Posted on 10/22/2005 5:00:58 PM PDT by Publius
It is time to “TTX” Amtrak – to sell Amtrak back to the freight railroads much as TTX is owned by the major carriers using its pooled freight cars.
The manner in which Amtrak has been financed and operated since its creation in 1970 is no way to run a railroad. Amtrak's annual trek to Capitol Hill and ensuing begging mission – habitually impeded by conservatives anxious to kill it – begets barely sufficient funds to achieve mediocrity and discourages the best and brightest from seeking employment.
Alas, the electorate won't permit Amtrak to die; conservatives won't permit Amtrak to prosper.
The Bush administration proposes dismantling Amtrak and permitting forced access to freight rail tracks by perhaps a dozen “who-knows-whom” entities. This is neither an efficient nor safe solution to the reality that rail passenger service is here to stay. Instead, let's integrate rail freight and passenger service by transferring ownership and control back to the freight railroads.
But wasn't it the freight railroads that unloaded passenger rail service because it was such a drag on already perpetual revenue inadequacy? Yes, but that was a different era. What has changed is that Congress now permits rail passenger service to be operated more like a business and provides (albeit insufficient) subsidies. And privately owned freight railroads no longer reject accepting subsidies as they did 35 years ago. As Association of American Railroads President Ed Hamberger wrote recently, “Public/ private partnerships create better value for taxpayers and provide public benefits that otherwise would not be obtained.”
At Railway Age's 2004 Passenger Trains on Freight Railroads conference, Norfolk Southern Chairman David Goode said, “Five years ago, I was 'Dr. No,' but today I know it makes business sense (for passenger trains to run on freight railroad tracks). Will passenger trains be run by Norfolk Southern? That's a stretch, but even to mention it shows a big leap in the thinking.”
Goode stresses that “certain rock-hard commitments are essential. For example, no reduction in capacity for freight rail, fair value for use of the tracks, and liability protection, to name a few.” Hamberger similarly says, “Public/private partnerships must be voluntary on both sides – for government, to protect the public interest; and for railroads, to protect the interest of their employees, shareholders, and service to their customers.”
Interest-based bargaining, whereby the feds, states, localities, and freight railroads each work to satisfy the other's needs, can accomplish the task. Provisionally, government might have a say in passenger routes, but eventually they would be determined by the marketplace.
Here are the gains produced by TTXing Amtrak:
As former TTX President Ray Burton said, “Railroading is a complex business.” Indeed, it should be left to those who do it best-and that includes operating the nation's intercity rail passenger network, whose time has come again.
Frank N. Wilner, an economist, is author of The Amtrak Story and three other books on railroad economics and labor, and is editor-in-chief of the Journal of Transportation Law, Logistics & Policy. A former AAR public affairs officer and a chief of staff at the Surface Transportation Board, he is now public relations director for the UTU. The views expressed are his entirely.
What is astonishing is that during the Twenties, railroading's golden era, a huge number of passenger and freight trains were hauled on the same track, and the passenger trains tended to run on time.
One thing that would be neat if it could be done efficiently and practically (though it probably never will be) would be if cars could be *quickly* loaded onto train cars (or even trucks) which could take the cars near their final destination.
Amtrak's Auto Train from Lorton, Virginia (near DC) to Sanford, Florida (near Orlando) is an example of this as far as cars are concerned.
Canadian Pacific's Expressway service from Montreal to Detroit is an example of how this is being done for trucks. A good many truck shippers are now working with the Class I's to make this happen on a larger scale. (BNSF has been doing it for J. B. Hunt since 1974.)
Do you drive? Or would you ride the bus?
Given that there are three other options to train travel, which the vast majority of travelers find as (if not more) acceptable, I'm questioning whether people "like you" constitute a large enough market to warrant the service.
Passenger trains are, by their nature, very expensive propositions -- in terms of both fixed and variable costs. If the market can't justify regular service, then economics would dictate that the service not be offered.
You are describing luxury tour trains and -- yes, you are correct -- they make a lot of money.
Well you know (he said from some experience) the California Zephyr runs from somewhere in the bay area to Chicago. And they didn't name it Zephyr for no reason. Lotta wind broken on the train, lemme tell ya.
Honestly the crew really tries to make the trip a nice one but the cost is *amazing*! Go to the Amtrak site and try to book a sleeper or nice seats between Sacramento and Reno $$$.
There are plenty of people on board, those afraid to fly and genuinely those that want to see the country up close, and those that want to get smashed on their trip to Reno.
Food is bad and expensive, the restrooms smell and the train is *ALWAYS* late. Amtrak travels at the leisure of the track owners so always count on delays. In the winter after a fresh snow it's no better or more beautiful way to travel.
I rode the California Zephyr when it was still a "good train" -- from Chicago to Denver on the Burlington. An absolute delight.
Sorry to hear that the CZ no longer lives up to that standard. But happy that it still has its virtues...and passengers.
"Does that CATO Institute take into account the multiple multi-billion dollar bailouts we've made of the airline industry? We'd pay for the ticket and still be subsidizing the trip atop it"
I don't know...I thought the subject was Amtrak.
But if you're interested in airline bailouts I'm sure you can find lots of articles written against them too.
If it is under the federal rails to trails law, the trail is effectively "route-banking" the right of way. Which means if a transit authority is looking for a right of way for a rail route, there it is. Of course the enviro wackos will complain about that.
That has been in place since 1980.
Actually now with much of the freight traffic consisting of container trains, it's not much more of an upgrade for high speed rail service. Container trains run by BNSF are running at 80+ mph for some good long stretches.
>The Class I's, by the way, have no problem running corridor >service passenger rail if they are paid for it, and BNSF >actually uses Amtrak as a profit center. So there is hope.
BNSF runs commuter trains in the Chicagoland area with success
Seems like US builds a lot of hiways too. How about raising trucking fees and maybe limiting hrs. This could push more freight trafic back to RRs. Maybe more partial loads and mixed freights instead of unit trains. Pass. trs. to state and regional authorities.
Because, it does not! :-)
Amtrak won't die. Congress is too liberal right now to cut the subsidies. NE RINOs and the Dems (Libs) get in bed to keep subsidizing by the billions.
I'm in exactly the same boat. I don't fly, and I love train travel. There is a problem with time since freight trains take priority and sometimes the passenger train has to wait. However, that's just what you have to deal with if you want to travel that way. I've always had great experiences on train trips (took one from E. TX to Newark NJ via Chicago and also went from Houston to Jacksonville FL--there's nothing like waking up to sunrise over the Gulf from the train window!). Of course, I want to book a trip back to TX now, but they are not running from Florida to there (southern route) until 2006 because of Katrina. Going the northern route (Chicago) takes longer so you have more sleeper nights meaning more $$$. Oh well.... I just hope they dont' do away with Amtrak.
susie
Do your taxes pay for roads or airline travel (things like ATCs and airports)?
susie
Do you remember the dumbass executives who made the decisions to not maintain the rails, the cars or the locomotives, offer poor service and simply write off passenger service.
I would use all capital letters somewhere in this post but I can't figure out the point.
Don't we also subsidize highways and air travel in this country? In fact one reason more people use these is because the infrastucture is in better shape, because they are subsidized.
The problem with Amtrak or any other passenger train operator outside the densely populated corridors is the lack of business travelers. Business travel is what pays the bills and as long as time is money, business travelers aren't going to be riding trains idling in sidings or following the unit coal train.
Today's long distance trains are nothing more than land cruises appealing to affluent retirees nostalgic for the train travel of their youth and others in no particular hurry to arrive at their destination. Until the time comes when inner-city trains can be made attractive to business travelers, there is no sense wasting the taxpayers' money perpetuating an obsolete mode of travel.
("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.