Gunn to be fired

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bbrant

I do have to ask this. If Amtrak can't be profitable as a private company, then why should anyone be in favor of the government continually putting money - our money - into something that isn't profitable? Not trying to start anything, just asking.

Brian

One of the very first things the gov't did was to spend taxpayer money on transportation - a road over the Appalachian Mtns (more or less on the allignment of US40). There was no hard dollar income from this road, but it did help open up the "west" (Ohio) at the time.

"The common good" does not always yield a profit in the traditional sense.

Most transportation project DO yield benefits greater than their costs, but those benefits do not often show up as hard dollars in the same "pocket" the money came out of.

Overtly profitable operations belong in the private sector. Those that aren't, the gov't either has to contrive to make them overtly profitable (Airlines, Post Office) or operate themselves.(Interstate Highways, Air Traffic Control, ACE, mass transit)

[Anonymous]

BRIAN, WOULD THE AIRLINES BE EVEN REMOTELY PROFITABLE IF THEY HAD TO PAY FOR AIR TRAFIC CONTROL. WOULD THE BARGE COMPANIES BE PROFITABLE IF THEY HAD TO P[AY FOR THE WORK THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DOES.COULD YOU AFFORD TO PAY THE TOLLS IF ALL OF THE HIGHWAYS WERE PRIVATIZED.I THINK NOT.

[Modelcar]

...Brian.....What form of transportation {overall}, that the government puts money in...is profitable....It is my opinion we need public transportation in our big and great country....Why can't we just state the art of moving passengers by rail...{other forms too}, is a service we should have...Why does it HAVE to be profitable....We know the systems world wide that transport people {with few exceptions}, DON't make money....What is the big hangup of funding this process if it is structured to be a sensible workable program that does the job....? We sure fund lots of stuff that I don't have any benefit from and I'm not screeming bloody murder over every separate instance where that's done....I just don't understand all the noise about it...[:0]

[bbrant]

I do have to ask this. If Amtrak can't be profitable as a private company, then why should anyone be in favor of the government continually putting money - our money - into something that isn't profitable? Not trying to start anything, just asking.

Brian

[bbrant]

QUOTE:
But what private company in their right mind is going to take it on? That statement is oxymoronic.

The way I see it, the Bush Administration would make Amtrak it's own private company. Personally, I like the idea.

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bbrant

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

...As stated above..." trainoffs and other service cutbacks".....by the Adminsistration are not hard to believe....They are completely against this country having a rail passenger system...{maybe the exception is at campaign time when they like to climb on a train, etc....}. One way or another, they will get it done...{kill the system}. Thanks for term limits.

Quentin -

I disagree. I think the Bush Administration is for a national rail passenger system that's more privatized and less reliant on govenrment funding.

Brian

But what private company in their right mind is going to take it on? That statement is oxymoronic.

[bbrant]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

...As stated above..." trainoffs and other service cutbacks".....by the Adminsistration are not hard to believe....They are completely against this country having a rail passenger system...{maybe the exception is at campaign time when they like to climb on a train, etc....}. One way or another, they will get it done...{kill the system}. Thanks for term limits.

Quentin -

I disagree. I think the Bush Administration is for a national rail passenger system that's more privatized and less reliant on govenrment funding.

Brian

[Modelcar]

...As stated above..." trainoffs and other service cutbacks".....by the Adminsistration are not hard to believe....They are completely against this country having a rail passenger system...{maybe the exception is at campaign time when they like to climb on a train, etc....}. One way or another, they will get it done...{kill the system}. Thanks for term limits.

[Anonymous]

Gunn, about his firing and Amtrak from the Railway Age website:

November 9, 2005
David Gunn: “I did the honorable thing”

When he came out of retirement to accept the position as Amtrak’s President and Chief Executive Officer little more than three years ago, David L. Gunn—a highly respected career railroader with more than 40 years’ experience operating freight trains and running transit systems in the U.S. and Canada—said he didn’t need the job, and if his superiors didn’t like the job he was doing, they could fire him. He’d return to his home in Nova Scotia.

That’s exactly what happened earlier today, when Amtrak’s four-person, Bush-Administration-appointed Board of Directors (only one of which—Chairman David M. Laney—has been confirmed by the U.S. Senate), released Gunn, saying that Amtrak “needed to intensify the pace and broaden the scope of its reforms.” He was reportedly let go because of “philosophical differences” with the Board, most likely a clash over the Board’s vote in September to authorize splitting off the Northeast Corridor, an idea backed by the Bush Administration. That apparently was the straw that broke the camel's back.

Chief Engineer David Hughes has been named Acting President and CEO, and the Board “has launched a national search to find the railroad’s next leader.”

“The Board members came in this morning and asked me to resign. I refused, so they fired me,” Gunn said in an interview this afternoon with Railway Age Editor William C. Vantuono. “I feel at least that I did the right, honorable thing. I wasn’t going to abandon our people.” He said that the Bush Administration’s people wanted to implement their plan, “which is destroying Amtrak.” “I stood in their way,” he said. “That’s why they fired me.”

Gunn, a veteran of the Santa Fe and Illinois Central railroads who made his mark in transportation by turning around transit systems in Boston, New York City, Washington D.C., and Toronto, spent the past three-plus years streamlining Amtrak’s management structure, improving financial controls, and implementing many state-of-good-repair programs on plant and equipment. “If you want an example of getting fired for producing good numbers, this is it,” he said. “It’s an upside-down world we live in.”

The biggest question: Who will want Gunn’s job? Presumably, it will have to be someone willing to be more aggressive in carrying out the Administration’s plans for “reforming” Amtrak and intercity passenger rail.

“David Gunn has helped Amtrak make important operational improvements over the past three years,” said Laney in a prepared statement. “Amtrak's future now requires a different type of leader who will aggressively tackle the company’s financial, management, and operational challenges. The need to bring fundamental change to Amtrak is greater and more urgent than ever before. The Board approved a strategic plan in April that provides a blueprint for a stronger and more sustainable Amtrak. Now we need a leader with vision and experience to get the job done.”

“I have known David Gunn many years and respect the work he did to help streamline and stabilize Amtrak,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said in a prepared statement. “However, it is the job of Amtrak’s Board to make decisions that are in the best interest of Amtrak. I am confident in the Board’s judgment and its belief that different leadership is needed to address the serious challenges facing the company. The U.S. Department of Transportation stands ready to support Amtrak as it reforms its long distance services, upgrades the Northeast Corridor, and establishes new fiscal accountability measures and will continue to work with Congress to ensure the future of intercity passenger rail.” (Just two days ago, following a highly critical General Accountability Office report, Mineta said that Amtrak needs to “clean up its act and become more accountable to taxpayers and the traveling public.”)

“Anything they’ll tell you is bulls_t,” Gunn told Railway Age in his characteristically frank, shoot-from-the hip manner. Citing the 93-6 vote in the Senate approving an Amtrak reathorization bill earmarking nearly $12 billion in mostly capital investment over the next few years, Gunn said “it doesn’t compute. The Administration is serious about taking this place apart.”

Gunn’s ouster has prompted a flurry of mostly angry reactions:

“Today’s decision to fire David Gunn is wrong, ill-advised, and further proof that the Bush Administration doesn’t want Amtrak to succeed,” said Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), a former Amtrak Board member. “Strangely, this decision comes just a week after the Senate overwhelmingly approved an Amtrak reform bill in one of the most pro-Amtrak votes I’ve ever seen. Ninety-three senators are now on record supporting a meaningful and thoughtful Amtrak reform bill. It’s unfortunate that the Administration, through the Board, would rather play games with Amtrak’s management than engage Congress on how to make Amtrak stronger. Today’s action was taken by a weak Board with questionable legitimacy. It is just one in a long line of poorly thought-out proposals to come out of the Bush Administration. Earlier this year, the Administration proposed to eliminate all funding for Amtrak and reform it through the bankruptcy courts. Then they proposed splitting off the Northeast Corridor. Now they’re firing someone who’s actually made real progress at bringing some much-needed change to Amtrak.”

Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), who with Sen. Frank Lautenberg (d-N.J.) cosponsored the successful Amtrak reathorization bill, called the Amtrak Board’s action “a step backward.”

“The manner in which Mineta has handled this is disgraceful,” said one industry observer. He described the Secretary as “widely regarded in the railway industry as little more than a Bush Administration puppet.” Mineta’s pronouncements on Amtrak, particularly, the FRA awarding grants to Amtrak only if it “demonstrates that it has reformed its acquisitions practices,” have sounded like “the petulant parent who threatens to punish a misbehaving child by cutting off his allowance.”

David Laney was previously on record as opposing Administration plans to break up Amtrak. He “is now seen as a part of that effort,” said the National Corridors Initiative. “Many people believe that the Administration will attempt to sell off the Northeast Corridor to a consortium of private interests. Administration officials are reportedly in the process of meeting with the private-sector organizations involved.”

Other sources have told Railway Age that a possible scenario would involve retaining federal ownership of the NEC but placing operations under the auspices of a public/private partnership that would include a federal/multi-state consortium. That model, Gunn maintains, won’t work, given a railroad’s unique (compared to other transportation modes) need for fully integrated operations and infrastructure.

What happens next? “The Administration is running out of time,” Gunn told Railway Age. “They have to do a lot of the dirty stuff this year, because next year is an election year, and what they’ve got in mind will be very unpopular.” Gunn predicted that, within the next few months, “there will be a lot of train-offs and other service cutbacks.”

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton

QUOTE: Originally posted by Dutchrailnut

Maybe Vranich can run the job, he has been telling everyone in USA how Amtrak is F**k**p and how he would change things;-)

No doubt he would an excellent choice. He sure can talk the talk and that is all that is required these days.

That is about all Vranich is good for, talk...

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bbrant

Figures the Times would have such an article. They'll print anything to make Bush look bad. Just so happens that Amtrak is there most recent way of doing so. Oh well, liberalism always generates the exact opposite of it's stated intent.

From a lifelong Republican...

Bush is doing just fine making himself and the GOP look awful just fine without Amtrak or the NYT. Having a national passenger rail system shouldn't be about politics...

LC

[bbrant]

Figures the Times would have such an article. They'll print anything to make Bush look bad. Just so happens that Amtrak is there most recent way of doing so. Oh well, liberalism always generates the exact opposite of it's stated intent.

[Anonymous]

There have been numerous other articles in the press...

Opinion: A disgraceful signal at Amtrak
(The following editorial was posted on the New York Times website on November 10.)

NEW YORK -- The sudden firing by the Amtrak board of David Gunn, the best president in years of the nation's only passenger railroad, was a body blow to anybody who cares about long-range passenger trains.

Mr. Gunn has done a masterly job in the last three years of holding down costs without dismantling the railroad. That, apparently, was his problem. Mr. Gunn was trying to save Amtrak, but the Bush administration wants to privatize it, bit by bit.

The battle between Mr. Gunn and Amtrak board members - all of them appointed by President Bush - intensified in recent weeks when the board took steps to break off the more profitable Northeast Corridor, putting it into its own division and sharing its control and costs with the states. Senator Frank Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey, called it a "fire sale" intended to break up the nation's railroad system.

So last week Senator Lautenberg and Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi, managed to get a 93-to-6 vote to authorize $11.6 billion for passenger rail service in the next six years - as close to an all-out endorsement of Amtrak as you can get.

But while senators were trying to help Amtrak move forward, its board took a step backward. It complained yesterday that Mr. Gunn - who has greatly increased ridership, improved management and upgraded equipment - was moving too slowly. After his firing, Mr. Gunn said, "Obviously what their goal is, and it's been their goal from the beginning, is to liquidate the company."

For Amtrak's 25 million passengers, this should be a call to arms. Amtrak should be a public transportation trust. It will never be self-sufficient, nor show a conventional profit, any more than the airline industry can fly without federal help. The Bush administration long ago threatened to disassemble Amtrak. Yesterday it began at the executive suite.

[RudyRockvilleMD]

The Amtrak Board made a very bad mistake when it fired David Gunn because he was one of the best, if not the best president Amtrak ever had. But, let’s keep this in perspective. There were two topics on firing David Gunn, and in each there were a lot of calls for Secretary of Transportation Mineta to be fired. so let’s get a few things straight.

Cabinet Secretaries are nominated by the President, they are confirmed by the Senate, and they serve at the pleasure of the President; he cannot be fired by anybody except the President, so any calls for his firing are silly. A hearing is scheduled in the House for November 15, but I predict nothing will come of it.

Secretary, Mineta was accused of murder in another post in connection with evacuating people from New Orleans in the face of Hurricane Katrina. This is irrelevant, and too absurd to be addressed further.

Some feel the “public” will have little concern over David Gunn’s firing, and I agree with that. An article appeared about his firing on the first page of last Thursday’s Washington Post business section, but nothing has appeared in the news media since then.

[jeaton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Dutchrailnut

Maybe Vranich can run the job, he has been telling everyone in USA how Amtrak is F**k**p and how he would change things;-)

No doubt he would an excellent choice. He sure can talk the talk and that is all that is required these days.

[PigFarmer1]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bbrant

QUOTE:
And why should Bush care? Him and his rich cronies have their SUV and limo convoys they can ride around in. They certainly wouldn't lower themselves to use PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. Gunn was the best man available for the job, but since he wouldn't get on board with the plan to bury Amtrak, he's history.

Maybe he'll shut down the Northeast Corridor and take the whole area from gridlock to parking lot.

When was the last time any president used public transportation, Amtrak or otherwise. Don't you think that they ride in special SUVs and limos for a reason?!?

The prez uses public transportation on a daily basis. Our taxes pay for just about every single ride he takes whether it be Air Force One, Marine One, or his limo. The public pays a hefty price for his rides on public transportation.[}:)]

[PigFarmer1]

"Gunn to be fired". Pun intended???[:D]

[Dutchrailnut]

Maybe Vranich can run the job, he has been telling everyone in USA how Amtrak is F**k**p and how he would change things;-)

[UPTRAIN]

All the politicians democrat or republican are all misinformed by that fricken retard of a secratary of transportation, that sits on the board, they ask him for information, and he throws those famous lies of his into the air, what an idiot...along with other words that I can't type on here....

[Philcal]

As I see it, David Gunn has two problems. He's a railroader who knows what he's doing, and he tells it like it is. These seem to be two qualities the present administration has little regard for. News of Gunn's possible firing was on CNN last date. (11-09-05). No doubt the administration has a crony lined up for the Amtrak job, and no doubt it will be someone who knows nothing about railroading, and could care less.

[Big_Boy_4005]

I don't mind playing lightning rod for my views. Yes, it's fair to say I lean left, though perhaps not as far as some might guess from my posts. I am all in favor of fiscal responsibility, especially when it comes to a balanced federal budget. I also I think it's the little guy that needs representation in Washington, not big business. I don't believe in government hand outs, I just want to see a level playing field.

I never said that Bush fired Gunn, but Bush's much discussed policy toward Amtrak has been consistantly and clearly negative. Now, most of the people around here seemed to think that Mr Gunn was doing a pretty good job. This firing came like a bolt out of the blue.

We know who appointed Mineta, but who appointed the Amtrak board, and what was the reason for the sudden firing? The GAO thinks some money was wasted. Wait until we see the reports from the Katrina spending. Anyone care to bet whether the waste is bigger than Amtrak's annual budget?

This whole thing smacks of partisan politics. It was probably some senator who was opposed to funding Amtrak in the first place, that had the report drawn out of revenge. Clean and annonymous. Though we may never know if someone was whispering in his ear.

[bbrant]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

By the way people, my previous comments were not about party politics or liberalism vs conservatism. This country is supposed to belong to the people, not just the wealthy people.

These are my observations and impressions of the person in the White House. The person this country supposedly elected to represent them. The rest of the world is learning to hate us, and with good cause. He has managed to paint a target on us and weaken us with both his foreign and domestic policy, all the while lining his and his friend's pockets with taxpayer dollars.

It really bugs me when people get so hung up on one party or the other, that they can't see the big picture. Both parties are the same, stupid and self serving.

Ask yourself this honestly, Do you believe there is one member of congress who votes only for what the people need, and not for what they want to make them look good?

If you aren't outraged by the current administration's behavior, make an appointment for a CT scan.

Your comments obviously show you lean to the left. ("Supposedly elected", "weakened our country", etc...) That's fine. You're entitled to your point of view. However, to say Bush is at fault is for Gunn getting fired?!? It's completely nuts and pure politics for anyone to say that. You, I and everyone else on here do not know what transpired behind the scenes or what events lead to Gunn getting terminated.

I've said it before....Amtrak is not going away. Not because Gunn was fired. Not because the gov. handouts aren't what Amtrak would like. You don't just eliminate a major mode of transportation like this. How hard can that be to understand? Just because Gunn got the ax doesn't mean the sky is falling.

[Big_Boy_4005]

By the way people, my previous comments were not about party politics or liberalism vs conservatism. This country is supposed to belong to the people, not just the wealthy people.

These are my observations and impressions of the person in the White House. The person this country supposedly elected to represent them. The rest of the world is learning to hate us, and with good cause. He has managed to paint a target on us and weaken us with both his foreign and domestic policy, all the while lining his and his friend's pockets with taxpayer dollars.

It really bugs me when people get so hung up on one party or the other, that they can't see the big picture. Both parties are the same, stupid and self serving.

Ask yourself this honestly, Do you believe there is one member of congress who votes only for what the people need, and not for what they want to make them look good?

If you aren't outraged by the current administration's behavior, make an appointment for a CT scan.

[bbrant]

QUOTE:

From Funk And Wagnalls:

Lib-er-al (we know how to pronounce it) Free from narrowness, bigotry, or bondage to authority or creed, as in religion; inclined to democratic or republican ideas, as opposed to monarchical or aristocratic, as in politics; broad; popular; progressive

So you're saying that we're being led by "monarchial or aristocratic" leaders not "inclined to democratic or republican ideas."

Couldn't agree more.

Um, ok then. You don't need to further prove my point.

Amtrak's board made their decision. Gunn is gone. It doesn't mean Amtrak is. No administration, dem or republican, would just up and eliminate a major form of transportation system in the US. Anyone with common sense should know that. To think the Bush administration wants to eliminate Amtrak is a fallocy. Seems like anyone who blames him is doing so for political purposes only. Just my two cents worth.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bbrant

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

So, let me see if I have this straight. The constituents of the current administration are, Haliburton, oil companies, airlines, railroads, other big business, cronies, suck ups, and anyone with money, or without a brain. I see how he got elected without my vote.

I guess Mr Gunn doesn't fit into any of the perfered catagories, making him expendable.

Wake up people, this is our country he's destroying.[:(!][:(!][:(!][V][V][V][:(][banghead][banghead][X-)][censored][sigh]

More proof the liberal left is coming unglued.

How can you see that cutting funding HELPS Amtrak. And if Gunn had to go, then that rests with the powers that be - not you or I.

From Funk And Wagnalls:

Lib-er-al (we know how to pronounce it) Free from narrowness, bigotry, or bondage to authority or creed, as in religion; inclined to democratic or republican ideas, as opposed to monarchical or aristocratic, as in politics; broad; popular; progressive

So you're saying that we're being led by "monarchial or aristocratic" leaders not "inclined to democratic or republican ideas."

Couldn't agree more.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon

SWEET......It's the bi-monthly doom/gloom Amtrak is going to die, Amtrak hater vs. you can't be a railfan if you don't like Amtrak, let's bash Bu***hread...only we get two this week.....

There's LOTS of reasons to bash Bush, this just happens to be a railfan forum board.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bbrant

QUOTE:
And why should Bush care? Him and his rich cronies have their SUV and limo convoys they can ride around in. They certainly wouldn't lower themselves to use PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. Gunn was the best man available for the job, but since he wouldn't get on board with the plan to bury Amtrak, he's history.

Maybe he'll shut down the Northeast Corridor and take the whole area from gridlock to parking lot.

When was the last time any president used public transportation, Amtrak or otherwise. Don't you think that they ride in special SUVs and limos for a reason?!?

Or when this "silver spoon" we have in office was still just some out of touch rich boy. I'd be willing to bet he's never had to use ANY public transportation in his lifetime.

I realize that there's need for security of high government officials.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon

SWEET......It's the bi-monthly doom/gloom Amtrak is going to die, Amtrak hater vs. you can't be a railfan if you don't like Amtrak, let's bash Bu***hread...only we get two this week.....

Unfortunately it's not going to go. It will continue to exist like a coma patient. If it were up to me, I'd just pull the plug and let it go. Use the money to subsize or support regional transportaion initiatives that support the need of the regional customers, be it rail, air, road or donkey. Regional/commuter rail works...VRE, NEC, Coaster, Metrolink, TRE.....even Amtrak's Downeaster (a service created by demand of real users, not nostalgic foamers)..these are success stories. If government money is to be used to subsidize passenger rail, it should be run by the regions using it, not Amtrak. And long distance trains.....well leave that up to tour operators..if there is a market, the market will bear it out. If it's HSR you want...build it from the ground up and exclusive, not some rework of existing tracks.

As for the airlines and roads vs. Amtrak.....subsidies and such...these are what the people want and use and are critcial to the nation's economy, so will and should be funded accordingly. Amtrak doesn't even come close to measuring. It is not critcal to the economy, nor national defense.

I am for passenger rail. But Amtrak, isn't the answer.

Dan

A REAL AMERICAN ALSO..who thinks Amtrak's time has come.

I MOSTLY agree with you, but I don't think there is a path from "here" to "there" without Amtrak.

I don't have a problem with $2B a year for Amtrak. I just want more for my money.

It would have been better to leave Gunn in place and reform Amtrak ala the Lott/Lautenberg route.

What's going on here seems to be a bunch of guys who don't know what they don't know, who have started to believe their own BS, calling the shots.

It may be a good idea to get states to chip in to cover train service thru their states, but the notion that they should cover the direct above the rail operating costs is a thinly veiled effort to kill trains. Too many useful trains run thru too many states - and need to serve all those states to be successful - for that to work. (a good example is the Crescent which serves a major city in 12 of the 13 states it runs in (NYC, Newark, Phila, Wilmington, Baltimore, DC, Charlotteville, Greensboro, Charlotte, Greenville, Spartansburg, Atlanta, Birmingham, NO.)

You MIGHT get two states to agree to some regional service, but generally the only places this has worked well is when a single state has complete control (California, Illinois, Penna). In every case where there are two or more states contributing, there has been controversy bordering on killing the service. NH has just about killed the Boston - Portland svc. Oregon has just about killed the Talgo. So, having multiple states kick in to keep something like the Empire Builder running doesn't even rise to the level of pipedream

You CAN make the case that Amtrak needs to refocus on shorter haul corridors, particularly in the east. The GAO wasn't completely all wet about sleepers and food service. Would the Crescent route be better off as two daylight trains than a single overnight train? (split at Atlanta, Atlanta to NYC and Atlanta to NO. or perhaps, split at Charlotte NC). Or perhaps, multiple freqency from NYC to Atlanta and foget about Atlanta to NO?

There are lots of things to consider, but firing Gunn was just plain silly.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

So, let me see if I have this straight. The constituents of the current administration are, Haliburton, oil companies, airlines, railroads, other big business, cronies, suck ups, and anyone with money, or without a brain. I see how he got elected without my vote.

I guess Mr Gunn doesn't fit into any of the perfered catagories, making him expendable.

Wake up people, this is our country he's destroying.[:(!][:(!][:(!][V][V][V][:(][banghead][banghead][X-)][censored][sigh]

Hey! I think I was just insulted. [B)] Good thing I'm too stupid to realize it! [?]