Railroad Industry Subsidies of/by Amtrak

Mr. Norman, if you read the February 13 Wall Street Journal story regarding the Class I railroads' efforts to upgrade their infrastructure, what effect do you think these efforts will have on Amtrak service?

While I'm quite aware of the piece you note, Mr. Tarheelman, I believe the effect of such will be limited to enhanced train performance of the existing trains on their existing schedules - and of course additional performance payments to the roads.

The roads are not committing investor funds to these improvements for the benefit of hosting Amtrak trains; and so far as I'm concerned, heaven help any advocacy group that starts touting "look at all the improvements that have been made, why can't we have more trains?"

disclaimer: hold positions in BNI and NSC; both S&P outperform CY 07 and YTD '08

Gilbert B Norman wrote:While I'm quite aware of the piece you note, Mr. Tarheelman, I believe the effect of such will be limited to enhanced train performance of the existing trains on their existing schedules - and of course additional performance payments to the roads.

The roads are not committing investor funds to these improvements for the benefit of hosting Amtrak trains; and so far as I'm concerned, heaven help any advocacy group that starts touting "look at all the improvements that have been made, why can't we have more trains?"

disclaimer: hold positions in BNI and NSC; both S&P outperform CY 07 and YTD '08

Thanks for the insight, Mr. Norman. You confirm what I've been saying---for effective (i.e., fast and convenient) passenger service, we need a network of dedicated passenger tracks. The challenge for our state legislative critters and their counterparts in Congress is to exercise enough fiscal discipline to fund construction of such a network.

Unfortunately, given the record of Congress and most state legislatures, I'm not holding my breath on this.

tarheelman wrote:The challenge for our state legislative critters and their counterparts in Congress is to exercise enough fiscal discipline to fund construction of such a network.

Without doubt a rather curious statement. Most everyone who's not a member of this forum would generally associate construction of a dedicated rail network with a lack of fiscal discipline.

MudLake wrote:

tarheelman wrote:The challenge for our state legislative critters and their counterparts in Congress is to exercise enough fiscal discipline to fund construction of such a network.

Without doubt a rather curious statement. Most everyone who's not a member of this forum would generally associate construction of a dedicated rail network with a lack of fiscal discipline.

A difference in world view....some people view the job of Congress to spend as little as possible, others that a successful Congress will come up with a way to raise and property direct enough money to get critical tasks done. For some of us getting modern rail built is a critical task.

icgsteve wrote:A difference in world view....some people view the job of Congress to spend as little as possible, others that a successful Congress will come up with a way to raise and property direct enough money to get critical tasks done. For some of us getting modern rail built is a critical task.

Exactly! A fiscally responsible Congress (and, for that matter, a fiscally responsible state legislature) doesn't overtax its citizens and also spends the tax revenue it gets wisely.

IMO, wise use of taxpayer money is to focus it on the things that government does best---infrastructure, national defense, and public saftety. As such, using tax revenue to build a network of electrified rail corridors for passenger use allows high speed passenger service as an alternative to driving and flying on trips of appropriate length. HSR, in turn, reduces our dependence on foreign oil (and the unstable governments of most oil producting countries) as long as the electricity powering it comes from either low sulfur coal or nuclear energy. IMO, this is a much better use of tax revenue than wasting it on a bridge to nowhere (or any other useless pork barrel spending project resulting from some Congresscritter's earmark).

icgsteve wrote:

MudLake wrote:

tarheelman wrote:The challenge for our state legislative critters and their counterparts in Congress is to exercise enough fiscal discipline to fund construction of such a network.

Without doubt a rather curious statement. Most everyone who's not a member of this forum would generally associate construction of a dedicated rail network with a lack of fiscal discipline.

A difference in world view....some people view the job of Congress to spend as little as possible, others that a successful Congress will come up with a way to raise and property direct enough money to get critical tasks done. For some of us getting modern rail built is a critical task.

What I was driving at is the notion that the federal government might want to first slash the budget to the tune a couple hundred billion bucks or so just to bring themselves into the realm of fiscal responsibility. I'm all for spending on HSR but in no way, shape, or form do I consider that particular wish to be rooted in fiscal responsibility.

As for the energy independence concept, about all I can ask is the question of how many billions of dollars do we want to spend to reduce oil consumption by what really amounts to only a relative drop in the bucket? Does it make a difference? Sure, but it would probably be paltry compared to electric cars or some technology like that. Of the reasons to back HSR, this is probably lower on the list. Electrifying and expanding Metra, Metrolink, MBTA, etc. would make a bigger difference, IMHO.

Moderator's Note:

We are wandering away from whether or not Amtrak subsidizes the railroads, or the railroads subsidize Amtrak.

Please bring your posts back to Amtrak. The alternative is one of us closes this topic.

Thanks in advance.