If Amtrak IS Dismantled, Perhaps Time to Force The Railroads back into the Passenger Business

[Anonymous]

For The Last time AMTRAK HAS EMINATE DOMAIN AND THEY HAVE USED IT!
When Guilford refused to upgrade the tracks for the Montrealer back in the 80s Amtrak went to court and took the right of way from Guilford and sold to Central Vermont...Look it up! They also took track from Penn Central from Albany to Rotterdam Juntion for there use as well.

[DSchmitt]

QUOTE: Originally posted by up829
To make matters worse the places most interested in passenger trains, high speed rail, are often Democratic while the Federal government is Republican. For example, post 9/11 even the so-called Speaker of the House(R-IL) couldn't get Homeland Security funding to protect Sears tower.

It is not a Republican vs Democrat issue.

The places where passenger rail is most supported are those where there are high population densities and a high percentage of the population can use the service, whether they do or not. An almost equal number of people live in areas of lower density and far from rail passenge lines. Most of them do not will never need to ride a passenger train and do not see a need for them. I said on another topic that even if you live next to the tracks, if you have to drive to the train station, you are often better off just driving directly to you destination. This is especially true if the destination is not near a station.

The resurgence of commuter and short haul passenger services is on Local, State and regional levels where there is perceived need and a large Local or State component in the financing.

The politicans do have to answer to their constitutes and so often will not support projects that benifit other areas of the country unless they can bring something to their own area too. This is what "pork" is all about.

What a lot of us railfans see as good for the country is often seen a "pork' by the majority of the people.

Nearly everyone drives or rides in a car frequently, so they may perceive the "need" for a highway even if it is in another State.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by trainfinder22

For The Last time AMTRAK HAS EMINATE DOMAIN AND THEY HAVE USED IT!

I'm glad it's the last time. The actual term is "eminent domain" and it is granted to governments, Amtrak, being a government entity, can argue "eminent domain" cases on behalf of the government. This is not to say that Amtrak having this authority is a bad thing. Being a branch of our government, it can be used only for the "public good." Often that is a cloudy issue. Obviously our government feels rail passenger service is a vital service to give Amtrak this authority.

Wayne

Specifically it is given this right in the following:

UNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED
TITLE 49. TRANSPORTATION
SUBTITLE V--RAIL PROGRAMS
PART C--PASSENGER TRANSPORTATION
CHAPTER 243--AMTRAK

Current through Pub. L. 108-6, approved 02-13-03


§ 24311. Acquiring interests in property by eminent domain

(a) General authority.--(1) To the extent financial resources are available, Amtrak may acquire by eminent domain under subsection (b) of this section interests in property--
(A) necessary for intercity rail passenger transportation, except property of a rail carrier, a State, a political subdivision of a State, or a governmental authority; or
(B) requested by the Secretary of Transportation in carrying out the Secretary's duty to design and build an intermodal transportation terminal at Union Station in the District of Columbia if the Secretary assures Amtrak that the Secretary will reimburse Amtrak.
(2) Amtrak may exercise the power of eminent domain only if it cannot--
(A) acquire the interest in the property by contract; or
(B) agree with the owner on the purchase price for the interest.

(b) Civil actions.--(1) A civil action to acquire an interest in property by eminent domain under subsection (a) of this section must be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in which the property is located or, if a single piece of property is located in more than one judicial district, in any judicial district in which any piece of the property is located. An interest is condemned and taken by Amtrak for its use when a declaration of taking is filed under this subsection and an amount of money estimated in the declaration to be just compensation for the interest is deposited in the court. The declaration may be filed with the complaint in the action or at any time before judgment. The declaration must contain or be accompanied by--
(A) a statement of the public use for which the interest is taken;
(B) a description of the property sufficient to identify it;
(C) a statement of the interest in the property taken;
(D) a plan showing the interest taken; and
(E) a statement of the amount of money Amtrak estimates is just compensation for the interest.
(2) When the declaration is filed and the deposit is made under paragraph (1) of this subsection, title to the property vests in Amtrak in fee simple absolute or in the lesser interest shown in the declaration, and the right to the money vests in the person entitled to the money. When the declaration is filed, the court may decide--
(A) the time by which, and the terms under which, possession of the property is given to Amtrak; and
(B) the disposition of outstanding charges related to the property.
(3) After a hearing, the court shall make a finding on the amount that is just compensation for the interest in the property and enter judgment awarding that amount and interest on it. The rate of interest is 6 percent a year and is computed on the amount of the award less the amount deposited in the court from the date of taking to the date of payment.
(4) On application of a party, the court may order immediate payment of any part of the amount deposited in the court for the compensation to be awarded. If the award is more than the amount received, the court shall enter judgment against Amtrak for the deficiency.

(c) Authority to condemn rail carrier property interests.--(1) If Amtrak and a rail carrier cannot agree on a sale to Amtrak of an interest in property of a rail carrier necessary for intercity rail passenger transportation, Amtrak may apply to the Interstate Commerce Commission for an order establishing the need of Amtrak for the interest and requiring the carrier to convey the interest on reasonable terms, including just compensation. The need of Amtrak is deemed to be established, and the Commission, after holding an expedited proceeding and not later than 120 days after receiving the application, shall order the interest conveyed unless the Commission decides that--
(A) conveyance would impair significantly the ability of the carrier to carry out its obligations as a common carrier; and
(B) the obligations of Amtrak to provide modern, efficient, and economical rail passenger transportation can be met adequately by acquiring an interest in other property, either by sale or by exercising its right of eminent domain under subsection (a) of this section.
(2) If the amount of compensation is not determined by the date of the Commission's order, the order shall require, as part of the compensation, interest at 6 percent a year from the date prescribed for the conveyance until the compensation is paid.
(3) Amtrak subsequently may reconvey to a third party an interest conveyed to Amtrak under this subsection or prior comparable provision of law if the Commission decides that the reconveyance will carry out the purposes of this part, regardless of when the proceeding was brought (including a proceeding pending before a United States court on November 28, 1990).

[mustanggt]

This is better literature than books I have to read at school! But on a serious note, planes are much faster than long distance trains; And if Airlines have more passengers due to this, Then the high demand may make the cost of flying go down slightly. And, if Amtrak goes kaput in the next 10 years, they could sell their equipment to
commuter rr's (mbta, metra, ect

[Anonymous]

The commuter railroads don't want Amtrak's obsolete equipment..... And thats the root of the problem.... If we funded Amtrak adequately, we would have a state of the art high speed rail service everywhere..... But we don't, and don't.....

[Anonymous]

necessary for intercity rail passenger transportation, except property of a rail carrier, a State, a political subdivision of a State, or a governmental authority;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Um exsuse me but "Except property of a railroad carrier" how did this come into play when amtrak took property from guilford and gave it to CV?

[route_rock]

Ok first of all this is not Bush's fault k.So get over it.Had enough of that already.Second the main reason it was a female dog getting homeland security money for sears tower is cause daley is a moron plain and simple.9/12 he was running around screaming that no terrorist was going to attack Sears tower(news fla***here was agroup supposed to)then he stands around and cries that they cant put up the barriers etc etc.Daely is a putz but hey I dont live in the WIndy so I can do nothing about it.Lastly Forcing a buisness is stupid.Look at what 90's era reforms did.No CEO will earn above x so they found a way around it.Now that they are deregulated railroads can screw around and lose whatever buisness they dont want.Look at where single car shipments are going right out the door.Common Carrier just means if they bring it you have to ship it but that doesnt mean you cant drive the buisness off.This discusion has been going on since it was called Railpax.Hell anyone here remember all the crying over Conrail is running off fedral tax dollars?BNSF fan dude you need to relax.You scream over amtrak funding how about other wasteful programs?How about all the money to so called scientists that make no useful contribution?Or to artists that couldnt draw a circle?Get a grip dude I would rather pay for Amtrak than most other fedral programs.want the solution?Make Amtrak a public company.Let buisnessmen run it,not congressmen.

[Anonymous]

I have an idea,Why not let the American People Decide Amtrak's FATE......NOT THE GOVERNMENT!

[railman]

all that time, I thought that the government had to answer to us, boy was I wrong.

Either way, (here's the short solution to all our problems) give Amtrak the money it needs for a couple of years, then if it goes to the tubes, then all you cheapos who are paying doubled property taxes for all that other non-revenue stuff (roads, schools, utilities) can have a leg to stand on. What Amtrak is doing with the table scraps it gets from our "leaders" should be commended, not torn down.

[CG9602]

I second Railman's sentiments. :)

[route_rock]

Now we are talking BNSF and railman good ideas both.Hell anyone that has "run"amtrak should get a vacation in paradise!!Anyone that put up with that much stress needs a break.

[Anonymous]

I think that the Northeast Corridor will always be around

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by route_rock

Ok first of all this is not Bush's fault k.So get over it.Had enough of that already.Second the main reason it was a female dog getting homeland security money for sears tower is cause daley is a moron plain and simple.9/12 he was running around screaming that no terrorist was going to attack Sears tower(news fla***here was agroup supposed to)then he stands around and cries that they cant put up the barriers etc etc.Daely is a putz but hey I dont live in the WIndy so I can do nothing about it.

If you've ever flown much into Chicago, you know where the east-west flight paths used to go and how citical this is. Closing Meigs Field right on the lakefront was another piece of what became a highly political issue. Because of the way it's constructed, Sears Tower could probably take a hit without coming down, but it's not the most vulnerable target.

Daley was trying to reassure and calm the public about possible attacks, just like a lot of other mayors and public officials on 9/12, why does that make him a moron? After his request was turned down, it was re-requested twice by Hastert and Fitzgerald, both conservative Republicans and turned down again. It's fairly well known that Bush is one vindictive SOB and the Republicans lost Illinois big time thanks to our former Republican governor handing ourt CDLs for campaign contributions so un-qualified trruck drivers could(and did) kill people. We saw this again with the Bush admin's FERC policies towards California's energy problems and Enron, so it's not a surprise that his Transportation Department has no love for Amtrak which generally serves larger cities that are more likley to be Democrat and less likely to vote for Bush.

[Anonymous]

In 3 words: "shut us down". We've always said if this country feels we're no longer needed, then, go ahead and shut us down. Then, we'll all see what's what. Period. But, to you nay-sayers, just think about this: how much money does the USA give away in foreign aid? And, know that foreign governments fund their railroads. So, with our "give aways" to these nations, we (the tax payers) are financing the passenger railroads in other lands, either directly, or, in-directly. Yet , here in the USA we don't want to finance "our" passenger railroad properly. Then, there are some who state "well, Amtrak doesn't benefit my state". Well, ok, true as that may be, but just think about how much gasoline the people on the northeast corridor will start using because the trains they "used to ride" are no longer there. And, that will just add another "excuse" for the oil companies to raise the price for a gallon of gasoline because of the 'ol supply & demand game. And, guess what? You'll be paying that increase in gasoline prices, too. Those gasoline prices aren't just going to affect those states where Amtrak used to operate . Then, there's the issue of 22,000 railroad employees who will no longer be contributing into the railroad retirement fund. But, that's another debate.

[railman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by amtrak-tom

In 3 words: "shut us down". We've always said if this country feels we're no longer needed, then, go ahead and shut us down. Then, we'll all see what's what. Period. But, to you nay-sayers, just think about this: how much money does the USA give away in foreign aid? And, know that foreign governments fund their railroads. So, with our "give aways" to these nations, we (the tax payers) are financing the passenger railroads in other lands, either directly, or, in-directly. Yet , here in the USA we don't want to finance "our" passenger railroad properly. Then, there are some who state "well, Amtrak doesn't benefit my state". Well, ok, true as that may be, but just think about how much gasoline the people on the northeast corridor will start using because the trains they "used to ride" are no longer there. And, that will just add another "excuse" for the oil companies to raise the price for a gallon of gasoline because of the 'ol supply & demand game. And, guess what? You'll be paying that increase in gasoline prices, too. Those gasoline prices aren't just going to affect those states where Amtrak used to operate . Then, there's the issue of 22,000 railroad employees who will no longer be contributing into the railroad retirement fund. But, that's another debate.

[#ditto]

Yeah, give em' something to use for excuse. Another scam was to let them tear out all the oil tanks here in the states; so we're on a "day of" oil supply. So if ANYTHING happens we get the hammer. [soapbox]Why did we let them do this? Because we wouldn't want those poor starving oil companies to get stuck with a big supply if we all didn't need any oil one day...that'll be the day.