 | NARP blogTRAINS: A travel choice Americans want |
» Visit the Official NARP Website
Long Distance trains…the way to go!
Friday, March 31, 2006
I’ve had the pleasure of riding a couple of long distance trains lately. I really don’t like to fly, but sometimes have to. Like when I went to the NARP Region 10 meeting in Denver last weekend: I needed to be in D.C. for a meeting on Thursday and do some work Friday morning. So I was doomed to be crammed in a window seat for a three and a half hour flight from Washington to Denver. Not much fun.
My return trip, however, was on the California Zephyr. On board, I enjoyed spending time in the lounge car, watching a couple of television programs I’d missed during my travels and had burnt to DVD (sidebar: get a Recordable DVD machine if you can; I’m totally addicted!), and just watched the scenery go by. I also got a chance to talk to my fellow passengers. One thing I noticed both on this trip and my trip the previous weekend on the Texas Eagle and Capitol Limited is that more people my age—that’s late 20’s/early 30’s—are riding in sleeping cars.
I struck up a conversation with one such couple on the Zephyr. They were going from Denver to Galesburg to visit family. I asked if they were railfans. “No,” he said, “I’m not a buff or anything, I just always seemed to never be able to get through O’Hare and slept on the floor one too many times.” He went on to say how much more pleasant the train was…and that it also afforded a quiet, even romantic getaway for him and his girlfriend.
Contrary to what our Administration says, the California Zephyr was far from a train that “nobody rides to place(s) nobody wants to go to.” It was full and not just between endpoints—there were good “turnovers” at Ottumwa, Osceola and Galesburg.
Just some quick thoughts for a Friday afternoon.
-Dave Johnson
Posted by NARP
Tags:Washington Post Column and Chat Today
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Washington Post Business Columnist Steven Pearlstein in today’s column discussed obstacles to adequate infrastructure and observed that “it is only a matter of time before bottlenecks reemerge, either at the ports themselves or on the railroads and highways that connect them to the rest of the country.” I sent him a message documenting that the railroad bottlenecks are with us today. My message said, in part:
“Back on January 16, 2002, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials unveiled two major reports, Freight Rail Bottom Line and Intercity Passenger Rail Transportation. Of particular relevance here, the first of those documented a $53 billion shortfall between the estimated investment needs of the rail freight industry over the next 20 years and the industry’s ability to raise capital in the private sector. And those investment needs are just what would be necessary to maintain rail’s existing market share. [The passenger report concluded that about $17 billion needs to be invested in intercity passenger rail corridors over the next six years, and $43 billion over the next two decades.]”
He responded by asking why the railroads can’t use private capital to do all the investing necessary. That, by the way, is the same question a Hill staffer asked me two weeks ago in referring to the freight railroads’ current quest for a 25% investment credit to encourage railroad infrastructure investment. My response included this: “In a nutshell, two different objectives: management’s goal is a profitable railroad at reasonable risk, while public policy needs much larger rail capacity.
My full answer is at the bottom of the transcript of his on-line discussion this morning (also includes a link to his column).
—Ross Capon
Posted by NARP
Tags:NARP Regional Meetings
Ross and I have been attending NARP Regional membership meetings over the past three or four weekends. Other than being a bit road weary, we’ve had a great time and I think this year’s meetings have been the best ever. Each meeting has featured strong NARP member attendance, excellent speakers, and a real sense of the fact that our movement is growing.
The NARP Region 8 meeting in Havre last weekend got some media coverage. NARP President George Chilson was quoted extensively in an article in the Havre Daily News.
We thank all the members who attended and participated in these meetings. Ross and I do enjoy getting out on the road and meeting with membership—and enjoying a train ride or two!
-Dave Johnson
Posted by NARP
Tags:Excellent Pro-Amtrak Op-Ed Piece
Our friend Colin Peppard at Friends of the Earth has written an excellent op-ed piece about Amtrak and the need for more and better funding for Amtrak. It’s appeared first in the Fredericksburg Free Lance Star. Be sure to read it, and don’t forget to visit Colin’s blog, linked to the right in our blogroll.
-Dave Johnson
Posted by NARP
Tags:Chairman Laney’s comments last week
Thursday, March 23, 2006
NARP has received many questions about Amtrak Chairman David Laney’s remarks about route restructuring both during last week’s Senate Appropriations hearing, and similar comments right after the hearing to reporters, with whom he also discussed the search for Amtrak’s next CEO.
A Reuters story by John Crawley began: “Amtrak, under pressure to cut costs and reform its business practices, will reevaluate its 15 long-distance trains this year and could restructure that service, the railroad’s board chairman said on Thursday.” Crawley also wrote: “Laney said the railroad has a ‘mixed bag’ of prospects for its presidency, including ‘a number of potential candidates from the air industry.’ He did not identify any aviation executives but said they may be appropriate due to challenges faced by airlines to restructure their operations…‘We’ve got to take the entire long distance route structure and our trains on each of these routes and put them on the table and scrub them, and decide whether they make sense from an operating standpoint - whether they are as relevant as they were 20 or 30 or 40 or 50 years ago,’ Laney said.”
An AP story by Donna de la Cruz had this: “Amtrak’s chairman on Thursday said the railroad will scrutinize all of its long-distance routes this year for efficiency and could scrap, reconfigure or add lines as it tries to prove to Congress and the Bush administration that the rail system is reforming itself. ‘There’s nothing, as far as I’m concerned, that’s off the table,’ David Laney told reporters…[Long-distance trains] provide the only rail passenger service to 23 states, according to Amtrak statistics. Laney said Amtrak will study every route and decide on how efficient they are. ‘What we’re trying to do is make it succeed, not take it apart,’ he said. David Laney also told reporters…the board probably will not name a new Amtrak president before mid-May but could consider someone from the airline industry to replace David Gunn.”
David Laney deserves credit for two key decisions, starting with the pick of David Hughes (an early Gunn hire) for Acting CEO. I’d be happy if he got the job full-time: he’s an experienced railroader. In the current political climate, the fact that his entire pre-Amtrak career was in the private sector should be a plus.
Second, Amtrak’s grant request of $1.598 billion plus clear designated uses for an additional $275 million is a sound “ask”. It prompted Senator Murray (D-WA) to observe that the board’s Bush appointees must know something the “ideologues” don’t about the real costs of running a national passenger service.
Possibly, both in terms of CEO selection and route studies, Laney is laying the groundwork to better defend (to the administration) subsequent decisions we might like and the administration might dislike. Obviously, decisions known to be the product of careful study are easier to defend.
On the other hand, the concerns we’ve heard about these comments could be well founded. Or the truth might lie somewhere in the middle—Laney himself is not from the railroad industry, is relatively new to the Amtrak business and may genuinely be awaiting the outcome of a route study before he decides what to do.
In any event, we will be watching closely, and continuing to work to defend the entire system.
-Ross Capon
Posted by NARP
Tags:Amtrak Budget Amendments fail…but its not about the trains
Friday, March 17, 2006
Two amendments to the Senate Budget Resolution that would have raised Amtrak’s funding to $1.45 billion failed. But it really had nothing to do with Amtrak. It had to do with partisan wrangling.
I have several friends on the Hill. They all tell me that partisan bickering is at its worst ever. I’m sure you can see that from your hometown too: on TV, in the newspaper, and even possibly in person.
Like I’ve been telling NARP members at Regional meetings this year, Amtrak and rail transit investment is not a red state issue, its not a blue state issue, its not a rural issue, its not an urban issue, its widely supported. We’ve seen this in several ways: last November’s 96-3 vote for the Lott Reauthorization and major ballot victories for transit in “non-traditional” transit areas like Phoenix, Denver, and Nashville.
NARP members can go to the regular NARP website and login to see how your Senator voted on our new Senate Voting Chart. Resist the urge to attack your Senator for his or her vote. If you want to send a message to them, perhaps say, “I’m sorry to see that partisanship trumped the need to properly fund our nation’s passenger rail system. I trust you will continue to work to fund Amtrak’s budgetary request as the appropriations process moves forward.”
Visit our friend Collin Peppard’s blog at Friends of the Earth to get his take on this.
It’s a busy weekend for the NARP staff: I’m about to leave for Little Rock to speak to Region 9, Ross Capon will be in Baltimore tomorrow to speak to Region 4, and George Chilson is enroute to Detroit to speak to Region 6. Please attend one of these meetings if its in your area!
—Dave Johnson
Posted by NARP
Tags:Senate Appropriations Amtrak Hearing
Thursday, March 16, 2006
UPDATED with links to Amtrak’s funding request
I attended the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies hearing this morning on Amtrak. Amtrak Chairman David Laney presented Amtrak’s Fiscal 2007 budget request at this hearing. Other witnesses were Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta, Acting President & CEO David Hughes, Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph Boardman, and Mark Dayton, a senior economist with the DOT Office of Inspector General.
The Fiscal 2007 Amtrak request is $1.598 billion, plus $275 million in “strategic investment options,” bringing the total implied request to $1.873 billion.
Subcommittee Chairman Christopher Bond (R-MO) chastised Mineta on Amtrak, saying he had hoped to see a budget request supported by a realistic implementation plan. “That was an empty hope.” He said the Administration must be “prepared to implement a reform plan that is supported by the budget.” He noted that the current budget proposal is unrealistic, partly because it completely ignores Amtrak’s debt service payments—“The debt is there and must be paid even if we don’t like how it was incurred.”
Murray remarked that, “despite the fact that all members of the Amtrak Board were appointed by President Bush, their request is some $700 million more than the Administration requested. Apparently those Bush appointees know something about the national network and Amtrak’s costs that the ideologues don’t.” She also noted that rebuilding of the Northeast Corridor, while necessary, has consumed ”just about every dollar of increased appropriations we have provided in the last few years” to Amtrak. She further noted that ridership growth has been stronger outside the Northeast Corridor, citing these FY 2005 increases—Chicago-St. Louis 14%, Empire Builder 9%, St. Louis-Kansas City 7% and Cascades 4%.
Senator Robert Bennett (R-UT) again complained that the California Zephyr did not do enough business in Salt Lake City, and joked to Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL), “I’ve been trying to give you Utah’s Amtrak subsidy for years.” Bennett said he thought “less than a dozen passengers a day debarked in Salt Lake City, maybe 120 a week.” Amtrak’s on-line state fact sheet suggests the number is 254 a week, but the central point—as we noted a year ago—is that Utah is uniquely served at bad hours of the day (Salt Lake City 3:30 AM eastbound, 11:45 PM westbound); other states along the route do much better.
Mark Dayton (DOT-IG) attacked subsidies that go to Amtrak First Class passengers. While he did acknowledge progress in reducing food and beverage losses, he said first class sleeping car service is “still a problem. We find any subsidy for First Class service unacceptable and have yet to see even a pilot program for its elimination.”
NARP sees this comment as a stalking horse for outright elimination of the national system, particularly when coupled with the IG’s recommendation that “power to determine [Amtrak] services [devolve] to the states.” States tend to focus on intra-state needs, which is why NARP and Amtrak consistently have said that the national network trains should be a federal responsibility.
We issued a media advisory with more detail this afternoon, which is viewable on our regular website.
UPDATE Download the following from the Amtrak website:
2007 Grant and Legislative Request
David Laney’s testimony.
—Ross Capon
Posted by NARP
Tags:Harris Poll: Americans want more trains!
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Isn’t it nice when you are cleaning up after the holidays and find a present that you haven’t opened yet? Rail advocates got one such treat last week! Harris Interactive, which conducts The Harris Poll, did a survey of U.S. adults and found that a vast majority want more train service—both freight and passenger.
According to the survey, “The modes of transportation which the largest numbers of adults would like to see ‘have an increasing share of passenger transportation’ are: Commuter trains (44%)(and) Long-distance trains (35%).”
Americans want to see more freight move by rail as well. Again, according to the survey results, “Freight railroads (63%) come far ahead of all other modes that adults would like to see have an increasing share of freight transportation.”
Read the full news release from Harris here. Be sure to cite these survey results when contacting your elected officials!
—David Johnson
Posted by NARP
Tags:Baltimore Sun, GAO, and Amtrak’s Revenues and Losses
The Sun’s nice report on Amtrak’s relook at putting a hotel in Baltimore Penn Station was marred by this statement: “The national rail service is struggling with declining revenues and operating losses that are exceeding $1 billion annually and are projected to grow by 40 percent within four years, according to the Government Accountability Office.”
The GAO’s reference to operating losses growing 40% within four years is based on the incorrect assumption that management is doing nothing to reduce its losses. (The “exceeding $1 billion annually” phrase of course includes depreciation, which was $557.9 million in Fiscal 2005.)
While total revenues have been declining as Amtrak has exited various business, the net loss (including depreciation) declined in Fiscal years 2002, 2004 and 2005. The Fiscal 2005 net loss at $1.05 billion was 10.6% below the Fiscal 2001 loss of $1.18 billion.
Amtrak’s “passenger-related revenues” have not been “declining.” The Fiscal 2005 level actually was 3.6% above the FY 2001 level. However, Fiscal 2005 also was slightly below that of Fiscal 2004—primarily the loss of Acela Express for several months, but also the impact of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and the discontinuance of Three Rivers and part of the Palmetto. To illustrate the importance of Acela Express, September 2005 revenues (last month of the fiscal year) actually were up 12% compared with the year-earlier month.
—Ross Capon
Posted by NARP
Tags:Cedar Rapids Gazette: “America needs passenger trains”...but…
The Cedar Rapids Gazette ran a sort of hybrid editorial March 3, “The little engine that can’t.” On the one hand, they begin, “America needs passenger trains.” But they continue that “it’s time to let this patient [Amtrak] die and resurrect a passenger train service that can thrive.” They offer no specifics, just this generalization at the end of their editorial: “America needs its passenger trains to run—in a business model that works.”
Incongruously, they argue that states like Iowa stand the most to lose from letting Amtrak continue to live: “Train advocates in Iowa should not want the status quo. Without changes, the first victims of increasing financial problems of Amtrak are likely to be long-distance trains like the California Zephyr…”
I wrote to them yesterday, expressing appreciation for their opening statement and overall goal, but noting that Amtrak is making changes, and taking them to task for confusing annual operating grants and with debt, and for implying that the FY 2005 operating loss caused the debt to increase. Actually, Amtrak has taken on no new debt since June 2002, and total debt declined 8% from September, 2003, to December, 2005—from $3.9 billion to $3.6 billion.
Speaking of Amtrak’s debt, they are proposing $100 million in debt restructuring as part of their Fiscal 2007 federal grant, so they can get out from some of the very high rates they are paying. Secretary Mineta apparently does not understand this because he testified before a House appropriations subcommittee on March 7 that Amtrak was paying interest “at Treasury rates, as low as you can get.” That’s simply not the case.
—Ross Capon
Posted by NARP
Tags:“Just buy them a discount plane ticket”...if you can
Amtrak critics argue that you can “just buy everyone a plane ticket” cheaper than the per-passenger “subsidy” of an Amtrak long distance train (per-passenger subsidy, of course, being a flawed argument to begin with). Nevermind that discount air service is provided to only a fraction of America’s airports and only about 100 cities that Amtrak serves. The “proliferation of discount airfares” makes long distance trains unnecessary! Right?
The real question is what will travelers do if the much-vaulted model of discount air travel comes crashing down? The end appears to be in sight.
“Mr. Boyd (Michael Boyd, president of the Boyd Group) notes the low-cost carriers are more constrained in how much they can raise their fares because their success - and profits - are dependent on extremely price-sensitive travelers, many of whom would rather stay home on the couch than pay too much to see relatives. Add to this the fact that Southwest would also be losing money were it not hedged out until 2009, and Boyd believes that analysts will be talking about a very different “Southwest effect” come 2007.
“They’re living on borrowed time, and they know that,” says Boyd, referring to Southwest. “The Southwest model today doesn’t work unless someone’s paying 30 percent of your fuel.
Earlier this week, Southwest announced increases of $2-$10 in the price of its tickets to account for fuel prices.
The full article from the Christian Science Monitor can be read here.
—David Johnson
Posted by NARP
Tags:Welcome to the new NARP Blog!
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Welcome to NARP’s Blog! Our primary purpose here is to provide easy access to news stories and releases that we think are important, starting with last week’s Harris Poll indicating strong support in the general public for increased reliance on rail for carriage of both passengers and freight. There will also be commentary from time to time on current issues.
If you have a comment, complaint, or suggestion about something you read here on the site, please send it to us. When e-mailing, please indicate if you do not want your comments publicized.
Again, welcome!
—Ross B. Capon, Executive Director
—David R. Johnson, Assistant Director
Posted by NARP
Tags: rail blogging, first post©2010 National Association of Railroad Passengers | » NARP website
» Recent Entries
» Blogroll
» Terms of Service for Comments
You may register to post comments in response to NARP-generated postings on the Blog. By registering you agree 1) that all comments will be relevant to the respective posting and 2) not to post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, or that violate any laws. We reserve the right to permanently block postings from any user who does not abide by the above terms. NARP reserves the right to remove, edit, or move any messages for any reason.
» Monthly Archives
