Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Whether Amtrak is more than the budget is arguable.  It is not indispensable.  Amtrak is not doing anything that could not be done by another entity or group of entities (government, quasi government, private enterprise).  If Texans decide, as an example, that they want to invest in passenger rail in the Texas Triangle, why does it have to be managed and operated by Amtrak?  If an Australian company, for example, can do a better job, they should be given a chance to do so.  The government should create a framework that facilitates the development and implementation of a national transportation policy.  It should promote the best transport modes for a given environment.  Once the framework is implemented, the feds should get out of the way, other that to ensure that the playing field remains level.  In time the government should require each mode of transport to stand on its own.  The conventional wisdom was that Pan American Airlines, Eastern Airlines, Northeast Airlines, etc. were the airline industry models to be emulated.  That wisdom was wrong.  Many of their customers fly on Southwest, Jet Blue, Air Trans, etc.  These carriers did not arise by following the conventional airline business model.  Maybe we would get a better product - corridor trains - if there was more competition in passenger rail.There is little evidence that the long distance passenger train is a critical antecedent for corridor rail.  The number of passengers fed into or drawn from the corridors by long distance trains is marginal.  Dallas and Fort Worth (DART and T) implemented and operate the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) without any help from Amtrak.  The TRE is not dependent on the late running, lightly patronized Texas Eagle.  Passengers on the Heartland Flyer, however, are advised to use the TRE to extend their trip to Dallas.  I suspect this is because of the uncertainty of the connection with Number 22.  Capital Metro in Austin will implement commuter rail service from Leander to Austin - 32 miles - in late 2008.  The trains will run on the Austin and Western, which is owned by Capital Metro and Austin.  Metro received no help from Amtrak and the Texas Eagle is not a factor.  The equipment is coming from Europe.  A serious study is underway regarding the implementation of passenger rail service from Georgetown, which is about 30 miles north of Austin, to Austin, San Marcos, and San Antonio.  The planners have not factored Amtrak or the Texas Eagle into their planning.It is impossible to say what the Congress would do if the long distance train was buried.  Would a Texas Senator vote to continue supporting the NEC sans the Eagle?  He probably would if he got something in return, i.e. starter money for a Dallas to Houston corridor.  Clearly, politics is about mutual back scratching.  But to say that Amtrak would not have gotten the $1.3 billion subsidy from the taxpayers - you and me - is unknowable.  The key question is whether monies for corridor development would be authorized if the long distance passenger train was dropped.  They probably would be if the case for them was made using the models that business organizations must use to stay in business. What seems to be missing from this discussion, as well as others, is any serious analysis of the costs and benefits of long distance trains.  For example, NARP talks about revenue and ridership increases, but never gets around to talking about costs and benefits.  In business this is a sure fire prescription for financial disaster.  But then come to think about it, Amtrak is not a business.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag