Biden and McConnell call - what do you do?

[Tadman]

Pretend for a moment that you are on a conf call with Mitch McConnell and Joe Biden. They are offering to at least double the intercity passenger rail budget for next year, but there's some caveats:
1. You have to show a return of more than 1-for-1 seat miles. If the current budget is $1.8b and ridership is X, the new ridereship or revenue must be at least 2.1X.
2. You cannot upset the other track owners and operators, IE commuter and freights. Money or other offers are totally legit, but it has to have a return.
3. You do not have to use Amtrak, at least in it's current form. Scrap it all or use it some places or turbocharge it. Up to you.
4. It has to make a split congress happy, IE no hard-left or hard-right pipe dreams.
5. There is no mandate to use any of the current routes or equipment, but new equipment costs money and you have to keep a voting majority of congress happy.
6. This can include private operators on any variety of offering, from weekly scenic trains to heavy duty corridor.
7. Equipment can only be that commercially available or in service world wide today, IE no magic trains, no turbotrains, no maglevs, no Rader DMU.

These should be some interesting ideas, and keep it to maybe 10-20 bullet points rather than a book of paragraphs so guys can get through them.

[rcthompson04]

This is a fascinating topic... I would take a slightly different approach. Amtrak gets $3 billion in Capital funding if it turns an operational profit on EBIDTA. Every $50 million operational loss equals $250 million cut in the Capital funding. States that make contributions to passenger rail service (regional and long distance) will be allocated on a pro rata basis half of the $1.5 billion. The other would be spent as Amtrak seems fit.

[Gilbert B Norman]

Mr. Dunville, does the hypothesis you set forth presume President Biden and Majority Leader McConnell?

[Tadman]

Not really, just seemed like two establishment leaders of the traditional wings of their party.

That said, I'm not so sure the establishment is that great for Amtrak. All they've done is keep a 1971 business model on life support with paltry iterations such as Acela to put lipstick on a pig.

That's the reason for my question/hypothesis. How do you serve most states better than today in a highly useful way?

[hi55us]

I would take the extra $1 billion and offer a 5 year pilot program with any state, where Amtrak will provide funding for the first 5 years and $0 contributions from the state (after 5 years the state would be on the hook for another 5 before they cancel the program). Amtrak best success has come from state supported corridors and they need to incentivize more states to partner with them (especially as for-profit entities try and compete with Amtrak). You might have to charge a token $1 fee to the state so it's not amtrak funding a shorter state sponsored route.

[CarterB]

I would take the extra $1 billion and offer a 5 year pilot program with any state, where Amtrak will provide funding for the first 5 years and $0 contributions from the state (after 5 years the state would be on the hook for another 5 before they cancel the program). Amtrak best success has come from state supported corridors and they need to incentivize more states to partner with them (especially as for-profit entities try and compete with Amtrak). You might have to charge a token $1 fee to the state so it's not amtrak funding a shorter state sponsored route.

Totally agree!! Add generous federal matching programs to states who want to fund passenger rail.

[David Benton]

I would think the states should contribute something, if only 10 - 20 %. no contribution, no commitment.

[gokeefe]

All they've done is keep a 1971 business model on life support with paltry iterations such as Acela to put lipstick on a pig.

I don't think this statement accurately reflects Amtrak's business model at all. Congress kept a passenger rail operator on life support until modal shifts and population growth along with congestion brought about renewal of the business.

Amtrak managed to survive decades of urban flight that took place after they were created. Now they have had a decade (or two) of urban growth and they are in a position to take advantage of it.

I would also note that Amtrak has been particularly successful at reviving intra state routes which most railroads abandoned long before their long distance services.

This in of itself is a drastic change which Amtrak has consistently pursued from Day 1. I find their tenacity in this respect impressive. I'm of course excluding abberations such as Harley's Hornet and the like.

That's the reason for my question/hypothesis. How do you serve most states better than today in a highly useful way?

I think "most states" is the wrong way to put it. "Most people" seems more appropriate.

I would object to #2 in the OP as it is absurd. Conflict with host railroads and commuter agencies is a natural outcome of market forces. The balance of power between Amtrak, its hosts and its tenants relies on the current regulatory configuration. Your proposal fundamentally alters settled law that would call into question the future viability of the agency.

It's one thing to propose change it's another to propose change while also forcing the agency to support other host or tenant railroads using rigid political guard rails. That is the same type of overregulation that the ICC once imposed on the private lines with regards to ticket prices, service changes and labor management.

The fundamental answer to your question probably lies in major expansion of HSR service. Find air markets that are vulnerable to competition from rail and poach the hell out of them.

Assuming Virginia moves forward as planned, California keeps going, Las Vegas is locked up and Florida is all Brightline/Virgin I think Atlanta is the fortress I would lay siege to. Interestingly enough that's exactly where they are right now.

I would take out an RRIF loan for Atlanta - Charlotte and do the same for Atlanta - Miami on CSX. It's probably the only move that could truly make Brightline nervous at this point.

[Jeff Smith]

Cleaned up extraneous political nonsense. Keep it to the topic.

[SouthernRailway]

In this political environment, where nothing gets accomplished, I would just ask for an increase for funding for Amtrak and try to get Amtrak to do what it could to increase ridership, without being micro-managed by Congress.

I don't see either privatization or a huge increase in funding happening.

Better not to be too idealistic.

[wigwagfan]

7. Equipment can only be that commercially available or in service world wide today...no Rader DMU.

Wait, no Rader DMU? Then what the heck goes by my house (okay, 3/4ths of a mile away) 36 times a day? :-D

[SRich]

Just request for more stable funding of 3 billion a year for capital programs and 600 million for operating loses on LD and rest.