Lehigh Valley 2089 After looking at what Amtrak has gone through with the national government, would it really be a good idea to privitize the passenger railroad? It worked with Conrail, so why not Amtrak? It would take a lot off of the goverments shoulders, and allow Amtrak to not worry about funding. So, what do you think about this possibility? Do you think that it could really help the system, or just send it into turmoil?
After looking at what Amtrak has gone through with the national government, would it really be a good idea to privitize the passenger railroad? It worked with Conrail, so why not Amtrak? It would take a lot off of the goverments shoulders, and allow Amtrak to not worry about funding.
So, what do you think about this possibility? Do you think that it could really help the system, or just send it into turmoil?
It didn't work with Conrail until they changed the game (Staggers Act). It won't work with Amtrak unless they change the game there, too. But the change would have to be really drastic. REALLY drastic. Amtrak loses nearly 50 cents on the dollar. Conrail was much closer to breaking even, even before Staggers.
You could privatize in the sense that you bid out the operation in parts with the guy who needed the least subsidy winning. But that's not really privatizing....
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
gabeusmc These are the founding priciples of the US.
These are the founding priciples of the US.
If that is so, gabeusmc, then why does the Constitution give the Congress right to regulate interstate commerce? Why is there copyright laws and a Patent Office? Why has the Federal and state governements from the beginning issued charters, legislated bonding, allowed for eminent domain, or otherwise help form the system...I am not talking just 20th or 21st Century, I am talking 18th and19th Century, too. I am not neccessarityly talking railroads either, I am talking roads and highways, canals, waterways, airports and air traffic controls.
"The US dosen't need it."
What do you envision our population corridors would be like without passenger rail service? What alternatives would you propose that wouldn't be congested, used more land than in use now, and be non pollutant?
Overall your statement lacks a sense of history and the role the government has played in all our intercourse and economic (military?) growth nor considers the need for proper use of fuel, land, and air for practicality, safety and enviornmently sound choices.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
This is almost humorous. Everybody here thinks Amtrak is vital to the survival of the nation.This is simple. Do we need amtrak? No. If if falls of the face of the earth will it matter? No. So the answer is to privateize it. If it fails there is a reason. The US dosen't need it. If it succeds all the better. These are the founding priciples of the US.
"Mess with the best, die like the rest" -U.S. Marine Corp
MINRail (Minessota Rail Transportaion Corp.) - "If they got rid of the weeds what would hold the rails down?"
And yes I am 17.
Politicians not only want thier cake and eat it to, but they want the oven, the pan it was cooked in, the knife that cut it, the plate is was served on, the fork they used plus total amnisty all while telling you it doesn't exist.
.
Henry, you are right, but the sort of transparency of costs would actually dissuade anyone from privatizing Amtrak. I always ask: is this a total privatization, including the cost of rebuilding track." A few years back the states in the NE Corridor rebuffed an offer from Republicans to give them the NE Corridor, to quote a Don Phillips Trains article from June 2005: "Obviously private operators could not make money any more than Amtrak can make money. So would they be subsidized? ... The Northeast Corridor states all but sniffed at the plan. Why would they want a half-crumbling railroad line that needs billions of dollars in work."
And that is also another reason why "privatization" attempts are really only the privatization of operating profits but the socialization of losses in the form of upkeep of track. During the 2005 congressional hearings when the Republicans wanted to eliminate "money losing" long distance trains and keep the NE Corridor it was revealed that Amtrak loses more per rider in the NE Corridor than on long distance trains when you account for the upkeep Amtrak must pay for on track it owns. Long distance trains are on the other had a small incremental cost for the freight railroads. I saw a figure once that Amtrak pays the same to CSX and NS to send one train from NYC to Chicago as UPS does to send one piggyback trailer.
BTW, a little-advertised part of the Transport bill that made its way out of the Senate a few weeks back was a provision that would severely restrict the privatization of highways, I think they are waking up that privatization is more expensive:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/09/jeff-bingaman-senate-highway-bill-leases_n_1266385.html
As discussed in the latest issue of Trains, Nuovo Trasporto Viaggiatori, a private operator in Italy, is planning high speed (187.5 miles per hour) passenger rail service connecting Turin, Milan, Rome and Naples. Start-up is planned for later this year.
The article did not present any comprehensive financial details, i.e. fares, rentals for facilities use, etc., but the investors apparently believe that they can make money with a privately owned and operated rail service. The article indicates that they have raised the capital in public financial markets. I am keen to see how it works out. Hopefully, as the title of the article suggests, it could be a model for the U.S.
The Great Southern Railway in Australia is operated on a contract basis by a consortium of private investors. The Indian Pacific, The Gahn, and the Overland are its trains. The operators receive a subsidy from the Australian federal government. In turn they are required to meet stiff performance standards, or they run the risk of losing the contract. Having lived in Australia for five years, I have ridden all three trains on numerous occasions. I rode them when they were operated by the government and afterwards. The private operators improved the performance significantly.
The V Line in Victoria has been privatized along lines similar to the Great Southern Railway. Again the transition took place whilst I lived in Melbourne, and I saw first hand the improvements that followed the transition. Even the tram and bus lines in Melbourne were privatized.
I moved to Australia at the behest of my company because the Victorian government was privatizing the electric grid. The state government, which had owned it, sold it off, and my company bought a piece of it. As a result, amongst other things, the private operators were able to shed more than 20,000 unnecessary employees, who constituted a hidden tax on the customers, thereby delivering a better service for the utility customers. Most of the employees who lost their jobs found others of equal value or retired with a nice incentive package. Privatization involved temporary pain. But the benefits, at least in the case of electric utility service in Australia, outweighed the pain and resulted in an overall benefit for the population as a whole.
As long as Amtrak or any operator is forced to run long distance trains, which are used by a small percentage of intercity travelers, privatization would not work. However, privatizing passenger rail service in the relatively small number of corridors in the United States where trains make sense, i.e. NEC, southern California, Illinois, etc. might work if the operator could reduce the bureaucracy that encumbers Amtrak and force higher productivity from its employees.
Unfortunately, given the political environment in the United States, privatization of Amtrak or any form of intercity passenger rail is not likely. So Amtrak's losses, which reached a cumulative $28 billion at the end of FY11, will continue to add to the taxpayer burden associated with keeping it afloat.
Dwight, it is the mechinisms of the legislation that makes it all but impossible for Amtrak to become a private corporation. As for the Metrolink engineer texting or on the cell phone, that's indicative of too many working in all kinds of jobs be it transportation or factory or retail and even offices today; so that's not a factor of private operation not being able to make it. Our economic and political systems do not allow a private operation to succeed if because of high expectations of rate of return for investors (prublc or private), demands of a labor intensive business, and the unwillingness of a public to accept the whole cost plus profit purchase price. The ICC held railroad passenger ticket pices at given rates, the government built roads for cars and buses and built airports and provided traffic management for airlines, and states like NY had legislatures which did not allow the cost of a subway ride to raise above a nickel for over 50 years. So the public has no idea of the actual cost of traveling because it is so hidden and confusing to figure out. With that in mind, who in his right mind wants to get into the business of running passenger trains? Especially if there is no promise of financeial support (subsidy) from any government?
Privatizing Amtrak is completely unworkable: no system of public transportation anywhere makes a profit, and so in the end it would cost more to support the private firms operating Amtrak AND their profits and executive bonuses than it does as a straight government entity. Pro-privatization types like to point to Germany as a success, but only after HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS were invested in right of way improvements from the seventies on. In the UK it cost a fortune for the government to privatize BR and then pay to fix up the tracks. And then you have the tendency for private operators to cut costs on labor, rotating and split shifts etc., as with Veolia Transportation, the operator of Metrolink in California, until one of their engineers crashed into a UP freight while texting: http://projects.latimes.com/metrolink-crash/ No thanks.
Two different legislative creations, not equal, not able to do with Amtrak what was done with CR.
The Lehigh Valley Railroad, the Route of the Black Diamond Express, John Wilkes and Maple Leaf.
-Jake, modeling the Barclay, Towanda & Susquehanna.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.