Amtrak Store and the NARP

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

rmgreenesq

Lead Service Attendant
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
433
Location
Worcester, MA (WOR)
OK, so I bought one of those fancy expensive signed by the artist posters from the Amtrak store. I purchased it via amtrak.com and requested it be mailed to my office. It will be framed and hanged on the wall of my office. About a week after the order is placed and within days of the print arriving, I receive an invitation to join the National Association of Rail Passengers (NARP). The invite was mailed to the same address the poster was sent to.

I think Amtrak sold my name and address to the NARP from the store purchase. Anybody else encountered this?

Any opinions on the NARP? I already get the AAA discount, and they can't be stacked. Any other reasons to join?

Rick
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The reason why I keep my membership up is because they're by far the largest most powerful advocacy group in the country. They put as much pressure on Washington as they can to maintain and expand service, and it's the dues paid by members that help keep that pressure on The Hill.
 
OK, so I bought one of those fancy expensive signed by the artist posters from the Amtrak store. I purchased it via amtrak.com and requested it be mailed to my office. It will be framed and hanged on the wall of my office. About a week after the order is placed and within days of the print arriving, I receive an invitation to join the National Association of Rail Passengers (NARP). The invite was mailed to the same address the poster was sent to.
I think Amtrak sold my name and address to the NARP from the store purchase. Anybody else encountered this?

Any opinions on the NARP? I already get the AAA discount, and they can't be stacked. Any other reasons to join?

Rick
I had the same thing happen. I requested a timetable from Amtrak which they sent quickly. A few days later the invite from NARP showed up. They must be selling the list to NARP.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NARP and Amtrak have a very interesting relationship. NARP gets consideration from Amtrak through some direct payments for services and by virtue of the discount offered to NARP members (and also, it seems, by sale or more likely the gift of passenger mailing lists). NARP, in turn, equates their support of passenger rail solely to support of Amtrak. You will very rarely hear anything out of NARP that is even remotely critical of Amtrak. The Pennsylvanian / Three Rivers cut a few years ago and the Sunset situation recently are the only exceptions I can think of, and both of these were limited to some measured criticism, a press release, and that was about it.

That is my problem with NARP. Their name says they represent railroad passengers, but their actions say they represent the railroad- Amtrak. When those interests coincide: great. When they do not, or when there might be a solution outside the Amtrak structure, do not expect NARP to lead the charge. In fact, expect NARP to be a fervent supported of the Amtrak status quo, only more of it. They are rail boosters with blinders.

For better or worse, NARP is an Amtrak-booster, partially funded by Amtrak, and has been for some time. How much that one-sided support of the railroad actually helps the railroad's passengers is debatable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NARP and Amtrak have a very interesting relationship. NARP gets consideration from Amtrak through some direct payments for services and by virtue of the discount offered to NARP members (and also, it seems, by sale or more likely the gift of passenger mailing lists). NARP, in turn, equates their support of passenger rail solely to support of Amtrak. You will very rarely hear anything out of NARP that is even remotely critical of Amtrak. The Pennsylvanian / Three Rivers cut a few years ago and the Sunset situation recently are the only exceptions I can think of, and both of these were limited to some measured criticism, a press release, and that was about it.
That is my problem with NARP. Their name says they represent railroad passengers, but their actions say they represent the railroad- Amtrak. When those interests coincide: great. When they do not, or when there might be a solution outside the Amtrak structure, do not expect NARP to lead the charge. In fact, expect NARP to be a fervent supported of the Amtrak status quo, only more of it. They are rail boosters with blinders.

For better or worse, NARP is an Amtrak-booster, partially funded by Amtrak, and has been for some time. How much that one-sided support of the railroad actually helps the railroad's passengers is debatable.
PRR60,

Can you actually prove that NARP is "partially funded" by Amtrak or is that just surmise on your part?

If that is the truth and can be proven, I would think that those who fund Amtrak (ie our Congress) might have something to say about this!
 
PRR60,
Can you actually prove that NARP is "partially funded" by Amtrak or is that just surmise on your part?

If that is the truth and can be proven, I would think that those who fund Amtrak (ie our Congress) might have something to say about this!
NARP is contracted by Amtrak to administer the "Amtrak Customer Advisory Committee". This is intended to be a group that provides feedback to Amtrak on passenger needs and desires so that Amtrak can improve service. In 2005, Amtrak paid NARP $34,464 (according to NARP's IRS Form 990) to administer this "Committee". By contrast, NARP's total for membership dues is about $400,000 per year.

Now, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't NARP supposed to exist to provide Amtrak with feedback on the needs of passengers? If so, then why does Amtrak have to pay them to administer a committee to do that very same service? Does it not appear that Amtrak is simply paying NARP to be NARP?

Whether $34,464 is a big deal or not is a matter of opinion. But, being paid by the entity that you are supposedly watching to do the very same work that you are supposed to do anyway seems to me to be a bit questionable. Whether that, and the discount provided to NARP members by Amtrak, has anything to do with the pro-Amtrak positions taken by NARP is unknown. But it sure smells a bit funny to me.
 
The contract to administer the customer advisory committee has been known for a long time, there was never an attempt to hide it. It's out in the open for all to see. And $34K in revenue amounts to very little in the big picture. I can't find the info right now, but NARP's budget is well above $400K IIRC.

As well, they've criticized Amtrak many times for a variety of issues. If you are a NARP member and read the hotline and news letters you see they are quite active on a number of issues such as the dining service revisions, schedules, routes, almost any area of operation.

Honestly, I find most of the criticism of NARP (on various boards, etc.) to be from people who are either not members or are members and don't use the member resources to keep themselves apprised of all that is going on.

I raised my contribution level to NARP again this year, and if I can I'll do it again next. I'm quite satisfied with their work by and large.
 
Whether $34,464 is a big deal or not is a matter of opinion. But, being paid by the entity that you are supposedly watching to do the very same work that you are supposed to do anyway seems to me to be a bit questionable. Whether that, and the discount provided to NARP members by Amtrak, has anything to do with the pro-Amtrak positions taken by NARP is unknown. But it sure smells a bit funny to me.
Since Amtrak is prohibited from lobbying, there is going to be a somewhat different relationship between them and NARP. NARP has multiple responsibilites it seems to me. One is to represent the rail pasengers that use Amtrak, the second is to lobby on Amtrak's behalf for resources that it feels can ultimately benefit the passengers. Third, it provides feedback (compliments and criticism) to Amtrak that is based on a broader understanding of rail issues than the public and media at large can draw on.

I'm not saying NARP is perfect - for instance, why they haven't fostered a more effective alliance with AARP is a real mystery to me! But much of the criticism of NARP I see on this forum and others seems to come from people who have other agendas at work besides improving NARP/Amtrak/passenger rail. Or just plain ignorance - they aren't aware of what is going on.
 
PRR60,

Can you actually prove that NARP is "partially funded" by Amtrak or is that just surmise on your part?

If that is the truth and can be proven, I would think that those who fund Amtrak (ie our Congress) might have something to say about this!
NARP is contracted by Amtrak to administer the "Amtrak Customer Advisory Committee". This is intended to be a group that provides feedback to Amtrak on passenger needs and desires so that Amtrak can improve service. In 2005, Amtrak paid NARP $34,464 (according to NARP's IRS Form 990) to administer this "Committee". By contrast, NARP's total for membership dues is about $400,000 per year.

Now, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't NARP supposed to exist to provide Amtrak with feedback on the needs of passengers? If so, then why does Amtrak have to pay them to administer a committee to do that very same service? Does it not appear that Amtrak is simply paying NARP to be NARP?

Whether $34,464 is a big deal or not is a matter of opinion. But, being paid by the entity that you are supposedly watching to do the very same work that you are supposed to do anyway seems to me to be a bit questionable. Whether that, and the discount provided to NARP members by Amtrak, has anything to do with the pro-Amtrak positions taken by NARP is unknown. But it sure smells a bit funny to me.
Sorry PRR60,

For some reason I was not aware of the monies used to administer the Customer Advisory Committee. I can see a reason for having some monies provided: most people have to be paid for their time or they don't want to participate. Perhaps we should ask NARP how they use the money? Also how else does Amtrak find out if someone isn't going to help them collect the info? Now I agree it looks a little too convenient, but I wonder how many companies that collect such information would do it for the relatively cheap price of $34,000 a year?
 
I think Amtrak sold my name and address to the NARP from the store purchase. Anybody else encountered this?
Rick
Going to amtrak.com and clicking on "Privacy and Security" at the bottom of the page gives one all the details of what Amtrak may do with the personal information one provides, including by way of on-line merchandise purchases and requests for travel/promotional info.

A couple of the relevant headings are "Section 2: The Personal Information We Collect from You on Amtrak.com and How We Collect It" and "Section 4: With Whom We Share Your Personal Information".

In a quick scan of the policy, I found no way to opt-out of the info-sharing. California residents, by state law, do have the right to request once a year that Amtrak provide them with a list of anyone who received their personal information.
 
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't NARP supposed to exist to provide Amtrak with feedback on the needs of passengers?
Consider yourself corrected. NARP exists to lobby on behalf of expanded and improved rail passenger service in the United States. Put more succinctly, NARP's mission is to advocate for "A modern, customer-focused national passenger train network that provides a travel choice Americans want."

The ACAC, on the other hand, is focused solely on providing Amtrak feedback on the company's services and policies. The ACAC is not there to lobby the government for anything. The ACAC also isn't concerned with commuter rail in Nashville or light rail in Seattle.

ACAC is a relatively small volunteer committee made up of people that ride Amtrak regularly. NARP is a large organization made up of people that range from frequent rail travelers to people that haven't set foot on a train in ten years.

Completely different groups, even though there is some overlap.
 
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't NARP supposed to exist to provide Amtrak with feedback on the needs of passengers?
Consider yourself corrected. NARP exists to lobby on behalf of expanded and improved rail passenger service in the United States. Put more succinctly, NARP's mission is to advocate for "A modern, customer-focused national passenger train network that provides a travel choice Americans want."

The ACAC, on the other hand, is focused solely on providing Amtrak feedback on the company's services and policies. The ACAC is not there to lobby the government for anything. The ACAC also isn't concerned with commuter rail in Nashville or light rail in Seattle.

ACAC is a relatively small volunteer committee made up of people that ride Amtrak regularly. NARP is a large organization made up of people that range from frequent rail travelers to people that haven't set foot on a train in ten years.

Completely different groups, even though there is some overlap.

Ahh,

That makes more sense to me. Thanks for filling in the blanks rmadisonwi.
 
The mission of the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP), whether it is to represent railroad passengers (which its name certainly suggests) or lobby on behalf of the passenger railroad (which as a 501( C)(3) public charity it should not be doing to any significant degree) is really irrelevant to the question of whether it is proper for NARP to accept funding and consideration from Amtrak while it promotes Amtrak as the best possible solution to provide Americans with a rail option for transportation.

Unlike the Air Transport Association (ATA), the industry funded organization that lobbies for commercial aviation interests, NARP is incorporated as a public good charity, not a lobbying group. Its stated principal role is public education. Given that, NARP should accept funding only from its constituents: rail riders. Then there would be no question that the positions taken by NARP in its education outreach represent reasoned, best choice options. But by accepting $35,000 from Amtrak to run "a relatively small volunteer committee" (that costs $35k to run?), by accepting Amtrak's offer of discounted trips for members, and perhaps by having Amtrak provide NARP with names and addresses of customers, the impartiality of the positions taken by NARP about Amtrak's role in transportation has to be questioned.

NARP may very well be offering exactly the right solution for transportation diversity in promoting protection and expansion of Amtrak as the best choice for intercity rail. But that position would be a whole lot more credible if NARP were not accepting funding and value from Amtrak.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The mission of the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP), whether it is to represent railroad passengers (which its name certainly suggests) or lobby on behalf of the passenger railroad (which as a 501( C)(3) public charity it should not be doing to any significant degree) is really irrelevant to the question of whether it is proper for NARP to accept funding and consideration from Amtrak while it promotes Amtrak as the best possible solution to provide Americans with a rail option for transportation.
Unlike the Air Transport Association (ATA), the industry funded organization that lobbies for commercial aviation interests, NARP is incorporated as a public good charity, not a lobbying group. Its stated principal role is public education. Given that, NARP should accept funding only from its constituents: rail riders. Then there would be no question that the positions taken by NARP in its education outreach represent reasoned, best choice options. But by accepting $35,000 from Amtrak to run "a relatively small volunteer committee" (that costs $35k to run?), by accepting Amtrak's offer of discounted trips for members, and perhaps by having Amtrak provide NARP with names and addresses of customers, the impartiality of the positions taken by NARP about Amtrak's role in transportation has to be questioned.

NARP may very well be offering exactly the right solution for transportation diversity in promoting protection and expansion of Amtrak as the best choice for intercity rail. But that position would be a whole lot more credible if NARP were not accepting funding and value from Amtrak.
I'm afraid that, the more that you try to make your point, the less you sound like you know what you're talking about. NARP doesn't represent the passenger rail industry; it represents its members -- just regular folks.

Right off the front page of the NARP website:

Our Mission

A modern, customer-focused national passenger train network that provides a travel choice Americans want.

Is not providing customer advisory to that end? Would it be prudent for any organization to refuse remuneration for doing what it would do anyway? Is it not possible that NARP could furthur its goals better in the position of running such an advisory group for pay than for free?

My personal feeling is that, if NARP were a multi-million dollar organization, they would run the ACAC for free. But they are not and there are costs involved with running it, whether done by NARP, another organization, or Amtrak themselves.

They don't hide this situation, and, if you don't like it, you're free to not join.
 
I'm afraid that, the more that you try to make your point, the less you sound like you know what you're talking about. [OUCH!] NARP doesn't represent the passenger rail industry; it represents its members -- just regular folks.
Right off the front page of the NARP website:

Our Mission

A modern, customer-focused national passenger train network that provides a travel choice Americans want.
Well, let me make this as clear as possible so that it is either obvious I know what I am talking about or obvious I do not.

If NARP's mission is to represent its members in the promotion of passenger rail policy, then they should not accept any payment or other consideration from any possible beneficiaries of those policy positions, including Amtrak. Both the ACAC contract and the NARP member rail fare discount are consideration. That is the text book definition of a conflict of interest.

Lets do a hypothetical. Lets say New York State proposes to have Metro North operate on the Albany to New York route in competition with Amtrak and MN would charge half the Amtrak fare. New York DOT needs NY legislative approval and Amtrak is fighting it tooth and nail. NARP is asked to provide an advisory opinion as to what is best for rail passengers. Were I a NARP member, I would want to be sure that the position taken by NARP was in my best interest and was not being influenced by any ties NARP has with Amtrak. The present arrangements NARP has with Amtrak simply does not provide that assurance.

...Would it be prudent for any organization to refuse remuneration for doing what it would do anyway? Is it not possible that NARP could further its goals better in the position of running such an advisory group for pay than for free?
If your mission is to retain independence, no it is not prudent. Consumers Union, publisher of Consumers Report magazine, does product testing all the time. It is their core business. Would they enter into a contract with Proctor and Gamble to perform testing of new P&G products prior to market release? No, they would not. They are very protective of their independence and will not accept any business dealings with commercial firms who may be subjects of their product testing. Doing so would present the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Isn't NARP similar? Doesn't NARP evaluate the options for the future of passenger rail service and present its opinions as being representative of its members? If so, then as a member I would want the positions taken by NARP to be reasoned and unbiased. NARP accepting funding and considerations from Amtrak presents at least the potential for bias toward the positions desired by Amtrak.

Now having said all that, the fact is that NARP is NARP. Originally an organization designed to represent rail passengers as service on the passenger railroads was declining toward extinction in the late 1960's, it is now basically a lobbying arm of Amtrak. Most of its members know that and are fine with it. I just wish NARP would admit what they are and not pretend they are something else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would certainly agree that any funding NARP gets from Amtrak makes their objectivity (having the best interest of rail passengers vs. the best interest of Amtrak as their primary thought) questionable. I don't know that I would extend that to the passenger discount, since Amtrak offers that to other groups, including Veterans' Advantage and AAA, and I don't think I would be inclined to question their objectivity. The passenger discount I just consider marketing with a dual purpose - (for Amtrak), to increase ridership by enticing the members of those organizations to ride, and, (for those other companies), as a marketing tool to entice people to join the organizations. Everybody wins.
 
Once again, if you don't like it, you're free to not join. Many organizations receive remuneration from companies which might, ostensibly, receive the benefit of their action. AARP comes to mind, as the advertising is all over the place, but there are others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top