Amtrak was never very popular with the current house and now with a conservative Senate just wonder what Amtrak fate will be?
ROBERT WILLISON Amtrak was never very popular with the current house and now with a conservative Senate just wonder what Amtrak fate will be?
Status quo, most likely. Remember all those years the Reagan WH wanted to "zero out" Amtrak's budget (remember David Stockman?) Even when the whole gov't was R, it didn't happen. In fact, there were almost now changes to Amtrak during that era.
What you'll see long term is a continuous squeeze on Amtrak's budget as the government gets more interested in reducing deficit spending. This isn't an R of D thing, generally. All forms of discretionary spending are going to get pinched.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I think that is wishful thinking!!!!
ROBERT WILLISON I think that is wishful thinking!!!!
Do you remember the 1980s? The Reagan administration called for Amtrak's death every year for eight years - often in very copius ways.
The climate for Amtrak funding - even in the House - is much better than it was back then. Bud Shuster's kid is running the committee that deals out the money for Amtrak. He's not been shy about coming up with $$ for Amtrak. There is no talk from anyone of zeroing out Amtrak's budget.
Amtrak will get just enough money to limp along.
You seem much more optimistic than what trains posted yesterday. A frozen operating and capital budget. Not enough capital to be self substaining system. Certainly no budget for any new equipment.
which is indeed a repetition of the latter Bush years. but remember the effects of the Warrington management. hopefully the management will be a bit better at least. hopefully, there won't be a new Minetta. And management of real estate can make up for some of the shortfall.
There was one attribute of Anthony Haswell and NARP, which he founded. He gave a shout out to political leaders he deemed "Friends of the Railroad Passenger", but he never complained about or criticized opponents nor brought partisan politics into the discussion.
In my innocent youth when me and my train enthusiast childhood friends sent in that portion of our lawn-mowing and paper-route earnings to pay NARP dues that remained after purchasing a new Athearn locomotive and some Atlas turnouts, I thought of NARP as this massive organization with lobbyists prowling the halls of the Capitol. It was nothing of the kind, and back in the day, NARP was Tony Haswell producing that monthly newsletter.
The newsletter had a large name of Sponsors, which included, if I remember correctly, author Ray Bradbury and other notable persons of the day, but these were people who authorized Mr. Haswell to invoke their good name in support of passenger trains. NARP was simply Tony Haswell collecting member dues to support his one-man operation of putting out the Newsletter and press releases.
The Newsletter had a back page feature "Friend of the Railroad Passenger", and for some reason I remember Vermont Senator Winston Prouty (R) featured one month. Yes, most of the featured personages were probably liberal Democrats rather than conservative Republicans like Prouty, but Anthony Haswell acknowledged anyone and everyone who supported passenger trains in some manner, never demonized or even talked about anyone not on his side, and certainly didn't make generalizations and categorizations based on political party.
The story I heard is that Mr. Haswell got his start in Public Relations for the then Illinois Central railroad before going off on his own as the pioneering passenger-train advocate. Maybe the corporate culture of attempting to influence the political process is to notice you friends, pay no heed to your opponents, and keep partisan politics out of it?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Paul MilenkovicThe story I heard is that Mr. Haswell got his start in Public Relations for the then Illinois Central railroad before going off on his own as the pioneering passenger-train advocate. Maybe the corporate culture of attempting to influence the political process is to notice you friends, pay no heed to your opponents, and keep partisan politics out of it?
Very true. I recall that Paul Weyrich, who was a very conservative activist (he came up with the term "Moral Majority"), was also a great advocate of passenger rail and local rail transit.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Predicting what Congress will do about Amtrak or anything else is akin to timing the stock market. No one has ever done it successfully, other than by happenstance.
ROBERT WILLISON A frozen operating and capital budget. Not enough capital to be self substaining system.
...and this is different from the vast majority of Amtrak's years how?
daveklepper which is indeed a repetition of the latter Bush years. but remember the effects of the Warrington management. hopefully the management will be a bit better at least. hopefully, there won't be a new Minetta. And management of real estate can make up for some of the shortfall.
You clearly don't remember David Stockman.... or recall what Jimmy Carter did to the Amtrak map.
Paul Weyrich was, indeed, a friend of Amtrak (he was on the Board of Directors) and also believed very much in integration of various means of public transit systems. We shared numerous communications over the years and I was impressed by not only his rational thinking but also his intellectual commitment to "the common good." He also published just prior to his death a book titled something like "How to convince conservatives the value of passenger trains" which is, I think, available from his old organization Free Congress Foundation in WDC.
oltmannd daveklepper which is indeed a repetition of the latter Bush years. but remember the effects of the Warrington management. hopefully the management will be a bit better at least. hopefully, there won't be a new Minetta. And management of real estate can make up for some of the shortfall. You clearly don't remember David Stockman.... or recall what Jimmy Carter did to the Amtrak map.
As I recall Carter wasn't a member of the GOP.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Without creating a political argument the conservative's of the 1970,1980's were a different lot compared to today's conservative's and tea party. Amtrak has embedded it self in the fabric of America by operating state and regional trains. Its the long distance trains that will be on the chopping block, as we saw with Jimmy Carter who eliminated a few good routes. And yes I know jimmy was a dem.
Without sufficient capital Amtrak will not limp along, it will become even more unprofitable. The first order of 200 amfleet cars were placed in service by Budd in 1975. Not sure what thier service life is but 40 years seems a little long in the tooth. They are considerable older than the cars they replaced.
Paul Milenkovic The Newsletter had a back page feature "Friend of the Railroad Passenger", and for some reason I remember Vermont Senator Winston Prouty (R) featured one month.
The Newsletter had a back page feature "Friend of the Railroad Passenger", and for some reason I remember Vermont Senator Winston Prouty (R) featured one month.
Mr. Allot. Mr. President, Donald E. Deuster, of the Department of Transportation, has made a remarkable, candid, and factual speech to the Railroad Transportation Institute meeting in St. Louis, Mo., on November 5, 1970. Mr. Deuster discussed, from a first-hand view, the administration’s struggle to get the Railpax bill enacted into law. In the speech he correctly quotes my statement regarding the role played by the distinguished junior Senator from Vermont (Mr. Prouty) in the effort to get a bill through the Commerce Committee. In addition, he paints a vivid picture of the effort made by a distinguished Coloradan, Mr. Robert Kessler, now general counsel for the Federal Railroad Administration, in the final moments before the Railpax bill passed the Senate. I must say that I was pleased with Mr. Deuster's candor in telling the story which I think many of my colleagues who were not directly involved with the bill will find interesting. For that reason, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Deuster’s remarks be recorded in the Record. There being no objection, the remarks were ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
Absolutely! If history notes one great decision by the 91st Congress, It will be enactment of the landmark National Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970. Why? Well, essentially this rail passenger act signifies a triple transportation accomplishment. First, it marks the rejuvenation of the American passenger train system. Secondly, it portends the rehabilitation of our ailing railroad industry. And thirdly, it is a giant step toward bringing America’s national transportation policies into balance.
Soon, if all goes well, beautiful gleaming red, white and blue passenger trains will be streaking across the land. These “America-liners” will speak for themselves.
Every evening for the past two years when I arrived home from Capitol Hill, confused and weary, my wife would taunt me by asking: “Well, dear, aren’t you going to tell me what happened to the rail passenger bill today?”
Happily, that tortuous and treacherous legislative trail is past. Last Friday, out in California, President Nixon with a flourish of his pen Constitutionally converted what was "our bill” into what is now “the law of the land.” What a relief! What joy! And what a struggle!
During the germination of this Jubilee Act of Congress, it was my good fortune to be the only Nixon Administration official assigned full-time to work on Capitol Hill solely on railroad affairs.
I am especially grateful for the opportunity this task has afforded me to meet and work with so many friendly railroad people, including chairman Donal Turkal and Secretary Jim Nisbet of the Railroad Transportation Institute.
The harmonious spirit evidenced in this Congress by railroad people—president, union leaders and the Capitol Hill legislative representatives for both labor and management—has been phenomenal. Despite this unusual team spirit, final enactment of the rail passenger bill was an eleventh hour, suspenseful Congressional cllffhanger.
Initially, most experts doubted that any railroad bill would pass. Once upon a time, Senator Everett Dlrksen gave a pep talk to a gathering of Republican women at Highland Park, Illinois. He told about an old barnyard rooster who had gathered all his hens into the chickenhouse for an inspirational harangue.
At the finale of this elocution, for Illustrative purposes the rooster rolled out a giant ostrich egg into the henhouse floor. "Now, girls,” said he, “don't get me wrong. It’s not that I am dissatisfied with the quality of your performance. But, I do want to show you that with a little extra effort, it can be done.”
Believe me, precisely that kind of extra exertion was required to bring about passage of the railroad bill.
Unfortunately but predictably, this landmark law became mired in the usual murky pre-election adjournment atmosphere on the Hill. Luckily, it was extricated from a legislative snake pit of partisan cross-fire, mysterious foot-dragging, great confusion and some sniping.
On the very last day of Congress the passenger bill slipped through the House of Representatives shortly before noon on a voice vote, languished most of the afternoon in the Enrolling Clerk’s office, was finally messengered over to the Senate just half an hour before adjournment, and shimmied through another voice vote only moments before the last gavel fell.
From start to finish the path of this bill was spiced by melodramatic suspense and humor.
One day during the Senate hearings back in September 1969, Chairman George Bloom of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission told a tale to emphasize the need for better quality passenger service. He recalled how:
“Service was so bad the passengers at Altoona, Pennsylvania got off the train, sat down in front of the engine, did not get on, and said they were going to sit there until they got ice and air-conditioning on the train.”
At this point, Senator Howard Cannon of Nevada leaned forward to ask: “Are they still there?"
Laughter rocked the hearing room and that incident has often been retold. The popularity of this joke reflects the widespread public and Congressional disapproval of the miserable rail passenger service we now suffer. Fortunately, enactment of the passenger bill offers us a golden opportunity to overcome this public outrage and the industry's bad image by providing excellent service. Happy days are ahead—I hope!
During these same Senate hearings, former president of the Penn Central, Stuart Saunders, was queried as to why the Penn Central passenger trains did not travel faster. After describing the peculiar curvature of the Penn Central tracks, Mr. Saunders summed it up by saying: “You see, ours is a very crooked railroad.”
The belly laughs subsided considerably when the news broke on Sunday, June 28, 1970, that the Penn Central was going into bankruptcy and when Congress began examining the circumstances. Fortunately, all this happened one month after the Senate had passed the passenger bill because immediately shock waves struck Capitol Hill and thoroughly muddled the legislative waters. The bankruptcy triggered four reactions:
One. At long last Congress became convinced that the railroads were not just crying “wolf.” Credibility was unbearability of the passenger train deficits.
Two. A hasty search was begun to find a scapegoat somewhere. All the old simple answers were dredged up again. We listened to Congressional charges of “bad management, intentional downgrading of service, conglomerate manipulations, ungrateful robber barons and subsidized competition.”
Three. The Association of American Railroads hastily completed and publicized the “ASTRO Report” on the industry’s overall plight. The principal thrust of that report was the urgent need to correct deficient public policies.
Four. After the Initial shock, confusion and consternation passed away, the need for the rail passenger bill became obvious to almost everybody. Expectation of House action on the bill became widespread.
So it all came to pass on October 14, 1970, but not before one final flourish of humor.
Minutes before the House was to adjourn, Majority Leader Carl Albert rushed onto the floor to excitedly report: "The Senate has amended the railroad bill and is sending it back!"
In utter consternation Members rushed to Speaker McCormack to hold up adjournment. Simultaneously, a crowd of Members circled around Republican Congressman Durward O. “Doc” Hall of Missouri to facilitate “unanimous consent" reconsideration of the rail bill when it came back burdened with some mysterious Senate amendments.
In the midst of this confused scene, Congressman Albert next announced that he had been misinformed. Actually, it was some crime bill that the Senate had amended.
At this point, Congressman Harley O. Staggers of West Virginia, who had carefully maneuvered the bill through quite a procedural obstacle course, was in no mood to speculate or act on hearsay. Mr. Staggers insisted that adjournments be held up until he had personally spoken with Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield.
Only after he was positively and personally assured from the very mouth of Senator Mansfield that indeed the Senate had passed the rail passenger bill with no amendments, and it was now cleared for the President, only then did Mr. Staggers advise the Speaker to adjourn.
So, the gavel fell at thirteen minutes past four. Congress was out, and rail passenger service was in.
To describe in capsule form this extended and precarious legislative journey is impossible. One analogy comes to mind which may help others appreciate how things like this happen on Capitol Hill. Several years ago my wife and I were spectators at an unusual sporting event back home in Libertyville, Illinois. The Libertyville Athletic Club secured a giant medicine ball, six feet in diameter. This giant heavy ball was placed on the fifty yard line of a football field. Two teams of twenty men lined up. When the whistle blew, everybody started pushing.
As bodies jostled and elbows flew in the air, the Libertyville volunteer firemen pumped a powerful stream of water on the ball, on the players and on the field. Soon, everything was muddy, and slippery. Everybody was lunging at the ball, knees were being scraped, tempers were rising, but nothing was happened to the ball. What a spectacle!
The scene precisely resembled the situation in Washington, D.C. during the winter of 1969 and 1970 as both the Nixon Administration and the Senate Commerce Committee struggled and searched for some good solution to the passenger train crisis.
First, almost everybody agreed that it was a crisis. When I was born in 1929, there were 20,000 passenger trains serving America. But, in just forty short years, as Congressman William Springer of Illinois emphasized on the House floor, thirty-nine of every forty trains had disappeared. Only 500 remained and they were vanishing fast.
Secondly, neither the Administration nor the Senate committee could decide on what to do. There was an impasse. Nothing was moving.
Meanwhile, back at Libertyville, slowly, here and there, some extraordinary pushing and shoving took place. As the water spray continued to bowl over players, the crowd detected a slight movement of the ball. Then, the ball began to slog along faster and faster toward the goal line, picking up momentum. Now, it seemed impossible to stop it.
That's the way it seemed on Capitol Hill in the Spring of 1970 when finally the Administration and the Senate Commerce Committee compromised, reached agreement on setting up a quasi-public corporation to run a basic network of passenger trains, and passed the bill through the Senate by the overwhelming margin of 78 to 3. It was really rolling!
But, back In Libertyville, just as the medicine ball reached the goal line, somehow it punctured, all the air escaped, and the players fell in a muddy heap on the soggy field over a limp piece of rubber.
Fortunately for our railroad bill, although some of us thought we heard the hissing of escaping air up to the very last minute, somehow the ball remained inflated and found its way to the President’s desk for signature into law.
Even as President Nixon was putting his pen to the Act, there was a hissing rumor circulating around Washington that he might not sign the bill, and thereby give this lovely landmark legislation what is known as a “pocket veto.” Under the Constitution, when Congress adjourns, the President must sign a bill within ten days or else it does not become law. Happily, the President put his ink to the paper and it was done!
Having been one of the muddy multitude pushing this bill along the slippery field, let me tell you about three heroes of the ball game.
The first great hero of the fray was Senator Winston L. Prouty of Vermont. Senator Prouty's diligence and decisive action is best described by the words of his colleague, Senator Gordon Allott of Colorado, spoken on the day of adjournment.
“How did it come about? Quite frankly, it came about because the Junior Senator from Vermont did not give up his fight on April 9 when the committee (Senate Commerce) decided to report an operating subsidy bill.
"My distinguished colleague from Vermont filed individual views and unveiled in detail his proposal for creating a semi-public corporation to take over all intercity rail passenger service.
“Within one month’s time, Senator Prouty had accomplished the impossible. He had convinced rail management, rail labor, his own administration, the Interstate Commerce Commission, the National Association of Railroad Passengers, the leadership of the Senate Commerce Committee, the majority leadership and the minority leadership that his proposal was a superior method for solving the crisis in rail passenger service.”
On May 6, 1970, the Senate by a vote of 78 to 3 approved Senator Prouty's proposal.
This extraordinary legislative achievement amazed most onlookers, including me, and clearly marked Senator Prouty as hero number one.
Undoubtedly, the second great hero was Secretary of Transportation John A. Volpe. Secretary Volpe labored day and night, as is his habit, to seek out the most sensible way of resolving the rail passenger crisis. This called for a lot of pushing and hammering.
Finally, after a protracted period of gestation running from the spring of 1969 into the spring of 1970, Secretary Volpe hammered out of the Department of Transportation and out of the Administration the concept of the rail passenger corporation.
Unfortunately, in January 1970, before the White House could approve this complicated proposition, somehow the details found their way into the daily newspaper. How embarrassing and aggravating it was. Even though the “press leak” is part of Washington life, neither the White House nor Members of Congress like to learn about Administration proposals in their morning paper.
Despite the difficulties, Secretary Volpe continued to work for a solution. He kept his top policy advisers struggling to perfect the corporation idea, he discussed the dilemma with railroad people, he cooperated closely with Senator Prouty and he negotiated with Chairman Warren Magnuson, senior Republican Norris Cotton and Subcommittee Chairman Vance Hartke of the Senate Commerce Committee. Secretary Volpe secured Administration approval for the compromise bill that was ultimately produced. Constantly, he was pushing the ball.
When it came to expostulating the virtue of the passenger bill, Secretary Volpe must have spent more time on the telephone than anyone in Washington, including even the most talkative Cabinet wife or even my teen-age daughter.
Some may wonder when and where this great bill was actually born. I am reminded of a speech given by Senator Dirksen a few years ago when he referred to the “grand and glorious birth of the Republican Party at Jackson Michigan."
I was flabbergasted. As a graduate of Ripon College, I knew that the Republican Party was born at Ripon, Wisconsin, where the first meeting was held in a little white school house on March 20, 1854. Later on in July of 1854, a convention was held at Jackson, Michigan. So, I put all this in a memorandum for Senator Dirksen and left it with his personal secretary, Mrs. Glee Gomlen.
Soon the mailman brought me a short, personally dictated and devastatingly unanswerable reply. It read:
“Dear Don: Birth is one thing and conception another. It is true that the Republican Party was conceived at Ripon. However, it was born at Jackson!"
Likewise, you can say that the railroad passenger bill was conceived in the Department of Transportation. However, it was born in the Senate, and the Senatorial obstetricians who gave it form, birth and life were Senator Prouty, his colleagues on the Senate Commerce Committee and their diligent professional staff men, Dan O’Neal, Paul Molloy and Henry Rush.
If the determination and persistence or Senator Prouty and Secretary Volpe were duplicated by anyone, they were matched by the steadfast drive of the third great hero, Chairman Harley O. Staggers of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
Congressman Staggers pushed this bill steadily despite his committee’s exceptionally heavy agenda of other business. Some of that other business included holding emergency hearings and executive sessions and settling the threatened national railroad strike in March, and also investigating the complications surrounding the tragic Penn Central bankruptcy in July.
Steering any bill through both Houses of Congress on one day much less the last day before an election campaign is quite an art. Chairman Staggers accomplished this feat with the precision of a circus tightrope walker.
There were three ticklish procedural situations. First Mr. Staggers luckily secured a hearing before the House Rules Committee on Tuesday, October 13th, its very last day of sitting. Skillfully he participated in a closed door decision to leapfrog the passenger bill from second place on the Rules Committee agenda into first place ahead of a controversial manpower bill. This expeditious surge forward was absolutely essential for taking the bill to the House floor that very afternoon and completing general debate so that voting could take place first thing Wednesday morning at eleven.
Secondly, Chairman Staggers diplomatically and harmoniously secured approval by the Ways and Means Committee of a technical revenue amendment for the protection of taxpaying railroads who join the passenger corporation.
Once this revenue amendment was added, two complications arose. First, the Constitution requires that all revenue legislation originate In the House of Representatives. Accordingly, Mr. Staggers had to abandon the Senate bill, S. 3706, and proceed with a House bill, H R. 17846. This changing of legislative horses in midstream sometimes causes consternation and confusion to the unsophisticated. Secondly, under the House Rules the bill now came under the jurisdiction of not one but two legislative committees. Mr. Staggers therefore had to request a complicated ‘‘rule" under the terms of which two hours of floor debate would be handled by his Commerce committee, and one hour of debate would be controlled by the Ways and Means Committee under one or their traditional "closed'' or "gag" rules forbidding floor amendments. All of this procedural maneuvering took time, muddied the waters, and called for delicate handling. Thanks to the legislative skill and persuasive powers of Congressman Staggers, all of these complications were overcome. No account of any bill’s emergence from the House Commerce committee would be complete without a salute to the masterful explanatory efforts of the ranking Republican Member William L. Springer of Illinois. Congressman Springer put our complicated corporation concept into simple “capsule” form. In persuasive testimony before the Rules Committee and debate on the House floor, Mr. Springer made the bill sound simple and good. He was a wizard of capsulization.
Another spark plug for saving the passenger train throughout this long struggle was Congressman Brock Adams of Washington who was articulate and clear before the Rules Committee. Also, both Congressman Al Ullman of Oregon and John Byrnes of Wisconsin, the ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee clarified and simplified the complicated revenue amendment before the Rules Committee, and greatly helped the bill shimmy forward unscarred. Even after all these exertions. Chairman Staggers found it necessary to go to the Speaker's office and to the House floor to personally insure that the passenger bill was hand-engrossed and hastened to the Senate in time for action there. Just minutes of delay could have been fatal for the Senate was anxious to leave town.
Certain Senators were hoping that the controversial farm bill, a political hot potato, would not come up for a vote before the election. So, when the official messenger from the House arrived with the farm bill, these hostile forces in the Senate blocked the chamber door and refused to admit the House messenger. What an insult to the House! What a burlesque mockery of the bicameral system! But it happened, and while the Senate doors remained blocked, among the House documents being refused admittance was our beloved rail passenger bill. On that last suspenseful afternoon, I probably walked back and forth from the House side to the Senate side at least twenty times. With me pounding the marble corridors and wearing out shoe leather were two attorneys for the Federal Railroad Administration, Chief Counsel Bob Kessler and Assistant Counsel Pat O'Driscoll. Together, we waited for the Senate doors to open. We watched from the Senate gallery when at 8:32 p.m., the doors opened to receive at long last the House messenger and the railroad bill.
Senator Hugh Scott of Pennsylvania took the floor to rejoice, too, saying: “Thoughts to deep for tears subdue the minority leader who has waited with unbated breath, I regret to say, for the arrival of our beloved messenger from the other body. ... I am delighted to see the messenger from the House of Representatives. ... I am pleased that he finally made this long and perilous trip from the House of Representatives, surmounting as he did one peril after another—perils consisting of individual Members of the majority, emissaries from the majority, mercenaries, janissaries, shock troops, and—if we could now have the farm bill, my cup would indeed overflow, happiness would pervade the Chamber, and the farmers could merrily return to the tillage of the soil, and take over from the Senate of the United States the distribution of the fertilizer of the Nation."
BaltACD oltmannd daveklepper which is indeed a repetition of the latter Bush years. but remember the effects of the Warrington management. hopefully the management will be a bit better at least. hopefully, there won't be a new Minetta. And management of real estate can make up for some of the shortfall. You clearly don't remember David Stockman.... or recall what Jimmy Carter did to the Amtrak map. As I recall Carter wasn't a member of the GOP.
Exactly! Neither party has been kind to Amtrak! No reason to expect change now - particularly when there is even less money to go around.
ROBERT WILLISON Without creating a political argument the conservative's of the 1970,1980's were a different lot compared to today's conservative's and tea party. Amtrak has embedded it self in the fabric of America by operating state and regional trains. Its the long distance trains that will be on the chopping block, as we saw with Jimmy Carter who eliminated a few good routes. And yes I know jimmy was a dem. Without sufficient capital Amtrak will not limp along, it will become even more unprofitable. The first order of 200 amfleet cars were placed in service by Budd in 1975. Not sure what thier service life is but 40 years seems a little long in the tooth. They are considerable older than the cars they replaced.
The tea party is not in charge of the R's. in fact, they may be pretty much irrelevant to any bill the gets passed that the prez will sign. Bill Shuster is not going to chop the LD routes. The cars Amtrak replaced with Amfleet were carbon steel. Amfleet is all stainless. The diners and baggage cars that are just now being replaced are all stainless and are over 60 years old. Amfleet is not technologically obsolete - can be rebuild indefinitely.
Most companies do not operate equipment indefinitely for a wide variety of reasons.The fact that they can be rebuilt indefinitely doesn't mean it make sense to. New technology can be incorporated into new equipment making them more efficient and better addressing customer needs.The cars that amtrak replaced were not carbon steel. Amtrak from the outset purchased a fleet of primarily budd stainless cars. Amtrak didnt even purchase cars built by pullman standard because of how PS cars were manufactured. The fact that some of these budds are still in daily service today only acknowledge the fact of how well the cars were engineered and how well Amtrak mechanical people have kept them in operating condition.
As far as the mood in congress, even train's magazine in this forum takes a position where things could get rough for Amtrak. Historical Amtrak long distance trains have taken a hit, some of it under the dems as well.
ROBERT WILLISONAmtrak from the outset purchased a fleet of primarily budd stainless cars. Amtrak didnt even purchase cars built by pullman standard because of how PS cars were manufactured.
This is incorrect. Amtrak purchase lots of Budds, but a huge amount of carbon steel cars as well. Don't be fooled by the stainless steel facade...
You are right about new technology driving new equipment purchases. It's what drives the railroad's locomotive purchases. Otherwise, railroads would just rebuild SD40-2s indefinitely.
However, what new technology for single level cars has come about in the past 40 years? That Amtrak's current purchase of sleepers is just a tweaked 30 year old design speaks volumes....
ROBERT WILLISONAs far as the mood in congress, even train's magazine in this forum takes a position where things could get rough for Amtrak.
The mood has been rough for most of Amtrak's existence. It was nastiest under Reagan. Every budget he sent to the hill had zero $ for Amtrak. Even the "worst" R's now talk about "reform" rather than death. (even though the reform would probably kill most LD trains in the long run)
Bill Shuster, a House R, fought like crazy to find money to keep the Pennsylvanian going. A deep red state - Kanas - is finding money to keep the ATSF's weedy mainline through their state alive enough to host the SW Chief.
The real pressing need is to get the NEC up to a good state of repair. Finding enough money will be tough - it might take a crisis. But, that was the case when Washington was recently all "D", too. I'm not any more worried about Amtrak now than I was 30 years ago.
less worried than when Minetta held some of the cards
I guess its all speculation now. Let's hope for some compromise, and funding that will support both the NEC and the core LD trains.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.