As to the question of privatization of long hauls, ask someone who has gone through this complete exercise. Thank you, I’m glad you asked. In 1990 a group of us took VIA Rail Canada apart and put it back together again on paper. This was not an amateur or academic exercise, but a real-world study to determine the future of rail transportation in Canada. The result? Over a eleven year period, the VIA long-hauls (national system) could be privatized and turn a modest profit. But, this only occurred if their version of the NEC between Toronto and Montreal stayed in government hands. Other details include radical changes in the way the company was operated by senior management, and even more radical changes in marketing practices. It also required new bi-level equipment and the operation of MORE daily trains, not tri-weekly or less trains. The project did not go forward because of the necessary huge capital investment needed and a change in federal government from conservative to the present liberal government.

The same can be done with Amtrak, but it will take far beyond 2002 to do it. And, before it can be privatized, the Amtrak corporate culture must undergo radical surgery to harmonize the company and eliminate many hurtful and wasteful things which now occur on a daily basis.

Also, Amtrak ownership will have to be structured similar to that of the old Pullman Company. Own equipment and motive power, have reservations and marketing, but leave everything else to others, including the NEC. The NEC should remain a government agency because it operates more like a highway than anything else.

Dr. Adrian Herzog of URPA has created a thoughtful White Paper on the future of passenger rail in our country, and he envisions tax credits and a number of other issues, including perhaps cheerful participation by the managements of present freight railroads. Dr. Herzog put much effort into this work, and it is an admirable document, in fact, the only long-term plan now on the horizon.

If others with to think differently than Dr. Herzog, they should put the same time and effort into possible solutions. This could only have a positive effect, with new ideas being openly debated.

As someone who in the regular course of business has conversed with more than one freight railroad president on the subject of passenger rail, it is my opinion – and please read the word opinion again – that the senior management of the major freight railroads today do not wish to become any further involved with passenger rail beyond a commuter capacity. When a workable national play is drawn where the freight railroads can participate on a basis they can justify to their stockholders, then they will come to the table. Before that, they will stick to what they know best now, which is hauling boxcars.

From a non-emotional, business standpoint, the present senior management of Amtrak has a series of problems which must be addressed immediately. These problems were created by their past actions since 1993. Who will answer these remains to be seen.

The next president of Amtrak must be a risk-taker, who is willing to put in place sound principals and be a student of history. Amtrak’s history is spotty at best, and to know where the company has failed before will help in not making the same mistakes again.

When Graham Claytor became president of Amtrak, he did so as the capstone to his career. He had “been there, done that” in about every capacity in the railroad industry, and therefore, was able to go to Amtrak and use his personal credibility to bolster the entire company.

Someone of his stature, age, and wisdom needs to do this again. It us unlikely someone from the freight industry will view moving to Amtrak as a career enhancement on the way to higher position. Too many risks that are too great and too many chances of failure are present. The best candidate will be someone who knows innovation and is far-sighted, but also does nothave a personal agenda for the extended future.

The next president of Amtrak should be someone who is willing to put a lifetime of talent and wisdom into stabilizing Amtrak, and then start it to grow again. Amtrak’s problems will never be solved by cost cutting, but only by orderly growth through revenues from passenger miles, state or regional tax support, and other ways, such as a rational plan to increase express business in such a way everyone can accept it.

Congess appointed a Blue Ribbon panel earlier this year which came up with several good ideas about the future of Amtrak and passenger rail in general. What has happened to this document? Was it only a “feel good” exercise that will never again see the light of day?

Let’s don’t destroy Amtrak now. Let’s work with our politicians to make instrumental change and have a long-term view of solving passenger rail problems. Let’s stabilize and take what we have and build from there. Let the regional needs be met by their own constituencies, and let’s together face the national challenges.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Bruce Richardson
Jacksonville, Florida