Micromanaging always bad?

[capltd29]

There has been much talk about micro-managing of amtrak with the food service and sleepers and discounts and all that.

To what extent could this be used to save the LD system?

Could, for example, the congress pass a bill with legislation stating that no services could be cut? No route miles lost?

JP

 

[Midland Valley]

I don't think they have the will to do that. They voted to save Amtrak. They have done their duty.

 

[Trogdor]

Could, for example, the congress pass a bill with legislation stating that no services could be cut? No route miles lost?

Congress could, theoretically, pass anything it wants.

Instead of having congress micromanage the LD system (leaving it susceptible to *more* attacks from those that say the trains are just run for political pork), I'd rather see some coherent policy in place for passenger rail (and, preferably, a policy that integrates *all* manner of transportation in a coherent and efficient fashion), and funding to back it up.

Then, we wouldn't need to worry about micromanaging.

 

[GG-1]

I'd rather see some coherent policy in place for passenger rail (and, preferably, a policy that integrates *all* manner of transportation in a coherent and efficient fashion), and funding to back it up.

Aloha

The only comment to what you just said is "HERE HERE"

 

[trainboy325]

Midland Valley,

It's always important to remember that Congress supports Amtrak as a whole, any congressman or cosponsor can generate any legislation that specifically manages any part of Amtrak. For example, a Congressman from the Dallas, TX area has a bill that requires Amtrak to abolish many long distance trains, like the Sunset Limited, Southwest Chief and even the Silver Star. Although the likelyhood of such a bill to even get out of committee is next to nothing, it still reminds everyone that micromanagement policy is an annual problem that plagues the development of a unified national passenger railroad policy.

On the flip side, Congress can legislate the preservation of a route and service, however, under the current Amtrak authorization legislation, the company is not bound to comply with the law if it doesn't receive any funding to back the legislated route or level or service (Amtrak Reform & Accoutability Act of 1997). This is one of the major reasons why many state supported trains are jeopardy when their respective state legislatures cut funding for their trains. Amtrak can't cover the state's portion without permission from Congress, which in it self is a micromanaging policy that puts, among others, the Michigan trains and their services in trouble due to political infighting in Lansing.

I believe that any micromanaging legistation for Amtrak is bad. It prevents Amtrak from seeking any type of business model to run the railroad. Today's Amtrak is a 35 year legacy of political pork and lack of vision for the passenger trains due to years of "government bureaucracy" style management. Until Amtrak is totally free and independent organization, it will continue to be nothing more than a huge Northeastern United States bureaucracy that runs "those trains" in the South and West. As long as Amtrak and passenger trains continue to be "subsidized" by the federal government, we'll never see any overall improvement in passenger railroading since Congressmen will fight for their districts and those who don't have trains will fight to kill those that don't benefit their constituents.

Although its a little off topic, the release of David Gunn is a prime example where Amtrak was succeeding as a "business" and the bureaucratic mentality of Amtrak sent him on his way as he was saving the company from mountains of debt, the lack of confidence Congress had for the company, the hundreds of "managers" and their salaries and bringing back that long lost concept: reliable service and equipment. That was too much for the bureaucrats and they sent him on his way as the board, middle managers and those wanting to destroy passenger trains lost control of the destiny of of the company: their goal to destroy Amtrak's trains, unionized labor force and put more passengers back onto highways and into the skies on airlines that receive millions in federally funded infrastructure networks (airports, etc.) and labor (FAA, TSA, etc.).

 

[capltd29]

The reason i asked this was because I was invisioning a scenario where Gunn was replaced by a crazy guy wants only to make cuts to service. I was wondering if congress would be able to sstep in and do something in this case.

 

[Guest]

The crazy guys name is Bush Mineta Laney...

 

[Trogdor]

Congress could pass the legislation I noted, and include in that legislation certain mandates. That would not be the same as micromanaging. Such legislation would, presumably, have a new way of forming the Amtrak board of directors, and would give the company a clear mission about what kind of service is desired, and (in general) where. I would not go so far as to say that no route cuts could be made.

If Amtrak had adequate funding and enough equipment, I could see a restructuring of the network that may not preserve 100% of the routes (or even route miles), but would result in a better system overall. However, I do believe that any attempt at doing so now would be akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Therefore, I wouldn't be in favor of a "restructuring" until Amtrak's financial future is more certain.

 

[AKA]

Contact your congressman. ( Or person ) Go to NARP site to get the story.

 

[trainboy325]

That's exactly Amtrak's biggest problem, a lack of "real" governance of a railroad company rather than a "transportation program" as Congress sees Amtrak. Until Amtrak becomes a "bureaucratic free" organization, with a real board of directors, dedicated funding source other than descretionary funding and a mandate of what Amtrak is to provide for the country as a whole, any type of micromangement approach to the existing Amtrak will lead to a more chaotic and uncertain future.