United Rail Passenger Alliance

Volume 3 Number 38

1. Cooperation for a common goal is considered to be a good idea. The common goal of this exercise is for the freight railroads to run Amtrak trains in a timely manner. Chip Jones, the very good transportation reporter for the Richmond (Virginia) Times-Dispatch wrote last week that CSX is working with Amtrak to improve on time performance.The crux of the matter is this: CSX has a contractual obligation, agreed upon when Amtrak began operating in 1971, to operate all passenger trains on a priority basis, with clearances over freight trains. This is the deal the freight railroads made with the devil to be relieved of regulatory requirements to run their own passenger trains and turn over all operations to Amtrak.

   Thirty-five years later, the railroad industry is in a much different stance than it was in 1971. Instead of being in a survival/shrinkage mode, America’s railroads today are bursting at the seams with business of every type and description, including a refreshing clamoring for new commuter rail projects in and around cities of every size.

   The railroads that did everything that could be done to get unused or lightly used trackage off of the tax rolls now suddenly find some of those then-redundant main and secondary main lines would be very profitable and useful in today’s railroad world. In the 1960s and 70s, railroads were looking at a bleak future; today, our society has advanced enough to recognize each form of transportation in our domestic transportation matrix as an important part of the mix, and that includes both freight and passenger railroads.

   The scenario today is that most Class I railroads, such as CSX, Norfolk Southern, CN, BNSF, CP, and Union Pacific have as much freight business as they can handle with their present infrastructure. And, most economists agree the railroad industry is poised for continued growth.

   Therefore, adding passenger trains, or accommodating current passenger trains is a low priority on the railroad totem pole. But, the law says the railroads have to accommodate Amtrak.

   Which brings us to what reasonable people usually do … they sit down and come to a compromise that helps each party. In this instance, CSX is requesting longer transit times for Amtrak trains, such as the Auto Train, and the Florida service trains.

   Amtrak apologists may harrumph about such a thing; today’s schedules are generally hours longer than historic passenger train schedules over the same or similar routes. And, it is not improper to wonder how railroads in World War II managed to handle all of the wartime freight movements along with the wartime passenger train movements, plus the extra troop trains, all without the benefit of computerized signaling and using paper dispatching.

   The best answer to that? That was then, and this is now. Before the wave of mergers began after World War II, there was far more main line track in this country, operated by dozens of railroads, not just seven Class I railroads and a number of smaller, regional railroads. At the beginning of WW II, much more track was double tracked on the main lines, instantly providing much more capacity. Very few cities had one dominant carrier; as an example, goods from the West Coast to Chicago could originate on the Union Pacific, Southern Pacific, Great Northern, Northern Pacific, or Santa Fe, instead of now just UP or BNSF.

   Reviewing the long range plans of all of the major railroads clarifies the infrastructure improvement plans of each railroad, some of which are already in progress, and others in final planning stages. The purpose of the freight railroads is to make money for shareholders, and the only way to do that is haul more freight. The only way to haul more freight is to have more capacity. Along with that increased capacity will be opportunities for new passenger rail service for both long distance and regional trains.

   As all of this capacity is being built, the short term answer is for Amtrak and its host freight railroads is address the realities of today, and figure out how to run trains in a timely manner, which may include some schedule changes and longer trip times. When passengers know what schedule to expect, they accept the proposed trip time. When passengers are constantly abused by late trains, they become unforgiving and grumpy. Longer schedules for months or a few years is a small price to pay for passenger satisfaction and the ability of Amtrak to advertise itself as reliable domestic transportation.

2. In mid-August, a comment was made about West Coast socialist rail advocacy groups which support Amtrak. Now that all of the information is in, it is apparent that comment was in error. Tony Trifiletti, the president of All Aboard Washington explains.
   

   When I saw Bruce Richardson’s characterization of certain West Coast rail advocacy groups as “socialistic,” I bridled a bit. You can call me a lot of things, but I get really angry if you call me a socialist. Them’s fightin’ words.

   While most rail advocacy groups support Amtrak unconditionally, we at All Aboard Washington (formerly the Washington Association of Rail Passengers) support Amtrak but with a jaundiced eye. We understand Amtrak is the only game in town, so there is a certain degree of reflexive support. But many of us understand Amtrak has done a less than stellar job over the past 35 years, and not all of that is connected to a lack of federal funding. Amtrak is a government bureaucracy, and bureaucrats as a rule can’t think like entrepreneurs. In fact it’s not fair to ask them to, for they lack the training and the mind set to function outside the world of government.

   Like most rail advocacy organizations, half our members are nostalgia buffs, members of the Greatest Generation, who tend to be New Dealers. Another large group are railfans, who tend to have strong ties to organized labor. A few of us are transportation professionals – veteran, retired and undiscovered – who try to think outside the box and often pound our heads bloody on the walls of that box.

   Our journey to an out-of-the-box solution to America’s passenger rail problems began at an annual regional meeting of Pacific Northwest rail advocacy organizations held in Portland in February 2000. Our chairman, Chuck Mott, had spent over a decade with the Northern Pacific and Burlington Northern railroads and had been an incorporator of Burlington Northern Air Freight, now BAX Global. Chuck knew the package business inside and out, and upon viewing Amtrak’s presentation on revenue projections for the mail-and-express initiative, he saw immediately the Amtrak people were dreamers and lacking in good sense with no understanding of how difficult it would be to develop the level of business they projected, let alone figure out its profitability or lack thereof.

   Then we heard a presentation on Amtrak’s “glidepath to solvency,” and at that point I attempted to introduce reality into the discussion, an attempt remembered today as “Tony’s temper tantrum.” I meant no animus toward the people at Amtrak, but it was patently obvious their glidepaths and initiatives were doomed to failure because they couldn’t get beyond their bureaucratic mind sets. I made a terrible prediction as to what would happen, and it was with no small amount of horror I watched my prediction unfold over the ensuing years.

   In April 2000, a group of us met at the Pizza Bank restaurant in Kirkland, Washington to discuss the possible demise of Amtrak and how we could preserve our Cascades Service trains in the event of its dissolution. We were officers and directors, yet we knew our sentiments were not reflected by a majority of our membership. Present were myself, Chuck Mott, J. Craig Thorpe and Dr. Hal Cooper. Craig Thorpe is America’s leading railroad artist, and Hal Cooper, an engineering consultant, is the father of the Trans-Texas Corridors – but in their original configuration as a rail project.

   At the Pizza Bank we agreed something needed to be done, and we thought getting all the West Coast rail advocacy organizations in one room would be a good start. We needed to hold a conference.

   That conference was set for San Carlos, California on September 12, 2001 – and everyone remembers what happened the day before. Only those of us who came to the Bay Area by Amtrak’s Coast Starlight got there. With most of our Oregon counterparts stuck on the ground and our California counterparts at their emergency stations, the conference was postponed. Fortunately, those of us who came by train left by train, and the trains were running despite a national emergency. That incident alone pointed to the criticality of a national rail system.

   The conference was finally held in July 2002 in Sacramento. Unfortunately, what I encountered was a sea of denial. Despite the Amtrak Reform Council report, only the few of us from All Aboard Washington grasped the possibility that Amtrak could be in real danger. For most of the attendees from Oregon and California, it was as simple as the Democratic Party riding to the rescue or the backing of the invincible AARP. Some accused me of disloyalty to Amtrak, arguing that the only purpose of the conference should be to redouble our support of the beleaguered railroad. Others accused me of being unnecessarily alarmist. I left that meeting both dismayed and depressed.

   In the summer of 2004, Chuck Mott came up with an idea for a pilot project that would hand the Southwest Chief back to the BNSF for a five year experiment. At about this time, Tom Till, who had been Executive Director of the Amtrak Reform Council, was working in Seattle for the Discovery Institute as manager of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation grant. Tom was holding a series of conferences at the Rayburn House Building in DC to discuss various privatization alternatives to Amtrak, and Tom thought enough of Chuck’s concept to permit me to present it at his September 2005 conference. Tom Rader of Colorado Railcar eviscerated the concept with one pithy statement, but it was a valid comment – and it sent me back to the drawing board.

   The critical idea I took away from Tom Till’s conference was the “virtual” railroad companies of the UK privatization, who lease their trains, outsource their employees and run a railroad out of a small room with a few people, a computer and a bank account. Based on this concept and aiming for a grand design, Chuck, Craig and I wrote “A Privatization Paradigm for Returning Intercity Passenger Trains to the Class I Railroads”. We have vetted this document through two passenger rail organizations, and initial reactions have been positive. (For those who would like to read the document and join our discussion, just request a copy via e-mail at tonytrif@msn.com.)

   All Aboard Washington today is in the process of restructuring its board by bringing in outside directors, and we are searching for grant money to fulfill our mission in Washington state. We will soon be reaching beyond our current 500 members in a massive recruitment drive. We have taken the first steps in a long path, and we’re eager to see where it leads.

   Tony Trifiletti President, All Aboard Washington

3. Have you noticed the Sunset Limited is still not operating east of New Orleans? Various reports keep floating into the URPA nerve center here in Jacksonville, but still no sign of a train coming down the track. Presumably, Amtrak is still saying the dog ate Amtrak’s homework, so it can’t run the train.
4. Alex Kummant has now officially been in his new office as President and CEO of Amtrak for 11 days. Yet, all of this time, nothing has changed. After all, it has been 11 whole days. What’s taking so long?Here’s a little secret: it’s going to take a while before anything happens. Some are impatient, saying the “Bush management team” hasn’t accomplished much, or has even gone backwards.

   Take a chill pill.

   Ending literally decades of corporate abuse and hanky-panky takes time, and it can’t be accomplished over night. Most business professionals measure changes in corporate culture in terms of months and years, not in days and weeks.

   Until the arrival of Mr. Kummant, there has been no “Bush management team” at Amtrak, but merely a board of directors appointed by Mr. Bush which has had to contend with an enormous, entrenched corporate bureaucracy that is unaccustomed to emitting any positive reaction to anything offered by the board of directors. The mercifully departed David Gunn was hired by the board of directors appointed by President Clinton, not President Bush. And, Mr. Gunn surrounded himself (as many high level executives commonly do) with people he felt he could trust from past working relationships. The management team inherited by the Amtrak board and now Mr. Kummant is a team not of their making.

   The Amtrak Board of Directors has been doing plenty, considering what they inherited, and the management team they had to contend with under David Gunn. The also now-departed David Hughes, as acting president kept the company going until Mr. Kummant could arrive. So, while there may be some cosmetic changes, and hopefully soon some upper level personnel changes, don’t expect anything to happen over night. A thoughtful steward of the company, there for the long haul (and, hopefully, the long haul trains), will first take a corporate temperature, and work with senior planners and numbers crunchers before major overhauls take place. No reasonable person should expect instant results. Those who do are always disappointed.

5. Former Amtrak spokesman, author, shill for high speed rail, and book huckster Joe Vranich has been browbeating the passenger rail countryside again, seemingly hoping to get enough people to listen to him so his latest book will rise higher in popularity on the Amazon.com ratings list. This gentleman, who has made a career about being visible enough to sell his own books, has been urging Congress to dump Amtrak and start fresh with his interpretation of how passenger rail should be in America. It’s always interesting to see how many places Mr. Vranich pops up with the same song, but to a slightly different tune.