Amtrak is A Private Corporation

[juliusaugustus]

"The National Railroad Passenger Corporation, also known as Amtrak, is not a government agency or establishment. Although Amtrak is a private corporation operated for

profit, it is subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under provisions of the Rail
Passenger Service Act, as amended. See 49 U.S.C. § 24301 note"

"Amtrak is a private corporation, not a federal agency and therefore does

not have an Open Government Team."

"(2) shall be operated and managed as a for-profit corporation; and

(3) is not a department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States Government, and shall not be subject to title 31."

Sources

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/83/141/FOIA_Handbook-Oct2008.pdf

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/547/386/ChiefFOIAOfficerReportRev.pdf

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/24301

Amtrak like the Federal Reserve is government in the since that it was created and managed by the government but it is setup as a private corporation. Other private corporation receive subsidies as well such as southwest airlines. You are essentially sending tax dollars to a private corporation.

 

[stntylr]

It is a private corporation but all of the shares of prefered stock are owned by the Department of Transportation. Being a private corporation does give it some protection against the craziest ideas from Congress since property cannot be taken from Amtrak without paying fair market value.

 

[haolerider]

"The National Railroad Passenger Corporation, also known as Amtrak, is not a government agency or establishment. Although Amtrak is a private corporation operated for profit, it is subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under provisions of the Rail

Passenger Service Act, as amended. See 49 U.S.C. § 24301 note"

"Amtrak is a private corporation, not a federal agency and therefore does

not have an Open Government Team."

"(2) shall be operated and managed as a for-profit corporation; and

(3) is not a department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States Government, and shall not be subject to title 31."

Sources

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/83/141/FOIA_Handbook-Oct2008.pdf

http://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/547/386/ChiefFOIAOfficerReportRev.pdf

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/24301

Amtrak like the Federal Reserve is government in the since that it was created and managed by the government but it is setup as a private corporation. Other private corporation receive subsidies as well such as southwest airlines. You are essentially sending tax dollars to a private corporation.

I'm sorry, but I think most people on this forum are aware of these details and are aware of the subsidies. Thank you.

 

[juliusaugustus]

It is a private corporation but all of the shares of prefered stock are owned by the Department of Transportation. Being a private corporation does give it some protection against the craziest ideas from Congress since property cannot be taken from Amtrak without paying fair market value.

The common stock is owned by the private railroads.

Oops sorry I misread what you said.

 

[Ryan]

I'm sorry, but I think most people on this forum are aware of these details and are aware of the subsidies. Thank you.

Agreed. I'm struggling mightily to see what the point here is.

 

[xyzzy]

Not sure what the point is, either, but the analogy of the Federal Reserve isn't 100% accurate. Also the single largest common shareholder in Amtrak is no longer a railroad but one of the non-railroad successors to Penn Central.

 

[Nathanael]

Amtrak *is* part of government for the purposes of some laws (not others). This area of law is quite hairy!

Many laws, including most of the civil rights laws which apply only to government, also apply to private companies controlled by government. Of which Amtrak is one.

Certain other laws, notably the laws related to open meetings and public hearings, do not apply to companies like Amtrak; this is OK because those laws are mostly about regulations, and Amtrak doesn't get to make regulations.

Anyway, Amtrak is owned and controlled by the federal government. While four other private corporations own the common stock, the federal government owns an enormous amount of preferred stock, which (a) has preferential rights for any profits Amtrak may generate, (b) has a backlog of many million dollars in dividends "owed" before any dividends can be paid to the common stockholders, © can be converted into common stock if it's ever necessary to outvote the private corporations. The federal government also holds a gigantic loan (which charges no interest and does not need to be repaid) which has first claim on any profits from Amtrak. The federal government also holds, by statute, the right to control Amtrak's board. In short, the private companies who own the common stock have no control, and no ability to collect profits unless Amtrak suddenly starts gushing cash for decades on end.

 

[George Harris]

Like Ryan, (who I don't usually agree with if it is at all in the political arena) I don't see the point. I usually try to refrain from critiquing spelling and grammar, but this one gets to me:

“in the since that” should be “in the sense that”

 

[D.P. Roberts]

Aside from everything the previous posters have already pointed out, Amtrak has never made a profit- that's the whole point for many of Amtrak's detractors. Having not made a profit, none of your tax dollars have ever lined any corporate pockets - they're being used to operate Amtrak. Even if your statement were true (which it isn't, as others have pointed out), it wouldn't really be relevant to any of Amtrak's 42 years of history.

 

[railiner]

Amtrak *is* part of government for the purposes of some laws (not others). This area of law is quite hairy!
Many laws, including most of the civil rights laws which apply only to government, also apply to private companies controlled by government. Of which Amtrak is one.

Certain other laws, notably the laws related to open meetings and public hearings, do not apply to companies like Amtrak; this is OK because those laws are mostly about regulations, and Amtrak doesn't get to make regulations.

Anyway, Amtrak is owned and controlled by the federal government. While four other private corporations own the common stock, the federal government owns an enormous amount of preferred stock, which (a) has preferential rights for any profits Amtrak may generate, (b) has a backlog of many million dollars in dividends "owed" before any dividends can be paid to the common stockholders, © can be converted into common stock if it's ever necessary to outvote the private corporations. The federal government also holds a gigantic loan (which charges no interest and does not need to be repaid) which has first claim on any profits from Amtrak. The federal government also holds, by statute, the right to control Amtrak's board. In short, the private companies who own the common stock have no control, and no ability to collect profits unless Amtrak suddenly starts gushing cash for decades on end.

This begs the question: Why in the world would the owner's of the common stock continue to do so, unless they had to, say as in no one else would want to take it from them?

I had thought that the four railroads, (or their successor's), had long ago gotten rid of their shares. Not sure, though.

I recall that Amtrak called itself a "Mixed Ownership Government Corporation". It used to say that on the back of employee ID's., among other places. Not sure if they still use that line......

 

[Nathanael]

This begs the question: Why in the world would the owner's of the common stock continue to do so, unless they had to, say as in no one else would want to take it from them?

Gambling value. As far as we can tell they think of those shares as a lottery ticket.

 

[railiner]

This begs the question: Why in the world would the owner's of the common stock continue to do so, unless they had to, say as in no one else would want to take it from them?

Gambling value. As far as we can tell they think of those shares as a lottery ticket.

I don't believe they will ever be of any value. Possible exception....if they could sell off a share at a time, there may be a market for them as railfans and other collectors may want a stock certificate and/or ownership "bragging rights"....

 

[the_traveler]

Aside from everything the previous posters have already pointed out, Amtrak has never made a profit- that's the whole point for many of Amtrak's detractors. Having not made a profit, none of your tax dollars have ever lined any corporate pockets - they're being used to operate Amtrak. Even if your statement were true (which it isn't, as others have pointed out), it wouldn't really be relevant to any of Amtrak's 42 years of history.

I'm not disagreeing with you in the least. But neither has most (all?) other national railroads.

So the OP seems to be saying that besides Amtrak, the following should also be dismantled:

1. The French railroad
2. The German railroad
3. The Japanese railroad
4. The Chinese railroad
5. Etc..., etc...

While we're at it, we might as well dismantle most airlines, since they lose millions of $$$$ each every quarter, and roads lose money, so lets get rid of them too! :wacko:

 

[D.P. Roberts]

Aside from everything the previous posters have already pointed out, Amtrak has never made a profit- that's the whole point for many of Amtrak's detractors. Having not made a profit, none of your tax dollars have ever lined any corporate pockets - they're being used to operate Amtrak. Even if your statement were true (which it isn't, as others have pointed out), it wouldn't really be relevant to any of Amtrak's 42 years of history.

I'm not disagreeing with you in the least. But neither has most (all?) other national railroads.
So the OP seems to be saying that besides Amtrak, the following should also be dismantled:

• The French railroad
• The German railroad
• The Japanese railroad
• The Chinese railroad
• Etc..., etc...

While we're at it, we might as well dismantle most airlines, since they lose millions of $$$$ each every quarter, and roads lose money, so lets get rid of them too! :wacko:

It seems like what the OP is objecting to is sending tax dollars to a non-government entity. Whether our country is getting its money's worth from that entity is a valid concern. However, if we were to object to federal tax money going to a private entity, we'd have to eliminate almost ALL spending. Not just Medicare, welfare, farm subsidies, etc. that go to private individuals, but every defense contractor who built a tank, ship, or fighter jet, and every construction company that ever built a government building, every company that ever paved a road, etc. And, unlike Amtrak, most of those companies actually turn a profit & make billions of dollars (paid with our taxes) for their owners/shareholders.

 

[the_traveler]

Maybe so, but after 9/11/01, the Government paid BILLIONS of $$$$ to airlines, because they "lost revenue"! And even with names like "American Airlines", "US Airways" and I'm not certain if this was before the merger "America West", as far as I know, these are not Government entities either. Yet at that same time, Amtrak received an extra $000,000,000 (ZERO)!

So there goes that theory!

 

[chrsjrcj]

Oh my, juliusagustus is here. He makes trouble all the time on a political forum I visit. :giggle:

Trust me julius, ALL of us here know what you have to tell us.

 

[juliusaugustus]

I didn't really accomplish anything but the central point is true though Amtrak is technically private. It could pay for itself if it simply reduced wages and benefits being as they make up 50% of expenses.

chrsjrcj: what political forum do you see me on?

 

[PRR 60]

Maybe so, but after 9/11/01, the Government paid BILLIONS of $$$$ to airlines, because they "lost revenue"! And even with names like "American Airlines", "US Airways" and I'm not certain if this was before the merger "America West", as far as I know, these are not Government entities either. Yet at that same time, Amtrak received an extra $000,000,000 (ZERO)!
So there goes that theory!

Amtrak got $100 million in post 9-11 funding for safety and security upgrades.

 

[Ispolkom]

I didn't really accomplish anything but the central point is true though Amtrak is technically private. It could pay for itself if it simply reduced wages and benefits being as they make up 50% of expenses.

How would it break legally binding contracts with its workers?

Who would it replace them with if it could?

How would that affect operations?

 

[NW cannonball]

This discussion - my mind boggles - is it about profit versus non-profit? Well, a lot of for-profit corporations don't profit -- many "non-profit" corporations make a lot of money.

Is it about the idea of "corporation" - a corporation is - by definition, an entity that enjoys some of the rights of a natural person - and is created by some government for some purpose of that government. Many cities, many local governments - are "corporations" not just in North America. Compare the "Company Raj"

No clue here about what this is about.

Is about "NRPC" should be something that it isn't?

But all these issues are irrelevant to people who use Amtrak trains to get to where we are going.

Theoretical issues be damned.

 

[dlagrua]

If we object to the government funding for Amtrak and want to end it, then to be fair about it we also need to defund the interstate highway system, public roads, bridges, all of the airport terminals, the air traffic control system, the city bus systems, interurban commuter rail, and subways which are ALL government owned.

Most of the operating cost of Amtrak is paid for by the fares that they collect and the subsidies are only a miniscule small part of the overall transportation budget.

Its nice to offer a suggestion that will save the taxpayer money but if you do this, you must also offer a solution that will solve the huge problem that will remain by any government defunding.

Here is some additional food for thought:

The government employs 55,000 air traffic controllers, technicians and bureaucrats that manage the national air traffic control system. This cost three billion without adding any costs to maintain and run the airports. Total number of Amtrak employees number 20,000.

Many commercial airline pilots were former military pilots trained by the government and cost the private airlines little to nothing to train.

Much of the research to develop new airline technology is paid for by the government. This technology is used by the domestic airline industry for military AND shared for commercial aircraft.

As a whole the commercial airline transportation industry has never turned a profit since its inception. The airlines have been the beneficiary of one of the largest government tax payer subsidies in history.

.

 

[juliusaugustus]

If we object to the government funding for Amtrak and want to end it, then to be fair about it we also need to defund the interstate highway system, public roads, bridges, all of the airport terminals, the air traffic control system, the city bus systems, interurban commuter rail, and subways which are ALL government owned.Most of the operating cost of Amtrak is paid for by the fares that they collect and the subsidies are only a miniscule small part of the overall transportation budget.

Its nice to offer a suggestion that will save the taxpayer money but if you do this, you must also offer a solution that will solve the huge problem that will remain by any government defunding.

Here is some additional food for thought:

The government employs 55,000 air traffic controllers, technicians and bureaucrats that manage the national air traffic control system. This cost three billion without adding any costs to maintain and run the airports. Total number of Amtrak employees number 20,000.

Many commercial airline pilots were former military pilots trained by the government and cost the private airlines little to nothing to train.

Much of the research to develop new airline technology is paid for by the government. This technology is used by the domestic airline industry for military AND shared for commercial aircraft.

As a whole the commercial airline transportation industry has never turned a profit since its inception. The airlines have been the beneficiary of one of the largest government tax payer subsidies in history.

.

Actually I wouldn't be against the government getting out of the Transportation business.

 

[Bob Dylan]

If we object to the government funding for Amtrak and want to end it, then to be fair about it we also need to defund the interstate highway system, public roads, bridges, all of the airport terminals, the air traffic control system, the city bus systems, interurban commuter rail, and subways which are ALL government owned.Most of the operating cost of Amtrak is paid for by the fares that they collect and the subsidies are only a miniscule small part of the overall transportation budget.

Its nice to offer a suggestion that will save the taxpayer money but if you do this, you must also offer a solution that will solve the huge problem that will remain by any government defunding.

Here is some additional food for thought:

The government employs 55,000 air traffic controllers, technicians and bureaucrats that manage the national air traffic control system. This cost three billion without adding any costs to maintain and run the airports. Total number of Amtrak employees number 20,000.

Many commercial airline pilots were former military pilots trained by the government and cost the private airlines little to nothing to train.

Much of the research to develop new airline technology is paid for by the government. This technology is used by the domestic airline industry for military AND shared for commercial aircraft.

As a whole the commercial airline transportation industry has never turned a profit since its inception. The airlines have been the beneficiary of one of the largest government tax payer subsidies in history.

.

Actually I wouldn't be against the government getting out of the Transportation business.

That's your Right, hope you enjoy Your $250,000 Automobile, $25 a Gallon Gas,$25 Tolls, the $25,000 Airline Tickets and the $50 Commuter Rail Tickets!

 

[juliusaugustus]

If we object to the government funding for Amtrak and want to end it, then to be fair about it we also need to defund the interstate highway system, public roads, bridges, all of the airport terminals, the air traffic control system, the city bus systems, interurban commuter rail, and subways which are ALL government owned.Most of the operating cost of Amtrak is paid for by the fares that they collect and the subsidies are only a miniscule small part of the overall transportation budget.

Its nice to offer a suggestion that will save the taxpayer money but if you do this, you must also offer a solution that will solve the huge problem that will remain by any government defunding.

Here is some additional food for thought:

The government employs 55,000 air traffic controllers, technicians and bureaucrats that manage the national air traffic control system. This cost three billion without adding any costs to maintain and run the airports. Total number of Amtrak employees number 20,000.

Many commercial airline pilots were former military pilots trained by the government and cost the private airlines little to nothing to train.

Much of the research to develop new airline technology is paid for by the government. This technology is used by the domestic airline industry for military AND shared for commercial aircraft.

As a whole the commercial airline transportation industry has never turned a profit since its inception. The airlines have been the beneficiary of one of the largest government tax payer subsidies in history.

.

Actually I wouldn't be against the government getting out of the Transportation business.

That's your Right, hope you enjoy Your $250,000 Automobile, $25 a Gallon Gas,$25 Tolls, the $25,000 Airline Tickets and the $50 Commuter Rail Tickets!

Why those things be that expensive? Government doesn't drive down costs it drives them up hugely. For example a fare on public transit before government take over was 5-10 cents which translated today would be 89-1.10 dollars and the systems made money on these fares. Now a fare on MTA costs 2.50 where as they loose money. I do like Amtrak but I have come to the realization that government is no friend to the railroads. It was government over regulation which killed streetcar systems, passenger rail, nearly killed freight rail, combined with subsidies to competing industries spelled death for these industries. Government also created urban sprawl through zoning and subsidies to the banking industry,mortage industry and mortgage interest deductions. I wish the government would provide good passenger service but it isn't Amtrak has gotten less money in its entire existence than highways get every year. If you want the trains to come back the government has to get out of the way.

 

[leemell]

Actually, in Los Angeles it was the newly available automobile that killed the streetcar. People fled the SC and went to cars because of the autos flexibility. Pacific Electric cars went bankrupt in the 30's and was resurrected and, ironically, kept in operation in WWII all the way to the early 50's by government support.