Passenger Trains > What's Up With Overcharges between INDOT and Amtrak?

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/urpa-responds-to-stephen-gardner/

From the article published by Railway Age:

"Gardner coyly asserts that the recent effort by Indiana to free itself from Amtrak overcharging for operating the Hoosier State failed. He’s a little vague on why that occurred, neglecting to mention Amtrak’s actions that undermined it. Perhaps he never read Indiana’s contracts with Iowa Pacific and Amtrak, which guaranteed IP’s failure by promising Amtrak full recovery of its arbitrary and inflated “costs” of operating the train before IP was paid for its customer-facing contributions. No one could succeed under that arrangement. The wonder is not that IP withdrew, but that it lasted as long as it did."

Government is funding black ops with the overcharges.
Amtrak toilet seats cost $600,000.00 each.

79mph Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Government is funding black ops with the
> overcharges.
> Amtrak toilet seats cost $600,000.00 each.

Then imagine how much in political contributions a seat on the Amtrak Board costs!

https://amp.jconline.com/amp/2535733002

Train funding zeroed out...

There were reports last month saying that Mr. Anderson and INDOT officials rode the American View on the Hoosier State to Chicago.  I thought it strange at the time that INDOT made no statements.  Much clearer now with Gardner's comments and the the budget announcement..  Smashing pumpkins again!

Get the hospital trains ready again.

Would not surprise me if Anderson/Garnder told INDOT to cut off funding so we don't have to run this silly train. Indiana certainly has $3.5M to keep running it if they really wanted to. They'll stick hospital cars on the Cardinal as they did during the IPH phase. Then the Daily Cardinal fans, including NARP, will come out more prominently with no clue as how to pay for that.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/19 07:54 by joemvcnj.

In all fairness, Indiana and all of the other states along the Cardinal route should have a daily Cardinal federally funded.

> Indiana certainly has $3.5M to keep running it if they really wanted to.

It sure is easy to spend "other people's money".
INDOT was only part of the funding ... the cities it served were the rest.
 

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In all fairness, Indiana and all of the other
> states along the Cardinal route should have a
> daily Cardinal federally funded.

Why?

another_view Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ts1457 Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > In all fairness, Indiana and all of the other
> > states along the Cardinal route should have a
> > daily Cardinal federally funded.
>
> Why?

Because I say so. About everything on Trainorders is opinion anyhow.

Looking over states that have a tri-weekly train, I believe they all have at least another route which is daily. I guess my equity (between states) argument is too not strong.  However I will give another opinion. If you can't run a train daily, you might as well not run it at all, except if it is a schedule that obviously is needed for a particular day of the week.

 

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> another_view Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ts1457 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > In all fairness, Indiana and all of the other
> > > states along the Cardinal route should have a
> > > daily Cardinal federally funded.
> >
> > Why?
>
> Because I say so. About everything on Trainorders
> is opinion anyhow.
>
> Looking over states that have a tri-weekly train,
> I believe they all have at least another route
> which is daily. I guess my equity (between states)
> argument is too not strong.  However I will give
> another opinion. If you can't run a train daily,
> you might as well not run it at all, except if it
> is a schedule that obviously is needed for a
> particular day of the week.

The Cardinal has been tri-weekly since the era of David Stockman tirades (35 years ago). I am sure West Virginians would disagree that 3 trains a week is as bad as 0, especially now that Greyhound has vanished from most of the Who-villes along the route, and much of the rest of the country.

If WV needs better access, I'd rather see a Quebec-style remote train run tri weekly on non-Cardinal days between Indy and Clifton Forge, and WV should put some skin in the game. That would be far cheaper than adding a full service train 4 more day on a pokey, circuitous route between NY and Chicago.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/19 11:17 by joemvcnj.

Several prior train reports suggested that 850/851 were very poorly patronized for most of their trips.

True, or not true?

If it goes, all fully allocated fixed costs that are assgned to the Hoosier State will then be dumped on the Cardinal.

joemvcnj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Cardinal has been tri-weekly since the era of
> David Stockman tirades (35 years ago). I am sure
> West Virginians would disagree that 3 trains a
> week is as bad as 0, especially now that Greyhound
> has vanished from most of the Who-villes along the
> route, and much of the rest of the country.
>
> If WV needs better access, I'd rather see a
> Quebec-style remote train run tri weekly on
> non-Cardinal days between Indy and Clifton Forge,
> and WV should put some skin in the game. That
> would be far cheaper than adding a full service
> train 4 more day on a pokey, circuitous route
> between NY and Chicago.

You are being a bit harsh on West Virginia. Maybe you think the state got more than its share of Amtrak in the early days and should suffer for that

Two states served by the tri-weekly Cardinal which I think could stand some equity (i.e. daily service) are West Virginia and Kentucky. The daily trains that serve those states only make one stop in their respective states and those are on the edge of the state. In other words those two states are not getting much service. Maybe they need something different than the Cardinal, but whatever that is, it should be daily for fairness.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> joemvcnj Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Cardinal has been tri-weekly since the era
> of
> > David Stockman tirades (35 years ago). I am
> sure
> > West Virginians would disagree that 3 trains a
> > week is as bad as 0, especially now that
> Greyhound
> > has vanished from most of the Who-villes along
> the
> > route, and much of the rest of the country.
> >
> > If WV needs better access, I'd rather see a
> > Quebec-style remote train run tri weekly on
> > non-Cardinal days between Indy and Clifton
> Forge,
> > and WV should put some skin in the game. That
> > would be far cheaper than adding a full service
> > train 4 more day on a pokey, circuitous route
> > between NY and Chicago.
>
> You are being a bit harsh on West Virginia. Maybe
> you think the state got more than its share of
> Amtrak in the early days and should suffer for
> that
>
> Two states served by the tri-weekly Cardinal which
> I think could stand some equity (i.e. daily
> service) are West Virginia and Kentucky. The daily
> trains that serve those states only make one stop
> in their respective states and those are on the
> edge of the state. In other words those two states
> are not getting much service. Maybe they need
> something different than the Cardinal, but
> whatever that is, it should be daily for fairness.

Equity or fairness has nothing to do with it.

reindeerflame Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Equity or fairness has nothing to do with it.

If we are going to have a highly subsidized national system, we do need a bit of fairness.