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.
I drive local but my husband and I have reached an age where long trips are to hard on us, so we would be stopping and staying in motels. The reason I don't like the bus is you can't get up and walk around.
My husband and I took the train from Washinton State to Indiana in 1983 and that was quite enjoyable. It was a lot cheaper for us than driving by the time we would have paid for motels etc. I haven't traveled the train that much but the times I did, they were full of passengers. I think as bad as the airlines have gotten more and more people will take the train.
Taking the train has all the speed and comfort of taking the bus with the expense of taking a plane.
You called the highway system heavily subsidized. Am I wrong in thinking that the highway system is paid for in gasoline taxes paid by the highway users?
Also, the airways are now becoming congested and perhaps near capacity. Couple this with vulnerability to weather and terrorism, and rail travel makes real sense.
Come again? You would like to punish the efficient haulers and reward the less efficent?
Sounds like a great idea!
I would like to see passenger train service come back to the private sector. I can remember a couple of trips when I was a kid and it was great fun. I tried it about 12 years ago for nostalgia's sake on Amtrack. What a difference. Everybody was rude. The trip was to be endured, not enjoyed. In the old days, one could actually dine in the dining car, not so with Amtrack. To this day, I can still remember the fine aroma from the dining cars from years gone by
That would be the "Coast Starlight", L.A. to Seattle. Semi-famous. Older trains, a little cranky. Track aint that great in many places. Some real nice scenery, though. In the Winter time, the track can be more dangerous, through parts of N. CA, Oregon & Wa. Train doesn't hug the Coastline, except for in S.CA, South of San Luis Obispo. Northbound from this city I mention, S.L.O., the train by-passes S.F, passing through Oakland, instead, and from there, inland to Sacramento, then North to OR & WA.
No it would level the playing field to some extent. The railroads build and pay for their own track. How many roads have the trucking companies built? Also it would allow more room for autos, cut down on fatal accidents, possibly lower insurance rates, and save on road repairs.
Airways near capacity.... give me a break. Dont like to fly - take a taxi. I dont like to pay taxes, but I do. We should construct an inefficient pass rail network for a few? By the way; air safety is MUCH better than rail.
oh yeah, and rails are just as vulnerable to terrorism and weather.
The Federal Highway Trust fund has nothing left in it but government IOU's, (just as the Social Security trust fund). My point here is the taxes on trucking subsidizes the government, and to suggest otherwise in defense of the railroads, makes the case for supporting the railroads that much weaker.
Trains are cool but they have to pull their own weight. They have to keep saying "I think I can" and not wait for a taxpayer to pay even more in taxes, (resulting in less for the taxpayers family), to help pull them along.
I don't have any quality studies to back this up, but my opinion is that with decent routes, reliable service and competitive rates, passenger rail could be well used.
How to achieve those goals? I don't know. But I do know how not to achieve them. Routes that we'd like to use have been cut (central Florida), the trains are not on schedule.
Some years ago a brand new station was built here in Lakeland. We used to use the Lakeland to Winter Park route. Then the train stopped coming through Lakeland. What do they do? To go to Winter Park, which is 50 miles away, you go to the train station & buy a ticket. They put you on a bus to the Orlando train station, then have you get on the train to go the final 10 miles to Winter Park. Insane. Or, I can drive 40 minutes east to Winter Haven's station and then 40 minute train ride to Winter Park. Or I can just get in my car and drive for 60 minutes. And even at $3 a gallon, it's still cheaper to drive.
Thing is, Lakeland is in the center between Orlando and Tampa. Should be a good route.
As far as I'm concerned, this is a red-herring proposal that's intended to kill passenger rail altogether. Oh, there may be some routes that survive (such as the commuter service for NYC and the NE corridor). But in general, the freight carriers have absolutely no interest in developing passenger service.
Heck, they don't even have any interest in maintaining/developing domestic FREIGHT service. They're too busy abandoning thousands of miles of local rail, focusing strictly on transnational "intermodal" freight on the main lines. And that is incompatible with passenger service: too many freight trains traveling too slow to offer competitive high-speed passenger service.
I am not opposed to privatization of Amtrak to provide better operating efficiencies. But I would prefer a model that more resembles our Interstate Highway system, or our airport/air traffic control system. Let government own/maintain the rail infrastructure. Let private enterprise own/operate the vehicles that travel on it.
Yep... just as I said...
The freight lines want to push passengers off the rails altogether.
Pi$$ on 'em.
There is no subsidy. You and I and every truck owner pay for roads through gas taxes. The more gas you use (as in big heavy trucks that wear the roads out) the more money you pay.
Just where in the Sam Hill do you think you get off? Asking logical and prudent questions....like that.
Crikey!! The nerve of some people....!!!
Yes. Gasoline taxes pay for only a portion of the total cost of building and maintaining highways. Money from other sources makes up the rest, and those monies constitute a subsidy. Please see the link in Post #28.
"There is no subsidy." WHAT DO YOU CALL IT WHEN THE GOVT GIVES THE TRUCKS THE ROAD? THE RAILROADS BUILD THEIR OWN TRACK -AND PAY TAXES TO BOOT.
I wasn't aware that trucking companies paid no taxes. I guess that is teh business to be in!
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.