Railroad Forums 

  • July TRAINS; An "Ambash" Issue

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1475158  by Gilbert B Norman
 
I can't recall a TRAINS issue taking Amtrak to task as this July issue.

Starting with Fred Frailey's column (the food; "Contemporary and Fresh" notwithstanding) to a Bob Johnston article on the V-II debacle, there does not appear an encouraging word within.

Of course, DPM was less than happy during later '67 when he know it was "game over"; when the SP downgraded the Sunset so that it was Coach and Automat only and the ICC imposed service standards, DPM was "understanding". On this, I can report that the SP lived up to their word. In exchange for reducing Daily to Tri-weekly, they restored Sleeping and full-service Dining. They even participated in an NY-LA Sleeper line.

Based on a December '70 trip NO-El Paso I made, they held about an hour for a late L&N connection, made a stop at Carrollton Ave for those "connects", and had pretty well whittled down the deficit by San Antonio.
 #1475168  by Gilbert B Norman
 
The Don Phillips column appearing in 2nd Quarter PTJ is presently Open Content:

http://passengertrainjournal.com/state- ... ts-amtrak/#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use:
This column will build on the questions I would have asked Amtrak President Richard Anderson about the mistakes and missteps of his first couple of months in charge if he would agree to talk to any reporters. The column will quote professionals who are in charge of Amtrak service in various states and who are engaged in snarling at Mr. Anderson for failing to consult them before making decisions that they consider stupid.

The most stinging criticism came from California where the three people in charge of the major California routes signed a letter questioning his decisions and telling him they would reverse some or all of them. The three officials who signed the letter are David Kutrosky, managing director of the Capitol Corridor; Stacey Mortensen, executive director of the San Joaquins; and Jennifer Bergener, managing director of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency. The stinging letter said the discount programs that Mr. Anderson proposed for reduction or elimination generated $27 million in revenue for the three routes last fiscal year along with ridership of more than 1.1 million.
 #1475174  by Dick H
 
Railpace Newsmagazine has a scathing editorial on Anderson's management
actions at Amtrak in their June issue. Of note is that the editorial takes]
up twice as much space as the usual monthly editorial. The editorial
appears only in the print edition, and not on their web site. Essentially,
the editorial calls for the replacement of Anderson and urges readers to
contact their Senators and Representatives on the situation.
 #1475182  by David Benton
 
Fred Frailey's July article is the same as his blog , posted a month or so ago. At least I didn't pick up any differences.
http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/fred-frailey ... oh-my.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sometimes , the printed article will differ to the blog , usually with extra information or corrections that come up in the discussion on the blog.
I think Bob Johnston writes virtually all the passenger related articles and news, I have always thought him to be pretty balanced in his views.
I don't really see any bashing going on . Frailey has admonished more extreme posters on his blog to , "give Anderson a chance".
 #1475193  by Matt Johnson
 
My question is why is the GOP so worried about eliminating a loss that amounts to less than the cost of a single F-35 when there are so many much more egregious sources of waste out there? The effect on the deficit is negligible. When there has been a long history of attempts on the right to scuttle mass transit and prevent establishment of rail service, or eliminate it where it exists, the cynicism is understandable.

http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/fred-frailey ... oh-my.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The other forgotten fact, which Richard Anderson is not allowed to forget, is that Congress preordained this to happen. Embedded in the Passenger Rail Reform & Investment Act of 2015 is this command: “Beginning on the date that is five years after the date of enactment of [PRRIA], no Federal funds may be used to cover any operating loss associated with providing food and beverage service on a route operated by Amtrak.”
 #1475206  by Alex M
 
Regarding Mr. Johnston's article, I found it to fall into the category of constructive criticism. He lays out a way forward for Amtrak to grow the business and become more relevant in the process. As the old saying goes: The yes man is your enemy. Your friend will argue with you.
 #1475214  by NRGeep
 
Matt Johnson wrote:My question is why is the GOP so worried about eliminating a loss that amounts to less than the cost of a single F-35 when there are so many much more egregious sources of waste out there? The effect on the deficit is negligible. When there has been a long history of attempts on the right to scuttle mass transit and prevent establishment of rail service, or eliminate it where it exists, the cynicism is understandable.

http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/fred-frailey ... oh-my.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The other forgotten fact, which Richard Anderson is not allowed to forget, is that Congress preordained this to happen. Embedded in the Passenger Rail Reform & Investment Act of 2015 is this command: “Beginning on the date that is five years after the date of enactment of [PRRIA], no Federal funds may be used to cover any operating loss associated with providing food and beverage service on a route operated by Amtrak.”
Seems it could be more the symbolism of a "bygone" mode of travel continuing, however minimal, into the 21st century. Also many "Conservatives" are worried that passenger rail could become a bigger part of our transit infrastructure if they don't put up road blocks and prevent the delusional assault on their beloved automobiles.
 #1475224  by djlong
 
Matt Johnson wrote:My question is why is the GOP so worried about eliminating a loss that amounts to less than the cost of a single F-35 when there are so many much more egregious sources of waste out there? The effect on the deficit is negligible. When there has been a long history of attempts on the right to scuttle mass transit and prevent establishment of rail service, or eliminate it where it exists, the cynicism is understandable.
Because it's a talking point. They would get to point to something they cut and "saved money" on. They do this a lot. Cut something small and have a press conference about it while refusing to even look at huge, big-ticket items. Oh, and make people believe that it's the small stuff busting the budget.
 #1475281  by Suburban Station
 
NRGeep wrote:
Matt Johnson wrote:My question is why is the GOP so worried about eliminating a loss that amounts to less than the cost of a single F-35 when there are so many much more egregious sources of waste out there? The effect on the deficit is negligible. When there has been a long history of attempts on the right to scuttle mass transit and prevent establishment of rail service, or eliminate it where it exists, the cynicism is understandable.

http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/fred-frailey ... oh-my.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The other forgotten fact, which Richard Anderson is not allowed to forget, is that Congress preordained this to happen. Embedded in the Passenger Rail Reform & Investment Act of 2015 is this command: “Beginning on the date that is five years after the date of enactment of [PRRIA], no Federal funds may be used to cover any operating loss associated with providing food and beverage service on a route operated by Amtrak.”
Seems it could be more the symbolism of a "bygone" mode of travel continuing, however minimal, into the 21st century. Also many "Conservatives" are worried that passenger rail could become a bigger part of our transit infrastructure if they don't put up road blocks and prevent the delusional assault on their beloved automobiles.
Sadly it has become part of the culture war
 #1475543  by eolesen
 
You guys crack me up.... Culture war... afraid of infrastructure... Like it or not, a couple hundred million here, a billion there and it all starts to add up.

All conservatives have ever asked for Amtrak to be run like a for-profit business instead of a jobs program.
 #1475592  by ryanov
 
Right. And I say “let the adults talk,” because that POV completely ignores all of the ways that government intervention and subsidy make that possible for other modes, and make it harder for rail.
 #1475596  by jerryhello
 
eolesen wrote:You guys crack me up.... Culture war... afraid of infrastructure... Like it or not, a couple hundred million here, a billion there and it all starts to add up.

All conservatives have ever asked for Amtrak to be run like a for-profit business instead of a jobs program.
You know what adds up? A $716 billion military budget. Conservatives have never had a problem with that jobs program...
 #1475611  by STrRedWolf
 
jerryhello wrote:
eolesen wrote:You guys crack me up.... Culture war... afraid of infrastructure... Like it or not, a couple hundred million here, a billion there and it all starts to add up.

All conservatives have ever asked for Amtrak to be run like a for-profit business instead of a jobs program.
You know what adds up? A $716 billion military budget. Conservatives have never had a problem with that jobs program...
Oh, I can think of a few ideas with the military, considering some folks around Baltimore, and turning them into various engineers? Would be worth the money.