Amtrak funding

[Anonymous]

On the long distance runs Amtrak operates on any section of track 2 trains, 1 train in each direction. If the railroads capacity is so short that it cannot handle 2 trains on any section of track, how do the railroads intend to increase their business? While Amtrak might not pay for the maintenance of the track, Amtrak does pay the railroads plenty for dispactching....
More than likely Amtrak could do its own dispatching along the tracks it uses for less.....

[Anonymous]

Excuss me!STB. Do they have to deal with them on a nation wide basis?Thought we were talking about trains that ran through many states.Like to see the states agree with a simple thing like schedule times.I want my train to run during such and such a time.No I want my train to run those times.Why should my train have to run at night.Not fair to our citizens....Or are we going to have to change trains state to state? Ideas sound good on paper but in reality ...well.

[Anonymous]

Mike , Sounds good but not really posible without a very sizable dollar cost.Remember the RR's are in the frieght moving business.Can give you a few examples if you want.A couple of weeks ago I was operating the Chi-Den Z9-train with a sizable UPS trailer load which is on the BNSF's guarenteed delivery timetable.We were put in the hole(siding)outside of Denver on account of AMTK#6 leaving Denver.Because of the delay in allowing AMTK to leave on time we missed the 9PM guarenteed delivery cut-off.Costing the BNSF countless dollars.Just one of many examples that happen on a daily basis nation wide.The BNSF does a very comendable job of giving AMTK priority over frieght trains.At what cost?Well if the BNSF meets the AMTK set incentive it could get a kick-back of up to 5 million dollars on a yearly basis from AMTK.Does it cover the cost of late trains? No.Doesn't even come close.Remember the BNSF is forced into letting AMTK run over its rails.Empire Builder,Zepher,SanDiegans,SuperChief,many trains many delays.I personally don't mind getting out of the way for AMTK but does it make buisness sense for the BNSF? Remember the RR's pay for the up-keep and maintanece of their own tracks.Also pay taxes on their right of ways.The tracks I operate on are very busy.Single track CTC.Approximately 30 trains a day.The cost of doulbe tracking is cost prohibitive until you reach a certain level of train numbers.Building more tracks isn't as easy as people think.It also doubles the maintanence costs.The other problem out here in the west is that the cities are so far apart.Closest city to Denver with a population of over 1 million is either Salt Lake City or Kansas City over 500 miles away.What is the answer? Wish I knew.What I do know is AMTK came about 32yrs ago because the frieght RR's realized that it was impossible to make a profit from passenger trains.Still is.Sure you could charge more but you get to a break-over point where no body would pay because it is far to much.On the Calf.Zepher AMTK has to come up with over 125 dollars per paying passenger to break even.AMTK statistics.Another words we're all subsidizing each and every paying passenger who rides the Zepher with our tax dollars.

[Anonymous]

Um, the ICC was completely dissolved in 1995, so it is impossible for Ed or anyone to deal with them. It would now be the STB, who's current chair is Linda Morgan.

And if transit agencies can successfully deal with these agencies, as do state DOTs. I see no reason why a passenger rail system could not also. No one would suggest that transit or that state DOTs would be run better from DC!

[sooblue]

Hi,
what happens with the freight trains now?
If Amtrak was supported by all of us, improvements to the infrastructure could be done to facilitate smooth movement. We have yet to see (and admittedly may never see) what Amtrak could become given proper support. A long time ago the RRs gave up on passenger traffic. They couldn't wait to unload it and they did so with out thinking. They could have united togeather in that one part of thier buisness, it was money losing any way. Togeather and with the government lending support just like the Alamida corridor the nation would have had access to a complete passenger system instead of a broken down shell.
It will take a dissaster like running out of gasoline before new track will connect the cities and towns again. Until than yeh, the RRs can do their part and donate the infrastructure and help the people. Think of the PR for the first RR to stand up and say We'll help facilitate Amtrak.
Maybe "we the people" would give THEM a tax break
for being "helpful"
Anyway, If people would unite togeather with the same zeal 9-11 and Pearl Harbor brought on and focused that on our government "we the people" would make one heck of a diffrence. It shouldn't be Business telling "us" what we can or can not do or want, after all, name one business that doesn't ask "we the people" for help and support.
In this country, Thank God, all of us are subsidized to some extent. Put it into perspective, We give our taxes to our local, state and federal governments and we get every dime back in some way, even when some of our money goes over seas we get that back too. Maybe just in good will, so that when your son or daughter serves over seas they get treated better by those they are helping.
What's a buck now days anyway, It's not even backed by gold any more. It's only worth the price of the paper and ink and labor. One doller just may be worth more than one doller but a ten doller bill isn't worth any more than that one doller. It would be so simple to drop money all togeather but that's another topic on some other forum.

[Anonymous]

Ed,Do you in your capacity have to deal with the ICC? The FRA? The DOT? or any of the other myriad goverment agencys? Well anything that deals with interstate commerce or the conveyance of goods or passengers do.

[Anonymous]

Not only have I been on them but I worked for AMTK for 11yrs while on a leave of absence from the BN.Worked the Calf.Zepher and the Pioneer for the short time it ran out of Denver.Your talking a very small percentage of travelers who rely on AMTK long distance pass. trains.All I've been saying is that its time to give AMTK the funds it needs to run properly or put it out of its misery.

[Anonymous]

Whkey,

Thanks for clearing that up. I thought you were advocating us converting AMTK into some modified European variety. I think that would be a huge mistake because AMTK would only be accountable to the US Congress. Since AMTK would be a small piece of the pie by comparrison, nobody in Congress would spend any time on it unless someone were seriously injured.

As I have stated before, Amtrak would raise their level of service if they were more beholden to the customer. Moving government involvement down to the states from the federal level would get things closer to that goal.

Consider the benefits of having the NEC portion of AMTK concentrate on providing service to NEC customers. Also, AMTK would only provide long-haul service to corriders which demonstrate demand. A fellow a while back said AMTK sidestepped the Dallas-Fort Worth area in favor of a smaller metro area to the north. An AMTK concerned about the bottom line and not beholden to a congressman would not have the luxury of making a fundamental mistake as that.

As far as handling 46 different states, my company does exactly that. We have offices which specialize in each state market. I have a special skill and I am particularly suited to working in the state where I have the most experience. If I am needed in another state, I go and assist someone who is a specialist in that state. It is something that can be overcome. I'll tell you something else, I like working for a state more than I like working for the Feds, which we also do from time to time. - Ed

[Anonymous]

As a former officer in the United States Army, I forgive you for your cheeky response . . . this time.

[Anonymous]

Terry:

The main problem I have with your argument is that you are essentially extoling the social virtues of train travel. Trains are good for the community, good for the nation, build character, teach, etc...

That may be true, but it is also true of many other modes we no longer significantly support, like horseback riding and steam paddleboats. Some of them do survive because of what you state. Could long distance trains be good tourism tools? Sure, that's why American Orient Express and Rocky Mountain Railtours and Montana Daylight etc etc are in business, along with dozens of rail excursion and tourist railroad companies.

But these social arguments have nothing to do with a transportation system as a whole. They don't address efficiency or ridership or routing or cost effectiveness. People don't fly for social reasons. Some do drive for social reasons, and I guess there might be a few people who think riding a bus is neat and ride it for social reasons. But if it weren't for the ability of these modes to exist at a reasonable cost recapture rate, then these modes too would wither and die.

So I am not saying long distance trains are worthless, but I am saying that, at the speeds and with the methodology by which they now run, they are not significant contributions to passenger transportation capacity as a fraction of the national whole.

Regards,

Alexander

[Anonymous]

Well, i can give you one good example of the "just touch" concept. In the Cascades Corridor, there are two (or is it three?) daily trains between Portland, Oregon and Seattle, Washington.

Now 1/2 of those trains are (operationally) funded by Amtrak and 1/2 by Washington. (These are rough figures here.)

Now Portland is in Oregon, so shouldn't Oregon be paying a share? Well, maybe it ought to, but we don't. The Oregon Leg. has never seen a need for passenger rail (outside of light rail) and has refused to put up their half. This is why there is only one train Portland-Eugene, and fully funded by Amtrak.

Now, under the way I outline, there would be NO train Portland-Eugene. Good! Because we shouldn't have the Fed's bailing out our Leg's sorry butts. If we actually knew how little we got for what we gave to Salem, maybe the Leg would finally feel the heat to reorganize their priorities.

BTW the OR Leg is currently nominally Republican, but has been guilty of this oversight for the last 20 years. There really is only one party down there- the pork party.

I think you might also be concerned over, say, a train from Denver to Dallas that must pass thru the panhandle of Oklahoma- but then what if OK doesn't fund it any? I would guess that if there is no funding, there are no stops.

More serious might be a train from LA to Albequeque, but AZ doesn't kick in anything. That might be more troublesome. But if the ridership is sound between those city pairs, and if the tracks being used are Freight RR rights, then it may not be as big a deal as you might think. The only escess cost then would be in the extra time (labor) and fuel that would have to be shared 2 way- CA / NM, versus 3 way, CA / AZ / NM.

This might be more of a problem in the NE with so many states converging in tight quarters. But since the run is shorter there, it may not be that big of a deal.

The place this would be killer is for long distance trains. I do think they could still work, as faster scheduled, medium distance night trains. But I agree that the long distance train is not really very relevant to modern transporation systems. Too slow, and eats up too much equipment.

Alexander

[Anonymous]

Terry:

No, we won't pull up the tracks. They'll still be there, the backbone of our freight system, as they always will be.

Yes, waxing the car, driving to the convenience store for an ice cream, maybe roaming one of the classic byways of the country... sounds really nice to me...

And if you don't like that? Then don't do it- that's what freedom's all about.

And yes, I am guilty. From time to time I stray... but I always try to get back to whatever topic a thread is supposed to be about.

So going back to Amtrak funding, I would say, the tracks will be there, and if people really hanker for passenger rail so much, do you think the RRs are just going to sit there and say, "wow, a new market. No, we don't want that."

And if no one is interested in that market, it's probably because we don't really want it that badly.

[mnwestern]

Has anyone commenting on the necessity of long-distance Amtrak trains actually been on them?

I have. Who were the other passengers? Yes, there were some railfans who would rather take the train and see the countryside and were in no hurry to be beamed to some far off land by a flying bomb.

But there also were many students headed to college or back home, taking the opportunity to study along the way or to see the world.

There were older people who, for health reasons, can't flyer, or who recall the golden age of passenger trains, and enjoy the opportunity to meet people. They can't drive long vacation trips anymore, and being trapped in bus seats for hours and for miles is not appealing.

There were scout groups whose cheapest way to get to a annual national jamboree was by train. Not only did it cost less, but it was a better learning experience seeing their great country through the train windows over a span of a day or two, than from 35,000 feet up for three hours.

There were families, minorities or economically disadvantaged who can't afford airline flights.
There were overseas visitors used to traveling on trains in their homelands who wanted to see the U.S. by train.

In some communities, such as those in North Dakota and Montana, Amtrak's Empire Builder is about the only public transportation available for a 100 miles or more.

So, yes, some of us can find other means of getting across country. I can still drive. I'm less inclined to fly after 9/11. Didn't like if before then and like it less now. But others will be left with few and any options. They will, in affect, become shut-ins.

If long distance trains are not needed, why then are they packed this summer, even with all the talk of a possible Amtrak shutdown? Seems the traveler may be speaking with their pocketbooks after all, guys. Tickets sales were up in late June and early July even with all the bad publicity.

You won't know what you're missing until you don't have it.

[mnwestern]

Ed,
If you don't think we are in the Middle East (Persian Gulf) to protect oil, what are we there for? A lot of the 9/11 issue comes right back to our presence there because of our reliance on foreign oil. If you don't believe that, which cave have you been hiding in, Osama's?

[mnwestern]

Ah, this new argument.

So we will just pull up our tracks, stay home, and wax the car for our next trip to the convenience store.

And everything you've written addresses Amtrak funding? Not!

[Anonymous]

Elvis (a.k.a. Alexander),

I don't think I'll ever get near 167 messages. You'll always be The King!

Some joker brought this thing back up to the top so I had to volley it back. Traffic is picking up. I do enjoy the debate. Thanks for your comment responding to the guy saying the military is only there to protect Big Oil. Some posts are beneath a response. I can't debate someone who has significantly inferior morals.

Catch you later. - Ed

[Anonymous]

Alexander, A regional concept makes more sense than letting the states go it alone,but still have to set up the regions which might be a problem.Don't know if states could learn to co-operate amonst themselves.
We all know that Alsaka,and Hawaii don't have AMTK along with S.Dakota and Wyoming.What about Maine is it currently served by AMTK.? Think I might have heard something about the Downeaster train.??
What do you propose for AMTK where it just touches states and really doen't serve them?
The fact of the matter is that most LONG distance AMTK trains are nothing but Princess Cruise Lines on steel rails.Are they needed? Do they help take traffic off the highways? Are they a necessary public convienence? The answer to those questions is sadly no.Why should a representitive from say Wyoming want to help AMTK the way a rep. from N.J. would? Both votes have eguall weight.
The reason we have the problems with AMTK that we do is that these same battles have been going on for decades.Just give it enough money to keep it going.Not enough for the states where it is critical for AMTK to survive,without asking for to much so that the states that don't benifit from AMTK ask why.No long term capital plans to improve it.Year by year survival.Its a wonder its survived this long.At the wim and fancy of the frieght RR's that it runs over.Why should they disrupt frieght for one train? Its a situation that we need to decide if we need in it's current makeup.Do we give it what it needs,or break it up into small parcels that are needed.

[Anonymous]

I understand your point about regulation, but I think i have two answers on that.

One, the states cannot regulate certain aspects of railroading, as they are proscribed and appropriated by Congress. Altho, I do recall that there is a Texas RR Board- but I don't know how much power it really has.

I agree tho- I wouldn't want to have a mini STB for Oregon! Ugh, it's bad enough at doing what it does now....

And shouldn't that be 48 states, not 46?

And on that note, I don't think that most companies would have to deal with 48 states. A Californian system, for example, probably wouldn't deal with more than CA and maybe NV, OR, and at a stretch, maybe UT/CO/AZ

A Midwest system would be dealing with WI, MN, ILL, IND, OH, IA, MO.

Likewise, the NE would be ME, MA, NH, VT, CN, RI, MA....

So it appears the average would be 4-6 states. Which is a lot but much more manageable. I just don't think we'de see one carrier nationwide under this funding system- but who needs one? The "glory days"- whether justifiably so or not- were when practically every line ended in Chicago, and some didn't even get that far.

Alexander

[Anonymous]

Donating the tracks IS a no-go... but I think Mike didn't mean that. I *think* he meant trackage, not tracks.

I think.

[Anonymous]

SooBlue,
Are you kidding? The frieght RR's donate their tracks?What do you do with the frieght trains?Do you want AMTK to pay the taxes on the rights of way like the frieght RR's do? Who does the maintenance on the track like the frieght RR's do?Amtk gets by relatively easy by not having to pay for these things except for a very very small percentive.

[Anonymous]

Ed
Never said we should do things like they do in Europe.Just mentioned the fact that all of the European pass.RR's are subsidized by thier goverments.Most people want to know why we can't have a pass. rail network like they do in Europe.Size of most European countries are the reason.As far as AMTK being accountable to the individual states I ask you when was the last time you heard of 50 differant people agreeing on something? Well 46 differant people as it is now.Sure wouldn't want to be the business that has to deal with 46 differant regulations,requirements,tax system,laws,etc...

[Anonymous]

Mike:

I agree, just because criminals go to jail, it doesn't mean crime stops. Just, we don't have much accountability in government at all, at least there is some, if not enough, in the private sector.

However, your proposal is that we hold government accountable, and achieve transparency through civic involvment. In this, I support your proposal.

However, I guess you might think me cynical for saying this- but all governments are political, not functional, and are corrupted to a greater or lesser degree. Just as the private sector- except the private sector is not as political. So both entities have graft, but generally a private company will only go where it makes sense, whereas the public entity goes everywhere it can. Goverment is an expansionist philiosophy at heart.

So I'm not saying your wrong. I'm just saying I don't feel confident that we'll ever clean up governments enough to get where you want to be. After all, politics are as old as the first time that mankind tried to govern over itself, by putting others on thrones or in senates.

Finally, though, yes. Do let's reorganize Amtrak- or more specirfically passenger rail- before there is an emergency. But again, it won't be. Come this fall we'll all be in for a redux of July 4th, but this time at much dire stakes.

Alexander

[sooblue]

I must disagree with you, not in total though.

Anyone or any entity can "cook the books"
When it's over how many investment firms and accounting firms are going to disclose that they have "cooked the books"?
How many will go on because they have not been cought?
Is it going to stop because some CEOs have gone to jail?
NO! they went to jail in the 30s, the practice didn't stop, here we are again.
I would rather put my trust in our government and our way of life. A man can look at our political system positivly or negativly.
Government "for the people by the people" means that the people have control over what is best "for the people" It's a sad fact indeed when the "people" would rather burry their heads in the sand than to MAKE our government Fully Disclose and be Fully accountable to "the people"
The very same free riders on a new Amtrak would be able to control every aspect of the funding. If it's not right make it right.
Our founding fathers said it best when they formed "a more perfect union".
More perfect isn't Perfect, it can be made even more perfect, IF we want to.
This ability of the majority of the population to change "government" is what sets this country apart from most others and is the exact diffrence
between our brand of socialism and communist socialism.
look at our public school system as an example, It's not perfect by any means but it works. We can make it better though if only the People who are paying for it would join togeather in one voice and force accountability.
Amtrak doesn't have to die and we don't have to see rail travel founder. The fact is that some day crude oil is going to be hard to come by and the price of diesle and gasoline is going to be so high that we may see a resurgence of coal for fuel and steam for power. Rail travel will make the most sense and the government will back it to the hilt because the "people want it" NEED IT.
Why wait for an emergency? lets reorganize Amtrak now and do it right.

[Anonymous]

Don:

Yes, and that man is one I admire a great deal. Some have questioned if her really discovered Marias, (namely some of his underlings-) but even so, he still deserves the lion's share of the credit for that. BTW he also ran the Rock for a while, and was the President of my own favorite RR, the Spokane, Portland & Seattle. It is one of the finest engineered parts of the BNSF system and is his brainchild, largely.

Yes, that man is John Frank Stevens.

The story of his secret mission up the Deschuttes canyon before WWI is an amazingly entertaining one as well. Just shows you how serious competition was then! Corporate Espionage, Edwardian style.

BTW if you know of any good books on him i'd love it if you post them. No suitable bio has ever been written about this man.

And you might also want to check out his companion, Ralph Budd, who had worked with him in Panama, and who later saved the passenger train from an early death. Some of his ideas, too, would be highly applicable to today's passenger rail scene.

Alexander

[Anonymous]

History! Funny thing happened in January 1942, the transcontinentals backed up with too much traffic, hurting the war effort only one month into the war.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt convened a meeting of the best brains of the railroads, and asked where can the Corps of Engineers build another railroad over the divide? Roosevelt liked to throw money at his problems, like the Inner Coastal Waterway from the tip of Texas to the east end of Maine...

The answer was, there wasn't any place. Over a thousand miles of divide, and no suitable place to build another railroad. An old man in his late years, had suggestions to improve sidings and yards. That man was the same man who was the second engineer of the Panama Canal who suggested a lock and dam canal. That man was the same man who built railroads in America, Mexico, the Philliipines, over the Andes, and the Trans Siberian Railway. There is a pass named after him in Washington state, and there is a statue of him at Marias Pass in Montana. Did I forget to mention that this same man discovered Marias Pass on a very cold many degrees below zero Christmas Eve? Who is this man.....probably the best railroad engineer in American history, by far shoulders above the rest.....A man Teddy Roosevelt called a bear.....

[Anonymous]

You bet that's humor, Mike. Government, accountable! Ha.

No, but seriously. Here's the problem with a free, 100% subsidized system, and why, IMO, and IMO only, it would not work.

If the cost is paid by the Gov then the only people who really see the numbers will be the gov. Which means, next stop, leak city. Can't you see it now? Stewards that make 40k a year, conductors that make 70k. Phew! And that's in todays comparable civil service numbers, think what they'll get a decade from now.

In addition to saoring personnel costs, what about performance and ridership? These nubmers too would be "cooked" for political purposes. You entity would be more political than what we have now.

Now, a privatized or a public for cost system isn't perfect, but the overiding advantage is that if the ticket sales aren't high enough, (and thus public support is insufficent,) the train dies. Survival of the fittest and mister Truman combined.

The buck train stops here.

Your qoue is the key: "Good stewardship is all it takes"- but that's a tall order. And the reason private versus public is more likely to provide that is that private firms go bust. Dirty CEOs go to jail and lose their mansions. Looks like soon they may also go to Attica, yay! The way it ought to be for all criminals of that caliber.

But when does a public firm go bust? Who's the last politician or administrator to go to jail?

So Private isn't pefcet- but it isn't a monopoly like government.

[Anonymous]

Hey Ed, long time no speak.

What happened? Did Amtrak do something that didn't make the headlines here in Portland? Look at all the traffic pick up on this thread!

You may beat my record yet....

Alexander

[Anonymous]

Ah, this old argument.

So we will just pull out the troops, go home, and all run our cars on chicken ****. Guess what? We will still require a military, and still have to pay attention to the mideast. So your idea solves nothing. And it certainly doesn't address Amtrak funding.

[Anonymous]

Terry:

Your answers are:

Q1: yes, have done, drive them all the time.
Q2: Yes, it works better than anything else.
Q3: Fine with me, air / road users should pick up the tabe. Guess what- road allready does, has done for some time. Now, we could argue over whether it has yet paid back it's initial development. And you do have fair points on surface streets.
Q4: Trucks DO contribute- weight/mile tax , anyone? We tried "reforming" this system to a "fairer" system here in Oregon a few years back, and guess what? Voters said no. AAA said no. The average driver said no.

Why? Because then everyone would have to pay a user fee on TOP of what they pay through their gas taxes now. These "reforms" always equate double taxation.

Q5: Yes, am homeowner
Q6: yes, am business owner. Self employed. Why do you think I beleive in fair payment? because these are the rules we HAVE to live by.

So fair is fair. If they get a subsidy because of their contribution to the social fabirc, then I think that I too should receive a subsidy, because my business makes my community nicer. Oh, mister Congressman!

Q7: Yes. Our street was shut down for one year due to widening- for a bike lane no one ever uses.

Q8: I am real. Otherwise why do these bills hurt so much? But then that's no different for Greyhound or Hunt- they just deal in more zeros. So don't balance your kooky ideas on our backs. Us camels can only hold so many straws.

[sooblue]

Hi Ed,
I was thinking that there are really two Amtraks maybe three. The local, within a State. The regional, like NEC. The long distance coast to coast.
I like the idea of user funded but it is too costly a burden to be compeditive. If Amtrak is Government funded everyone takes a Share of it, but than when you buy a ticket you are getting double charged.
I like your comment about Amtrak being accountable to the States too.
This is my Idea.
Amtrak becomes Fully funded by all of us(the government)
There is NO charge for the users unless they want premium service and than that is non-profit.
Amtrak becomes fully accountable to the States the regions and the Federal Government.
The track used in service must be DONATED by the railroads and Amtrak gets PRIORITY (since they dropped the ball years ago when they could have gotten togeather and provided uniform service)
The Government will upgrade the track for it's use same as the Federal highway system is.
Will this be benificial to us?
yes, especially in commuter service.
People will park there cars and trucks and ride like crazy where ever they can because in most peoples minds, IT'S FREE. Also, when these people get to thier destination they will need transportation ( electric car fleets for rent, Bicycles, taxies, busses all for a fee )
Maybe this is unrealistic, I don't think so but..
If everyone paid a little, we could do a lot of things, We do now! a lot of it works good, when we are not greedy and we keep where the money comes from in view. Good stewardship is all it takes, but sometimes the people in government are JUST like Enrons accountants and CEO.

THE HECK WITH AMTRAK LETS MAKE THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE ( humor )