Passenger Trains > Politico portrays Anderson as dismissive, condescending

LONG DISTANCE, NO FUTURE?

Amtrak CEO Richard Anderson sounded off in an interview with NPR this week, suggesting that he does not see the famed long-distance routes as being important to Amtrak's future. "Americans live in a very different way and all the growth in our country has come in urban corridors like the corridor from Boston to New York,” Anderson told "Here and Now". “If we're going to deal with congestion, growing population and the carbon footprint of automobiles, Amtrak is the best answer for inner-city transportation in a 200 to 300-mile market.”

Regardless, he said, the railroad is also searching ways to serve rural communities and the vocal group of people who appreciate “the beauty of going 45 miles an hour on a train for a couple of days."

-Politico, Dec. 4, 2019

He's right on. It's not that America doesn't need LD trains; it's that America needs corridors more.

This isn't new. Congress pushed this in the Passenger Railroad Rebuilding Act of 1980. Somewhere I still have the FRA report that Congress mandated. 

Where does that fool get the idea we want to go ( or actually do ) 45 mph on long distance trains ??

Killing the LD train does nothing at all to finance corridors. That is like shutting down lightly used interstate highway in God's country to do lane expansion in populated corridors. 

The SW Chief rivals the NEC in average speed east of KC. 

200-300 mile market - then Congress should legislate all NEC trains be segmented and balkanized just as he wants to do to the LD routes. All trains from Boston must terminate in NY or Philly. All trains from DC must terminate in NY or New Haven. All trains from Virginia must terminate in NY. SInce he is too stupid to undestand the concept of overlapping corriors, make him eat his words, or else terminate the $750 million annual subsidy to the "profitable" NEC.

"railroad is also searching ways to serve rural communities"
- Really ? They have been doing their inception in 1971



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/19 15:26 by joemvcnj.

ctillnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He's right on. It's not that America doesn't need
> LD trains; it's that America needs corridors
> more.
>
> This isn't new. Congress pushed this in
> the Passenger Railroad Rebuilding Act of 1980.
> Somewhere I still have the FRA report that
> Congress mandated. 

Well, at least you are honest. By saying “America needs corridors more” you are saying that we should abandon the transportation needs of small and medium sized communities across the US. So, we need to get people to and from large urban centers “more” than we need to provide a way to get people in smaller communities to medical clinics which trend to be in larger cities. I guess folks in urban areas are “more” important than small town folks.

But, you will say, there are more people in urban areas. True. And, you might ask yourself why. Lack of public transportation is one of many reasons. Not everyone can drive. Or should have to drive. Can’t even get there by bus. Greyhound has abandoned the entire upper Midwest and Rocky Mountain area. Can’t make enough money. Rather than provide the service and make less profit, they would prefer to make more profit elsewhere. Part of the reason for Amtrak’s creation by Congress is to fill the gap.  A national network. 

John Webb
Trinidad, CA

Maybe we will see AARP articles in mainstream media countering this? I’d like to see those stories get down to nuts and bolts of what is going versus a feel good article about nostalgia aboard a train. Agree?

Posted from iPhone

As has been said over and over, overlay the LD routes with corridor trains, but use the LD trains as the trunk line to a) retain the route and b) build from the route. Chicago to Kansas City is VERY competitive and could be made more competitive. Twin Cities to Chicago - could be made competitive once again as a corridor. One could even look at Denver and Salt Lake City or Reno and the Bay Area. San Fransisco to LA is another corridor that should get off the ground, but it is not going to be through the CA High Speed Rail commission, but rather should be via the route of the Southern Pacific Daylights. Not trying to go back in time, but we could learn something from the trains and routes back then (and how they also had more frequencies and ran faster than today). Now that the roads and even skies are getting "congested," passenger train corridors should be able to "work." But guess what is the only train operating over the routes presently - the long distance trains. If Amtrak gets rid of these trains, Amtrak will never get access to the lines back. 

I  have  always  felt  the  driving  fun  ended  at  about  300 to  600 miles.  250?  Easy.  Unless  entering a  mega-city. Study  shows  I am  1/2  as  alert  at  5  hours as I  was  starting a  driving  trip. My  wife will swear to  that!!
  Anyhow, plenty  market  for  passenger  rail of  all types.

Getting on the quote rolodex is extremely important in getting your point across. If you don't speak up and be seen as an authority, you won't have much of a voice.

Reporters, but not opinion writers, often seek factual alternative points of view.

Posted from Android

> Well, at least you are honest. By saying “America needs corridors more” you are saying
> that we should abandon the transportation needs of small and medium sized communities
> across the US.

I would say "the partial transportation needs of a very small percentage of small communities across the U.S." But yes, that's what I advocate. By my count about 190 stations would lose service. Several of them are in my own state. The remaining stations -- the majority of all stations, incidentally -- are already served by daytime trains of less than 750 miles (including commuter services) or have a reasonable likelihood of being served by new corridor trains if we redirect the money and equipment. 

Note that some new cities would be served.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Getting on the quote rolodex is extremely
> important in getting your point across. If you
> don't speak up and be seen as an authority, you
> won't have much of a voice.
>
> Reporters, but not opinion writers, often seek
> factual alternative points of view.
>
> Posted from Android

Spot on.   Who wants to return back to the 1950's anyway?

I for one jus wish he and all the other cronies he has just go and they can get leadership that can actually grow and improve Amtrak, had it under Gunn, wonder why there is not another person who can make Amtrak better and really break even the right way, not downgrading stuff and caim it can happen, everyone in their right mind know that mindset is utter bull crap!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/19 21:25 by ProAmtrak.

JohnM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Getting on the quote rolodex is extremely
> > important in getting your point across. If you
> > don't speak up and be seen as an authority, you
> > won't have much of a voice.
> >
> > Reporters, but not opinion writers, often seek
> > factual alternative points of view.
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> Spot on.   Who wants to return back to the
> 1950's anyway?

Spot on? Oh yeah sure, screw the rest of the country and watch a major disaster happen and everyone would be wondering why the LD Trains went away in the 1ST Place!

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JohnM Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Getting on the quote rolodex is extremely
> > > important in getting your point across. If
> you
> > > don't speak up and be seen as an authority,
> you
> > > won't have much of a voice.
> > >
> > > Reporters, but not opinion writers, often
> seek
> > > factual alternative points of view.
> > >
> > > Posted from Android
> >
> > Spot on.   Who wants to return back to the
> > 1950's anyway?
>
> Spot on? Oh yeah sure, screw the rest of the
> country and watch a major disaster happen and
> everyone would be wondering why the LD Trains went
> away in the 1ST Place!

Some how I doubt the entire country is going to be up in arms over the demise of parts or most of the Amtrak LD network after a national disaster.  (clarification)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/19 18:40 by JohnM.

Anderson also said this in that NPR interviwe:

1.  The host  asked Anderson something to the affect (and I am paraphrasing) --" Last year you wanted to replace the Chief with a 300 mile bus bridge--but, Congress forced you to continue operating the train. What do you say to that?  To which Anderson replied that he is ",,,happy to take the directions of our owners".

To me, this is strong evidence that Congress does not approve of everything this guy dose--and is willing to stop some of his negative actions.

2,  After pontificating all that stuff about LD trains going 45mph, and not being suited to modern taste (and based on a model from the 1920's)--he said this:
"long distance trains are facing the need for new equipment--and that bill starts with a "B".

Aahh!, could this be the real reason he wants to drop LD trains?  namely, spending Billions for new equipment on trains he considers 45MPH relics from the 1920's?
This is something a cost-cutter like him will never bring himself to do. Congress will probably have to force him

.  

 

JohnM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ProAmtrak Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > JohnM Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Getting on the quote rolodex is extremely
> > > > important in getting your point across. If
> > you
> > > > don't speak up and be seen as an authority,
> > you
> > > > won't have much of a voice.
> > > >
> > > > Reporters, but not opinion writers, often
> > seek
> > > > factual alternative points of view.
> > > >
> > > > Posted from Android
> > >
> > > Spot on.   Who wants to return back to the
> > > 1950's anyway?
> >
> > Spot on? Oh yeah sure, screw the rest of the
> > country and watch a major disaster happen and
> > everyone would be wondering why the LD Trains
> went
> > away in the 1ST Place!
>
> Some how I doubt the entire country is going to be
> up in arms over the demise of Amtrak after a
> national disaster.  

Are you saying that you don't run to the train station as soon as a fire breaks out?

I'm not sure Anderson realizes how iconic the long-distance trains are, and how central they are to the very existence of Amtrak for people and legislators across much of the country.

If a flight from Tucson to Missoula is losing money, then cut it and let folks find connecting routes.  That's how Anderson sees the Southwest Chief and pretty much all of the overnight routes.  Nobody gives a rip about a flight as anything but a means of transportation, so let the complainers complain and move on.

A long-distance train route, on the other hand, is a whole different animal.  They have histories, sometimes on-board tour guides, devoted Facebook groups, celebrated anniversaries, and local cachet.  The Empire Builder - to pick one example - may be a money loser, but the residents of northern Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, and Minnesota that live within 100 miles or so of the route tend to have a warm fuzzy feeling about it in a relic-of-the-good-old-days sort of way, even if they have personally never been on it.  Consequently the legislators from those states care about the train, and more importantly for Anderson if the train goes away they have no reason to care about the existence of Amtrak whatsoever. 

If we are to have a federally subsidized passenger rail operation, then political logic dictates that it must serve a majority of legislative districts.  I certainly hope that the next person at the helm recognizes that and is willing to invest in equipment to maintain ALL of the long-distance routes, and maybe even bring a few more back from the dead.

 

GenePoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LONG DISTANCE, NO FUTURE?
>
> Amtrak CEO Richard Anderson sounded off in an
> interview with NPR this week, suggesting that he
> does not see the famed long-distance routes as
> being important to Amtrak's future. 

Fine with me, but what about his boss' supporters who live in the "fly-over states" who have little or no choice when it comes to long distance travel, since most of the tourist destinations are along the coasts. 

Winnemucca Wrote:

> So, we need to get people to and from large urban
> centers “more” than we need to provide a way
> to get people in smaller communities to medical
> clinics which trend to be in larger cities.

Good lord what a red herring.....Getting rid of long distance passenger trains does not keep "people in smaller communities from getting to medical clinics".  There are thousands of "smaller communities" in this country that do not have access to the passenger train network.  The population of those communities seem to be able to get to your far away medical clinics just fine.   With many medical clinics now offering physician visits via web cam/face time, the need to travel to see a doctor is declining.  I guess if there is a real emergency, nothing says life saving like going to an emergency room at 45mph......  

Seems Anderson needs to get out and ride some long distance trains. Her might learn a few things. It is apparent to me that he knows little about Amtrak and is not trainable.