From now until 2016

[CHamilton]

Obama victory likely to preserve highway, Amtrak funding

President Obama's reelection is likely to ensure efforts to privatize Amtrak service and cut transportation funding will be unsuccessful.

Unsuccessful Republican nominee Mitt Romney had repeatedly pledged to eliminate government funding for Amtrak, and GOP vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-Wis.) budget would have limited transportation funding to revenues generated by the federal gas tax.

"I think Amtrak is safe and surface transportation levels are safe," Joshua Schank, president of the nonpartisan Eno Center for Transportation, said in an assessment of the election.

"I'd be very surprised to see the president and a Democratic Senate accept a cut" to transportation funding, Schank continued.

Schank said Obama's win could make it more likely that negotiations on a deal on federal debt levels will begin soon, but he said lawmakers may leave transportation funding out of the mix.

 

[AlanB]

Oh, absolutely. But wasn't there some issue that prevented Amtrak from using the infrastructure? It was too old and in disrepair or something of that nature? I recall that Amtrak did a substantial amount of work to reelectrify the route in the 2006-2007 timeframe (I could have my dates a little off).

Yes, your mind is not deceiving you, there was a period of time where Amtrak used diesels only on the Keystone line. This was due in part to a shortage of electric motors, but also because the power infrastructure had been allowed to deteriorate. The State of PA & Amtrak invested heavily to restore electric service and to upgrade the tracks for higher speeds in the early 2000's.

.

 

[afigg]

Has anyone heard who is going to replace Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood?

According to The Hill, it is not clear if Secretary LaHood will step down or not. If Obama asks him to stay on for another year or two, sounds like LaHood might agree to do so.

Possible successors that have been mentioned, not only in The Hill but elsewhere, are Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa or former Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania & former Mayor of Philadelphia. Speaking of the PHL-HAR line, Rendell helped to get $160 million of PA state funding to restore the line and Keystone service. Rendell has been a major advocate of increased infrastructure spending and transportation, and would very likely be very supportive of funding for NEC improvements.

 

[afigg]

Ah, the game of who gets what job in Congress and the Cabinet is now is underway now that the election is over. DC's version of Games of Thrones, but with a lower body count.

Mica may ask for a waiver to stay on as the committee chairman while Bill Shuster is openly seeking the chairmanship. Get ready for a behind the scenes rumble. See The Hill article "Shuster confident transportation panel bid despite possible Mica waiver."

 

[Anderson]

Since I'm not familiar with Bill Shuster (I always mix him up with Bud "I have a freeway named for me" Shuster), could someone clue me in on his politics?

 

[jis]

Since I'm not familiar with Bill Shuster (I always mix him up with Bud "I have a freeway named for me" Shuster), could someone clue me in on his politics?

Isn't he the guy that had been gunning to privatize NEC?

 

[afigg]

Since I'm not familiar with Bill Shuster (I always mix him up with Bud "I have a freeway named for me" Shuster), could someone clue me in on his politics?

Isn't he the guy that had been gunning to privatize NEC?

Yes, he was. That proposal did not get any traction, so to speak. Looking Shuster up, my impression is that he may be more conservative than Congressman Mica with a let's privatize almost everything bent. Probably won't be that different from Amtrak's perspective than dealing with Mica, but Amtrak may get spared the hearings on losses in food service, which appears to be Mica's fixation.

I tend to mix him up with Bud Shuster as well, because when I wrote the earlier post, I had written Bud which i had to correct. His father was a legend when it came to earmark spending on transportation and local projects which gave us the Bud Shuster Highway in PA.

 

[jmx53]

The Republicans will still have majority in the house and Representative Mica was re-elected. What are the chances that he remains as Chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee?

Assuming he doesn't die, resign, or get caught with an intern, 100%.

I was wondering about Chairman Mica. No, it turns out he is term limited because the House Republicans some years back put term limits on how long someone can be the ranking minority member or Chairman of a committee. Congressman Bill Shuster (R-PA) is seeking the Chairmanship of the House Transportation and Infrastructure committee according to this Progressive Railroading article. As I recall, he was a major backer of the effort to push a bill to take the NEC away from Amtrak and have private investors take it over. Which went nowhere with the Senate and the Obama Administration.

Since I'm not familiar with Bill Shuster (I always mix him up with Bud "I have a freeway named for me" Shuster), could someone clue me in on his politics?

Isn't he the guy that had been gunning to privatize NEC?

Yes, he was. That proposal did not get any traction, so to speak. Looking Shuster up, my impression is that he may be more conservative than Congressman Mica with a let's privatize almost everything bent. Probably won't be that different from Amtrak's perspective than dealing with Mica, but Amtrak may get spared the hearings on losses in food service, which appears to be Mica's fixation.

I tend to mix him up with Bud Shuster as well, because when I wrote the earlier post, I had written Bud which i had to correct. His father was a legend when it came to earmark spending on transportation and local projects which gave us the Bud Shuster Highway in PA.

You beat me to it RE: Mica being term limited as Chair of the T&I committee. This morning Jason Dick, who focuses on reporting on the House for Rollcall.com, also said on C-span that Bill Shuster is likely to succeed Mica as chair.

Shuster is currently chair of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials. I skimmed a few entries on his congressional website and according to a May 2011 entry it says that the legislation he proposed with Mica to separate the NEC from Amtrak would transfer it to a separate entity. They wanted to begin a competitive bidding process that would allow for a public-private partnership to design, build, operate, maintain, and finance high-speed service. They said this plan would improve the NEC to true HSR in 10 rather than 30 years, and at a fraction of the $117 billion cost proposed by Amtrak, and would have running times of less than 2 hrs between DC and NYC.

Shuster also states that the HSR funds should have been directed solely at the NEC and not spread around to the other proposed HSR corridors in other parts of the country. I didn't see where he stands on LD trains but it sounds like he might be against them and in favor of only having passenger rail in places where there is a dense population corridor. Also didn't see any mention of where he stands on food service.

On another website which tracks voting records on various issues, he is rated as a hard-core conservative and his voting record RE: Amtrak is: Voted YES on $9.7B for Amtrak improvements and operation thru 2013. (Jun 2008) & Voted NO on increasing Amtrak funding by adding $214M to $900M. (Jun 2006)

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Oh, absolutely. But wasn't there some issue that prevented Amtrak from using the infrastructure? It was too old and in disrepair or something of that nature? I recall that Amtrak did a substantial amount of work to reelectrify the route in the 2006-2007 timeframe (I could have my dates a little off).

Yes, your mind is not deceiving you, there was a period of time where Amtrak used diesels only on the Keystone line. This was due in part to a shortage of electric motors, but also because the power infrastructure had been allowed to deteriorate. The State of PA & Amtrak invested heavily to restore electric service and to upgrade the tracks for higher speeds in the early 2000's.

.

Oh, all right. I guess Bush was kinda neutral to Amtrak, which is at least better than trying to axe it! Now Carter REALLY messed up when he recommended those cuts, now the Floridian will take forever to return!

 

[Anderson]

Wait, explain that record? He voted to give Amtrak $9.7bn in 2008 but not to up funding in 2006? What were the overlying bills for those votes?

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Wait, explain that record? He voted to give Amtrak $9.7bn in 2008 but not to up funding in 2006? What were the overlying bills for those votes?

Hmm, sounds weird.

 

[AlanB]

Oh, all right. I guess Bush was kinda neutral to Amtrak, which is at least better than trying to axe it! Now Carter REALLY messed up when he recommended those cuts, now the Floridian will take forever to return!

President George W Bush's White House was hardly neutral to Amtrak. Twice they sent over the proposed budget to Congress with Zero dollars in funding for Amtrak. I'd say that's pretty hostile!

Mind you, I personally don't believe that it was Mr. Bush who zeroed out funding, which is why I said "his White House" did it. I believe that other's behind the scene did that.

 

[jmx53]

On another website which tracks voting records on various issues, he is rated as a hard-core conservative and his voting record RE: Amtrak is: Voted YES on $9.7B for Amtrak improvements and operation thru 2013. (Jun 2008) & Voted NO on increasing Amtrak funding by adding $214M to $900M. (Jun 2006)

Wait, explain that record? He voted to give Amtrak $9.7bn in 2008 but not to up funding in 2006? What were the overlying bills for those votes?

I got those numbers from Shuster's page on http://www.ontheissu...nvironment.htm:

Reference: Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act; Bill HR6003 ; vote number 2008-400 on Jun 11, 2008

Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2013 for Amtrak capital and operating grants; Amtrak repayment of long-term debt and capital leases; and the rail cooperative research program.

Authorizes grants for the Next Generation Corridor Train Equipment Pool Committee.

Proponents argument for voting YEA: Rep. OBERSTAR: America is on the threshold of a "renaissance'' for intercity passenger rail that approaches the enthusiasm of the completion of the transcontinental railroad. Last year, Amtrak set a ridership record for the fifth year in a row, exceeding 25.8 million passengers. Its ticket revenues rose 11 percent to more than $1.5 billion, the third straight year of revenue growth. This record of achievement is even more impressive considering that for the past eight years Amtrak has contended with an Administration committed to its bankruptcy. Indeed, these achievements are occurring when there is a greater need than ever for alternatives to our congested highways and skies. To alleviate this congestion and strengthen our energy security, we need to invest in intercity passenger rail.

Other countries already make an annual commitment to intercity passenger rail. In 2003 alone, France invested $10.6 billion in its rail system; Germany invested $12.4 billion; and the United Kingdom invested $7.8 billion. China plans to spend a total of $162 billion from 2006 through 2010 to expand its railway system. This bill authorizes $14 billion over 5 years:

$6.7 billion for capital grants

$3.0 billion for operating grants

$2.5 billion for 80% matching grants to States to pay for the capital costs of facilities

$1.75 billion to finance 11 authorized high-speed rail corridors

Voted NO on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M.

Reference: Department of Transportation appropriations; Bill HR 5576 Amendment 1008 ; vote number 2006-263 on Jun 13, 2006

Voting YES on this amendment would restore $214 million in funding for AMTRAK, bringing the total annual expenditure for AMTRAK to $1.114 billion. The chairman of the Railroad Subcommittee explained the increase as follows:

Unlike aviation, highways and transit, there is no dedicated funding for investing in our Nation's passenger rail service. This amendment restores $214 million to the Amtrak account, taking it to $1.114 billion, which is still about $300 million less than we had during the course of last year's discussion.

Last year the President sent up a budget of zero for Amtrak. We had an amendment process that we went through this time. This time we are up to $900 million in the bill [without this amendment].

But if you look at that $900 million, there is only $500 million for capital expenditures, out of which has to come a debt service of $280 million, which only leaves $220 million for the capital needs of this country for Amtrak, for passenger rail.

There is nothing for operation, and I know that the response to that is going to be that there are some incentive grants in the bill.

Opponents of the amendment say that it would increase funding for Amtrak by gutting and eliminating critical programs, including safety programs, resulting in reductions in force at several agencies.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Other countries already make an annual commitment to intercity passenger rail. In 2003 alone, France invested $10.6 billion in its rail system; Germany invested $12.4 billion; and the United Kingdom invested $7.8 billion. China plans to spend a total of $162 billion from 2006 through 2010 to expand its railway system. This bill authorizes $14 billion over 5 years:

$6.7 billion for capital grants

$3.0 billion for operating grants

$2.5 billion for 80% matching grants to States to pay for the capital costs of facilities

$1.75 billion to finance 11 authorized high-speed rail corridors

Wow, for the small countries, Deutschland tops out at much higher than the US. They do have agreat system but I feel that some more comfortable seats are needed for the longer runs, like Berlin-Munich. First Class has wider seats but the seat pitch isn't much better.

 

[dlagrua]

Considering the fiscal mess that the government is in, I see no change in Amtrak policy, few if any new routes and a continuance of the ongoing struggle for improvment in passenger rail. If Amtrak continues to grow to the point where the service is bursting at the seams,then perhaps we will see more support from Washington.

 

[nocTurnal]

What's the update on the $150 million new train system from Philadelphia-NYC-Boston? The one where the train will speed up to 210 mph. Are they building new tracks for it?

 

[afigg]

Reference: Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act; Bill HR6003 ; vote number 2008-400 on Jun 11, 2008

Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2013 for Amtrak capital and operating grants; Amtrak repayment of long-term debt and capital leases; and the rail cooperative research program.

Authorizes grants for the Next Generation Corridor Train Equipment Pool Committee.

This is an Authorization bill, not a funding bill. The funds have to be provided in each fiscal year appropriations bill. In 2008, it was not a big deal for a conservative Congressman to vote for the PRIIA bill. Amtrak is authorized to receive around $2.2 billion each year under the PRIIA bill, but got $1.47 billion in FY11 and $1.41 billion in FY12. The final FY13 funding levels remain to be settled.

 

[afigg]

What's the update on the $150 million new train system from Philadelphia-NYC-Boston? The one where the train will speed up to 210 mph. Are they building new tracks for it?

It is the $117 billion Next Gen NEC plan with the 220 mph HSR trains. $33 billion of the $150 billion number that was publicized is for modernization and capacity expansion of the current NEC including the Gateway project, multiple 160 mph segments, bridge & tunnel replacements, Keystone East & New Haven-Springfield corridors.

The $117 billion Next Gen NEC concept is a very long way from starting construction, if it does manage to do so. It is a concept, not a detailed plan with engineering design so far.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

What's the update on the $150 million new train system from Philadelphia-NYC-Boston? The one where the train will speed up to 210 mph. Are they building new tracks for it?

It is the $117 billion Next Gen NEC plan with the 220 mph HSR trains. $33 billion of the $150 billion number that was publicized is for modernization and capacity expansion of the current NEC including the Gateway project, multiple 160 mph segments, bridge & tunnel replacements, Keystone East & New Haven-Springfield corridors.

The $117 billion Next Gen NEC concept is a very long way from starting construction, if it does manage to do so. It is a concept, not a detailed plan with engineering design so far.

I don't think NextGen NEc will happen unless the politicians wake up to the reality that America needs passenger rail. Then they'll have to expand everything else as well. Also, $150 billion is FAR more than $150 million!

 

[CHamilton]

An interesting take on what might happen if/when Mica is no longer chair of the House Transportation Committee. I've included some excerpts, but read the whole thing.

What Kind of Leadership Would Bill Shuster Bring to the Transpo Committee?

Over the next few weeks, we could see a shake-up on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in the House. Current Chair John Mica (R-FL) has been the top Republican on the committee for six years, and according to GOP rules, that’s the limit. While Mica is asking leadership for a little wiggle room, his deputy is making the case for his own candidacy. Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA) announced late last week that he would seek the chairmanship.

...

Democrats are “cautiously optimistic” that a Shuster-led committee could be less polarized than it was under Mica. The T&I committee was until recently viewed as a model of bipartisanship, but became sharply divided after Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-MN) left in 2010 and Republicans took control of the House. Democrats complained through the entire session that they were shut out of everything, never consulted or even allowed to see draft legislation before it was made public. While House Democrats served on the conference committee that eventually hammered out a compromise bill, the real negotiations were always between Senate Dems and House Republicans.

...

Advocates are also hopeful that Shuster’s abiding interest in rail and “outside-the-box” thinking could lead to a positive session. “He seems like a thoughtful person who has genuine interest and expertise in the issues,” said David Goldberg of Transportation for America.

The stakes are high. Shuster looks forward to crafting a new surface transportation bill in the next session, if he becomes chair, as well as working on a new rail authorization. And he could bring some contentious ideas to the table.

Shuster believes high-speed rail should be limited to the Northeast Corridor, which he says is the only place in the country with the appropriate conditions for it. He says high-speed rail is a “terrible idea” in California, even calling it a form of blackmail since the state will then be on the hook to finish the project. He’s called for taking the federal money allocated to California HSR and giving it to the NEC. For the rest of the country, he says “frequency and reliability” are what matters for increasing ridership – not 150 mile speeds.

But his idea for “fixing the administration’s mishandling” of high-speed rail would be not only to focus “like a laser” on the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak’s most successful route, but to privatize it. Experts and Democrats said the privatization plan he crusaded for is unworkable and could actually lead to more government outlays, not less.

Still, he does bring a passion for rail transportation and a genuine desire to see it thrive. He helped author the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, even then showing his desire for more private sector involvement in rail by writing a section establishing “a public-private partnership opportunity for high-speed rail development.”

 

[jebr]

Shuster believes high-speed rail should be limited to the Northeast Corridor, which he says is the only place in the country with the appropriate conditions for it. [...] For the rest of the country, he says “frequency and reliability” are what matters for increasing ridership – not 150 mile speeds.

Bingo. Yeah, high speed rail is nice, but with limited federal money, frequency and reliability is a first priority. If I can get there in roughly the same time as driving a car for a corridor-level fare (Hiawatha, etc.), I'll take that over 150mph speeds but have to pay NER or Acela fares. Longer distances are probably best served by aircraft, anyways, and even high speed rail can't compete terribly effectively time-wise with long-haul flights.

But his idea for “fixing the administration’s mishandling” of high-speed rail would be not only to focus “like a laser” on the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak’s most successful route, but to privatize it. Experts and Democrats said the privatization plan he crusaded for is unworkable and could actually lead to more government outlays, not less.

Disagree with him here. But otherwise he seems to somewhat understand passenger rail and what it needs in most of the country. Why is Megabus taking off? Because it's able to compete timewise with driving a car and cheaper than driving solo (and often cheaper than driving with one other person.) There's also numerous frequencies in most areas to choose from, so you can make it work with your schedule, instead of having to modify it to work with the one-a-day frequencies most cities have with Amtrak.

 

[afigg]

Adding to the recent news articles on Amtrak, Mica, Shuster, Congress, here is one from Politico "Hill's Amtrak antgaonism still on the long haul". Odd headline because it does not really reflect the tone and content of the article. From the article, it appears that Mica's attacks on Amtrak and the food service losses may be have the opposite effect of garnering sympathy and for Amtrak among the Democrats who find his hearings a waste of time.

Some excerpts

Mica’s Amtrak focus has angered some Democrats, who say the chairman is overly antagonistic and focusing on pittances of waste rather than constructive policymaking. Mica likens his Amtrak leadership to that of a parent’s tough love, but Boardman said Mica’s food hearing was “a stunt” and the focus on hamburger costs — which Boardman admits surprised him — “misuses Amtrak.”
“They accused me of focusing in the weeds, getting in the weeds. $833 million food loss in 10 years is not in the weeds,” Mica said of the hearing.

Even with Republicans keeping control of the House, Mica’s Amtrak offensive is likely to soon end. Democrats expect a softer touch from the next chairman, likely Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Pa.), assuming Mica doesn’t get a rare waiver from his term limits.A rail title was left off the new transportation law, which means Congress is in line to write a stand-alone bill next fall with Shuster in the conductor’s seat.

Multiple Democrats told POLITICO that Shuster’s lineage as son of a former chairman — Bud Shuster — and origins in rail-heavy Pennsylvania will lead to a more sympathetic stance toward Amtrak. Rep. Bill Shuster represents a large state home to some of the country’s richest train-riding traditions.

“I think he’ll be little more sympathetic,” said Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.). “Pennsylvania is a state that’s right there. I just think that Shuster would be very reasonable on that.”

 

[jmx53]

An interesting take on what might happen if/when Mica is no longer chair of the House Transportation Committee. I've included some excerpts, but read the whole thing.

What Kind of Leadership Would Bill Shuster Bring to the Transpo Committee?

Over the next few weeks...

Adding to the recent news articles on Amtrak, Mica, Shuster, Congress, here is one from Politico "Hill's Amtrak antgaonism still on the long haul". Odd headline because ...

Thanks for posting these links.

 

[Nathanael]

Shuster believes high-speed rail should be limited to the Northeast Corridor, which he says is the only place in the country with the appropriate conditions for it. He says high-speed rail is a “terrible idea” in California, even calling it a form of blackmail since the state will then be on the hook to finish the project. He’s called for taking the federal money allocated to California HSR and giving it to the NEC.

Idiocy.

For the rest of the country, he says “frequency and reliability” are what matters for increasing ridership – not 150 mile speeds.

Well, that's true for the most part. Speed does matter too; average speed matters, not top speed: bring NY-Chicago down to 12 hours... or 10... or 8....

But his idea for “fixing the administration’s mishandling” of high-speed rail would be not only to focus “like a laser” on the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak’s most successful route, but to privatize it. Experts and Democrats said the privatization plan he crusaded for is unworkable and could actually lead to more government outlays, not less.

Indeed, that is bogus.

I guess it depends on whether Shuster's pandering to the anti-train, privatization/profiteering, and 'drown government in the bathtub' portions of the Republican Party will outweigh his seemingly genuine support for reliable, frequent rail service.

Given his district location, it's possible he might actually fund the Philly-Pittsburgh route, if his sanity wins out over his party allegiance. He'll find pretty quick that it's necessary to build all-new track on an mostly-new alignment, because NS won't want more passenger trains over the tracks it now owns. And he'll find out that no private company is interested in building a new passenger rail line through the mountains. If he's still interested... well, then he'll probably be drummed out of the Republican Party, but I would gain respect for him!

 

[jebr]

For the rest of the country, he says “frequency and reliability” are what matters for increasing ridership – not 150 mile speeds.

Well, that's true for the most part. Speed does matter too; average speed matters, not top speed: bring NY-Chicago down to 12 hours... or 10... or 8....

Call me a cynic, but I'm not sure throwing money into an 8 hour run between NY and Chicago is the best use of our money. It's a long enough corridor that even if we could get an average speed of 79mph, we're still looking at 10 hours (based on Google Maps.) My guess is that that sort of trip will, at least with today's technology, be better served by air. Now, improving it would still be useful for the in between points, especially if the Pittsburgh to NY could be shortened to even eight hours (right now the Pennsylvanian is a nine and a half hour run.) Perhaps make it possible to do eight hours from Pittsburgh to Chicago (hour and a half reduction) and then those that want to do the full length could do it in sixteen hours (instead of the 19 hours on the Lake Shore Limited.) If you leave at, say, 4:30 PM from Chicago, you could hit NY around 9:30 AM (and run an opposing-time train for 2x/day frequency, minimum.) Even bumping it up an hour could be useful if someone's going to a conference that starts in the afternoon (or has an afternoon meeting,) as they'd have enough time to stop at the hotel, freshen up, and be ready for a 1 PM meeting.