Tadman wrote:If Amtrak has <1% of the market for travelers to Chicago, how do all these voters have any idea where the trains go? Very few people in the midwest, west, or south know where any long distance trains go. This is called "projection" where we assume the folks in Toledo or Bismarck are just itching for a sleeper, full diner, and big dome to all points of the compass. They aren't. They don't even know such a thing exists. And they don't care because Southwest or United gets them anywhere in a few hours that their trucks or cars can't.
When I check in at hotels or rental car desks and mention I've just arrived on the train, the looks I get are stranger than if I just arrived in a Studebaker from outer space driven by John Lithgow.
Completely understandable point of view but that is not the audience I was addressing. The Chambers of Commerce and their local influence networks are the ones to whom end point connectivity probably feels most relevant. Significant to travel? Almost certainly not. Psychologically meaningful to those who know there's a train? Yes. Politically problematic for the Congressional delegations? Absolutely.
Regardless of whether we think these trains, could have died in '72, should have died in '74, ought to have died in '79, will die in 2020 or must die in 2021 it remains highly unlikely such will occur.
There just isn't a political consensus now or anytime in the future that is likely to emerge which will result in the termination (or even a permanent reduction) of those services. Absent a permanent reduction in travel by the public it's absolutely farcical thinking to believe these trains will not return to their previous service levels.
My point of view has nothing to do with whether or not it's sound policy. Tadman's map is more than a reasonable proposal. But it has no political support now nor in my judgment is it likely to in the future.
Given the political mandate to run the best way to grow ridership is to enhance the Thruway network.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk