Privatizing the Northeast Corridor

[jeffhergert]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

Well, if you provide the right kind and amount of hidden subsidy, a "private" operator could make money.

Let's say the private operator only had to pay for equipment maintenance and on-board personnel and pay a small ticket tax that would go toward a small fraction of everything else (capital expenses, ROW ownership and maint., dispatching, policing, stations, ticket sales, etc.).

Maybe, you would find a bidder.

....and maybe not.

I think you are on the right track here, no pun intended.
If the right "operators" came along, Halliburton Express anyone, the government couldn't give them money fast enough. It wouldn't be a hidden subsidy either. All of a sudden, passenger rail would be a major national asset and any money would be an investment. Not that service would really improve.
Jeff

[Junctionfan]

How many people can fit into a coach car? If you run 2 or 4 trains of say 50 cars with 4 or 5 locomotives and unload all the people at once (every car has a door) with 1 train heading to say from Houston to northern Texas; how long would that take?

Not insinuating anything; just asking a question.

[jeaton]

Given that something like a million people from Galveston and Houston are leaving town at one crack, I am not sure that any reasonable level of rail service could be expected to make much of a dent. At, say 1000 people per train, it would take 100 train trips to to move just one tenth of the people on the move.

Of course, it looks like cars and buses aren't doing that great of a job.
On top of it all, if I heard it right, only about a quarter of the Houston area population is on the move.

Jay

[oltmannd]

Well, if you provide the right kind and amount of hidden subsidy, a "private" operator could make money.

Let's say the private operator only had to pay for equipment maintenance and on-board personnel and pay a small ticket tax that would go toward a small fraction of everything else (capital expenses, ROW ownership and maint., dispatching, policing, stations, ticket sales, etc.).

Maybe, you would find a bidder.

....and maybe not.

[jockellis]

G'day, Y'all,
In case no one has noticed it, passenger rail is a good way for a congressman to get quoted. Since no one funds an opposition to the nay sayers who want passenger rail eliminated, no one contradicts them with facts. They can say darn well anything they please.
I've about beaten this mule to death, but those "cracks" in the Acela brakes? A .040 inch long "crack will typically be only .001 inch deep, taking virtually no strength away from the brake. And they have been there for three years without getting any bigger than that? The FRA and Minetta just jumped on this, knowing AMTRAK could not counter this joke with a publicity campaign of facts without seeming to be lying through its teeth.
The administration can say pretty much anything about AMTRAK it wants and get away with it. No one seems to question anything derogatory that is said.
Jock Ellis
Cumming, GA US of A
Level II Certified Non Destructive Testing inspector (Magnetic Particle and Liquid Penetrant Testing)

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Somehow, the current regime in Washington doesn't realize that if passenger service was profitable, the various railroads would still be providing passenger service, both long-haul and suburban, and Amtrak and the various local transportation agencies wouldn't exist.

[Leon Silverman]

Amtrak's funding problem is due to the general attitude that Amtrak is necessary to provide transportation for the small minority of our population that canot or will not fly or drive. The passenger railroads no longer have any role in National Security. Does anyone know of any troop carrier cars built after World War II? This is because troop transport has been accomplished by air or road travel.
Esienhower instituted the Interstate HIghway system after observing how efficient the Autobahn was in moving troops around in short order. Today, with most of our interstates hopelessly clogged in and around all metropolitan areas, making over-the- road troop movements ill-advised, and the Texas Governor's use of a commutor train to evacuate 800 people in one shot, politicians might just realize that supporting Amtrak will maintain a very effective emergency back-up transportation system at relatively low cost. Look how Caltrans' ridership jumped up when the Southern California earthquake shut down major expressways. Doubling or tripling passenger capacity on a railroad does not clogg the artery like doubling or tripling the number of cars using an expressway during the rush hour.

[BudKarr]

So, there will be a tidal wave resulting from the splash created by all of those interested in throwing their money into a cash cow? Right! Sign me up.

BK

[jeaton]

The House Transportation Committee web site has links to the testimony on the subject. http://www.house.gov/transportation/ Several alternates to Amtrak's current structure are suggested and Amtrak's Board Chairman also reiterated Amtrak's proposal for "privitization".

While nobody with any plans or suggestions will come straight out and say it, but everything on the table will require federal or state funds, or some split between the two.

Jay

[TomDiehl]

I wonder where he thinks this "private money" is going to come from. Especially since the government has widely publicized the fact that Amtrak isn't profitable.

But then what public transportation system is profitable?

[ndbprr]

so the reason the railroads or anyone else would want to run the corridor is?

[jeaton]

By the way, Congressman Micah thinks that the Auto Train is just fine and will probably have a fit if it is shut down. On the other hand, no one living along the NEC gets to vote for him, so what does he care about that.

Jay

[Leon Silverman]

AntonioFP45:
That bailout can be "justiifed" because the Federal government has an agreement with the major airlines to provide charter airline service to transport troops during mobilizitions. As a result, federal employees are obligated to use these airlines for authorized govenment travel even when an less expensive, more convenient, airline might be available. However, these airlines have always used government built airports that are only partially supported by the landing and terminal fees charged to the airlines.

[AntonioFP45]

Mica should have included in his comments about taxpayer abuse the billions of dollars that were spent bailing out several airliines after the 9/11 attacks.

[Leon Silverman]

Mica says "It is a sin to abuse the taxpayers the way we are doing now."
Privitizing Amtrak would also mean removing government control of the Corridor. Were the taxpayers' interests served by the Enron or Savings and Loan scandals? Will the Department of Transportation be able build new roads or even widen existing one if Amtrak goes belly-up and ceases to operate altogether? What about the pollution and OIL/GAS consumption caused by all those extra vehicles on the road?
Surely, if someone actually performed a system cost-benefit analysis of our transportation system as a whole (That means including road and air traffic expenditures that are supported by fuel taxes and user fees) rather than just Amtrak alone, that computation would show that the taxpayers are being pampered by Amtrak, not abused.

[SchemerBob]

WASHINGTON - Putting routes in the Northeast under private control and other steps to make Amtrak profitable drew attention on Wednesday from a House panel.

ADVERTISEMENT

At the hearing, the chairman of the passenger railroad, David M. Laney, said all 20 of the high-speed Acela Express trains had returned to service. The trains, which operate between Washington and Boston, stopped running in April after the discovery of cracks in brake discs. Limited service resumed in July.

Among the overhaul ideas discussed was the Bush administration's plan to eliminate Amtrak subsidies while setting aside $360 million for service in the Northeast.

Amtrak is requesting $1.82 billion for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, compared with the $1.2 billion it now receives.

One Senate proposal would cut Amtrak's operating subsidy by 40 percent, leaving the railroad with $3.3 billion over six years. This approach would give the railroad $4.9 billion over six years for capital grants.

A competing plan in the Senate would give Amtrak a $1.4 billion subsidy next year.

At the hearing of the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on railroads, GOP Rep. John Mica (news, bio, voting record) of Florida said he planned legislation that would require Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta to conduct a competitive bid process seeking private companies to operate the Northeast routes.

"This is long overdue," Mica said. "It is a sin to abuse the taxpayers the way we are doing now."

Paul Reistrup, Amtrak's president from 1975 to 1978, said he favored creating an operating company that would run Amtrak's trains.

The company would use private money to buy new locomotives and cars, pay user fees for the use of stations and tracks and set aside part of ticket sales for a capital fund.

Reistrup is chairman-elect of the Railway Service Corporation, a Delaware company he said was involved in developing the private operation of rail passenger services.