Version XXX - This Was The Week That Was - An Amtrak Saga
November 30, 2001
Another milestone, Week 30. Who would have thought your humble correspondent could remember Roman numerals this high?
- One of Washington’s Wise Men that reads this space was kind enough to pass along his thoughts regarding Amtrak, Jr.
The gentleman graciously pointed out that perhaps “Amtrak, Jr.” wasn’t the best shorthand method to refer to the successor of Amtrak as we know it today. He made a reference to a success story of the past, Chrysler Corporation, that received a huge federal bailout in the 1970s (For many of us who remember that saga, it seems like only yesterday when Lee Iacocca was the whiz kid of Detroit.).
When Chrysler received the aid and was able to right itself, it appropriately referred to itself as the “New Chrysler Corporation.” Many will recall what a hit that was as everyone watched agog as this lumbering giant was finally able to stand up straight and rid itself of many harmful corporate practices.
The Washington Wise Man offered the thought that the “New Amtrak” was a better moniker to use instead of “Amtrak, Jr.” as “New Amtrak” better describes the hopes and dreams of many of us for a bright future for passenger rail travel in the United States.
The gentleman was right. “New Amtrak” it is. “Amtrak, Jr.” can fade away.
- From the No Good Deed Goes Unpunished Department: Can you imagine that politicians and bureaucrats in Washington could hold a grudge? Can you imagine that games are played to “get even” when someone trespasses against you?
This morning, the Transportation Conference Report went through the House of Representatives in about 10 minutes, without any prior reading of the document. The report is the conclusion of the joint committee of the House and Senate that irons out differences in bills once original versions have been passed in both legislative bodies. The Senate will probably vote on it on Monday.
In the report was the funding for the Department of Transportation, and, as part of that, the funding for the Amtrak Reform Council. Here’s the rundown: In FY 2001, ARC funding was set at $750,000; in FY 2002, the House approved $450,000 and the Senate $420,000. Now, the conference report came back with a level set at $225,000.
There has been speculation this is “payback” for the Amtrak finding declaring Amtrak insolvent. Isn’t that convenient? You’re a powerful member of Congress and don’t like something an august body of patriotic citizens did, so you cut their funding. Boy, that will solve a lot of Amtrak’s problems.
Are there any ostrich farms conveniently close so we can learn to put our heads in the sand and think the danger will go away?
The word is that the $225,000 will be enough to get the ARC through April when its final report is due.
- United Rail Passenger Alliance has some new charts and graphs of Amtrak data to share. Titled “Analysis of Amtrak System Indicates Long Distance Trains, Not Corridors, Are the Moneymakers,” this information, all based on internal Amtrak data, can be found at www.trainweb.com/urpa
Other information on the web site includes an update to the Selden Plan and examples of what could be expected during the first six months of a Selden Administration at Amtrak.
- US Airways, one of the operators of the Boston-New York City and New York City-Washington air shuttle has just announced a new price reduction. The US Airways shuttle flies in and out of Reagan Washington National Airport.
If you purchase a highly restricted GoFares round trip shuttle ticket from either endpoint to New York City, the fare is as low as $138, round trip, or $118, round trip if purchased on the airline’s web site.
The normal, one-way, walk up shuttle fare is $200.00.
Just for comparison, Amtrak offers three walk up fares between Washington and New York City.
Acela Express - $144.00 one way, or $288.00 round trip. Still $112.00 cheaper than the round trip for the shuttle walk up fare, but $170.00 more expensive than the restricted advance purchase web site air shuttle fare.
Metroliner - $125.00 one way, or $250.00 round trip. Still $150 cheaper than the round trip for the shuttle walk up fare, but $132.00 more expensive than the restricted advance purchase web site air shuttle fare.
Acela Regional (former NE Direct) - $69.00 one way, or $138 round trip. Still $262.00 cheaper than the round trip for the shuttle walk up fare, but the same price for the restricted advance purchase air shuttle fare if bought through a travel agent, and $20.00 more expensive than the restricted advance purchase air shuttle fare if bought on the airline’s web site.
This is an indication that the airlines are not going to let Amtrak go unchecked in the shuttle market. At some point it will not be surprising to see the Acela Express fare almost the same as the shuttle fare with some type of mild restriction.
Reports have been that passengers have been filling the Acela Regional (former NE Direct) trains, but leaving the more expensive Acela Express trains half full or less. For a difference of $150 to save a total of less than an hour round trip, many are deciding to keep the money and settle in a coach seat for a few more minutes.
- Everyone with an opinion is coming out of the woodwork, all offering expert advice on what to do about the future of passenger rail in the United States.
The regrettable part about all of these opinion writers is that the majority of them are coming to flawed conclusions because they are depending on flawed data from Amtrak and its supporters.
Again, the canard that only corridors are desirable and can be profitable has been said so many times that otherwise intelligent people believe this nonsense.
As a result, articles from every point in the political spectrum are all basing aspirations for the future on a narrow focus, and failing to look at the broad picture of a true national passenger rail system.
URPA is doing its part by publishing on our web site actual Amtrak data that disproves the abject silliness that only corridors can make money and are a good investment for the future. Just the opposite is true.
As said before, Benjamin Disraeli said there are “lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Take a look at the set of numbers on the URPA web site and see how, when used truthfully, they tell the story that a balanced national system is not only desirable, but able to support itself.
There’s that notion again: Passenger rail in the United States able to be self-supporting. Check out charts and come to your own conclusions. Projections suggest system fixed costs and operating expenses could be met with a long distance train network offering service approximately four to five times that of Amtrak’s current network.
That’s not an impossible goal to reach if the focus shifts from corridors only to a national system.
Demand is there. Capacity can be there. Join the two together and you have a healthy network of passenger rail that can include conventional corridors, corridors with trains reaching speeds of 125 mph or more, and lots of long distance trains to many places.
It’s not a dream. It’s a reality that Amtrak’s own number prove can happen in less than 10 years.
That concludes another week in the 90 day period to redefine passenger rail in the United States.