posted
I just read an article saying a House subcommittee is recommending only $580 mil for Amtrak next year. The reasoning was to force 'reform'. A Representative gave an example of reform as the NE states taking over the NE Corridor, and the Feds running the National system?
Sounds absurd to me. California can do it because they are one state. But then they end up subsidizing their regional system while the NE gets it paid for by the Feds.
Just throwing this out for discussion. My point of view is that Gunn is doing a good job and give him more money. Much more.
BNSF 1088 Member # 2400
posted
Mr Gunn is doing a great job and i hope if he does not get the money he will shutdown Amtrak to show the Government that he won't play there game anymore
------------------ LOOK LISTEN LIVE BEFORE CROSSING RR TRACKS
[This message has been edited by BNSF 1088 (edited 07-12-2003).]
irishchieftain Member # 1473
posted California can do it because they are one state. But then they end up subsidizing their regional system while the NE gets it paid for by the Feds
About the Northeast Corridor:
It's owned by Amtrak (actually 80 percent of it) versus private ownership in CA It cuts across eight states plus the District of Columbia Speeds on this corridor are higher than elsewhere in the nation The density of usage of this corridor does indeed exceed CA's use by leaps and bounds It serves the nation's capital, obviously The states pay their share, especially those who own their segments (CT, MA)
That of course does not excuse the federal government for not giving more aid to other rail corridors for passenger use.
This fight is not over yet; the House knows that if they proceed with a mere $580m that David Gunn will shut down the system.
[This message has been edited by irishchieftain (edited 07-12-2003).]
TwinStarRocket Member # 2142
posted
Thank you irishcheiftain for those facts on the NE corridor. Living in the midwest (St.Paul) I tend to hear a lot of 'NE gets all the attention' rhetoric.
But when it comes to financial crunch time, we lose train service altogether. RIP: North Coast Hiawatha (CHI-SEA on ex-NP) North Star (St. Paul - Duluth) The Pioneer and Desert Wind The Santa Fe CHI to Texas (faster) train. So one can get paranoid when this news hits.
It would be interesting to see subsidy per passenger mile figures broken down by NE corridor, national, and regional that include the cost of ownership of the rails and stations by Amtrak.
Also the NE has the 'economy of scale' advantage: once you have frequent, convenient, fast service, more people use it and your subsidy per ride goes down. This could apply to areas of somewhat less population density as well.
When will Congress get out of the mentality of giving Amtrak just enough money so it cannot improve service enough to get a better return on investment? Northwest Airlines alone is now losing more money per quarter than the annual Amtrak subsidy. Rest assured another federal or state bailout for the airlines will be there, and it will dwarf Amtrak's.
ozarksjoe Member # 2200
posted
The airline subsidy is of course an indirect subsidy to commerce, business, services for pay, etc and therefore related to 'the economy', it's perpetual 'ups and downs'.
Rail passenger service is much, much less related to those 'commercial' users.
Follow the money, as in campaign contributions and similar 'deal making'. Istook must be bought and paid for the trucking/highway moguls. Another factor may be because Oklahoma is losing truckers to the rail/truck operation in nearby northwest Arkansas.
irishchieftain Member # 1473
posted The airline subsidy is of course an indirect subsidy to commerce, business, services for pay, etc and therefore related to 'the economy', it's perpetual 'ups and downs'. Rail passenger service is much, much less related to those 'commercial' users
Oh yes, "of course". Except in the case of 9/11 and "of course" commuter rail. Does this mean that France, Germany, Japan et al are doing it backwards? I think not. The fact that we are facing the possibility of deflation for the first time since the Great Depression speaks volumes about the true state of the economy, not to mention recent reports of the deficit just climbing to the highest point in this country's history ($400 billion).
posted