Passenger Trains > Bipartisan group of ten senators writes Amtrak

https://www.hayspost.com/2019/04/14/moran-urges-amtrak-to-continue-support-for-routes-that-connect-rural-communities/

The senators (eight Democrats and two Republicans) voice their support for the long-distance network, and they close with a few pointed questions for Anderson:

"We look forward to working with you and receiving assurances of your commitment to the national network. For these reasons, we request your response to the following questions by April 29, 2019.   

• Amtrak customers have already experienced a deterioration in service as Amtrak pursues efficiencies. A recent report in Trains Magazine[1]indicated that Amtrak utilizes accounting mechanisms to inflate costs associated with the national network, by charging long-distance and state-supported routes for costs which may be more appropriately charged to the Northeast Corridor. We are concerned that Amtrak’s accounting is intentionally obscure and is causing a false inflation of costs of lines outside of the Northeast Corridor.  Please provide the accounting methods used to determine the costs referenced.


• Does Amtrak plan to truncate or otherwise alter any of the long-distance train routes? If yes, then: 

• Which routes are under consideration for alteration? 

• Would any of these routes be altered in such a way that they would fall under the definition of State Supported routes, requiring states to find local operating funds for existing service? What discussions has Amtrak had with states, if any, that lead it to believe states would be willing to assume this financial obligation?


 

• Amtrak says it wants to introduce new short distance routes with daytime service and multiple frequencies. What specific routes is Amtrak considering? What discussions—if any—has Amtrak had with host railroads, stakeholders, or government officials regarding these additional frequencies?  

• Amtrak claims that public demand for its long-distance interstate service is declining. Yet the number of passengers using the total long-distance network in FY 2017—the last year without major service interruptions—was 10.6% higher than it was eight years earlier in FY 2010. It was also higher than in all but three of the last eight years. This growth occurred in spite of worsening on time performance, capacity reductions and other changes to service levels. On what basis does Amtrak claim that demand is declining for long-distance trains? 

• Amtrak has made a number of changes impacting long-distance routes in 2018 that may reduce revenues and services, such as the removal of ticket agents at a number of stations across the country.  Why did Amtrak calculate ridership totals based on weekly boardings on routes that do not run daily?  When will Amtrak restore or otherwise alter assistance it provides passengers at stations based on Congressional directives in the Fiscal Year 2019 Appropriations Act?
 

• Amtrak has expressed concern at how the dispatching practices of some host railroads has led to deteriorating on-time performance (OTP). Does Amtrak have a strategy to improve OTP and better interface with the host railroads? Are there policies that would assist Amtrak in this endeavor? 

• Sleeper cars provide approximately 40-50% of the revenue on many long-distance trains. Please provide us with an update on the 25 sleeper cars that were scheduled to be delivered in 2015 and 2016. Please provide a timeline for completing this order and putting the new cars into service?

Our constituents – in both large and small communities rely on Amtrak service.  We look forward to continue to work with you to preserve and expand the long-distance and state-supported routes, and to reviewing your response to our questions.


Paul Wilson
Arlington, VA

I am glad they brought up the creative accounting issues.

Excellent letter. It will be most interesting to read Amtrak's responses.

   Ross Rowland

What repsonse ? The one to Feb 22nd letter hasn't appeared.  



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/19 17:41 by joemvcnj.

Just because some senators write Amtrak a letter doesn't  mean that Amtrak has to reply.
You want to get anything through the Senate you have to get Sen Mc Connell behind it.
So how does Sen Mc Connell feel about Amtrak? Because I believe that Amtrak does not serve Kentucky at all.

Didn't PRIIA require Amtrak to create firewalls between NEC, state corridors, and long distance costs for reporting purposes?

Both operating and capital outlays.

For precisely this reason?
In 2009?

Posted from Android

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So how does Sen Mc Connell feel about Amtrak?
> Because I believe that Amtrak does not serve
> Kentucky at all.

Well, Amtrak does have 4 rail stations in Kentucky:
Fulton-served by the City of New Orleans
Maysville,  South Portsmouth, and Ashland-served by the Cardinal
Not much, but more than some of Senator McConnell's peers.
BSB 

And I'll add a question:  why is revenue from private car owners no longer being sought to help defray operating expenses?

BigSkyBlue Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PHall Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So how does Sen Mc Connell feel about Amtrak?
> > Because I believe that Amtrak does not serve
> > Kentucky at all.
>
> Well, Amtrak does have 4 rail stations in
> Kentucky:
> Fulton-served by the City of New Orleans
> Maysville,  South Portsmouth, and Ashland-served
> by the Cardinal
> Not much, but more than some of Senator
> McConnell's peers.
> BSB 

Okay, but how does Mc Connell feel about Amtrak. Needed or just another entitlement?

And McConnell's wife is Secretary of Transportation - Elaine Chao.  

I think this husband and wife power couple should ride the Cardinal west out of Washington, D.C. some Friday morning at 11 a.m. and end up in S. Portsmouth about 12:30 a.m. or Maysville about 1:15 a.m. or Cincinnati at 2:45 a.m. - all these stations are unmanned stations.  Experience could be a good teacher...........

All Aboard!

Thank you Mr. Wilson for posting this important and timely report.

It is now time for Amtrak management to explain their strategies and prove their contention that LDT travel is truly in decline. 

Finally, some Congressmen are catching on to this guy.  And by a bi-partisan group at that! (even if a lopsided one)



I expect Anderson will reply, but we can be sure it will be full of his usual BS language-- like: "we are pursuing cost reduction and efficiency to seek sustainability and provide a contemporary  
service model consistent with customer facing ideas consistent with a glide-path to self sufficiency"  Get ready to gag.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/19 19:15 by ronald321.

Hey another_view -- When you guys at Amtrak HQ complete your response to this bipartisan letter from the Senate, please post a copy here for our review. Thanks man!

Very simple....no other country in the world has a self sufficient passenger railway system...so .that is a non-starter.....the stated position of Anderson's boss's administration is to eliminate Amtrak. So expect nothing from this twit.  

It almost reads like an Interstate Commerce Commission directive from years ago.
When you squeeze higher ticket prices out of a puposely limited consist, yes, ridership will probably go down.
 

LX15840 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Very simple....no other country in the world has a
> self sufficient passenger railway system...

That would be incorrect, although "almost no other country" might be true.

The current administration is busy fighting other fires. I doubt Amtrak's future will change after the elections in 2020, because we're dealing with two political parties: wimps and liars.

However, there are entities that dislike passenger trains, and if you say that they might be influencing policies, that's a more realistic claim. Don't forget the Class I railroads, who'll benefit the most from the elimination of LD trains.

All this is moot if there aren't sufficient people available, like Graham Claytor in the past, to provide leadership. Even these "pro-Amtrak" Congressmen are ineffective in the long run.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just because some senators write Amtrak a letter
> doesn't  mean that Amtrak has to reply.
> You want to get anything through the Senate you
> have to get Sen Mc Connell behind it.
> So how does Sen Mc Connell feel about Amtrak?
> Because I believe that Amtrak does not serve
> Kentucky at all.

Senators who write to Anderson expect Anderson to answer. McConnell has nothing to do with it. (The Senate President is actually Pence). Amtrak has an authorization and an appropriation with a discrete national network account.. 

With what occurred regarding the SW Chief situation last year, with Congress completely over-riding the Administration's intended Amtrak budget at least the last couple of years now, with a House subcommittee letter received by them on February 22 seeking direct answers, now a letter from Senate members seeking perhaps even some more direct answers, also many individual's and advocacy group's letters, Railway Age, Trains Magazine, etc. writers......   I tend to think unless they are completely numb by now they must in some way sense there are actually some winds blowing out there.   They seem to view it as their challenge to see how ignorant, unresponsive or even arrogant they can possibly be and get away with it.

This is a great letter...Let's see what Propellar Head does about this....

It’s time they are called before Congress since Anderson and company don’t want to respond in writing to these salient questions.