Trump proposes cutting long distance support

I am so sick of this game: Amtrak cuts are proposed, the grassroots has to fight hard to save Amtrak, and then Amtrak survives.

We need to re-think Amtrak's funding structure so that we don't have to play this game nearly every year.

I propose giving tax credits to Class I railroads to run the LD network (as they have significant lobbying power, which Amtrak lacks, which would be a big help in this battle each time), but I'm open to other suggestions.

Give Amtrak independent borrowing authority with a government backstop, a la the Tennessee Valley Authority. The bonds could be tied to specific projects: a new North River tunnel, say, or rolling stock acquisition. There's demand out there in the market for bonds like that.

Tax credits for the Class I's are a good idea. Never thought of that one.

Cutting long distance Amtrak and essential air service affects mostly red district voters. We see the same every time.

"Cut wasteful spending!!!"
*cut proposed*
"Oh no, not that, we like that"

I wouldnt be surprised to see some cuts, but not an across the board elimination.

Not sure about bonds; Brightline has not found much of a market for their's. I do like the idea of tax credits, though.

SouthernRailway wrote:I am so sick of this game: Amtrak cuts are proposed, the grassroots has to fight hard to save Amtrak, and then Amtrak survives.

We need to re-think Amtrak's funding structure so that we don't have to play this game nearly every year.

I propose giving tax credits to Class I railroads to run the LD network (as they have significant lobbying power, which Amtrak lacks, which would be a big help in this battle each time), but I'm open to other suggestions.

A dedicated funding source, proposed way back under Graham Claytor, actually would still work. It doesn't have to be a gas tax either; Anything would be a (very) difficult sell, though sin taxes (tobacco, booze) are often somewhat easier.

Jeff Smith wrote:Not sure about bonds; Brightline has not found much of a market for their's.

I'll admit I'm totally ignorant about Brightline, but I wonder if it could be because they're too new and seen as too risky?

Here in Maine, when the Maine Turnpike Authority bonds to widen a section of highway, the market snatches those up faster than seagulls on French fries in the McDonald's parking lot. But the Maine Turnpike Authority has been around since 1948 and is one of the best-run agencies of its kind in America, so that probably helps a little.

Ditto for when the State of Maine bonded for the initial Downeaster track rehab and the Rockland Branch track rehab.

At any rate, I just wonder if bonds from Amtrak might be viewed more favorably than Brightline, given the age/size/scope of Amtrak.

As I said elsewhere, pretty much a non-starter. Amtrak can't exist politically w/o the LD trains because those Senators and Congress-critters are loathe to give up even those morsels of pork.

Let me float a trial here:

Instead of playing this BS game every few years, let's get in front of it.

Cancel all the LD trains as of 1/1/18.

In the mean time, set up a plan to triple down on corridor trains. All corridors get 5x/day minimum service. Equipment comes from the former LD trains, refit to medium and high density. The beginning and ends of many LD trains become corridors, I.E. Chicago to MSP, KC, STL, Indy; NOL-HOU, LAX-Tucson, SEA and PDX to SPK, etc...

What do you get? Amazing asset utilization, including stations. No more 24/7 engine use, which just destroys P42's. No more thin loadings in the bones while crush loads with 12 hours of the bigger cities.

There are probably a million holes in this plan, but there are in most plans.

And if you corridor-ize trains to AZ, MN, IN, WA, OR, PA, VA, GA, TX, OK, etc... what states are you really losing in support compared to LD's? NM, NV, WV, ND... You actually have better service to those states.

SouthernRailway wrote:I am so sick of this game: Amtrak cuts are proposed, the grassroots has to fight hard to save Amtrak, and then Amtrak survives.

We need to re-think Amtrak's funding structure so that we don't have to play this game nearly every year.

I propose giving tax credits to Class I railroads to run the LD network (as they have significant lobbying power, which Amtrak lacks, which would be a big help in this battle each time), but I'm open to other suggestions.

I don't care how many tax credits you hand out, the Big Seven have no interest in getting back into the passenger business. Do you think Hunter Harrison is sitting around Jacksonville thinking, "Yeah, we can some nice tax credits by running employee-heavy passenger trains? That will make my stock portfolio really blossom." I think not.

What was simply a tangential reference in the Administration's budget document has seemed to gain traction through the day.

The Budget was discussed today on WBBM 780/105.9 Noon Business Hour, but a bit aided and abetted by the host, the guest did make reference to Amtrak. While no specific reference to Mr. Moorman's "glue", he did note that the long distance trains, while beginning or ending their routes in "the Blue" they cross "a lot of Red" to get between. And we all know who the Red supports.

I think "worst case" will be a "pruning". The usual suspects of course are The Sunset Limited and The Cardinal, and if it came down to one, I'd say Sunset.

Thoughts, anyone on the "hit list" - again if any.

CHTT1 wrote:

SouthernRailway wrote:I am so sick of this game: Amtrak cuts are proposed, the grassroots has to fight hard to save Amtrak, and then Amtrak survives.

We need to re-think Amtrak's funding structure so that we don't have to play this game nearly every year.

I propose giving tax credits to Class I railroads to run the LD network (as they have significant lobbying power, which Amtrak lacks, which would be a big help in this battle each time), but I'm open to other suggestions.

I don't care how many tax credits you hand out, the Big Seven have no interest in getting back into the passenger business. Do you think Hunter Harrison is sitting around Jacksonville thinking, "Yeah, we can some nice tax credits by running employee-heavy passenger trains? That will make my stock portfolio really blossom." I think not.

The Class Is themselves have indicated otherwise.

The Class Is are likely thinking, "Yikes, with the coal business drying up, let's look at other ways to make money."

Gilbert B Norman wrote:What was simply a tangential reference in the Administration's budget document has seemed to gain traction through the day.

The Budget was discussed today on WBBM 780/105.9 Noon Business Hour, but a bit aided and abetted by the host, the guest did make reference to Amtrak. While no specific reference to Mr. Moorman's "glue", he did note that the long distance trains, while beginning or ending their routes in "the Blue" they cross "a lot of Red" to get between. And we all know who the Red supports.

I think "worst case" will be a "pruning". The usual suspects of course are The Sunset Limited and The Cardinal, and if it came down to one, I'd say Sunset.

Thoughts, anyone on the "hit list" - again if any.

I'm not in any way expecting a 'pruning' (its a discredited strategy anyway), but were something to be on the chopping block, my first suspects would be any train(s) which someone thinks might be cast off onto the respective states to fund. That idea is also a non-starter (and a terrible precedent), but I wouldn't be completely shocked at the suggestion.

We still (and badly) need more information on this budget proposal before getting all worked up over it.

Tadman wrote:Let me float a trial here:

Instead of playing this BS game every few years, let's get in front of it.

Cancel all the LD trains as of 1/1/18.

In the mean time, set up a plan to triple down on corridor trains.

I could see your proposal to Penn Central the LD service succeeding under this current presidency and Congress, vocally interested in subsidizing haves over have-nots, and that upsets me greatly.

Amtrak is operated by the Federal government as a subsidized for-profit public service (I know it's a contradiction). By pruning Amtrak into disconnected route clusters it ceases to be national, opens the door to piecemeal privatization, and invites foreign-owned corporations to take money out of the US economy while also almost certainly increasing operational costs. I'd rather invest American money in an American (government-owned) corporation that keeps most of its income in America, even with its faults.

More practically, where do you draw the lines between regions?

Amtrak's crazy accounting putting a lot of fixed costs onto LD trains brings up a question. Will all those fixed costs now be on SD and NEC make every Amtrak train a money looser ?

mtuandrew wrote:Amtrak is operated by the Federal government as a subsidized for-profit public service (I know it's a contradiction). By pruning Amtrak into disconnected route clusters it ceases to be national, opens the door to piecemeal privatization, and invites foreign-owned corporations to take money out of the US economy while also almost certainly increasing operational costs. I'd rather invest American money in an American (government-owned) corporation that keeps most of its income in America, even with its faults.

On a similar note, USPS is a non-subsidized (receiving no public appropriations) public service not intended for profit, but break-even based on total revenue (supposedly "revenue neutral"). Yet USPS still loses millions each year and quarter. And in an analogy to LD passenger service, USPS operates a Bypass Freight delivery program in Alaska, losing over $70 million a year delivering essential goods and supplies in pallets to rural villages at lower rates than Parcel Post, Priority Mail or private carrier. It began in 1972 and continues, with the support of late Sen. Ted Stevens over the years, citing an important lifeline and delivery network. Interesting read on this rather unknown program: 2011 USPS OIG report