» Dec 31, 2002: 2002 News Releases

Amtrak Outperforms Airlines During Winter Storms - December 17, 2002
NARP presents Golden Spike Award to Doras Briggs - October 18, 2002
NARP statement on rail trust fund - October 11, 2002
House Committee Votes 35-25 Against Amtrak - September 26, 2002
NARP Letter to House Appropriations Committee - September 26, 2002
Statement on Capitol Limited Derailment and New Speed Limits - August 5, 2002
NARP Unveils Report Urging Passenger Rail Development - June 21, 2002
NARP reacts to Bush "Amtrak plan" - June 20, 2002
May rail, air travel; Another Amtrak hearing - June 19, 2002
Rail Passenger Update - June 7, 2002
Diverse, Bipartisan Gathering Urges Congress to Fully Fund Passenger Rail System in 2003 and Beyond - May 8, 2002
Burch Safety Award Goes to Amtrak's Henry Marcell - April 25, 2002
Rail Passengers Honor Jack Quinn of New York - April 25, 2002
Rail Passengers Honor Senator Hollings of South Carolina - April 25, 2002
More Rail Travelers; More Uncertainty on the Hill - March 15, 2002
January Sees Continued Shift to Rail - February 15, 2002
NARP Letter to Secretary Mineta - February 8, 2002
NARP Letter to ARC - February 7, 2002
Time for U.S. Commitment to Rail - February 1, 2002
Passengers Still Moving Towards Rail - January 25, 2002
NARP: Federal Funding Commitment Needed - January 10, 2002

Amtrak’s performance in the Northeast Corridor in two recent storms once again demonstrated the reliability of modern trains in adverse weather conditions.

On December 5, Washington, D.C., and much of the northeast received the first major snowfall of the year. The peak disruption to travel came during the Thursday morning rush hour. Snow-covered highways, which were blamed for several accidents, quickly congealed with traffic, while Dulles, BWI, and Reagan National Airport were forced to delay or cancel many flights. In contrast, Amtrak operated a normal schedule with only minor delays.

The following Wednesday, December 11, Washington was again hit with an ice storm. On December 12, the Washington Post reported, "Two-thirds of the morning flights at Baltimore-Washington International Airport and one-third of the morning flights at Dulles International Airport were delayed or canceled, according to airport officials. Delays at both airports eased throughout the day, but flights never fully caught up. The impact was minimal at Reagan National Airport, where crews treated runways early and temperatures hovered above freezing most of the morning, said Tom Sullivan, a spokesman for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority."

In contrast, Amtrak operated a normal schedule, with only minor delays to rail traffic (see tables, below)
 

Note -- Train 84, which departs Washington at 8:35 am, was cancelled due to a broken rail on CSX-owned track north of Richmond. As a result, passengers from Richmond were put on a later train, arriving New York at 6:35 pm. (Train 84 was scheduled to arrive at New York at 11:43 am).

The National Association of Railroad Passengers today honors its long-time board member Doras Briggs for her untiring efforts to expand citizen efforts to support our national rail passenger network, and for her efforts spearheading the creation of the California station host program.

The Association's George Falcon Golden Spike Award will be presented to Ms. Briggs at about 6:20 pm today (Friday) at a reception at the California State Railroad Museum (roundhouse) in Sacramento. The reception is held in conjunction with the association's national board meeting Friday-Saturday in Emeryville.

(A second presentation is planned for about 9:00 Saturday at the Holiday Inn San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge after Emeryville Mayor Ruth Atkins speaks briefly.)

The statement below in support of establishing a rail trust fund was submitted today to the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit. A similar statement was filed for inclusion in the record of a joint hearing, "TEA-21: Innovative Financing," held September 25 by the Senate Environment & Public Works and Senate Finance Committees.

Click here to read statement.

This afternoon the House Appropriations Committee voted 35-25 against an amendment to raise Amtrak funding to $1.2 billion (from $762 million), with the 35 "no" votes cast by the 35 Republican members of the committee. The amendment was offered by Rep. Martin Olav Sabo (D.-Minn.), ranking member of the transportation subcommittee.

The committee resumes consideration of the bill -- which covers all forms of transportation--next Tuesday.

The committee dropped a controversial provision to end service on routes with a per-passenger loss over $200, and replaced it with a $150 million cap on total long-distance operating grants. (Since the long-distance network requires at least $350 million, this new provision is crippling systemwide but apparently was seen as less painful because it is not accompanied by a short, specific list of affected routes.)

The fundamental problem is that the House's total funding level -- $762 million--will not support the entire system, and Amtrak cannot slim down to a lower grant level by cutting routes.

As the Senate Appropriations Committee report put it: "Eliminating [the] 18 long-distance trains...would yield effectively zero savings in the first year...Only after 5 years would the elimination of these services yield annual operating savings exceeding $200 million -- an amount that will not even cover Amtrak's anticipated debt service payments for that year. And such savings does not represent even 5% of the identified capital backlog in the Northeast Corridor. This analysis prompts the Committee to reject the notion that Amtrak can shrink its way to financial health."

The Association is deeply disappointed at today's vote, but remains optimistic that the nation's desire for a national rail passenger system will be reflected in what is ultimately enacted.

There are growing indications that a final Fiscal 2003 bill will not be done until early in calendar 2003.

The following letter was sent late yesterday to the chairmen and ranking members of the House Appropriations Committee and its transportation subcommittee. This was in connection with today's full committee "mark-up" of the fiscal 2003 transportation spending bill. The letter elaborates on three points:

• Amtrak needs $1.2 billion;
• The system is already so skeletal that elimination of any major route means total loss of service to entire states and major metropolitan areas;
• The committee's reported threshold, "subsidy per passenger," does not measure relative economic performance of different routes.

To read the letter, click here.

The National Association of Railroad Passengers issues the following statement in the aftermath of the July 29 Capitol Limited derailment and passenger-train "heat orders" imposed by CSX across its system:

"The National Association of Railroad Passengers is deeply concerned about the disruption so many have faced as a result of the July 29 derailment of the Capitol Limited at Kensington, Md., particularly those who were injured, and their loved ones.

"In the wake of that accident, CSX imposed severe 'heat orders' slowing passenger trains to speeds slower than CSX's own intermodal trains. Prior to last week, CSX imposed heat orders systemwide on freight trains between 1:00 pm and 9:00 pm where the temperature has been over 90 degrees (for the second day in a row), or fluctuates more than 40 degrees in a 24-hour period. This means trains must run 10 mph slower than the speed limit that otherwise would apply. After July 29, CSX treated passenger trains like manifest freight trains for heat order purposes. Manifest, or merchandise, freight trains have slower speed limits than intermodal freight trains.

"We are concerned that the impact of such severe restrictions is to reduce the overall safety of the U.S. transportation system by encouraging passengers to switch to automobiles, which are statistically far less safe than trains.

"We are, however, encouraged by the fact that discussions are continuing between CSX and the passenger railroads which use its tracks about appropriate modifications to the current speed limits. We are hopeful that a less sweeping, better-targetted remedy will emerge from these discussions. The routine addition of hours to Amtrak schedules -- and even of shorter times to commuter train schedules -- is unacceptable.

"We trust that all involved, and especially CSX and the National Transportation Safety Board, are closely studying the relationship between very hot weather and the process of removing trackwork-related slow orders. We say this because -- one day after trackwork was performed at this location -- Amtrak's Capitol Limited was authorized for 60 mph [and would have been authorized for 70 mph but for the presence of a particular type of express car in the train]."

The National Association of Railroad Passengers today urged a bold approach to upgrading and expanding the nation's "largely neglected ... rail system to modern 21st Century standards" so rail is a real travel choice for Americans. The Association favors creating a "broad long-range vision for an expanded intercity rail network that connects all regions and metropolitan areas of the country and serves all important transportation routes," and funding that vision partly through creation of a rail trust fund.

The Association's new report, "Modern Passenger Trains:  A National Necessity; Analysis and Recommendations," is available on the Association's web site -- click here to see it.

Regarding Amtrak's cash crisis, the report urges giving Amtrak "an immediate emergency grant" to insure maintenance of "all current routes and services" and "repair and return to service [of] all passenger rolling stock now idled ..."

The report echoes DOT Inspector General Kenneth Mead who says the cost of running long-distance trains is "chump change" compared with Northeast Corridor infrastructure investment needs. The Association favors transfer of ownership (but not control) of Amtrak infrastructure to the Department of Transportation, emphasizing that the Secretary would be "responsible for funding the maintenance and development of these assets as publicly owned facilities to support" all forms of rail service.

The report urges mandating "that Amtrak's Board of Directors be appointed to represent all regions" and include "elected officials, business leaders and consumers."

The Association supports improving and expanding all types of intercity passenger rail services: "Even though public use of Amtrak's existing trains is high, lack of adequate capital funding over the three decades of Amtrak's existence has greatly limited its ability to satisfy the nation's growing demand for transportation …"

The report urges debate to "focus on strategies that will allow rail to realize its full potential in serving public needs, not on ones that seek only to reduce further -- or eliminate entirely -- federal support of intercity rail service."

Other key recommendations include:

• "Create a broad long-range vision for an expanded intercity rail network that connects all regions and metropolitan areas of the country and serves all important transportation routes." This vision "would outline policies for allocating public funds by regions and types of service and establish guidelines for balancing volume growth with farebox recovery."
• "Fund the vision…NARP urges the Federal Government to establish a Rail Trust Fund … so that intercity rail is not entirely dependent on the annual appropriation process for its funding. The Federal Government would fund 100% of the national system and 80% of state sponsored regional services ..."
• End the "operating self-sufficiency" mandate, and set realistic performance targets based on growth in usage and "realistic farebox recovery levels."
• "Maintain Amtrak as the agency responsible for managing and dispatching the Northeast Corridor as well as the other lines and stations it currently owns ..."

The following is the preliminary reaction of the National Association of Railroad Passengers to the Bush Administration's "Amtrak plan" as reported in the media:

• Ending operating grants is tantamount to ending all service, because not even the Northeast Corridor breaks even when below-the-rail costs are considered. It is absurd on its face to simultaneously talk of "eliminating federal operating grants" and "putting Amtrak on a sound economic footing."
• The states long have been waiting for the federal government to become a funding partner on capital projects to improve running times on corridors across the country. Had the federal government stepped up to the plate on this issue in a timely fashion, trains today would be running faster and the need for operating grants would be much reduced.
• We strongly oppose any suggestion that states should be solely responsible for funding new high-speed service; such a policy would be a total abdication of federal responsibility. [Note -- initial media reports suggested that the policy would leave high-speed corridor development to states alone; the policy released by DOT later in the day did not contain such language.]
• Existing Amtrak services merit continuation and the present network should be the foundation for improvement and expansion of intercity passenger rail in the U.S. We see no possibility of state support for the long-distance network. Short term, even in corridor services, we are not optimistic, given states' current financial conditions and the fact that operating grants would largely be payments for the failure of federal policies to date.
• We agree that, because of the huge funding needs (particularly those associated with facilities like the Hudson River tunnels where only about 10% of the passengers are on Amtrak trains), ownership of the Northeast Corridor and other Amtrak infrastructure should be transferred. However, the transfer should be to the Federal government,
• not to some unspecified "partnership" among many states, commuter lines and corridor users. Also, Amtrak should continue to be responsible for dispatching trains and for managing capital investment.
• Clearly, elements of competition could help improve service quality, but in a context of quickly disappearing federal support, it would be next to impossible to secure the requisite cooperation of the freight railroads who own most of the tracks Amtrak uses or the unions who perform the work. Private track ownership sets U.S. passenger rail apart from most foreign nations.
• Amtrak's highly regarded, new President & CEO David L. Gunn should have the time and resources to demonstrate the same "turnaround artist" abilities he has shown at various transit agencies.

Here are Amtrak and Domestic airline passenger data (percentage change from the year-earlier month) for May:
 

May ridership:	Amtrak, +1.1%	Air, -10.8%
May passenger-miles:	Amtrak, +0.2%	Air, -7.9%
May passenger revenues:	Amtrak, +13.2%	Air, see note

Note: The Air Transport Association reports average fares later in the month, but Air Transport Association President Carol Hallett, in a June 18 speech, said, "Industry revenues are off a solid 20 percent from where they were a year earlier -- and that revenue shows little sign of soon returning." She also said that, over the past 50 years, "Over the last fifty years, the industry's net profit margin is one-half percent, compared to the average for all industries of approximately six percent."

Within Amtrak, the high end Northeast Corridor services (Acela Express/Metroliner) had 23.1% more riders and a 44.2% growth in revenue from May 2001. Combined results for those services plus the lower-priced NortheastDirect/Acela Regional trains and the Twilight Shoreliner were: ridership up 5.8%, revenues up 25.2%.

On sleeping cars, ridership was up 0.5%, passenger-miles up 2.0%, and revenues up 5.2%. May saw elimination of sleeping car service on the New York-Tampa-Miami Silver Palm and elimination (May 20) of the sleeper on the Boston-Washington-Richmond-Newport News Twilight Shoreliner. The well-used latter service, however, resumes this weekend, with first trips from Boston Friday and from Newport News Saturday.

In the Pacific Northwest, ridership on Amtrak's "Cascades" increased 10%.

The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, chaired by Sen. Patty Murray (D.-Wash.), has scheduled a hearing on Amtrak's immediate cash situation for tomorrow (Thursday) at 1:30 pm. It appears that a $200 million government loan guarantee is needed for Amtrak to continue operation in the last quarter of fiscal 2002 (July-September).

This week, a pro-Amtrak letter signed by 162 House members went to the chairmen and ranking members of the House Appropriations Committee and its Subcommittee on Transportation. Click here to see a list of members. The letter urges that Amtrak's FY 2003 appropriation include $1.975 billion, the same as in the authorization bill passed by the Subcommittee on Railroads on May 8. This includes Amtrak's "basic" $1.2 billion request plus $400 million for life safety work in the New York, Baltimore and Washington tunnels, and $375 million for security improvements.

Here are Amtrak and domestic airline ridership/enplanements, passenger-miles and revenues for March and April compared with the year-earlier months (a passenger-mile is one passenger traveling one mile; airline fare information excludes Southwest):
 

March ridership:	Amtrak, +0.6%	Air, -10.3%
March passenger-miles:	Amtrak, +2.3%	Air, -7.4%

Amtrak Acela Express + Metroliner passenger-miles, +37.4%
Amtrak sleeping-car passenger-miles, +8.3%

Amtrak passenger revenues, +13.3%
Amtrak sleeping-car revenues, +18.6%

Airline average fare per mile (yield), -13.2%
 

April ridership:	Amtrak, +1.2%	Air, -13.1%
April passenger-miles:	Amtrak, -0.5%	Air, -10.6%

Amtrak Acela Express + Metroliner passenger-miles, +54.2%
Amtrak sleeping-car passenger-miles, +8.2%

Amtrak passenger revenues, +9.5%
Amtrak sleeping-car revenues, +10.2%

Airline average fare per mile (yield), -11.9%

[April was the first month since September in which airline percentage changes were worse than the previous month.]

Some factors influencing the above numbers: Easter was in mid-April in 2001 but March 31, 2002, so some holiday travel shifted from April to March. Also, Amtrak's Auto Train missed several trips in April due to the derailment in Crescent City, Florida. [Airline statistics are available at the Air Transport Association.]

NARP believes that the data continue to show strong marketplace support for a nationwide rail passenger network. We also believe that Amtrak service will continue uninterrupted in July and will solve its well-reported financial problems to insure service well into the next fiscal year.

Notes to reporters: Our hotline is updated at least every Friday afternoon. If you are not receiving our newsletter (available only by regular mail), please send your mailing address.

For good information about the Census data on transit use, and a different perspective from much of this week's media coverage, we recommend the Surface Transportation Policy Project.

Jointly issued by:

• American Passenger Rail Coalition
• National Association of Counties
• National Association of Railroad Passengers
• National Conference of State Legislatures
• Railway Progress Institute
• Sierra Club
• Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO
• U.S. Conference of Mayors

Participants in the "Rally for Rail" represent many businesses, labor unions, and state and local governments, as well as millions of consumers and citizens across America. More than 50 groups (see below) have endorsed resolutions calling on Congress to fully fund Amtrak in 2003, and to enact a reauthorization bill that ensures a strong, long-term future for the nation’s passenger rail system.

"Today's event demonstrates that people from all across America and across the political spectrum want a stronger passenger rail system in this country," said Mayor Kenneth Barr, chairman of the Transportation and Communications Committee of the U.S. Conference of Mayors. "We are all united in the conviction that it's time to put Amtrak on a more stable foundation for the future, and to have it play a growing role in our country's congested transportation system."

Just this week, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties, the National Conference of State Legislatures and three other national organizations representing local governments sent a letter to House and Senate leaders urging them to appropriate $1.2 billion for Amtrak in FY '03 to prevent the elimination of train services.

"State legislatures believe that developing a stronger passenger rail system provides us with opportunities to reduce traffic congestion and to diversify the nation's transportation system, while contributing to economic growth and an improved environment," said Del. Brent Boggs of the West Virginia House of Delegates, representing the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Among those addressing the 9 a.m. pep rally are Senators Joe Biden (D-DE), Tom Carper (D-DE), and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX); Reps. Jack Quinn (R-NY), James Oberstar (D-MN), and Bob Clement (D-TN); Mayors Kenneth Barr of Ft. Worth, TX and Patrick Henry Hays of North Little Rock, AR, representing the US Conference of Mayors; Rhea Huddleston, Wapello County Board of Supervisors, Ottumwa, Iowa, representing the National Association of Counties; George Dorshimer of LTK Engineering Services of Ambler, PA, representing the business community through the American Passenger Rail Coalition; Mac Fleming, international president of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees; and Debbie Sease, legislative director of the Sierra Club. The rally is also being enlivened by a performance by the award-winning Hines Junior High School Marching Band of Washington, DC.

Later in the day, Rally participants will fan out on Capitol Hill to meet with more than 45 key members of Congress.

Congress created Amtrak in 1971 to take over unprofitable passenger rail lines from the private sector. But unlike aviation, highways and other modes of transportation, passenger rail has no dedicated source of funding. Instead, it must rely on the unpredictable annual appropriations process, which has provided only about 50% of the authorized funding levels in recent years.

Without adequate funds in 2003, Amtrak has told Congress and state leaders it may have to discontinue much of the national network as early as this autumn.

"Investing in our national Amtrak passenger rail system has never been more important," said George Dorshimer, President of LTK Engineering Services of Ambler, PA and board member of the American Passenger Rail Coalition. "Investments in rail service produce substantial economic, mobility and environmental benefits for the nation and communities across America."

"It's ironic we're in this situation because Amtrak is performing so well in the market," said Alan Yorker of Decatur, Georgia, president of the National Association of Railroad Passengers. "The growing demand for Amtrak's services is a reflection of the fact that rail is an attractive option for many business and leisure travelers, it's cost-effective for state and local governments, it's a contributor to job creation and economic development, and it's good for the environment and energy independence."

"The need for the service is there, along with strong support from the traveling public, state and local governments, and all of these groups here today," Sonny Hall, president of the Transport Workers Union of America and president of the Transportation Trades Dept. of the AFL-CIO. "What Amtrak needs most now is a steady, strong partner in the federal government -- a partner it doesn't have today."

[The morning rally was held in the Upper Senate Park, Constitution and Delaware Aves., N.E., Washington.]

Appendix -- Organizations Endorsing Pro-Amtrak Resolutions
* Indicates organizations that endorsed a resolution with wording different from the one released at the May 8 rally.
List will be updated as new endorsements are communicated to us.

• American Association of Private Railroad Car Owners
• American Passenger Rail Coalition
• Association of Oregon Rail and Transit Advocates (AORTA)
• Association of Rail Travel in the U.S.
• Biloxi Bay Chamber of Commerce (Mississippi)
• Carolinas Association for Passenger Trains
• City of Coralville, Iowa
• *City of Fayetteville, North Carolina
• City of Plano, Illinois
• City of Rugby, North Dakota
• Colorado Rail Passenger Association (ColoRail)
• Committee to Advance the TransDominion Express (Virginia)
• Community Transportation Association of America
• Council of State Governments
• Council of State Governments-Eastern Regional Conference
• *Cumberland County (North Carolina)
• Delaware Valley Association of Railroad Passengers
• Delmarva Rail Passenger Association (Delaware)
• Environmental Defense
• Florida Coalition of Rail Passengers, Inc. (Florida)
• Friends of the Earth
• Georgia Association of Railroad Passengers
• Grand Island Area Chamber of Commerce (Nebraska)
• Hastings College (Nebraska)
• High Speed Ground Transportation Association
• Indiana High Speed Rail Association
• Iowa Association of Railroad Passengers
• Johnson County Board of Supervisors (Iowa)
• *Lubbock Chamber of Commerce (Texas)
• Lynchburg Chamber of Commerce (Virginia)
• MetroJackson Chamber of Commerce (Mississippi)
• Michigan Association of Railroad Passengers
• Midwest High Speed Rail Coalition
• Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission
• Montana/Wyoming Association of Railroad Passengers
• National Association of Counties
• National Association of Railroad Passengers
• National Association of Regional Councils
• National Conference of State Legislatures
• Natural Resources Defense Council
• Ohio Association of Railroad Passengers
• *Ohio State Senate (on a 30-3 vote)
• ProRail (Madison, Wis.)
• *ProRail Nebraska
• Rail Labor Division of the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO
• Rail Passenger Association of California (RAILPAC)
• Rail Users' Network
• Railway Progress Institute
• Richmond (Va.) Friends of Rail
• Sierra Club
• Southern Rapid Rail Transit Commission
• Surface Transportation Policy Project
• Tennessee Association of Railroad Passengers
• Texas Association of Rail Passengers
• Texas Eagle Marketing and Performance Organization (TEMPO)
• The Senior Network, Inc.
• *Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments (Ohio)
• Train Riders' Association of California (TRAC)
• TrainRiders/Northeast (Portland, Me.)
• Transportation Riders United (Detroit, Mich.)
• U.S. Conference of Mayors
• United Transportation Union
• Veterans Advantage
• Virginia Association of Railway Patrons
• Virginia High Speed Rail Development Committee
• Washington Association of Railroad Passengers
• Wisconsin Association of Railroad Passengers

A Resolution for a Strong Federal Funding Commitment to the National Intercity Passenger Rail System

Whereas, the national Amtrak passenger rail system serves over 500 cities and communities across the country and provides safe, efficient and affordable mobility for millions of Americans each year;

Whereas, ridership on Amtrak trains has increased 19% since 1996 and reached a total of 23.5 million riders in 2001 and demand for rail services continues to be strong on both corridor and long-distance trains;

Whereas, the terrorist attacks of September 11th highlighted the value of the nation's intercity passenger rail system to national security and, whereas, rail ridership in the five months since the attacks has remained strong despite a weak economy, significant reductions in travel and tourism and sharp declines in domestic air travel;

Whereas, rail provides clean, energy-efficient mobility which can help reduce the heavy U.S. dependence on imported oil. Travel by Amtrak uses 38% less energy (btu) per passenger mile than does travel by commercial airline. Travel by high-speed rail offers the potential for significantly greater energy efficiencies;

Whereas, congestion costs the U.S. economy $100 billion annually and rail provides a crucial means to help alleviate growing highway and airport congestion;

Whereas, state and local governments see intercity passenger rail as an essential way to assure future mobility for their regions but need the federal government to partner with them in making the rail investments (as the federal government does for highway, air and transit investments);

Whereas, the U.S. government has significantly undercapitalized the national Amtrak system for decades, failed to provide passenger rail with a dedicated secure source of funding like other modes enjoy and required Amtrak alone to achieve operating self-sufficiency;

Whereas, Amtrak has reached a critical juncture and will be forced to implement extensive service cuts nationwide unless federal funding is substantially increased above current levels. The Department of Transportation Inspector General says Amtrak needs $1 billion annually for capital alone. Amtrak has requested $1.2 billion for FY 2003.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the undersigned organizations (representing rail industry, passenger and labor associations, state and local government associations, environmental organizations and Chambers of Commerce) call on the U.S. government

1. To provide at least $1.2 billion for Amtrak in FY 2003 to sustain our national intercity passenger rail system over the next year;
2. To make a commitment to provide stable and adequate funding for the national Amtrak passenger rail network and infrastructure and development of designated high-speed rail corridors.

The Dr. Gary Burch Memorial Safety Award for 2001 will be presented tonight to Henry Marcell, of Branford, Conn., for his work as Amtrak's Director of Safety for Northeast Corridor Engineering (Maintenance of Way). He is now Employee Development Specialist-Engineering  Services. He was nominated by Raymond Cox of the Connecticut Department of Transportation -- and is the first award winner to have been nominated by other than his employer.

The annual Award goes to the individual judged to have done the most to enhance rail passenger safety. The award honors the memory of a victim of a 1991 passenger train derailment in South Carolina. The Burch family has sponsored the award since its establishment in 1994. The award will be presented at the Association's annual Washington reception, in the Starlight Room in Union Station. The reception is 6:00-8:00 p.m., and this presentation is expected between 6:30 and 7:00 pm.

Marcell has worked for Amtrak since 1975. During his two years as Safety Director, he played a key role in implementing new safety initiatives and educating Amtrak track forces, as well as revamping and updating current safety practices and procedures. He was instrumental in developing and implementing a seven-point accident investigation procedure, which coordinates efforts among several Amtrak departments to identify root causes of accidents and recommendations to prevent recurrence of accidents and injuries.

The National Association of Railroad Passengers will present its George Falcon Golden Spike Award to Rep. Jack Quinn (R.-N.Y.) tonight. The award will be presented at the Association's annual Washington reception, in the Starlight Room in Union Station. The reception is from 6:00 to 8:00 pm and Representative Quinn is expected to receive the award at about 6:30 pm.

The award is presented "in appreciation for his strong efforts to maintain and improve America's National Intercity Passenger Rail Network." The wording on the plaque continues, "As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Rep. Quinn begins hearings by saying he is a strong Amtrak supporter. He has worked in support of an authorization with adequate funding to continue Amtrak's nationwide network, and played a key role in securing federal funds for a modern station for downtown Buffalo. His characteristic talent for getting people to work together to solve problems is invaluable."

NARP President Alan M. Yorker said, "The Association appreciates Chairman Quinn's strong efforts to maintain and improve a nationwide passenger rail system in the United States. Often reminding listeners, 'you get what you pay for,' he has acknowledged a major impediment -- inadequate funding of passenger rail, compared to competing modes. Chairman Quinn has pledged not to allow passenger rail in this country to disintegrate."

The National Association of Railroad Passengers will present the George Falcon Golden Spike Award to Senator Ernest F. Hollings (D.-S.C.). Debbie Hersman of his staff will accept the invitation on his behalf shortly after 6:00 p.m. this evening at the Association's annual Washington reception in the Starlight Room at Union Station. The reception runs from 6:00 to 8:00 pm.

The text on the award calls Senator Hollings "a leading advocate for saving and upgrading our national intercity passenger rail network and for developing high speed rail corridors." The plaque continues, noting that, even after the events of September 11, 2001, obstacles to balanced transportation policy continue, which makes the Senator's "role as advocate extremely important."

NARP President Alan M. Yorker said, "Ernest Hollings' position as Chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee makes his support of passenger rail even more important. Chairman Hollings' support goes far beyond mere promises to consider a constituent's position in making voting decisions, but extends to writing and pursuing vital passenger rail legislation, and forcefully making the case for passenger rail on the Senate floor. We are pleased to support the Chairman's pending bill, S.1991, the National Defense Rail Act, because it goes the farthest toward improving and expanding nationwide passenger rail service."

February was the sixth straight month in which Amtrak performed much more strongly than did the airlines in terms of year-to-year percentage change comparisons. It also saw Amtrak's strongest percentage increases of the fiscal year.

Amtrak ridership was 6.4% above the February 2001 level; passenger-miles rose 8.6%. The Air Transport Association reported declines for domestic service of 12.5% and 10.3%, respectively. Amtrak's passenger revenues were up 17.0%.

Strong demand for passenger rail is truly nationwide and is not confined to the Northeast Corridor:

• On sleeping cars, ridership was up 13.1%, passenger-miles 13.5% and ticket revenue 18.0%.
• For the third consecutive month first class ridership on the Los Angeles-Seattle Coast Starlight hit an all-time record, increasing 10.7% compared from a year ago, while ticket revenue was up 12.3%.
• Ridership on the Pacific Surfliners (San Diego-Los Angeles-Santa Barbara) and Cascades (Eugene-Portland-Seattle-Vancouver, B.C.) surged 9.6% and 14.2%, respectively.

At yesterday's Senate Commerce Committee hearing on Amtrak, Chairman Hollings (D.-S.C.) noted that his bill -- S.1991, an authorization aimed at supporting and improving the entire system -- now has 25 co-sponsors. But John McCain (R.-Ariz.), the committee's ranking member, again questioned the need for passenger trains outside the Northeast Corridor and perhaps the West Coast.

Deputy Transportation Secretary Michael Jackson took criticism from both Hollings and McCain for the lack of a specific Bush Administration plan for passenger rail. Jackson said, "We need to change the behavior and the structure that has produced [Amtrak's fiscal] problems ... We're not prepared to commit to a specific dollar amount...The President needs to review the significant economic costs of this need."

Amtrak ridership was 4.5% above the January 2001 level, and passenger-miles were up 5.0%. The corresponding numbers reported by the Air Transport Association for domestic airline service are declines of 14.7% and 12.8%, respectively. Amtrak's passenger revenues were up 12.4%.

• All three Amtrak business units posted gains in ridership, passenger-miles and passenger revenues.
• Long-distance sleeping cars continue to experience heavy volume and frequent sell outs. Overall, sleeping-car ridership grew 10% and revenues grew 19%.
• While these Amtrak statistics represent a continuation of established post-9/11 trends, they all reflect stronger growth than in December, and are particularly notable given the continuing recession in the travel industry.

At yesterday's House Railroads Subcommittee hearing, the statement was made that long-distance trains are "used by railfans for nostalgic reasons." We urge anyone who believes this to get on a long-distance train and talk to the passengers. They are overwhelmingly using the train for real transportation purposes.

The following letter was sent February 7 to express concern about out-of-context statements in the Bush Administration budget comparing Amtrak's 1979 and 2001 ridership figures. Amtrak Reform Council members made similar statements at this morning's ARC meeting. A second section of the letter expresses concern about the budget's reference to market share.

FULL TEXT OF LETTER:

The Honorable Norman Y. Mineta
Secretary of Transportation
Washington, DC 20590

Dear Mr. Secretary:

First of all, I'm sorry you needed a round with the medical profession, glad to hear the operation was a success, and wish you the speediest possible full recovery.

The big Bush Administration budget book contains some nasty and factually misleading statements about Amtrak, which I hope you will be able to correct.

Amtrak Ridership Trends

I take particular exception to the following statement: "Since 1979, Amtrak has failed to increase significantly the number of passengers it carries."

The increase from 21.4 million in FY 1979 to 23.5 million in FY 2001 is 9.8%. This is nothing to write home about, but also needs some context, as follows:

• This is an apples-and-oranges comparison because the 1979 figure includes a huge number of short-distance daily commuters in the Northeast-commuters who during the 1980s were deliberately shifted onto commuter trains run by regional transit authorities. Conversion of the Washington-Martinsburg, WV, Blue Ridge from Amtrak to MARC probably reduced the Amtrak ridership count by over 200,000 a year, and much larger passenger volumes were transferred to New Jersey Transit. Thus, the ridership comparison in question understates the growth of true intercity travel. This is also reflected in the 1979-to-2001 increase in average trip length for Amtrak passengers (3%, from 229.7 to 236.6), which came in spite of a reduction in the size of the long-distance-train network and recent growth in West Coast corridors with short average trip lengths.
• It is almost as if 1979 was used as a base to make Amtrak look bad. That was when the gasoline availability crisis swelled ridership artificially-it rose 13.2% from 1978 (18.9 million) to 1979 (21.4 million). If, for example, 1978 is used as the base year, the growth to 2001 would be 24.3% rather than 9.8%.
• The federal government's message to Amtrak is schizophrenic: post great ridership increases or we'll attack you, but live within a tight budget. Sharp fare increases in 1995-96 lead to ridership reductions, but Amtrak managers remain convinced that these fare increases also solved the budget problem of the time as intended. In other words, minimizing losses and maximizing ridership may be incompatible goals, as evident from European countries where lower-fare railroads tend to have higher market shares and higher losses.
• During the period in question, federal investment in highways and aviation skyrocketed, while investment in Amtrak stagnated, including some years in the early 1980s when capital investment was close to zero.

The next sentence in the budget reads: "Currently, Amtrak's share of the nation's intercity passenger market amounts to only one-half of one percent of all passenger-miles, compared to more popular means of transportation such as auto (50%), air (48%), and intercity buses (1.5%)."

This sentence seems designed to downplay the significance of passenger rail, and thus the significance of massive reductions in rail service. It ignores the huge importance significance Amtrak has in certain markets, and -- more importantly -- it is a "backward-looking statement" that by definition ignores the key question facing the nation:  what is the best way to address increased transportation capacity needs in the future?

Finally, this statement ignores what you and other Administration officials have acknowledged: September 11 marked a major change in Americans' attitudes towards transportation, and their interest in alternatives to flying.  Amtrak's market share has been rising, as reflected in the following table.
 

Particular strength has been shown not just by Acela Express/Metroliner but also on sleeping cars nationwide, where, for example, December saw revenues rise 13%, passenger-miles 7% and ridership 3% -- a sharp contrast with domestic aviation, where passenger-miles fell 13.2% and ridership (enplanements) fell 14.7%.

Again, best wishes for your speedy recovery.

Sincerely,

Ross B. Capon, Executive Director
cc:  The Honorable Michael Jackson; The Honorable Allan Rutter

Below is the full text of our letter sent February 6 to the Amtrak Reform Council. The key points:

• "We don't think the public favors a reduction in any of the services Amtrak is providing."
• We favor funding Amtrak "at a level compatible with the services we expect from Amtrak, and creating ... a meaningful federal partnership for states so that corridor investment can move forward."
• The ARC's proposal to fragment "an already-small business will create a huge upheaval and eliminate important, existing economies of scale."
• "The freight railroads likely will fight hard, and effectively, against any proposal -- such as the one the ARC tentatively approved January 11 -- which the railroads perceive as distributing Amtrak's right of access to other parties."
• Most states now funding service are struggling just to maintain their existing operating grant commitments for short-distance trains and are unlikely to increase those grants, particularly knowing the need for such increases is a result of a failure of federal policy.
• "We heartily disagree with Council Member Bruce Chapman's statement, reported in The Seattle Times (February 3): 'The corridors are right now subsidizing the big money losers that go across the country.' If those federally (Amtrak) supported  long-distance trains disappear, a lot of facility costs they share with corridor trains would be shifted to the corridors. The corridors also would lose connecting revenues from long-distance trains. For both reasons, corridor net costs are likely to rise, with economically challenged states asked to increase their payments or lose the service -- exactly the opposite of the picture Chapman paints."

The Honorable Gilbert F. Carmichael, Chairman
Amtrak Reform Council

Dear Gil:

First, let me congratulate you and the others responsible for your booklet, "A New Transportation Agenda for America in the Aftermath of 11 September 2001." The paragraphs "Develop a role for high-speed rail" and "Expand conventional rail passenger service," and the emphasis on improved intermodal connections are particularly on target, as is the entire booklet.

I only quibble with the letter -- not the spirit -- of one of your points: "In the majority of [short and medium-haul market] city pairs, [Amtrak] service is limited to one daily train frequency in each direction." Actually, Amtrak already offers two or more daily frequencies in short-distance corridors except for the Grand Rapids, Lansing and Quincy lines. But service effectiveness on all Amtrak short-distance routes in the Midwest -- and on several elsewhere -- obviously requires greater frequency and higher average trip speed than currently offered.

Where we really differ is on the Council's conclusion that Amtrak should be subdivided, or replaced with several different organizations. DOT Inspector General Ken Mead was quoted in the January 28 Wall Street Journal saying, "For what it has been charged to do, it's amazing that Amtrak has gotten this far." Our  view -- reinforced by the DOT Inspector General's January 24 report -- is that Amtrak's fundamental problem is a mismatch between the service levels it is providing and the funding it is getting.

Some have spoken loudly about what services they think Amtrak should drop, but -- particularly in the wake of September 11 -- we don't think the public favors a reduction in any of the services Amtrak is providing. The following figures tell part of the story:
 

Our concept for a solution is remarkably simple -- fund Amtrak at a level compatible with the services we expect from Amtrak, and create a meaningful federal partnership for states so that corridor investment can move forward in many areas, not merely in the handful of states that have either (a) been willing and able to move on their own, or (b) lucky enough to get a federal match from Amtrak at a time when Amtrak had the resources to commit.

We are concerned that fragmenting an already-small business will create a huge upheaval and eliminate important, existing economies of scale. The freight railroads likely will fight hard, and effectively, against any proposal -- such as the one the ARC tentatively approved January 11 -- which the railroads perceive as distributing Amtrak's right of access to other parties.

We don't think the public or the Congress will welcome the political fight the proposed restructuring will entail, particularly when it becomes clear that the fundamental problem -- the need for adequate funding -- would remain unaddressed at the end of the 'restructuring' fight.

Safeguards are needed to assure that Amtrak makes good use of its adequate funding, but we simply don't understand the Council's leap from "Amtrak will not meet the operational self-sufficiency target" to "let's have a major restructuring that continues reliance on federal support."

We don't see states increasing their operating-grant support for corridors. Most states have budget crises and constitutional prohibitions against deficits. Even before facing dramatic federal cuts on many fronts, states have had an average 7-8% in revenue declines during the past year, according to the National Governors Association, and most states expect a 10% shortfall within the year.

States also believe that a timely, meaningful federal partnership for track improvement projects would have meant reduction in operating grants by now, and they do not see the need to compensate for the federal government's continuing failure to develop such a partnership. The ARC hand-out from January 11 says of the Northeast Corridor infrastructure company: "operating shortfalls covered by track use fees." We presume this contemplates a significant increase in payments from commuter rail authorities. That should be stated clearly so everyone understands it. Congress has visited this issue in the past, notably during House hearings in 1995 when the number of Northeast Republicans on the committee helped shoot down efforts to force commuter rail authorities to pay more. The effort did not fall on deaf ears, however, as commuter-rail states negotiated significant capital-investment cost-sharing deals with Amtrak. It may indeed be appropriate for transit authorities to pay more for operations, and this may be more practical than getting states to make "intercity-only" corridor investments. But clarity in the message is important.

We appreciate that many Council members believe the federal government should increase its financial commitment to intercity passenger rail. However, we are concerned that the restructuring the Council seems poised to recommend will make it harder rather than easier to get funding from Congress, by taking apart the delicate coalition which has supported funding to date.

The concept of separating the Northeast Corridor (NEC) infrastructure is attractive, but has this problem: Northeast legislators are the powerhouse behind efforts to get Amtrak funding; if they see that their service depends upon another organization getting the bulk of this funding, their incentive to push for "Amtrak proper" funding is sharply reduced. A Northeast Corridor subsidiary of Amtrak might fill the bill, but there is yet another problem: if NEC states gain more control over the corridor, their officials may find it harder to maintain needed paths for intercity services, that is, harder to avoid succumbing to pressure from daily commuters for scheduling decisions that give preference to commuter trains and decimate the intercity market, especially Acela Express.

Finally, we heartily disagree with Council Member Bruce Chapman's statement, reported in The Seattle Times (February 3): "The corridors are right now subsidizing the big money losers that go across the country." If those federally (Amtrak) supported  long-distance trains disappear, a lot of facility costs they share with corridor trains would be shifted to the corridors. The corridors also would lose connecting revenues from long-distance trains. For both reasons, corridor net costs are likely to rise, with economically challenged states asked to increase their payments or lose the service -- exactly the opposite of the picture Chapman paints.

In conclusion, we appreciate the clarity with which you have repeated a view that we both share: America needs more passenger trains.

Sincerely,

Ross B. Capon, Executive Director

Today, Amtrak President & CEO George D. Warrington announced the layoff of 1,000 employees (700 agreement; 300 non-agreement), reduced staffing hours at 73 stations, and a number of other actions aimed at enabling Amtrak to make it to September 30, the end of the fiscal year.

He said Amtrak needs a $1.2 billion appropriation for FY 2003 in order to avoid "substantial route cuts" on October 1. He told a news conference that a $521 million appropriation would mean only the Northeast Corridor "would have an opportunity to run." He indicated plans to post the legally required six months' advance notice of discontinuance on March 28 for all long-distance trains, to prepare for the possibility that Congress would not provide the needed funds.

The National Association of Railroad Passengers strongly believes that the existing system is "skeletal," (to use Warrington's own words) and should be continued in its entirety. We believe that the general public -- particularly since September 11 -- agrees with the importance of maintaining and improving our national passenger rail network, especially through cooperative federal/state investment in short-distance corridors around the nation. In December, for example, passenger-miles on Amtrak rose 3.8% while domestic aviation fell 13.2%. (On Amtrak's sleeping cars, passenger-miles rose 7% and revenues rose 13%.)

The federal government this year will spend $33 billion on highways, $13 billion on aviation, but only $570 million on intercity passenger rail. Moreover, the federal government offers 80% matches to encourage states to focus their investments on highways and aviation. Federal matches to support state investments for intercity passenger rail are virtually non-existent.

This "anti-rail" funding bias has helped put Amtrak in its present situation. At best, Amtrak's clear statement today may be a step toward ending the anti-rail bias in federal funding policy. It is painful to see valued employees laid off in a business that should be growing, but we understand Amtrak's decision not to seek a supplemental appropriation. Such an effort would be time-consuming, with no assurance of success, and would be a distraction from the central issue before the public: the long-term future of a connected, intercity passenger rail network.

Two things should be clear regarding elimination of the long-distance network:

• It would be a decision "for all time" and virtually impossible to reverse in a later, more enlightened era, and
• The result would increase the cost of operating state-supported short-distance trains, which no longer would share facility costs -- or connecting passenger revenues -- with long-distance trains.

December figures show that travelers are still moving towards trains. For domestic air service, passenger-miles fell 13.2% from a year ago. The passenger-mile -- one passenger traveling one mile -- is the standard measure of intercity passenger travel. Domestic air ridership ("enplanements") fell 14.7%. (Source: Air Transport Association web site.)

On Amtrak, passenger-miles rose 3.8%. Ridership fell 0.8%. (Taking out the New York-Philadelphia Clockers, a handful of peak-hour trains, ridership was up 1.6%.) Nationwide sleeping-car demand remained strong.

The National Association of Railroad Passengers believes a modern, national rail passenger system is essential to the future mobility, quality of life and economic well-being of the American people. We agree with the DOT Inspector General that discussion of Amtrak's future should include "the role Amtrak has played since September 11 in providing an alternative to airline travel."

(For more statistical information on this topic, click here.)

Following is a statement from the Association:

A modern, national rail passenger system is essential to the future mobility, quality of life and economic well-being

» back to main hotline page