Sounds like Mr. Gunn is ready for the fight....

[daveklepper]

And like the airlines get a handout anytime there is a bad break and also close down anytime their is a national emergency!

I like the analogy. The Fire Dedpartment doesn't show a profit either!

[Anonymous]

A advice tip on contacting Washington: fax or email is the best route to go. Reps offices prefer it. The problem with US mail to our DC reps is that due to the past anthrax scares, mail now has to be pre screened . This only adds delay to getting the message out and the faster pro Amtk support can be received up there, all the better

[K. P. Harrier]

Lets get down to brass tacks: Why is there a problem in the first place?

[jeaton]

So rhodes in Europe-You are suggesting that if George Bush said that taxes would have to be raised to fund Amtrak support for Amtrak would disappear. You are either extremely short of money or have not mastered simple arithematic. The increase needed to fund Amtrak at the FY 2005 level would be about $10 per taxpayer per year. Double that amount and in about three years, Amtrak would be in top shape. Some of us actually see valuble benefits coming from the money we pay for taxes.

Jay

[Anonymous]

They don't have any more cars. They are out, o-u-t, out. Retirements of cars beyond economic repair and demolished in wrecks, and lack of dollars for basic maintenance and in wreck repairs, have decimated the fleet. Most of the Western long-distance trains are shadows of what they were a decade ago, when 15-17 car summer consists were feasible. Now the same train goes by with seven cars.

OS

[Puckdropper]

Let me ask a question... I hear about some trains that are 85%-100% full quite often. Doesn't that mean it's time to add another car?

I have heard many viewpoints and am not sure what to believe on how Amtrak is doing on many trains... "empty" but really full? I just don't know...

[andrewjonathon]

It is easy to support all kinds of things in a poll. People always support government programs until they are asked to pay for it. But ask the same people who say they support Amtrak to write a check and I'll bet many of the supporters will disappear as rhodes says.

[Modelcar]

...Believe you are way off base in much of your assumptions. We all realize Amtrak is not running to create a profit...that's not possible. I suspect if every seat was filed each run it would still not turn a profit.
Most polls I have seen the public does support some sort of rail public transportation.

[Anonymous]

As an American living in Europe for a number of years, this whole Amtrak issue appears to get blown way out of proportion by just about everyone concerned. If you approach this thing from an economic point a view, there are several things to consider: Amtrak is not profitable, will never be profitable and from an economic standpoint has no basis for existing. Because railfans enjoy watching the only major remaining passenger rail service in the U.S. is not a valid argument for Congress or the American public. If the consumer considered Amtrak a cost-efficient, valuable product then there would be no need for all the heated disscussions every time funding for Amtrak was on the agenda. Amtrak would then be declaring dividends on a quarterly basis and everyone would be pleased as punch.

As far as I am aware, no passenger train service in the entire western world is profitable. European goverenments subsidize heavily to keep passenger service in operation, because they regard it a public service, much like socialized health care. The only difference is that European tax rates on personal income are roughly 50-75% more than in the U.S. If George W. decided tomorrow to raise taxes to fund Amtrak the great majority of the Amtrak supporters would vanish like David Copperfield. Let's get real folks, 99% of the public would rather take the car than buy an over-priced ticket to ride a train that doesn't leave when they want to go and doesn't drop them off where they need to be.

It's time to let Amtrak die in peace. Which should have happened long ago.

A railfan.

[Anonymous]

As an American living in Europe for a number of years, this whole Amtrak issue appears to get blown way out of proportion by just about everyone concerned. If you approach this thing from an economic point a view, there are several things to consider: Amtrak is not profitable, will never be profitable and from an economic standpoint has no basis for existing. Because railfans enjoy watching the only major remaining passenger rail service in the U.S. is not a valid argument for Congress or the American public. If the consumer considered Amtrak a cost-efficient, valuable product then there would be no need for all the heated disscussions every time funding for Amtrak was on the agenda. Amtrak would then be declaring dividends on a quarterly basis and everyone would be pleased as punch.

As far as I am aware, no passenger train service in the entire western world is profitable. European goverenments subsidize heavily to keep passenger service in operation, because they regard it a public service, much like socialized health care. The only difference is that European tax rates on personal income are roughly 50-75% more than in the U.S. If George W. decided tomorrow to raise taxes to fund Amtrak the great majority of the Amtrak supporters would vanish like David Copperfield. Let's get real folks, 99% of the public would rather take the car than buy an over-priced ticket to ride a train that doesn't leave when they want to go and doesn't drop them off where they need to be.

It's time to let Amtrak die in peace. Which should have happened long ago.

A railfan.

[Anonymous]

As an American living in Europe for a number of years, this whole Amtrak issue appears to get blown way out of proportion by just about everyone concerned. If you approach this thing from an economic point a view, there are several things to consider: Amtrak is not profitable, will never be profitable and from an economic standpoint has no basis for existing. Because railfans enjoy watching the only major remaining passenger rail service in the U.S. is not a valid argument for Congress or the American public. If the consumer considered Amtrak a cost-efficient, valuable product then there would be no need for all the heated disscussions every time funding for Amtrak was on the agenda. Amtrak would then be declaring dividends on a quarterly basis and everyone would be pleased as punch.

As far as I am aware, no passenger train service in the entire western world is profitable. European goverenments subsidize heavily to keep passenger service in operation, because they regard it a public service, much like socialized health care. The only difference is that European tax rates on personal income are roughly 50-75% more than in the U.S. If George W. decided tomorrow to raise taxes to fund Amtrak the great majority of the Amtrak supporters would vanish like David Copperfield. Let's get real folks, 99% of the public would rather take the car than buy an over-priced ticket to ride a train that doesn't leave when they want to go and doesn't drop them off where they need to be.

It's time to let Amtrak die in peace. Which should have happened long ago.

A railfan.

[edbenton]

Here is a name of a website that has links to all Members of Congress . Congress.org and from there you can Email your rep

[Anonymous]

MR GUNN.. NOW HE GOT ME STATRTED . WHAT ABOUT WWWI WWII THEY BOMBED US BEAT THEM IN WAR AND THEN WE GAVE THEM BILLONS TO REBUILD.. THEY GIVE BILLONSOVER SEAS FOR DISASTERSAND THEY DONT WANT US THERE .. THEY GAVE THE AIR LINES BILLIONS TO HELP THEM. THE FEDERIAL HIGHWAYS GET BILLIONS...HOW ABOUT GIVING S S BILLIONS AND NO ONE WOULD WORRY ABOUT RETIREMENT.mr.GUNN iSTAND BEHIND YOU.MAYBE SHOULD HAVE GIVING THE BUSHS A PRIVATE TRAIN LIKE CSX DID FOR REELECTING.

[andrewjonathon]

I wonder how many billions the subsidy would be today if Amtrak was operating all those trains. I assume much, much larger since it seems that most people argee that a subsidy is required regardless how full the train is. So I assume more trains would equal more subsidy.

[coborn35]

Full power to Gunn[bow] The government is in a terrible state.

[coborn35]

Amtrak needs to somehow find a way to get better technology. Take the Japan Bullet Train for example. Bet Bush wouldnt want to get rid of that if we had it.

[kenneo]

Don

As to "mission" Amtrack has never been permitted to operate at their assigned mission level. To just use the Pacific Northwest as an example, Chicago-PNW service was supposed to "duplicate" or "replace" The GN's Empire Builder, the NP's North Coast Limited, the UP's City of Portland and Saint Louis via Denver and KC UP's Portland Rose/City of St. Louis. The UP trains never ran. The NP train ran for about a year or so until the first round of budget cuts. The Spokane-Portland connection for the Empire Builder almost never got off the ground. For about 5 years, the Pioneer operated between Portland and Denver with the UP doing its best to make sure it was never on time anywhere - including its origin station.

The Pioneer was originally supposed to operate Seattle, Portland, Boise, Salt Lake and make a direct connection with the CZ and the Desert Wind, with the Pioneer continuing on to Los Angeles via Las Vegas as the Desert Wind. Northbound, of course, it was the Desert Wind that continued on as the Pioneer. Until the connections were broken (I don't know by whom), the Pioneer/Desert Wind was operating 85% to 100% seat occupancy, depending on the route segment.

The way Amtrack has been forced to operate since its inception, it cannot be made to show a profit. From its very beginning, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation - Amtrack - was designed to end all rail intercity passenger service within 12 months of April 1972.

So what has happened has been a suprise? I am - well - "Sacre Bleu" - stunned - that we still have even one Amtrack train operating.

I will close this with an observation from a wire service report concerning this new budget proposal concerning Amtrack. One of the idealogs in the Bush camp said --- that Amtrack subsidies must stop. It must operate like all other transportation systems - like the airlines.

My jaw is still in a cast.

[oltmannd]

***-

You may very well be able to buy a JetBlue ticket from NY to LA for the avg direct subsidy paid per Amtrak passenger, but when is JetBlue going to start service to Minot ND or Altoona PA?

I've always hated that "you could buy them airline tickets" arguement. I wonder what the per passenger direct subsidy would be to provide direct jet service to all current Amtrak passengers?

This is not to say that Amtrak is a very efficient service provider - but that may not be their mission.

[Anonymous]

Mr. Lewis, the WSJ's editorial page writers have bamboozled you. You really ought to read the full report -- it only takes about 20 minutes. It's a perfectly fine report on its face, but the limitations of the data are immense. All it compares is cash in to the federal government vs. cash out, and it terms the difference "subsidy." It doesn't attempt to assess ca***hat was never paid in the first place, or cash paid to states, or costs forced onto others, etc. I would never use information so hopelessly incomplete to make a business decision. It's like doing a spreadsheet for a small-business cash flow and listing only gross sales of inventory and gross purchases for inventory, neglecting things like your own time, the property tax you're paying on the spare room in which you store your inventory, the computer you bought last year, the use of your own car to run errands, and so forth.

OS

[Anonymous]

Quote from Wall Street Journal Editorial, Feb. 10, 2005:

Amtrak supporters love to make the argument that rail travel is somehow more cost-efficient than other modes of transportation and that the billions thrown at the national railroad go further than the money spent on highways, commercial air travel and urban transit. A recent study from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics shows otherwise.

BTS gathered data on federal subsidies to these four areas between 1990-2002, subtracted any revenues brought in by user fees, and then divided by the number of passenger-miles. As the report says, the aim was "to show the amount of subsidy relative to the level of use." This is as close as you can get to comparing apples to apples, says Robert Poole of the Reason Foundation.

The results? Amtrak weighed in with an average subsidy of $186.35 per thousand passenger miles -- a sum that could take you across the country and back on JetBlue. That compares with average subsidies of $118.26 for urban transit and $6 for airlines. Highway users actually ended up paying Washington $1.91 per thousand passenger miles.

Source for WSJ statistics: http://www.bts.gov/programs/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/executive_summary.html

[SALfan]

Gunn fired 65 vice-presidents? DANG! I hadn't heard that. Details? Indicates he isn't afraid to shake things up.

[Anonymous]

Don, I can only hope one or two new people pay attention to your posts on Amtrak. I searched back in the archives, and every one of your posts on this topic is dead on target with bare-bones candor. We can only hope. The truth has been laying out in plain sight in front of Joe Public for 35 years, and they still can't, won't, or don't want to see it. Like I said in another forum, what's a fact or two compared to the almighty power of a well-cemented belief system.

I think Mr. Gunn has made miraculous changes in Amtrak already, but the dead weight of public ideology is daunting, affecting everything from pension systems to safety systems. I knew I was going to like him the day he fired 65 vice presidents.

OS

[oltmannd]

It sounds to me like Gunn is trying to make Amtrak's owners step up and define the mission. In the absense of any direction, he's taken the mission as status quo plus fix what's broken. That's the right thing to do. It's not up to Gunn to tell his owners what Amtrak should be. It's up to Gunn to run the company - and he's done a pretty good job so far. (Even though I still wonder about what all those employees do all day!)

The Bush Admin has not offered any direction to Amtrak at all, but has pushed the responsibility off onto Congress by way of a budget that's a non-starter w.r.t. Amtrak. Apparently, nobody wants to take the fall for any particular service changes.

Will Congress "reform" Amtrak? Will Gunn get enough $$ to limp thru another year? Will a token LD train get "shot"? Will the Bush admin ever step up and do the "vision thing" w.r.t. transportation?

Stay tuned! Prepare to be entertained, but don't expect much common sense!

And, if you're passionate - get involved!

[Modelcar]

Brian....In the case of Amtrak, the training wheels would be worn out by now...plus thirty some years. It would be great if the structure in America could simply support such a service like a business {for profit}, but I believe most of us can agree, this type of operation cannot be sustained by fare box...So if we as citizens want such a service it has to be financed just as many public tramsportation services are....

[bbrant]

Yikes! Sounds Bush administration is trying to make Amtrak run like a real business.

If you don't take the training wheels off the bike the child will never learn to ride.

[jeaton]

Just exactly what I would expect from Dave Gunn-an honest look at the situation, but encouragement to the employees to stay on the job. I don't think there are many who could navigate this as effectively as Mr. Gunn.

I would add that sending you correspondence by fax also is an effective means of getting your position delivered promptly.

Jay

[daveklepper]

Ross, thanks for your support and for puting your name on this thread. You are a truly fine person and I thank you for everything you have done. For all railfans as well as the USA.

[Modelcar]

...Yes, I very well remember the thoughts and wishes of B D David Stockman....Glad most were defeated. Remember the great 614 too...!

[co614]

As a member of the Amtrak BOD I lived through the Reagan era "zero funding" exercise promoted by then Budget Director Stockman. Even though I was a Reagan appointee I publicly disavowed the policy(and as a result was not nominated for a second term) as short sighted and against the long term interests of the nation. Amtrak survived thanks to an outpouring of support from the general public directed at members of Congress. I would urge everyone that supports Amtrak to take the time to write a short -to the point letter to thier Congressman/Senator ASAP. Be polite and positive and request a reply. If enough of us write I believe we've got a fighting chance of saving the pssgr. train for us and future generations. One mans opinion! Ross Rowland