See attached post: New Transport Sec'y eyes alternatives to federal funding. One can only hope that, should she actualy follow through on this, her impressions will be positive, and she would understand the issues and the environment in which Amtrak has to function.
Posted by Mr. Toy (Member # 311) on :
Well, judging from quotes in that article, she doesn't get it right now.
Consider:
quote:Peters said she embraces the Bush administration's push to reduce annual federal subsidies for Amtrak to help prod the national passenger rail system into replacing "a failed business model," Peters said.
More of the same. Starve Amtrak into submision.
quote:If the end segments of a long-distance route produce enough passengers to make those segments economical but that isn't the case for the middle, it may be prudent to have trains roll through some current stops, she said.
Doesn't sound like she understands that trains aren't planes, and that intermediate stops are cheap and effective ways to draw more paying customers.
She is right, though, that Amtrak needs more stable funding.
Her views on Highway funding seems to echo her predecessors views on Amtrak funding:
quote:The federal gasoline tax provided enough revenue for building the interstate highway system during the second half of the 20th century but won't serve as large a role in meeting the nation's transportation needs in the 21st century, Peters said....
States and local governments now can shoulder more of the load, both in ability to raise private funding to pay for transportation improvements and in increased expertise in planning and managing sophisticated projects, Peters said. "Those are decisions that local governments are going to have to make."
First of all, states already do the planning and managing of highways, so I don't know what she's thinking there. But it sounds like she's trying to shove highway funding burdens on the states just as Mineta tried to shove Amtrak funding on the states. Do you think she'll get a cheerful reception in statehouses? Mineta sure didn't.
Posted by Kiernan (Member # 3828) on :
How can you get to be secretary of transporation and never have ridden an Amtrak long-distance train?
The United States has a good highway system because we have the Federal Highway Trust Fund. California has good rail passenger systems because the public is willing to fund them. An article in The New Yorker said that economists generally agree that the gasoline tax is a fair tax that works well. So what's the problem? We have railroads in this country because in the 1800s the FEDERAL government supported them. The people at the time recognized the need for a good transportation system, and that need hasn't decreased on bit.
It is true that some states need to pay more for transportation--Alaska comes to mind--but pushing costs off on the states is not going to solve the problem, either rail or highway.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kiernan: How can you get to be secretary of transporation and never have ridden an Amtrak long-distance train?
The same way you get to be boss of a lot of things without knowing a thing about the nuts and bolts of the business. You know the right people and have somehow managed to impress them that you know how to manage things. I could have said politics, but large private businesses are really no better. The supposed ability to manage is sufficient because we have developed this concept that "management" is a free standing skill that does not require any knowledge of the thing being managed. There are quite a few business failures due to this cause. It is probably worse in government because so far at least the government has never gone bankrupt.
There have been cities that have hired managers of their city transportation systems - read bus systems - that have never in their lives ridden a city bus.
Posted by Frank,NARP (Member # 4586) on :
Curious enough,But the current nominee of the Sect of Transportation is a well informed on railpassenger and I beleive she will help Amtrak rather than Hinder Amtrak as tyhe previous Secretary did. You dont really have toride the "RAILS" persay if you listen to the actual persons involved in the day to day peration of Amtrak.
Posted by Tanner929 (Member # 3720) on :
Success of a inter-city model might,could, will increase Long Distant Ridership. I believe many people think a train trip from NY to Washington DC is a long distance train trip. We have to get off the "There starving Amtak" mantra and look to find train travel America needs and wants. A few dollars more ain't bringing back the 20th Century Limited. Stop turning a trip from Richmond to Philadelphia into a Long Distant journey.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
I hope that if Ms. Peters is sincere with her intent to 'get out and ride', she first visits her hair stylist for a dyejob (I'm not saying she is an unattractive woman as is, in fact quite the opposite). Then presumably with her husband who does not appear to be in the public limelight, book a Bedroom under an assumed name. If she is afforded Secret Service protection, her detail can book in an adjacent BR.
I hope she would select an array of trains; not only the Sunset and/or Starlight, but also the Builder and/or Auto train.
Related, I note Mr. Kummant is 'out riding' - in #10001 and the Dome #10031. I'm sure with a hand picked OBS crew serving he 'and party", the whole experience will be analagous to, when I was on duty in a CommCenter in VietNam and here comes the message (it was Top Secret at the time, but obviously long since declassified) alerting the unit commander to and preparations expected for, LBJ's 1967 Xmas with the troops at Cam Ranh Bay
Then presumably with her husband who does not appear to be in the public limelight, book a Bedroom under an assumed name. If she is afforded Secret Service protection, her detail can book in an adjacent BR.