Vol. 2, No. 18 - July 29, 2005
- It’s hard to know where to begin. When you’re dealing with such monstrous ideas, the possibilities are endless for reasonable people to respond.
Those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it.
Utter stupidity.
Unnecessary meddling.
Misdirected good intentions (to be polite about it).
But, perhaps the only real way to say it is, “masterful ignorance.”
Yes, we’re referring to United States Department of Transportation Inspector General Kenneth M. Mead’s Report on Analysis of Cost Savings on Amtrak’s Long Distance Services, released on July 22, 2005.
We commented on this travesty two weeks ago, when an initial draft was reported in the news media. The actual report itself is even worse.
Mr. Mead and his cohorts in the IG’s report writing office have produced a report that has little basis in reality, no basis in business acumen, and manages to offend just about everyone involved except those true devotees to transit travel that somehow think traveling for hundreds of miles in a transit seat is a worthwhile endeavor.
Mr. Mead, who, as stated before, should be inspecting paper clips instead of long distance service at Amtrak, since he clearly is not prepared to offer proper analysis of Amtrak’s operations, has suggested that Amtrak could save up to $158 million a year by eliminating all amenities on long distance trains (but not corridor trains), including dining cars, lounge cars, sleeping cars, and baggage cars.
The bit of idiotic thinking, according to Mr. Mead’s report, would not affect coach passengers, who would ride trains anyway, and enjoy such benefits as taking meals at restaurants in stations along the route, perhaps purchase box lunches to be delivered to the train, or in extreme cases, buy prepackaged food from a cart that moves down the aisle, a la airline style. Imagine this: Mr. Mead envisions a three or four coach car train for the California Zephyr. It’s January in Colorado, and it’s lunchtime. The Zephyr makes a station stop, and the conductor announces (presuming Mr. Mead thinks keeping the public address system is a worthwhile cost) that the train will make a 30 minute station stop for a meal. How many happy passengers are going to bundle up in hats and coats and detrain to go into a station for a meal in sub-freezing temperatures? For that matter, how many stations are currently large enough to hold all of the passengers from three or four coaches, much less have a working restaurant with seating that can handle that many people in a short period of time once a day? Considering the location of most Amtrak stations in cities and towns, what chances are there that ANY restauranteur would want to start a business in an Amtrak station? Mr. Mead envisions the NEC, not the real world of the national system.
Mr. Mead’s thinking wants to eliminate all onboard employees except for conductors (or trainmen, as he likes to use transit parlance). Apparently, while Mr. Mead is worried about cost, he has no concerns for crew or passenger safety, by eliminating all safety personnel in the form of car attendants. Many people forget, just like airline attendants, that coach and sleeping car attendants are there for safety reasons as well as service reasons.
Also, apparently Mr. Mead has forgotten that, unlike transit equipment, long distance coach doors to the platform do not open automatically. If all of the car attendants are eliminated and only one conductor is on a three or four car train, who is going to open doors at station and terminal stops?
The flaws in Mr. Mead’s plans are nearly endless. This plan has all the potential to even be more ill-starred than the Mercer plan during the stewardship in the mid-1990s of Tom Downs, the first of the Transit Trio of Mr. Downs, George Warrington, and present President and CEO David Gunn. The Mercer plan, perhaps one of the worst pieces of corporate consulting ever hatched, presumed that if Amtrak ran fewer trains when it was convenient to run them, that passengers would still keep trains full. Wrong. Passengers stayed away in droves, losses skyrocketed, and Amtrak’s current downward fiscal spiral began.
Here’s another thought: Mr. Mead’s ill-conceived plans mirror almost exactly those of the private railroads, as they were desperately trying to get out of the passenger business in the 1960s. First, the railroads downgraded the trains by eliminating food and beverage services and sleeping cars. Then, they slashed coach service to the point where even the cars weren’t cleaned. The result was a wholesale abandonment by passengers because Americans like to travel in comfort, not Soviet-style austerity. Keep in mind that last statement, the freight railroads were trying to get rid of their passenger services. Amtrak was created as a rescue vehicle for the railroads. Now, Mr. Mead wants to go through the same routine.
Finally, the question begs, why is Mr. Mead attempting to substitute his obviously flawed business judgement for that of Amtrak’s board of directors? The District of Columbia Corporation Code, under which Amtrak is chartered, vests that authority with the board of directors, not the shareholder (the Department of Transportation, Mr. Mead’s employer). One must wonder, absent an allegation that dining cars and sleepers are ILLEGAL, why Mr. Mead is wasting federal resources on something that is clearly outside his well-defined jurisdiction?
- Because there is so little institutional memory at Amtrak (too much management and employee turnover, and too few critical records maintained), most don’t know that in the past there have been similar proposals to turn all trains into nothing more that busses on steel wheels. All of those proposals were eventually soundly rejected, even after some disastrous experimentation.
Here’s the best part: Mr. Mead’s proposal was sent to the Amtrak Board of Directors for comment. Chairman David Laney replied courteously that many points made by Mr. Mead were valid, and further study was needed.
But, witness the current excellent effort Amtrak is making with the Empire Builder, based on higher passenger service, improved sleeping car amenities, and better dining car service beginning in August. Who is going to win this battle? Probably not Mr. Mead.
- The other exciting news this week is the introduction and passage in the Senate Commerce Committee of an Amtrak reauthorization bill by Senator Trent Lott and other co-sponsors. This is the most comprehensive overhaul of Amtrak and its expectations in many years. Included in the bill are provisions for private competition to supplement Amtrak, mandates for better accounting systems for the company, and a separation of funding for train operations and capital infrastructure (NEC) improvements.
While the major disappointment of the bill is that it did not separate the NEC into a different entity from the operating company, overall the bill appears at first glance to be an excellent move in the right direction. There will more indepth analysis of the bill in future editions of TWA.
- No good deed goes unpunished. Last week in TWA, credit was given to the Transit Trio for the extension of the Sunset Limited from New Orleans to Florida. An alert reader, who was on the first Sunset Limited coast-to-coast run, pointed out that this occurred in 1993, at the very end of the late Graham Claytor’s stewardship as President of Amtrak. We apologize for the error.
- URPA has updated and upgraded our Internet web site, located at http://www.unitedrail.org. Included in the changes are a section featuring biographies and photos of officers, and also a new section featuring editorial use of materials and a speakers bureau. You are invited to view the changes and updates.