United Rail Passenger Alliance

Ladies and Gentlemen,

This is a word for word transcription of the letter (originally on United States Senate letterhead), dated Friday, October 31, 1997 and simply addressed,

Amtrak Board of Directors
National Railroad Passenger Corporation
60 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002

Dear Board Members,

We are writing to inform you of our grave concerns over a report in today’s Wall Street Journal regarding an offer proposed by Amtrak to the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees in an effort to avert a threatened strike next week.

Based on this report, Amtrak has offered to increase wages provided Congress will give Amtrak additional federal subsidies to cover the higher wage expenses. If this accurately states Amtrak’s negotiating position, Amtrak’s posture is not only inappropriate, but it is ill-advised and unrealistic. Further, if this report is accurate, we believe the Board has overstepped its authority by promising wages based on future Congressional action.

Any and all federal funding allocated to Amtrak is to cover the operating and capital expenses identified in Amtrak’s FY 1998 Federal Grant Request. If Amtrak has been unsuccessful to date in obtaining its full Federal Grant Request, how can the Board rationally expect to receive even more subsidies to pay for new wage commitments?

For twenty-seven years we have listened to Amtrak officials discuss their proposals to turn the railroad into a viable operation. The reported negotiation posture does little to reassure us that Amtrak is committed to becoming a financailly sound and efficient passenger railroad.

We are working to find agreement on a comprehensive legislative authorization and reform package that will enable Amtrak to increase operating efficiencies and reduce costs. The provisions which we are championing are those requested by Amtrak. Your reported actions hold the potential of negating months of our work on Amtrak’s behalf.

Sincerely,

(Signed)

Senator John McCain
Senator Trent Lott
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Senator Jim Jeffords

Now, everyone can see an exact replica of what URPA has been reading and thinking aloud about. This letter obviously states that the senators named above are both unhappy with the current board’s posture, and are unwilling to put any more money into Amtrak as it stands today. Clearly, some type of meaningful reform and changes will have to take place for leaders of this Congress (and ask any knowledgeable political consultant or professional, this Congress will stay much the same after 1998 elections) to move towards helping Amtrak further. The leaders of the Senate are willing to discuss change and future funding, but based on realistic notions, not unbridled continued federal handouts.

Rail historians and those who follow passenger railroad service as a business rather than a nostalgic hobby will recall that a similar scenario happened in Canada to VIA Rail Canada in 1989. The management of VIA (all Canadian federal government appointees) constantly “submarined” the federal government and expected the government to give them an unlimited amount of annual funding.

And, you must note, Canadians as both a peoples and government are far fonder of passenger rail than those of us south of their border. So, Brian Mulroney’s government took drastic action, and slashed VIA funding by huge amounts, resulting in a loss of about a third of the VIA system, and all of the daily trains outside of their version of the NEC, the Windsor/Sarnia – Toronto – Montreal corridor.

VIA survived, but today is a mere skeleton of itself, operating rehabbed Canadian Pacific stainless steel low-level equipment. Talk with any VIA or Canadian union official, and they envy Amtrak.

Politicians are all alike, no matter where they come from in North America. Even with the two very diverse systems of government between the U.S. and Canada, a government scorned is one that strikes back by slashing a budget.

History is meant to be learned so it is not repeated.

Bruce Richardson