Passenger Trains > Joe Biden's hometown newspaper: Propping up Amtrak "Bad Business"

Editorial: It's bad business to prop up Amtrak
The News Journal (Wilmington, DE)
August 26, 2016

> We understand and share Vice President Joe Biden’s affinity for train
> travel. Any Delawarean who has ridden Amtrak down to D.C. or up to
> New York or Boston knows that it can be a far less stressful
> alternative to driving.
>
> But the news Friday that the U.S. Department of Transportation will
> loan Amtrak $2.45 billion to upgrade the Northeast Corridor stopped
> us in our tracks. You can groan at that pun as you groan at the
> amount of federal money going into a system that continues to bleed
> money.
>
> A press release from December announcing Amtrak’s fiscal 2015
> performance does not even include the word “profit.” The railroad had
> a net loss of $307 million. In fiscal 2014, Amtrak lost $227 million.
> It lost around $300 million in both fiscal 2013 and 2012.
>
> The problem does not lie with the hard-working men and women who help
> some 30 million passengers complete their trips each year.
>
> The problem is with the owners of the Amtrak corporation, our federal
> government. It’s time the feds seriously explored the idea of
> privatizing America’s passenger rail service. If freight can be moved
> without the feds at the controls, why can’t people?
>
> Back before commercial air travel was available and affordable to the
> masses, passenger railroads across the country were publicly traded
> companies or owned by a select few moguls. If you’ve played Monopoly,
> you know some of those railroads.
>
> Passenger rail service took a back seat to airlines starting in the
> ‘50s. Then, airline deregulation in the 1980s created more
> competition and lower tickets prices, leaving passenger rail service
> even further behind.
>
> Yet the federal government subsidizes Amtrak to the tune of more than
> $1 billion a year. Similar subsidies have been happening since 1972.
> We’d say the return on the taxpayers’ investment has been poor, to
> put it kindly.
>
> Still, if nearly 20 million people are traveling on Amtrak through
> New York, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., each year, it would seem
> that a viable airline-like business model could arise, especially on
> the well-traveled Northeast Corridor.
>
> In England, as in much of Europe, passenger trains operate like
> airlines and have done so since the country privatized the industry
> in the late 90s. Twenty-eight companies compete for routes and
> passengers in England alone. Those companies pay the government for
> use of the tracks and other infrastructure.
>
> It is not a perfect system, to be sure. Some rail companies receive
> government subsidies. Still others pay surplus money back to the
> government.
>
> But let’s imagine privatizing only the Northeast Corridor to start.
> If not one but three companies put high-speed trains on those tracks,
> they would have to compete with one another with regard to ticket
> prices, scheduling and train amenities. The business is there to be
> had, if only we can pry it away from Amtrak, the big engine that
> can’t.

LINK:

It's bad business to prop up Amtrak

Gene--how many states basically support their own passenger service? Amtrak may or may not operate these!

So you copy and pasted an editorial whose objectivity couldn't be trusted further than we could throw it. What exactly was your point in starting a whole topic over this?

blah, blah blah.  Why give this writer any credibility by posting this drivel here?  He clearly doesn't know what he is talking about.

​How many stories has he done on how much money the government is 'bleeding' elsewhere?     Bueller????

Exactly.  The NEC needs $2.45 billion in taxpayer loans to prop it up....but it should be privatized??

A strong advocacy...which passenger rail does NOT have...cannot afford to ignore what it sees
as its opposition.

I disagree with many of Gene's posts and with the editorial.  That said, I see nothing wrong with Gene posting the editorial.  The reality is that there are many out there who oppose federal investments in Amtrak (or any passenger rail system, for that matter).  I think it makes passenger rail advocates stronger to be exposed to opposing viewpoints and consider how to respond to them.

One could also note that there are some TO members who would agree with the editorial.

We could spam this board everyday with unobjective editorials that are otherwise readily available to us with a few Google keystrokes. Thank goodness most of us do not. And I would hope to high heaven that those inclined to burnish their rail advocacy credentials don't source their exposure to opposing viewpoints from recycled editorials C&P-ed into Trainorders. It takes a lot more than that as you know.

Uh, guys, this is an online discussion group. You're seriously complaining that a post isn't "objective"?

Hate to tell you, everyone has an agenda. "We're objective and unbiased" is what people say when they want to convince you to avoid listening to any other opinions.

The editors of the editorial are apparently unaware of the unmentioned mode of transportation favored by just about everyone, everywhere in the USA, everyday -  the highway and our POVs.

Nomad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're seriously complaining that a post isn't
> "objective"?

Trainorders is not a clearinghouse for the nation's editorials... 

ColdRainAndSnow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nomad Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You're seriously complaining that a post isn't
> > "objective"?
>
> Trainorders is not a clearinghouse for the
> nation's editorials...                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               So, don't read his post already. And, it is not necessary for you to spead your gloom around so freely either.  Finally, I think we would all agree that the editorial is ignorant.  AA

Stanford White
Carmel Valley, CA

> > I think we would all agree that the editorial is ignorant.

So then why not spare us of its ignorance altogether by not posting it in the first place? There's a thought!

the fact that people still think a national system can be profitable is HUMOROUS no matter who's posting the editorial ... once again if passenger was profitable the freight railroads wouldn't have bailed out of their passenger business like a car sinking in flooded waters 

Editorials composed by stupid authors as we see above should be circulated so that more people are aware and can attack them.
Passive resistance doesn't work in these cases.

Biden's affinity for train travel, another joke on the taxpayer.  Almost every weekend he is flown on AF2 from Andrews to Wilmington and back on Monday to DC.  There has even been some trips where his wife was already at Wilmington but because she can't fly alone on AF transportation he flew to Wilmington just to pick her up.  It cost over $30,000,000 A YEAR flying him back and forth. Yes he certainly enjoyed the quick Amtrak trip when he was Senator Biden.  Did Congress authorize the loan or is it being bypassed by his boss as it is frequently done.

​Sooner or later face the fact long distance passenger train travel other than for touring is a lost cause and should be terminated. That is the only way operating losses will begin to recede. This isn't Europe or Japan where density justifies passenger rail service.

As as usual, you are wrong about everything, the last time being your describing NJTs Christie Republican fare hikes and fare levels as single digits and modest:

Biden's affinity for train travel, another joke on the taxpayer.

No - the Secret Service requested he stop and he was disrupting Acela departures.

​Sooner or later face the fact long distance passenger train travel other than for touring is a lost cause and should be terminated. That is the only way operating losses will begin to recede. This isn't Europe or Japan where density justifies passenger rail service.

When you are ready to produce a profit and loss statement for the interstate highway system and establish an interstate highway route closing commission let us know. Then get ready to drastically hike the federal gas tax AND for reimbursement of the SIXTY TWO BILLION DOLLARS of transfer payments from general funds over the last 10 year to bail out the highway trust fund.

Until then, all you stand for is socialism for me, not for thee.

It doesn't say who wrote the editorial?
I wonder if it came from somebody at USA Today?
It's amazing how many newspapers are controlled by Gannett;
http://www.gannett.com/brands/

That terrible editorial might crop up in some other newspapers!

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As as usual, you are wrong about everything, the
> last time being your describing NJTs Christie
> Republican fare hikes and fare levels as single
> digits and modest:
>
> Biden's affinity for train travel, another joke on
> the taxpayer.
>
> No - the Secret Service requested he stop and he
> was disrupting Acela departures.
>
> ​Sooner or later face the fact long distance
> passenger train travel other than for touring is a
> lost cause and should be terminated. That is the
> only way operating losses will begin to recede.
> This isn't Europe or Japan where density justifies
> passenger rail service.
>
> When you are ready to produce a profit and loss
> statement for the interstate highway system and
> establish an interstate highway route closing
> commission let us know. Then get ready to
> drastically hike the federal gas tax AND for
> reimbursement of the SIXTY TWO BILLION DOLLARS of
> transfer payments from general funds over the last
> 10 year to bail out the highway trust fund.
>
> Until then, all you stand for is socialism for me,
> not for thee.

it does NOT matter what the profit and loss statement is for the interstate highway system.  if we stopped spending BILLIONS on our interstate system,  it would have a devastating affect on our domestic commerce and subsequently make our economy much WORSE than it is now.  consequently, there would be a LOT of politicians voted out of office during the next election that would be replaced by those who WOULD spend money on our interstate system.

oh, and i think the n.e.c. and amtrak l.d. are important and deserving of receiving BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars to fund.  now, what do the majority of voters think about funding amtrak? 

66 

 

So, why are people opposed to opening the NEC to competitive train providers?

Posted from Android

Here is the editorial I would write:

Nowhere in the world does any form of transportation, be it trains, airplanes, or motor vehicles, pay its own way. The steel wheel on the steel rail can be the most energy-efficient. safest, and stressless, way to move large numbers of people from A to B. Publicly funded transportation is the price we pay for living in a civilized society, and train travel is, in fact, the most civilized as you get to see scenery galore and meet new people in the dining car. Mobs of people in a hurry to get everywhere does not speak well for the characteristicsof the economy that seems to require that or the motives of the people who are hell bent on hurrying. The need for speed has demonstrated palpable negative effects on the physical and mental health of humanity. And I have a real problem with all of the Amtrak money spent on the Northeast Corridor in preference to the rest of the country. Here in Palm Springs, we have three trains a week to New Orleans and three a week to Los Angeles at inconvenient times in the middle of the night. A major factor is Union Pacific, aka You Pee, who has insisted on major upgrades for more service so as not to interfere with its precious freight. Public ownership of all railroad tracks would put an end to that nonsense. People are more important than things.

The key to "making America great again" is a passenger rail network with frequest service everywhere. Think of the jobs that will be created building and maintaining the infrastructure and operating the system.

The people who oppose passenger rail for whatever reason, be they ideological and fiscal conservative, NIMBYS, or enviro-maniacs, are engaged in a fundamentally enterprise that must be stopped by any available means.  The time has come for major spending on rail, eliminating environmental impact reports for anything related to rail service, and divesting the courts of jurisdiction to make orders stopping or delaying rail projects.