CMStPnP schlimm And apparently the only one. I suppose Ellis felt he had to defend himself from the previously stated criticisms about IP equipment, etc., given the dispute with Amtrak that subsequently occured and ended his Hoosier prematurely. No there are like 5-6 other comments on another page including one where Amtrak responds to Ed Ellis' comments. It's a two way fight between the two......Amtrak and IP. They are both bickering on a public website (which I might add is quite revealing to read both side by side). Ellis seems to be warning other potential operators about Amtrak / FRA behavior and Amtrak seems to be acting in classic monopoly fashion and denying everything. Amtraks comments in response to Mr. Ellis are on this page you have to click the Docket link at the top of the first link provided to get there. https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FRA-2016-0023
schlimm And apparently the only one. I suppose Ellis felt he had to defend himself from the previously stated criticisms about IP equipment, etc., given the dispute with Amtrak that subsequently occured and ended his Hoosier prematurely.
No there are like 5-6 other comments on another page including one where Amtrak responds to Ed Ellis' comments. It's a two way fight between the two......Amtrak and IP. They are both bickering on a public website (which I might add is quite revealing to read both side by side). Ellis seems to be warning other potential operators about Amtrak / FRA behavior and Amtrak seems to be acting in classic monopoly fashion and denying everything.
Amtraks comments in response to Mr. Ellis are on this page you have to click the Docket link at the top of the first link provided to get there.
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FRA-2016-0023
Thanks! Balt's link had only the IP comment. Frankly, I have little faith in Ed Ellis. It seems like his operations fail, but he always blames others.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimmAnd apparently the only one. I suppose Ellis felt he had to defend himself from the previously stated criticisms about IP equipment, etc., given the dispute with Amtrak that subsequently occured and ended his Hoosier prematurely.
BaltACD schlimm Not exactly new - Ellis' comment is from Oct. 7, 2016 However that appears to be the newest comment that has been made.
schlimm Not exactly new - Ellis' comment is from Oct. 7, 2016
However that appears to be the newest comment that has been made.
And apparently the only one. I suppose Ellis felt he had to defend himself from the previously stated criticisms about IP equipment, etc., given the dispute with Amtrak that subsequently occured and ended his Hoosier prematurely.
CMStPnPThat's interesting, I would guess Mr Ellis is correct on Amtrak not really caring about the route and not calling the host railroads on ontime performance. Would also say he has a point of Amtrak attempting to ensure he failed as a contractor via miscommunication and dire notices to the traveling public. OTOH, Amtrak was probably correct about Mr. Ellis equipment requiring a lot of work to bring it up to spec as well as his equipment being responsible for some train delays. I remember reading about some of the runs in regards to malfunctioning or inoperable toilets and that stuff is the responsibility of Iowa Pacific as well as equipment inspection before the train pulls in for boarding passengers. I said it before and I will say it again, I would feel unsafe riding any Iowa Pacific equipment on any train based on what I have read so far about the company. I just constantly get the impression of a thinly capitalized shoe string operation.
OTOH, Amtrak was probably correct about Mr. Ellis equipment requiring a lot of work to bring it up to spec as well as his equipment being responsible for some train delays. I remember reading about some of the runs in regards to malfunctioning or inoperable toilets and that stuff is the responsibility of Iowa Pacific as well as equipment inspection before the train pulls in for boarding passengers. I said it before and I will say it again, I would feel unsafe riding any Iowa Pacific equipment on any train based on what I have read so far about the company. I just constantly get the impression of a thinly capitalized shoe string operation.
While I agree that Ellis's operations have been thinly capitalized - none of the currently existing railroads started out as being 'fully capitalized'. Railroads from their inception have been shoestring operations, when successful they secured enough profits to put money back into improving the physical plant.
I believe the STB has a financial standard to measure the current railroads - and not all of them are considered to be earning their own cost of capital.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
schlimmNot exactly new - Ellis' comment is from Oct. 7, 2016
Not exactly new - Ellis' comment is from Oct. 7, 2016
That's interesting, I would guess Mr Ellis is correct on Amtrak not really caring about the route and not calling the host railroads on ontime performance. Would also say he has a point of Amtrak attempting to ensure he failed as a contractor via miscommunication and dire notices to the traveling public.
RME CMStPnP Please don't quote the Newswire unless and until Mr. Schmidt has made the link live or 'sticky'. In any event, it is far more useful to go directly to the direct page for the Competitive Passenger Rail Service Pilot Program in the Federal Register. And, once there, to read the comments (there were 16 when I accessed the page) and -- I can't encourage this enough -- to leave a comment there, where it will have more effect than our usual round-and-round in the forum.
CMStPnP
Please don't quote the Newswire unless and until Mr. Schmidt has made the link live or 'sticky'. In any event, it is far more useful to go directly to the direct page for the Competitive Passenger Rail Service Pilot Program in the Federal Register. And, once there, to read the comments (there were 16 when I accessed the page) and -- I can't encourage this enough -- to leave a comment there, where it will have more effect than our usual round-and-round in the forum.
Some interesting reading in the comments.
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FRA-2016-0023-0021
CMStPnPWell it looks like from Trains writings in the News Wire section the Feds are actually going to try and send out RFP's for private companies to run the LD trains..........with a limit of no more than three LD trains per company, I think is what it said.
Please don't quote the Newswire unless and until Mr. Schmidt has made the link live or 'sticky'. In any event, it is far more useful to go directly to the direct page for the Competitive Passenger Rail Service Pilot Program in the Federal Register. And, once there, to read the comments (there were 16 when I accessed the page) and -- I can't encourage this enough -- to leave a comment there, where it will have more effect than our usual round-and-round in the forum. I note that forum contributor Virgil Payne did so twice in the 'earlier' proposed notice of rulemaking...
EDIT: note that these comments carry over from the earlier versions of this rule, and apply to the earlier comment period (which closed August 22, 2016). I would like everyone who is concerned about this thread to read the current version of the rule (7/7/2017) and then write a current comment. Now is one of the times that institutional Washington will be reading your thoughts and ideas!
PNWRMNMThe charter arguement is false
I would second and agree that is total BS. You can't have it both ways. If your billing Class I railroads for property taxes, income taxes, etc. and your charging them taxes in other areas such as fuel..........you can't also come up with BS that they owe the Feds money still and have to run Passenger Trains at a loss. It is the height of silliness to even make that argument. If the Feds wanted it that way they would have use Promissary Notes. Much of the land granted to the railroads was unimproved land with zero development and hundreds or thousands of miles from civilization. The railroads could easily argue the land was near worthless beyond the timber or mineral rights AND they performed a public service by developing and settling the land in most cases with limited security provided by the Feds.
Miningman It is sheer folly to be rid of Amtrak, or VIA, or long distance rail travel. It is a necessity from Stategic Defense to serving remote communities. It is vital to a nation and its people. It has a very bright future because of advancing technologies, environmental concerns and laws, serious overcrowding and delays at rapidly becoming inefficient airports and carnage and too much traffic on highways. A world leading high speed intercity and coast to coast service could be had in a matter of a few years but the time is not yet ripe. It will come because it has to. Perhaps the railroads should have their feet held to the fire on their original charters, but in a more sensible way. Amtrak and VIA can run their passenger trains with any schedule they need at no charge or fee at all and the railroads must accommodate to the highest order. In return they can charge "to the books' an acccounting of whatever they think is sufficient plus a profit. This then in turn becomes one big tax deduction and reduction.
It is sheer folly to be rid of Amtrak, or VIA, or long distance rail travel. It is a necessity from Stategic Defense to serving remote communities. It is vital to a nation and its people. It has a very bright future because of advancing technologies, environmental concerns and laws, serious overcrowding and delays at rapidly becoming inefficient airports and carnage and too much traffic on highways. A world leading high speed intercity and coast to coast service could be had in a matter of a few years but the time is not yet ripe. It will come because it has to.
Perhaps the railroads should have their feet held to the fire on their original charters, but in a more sensible way. Amtrak and VIA can run their passenger trains with any schedule they need at no charge or fee at all and the railroads must accommodate to the highest order. In return they can charge "to the books' an acccounting of whatever they think is sufficient plus a profit. This then in turn becomes one big tax deduction and reduction.
Well it looks like from Trains writings in the News Wire section the Feds are actually going to try and send out RFP's for private companies to run the LD trains..........with a limit of no more than three LD trains per company, I think is what it said. So that is interesting strategy to terminate them and get around the public uproar. We'll have to see how this pans out. At a minimum it will get the LD trains off the Amtrak balance sheet as well as the overhead.
http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2017/07/07-fra-establishes-timeline-for-pilot-program-to-privatize-long-distance-trains
Note that Florida East Coast Industries responded with comments.....hhhhh-mmmm, maybe they want their Washington D.C. to Florida streamliner back?
Interesting approach by the Feds....that just might work.
Statism? Nonsense. I could just as easily say you are a corporatist, aka a fascist (the corporate state), but that would just be silly and meaningless name-calling, same as you tend to do.
Capitalism with only the magical invisible hand (without proper regulation by the community, i.e., us) tends to self-destruct by inevitably turning into vulture capitalism (see EHH thread) concentrating all wealth and power into the 0.01%'s pockets, as in banana republics. Even Adam Smith recognized the need for regulation where the market is inappropriate or does not exist, something people like Mac seem to overlook. The notion of freedom of choice vs some government bureaucrat imposing his will is a false (though clever) dichotomy designed to deceive people into thinking our government is our enemy. A lack of regulation of finance led to the catastrophic Great Depression and the near-collapse of 2008, as well as numerous previous "Panics" in our economy. How many more of those do we want?
schlimm The railroads got a good deal. They were able to dump a money losing service required by their charters in exchange for for a cheap exit price and low rents, subsequently renegotiated. We need passenger service just as we need many government services. We don't live in selfish isolation on a desert island. We live in a society according to the Declaration, something people like Mac need to re-read.
The railroads got a good deal. They were able to dump a money losing service required by their charters in exchange for for a cheap exit price and low rents, subsequently renegotiated.
We need passenger service just as we need many government services. We don't live in selfish isolation on a desert island. We live in a society according to the Declaration, something people like Mac need to re-read.
The charter arguement is false. By the late 1960's both state regulatory commissions (intrastate trains) and the ICC for interstate trains had authority to approve or disapprove discontinuance of passenger service, and had for many years. They were generally unsympathetic to the railroads, being loaded with folks of Skchlim's ilk, but if the carriers could prove that the trains were consistent money loosers thery were able to get them discontinued, after years of regulatory delay in most cases. Had congress not intervened, the carriers would have been able to shed the passenger trains over time, probably the next five years.
The issue was time. The PRR, NYC and NH, each had massive passenger deficits that I would argue were the root cause of the failure of the then recently merged PC. The company was bleeding money due to non-compensitpory rates for hauling passengers and not being able to exit the trade. They saw ATK as the life line it was to them and took the bad deal congress offered. It at least stopped the immediate bleeding.
The 'need' for rail passenger service is totally subjective. The vast majority of the public abviously does not need it since they do not use it and had abandoned the passenger trains as quickly as they had a better option, like autos and airplanes.
The Declaration of Independence says nothing of the duty of the govt to rob Peter to pay for Paul's 12" to the foot scale model railroad, or a numberless host of other redistributionist policies. Yes there are things that can only be handled by governments. The duties granted to the Feds in the Constitution, the enumerated powers, are mostly matters of national defense and border security since no other entity can reasonably perform them.
The power to regulate interstate commerce is also delegated to the Feds. Unfortunately the various congresses have used the commerce clause to do untold harm to the economy.
Schlimm is a statist. By simply asserting a 'need' he justifies taking your money by threat of force to fund whatever he and his pals 'need' and building another bureaucracy to see that the need is met. Think of the war on drugs, or the man nade global warming hoax as examples. There are thousands of others including virtually every social welfare program you care to name. All because of some "need".
Mac
MidlandMike PNWRMNM Oh yes we are, and best with other people's money. In this case the freight carriers who are grosly underpaid for access to their network, and the taxpayers who see so much waste and redistribution of wealth that they do not know where to start cutting. ... Mac I know that the railroads didn't have a lot of say in the original Amtrak set-up, however, I understood that after the first 25 years, ATK has to negotiate with the RRs over the cost of access. Do I have that right?
PNWRMNM Oh yes we are, and best with other people's money. In this case the freight carriers who are grosly underpaid for access to their network, and the taxpayers who see so much waste and redistribution of wealth that they do not know where to start cutting. ... Mac
Oh yes we are, and best with other people's money. In this case the freight carriers who are grosly underpaid for access to their network, and the taxpayers who see so much waste and redistribution of wealth that they do not know where to start cutting.
...
I know that the railroads didn't have a lot of say in the original Amtrak set-up, however, I understood that after the first 25 years, ATK has to negotiate with the RRs over the cost of access. Do I have that right?
schlimm Midland Mike I hardly think of coachs full of people sitting up all night on an LD train are on "land cruises, nostalgia trips", and when was a Congressman bribed for Amtrak support? 1. The nosalgia land cruise is running trains on schedules in name only that often arrive many hours late, along with pullman accomodations and gourmet dining desired by many on here for pennies on the dollar of actual cost. 2. "Bribing Congressmen" goes back to Senator Byrd getting the infamous "Mountaineer" and the current "Cardinal" as a way of getting appropriations through Congress. It's the running of unneeded service in certain key districts or states in order to get votes. In both cases, the money spent on these services could be much better spent on developing shorter corridors that would link major population centers (some currently underserved or unserved, such as Columbus, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Atlanta) with air and road-competive rail services.
Midland Mike I hardly think of coachs full of people sitting up all night on an LD train are on "land cruises, nostalgia trips", and when was a Congressman bribed for Amtrak support?
Midland Mike
I hardly think of coachs full of people sitting up all night on an LD train are on "land cruises, nostalgia trips", and when was a Congressman bribed for Amtrak support?
1. The nosalgia land cruise is running trains on schedules in name only that often arrive many hours late, along with pullman accomodations and gourmet dining desired by many on here for pennies on the dollar of actual cost.
2. "Bribing Congressmen" goes back to Senator Byrd getting the infamous "Mountaineer" and the current "Cardinal" as a way of getting appropriations through Congress. It's the running of unneeded service in certain key districts or states in order to get votes.
In both cases, the money spent on these services could be much better spent on developing shorter corridors that would link major population centers (some currently underserved or unserved, such as Columbus, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Atlanta) with air and road-competive rail services.
1. Your definition of "nostalgia" is contrived, and "pennies on the dollar" is a gross exaggeration.
2. Trying to make congressional compromising equivalent to a bribe is rhetoric gone amuck.
I tend to agree with what Don Phillips said regarding the over hyping of LD costs vs. corridor costs, in his August Trains column.
BLS53 We all have our own unique passions in life. Unfortunately, we're not entitled to our own little tailor made government subsidy to satisfy them.
We all have our own unique passions in life. Unfortunately, we're not entitled to our own little tailor made government subsidy to satisfy them.
BLS53,
ATK is a good, admittedly small, place to start reighiening in our runaway Federal Govt.
daveklepper And to me views from trains of the Rockies and the Wasach (Sp) and even just the deserts in Texas cab certainly be compared with a Beethoven Symphony or a Bach Prelude and Fugue. Thanks for reinforcing this comparison. I wake up most mornings to Bach Trio Sonatas and go to sleep with Frank Chorales. Feel more energetic arising and go to sleep happier.
And to me views from trains of the Rockies and the Wasach (Sp) and even just the deserts in Texas cab certainly be compared with a Beethoven Symphony or a Bach Prelude and Fugue. Thanks for reinforcing this comparison.
I wake up most mornings to Bach Trio Sonatas and go to sleep with Frank Chorales. Feel more energetic arising and go to sleep happier.
BLS53 schlimm BLS53 daveklepper Yes,Schlimm, you do keep making the point, and from and accountants point-of-view and from a transporation-efficiency point of you, you are correct. But that is unfare. Why should a Kansas farmer subsidize the commuter that travels Acela or Northeast regional four times a week between Philadelphia and New York, but his son cannot enjoy a high-school graduation once-in-lifetime train tour to see the USA safely by hijself (and meet the people). Or have his elderly and handicapped grandparents come for a visit? The whole Amtrak subsidy is tiny compare do the civilization in brings the USA. Libraries and concert halls and symphony orchestras don't exist on ticket sales either but require donations and in many cases government subsidies. And then there is the very massive subsidy still existing, but hidden, to personal automobile transportion and over-the-road trucking. Odd comparison between the Arts and Transportation. I don't think the general public thinks of modes of transportation being culturally enriching in and of itself. It's simply a means of getting from point A to point B. I suppose a recreation of mid-19th century transcontinental wagon trains, would be the ultimate character building experience for a recent high school grad. Doesn't mean the government should start operating them in the name of cultural enrichment. Providing alternative transport for the elderly or handicapped would require a whole lot more routes and trains than we have now. As it is, outside the NEC, those folks seem to be able to get around just fine using air and roads. Subsidized land cruises, nostalgia trips and Congressional bribes are the only justifications LD proponents seem to make for such an anachronistic transport mode. Subsidies for fine arts have been with us for hundreds, even thousands of years. Don't know where I disputed the presence and history of subsidizing the arts. This is pretty much common knowledge. My point of question, was the previous poster's attempt to rationalize a transportation mode as a cultural activity, that should be subsidized on the same basis as the arts. Of course, art subsidies have opposition similar to Amtrak. They both show up regularly as candidates on the fiscal chopping block. So at the end of the day, the attempt at drawing a comparison with the arts, to justify support for Amtrak, is null.
schlimm BLS53 daveklepper Yes,Schlimm, you do keep making the point, and from and accountants point-of-view and from a transporation-efficiency point of you, you are correct. But that is unfare. Why should a Kansas farmer subsidize the commuter that travels Acela or Northeast regional four times a week between Philadelphia and New York, but his son cannot enjoy a high-school graduation once-in-lifetime train tour to see the USA safely by hijself (and meet the people). Or have his elderly and handicapped grandparents come for a visit? The whole Amtrak subsidy is tiny compare do the civilization in brings the USA. Libraries and concert halls and symphony orchestras don't exist on ticket sales either but require donations and in many cases government subsidies. And then there is the very massive subsidy still existing, but hidden, to personal automobile transportion and over-the-road trucking. Odd comparison between the Arts and Transportation. I don't think the general public thinks of modes of transportation being culturally enriching in and of itself. It's simply a means of getting from point A to point B. I suppose a recreation of mid-19th century transcontinental wagon trains, would be the ultimate character building experience for a recent high school grad. Doesn't mean the government should start operating them in the name of cultural enrichment. Providing alternative transport for the elderly or handicapped would require a whole lot more routes and trains than we have now. As it is, outside the NEC, those folks seem to be able to get around just fine using air and roads. Subsidized land cruises, nostalgia trips and Congressional bribes are the only justifications LD proponents seem to make for such an anachronistic transport mode. Subsidies for fine arts have been with us for hundreds, even thousands of years.
BLS53 daveklepper Yes,Schlimm, you do keep making the point, and from and accountants point-of-view and from a transporation-efficiency point of you, you are correct. But that is unfare. Why should a Kansas farmer subsidize the commuter that travels Acela or Northeast regional four times a week between Philadelphia and New York, but his son cannot enjoy a high-school graduation once-in-lifetime train tour to see the USA safely by hijself (and meet the people). Or have his elderly and handicapped grandparents come for a visit? The whole Amtrak subsidy is tiny compare do the civilization in brings the USA. Libraries and concert halls and symphony orchestras don't exist on ticket sales either but require donations and in many cases government subsidies. And then there is the very massive subsidy still existing, but hidden, to personal automobile transportion and over-the-road trucking. Odd comparison between the Arts and Transportation. I don't think the general public thinks of modes of transportation being culturally enriching in and of itself. It's simply a means of getting from point A to point B. I suppose a recreation of mid-19th century transcontinental wagon trains, would be the ultimate character building experience for a recent high school grad. Doesn't mean the government should start operating them in the name of cultural enrichment.
daveklepper Yes,Schlimm, you do keep making the point, and from and accountants point-of-view and from a transporation-efficiency point of you, you are correct. But that is unfare. Why should a Kansas farmer subsidize the commuter that travels Acela or Northeast regional four times a week between Philadelphia and New York, but his son cannot enjoy a high-school graduation once-in-lifetime train tour to see the USA safely by hijself (and meet the people). Or have his elderly and handicapped grandparents come for a visit? The whole Amtrak subsidy is tiny compare do the civilization in brings the USA. Libraries and concert halls and symphony orchestras don't exist on ticket sales either but require donations and in many cases government subsidies. And then there is the very massive subsidy still existing, but hidden, to personal automobile transportion and over-the-road trucking.
Yes,Schlimm, you do keep making the point, and from and accountants point-of-view and from a transporation-efficiency point of you, you are correct.
But that is unfare.
Why should a Kansas farmer subsidize the commuter that travels Acela or Northeast regional four times a week between Philadelphia and New York, but his son cannot enjoy a high-school graduation once-in-lifetime train tour to see the USA safely by hijself (and meet the people). Or have his elderly and handicapped grandparents come for a visit?
The whole Amtrak subsidy is tiny compare do the civilization in brings the USA. Libraries and concert halls and symphony orchestras don't exist on ticket sales either but require donations and in many cases government subsidies.
And then there is the very massive subsidy still existing, but hidden, to personal automobile transportion and over-the-road trucking.
Odd comparison between the Arts and Transportation. I don't think the general public thinks of modes of transportation being culturally enriching in and of itself. It's simply a means of getting from point A to point B.
I suppose a recreation of mid-19th century transcontinental wagon trains, would be the ultimate character building experience for a recent high school grad. Doesn't mean the government should start operating them in the name of cultural enrichment.
Providing alternative transport for the elderly or handicapped would require a whole lot more routes and trains than we have now. As it is, outside the NEC, those folks seem to be able to get around just fine using air and roads. Subsidized land cruises, nostalgia trips and Congressional bribes are the only justifications LD proponents seem to make for such an anachronistic transport mode.
Subsidies for fine arts have been with us for hundreds, even thousands of years.
Don't know where I disputed the presence and history of subsidizing the arts. This is pretty much common knowledge.
My point of question, was the previous poster's attempt to rationalize a transportation mode as a cultural activity, that should be subsidized on the same basis as the arts.
Of course, art subsidies have opposition similar to Amtrak. They both show up regularly as candidates on the fiscal chopping block. So at the end of the day, the attempt at drawing a comparison with the arts, to justify support for Amtrak, is null.
I totally agree!
MidlandMike schlimm Providing alternative transport for the elderly or handicapped would require a whole lot more routes and trains than we have now. As it is, outside the NEC, those folks seem to be able to get around just fine using air and roads. Subsidized land cruises, nostalgia trips and Congressional bribes are the only justifications LD proponents seem to make for such an anachronistic transport mode. Subsidies for fine arts have been with us for hundreds, even thousands of years. I hardly think of coachs full of people sitting up all night on an LD train are on "land cruises, nostalgia trips", and when was a Congressman bribed for Amtrak support?
schlimm Providing alternative transport for the elderly or handicapped would require a whole lot more routes and trains than we have now. As it is, outside the NEC, those folks seem to be able to get around just fine using air and roads. Subsidized land cruises, nostalgia trips and Congressional bribes are the only justifications LD proponents seem to make for such an anachronistic transport mode. Subsidies for fine arts have been with us for hundreds, even thousands of years.
wanswheel Too bad Congress lacked the foresight to establish the American Migrant Transportation Enterprise Corp. (Amtrek) before all the wagon trains disappeared. It could’ve been financed with ward bonds.
Too bad Congress lacked the foresight to establish the American Migrant Transportation Enterprise Corp. (Amtrek) before all the wagon trains disappeared. It could’ve been financed with ward bonds.
Well played.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.