I worry not much at all about what Trump means for Amtrak. I worry far more over the lopsided balance of both houses of Congress. Is it just me, folks, or does the old school of thought - the idea that the representation of the "flyover" states is enough to force the hand of the rest of 'em, and to keep the "railpax" "national" - seem to be gradually drifting toward the wayside? The PRIIA provisions have have already been slowly eroding the status quo - for better or for worse. (Might I add, lest some folks forget, that PRIIA - that great thing that provided an influx of money that one time - was actually a G.W.Bush-admin-plus-typical-split-congress type of act.) Indiana/Iowa Pacific has been heralded as a positive execution - don't get me wrong, it isn't 100% undeserving of that - and other state legislators have been quietly taking notice.
My point is that, even though the "flyover state" guys might still push for rural rail service, they probably don't care much about who exactly provides it - nor how it gets there, and nor how long it takes to get there - so long as it keeps stopping in the same places in their districts, and as long as it manages to fit into a however-farcical "national map". At the executive level, I don't think Trump specifically cares, one way or the other, what becomes of Amtrak. If the Congress continues to float it, he'll go along (and, in that way, gain a bargaining chip to say he supported jobs, rural America, the middle class, etc etc). OTOH, if enough support is gained in Congress to finally part out the system to the highest bidders, then that'll happen just as easily (Trump-cela, anyone?). The long haul runs, as ever, are the ones which really hang in the balance. Will those rural (R)-party Sens and Reps stick to their traditional guns, or will they fall in line with the party leaders? It remains to be seen - Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell are dangerous fellows - oh well, at least McConnell's 2nd wife will be the new Sec of Trans, right?...
de402 wrote:The reorganization by Wick Moorman indicates to me that senior management is gearing up to dig in against any sort of further cutbacks. Management that was already lean is further streamlined to three execs for each functional area, reflecting a more industry flair than say bureaucracy of a transit org. I think its notable to note that Joe Boardman who was a Republican often testified before Congress, sitting though Shuster's Amtrak is Soviet style train service (at least they had service!).
IMHO, I think for the most part Amtrak has shown that it is a good steward of public funds (94% cost recovery). Moorman isn't a bureaucrat, was a highly successful CEO of a Class 1 railroad. I think Amtrak's Board of Director's smartly recruited the best individual available who can hopefully make the case that its worth funding going forward. What really happens is anyone's guess as the President doesn't really act very presidential when it comes to decision making. best we can do is expect the worst and hope for the best.
"Management that was already lean" - ha ha ha, have you ever worked with or for amtk before? Okay, joking aside, I do think that Wick was a very good choice for CEO. I do hope that he sticks around long enough to shepherd the outfit thru at least a few years' worth of legislative sessions. Of course, he took the "high road" (read: only road, if the company was to ever hope to attract such high talent) by accepting a tiny salary with the chance at a big bonus for achieving preset financial goals. For the time being, I'm all for that. There is plenty of "streamlining" that can happen, and it needs to start at the top, rather than at the bottom, for a change.
