The bill and a summary will appear here https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-con ... -bill/8389 at some point. Not ready yet.
I can't tell from the representative's press release whether he wants the state to own the infrastructure and have Amtrak operate over it, like Mass, or whether he also wants the state to own/lease the equipment and contract for/run the service. If he wants the state to run the service, I can't tell if he wants Amtrak to give equipment to Penna or if he thinks Penna can uses the money it's currently paying Amtrak or get other federal capital money to buy its own equipment. Once we have those details this bill will be easier to understand and discuss.
For now, I have one question for the board: Are the tracks and infrastructure an asset for Amtrak, or a liability? In some situations Amtrak insists that states or localities provide stations, tracks, or both; could Amtrak actually be better off without the various maintenance costs? I kind of suspect that even though some might disagree with how much Amtrak says the operation (or any operation subject to that part of PRIAA) costs, and Amtrak might make a slight above-the-rail profit on this route and some other state-supported routes, instead of breaking even, that Amtrak is not actually making enough to maintain the line and certainly not enough to maintain the line AND send money from Penna to pay for operations in other states.
I can't tell from the representative's press release whether he wants the state to own the infrastructure and have Amtrak operate over it, like Mass, or whether he also wants the state to own/lease the equipment and contract for/run the service. If he wants the state to run the service, I can't tell if he wants Amtrak to give equipment to Penna or if he thinks Penna can uses the money it's currently paying Amtrak or get other federal capital money to buy its own equipment. Once we have those details this bill will be easier to understand and discuss.
For now, I have one question for the board: Are the tracks and infrastructure an asset for Amtrak, or a liability? In some situations Amtrak insists that states or localities provide stations, tracks, or both; could Amtrak actually be better off without the various maintenance costs? I kind of suspect that even though some might disagree with how much Amtrak says the operation (or any operation subject to that part of PRIAA) costs, and Amtrak might make a slight above-the-rail profit on this route and some other state-supported routes, instead of breaking even, that Amtrak is not actually making enough to maintain the line and certainly not enough to maintain the line AND send money from Penna to pay for operations in other states.
