Lawmaker Wants To Put Amtrak Service Up For Bid

[MrFSS]

Congress would take away Amtrak's popular Northeast corridor train service and invite private investors to bid for the right to develop high-speed rail under a plan outlined by a key House Republican Thursday.

The densely populated corridor — which extends from Washington to Boston, including service to New York and Philadelphia — is the most viable region in the country for truly high-speed trains averaging speeds better than 110 mph, said House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman John Mica, R-Fla.

But Amtrak has failed to provide fast service despite tens of billions of dollars in federal aid, he said while outlining his plan at a hearing.

Full Story HERE.

 

[jis]

Yet another idea that will go exactly as far as the Republican budget idiocy went. Even some Republicans will vote against it in the Senate!

 

[George Harris]

NOT WORTH READING

It is an exhibition of ignorance. How many times adn how many ways need it be said, Amtrak has squeezed about all the speed out of the Northeast Corridor that they can without major expense on realignments. Even replacement of the south end catenary, which should be done, will probably not save another 10 minutes in run time, maybe not even 5 minutes.

 

[transit54]

I suspect that attempts like this are a veiled attempt to attempt to kill off the bulk of Amtrak while retaining service on the Northeast Corridor. Once you separate the NEC, it's much easier to kill off Amtrak, or at least greatly reduce their services. It will also cause riders in the Northeast to shift their loyalties away from Amtrak, providing less political opposition when funding cuts are proposed.

Ultimately, I see the long term future of Amtrak much like SNCF and other international operators - using operating profits on high speed routes to cross-subsudize slower, connecting lines. Removing the NEC from Amtrak's control would be a major blow to Amtrak. Besides, the corridor will still require substantial federal capital investment.

If Mica thinks this is a good idea, he ought to also propose selling the entire interstate system to private companies and end federal support for highways. Also a terrible idea, but why treat highways any different than rail?

 

[D.P. Roberts]

I suspect that attempts like this are a veiled attempt to attempt to kill off the bulk of Amtrak while retaining service on the Northeast Corridor. Once you separate the NEC, it's much easier to kill off Amtrak, or at least greatly reduce their services. It will also cause riders in the Northeast to shift their loyalties away from Amtrak, providing less political opposition when funding cuts are proposed.

Yeah, that was my thought as well. Here's my favorite quote from Rep. Shuster: "We’ve tried it Amtrak’s way without success for nearly 40 years..." Really? How often have Amtrak's proposed budgets been approved so Amtrak can actually try to do things "their way"? As Rep. Mica said, "If anyone is holding their breath for Congress to approve $117 billion for Amtrak’s 30-year plan, they’re going to turn blue." So you'll never approve Amtrak's plan, and yet you're doing things Amtrak's way...

 

[Anderson]

I think there's a second game going on here: A private operator on the NEC could undoubtedly incorporate in a state like Virginia, with open shop laws, neh? If they did that, you'd have a decent chance of breaking some of the railroad unions in the process...and this goes double, as a non-unionized operator (or one operating under better agreements) could make a better bid for the operation.

 

[jis]

I think there's a second game going on here: A private operator on the NEC could undoubtedly incorporate in a state like Virginia, with open shop laws, neh? If they did that, you'd have a decent chance of breaking some of the railroad unions in the process...and this goes double, as a non-unionized operator (or one operating under better agreements) could make a better bid for the operation.

Really? Do the labor laws of the state where a company is incorporated apply to employees who reside and work in a different state?

 

[Nexis4Jersey]

I think the NE Division of Amtrak could survive and become very profitable for a company , if the FRA got rid of the weight regs , Horn rules , and Freight sharing rules. They need to get into the 21st century , and accept the fact that lighter trains are no more dangerous then heavier trains. PTC should be mandatory for all NE Railroads.... I think SNCF , or JR East could run and expand Amtrak NE into the 21st century.

 

[Anderson]

I think there's a second game going on here: A private operator on the NEC could undoubtedly incorporate in a state like Virginia, with open shop laws, neh? If they did that, you'd have a decent chance of breaking some of the railroad unions in the process...and this goes double, as a non-unionized operator (or one operating under better agreements) could make a better bid for the operation.

Really? Do the labor laws of the state where a company is incorporated apply to employees who reside and work in a different state?

Companies can, at the time of negotiating a contract, fight for a choice of forum for the laws to operate in when coming up with the contract. Once they come up with the contract, I believe that some form of full faith and credit applies, depending on how the union is set up. This is why the SAG can enforce demands on film companies operating in, say, Virginia (open shop laws) but Ford or GM haven't simply been moving plants to Texas and Georgia (though Boeing got into a kerfluffle on this point lately).

 

[MikeM]

I think the NE Division of Amtrak could survive and become very profitable for a company , if the FRA got rid of the weight regs , Horn rules , and Freight sharing rules. They need to get into the 21st century , and accept the fact that lighter trains are no more dangerous then heavier trains. PTC should be mandatory for all NE Railroads.... I think SNCF , or JR East could run and expand Amtrak NE into the 21st century.

Sure, if you relieve the new operator of all pension and legacy costs, and use public capital to fund the improvements to infrastructure to obtain higher speeds, then let them rent track access at some nominal amount... Sure, they could be very profitable. And those legacy costs would then be retained by Amtrak and spread over remaining LD and regional routes, which means they'd appear even that much less profitable.

The real crux of the issue is that no passenger rail system is fully profitable, and that's a false goal for any rail operator. Amtrak hasn't done the greatest job, but given their capital constraints, constantly shifting political winds, and meddling by politicians, it does a reasonable job. If they had excellent capital funding, costs might drop and timeliness would improve. Or we could starve Amtrak of capital, run the wheels off the trains (like the Pre-Gunn era) and see some temporary improvement, only to have everything come crashing down when deferred maintenance caught up with the company.

Really, I think the best option is to keep a national network, run it carefully, and just know it will never be self sustaining. Then again, when oil keeps increasing in cost, and travel by other modes gets more expensive, there will be another option available that can be built on for future growth.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

This isn't the first time a Republican lawmaker has proposed privatizing the NEC.

Like others have said, the NEC contributes a great deal of revenue for Amtrak. Even with the "half-high-speed" Acela service was able to take Amtrak's annual subsidy from around $974 million in 2000 (when Acela was introduced) to somewhere around $400 million today, and made train travel the premier business travel option in the Northeast. The NE air shuttles have lost most of their market share, and thus there shouldn't be any airline opposition to true-HSR between WAS and BOS.

Yes, there are a lot of stupid regulations that hamper Amtrak's fiscal situation, like the 750 mile rule (which prevents Amtrak from directly setting up corridor services) or some of the FRA's rules, or until 2002 mandating LD trains have to make a profit.

Expanding the number/mileage of "NEC-like" corridors in Amtrak's system would help improve the fiscal situation for Amtrak. Heck, just lengthening the most popular LD trains would help improve their cost recovery.

But hey, what's wrong with a government agency that's actually SOLVENT for once?

 

[MikefromCrete]

I think the NE Division of Amtrak could survive and become very profitable for a company , if the FRA got rid of the weight regs , Horn rules , and Freight sharing rules. They need to get into the 21st century , and accept the fact that lighter trains are no more dangerous then heavier trains. PTC should be mandatory for all NE Railroads.... I think SNCF , or JR East could run and expand Amtrak NE into the 21st century.

Horn rules? What the heck are horn rules?

 

[dlagrua]

The posts in this thread goes with the automatic assumption that privatizing the North East Corridor will be detrimental. Until we see what the total plan is, we won't know if its good or bad for the passenger. At this point its all speculation and I predict that the plan will probably go nowhere.

 

[Nexis4Jersey]

I think the NE Division of Amtrak could survive and become very profitable for a company , if the FRA got rid of the weight regs , Horn rules , and Freight sharing rules. They need to get into the 21st century , and accept the fact that lighter trains are no more dangerous then heavier trains. PTC should be mandatory for all NE Railroads.... I think SNCF , or JR East could run and expand Amtrak NE into the 21st century.

Horn rules? What the heck are horn rules?

The Horn blowing , its so backwards and does it really work? We still have crashes then any other developed country in the World , Germany has less crashes and alot more Urban / Suburban crossing then we do. The T Banned the horn rule and nothing increased , this rule is holding back alot of projects due to the NIMBYs not wanting the horn blowing near the house and i can agree with them....what is the point of it? Just Four Gate the crossings like they do in parts of Europe and Japan make the crossings safer and harder to jump.

 

[George Harris]

I think the NE Division of Amtrak could survive and become very profitable for a company , if the FRA got rid of the weight regs , Horn rules , and Freight sharing rules. They need to get into the 21st century , and accept the fact that lighter trains are no more dangerous then heavier trains. PTC should be mandatory for all NE Railroads.... I think SNCF, or JR East could run and expand Amtrak NE into the 21st century.

Horn rules? What the heck are horn rules?

The Horn blowing , its so backwards and does it really work? We still have crashes then any other developed country in the World , Germany has less crashes and alot more Urban / Suburban crossing then we do. The T Banned the horn rule and nothing increased , this rule is holding back alot of projects due to the NIMBYs not wanting the horn blowing near the house and i can agree with them....what is the point of it? Just Four Gate the crossings like they do in parts of Europe and Japan make the crossings safer and harder to jump.

Nexis, I think it would be safe to say that you do not work in the railroad industry, at least not in North America. There is far more involved in these issues than you appear to even imagine. As to the Boston area NIMBY's: These people will always find reasons to be against something. If not horns, then there will be something else. It is a wasted effort to try to satisfy the insatiable. The "horn rule" is a non-issue in the NEC where there are no grade crossings in high speed tracks, and is insignificant in cost in any case. If you have seen any pictures of a rail vehicle post-crash in Europe, and they do have them, then you would have a greater appreciation of crashworthiness standards. As to your crashes relationships, do you have statistics or is that assumption? I really do not know what the situation is now.

And you want PTC everywhere!! This stuff is expensive. So far there has yet to be any system that cannot be overcome by determined stupidity. That is, PTC will not prevent everything. It also addes one more system that can go wrong.

If people crash through two gates what makes you think they will not crash through four, or pull up and stop on the crossing regardless of all signs, lights, gates, etc.

When you have to use such descriptives as "backward" and "get into the 21st century" for logic, it indicates a lack of understanding of the real issues. There are reasons that some things should be changed, but not because they are "backward" but because there is a better way, and it does not matter whether the better way was developed last week, last year, or in the previous century.

I would like to sit back and watch what would happen if SNCF tried to run the US passenger system. If it were not for the disaster it would be, it would be simply hilarious. At least the Japanese recognize that different parts of the world are different. Not sure that applies to SNCF.

 

[AlanB]

The "horn rule" is a non-issue in the NEC where there are no grade crossings in high speed tracks, and is insignificant in cost in any case.

I've got to correct you here a bit George, there are still about 9 or 10 grade crossings left on the NEC in CT and RI. Several in the New London area are in areas with 60 MPH or slower speeds, including the Miner's road crossing where the only fatalities in a car vs. Acela accident happened. But in RI there are at least 2 or 3 crossings where Acela blazes through at speeds of 110 MPH or so.

 

[George Harris]

The "horn rule" is a non-issue in the NEC where there are no grade crossings in high speed tracks, and is insignificant in cost in any case.

I've got to correct you here a bit George, there are still about 9 or 10 grade crossings left on the NEC in CT and RI. Several in the New London area are in areas with 60 MPH or slower speeds, including the Miner's road crossing where the only fatalities in a car vs. Acela accident happened. But in RI there are at least 2 or 3 crossings where Acela blazes through at speeds of 110 MPH or so.

Thanks, Alan. I knew about the New London area crossings, but not those in 110 mph territory. It is scarey enough sitting in the front end coming down on a crossing at 70 to 79. But at 110? No such thing as enough crashworthiness for that.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

Thanks, Alan. I knew about the New London area crossings, but not those in 110 mph territory. It is scarey enough sitting in the front end coming down on a crossing at 70 to 79. But at 110? No such thing as enough crashworthiness for that.

Which is why for those speeds, grade separation is the best solution.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

NOT WORTH READING. It is an exhibition of ignorance. How many times adn how many ways need it be said, Amtrak has squeezed about all the speed out of the Northeast Corridor that they can without major expense on realignments. Even replacement of the south end catenary, which should be done, will probably not save another 10 minutes in run time, maybe not even 5 minutes.

Wouldn't not reading the article be an "exhibition in ignorance" itself? I agree that this plan probably has little if anything to do with actually improving schedules or timing, but there's an excellent chance it has an awful lot to with breaking unions and weakening Amtrak. Refusing to read about it and hoping it will simply go away isn't going to do anything to address this new threat.

The posts in this thread goes with the automatic assumption that privatizing the North East Corridor will be detrimental. Until we see what the total plan is, we won't know if its good or bad for the passenger. At this point its all speculation and I predict that the plan will probably go nowhere.

I think it's fair to assume Amtrak would be severely weakened by loss of the NEC operations. If you have some sort of explanation for how that would not be the case then I'd like to hear it.

 

[rrdude]

NOT WORTH READING. It is an exhibition of ignorance. How many times adn how many ways need it be said, Amtrak has squeezed about all the speed out of the Northeast Corridor that they can without major expense on realignments. Even replacement of the south end catenary, which should be done, will probably not save another 10 minutes in run time, maybe not even 5 minutes.

Wouldn't not reading the article be an "exhibition in ignorance" itself? I agree that this plan probably has little if anything to do with actually improving schedules or timing, but there's an excellent chance it has an awful lot to with breaking unions and weakening Amtrak. Refusing to read about it and hoping it will simply go away isn't going to do anything to address this new threat.

The posts in this thread goes with the automatic assumption that privatizing the North East Corridor will be detrimental. Until we see what the total plan is, we won't know if its good or bad for the passenger. At this point its all speculation and I predict that the plan will probably go nowhere.

I think it's fair to assume Amtrak would be severely weakened by loss of the NEC operations. If you have some sort of explanation for how that would not be the case then I'd like to hear it.

Pretty simple, if you pull the NEC out from Amtrak, and give it to Veolia, SNFC, Virgin, or some other concern, you basically "kill" Amtrak.

Not so much for the revenues/traffic, but you kill Amtrak's POLITICAL leverage.

 

[eagle628]

An absolutely heartwarming comments section on this Washington Post article about the idea. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/house-gop-proposal-would-privatize-high-speed-rail-along-amtraks-northeast-corridor/2011/05/26/AGBEZKCH_allComments.html?ctab=all_comments

 

[The Journalist]

Dang. Washington Post commenters largely have their heads on straight it seems. Couldn't say that for most newspapers' websites....

 

[George Harris]

NOT WORTH READING. It is an exhibition of ignorance. How many times adn how many ways need it be said, Amtrak has squeezed about all the speed out of the Northeast Corridor that they can without major expense on realignments. Even replacement of the south end catenary, which should be done, will probably not save another 10 minutes in run time, maybe not even 5 minutes.

Wouldn't not reading the article be an "exhibition in ignorance" itself? I agree that this plan probably has little if anything to do with actually improving schedules or timing, but there's an excellent chance it has an awful lot to with breaking unions and weakening Amtrak. Refusing to read about it and hoping it will simply go away isn't going to do anything to address this new threat.

Not reading something because it quickly becomes obvious that it is an exposition of ignorance, or because you know the nature and mindset of the author is not ignorance, it is avoidace of wasting time.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I think the NE Division of Amtrak could survive and become very profitable for a company , if the FRA got rid of the weight regs , Horn rules , and Freight sharing rules. They need to get into the 21st century , and accept the fact that lighter trains are no more dangerous then heavier trains. PTC should be mandatory for all NE Railroads.... I think SNCF , or JR East could run and expand Amtrak NE into the 21st century.

Why do I read your posts? I haven't bought stock in Bayer recently. The problems surrounding Amtrak are so complex, I doubt you can list them in a book less than an inch thick. No silver bullet exists. People could write tomes about Amtrak's problems and how to solve them- and have.

Nexis, I think it would be safe to say that you do not work in the railroad industry, at least not in North America.

He doesn't work in reality. But more so, Nexis seems to not listen to anything those of us with knowledge and experience say... so what's the point of arguing with him

Wouldn't not reading the article be an "exhibition in ignorance" itself?

Not automatically. I am in the glove and safety industry and probably know enough about hand, ear, eye, face, arm, fall and visibility protection that you'd need to take a week long course just to understand some of the things I could tell you I know about the industry and its products. You wouldn't need to know that information- ever- so if the New York Times writes and article on the subject, it is going to be dumbed down (and generally inaccurate) so that its readers can understand it without a crash course in the finer details of what they are talking about.

George is in the rail industry. Him reading an article about the rail industry in a national newspaper would be like me reading about gloves in one. He gets his knowledge about the trade from the trade, just like I do with mine. Reading any article outside of our trade for that purpose is only useful for understanding what the public perspective on it is. That article just continues to confirm that the public and politicians are woefully lacking of knowledge in the mechanics of running a railroad passenger service. Since it illustrates nothing industry insiders and well-informed advocates don't already know, reading it is a waste of time.

Not reading something because it quickly becomes obvious that it is an exposition of ignorance, or because you know the nature and mindset of the author is not ignorance, it is avoidace of wasting time.

Amen.74

 

[Nexis4Jersey]

I think the NE Division of Amtrak could survive and become very profitable for a company , if the FRA got rid of the weight regs , Horn rules , and Freight sharing rules. They need to get into the 21st century , and accept the fact that lighter trains are no more dangerous then heavier trains. PTC should be mandatory for all NE Railroads.... I think SNCF , or JR East could run and expand Amtrak NE into the 21st century.

Why do I read your posts? I haven't bought stock in Bayer recently. The problems surrounding Amtrak are so complex, I doubt you can list them in a book less than an inch thick. No silver bullet exists. People could write tomes about Amtrak's problems and how to solve them- and have.

Nexis, I think it would be safe to say that you do not work in the railroad industry, at least not in North America.

He doesn't work in reality. But more so, Nexis seems to not listen to anything those of us with knowledge and experience say... so what's the point of arguing with him

Wouldn't not reading the article be an "exhibition in ignorance" itself?

Not automatically. I am in the glove and safety industry and probably know enough about hand, ear, eye, face, arm, fall and visibility protection that you'd need to take a week long course just to understand some of the things I could tell you I know about the industry and its products. You wouldn't need to know that information- ever- so if the New York Times writes and article on the subject, it is going to be dumbed down (and generally inaccurate) so that its readers can understand it without a crash course in the finer details of what they are talking about.

George is in the rail industry. Him reading an article about the rail industry in a national newspaper would be like me reading about gloves in one. He gets his knowledge about the trade from the trade, just like I do with mine. Reading any article outside of our trade for that purpose is only useful for understanding what the public perspective on it is. That article just continues to confirm that the public and politicians are woefully lacking of knowledge in the mechanics of running a railroad passenger service. Since it illustrates nothing industry insiders and well-informed advocates don't already know, reading it is a waste of time.

Not reading something because it quickly becomes obvious that it is an exposition of ignorance, or because you know the nature and mindset of the author is not ignorance, it is avoidace of wasting time.

Amen.74

Your right i don't , i think outside the box. I'm part of a growing movement of Modern Rail Fanners , Rail planners ,and your Rail Employees who want Change. Our system is the laughing stock of the entire planet , part of the problem is politicians but the other problem is the older employees who don't want change and fight it. The older Employees are just as bad as some of the Anti-Rail politicians....