereby contributing to a poor on-time performance that robs Amtrak of what ridership potential it could wring out of its existing network.
When Amtrak publicly took Conrail to task for delaying its trains-and threatened to sue- The lake Shore Limited suddenly began running on time. Certainly Amtrak has operational problems of its own that contribute to tardy trains. But it has a statutory club that it has chosen not to wield against the freight railroads.
One key decision facing Congress is whether to merely reform Amtrak or to throw it out. Some legislators are likely to favor getting rid of Amtrak and starting over from scratch.
The high-speed bill offered by Rep Don Young, R-Alaska, for example, would bar Amtrak from touching any capital funding because Amtrak's history of turning capital dollars into operating funds. Others are likely to vote in favor of keeping a restructured Amtrak, perhaps one separated into different operating and infrastructure companies.
It should be an interesting battle. Of more importance,however, is how Congress and the White House answer the essential questions: What role should passenger rail play, how extensive should its route map be, and how willit be funded?
It's indisputable that passenger rail has a critical role to play in short-haul corridors where it is competive with airlines and highways. For evidence, look at the phenomenal ridership in gains in California, propelled by frequent departures and new equipment. Or the Northeast Corridor, which carries the lion's share of people moving between New York and Washington.
For all their charm and appeal, it's less clear what role long-distance trains have, unfortunately. Rail advocates will have a harder time winning the argument that the cruise-type trains Amtrka currently operates make finacial sense-assuming Amtrak loses as much money on them as it claims.
Hgher and high-speed rail is the way to go, and ultimately high-speed systems must be built. But you've got to walk before you run. So an incremental approach is necessary, where speed are raised to 90 mph, 110 mph, and eventually 125 and beyond. That's why high-speed rail provisions that are unfriendly to incrementalism should be shown the door. The Interstate highway system wasn't built in a day, after all.
guys Please Let your elected officials know yours. When you all do, be sure to try to shatter the myth that rail is the only subsidized mode of transportation.
I want you all to Remind them that the government spends on more on highways andaviation in a week than it does on rail in an entire year.
Maybe this time around, Congress can get rail right.
Well guys what are your thoughts and what are you going to do?
posted