On Friday, December 4, 2009, the Marshall (Texas) T&P Depot Board held a reception honoring local rail advocate Christina Anderson for receiving Amtrak’s President’s Award earlier this year in Los Angeles. Anderson and her husband, Harrison County Judge Richard Anderson, have been working on rail-related issues for years—including key roles in the saving of the Texas Eagle in 1997. I attended as an invited guest in my very new and very limited roll of passenger rail advocate.
The speeches of the reception can be viewed here: http://www.mars-hall.tv/player/christinareception.htm.
Since the information presented is in the public domain, let me break down some of the main points.
At the local level, Amtrak agent George Cantley reported that over 300 passengers traveled through Marshall in the week before Thanksgiving. This is significant because Marshall only serves the Texas Eagle twice a day—once in each direction—and offers no connections by rail or bus.
Judge Anderson reported that, after years of lobbying, Union Pacific has agreed to a traffic modeling study in preparation for proposed new Amtrak service between Shreveport, LA and Fort Worth, TX. A little background: some of you remember that in 1999/2000, a new train, the so-called “Crescent Star,” was to have entered service between Meridian, Mississippi and the DFW metroplex. This train would have been a segment of the Crescent and traveled on KCS trackage via their Meridian Speedway, passing through Shreveport, the small towns of Jefferson, Hughes Springs, Pittsburg, and others in Texas. Amtrak went so far as to run a test train on the line. The train never materialized, despite having been added to the national timetable.
The proposed service is slightly different—so far as I can tell, the eastern terminus would be Shreveport, although I suppose a link to the Crescent could be made via KCS out of Shreveport. It would also be 2 round trips per day, acting in two ways—a feeder for the long distance Texas Eagle as well as a commuter-style train, possibly serving the DFW airport and negating the need for a commuter flight to connect to the airport. The infrastructure is essentially in place from Marshall on west, though I would assume there would need to be a second platform constructed at Marshall (the depot sits in the middle of a wye, and in order for the new service to stop there, the train would have to proceed through the wye and then back into the depot.
Judge Anderson announced that the UP is requiring “us” to pay for the study. I’m not quite sure who “us” is, as there are several possible organizations. Best bet would be either the East Texas Corridor Council or the East Texas Council of Governments. The upshot is that the money is there to pay for it. Sen. Hutchinson, a friend to passenger rail, helped secure the grant funding, to the tune of ~$700,000.
The traffic study should commence in the spring, with the earliest possible service starting in October of 2010—if, of course, Union Pacific and Amtrak sign on.
The East Texas Corridor Council considers this a short-term or intermediate-term goal, with a long-term goal of double tracking the Union Pacific’s route from Little Rock to DFW in preparation for higher-speed travel on the federally-designated rail corridor. This, if the funding and government support hold up, could occur within the decade. A traffic study has already been conducted (see: ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/tpp/east_rail_study.pdf -- WARNING: 845-PAGE PDF!) For the first time, officials from Union Pacific are actively working toward this goal. A very-long-term goal would be true very-high-speed rail along the corridor.
There has been no discussion of the availability of Amtrak equipment for the proposed Shreveport-DFW trains (that I know of, anyway.) This has not been linked with the Sunset Limited’s lack of service east of New Orleans, though with the rumors hanging around that train, extrapolate what you will.
While the political environment is ever-changing and there is never any guarantee for any service, this is the first time that the stars have aligned at this level, with the Union Pacific agreeing, at least, to consider the new service. Nothing’s set in stone, but it is an exciting possibility.
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
How do the proponents of the expanded passenger rail service between Shreveport and DFW plan to pay for it?
The national debt stands at $12.1 trillion. That works out to $145,075 for every federal income tax payer - only 67 per cent of those who file a federal income tax actually pay any tax.
Likely a shared state-federal financing program comparable to the agreement between the Texas and Oklahoma departments of transportation that operate the Heartland Flyer, though talks aren't that far yet.
Just for reference, assuming a comparable cost to the Flyer of $3.9 million per year, we could operate the proposed Shreveport-DFW train for 333 years with the money spent on one Space Shuttle launch.
Or, we could double track the entire corridor between Little Rock and San Antonio for the cost of 2 cloverleaf interstate exit ramps.
Yes, millions of dollars are real money, but even throwing out the ratio of revenue to operating expense and assuming that the train would be a 100% loss as far as tax dollars are concerned, that still does not take into account the intangible benefits of increased tourism (and tourism dollars, with the increased local sales tax revenue) for towns along the route, nor the benefits of traffic reduction on the I-20 corridor; not considering any other travelers, the residents of DFW who currently drive and/or take busses to the casinos in Shreveport would possibly be captured by the train. And that's just the one-way market currently in place.
I'll believe it when I see it AND I don't think I will see it. Someone keeps resurrecting this plan but it always dies when it comes time to fund it.
What do the Shreveport casino associations have to say about this, and how much cash are they willing to put up?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.