What will Trump mean for Amtrak?

Trump has said he wants to invest in infrastructure, so is there a possiblilty he'll strengthen Amtrak's status? Or will he dissolve the Whole thing and leave future passenger rail in the hands of private enterprise?

He actually mentioned railroads in his inaugural address yesterday, but not Amtrak. I think he's a New Yorker who understands the value the NEC brings to the table, and he doesn't seem to be terribly ideological so I doubt he's going to be pushing to eliminate the rest of the system on purely budgetary or "limited government" grounds. OTOH, there's no telling what Congress might do.

USRailFan wrote:Trump has said he wants to invest in infrastructure, so is there a possiblilty he'll strengthen Amtrak's status? Or will he dissolve the Whole thing and leave future passenger rail in the hands of private enterprise?

My GUESS is that he'll streamline (LOL, no pun intended!) operations, and ONLY if that fails will he consider privatizing passenger rail. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Donald Trump is a BUILDER, and he's proven himself to be rail-friendly (If you don't believe me, do some research for yourself, and go back farther than last year please!). Personally, I have a good feeling about the Trump Administration as far as passenger/freight rail!
Peace,
Jonathan

markhb wrote:. OTOH, there's no telling what Congress might do.

How much will the "Rs" try to oppose the president's agenda ?

If there's one thing about Trump that folks ought to recognize by now it's that he MEANS business. The minute he won the election he wasn't wasting ANY time putting together a cabinet. In fact the only President-Elect to put together a cabinet faster than Trump was George H.W. Bush. And many of the people he picked were "held onto" from the Reagan Administration. On Friday he signed 4(?) executive orders (including 2 rather big ones) with more to come in the upcoming week. Some thought that he would roll back on a lot of his "rhetoric", but more than 2 months after the election he clearly doesn't think he's "got it in the bag". If he did he'd probably just go "well I won so whatever". NOT SO! He might not be the most eloquently spoken man to be elected to public office, but you can tell that he just wants to get the job done with whoever he thinks is best to handle the job. So when the time comes to build build build new rail infrastructure don't doubt that he would push hard for at the very least critical projects (Gateway, bridge replacements, etc.) and other proposals such as high speed rail.


Personally I think the citizens of SE CT and RI should petition Trump to issue an executive order cancelling the Old Saybrook-Kenyon bypass. Just about no one wants it in their backyard (and I can't say I blame them for what little benefits it'll bring).

http://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/01/19/t ... t-funding/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Eliminate funding for Amtrak – $519 million annually

Heritage calls for eliminating operating subsidies to Amtrak immediately, and phasing out capital subsidies over five years. The irony is that Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor service turns a profit, while the operating subsidies prop up a lot of service to far-flung, less populated areas. Cutting the subsidized portion of Amtrak operations isn’t actually popular with GOP lawmakers representing those parts of the country."

For what it's worth, there's the West Side Railline in Manhattan. Between 72nd Street and Pennsylvania Station, it's below street level in what was originally an open cut. Over time, parts of it were covered over by streets and buildings. To the point: om a couple of places, Trump wanted to buil;d over the railroad. but he didn['t interfere with the railroad. He had the buildings builot ocer the tracks so that Antrak's trains go underneath.

railfan365 wrote:For what it's worth, there's the West Side Railline in Manhattan. Between 72nd Street and Pennsylvania Station, it's below street level in what was originally an open cut. Over time, parts of it were covered over by streets and buildings. To the point: om a couple of places, Trump wanted to buil;d over the railroad. but he didn['t interfere with the railroad. He had the buildings builot ocer the tracks so that Antrak's trains go underneath.

No. He NEVER had a choice other than to build over the tracks. The right of way along the east side of the old rail yard there was owned by Conrail, which sold the route to amtrak. Amtrak sold the air rights above the tracks to trump's investors so the buildings could go over the tracks. Amtrak also sold air rights at nearly ever plot along the old west side line between 'freedom tunnel (72nd street) and the Penn station box tunnel. The route was an open cut up that was only built over in the last 20 years.

The real companies owning those west side buildings over the tracks that bore the trump name quickly removed his name after his vulgar nature came to light in october.

So I really wouldn't include this as evidence of anything. It is congress that will either maintain or de-fund Amtrak.



Conrail, then CSX, still owned the high line to the south, which the city later bought to convert to parkland.

https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/ ... ent=safari" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
$40:$1 private to public infrastructure spending ratio...NO mention of rail from Paul Ryan.
Beginning with a paltry $3.5B, and up to $25B (cash/tax credit)fed, the rest of the trillion 'pledged' by private interests? Or are we in for a Japanese Railways type situation of massive federal hardware investment with a private outcome?
Heavy Duty laundry list on the NEC is about $31B. Who's the sponsor on that casino?
Amtrak's funded by a House appropriation, with the 'freedom caucus' in a victory lap. Does he plan to actually write something into the budget?
Should be interesting to watch. I just hope Trump's not seduced by privatization schemes resulting in a British Rail type collapse.

Here is a link to the Heritage Foundation website for their "2016" recommendations

http://solutions.heritage.org/the-econo ... 1485082492" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

privatizing highways is a key factor in their plans plus reduction or elimination of public transportation which is just wasteful.
do a little research - lots of little tidbits on transportation and the Heritage view

rdgrailfan wrote:Here is a link to the Heritage Foundation website for their "2016" recommendations

http://solutions.heritage.org/the-econo ... 1485082492" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

privatizing highways is a key factor in their plans plus reduction or elimination of public transportation which is just wasteful.
do a little research - lots of little tidbits on transportation and the Heritage view

If I am reading this correctly, they just want to remove Mass Transit from under the "Highway Program" which could mean it could be moved to another area...

On the Heritage site search Amtrak. The search will lead to a variety of articles that reference the need to eliminate the wasteful and unproductive elements of public transportation.
The funny part to the whole "platform" is turning the interstate highways over to privatization as a method to control cost.

markhb wrote:He actually mentioned railroads in his inaugural address yesterday, but not Amtrak.

To expand upon Mr. Mark's observation, here is more context into which President Trump used the term railways within his Inaugural Address:

I will fight for you with every breath in my body -- and I will never, ever let you down.

America will start winning again, winning like never before.

We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will bring back our wealth. And we will bring back our dreams.

We will build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our wonderful nation.

We will get our people off of welfare and back to work -- rebuilding our country with American hands and American labor.

We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and hire American.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:

markhb wrote: wrote:I will fight for you with every breath in my body -- and I will never, ever let you down.

I'll admit that I had to laugh at this rick-roll of America!

We will build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our wonderful nation.

Honestly, other comments aside, this is the one area I'm hopeful on.

We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and hire American.

Well, we'll start on that perhaps after the inauguration

NH2060 wrote:So when the time comes to build build build new rail infrastructure don't doubt that he would push hard for at the very least critical projects (Gateway, bridge replacements, etc.) and other proposals such as high speed rail.

He'll be pushing hard against the vehemently stated platform of the current GOP leadership. They've made it quite clear money has to be CUT from other parts of the budget to fund ANY infrastructure. As far as lining up private investors, who would want the NEC in it's current state, needing $31B (2014 figure April Trains article)in SGR & capacity improvements just to keep pace with current and future traffic?

I can see a private operator (Virgin, SNCF, maybe some unknown USA operator)wanting to take over Acela services after the infrastructure can be trusted to be in a bonafide state of good repair to ensure profitability.