|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Feb 02, 2005: Rail Passengers: Outraged About Zero Amtrak Funding RequestThe National Association of Railroad Passengers is outraged at Reuters and New York Times reports that President Bush will propose zero funding for Amtrak for fiscal 2006, which starts October 1, 2005. We understand that the $360 million that has been characterized as for Northeast Corridor capital improvements is actually for continuation of commuter rail operations on the Northeast Corridor. Any zero budget request would end intercity passenger rail for Americans, notwithstanding Administration claims to the contrary. It would also be a tired reminder of similar, failed efforts by past administrations, which proposed Amtrak zeroes for FY 1986 through FY 1991. The Administration talks a lot about “Amtrak reform.” However, Amtrak under President and CEO David L. Gunn has experienced more reform in the past two-and-a-half years than probably in the previous thirty. Headcount has dropped by 3,900 (not counting the transfer of Boston area commuter rail to another operator). Meanwhile, the number of daily trains has risen from 265 in 2002 to 300 today. Amtrak has taken on no new debt since June 2002, although costs of servicing previously incurred debt continue to be significant. Americans want and use the travel choice that Amtrak offers. One indication of this is Amtrak’s 4.3% ridership growth in FY 2004, which Gunn said was “across all our services – corridor trains as well as long-distance trains…The ridership increases are noteworthy because they came during efforts to restore the fleet and bring Amtrak facilities back to a state of good repair.” Record ridership in FY 2004—at 25.1 million—was up more than one million from the previous record—24.0 million in FY 2003. For fiscal 2005, President Bush requested $900 million. Congress, recognizing that this would force a shutdown, wisely increased that to $1.2 billion. Amtrak’s initial request was $1.8 billion, later revised to $1.5 billion. Amtrak has said that $1.2 billion for FY 2006 would be unworkable. This is due to deferrals in capital investment and maintenance that would result for both rolling stock and infrastructure. The highest profile issues have been three elderly river bridges in Connecticut. There are concerns that the two bridges which are movable might have to be locked either open (for marine traffic) or closed (for trains). Last month, the Thames River Bridge at New London was locked closed for several days. Even if Congress ultimately trashes this zero proposal as it has previous ones, the proposal would harm employee morale and perhaps decrease ridership because of public concern about the elimination of Amtrak service. The Administration is out of touch with the public on this issue; we believe Congress ultimately should and will enable intercity passenger rail to continue. Feb 07, 2005: 2006 DOT Budget Will Eliminate All Intercity Passenger Rail ServiceThe Administration's Fiscal 2006 budget proposal eliminates all funding for Amtrak. The National Association of Railroad Passengers condemns this proposal as radical and irresponsible. It would end virtually all intercity rail passenger service in the nation, including through service on the Northeast Corridor between Boston, New York and Washington, D.C. This places the burden of funding intercity passenger rail entirely on states that do not have the financial resources to assume such an unfunded mandate. States with limited resources would place first priority on saving the commuter operations within their borders. The $360 million the Administration proposes is to allow freight and local commuter rail operations over the Northeast Corridor to continue. It is not clear that this would be enough to accomplish these purposes, and not even the Administration claims it would allow continuation of any Amtrak trains. Past experience suggests that the only way to fund services which cross multiple state lines is at the federal level. The Bush Administration misleads the public by saying that a "restructuring" based on zero federal support "should lead to the development of short-corridor routes between major population centers." On the contrary, the existing system has provided the framework and infrastructure for the significant corridor development we have seen on the West Coast, the Midwest, and in upstate New York. Eliminating Amtrak would jeopardize many of those improvements, and would preclude the possibility of improvements elsewhere. It completely disregards the nation's growing need for the rail travel alternative. Even if every short-distance corridor survived, the resulting "network" would be four isolated units serving a total of 21 states. Travel options would be dramatically reduced even in those states. Administration claims that an Amtrak bankruptcy would eliminate "inefficient operations" and lead to the emergence of a "more rational" passenger rail system that served routes where there is "real ridership demand" and "support from local governments--such as the Northeast Corridor" are false. Clearly they are targeting Amtrak’s long distance services and misrepresenting crucial facts.
The low funding in FY 2000-2001 allowed for no capital investment and helped create today's deferred capital problem. One indication that the Administration is not serious about intercity passenger rail of any kind is the zeroing out of the Federal Railroad Administration's "next generation high speed rail" programs of research, development, planning, and technology demonstration. This modest program was funded at $39 million in FY04 and $31 million in FY05. NARP is a non-partisan organization funded by dues and contributions from approximately 16,000 individual members. We have worked since 1967 to support improvement and expansion of passenger rail, particularly intercity passenger rail. Feb 16, 2005: Bipartisan Senate Support for AmtrakA bipartisan group of 35 senators signed a pro-Amtrak letter sent Monday (February 14) to Senate Budget Chairman Judd Gregg (R-NH) and the committee’s ranking member, Kent Conrad (D-ND). More senators are expected to sign a follow-up letter. Organized by Senators Conrad Burns (R-MT) and Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), the letter was sent Monday because of the need to get on the record quickly. The second letter will give additional senators who support Amtrak the chance to sign. The letter sent Monday states, in part, “We are writing to express our deep concern regarding the President’s proposed elimination of funding Amtrak in his 2006 Budget proposal…Without [federal funding], Amtrak would quickly enter bankruptcy and shutdown of all Amtrak services [would result], leaving millions of riders and thousands of communities without access to the essential and convenient transportation that Amtrak provides. “Therefore, we ask that you provide sufficient funding in the Fiscal Year 2006 Budget Resolution to sustain Amtrak’s national network of passenger rail service. Amtrak’s 5-year Strategic Plan, which was approved by Amtrak’s Board of Directors on June 10, 2004, specifies that approximately $1.8 billion will be required for fiscal year 2006 to provide safe and efficient operation of the railroad. In addition, the most recent reauthorization proposal from the Administration would require a funding level of at least $1.5 billion for fiscal year 2006, according to the Department of Transportation Inspector General… “Amtrak has made real progress reforming itself over the last few years by reducing its operating costs to help fund needed capital improvements. Over the last 30 months, Amtrak CEO and President David Gunn has cut operating costs, reduced the employee headcount…increased the number of trains…and implemetned internal reforms designed to control costs and improve efficiencies. Amtrak’s core operating expenses are now less than they were in 2000. “There is an enormous amount of work needed on the infrastructure, fleet and equipment Amtrak owns and operates…” The letter was signed both by senators whose primary concern is short-distance services as well as those primarily concerned about the national network trains. Signers recognize the fallacy in the Administration’s argument that destroying one part of the system will help save another part of it. Feb 17, 2005: NARP Responds to Secretary Mineta’s Amtrak CommentsThe National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP) continues to agree with Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta that the federal government should provide matching funds for state intercity passenger rail corridor development programs. But we disagree with the secretary about what is happening to Amtrak. If “...the federal…partnership…with Amtrak…has failed,” primary fault lies with the Federal Government, which has not provided essential funding for passenger rail infrastructure and rolling stock, and thereby limited service expansion and inflated operating costs. The case for intercity passenger rail funding on the order of $1.7 to $2.0 billion is persuasive. Amtrak needs $1.2 billion for the Northeast Corridor alone. Adding a mere $300 million keeps the rest of the system going—other corridor trains and national network (long-distance) trains. Funding above $1.5 billion could support a federal match for a state-controlled corridor development program. In short, the incremental benefits associated with each funding level above $1.2 billion are substantial. By contrast, the Administration’s zero budget request, if enacted, would mean the end of all intercity passenger rail. The national network (long-distance) trains are heavily used, accounting for almost half of Amtrak’s total passenger miles. They carry passenger loads comparable to – or higher than – those on most airline flights as well as on short distance passenger trains, including those in the Northeast. They tie rural and urban America together and provide the foundation on which states can build additional regional services. Without them, the number of city pair markets where rail is a travel choice would fall dramatically. Services which cross multiple state lines are federal responsibilities—including the Northeast Corridor and the national network trains. This reality reflects the willingness and ability of states to pay, and the difficulty of identifying an appropriate method for allocating costs among states. Running trains “closed door” through states that don’t pay is impractical. Except for a few cases where a route crosses a narrow corner of a state, the economic damage that any route would suffer from running “closed door” through any single state would be severe or devastating. In poll after poll and ballot initiative after ballot initiative, the American people have demonstrated that they want – and will vote to fund - improved and expanded passenger train service. NARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization primarily funded by dues and contributions from individual members. Since 1967 NARP has represented the interests of millions of passenger rail and transit users by supporting improvement and expansion of passenger rail, particularly intercity passenger rail. Feb 22, 2005: Administration “Plan” Threatens Passenger Rail in NC and NationwideOpen discussion of an Amtrak “bankruptcy” in the Administration’s budget request clearly indicates where this Administration is heading. Replacement of funds for Amtrak, and vague comments about as-yet-unrequested funds for states do not constitute responsible policy, as is made clear in the detailed February 16 letter from Sen. Patty Murray (WA), the top Democrat on the relevant appropriations subcommittee (Letter available on Murray’s website). Without the foundation Amtrak provides, “replacement” funding for states—even should it materialize—would be a far less efficient investment than the federal government’s current Amtrak funding. Fully one half of Amtrak passengers in North Carolina are riding “basic system” trains; the other half ride the state-funded “Carolinian” and “Piedmont.” The case for intercity passenger rail funding on the order of $1.7 to $2.0 billion is persuasive. Amtrak needs $1.2 billion for the Northeast Corridor alone. Adding a mere $300 million keeps the rest of the system going—other corridor trains and national network (long-distance) trains. Funding above $1.5 billion could support a federal match for a state-controlled corridor development program. In short, the incremental benefits associated with each funding level above $1.2 billion are substantial. By contrast, the Administration’s zero budget request, if enacted, would mean the end of all intercity passenger rail. We disagree with the secretary about what is happening to Amtrak. If “...the federal… partnership…with Amtrak…has failed,” primary fault lies with the Federal Government, which has not provided essential funding for passenger rail infrastructure and rolling stock, and thereby limited service expansion and inflated operating costs. The national network (long-distance) trains are heavily used, accounting for almost half of Amtrak’s total passenger miles. They carry passenger loads comparable to – or higher than – those on most airline flights as well as on short distance passenger trains, including those in the Northeast. They tie rural and urban America together and provide the foundation on which states can build additional regional services. Without them, the number of city pair markets where rail is a travel choice would fall dramatically. Services which cross multiple state lines are federal responsibilities—including the Northeast Corridor and the national network trains. This reality reflects the willingness and ability of states to pay, and the difficulty of identifying an appropriate method for allocating costs among states. Running trains “closed door” through states that don’t pay is impractical. Except for a few cases where a route crosses a narrow corner of a state, the economic damage that any route would suffer from running “closed door” through any single state would be severe or devastating. In poll after poll and ballot initiative after ballot initiative, the American people have demonstrated that they want – and will vote to fund - improved and expanded passenger train service. NARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization primarily funded by dues and contributions from individual members. Since 1967 NARP has represented the interests of millions of passenger rail and transit users by supporting improvement and expansion of passenger rail, particularly intercity passenger rail. Mar 10, 2005: Administration’s Amtrak Plan Would Kill All Amtrak ServiceDistributed by hand at Press Conference and to Missouri and Illinois media Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta visits the St. Louis Amtrak station today, to defend Administration policy. That policy is to remove the federal operating support which currently is provided in varying degrees—through Amtrak—to all trains Amtrak operates. The federal grant to Amtrak covers overhead costs for all trains. Missouri now pays about $6 million a year for the St. Louis-Kansas City trains, but the federal government covers $3 million in overhead costs, and the Administration wants to eliminate that support. The federal government pays even more for Chicago-St. Louis: overhead costs plus two-thirds of direct operating losses. A federal/state “partnership” on capital investment is badly needed in addition to—not as a replacement for —federal operating support. Moreover, the Administration proposes to establish this partnership only after Amtrak has been “reformed” in impractical ways. This includes allowing other contractors to compete with Amtrak to run trains, even though the freight railroads that own that tracks strongly oppose this. The Secretary also criticizes Amtrak for a variety of alleged sins of omission and commission. He denounces continued operation of long distance trains that he claims are little-used, including the Chicago- St. Louis-Texas-California Texas Eagle. Yet, in fiscal 2004, each long-distance train run, on average, carried 364 people (ridership), and had 171 on board at any given time. These trains as a group accounted for 48% of travel on Amtrak measured in passenger-miles (passenger-miles-per-train mile; one passenger traveling one mile). NARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization primarily funded by dues and contributions from individual members. Since 1967, NARP has represented the interests of millions of passenger rail and transit users by supporting improvement and expansion of passenger rail, particularly intercity passenger rail. More information is available through our “Amtrak Fact Check” and “Amtrak Facts and Myths” documents at our website. Mar 17, 2005: House Passes Budget Resolution Supportive of AmtrakThe House of Representatives today passed its Fiscal 2006 budget resolution. Transportation funding is “the President’s recommended level, as re-estimated by the Congressional Budget Office, with the following adjustment: the starting level was increased to accommodate for continued funding of passenger rail services.” The resolution assumes $1.2 billion for Amtrak, the same as this year’s funding level. House leaders added room for Amtrak in the budget resolution after 21 Republican members wrote March 2 to Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle (IA), urging him to “provide sufficient funding…to sustain Amtrak’s national network of passenger rail service. The company is moving in the right direction.” The lead signers were Railroads Subcommittee Chairman Steve LaTourette (OH), Mike Castle (DE), Sherwood Boehlert (NY) and Rob Simmons (CT). During House Budget Committee consideration of the resolution, Rep. Allison Schwartz (D-PA), also a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, engaged Nussle in a colloquy regarding in which Nussle acknowledged and was hopeful that a portion of the additional funding above the president’s request would be used for Amtrak but left it in the hands of the appropriators. Budget resolutions are advisory and are not enacted into law; appropriations laws set exact funding levels for each program. Yesterday, the Senate defeated 46-52 an amendment to the Senate’s budget resolution which would have increased Amtrak funding to $1.4 billion, from the zero President Bush requested. Four Republicans voted for Amtrak. Some other Republicans emphasized that their vote against the amendment was based on concern that the amendment was a closet tax increase. Eight Republicans signed a February 10 letter pro-Amtrak letter to Senate Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Ranking Member Kent Conrad (D-ND). Just before yesterday’s vote, Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) said, “While I support the intent of [Sen. Byrd] and I support Amtrak and I am determined to get this job done, we shouldn’t do it in this way at this point.” Noting he is again chairman of the authorizing subcommittee, Lott said, “I am committed to find a way to get a reauthorization and get a reliable stream of funds for Amtrak so its future can be certain and so this does not have to depend on annual appropriations.” Amtrak is unique in transportation in being responsible for multi-year capital projects but not having any multi-year funding. Mar 24, 2005: Administration’s Amtrak Plan Would Kill, Not Reform, Amtrak ServiceWashington—The Bush Administration continues work which would kill intercity passenger rail, Mineta on March 18 told a House subcommittee, “In the last four years alone, federal subsidies FEDERAL FUNDING FOR AMTRAK Bush Administration policy would eliminate federal operating support now provided in varying Ridership growth was strong on all three Michigan routes in fiscal 2004—up 20%, 17% and 12%, respectively. As Rep. John Sweeney (R-NY) told Mineta at a March 18 House subcommittee hearing, “What it looks like back home [regarding Amtrak] is the federal government is doing a dump.” The federal/state “partnership” on capital investment which Mineta is pushing is badly needed, but in addition to—not as a replacement for—federal operating support. NARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization primarily funded by dues and contributions from individual members. More information is in our “Fact Check” and “Amtrak Facts and Myths” documents. # # # In Fiscal Year 2004, Amtrak: • Transported 604,721 passengers to and from stations in Michigan • Employed 133 Michigan residents earning wages totaling over $6.4 million. • Expended $2.8 million dollars for goods and services in Michigan The Chicago-Niles-Kalamazoo-Battle Creek-Jackson-Ann Arbor-Dearborn-Detroit-Pontiac corridor receives no state operating support and both operational and overhead costs are covered 100% by Amtrak (through its federal grant). Amtrak paid for and constructed the facilities it uses in Dearborn, Ann Arbor, Port Huron, and the loading platform at Greenfield Village. Amtrak also owns the historical railway depots in Jackson and Niles. Niles has seen extensive renovations in recent years and Jackson—one of the first stations to be renovated (in 1974) after Amtrak took over passenger service—is in the planning process for another renovation. Amtrak, working closely with the Michigan Department of Transportation, responded to market demand, severe on-time-performance problems, and requests from passengers by rescheduling its Chicago - Port Huron service. The train no longer continues on to Toronto, Canada, rather, it terminates at the border. A more Michigan-friendly schedule is now in place (westbound in the morning, eastbound in the evening). When one compares ridership between January 2004 and January 2005, ridership increased 26%. NATIONAL AMTRAK RIDERSHIP Mar 24, 2005: Mineta Attacks Empire Builder, Amtrak System In Motor CityWashington—Secretary Mineta’s comments this morning in Detroit largely reiterated what he has said before. He again downplayed the killer impact of eliminating federal operating grants that now support all Amtrak trains. By taking aim at the Empire Builder, one of Amtrak’s strongest longdistance routes, he appeared to underline a commitment to end long-distance services (and thus service in every “red” state). Asked to back up his previous comment that Amtrak runs routes that “nobody” wants to ride, he said, “the problem is if the Empire Builder is going from Seattle to Chicago and it’s going through lets say Montana, but there are only 53 people a day using that train service, can I really justify pouring that kind of subsidy into the Empire Builder for a segment of that service?” Fact: In fiscal 2004, the Empire Builder handled 437,200 passengers, an average 1,195 per day (597 per trip, since there is one eastbound and one westbound train per day). This was 5% above the fiscal 2003 level, and 19% above that of fiscal 2002. In fiscal 2004, boardings and alightings within the state of Montana totaled 129,044 or an average of 353 per day. At the same time, about 100,000 passengers (average 275 per day) traveled all the way across Montana en route between Idaho-west and North Dakota-east points. Mineta also repeated his attack on the concept of having the same organization (Amtrak) own both track and trains, calling Amtrak “one of the last monopolies.” Fact: “vertical integration” (common ownership of tracks and trains) is standard in the U.S. bothfor freight and many commuter railroads. Separating Amtrak into various ownership and operating entities would create duplicative bureaucracy, and new legal “turf wars”. One example: operating railroads want to maximize track availability; track-owning companies want to give work crews maximum time to maintain the track. Thus, when a single CEO cannot mediate such disagreements—because the responsibility is split between two companies—wasteful litigation can result. Repeating previously-stated concerns about Amtrak on-time performance, Mineta said that delays to Detroit-Chicago Wolverine service trains were due to “Amtrak continu[ing] to delay desperately needed maintenance of the infrastructure that it already owns.” Fact: Michigan trains were delayed a total of 218,537 minutes during fiscal 2004. Delays due to Mar 30, 2005: Federal Government Leaves CA Taxpayers’ Questions UnansweredPRESS CONFERENCE: NARP and TRAC will be holding a joint press conference at Sacramento—The Bush Administration continues work that would kill intercity passenger rail, Despite Administration claims that “Amtrak is dying,” ridership on all California routes was up Bush Administration policy would eliminate federal operating support now provided in varying Last year, over 4.2 million passengers rode Amtrak’s California Corridor services. California depends upon Amtrak’s long distance trains to share costs of major facilities such as California would also lose rail service to the rest of the United States and to dozens of California towns which lie outside of the state corridors. As Representative John Sweeney (R-NY) told Mineta at a March 18 House subcommittee hearing, “What it looks like back home [regarding Amtrak] is the federal government is doing a dump.” The federal/state “partnership” on capital investment which Mineta is pushing is badly needed, but in addition to—not as a replacement for—federal operating support. NARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization primarily funded by dues and contributions TRAC, active since 1984, is a non-profit consumer lobby advocating improved passenger train Mar 30, 2005: NARP Expresses Views of Rail Passengers to Secretary MinetaThe National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP) has reached out to the Bush Administration in an effort to ensure the survival of America’s only national railroad passenger system. A letter from NARP President George L. Chilson was delivered to Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta on Monday. The letter addresses critical questions that NARP has about the Administration’s true motives in touting Amtrak “reform” and, more specifically, advocating bankruptcy as the best way to improve the railroad. Chilson said, “NARP’s first priority is preservation of existing Amtrak services. While we want to work with, not against, the Administration to improve our nation’s railroad passenger system, statements made thus far by Secretary Mineta and other Administration officials make cooperation difficult.” NARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization primarily funded by dues and contributions from individual members. More information is available through our”Amtrak Fact Check” and “Amtrak Facts and Myths” documents at our website. May 12, 2005: Senate Hearing Underlines Amtrak Funding CrunchAt this morning’s Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing, senators emphasized the difficulty of funding Amtrak in the current environment without support from the Bush Administration, and while dealing with severe budget cuts the Administration proposed in other popular programs. Chairman Christopher Bond (R-MO) said, “even if I was to agree that $1.8 billion [which Amtrak requested] was justified, I don’t see how we could provide it.” Amtrak Chairman David Laney emphasized that all of the increase Amtrak requested is for capital improvements; operating grant needs are basically flat. Mead said Amtrak is spending at a rate of $1.4 billion because Amtrak ended fiscal 2004 with about $200 million in cash. In contrast, President David Gunn said Amtrak might “limp into fiscal 2006 with $20 million” or roughly one week’s cash requirements. The transcontinental trains, of course, serve riders getting on and off all along the routes; actual “transcontinental passengers” represent a fairly small proportion of the business, although their revenue contributions are significant. NARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization primarily funded by dues and contributions from individual members. More information is available through our “Amtrak Fact Check“and “Amtrak Facts and Myths” documents at our website. May 18, 2005: Impact of Administration Plan: No Rail ServiceDistributed by hand at Mobile Press Conference and to Southeast media May 19, 2005: Mineta overstates Long-Distance Train Pricetag by $600 MillionViewable in PDF format.May 27, 2005: NARP Blasts Mineta Letter to AmtrakWashington—The National Association of Railroad Passengers today sharply criticized Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta for exacerbating Amtrak’s financial problems by twisting language intended to minimize a crisis into justification for creating a crisis. NARP Executive Director Ross B. Capon stated, “If Mineta really agrees with most Americans that ‘intercity passenger rail is too important to just stand by and watch it die,’ as he has written, he should not make public statements that drive up Amtrak’s costs. He should not make demands which assume that cutting still more operating expenses can significantly improve Amtrak’s bottom line over the next four months. “Instead, he should work constructively to help Amtrak manage around the cash problems created by the temporary withdrawal of Acela Express trains. He should get better acquainted with the facts.” [Many of the items on our Amtrak Fact Check” are responses to his misstatements.] Late May 25, Mineta wrote to Amtrak President & CEO David L. Gunn, threatening to withhold $60 million in federal money already appropriated to Amtrak for FY ’06. Mineta said “it is irresponsible to project a positive cash balance based on an assumption about reserve funds, when without those dollars, Amtrak’s cash position before September 30th could be as much as $40 million in the red.” Amtrak’s budget, approved by a board of directors composed entirely of Bush Administration appointees, assumes availability of the $60 million that Mineta calls “reserve funds.” Moreover, the appropriations law requires Mineta to give Amtrak that $60 million “during the end of the fourth quarter of fiscal 2005” except to the extent that, “as of the date of transfer,” funds are “needed by the Surface Transportation Board to pay for any directed service order issued through Sept. 30, 2005.” A directed service order [to maintain commuter rail service on Amtrak facilities] would only be necessary if Amtrak shuts down. Costs of an actual Amtrak bankruptcy would be horrendous. Gunn, speaking Wednesday to the Transportation Research Forum in Washington, DC, said Amtrak is America’s “Alamo” of high speed rail. He called the knowledge of Amtrak employees “our most precious asset…if we lose that, you can’t look people up in the Yellow Pages to run the railroad.” Capon noted, “Sadly, Mineta’s letter reinforces the view that there are people in the Bush Administration who want an Amtrak bankruptcy but who do not understand that it would force a shutdown of the railroad, raise serious questions about the ability to get it re-started, and impose huge costs on both the public and private sector.” A release yesterday from Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) included this: “In response to a question by Murray, Gunn testified that the Bush Administration’s stated goal to put Amtrak into bankruptcy and the failure of a Senate amendment to restore Amtrak’s funding has had a significant negative impact on Amtrak’s cash position. Gunn testified that, as a result of those events, Amtrak’s bond rating was downgraded, the railroad’s insurance costs and accounting costs increased, and the financial requirements by Amtrak’s suppliers were tightened.” Jun 01, 2005: Mineta Strays from Facts in Attempt to Kill Empire Builder and AmtrakRelease #05-16 [Note: NARP Assistant Director David Johnson is in Montana at the town hall meetings, but is inaccessible by cell phone. He will be at the town hall meeting and media events in Glasgow and Whitefish and at the media events in Havre and Shelby. NARP President George Chilson will participate in the town hall meetings at Havre and Whitefish and the media events at Havre, Shelby and Whitefish. If you are unable to speak with Johnson or Chilson, contact NARP Executive Director Ross Capon at 202/408-8362.] Our “Amtrak Fact Check” site consists largely of responses to previous erroneous statements by Mineta. He repeated some of those statements yesterday and added new mistakes. • Mineta: “Nation-wide Amtrak lost over $908 million last year on its long distance trains.” Fact: DOT Inspector General Kenneth Mead and Amtrak Chairman David Laney (a Bush appointee) testified May 12 that eliminating all long-distance trains would save only $300 million. • Mineta: The Empire Builder line “was built in the late 1800’s and hasn’t changed much since.” This proves nothing, since the same could be said of many transportation routes, and almost all rail lines. • Mineta: “The Alaska Railroad runs long distance trains that combine first-class travel cars owned and operated by cruise lines, along with its own cars.” Fact: The Alaska train in question is a daylight-only, 12-hour, 350-mile run, not a long-distance train. For this reason, and because it traverses some of the planet’s most spectacular scenery, it is of little relevance to Amtrak’s long-distance trains. Jun 13, 2005: Trains Should Unite the States, Not Divide Them—Release #05-17 Baltimore—“America needs more, not fewer, trains, due to growing congestion in major urban corridors, and growing isolation—including a new round of Greyhound cuts—in rural America,” said Ross B. Capon, executive director of the National Association of Railroad Passengers. Jun 15, 2005: House Appropriations Subcommittee Votes to Kill Passenger RailRelease #05-19 Washington—-Amtrak would get only $550 million, far below the minimum needed to continue operation, based on the subcommittee’s action this morning. Moreover, most of the information contained in the subcommittee’s is just plain wrong. The subcommittee which marked up (wrote) its fiscal 2006 funding bill is the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, The Judiciary, the District of Columbia. Amtrak is hit with a fatal, 54% cut in funding while aviation and highway spending would rise by 6.4% and 5.4%, respectively, because, as the committee’s release notes, these programs get “unique preferential treatment…not afforded to any other discretionary program including Veterans Medical Care, Homeland Security funding or National Defense programs.” The committee’s release pretends that $550 million is not a shutdown budget and would “fully support rail service for 4 out of 5 riders or 80% of Amtrak’s ridership [including]” the Northeast Corridor and most other short-distance trains. In fact, there is no way Amtrak could avoid bankruptcy and a complete shutdown at this funding level. Amtrak has requested $1.8 billion. Amtrak President & CEO David L. Gunn has stated that, even at $1.2 billion, Amtrak would be unable to install already-purchased, long-lead-time items for its capital investment program. The DOT Inspector General has testified that “intercity passenger rail needs Federal funding between $1.4 billion and $1.5 billion, plus [a continuation of] existing state contributions, in order to maintain the status quo” but even this would not be enough “to move the system to a state-of-good-repair.” The idea that $550 million could do anything other than send Amtrak into bankruptcy is perhaps more easily understood when one considers that-—although Amtrak has incurred no new debt since mid-2002—-debt service payments still are about $275 million a year. NARP Executive Director Ross Capon said “The subcommittee’s action is particularly unfortunate when Americans are showing increased interest in more transportation choices, especially rail. The transparently misleading statements in the subcommittee’s release can only serve to further lower public respect for Congress.” The subcommittee attacks an Orlando-Los Angeles train by citing Orlando-Los Angeles air fares, completely ignoring the fact most passengers on this train are riding between intermediate points, many of which lack attractive air service and that many people do not want to fly or are medically unable to fly. More than 100 Amtrak-served communities have no commercial air service; many more have no access to the discount air services that the committee’s release trumpets. A number of new items based on the committee’s misleading release will be added to the “fact check” section at http://www.narprail.org later today. Suffice it to say that the 90% discount the subcommittee attacks applies in the Northeast Corridor to the 3rd through 6th members of a small group whose first two members have paid full fare. If Amtrak did not undertake targeted fare reductions like this, critics would accuse Amtrak of lacking entrepreneurial initiative. Jun 22, 2005: Committee Ratifies Subcomittee’s Kill-Passenger-Rail DecisionRelease #05-19 Washington—The House Appropriations Committee voted yesterday to ratify its transportation/treasury subcommittee’s decision to kill U.S. intercity passenger rail. “This would deprive Americans of an increasingly important travel choice,” said NARP Executive Director Ross B. Capon. “Amtrak ridership rose in seven of the last eight years, while Amtrak stabilized operating costs the past three years under President and CEO David L. Gunn. Ridership growth did not come from fare cuts, since Amtrak’s yield—average revenue per passenger-mile—also rose (nine of the last ten years), contrary to recent experience of most airlines.” Knowledgeable observers agree that $550 million is far below the minimum needed to run any trains. Although Amtrak has taken on no new debt since 2002, an estimated $278 million is needed next year just to service old debt. Gunn has said a Northeast Corridor-only system would require about $1.2 billion. Amtrak Chairman David Laney and DOT Inspector General Ken Mead both testified that dropping all long-distance trains would save only $300 million a year, and that only after several years of severance payments. • John W. Olver (D-MA), the subcommittee’s top Democrat, proposed to continue $1.2 billion, and increase funding for four unrelated programs, by rolling back tax reductions on Americans reporting income over one million dollars a year. • Dennis Rehberg (R-MT), saying “Amtrak is not just essential, it is critical” to Montana, proposed language stating that the Empire Builder would continue to run. (No additional funding was included.) • Virgil H. Goode (R-VA) proposed to continue $1.2 billion by eliminating earned income tax credits for those in the U.S. on visas. • Increase federal-aid highway spending to $37 billion—$2.7 billion above the current level and $1.6 billion above President Bush’s request; • Increase Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to $14.4 billion—$877 million above the current level and $1.7 billion above President Bush’s request. (a) loss per passenger-mile; Jun 29, 2005: House Votes $1.2 Billion For Amtrak; NARP Praises Pro-Amtrak RepresentativesRelease #05-20 Washington—The National Association of Railroad Passengers today praised Reps. Steven The House of Representatives this afternoon on voice vote adopted the LaTourette/Oberstar The committee-passed level of $550 million would have assured shutdown, bankruptcy and NARP Executive Director Ross B. Capon said, “It is unfortunate that Amtrak must continually The House voted 269-152 for an amendment by Reps. Corinne Brown (D-FL), Nick Rahall (D-WV) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) to eliminate a committee-passed prohibition against spending federal funds on most of Amtrak’s route miles—all long-distance routes plus Chicago-Detroit, Chicago-Indianapolis and New York-Richmond-Charlotte. Absent the Brown/Rahall/Menendez amendment, the House would have voted against any service in 23 or 25 states (depending on whether one assumes that the Oklahoma City-Fort Worth train, not identified, could operate in isolation after termination of the Texas Eagle). At least 70 Republicans voted for the amendment. The language this amendment deleted was mischievous for two reasons. First, it would have Finally, the House overwhelmingly rejected (59-362) an amendment by Rep. Mark Kennedy (R-MN) to partially undue the LaTourette/Oberstar amendment by transferring $100 million from Amtrak to programs for the homeless. Brown delivered an impassioned speech against the amendment. LaTourette likewise called the amendment a “wolf in sheep’s clothing amendment” intended to hurt Amtrak. The counterpart Senate bill may get subcommittee and full committee consideration the week of July 11. Jul 06, 2005: Mineta’s Misleading Alaska/Amtrak AnalogyRelease #05-21 Washington—In yet another attempt to obscure the truth about intercity passenger rail, Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta issued a news release (carried on PR Newswire, presumably at government expense) misrepresenting the relevance of the Alaska Railroad to rail passenger service in the lower 48 states. Moreover, $48.62 overstates the true subsidy for two reasons. First, much of Amtrak’s federal grant supports capital investment for infrastructure shared with commuter railroads. Also, there is widespread agreement that Amtrak’s grant cross-subsidizes commuter railroads in the Northeast Corridor. On June 29, the House:
The Senate appropriations subcommittee plans to take up its counterpart bill July 14; the full committee July 19. Addendum—Suppliment to release #05-21 Here is more information about the Alaska Railroad that is not in the DOT release, but is relevant to Mineta’s claim that the Alaska Railroad is “an example for Amtrak to follow” and NARP’s claim that the analogy is misleading. (1) The Alaska Railroad received $261.8 million in Fiscal Years 1996-2004 from the Federal Railroad Administration and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). (2) Federal appropriations bills for fiscal years 2001-05 specifically earmarked $112 million for the Alaska Railroad’s passenger program—$20 million each in FY 2001-02, growing to $22 million in FY03, and $25 million each in FY04-05. The funds are “to enable the Secretary of Transportation to make grants to the Alaska Railroad, [dollar amount] shall be for capital rehabilitation improvements benefiting its passengers operations, to remain available until expended.” (3) The Alaska Railroad’s web site lists its projects and their funding sources. In particular, click on “System Wide Projects” then “Passenger Locomotives and Car Upgrades.” Note 91% FTA funding for 2004-2005 passenger car upgrades. Also, “$6.6 million budgeted (2003-2005) for the purchase of two new bi-level dome coaches. Outfitted with full kitchens, these cars will provide a new first-class service option as part of the Denali Star train, beginning in 2005. Locomotive upgrades and passenger car/coach refurbishment and purchase projects are funded primarily by the FTA, along with matching funds from the Alaska Railroad.” (4) The state-owned Alaska Railroad is exempt from four federal laws applicable to Amtrak and to freight railroads in the Lower 48: Federal Employers’ Liability Act; Railway Labor Act; Railroad Retirement Act; and Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act. [Prior to state ownership, the laws also did not apply because Alaska Railroad employees were federal employees] (5) It is disingenuous for the secretary to cite $908 million in losses for Amtrak’s long-distance trains when this includes capital costs (i.e., non-cash expenses like depreciation), while claiming that Alaska Railroad receives no passenger “operating subsidies,” but not reporting Alaska’s federal capital grants. Also, the DOT table with the $908 million shows Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor trains losing $300 million even though DOT General Counsel Jeffrey Rosen testified May 12 that these trains might continue if Amtrak went bankrupt because they break even. Clearly, DOT is selecting numbers carefully (and inconsistently) to cast Amtrak’s national network in the worst possible light.
Jul 14, 2005: NARP Calls IG Analysis Fatally FlawedRelease #05-22Contact NARP Washington--The National Association of Railroad Passengers today said DOT Inspector General Kenneth M. Mead’s report on eliminating sleeper, diner, lounge and checked baggage services is seriously flawed. The IG's report was “released” yesterday by Transportation Weekly. NARP projects that eliminating sleeping, food and checked baggage services would worsen Amtrak’s bottom line by $50 million, not improve it as the IG claims. An increased loss of any size, coupled with dramatically reduced ridership and revenues, could lead to the system’s demise. Even if the IG’s savings were real, they would come at an unacceptable cost: depriving most Americans of the choice to use existing and potential intercity rail services. Moreover, the wide range of the IG’s estimated net savings underlines the uncertainty of his analysis. The IG assumes that, since average coach trip length is less than the average sleeping-car trip, coach passengers do not need the targeted services. Accordingly, he incorrectly assigns costs of these services 100% to sleeping-car passengers, and incorrectly assumes these services can be removed with no coach revenue loss. In fact, coach passengers outnumber sleeping-car passengers for all trip lengths. For trips 800 miles or longer, FY 2004 ridership was 819,870 in coach and 318,378 in sleeper. Also, in ignoring connecting passengers using coach and sleeper on different segments of the same trip, the IG ignores coach revenue that would be at risk with loss of sleepers even if other services remained. Cash sales account for almost half of on-board food and beverage sales. [Cash is mostly from coach passengers. Meals come with the sleeping-car ticket; on AutoTrain, meals come with both coach and sleeping-car tickets.] Checked baggage need is a function of length of stay at destination, and one's ability to handle luggage. It is not a function of distance traveled, or of whether one travels in coach or sleeper. In sum, coach passengers make many long trips and generate much revenue, and the IG is wrong to assume that elimination of food and baggage services would not result in significant loss of coach ridership and revenues. The IG likewise is wrong to assume that food service of any kind can be provided on a break-even basis, regardless of labor cost assumptions. Food service cannot be profitable when the only buyers are passengers on board one train. As Amtrak testified on June 9, the primary purpose of food and beverage service “is to enhance ticket sales and ridership, not serve as a profit center.” For example, Maine provides a $210,000 annual food subsidy for the Boston-Portland “Downeaster” trains (116 miles one-way). The menu is limited, satisfactory only for short trips, and sold by non-union workers who spend less time away from home than do Amtrak long-distance on-board workers. But, using the rough measure of food subsidy per passenger-mile, extending even this inadequate service and unrealistic cost assumptions to the long-distance trains implies a food loss of about $27 million. The IG ignores loss per passenger-mile, which could skyrocket if sleeping-car revenues disappear. A passenger-mile is one passenger traveling one mile. It is the standard measure in the intercity travel business, except when the goal is to attack our national passenger rail network. Clearly, however, loss per passenger-mile is more relevant to economic performance than loss per passenger, which ignores the distance a passenger travels. It is unfortunate that the IG did not consider positive strategies for improving cost efficiency and fare-box recovery:
Jul 19, 2005: Senate Subcommittee: $1.4 Billion for Amtrak; Mineta to Recommend VetoRelease #05-23 Washington—A Senate appropriations subcommittee today approved $1.4 billion for Amtrak as part of the $136.6 billion Fiscal 2006 funding bill that covers the subcommittee’s jurisdiction: Transportation, Treasury, the Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies. Patty Murray (D-WA), the subcommittee’s top Democrat, said DOT Inspector General Kenneth M. Mead has testified that Amtrak needs $1.4 to $1.5 billion to maintain current routes and service. [Amtrak has said that $1.2 billion would severely disrupt Amtrak’s capital program. The railroad’s board of directors, all appointed by President Bush, had requested $1.8 billion. The House has approved only $1.176 billion.] Chairman Christopher S. Bond (R-MO) said at this afternoon’s mark-up, “I just had a nice call from Secretary Mineta who was pleased to inform me that funding at this level without reform would find him recommending a veto.” Bond noted that the bill has language enforcing a prohibition on subsidizing food and beverage losses. Murray said “it would be my preference to have reforms considered by the Commerce Committee” [which has authorizing jurisdiction]. She said she understands Commerce will consider an Amtrak bill shortly. NARP Executive Director Ross B. Capon said, “The subcommittee deserves praise for producing the $1.4 billion figure in the present budgetary environment, even though this amount does not address all of Amtrak’s needs. We share Senator Murray’s hope that legislative language will come from the authorizing committee and will avoid micromanaging Amtrak. We cannot repeat often enough the testimony of Amtrak Senior Vice President William Crosbie that ‘the primary purpose [of food and beverage service] is to enhance ticket sales and ridership, not serve as a profit center.’” [See also our release 05-22, issued last Thursday.] Jul 21, 2005: Senate Committee Increases Amtrak Funding to $1.45 BillionRelease #05-24 Washington-—The National Association of Railroad Passengers applauds the efforts of the Senate Appropriations Committee to provide Amtrak with essential funding for fiscal 2006. He said, “Reforms and financial improvements are important. For example, the need for changes to Amtrak’s current food outsourcing contract is widely acknowledged. But Amtrak should be judged on its overall bottom line. Congress should not be dictating Amtrak menus. Amtrak’s experience running ‘bare-bones’ long-distance trains, like the Three Rivers discontinued early this year, has not been good. Creating a network of third-class trains would drive away riders and hurt the bottom line. In any event, matters of this nature should be considered by the authorizing committees.” Jul 26, 2005: NARP Emphasizes Efficiencies That Maintain Good ServiceRelease #05-25 Washington—The National Association of Railroad Passengers today strongly criticized the concept of eliminating sleeper, diner, lounge and checked baggage services from Amtrak trains. DOT Inspector General Kenneth M. Mead, in a report released this morning, recommended that Amtrak “implement multiple pilot projects” doing just that on “its worst-performing long-distance routes as well as on others that offer the best potential for savings.” Because roughly half of long-distance passengers change trains en route, elimination of crucial amenities on “multiple” routes would take revenue away from most others. It is disheartening that the IG looks at cutting costs only by cutting service, ignoring extensive Capitol Hill testimony this year on ways to cut costs without devastating service and revenues. At a June 9 House Railroads Subcommittee hearing, witnesses agreed that Amtrak could net substantial savings by replacing or renegotiating the contract with GateGourmet, which has supplied on-board food since 1998. At a May 12 hearing of a Senate appropriations subcommittee, Amtrak President & CEO David L. Gunn was asked, “Are labor costs out of line?” He responded that Amtrak had made great progress, and that the “basic problem is work rules; rates of pay are not the problem. I have 700 to 1,000 people on payroll that would not be there if we had control over crew size and crafts.” [At the hearing, Mead added, “I agree wages are not out of line.”] It is also unfortunate that the IG’s report does not try to ascertain the needs of Amtrak’s customers. NARP President George L. Chilson said, “Rather than inform the debate over the future of intercity rail passenger service in this country, its negative tone is more likely to inflame it, increasing the chance of yet more policy errors. We are glad that Congress appears to be taking a broader and more comprehensive view as it contemplates the enormous potential that intercity passenger rail has for addressing some of America’s mobility and transportation problems.” NARP is also encouraged about Amtrak’s planned August 2005 relaunch of the Chicago-Seattle/Portland Empire Builder, which will allow Amtrak to raise fares by offering enhanced passenger amenities. The IG’s calculations make the unreasonable assumption that “no coach passengers would abandon Amtrak if they no longer had access to amenities [besides a basic coach seat].” This ignores the fact, noted in our July 14 release, that many coach passengers take very long trips. We said, “For trips 800 miles or longer, FY 2004 ridership was 819,870 in coach and 318,378 in sleeper. Also, in ignoring connecting passengers using coach and sleeper on different segments of the same trip, the IG ignores coach revenue that would be at risk with loss of sleepers even if other services remained.” Further in this regard, the IG admits, “Our analysis to date has not examined the elasticity of demand for coach service should diner-based food service and other amenities currently offered be eliminated.” The IG’s analysis does show that eliminating sleeper service would not produce cost savings for the Auto Train, where sleeper passengers account for 44% of ridership. The report also admits that “most of the costs associated with the number of passengers, such as station operations, would be relatively fixed and would not actually decline with a fall in passenger numbers.” The report acknowledges that Amtrak would have to continue to make payments on its leased equipment if these cars are placed into storage, and that there is “lack of a real secondary market for much of this equipment.” (15) NARP strongly believes that Amtrak should fully utilize available equipment to maximize revenue in the face of fixed costs. If anything, Amtrak’s national network needs a larger equipment pool to meet the traveling public’s demand, given the large number of trains where all sleeping-car rooms are sold out. The report ignores a fundamental reality, to which Amtrak testified at the June 9 hearing: the primary purpose of food and beverage service “is to enhance ticket sales and ridership, not serve as a profit center.” In exploring Amtrak food service, the report suggests impractical alternatives like passengers getting meals during station stops. As Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) said last Tuesday, “Food and beverages, as well as sleeper cars, are essential components of long-distance train travel. I agree that Amtrak needs to be more aggressive in contracting for food and beverage service, but I also believe we need to keep those amenities available.” Jul 27, 2005: NARP Applauds New, Bipartisan Passenger Rail ActRelease #05-26 Washington—The National Association of Railroad Passengers applauds the bipartisanship evident in the Passenger Rail Investment & Improvement Act of 2005, which was unveiled this morning at a news conference in the U.S. Capitol by Senators Ted Stevens (R-AK), Trent Lott (R-MS) and Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ). They praised Daniel Inouye (D-HI) for his interest and support. Stevens chairs the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation; Lott chairs its Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine; Inouye is the ranking member on both; Lautenberg continues his special interest in rail matters. NARP Executive Director Ross B. Capon said, “We are particularly pleased to see the bill’s endorsement of Amtrak’s national network, and provision of a robust capital investment program—both for infrastructure and rolling stock—to permit more reliable and frequent service, and more capacity. We are gratified that the bill directs the Secretary of the Treasury to negotiate restructuring of Amtrak’s legacy debt, which currently costs about $276 million a year to service.” The three senators speaking this morning said positive things about Amtrak. Stevens: “Just last weekend, I rode Amtrak to New York City and found a much tighter organization than several years ago.” Lott: “I’ve always felt that we needed a national passenger rail system…Under [President and CEO David L.] Gunn, Amtrak has made improvements. I’m a fan of Gunn.” Lott also said the bill recognized that if Congress expects Amtrak to be innovative, to provide quality service, and to “change culturally,” Congress has got to provide funding because “this is not something that’s going to be a great, big profit maker. It isn’t profitable anywhere in the world and it won’t be here.” Lautenberg said, “We have a wonderful leader, I think, in David Gunn.” The Senator lamented the fact that Gunn must spend so much “time fixing things that are worn out, lots of time on repair and rehabilitation to make up for past neglect…As part of a security matrix, I think it’s essential to have a national passenger rail system…With rail service, we’ll improve the quality of our air, and reduce the amount of oil we need for our cars.” Stevens said of the bill, “There are a great many provisions in this bill that give…options to expand the use of railroads in a creative and innovative way.” Lott said, “Enacting legislation to reform and improve Amtrak is one of my top legislative priorities this session.” He noted that a committee mark-up of the bill was set for tomorrow [scheduled for 10 AM]. The bill also empowers the Surface Transportation Board to address on-time performance problems with the freight railroads, and the Federal Railroad Administration and Amtrak to develop standards for measuring the performance and service quality of train operations. Ideally, we would like to see a new agency charged with planning an improved rail network. However, we are hopeful that, should this provision become law, FRA will work aggressively to improve and expand the national passenger rail network. Capon concluded, “Finally, we applaud the requirements that the Surface Transportation Board issue a quarterly on-time service report, make recommendations to Amtrak and freight railroads on how to fix intractable on-time performance problems, and take appropriate action to enforce Amtrak’s legal priority access where the STB finds that a freight railroad has failed to reasonably address delay problems.” Jul 28, 2005: Senate Committee Overwhelmingly Approves Rail Passenger BillRelease #05-27—July 28, 2005 Washington—This morning, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation voted 17-4 to report favorably S. 1516, the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2005. Chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK) praised the innovative nature of the bill, which Ranking Member Daniel Inouye (D-HI) called “the most comprehensive bill on Amtrak we’ve ever had.” NARP Executive Director Ross B. Capon said the 18-4 vote for the bipartisan bill “clearly signals that legislators are hearing, and responding positively to, the public’s call for more and better rail passenger service.” Trent Lott (R-MS), chairman of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine, said Conrad Burns (R-MT) and John Rockefeller (D-WV) had joined as co-sponsors. Other sponsors are Stevens, Lott, Inouye, Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX). Lott said the bill aimed to reform Amtrak but also to “financially support Amtrak so it can do its job.” Referring to a provision that makes the Amtrak president a voting member of the board, Lott said: “I like David Gunn and I think if we give him more power he will be able to get more accomplished.” Lautenberg, who worked closely with Lott on developing the bill, noted Amtrak’s national security value, which he said was vividly demonstrated after 9/11 when only Amtrak kept running. He called Amtrak “an essential part of our lives,” and reminded critics of federal aid that airlines get. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), saying Amtrak and the Northeast usually are mentioned in the same breath, emphasized Amtrak’s importance in California, where she said Amtrak’s ridership is the second highest in the nation. “We rely on Amtrak; without it we’d have much worse gridlock.” Conrad Burns (R-MT) lamented that U.S. DOT has always treated Amtrak like a “step-child,” which he said hurts the morale of Amtrak management and employees alike. He said this bill “and its reforms allows for a lot of discussion; that’s where we have to start.” The committee defeated 7-15 a McCain amendment to delete “placeholder” language allowing bond funding, which would depend on action by the Senate Finance Committee. Before that vote, McCain said, “Amtrak has never paid back a single penny of any money that has been loaned to them.” Actually, Amtrak has serviced its debt reliably for many years. Standard & Poor’s had a ‘stable’ rating on that debt until March 29, when the Bush Administration’s zero budget request for Amtrak led to a ‘negative’ rating. Continuing funding uncertainty caused S&P in early May to put Amtrak’s debt ratings on “CreditWatch with negative implications.” Also, Amtrak is repaying its newest loan—-$100 million from U.S. DOT in 2002—-in five equal, annual installments starting this year. Regarding bonding, Lott said, “I think we’re going to have to go that route eventually not just for passenger but also for freight rail.” Stevens saw the need for bonding also in aviation, “where traffic is going to double.” Aug 19, 2005: Rail Passengers: Empire Builder Enhancements A Model For All Amtrak TrainsRelease #05-28—August 19, 2005 Washington, D.C.—The National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP) applauds Amtrak’s official launch of upgraded service aboard the Empire Builder between Chicago, Seattle and Portland and commends America’s passenger railroad for emphasizing customer service as the most effective strategy for improving the financial performance of its routes. NARP President George L. Chilson praised Amtrak for reconditioning its Superliner trainsets assigned to the route, retraining on-board service staff, and offering passengers enhanced amenities. “Customer satisfaction is the lifeblood of any successful enterprise. It generates repeat business and positive word of mouth. Amtrak is addressing long standing service quality issues in a systematic and constructive way. The traveling public will benefit significantly from the new course that Amtrak is charting,” Chilson said. Last month, the US Department of Transportation Inspector General’s Office recommended that Amtrak take the opposite approach—eliminate all sleeping car, dining, lounge and checked baggage services. NARP disagreed strongly with this proposal. The Association noted that previous efforts to cut costs by reducing service quality have failed to deliver the projected improvements in financial performance. Independent analysis showed that the IG greatly underestimated the amount of revenue that Amtrak would lose if it implemented the proposals. NARP strongly endorses Amtrak’s strategy of using modest investments in equipment maintenance, employee training and supervision to produce the higher volume and greater revenue needed to improve farebox recovery on the new Empire Builder. (Click here to view pictures of Amtrak’s renovated Superliner sleeping cars.) Reasons Long Distance Trains Make Transportation and Economic Sense:
Sep 02, 2005: Amtrak Evacuation Train, Service Restoration, High ridershipRelease #05-29—September 2, 2005 The Department of Homeland Security, in a news release today, reported that “Amtrak will be sending a train to New Orleans today to assist in the evacuation of citizens to safe areas.” The tri-weekly Sunset Limited continues to run only between San Antonio and Los Angeles (carrying Texas Eagle through cars to and from Chicago, St. Louis, Little Rock, Dallas, Fort Worth, Austin and intermediate points). Thus, the only regular Amtrak service at Houston is a Thruway bus connection to the Texas Eagle at Longview (for travel to and from the Midwest). Sep 27, 2005: Passenger Rail Helps Evacuate HoustonRelease #05-30—September 27, 2005 Washington, D.C.—Two passenger trains enabled over 700 evacuees to avoid gridlocked Interstates before Hurricane Rita. Given the limited availability of passenger rail in Texas, the fact that so many people could take the train gives a tantalizing suggestion about rail evacuation possibilities where intercity passenger and commuter rail systems are well developed, and where rail systems of any size are integrated into evacuation planning. On Thursday afternoon, September 22, two trains departed Amtrak’s Houston station. Amtrak took 298 evacuees to San Antonio, while Trinity Railway Express (the Dallas-Fort Worth commuter railroad) took 440 to Dallas. Seating capacity for the two trains was 400 and 750, respectively. Both trains loaded quickly and without incident; all luggage was accommodated. In the aftermath of these hurricanes, public officials need to consider relying more heavily on passenger rail for evacuations. Realizing rail’s potential means developing plans so that railroad and public officials don’t have to ad lib every decision, and so that available equipment can handle as many passengers as possible. It also means improving communications between railroads and public officials, and developing satisfactory liability arrangements. Finally, the U.S. needs a useable, standby fleet of cars. Until about 1970, a large, reserve fleet of older intercity passenger cars was available for use during holiday peak loads, and for emergencies. Such a fleet no longer exists, although the growing commuter rail fleet is a plus. Regular Amtrak Houston service is three weekly departures west to Los Angeles and three east to New Orleans and Orlando, plus daily Thruway buses connecting at Longview, TX, with Amtrak’s Texas Eagle to and from Chicago-St. Louis. However, since Hurricane Katrina, Amtrak’s Los Angeles-Houston-Orlando train has not operated east of San Antonio. Some of the railroad east of New Orleans was severely damaged; news reports indicate that CSX expects the line to be rebuilt within 90 days. Oct 07, 2005: Empire Builder Provides Lifeline For North Dakota During SnowstormRelease #05-31—October 7, 2005 Washington, D.C.—When an early season snowstorm inundated the Northern Plains on Wednesday, October 5, highways and airports closed. In Minot, ND, all roads into and out of town—and the airport—were shut down. But Amtrak’s “Empire Builders” made their regular station stops, as they do every day. “Wednesday’s experience in Minot epitomized the essential transportation that passenger trains provide for communities large and small across the nation,” said NARP Executive Director Ross B. Capon. “The Empire Builder often provides mobility when other modes of transportation are not an option. Moreover, the train is by far the safest way to travel in bad weather.” On Wednesday, 69 passengers got on or off at Minot. All told, 1,104 passengers rode the two Builders that crossed Montana and North Dakota on Wednesday. These trains originated Tuesday—the westbound train in Chicago and the eastbound one in Seattle and Portland (two sections combine in Spokane). The trains make 11 stops in Montana, and serve seven North Dakota communities, including Fargo. The Empire Builder carried 437,200 riders in Fiscal 2004, up 16% from Fiscal 2003. Through the first 11 months of FY 2005 (October-August), Empire Builder ridership was 436,300, a 9% increase over the same months in FY 2004. Amtrak did not cut fares to produce these results—the Builder’s yield (average fare paid per mile traveled) rose sharply (10%) in Fiscal 2004, and another 1% in the first 11 months of Fiscal 2005. Nationwide, Amtrak’s long-distance trains handled four million passengers in Fiscal 2004. Some critics have emphasized the relatively small share of travelers who ride from one end of a route to another. Such comments obscure the fact that about 56% of passengers on these trains ride at least 400 miles, providing 85% of the trains’ revenues. Moreover, one third of all riders on long-distance trains travel 800 miles or more, paying 56% of the trains’ revenues. The long-distance trains accounted for 45% of the transportation (passenger-miles) Amtrak produced in Fiscal 2004 [47% in Fiscal 2005 through 11 months; a passenger-mile is one passenger traveling one mile]. The train is more comfortable, less stressful and often faster than driving. Oct 13, 2005: MEDIA ADVISORY: Amtrak Board Creating Infrastructure SubsidiaryWednesday, October 12, 2005 For Immediate Release It was revealed last night that the Amtrak Board of Directors, at its September 22, 2005, meeting, approved a resolution directing management “to take all appropriate action to create” a wholly-owned Northeast Corridor Subsidiary that would take title to Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor infrastructure.
The reasons for the Board’s sudden change of position, and the reasons they kept their action secret for so long are unclear. The board currently has only four voting members rather than the seven the law envisions. Only one, Chairman David Laney, has been confirmed by the Senate. A second, Jeffrey Rosen, represents Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta who has made many negative (and frequently inaccurate) statements about Amtrak this year. The other two members, Floyd Hall and Enrique Sosa, are recess appointments whose terms will expire when Congress adjourns for the year. Some observers have speculated that the White House would reappoint Messrs. Hall and Sosa, but the legality of a “re-recess appointment” is unclear.
Oct 22, 2005: NARP Expresses Concern Over Amtrak Board Action, and Vacancies on Amtrak BoardRelease #05-32—October 22, 2005 Washington, D.C.—The board of directors of the National Association of Railroad Passengers, at its semi-annual meeting today in Minneapolis, approved two resolutions. The full texts of both are at the bottom of this release. One reports that the NARP board is in unity with the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which on October 14 wrote to Capitol Hill leaders expressing the Conference’s “deep concerns” regarding the Amtrak Board’s decision to direct management to do the work needed to create a subsidiary that would take title to Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor infrastructure. The other resolution notes that Amtrak’s board currently has four members, all Republicans, and that two of these board members are recess appointments that expire when Congress adjourns later this year. Under the law, the board is to include seven voting members, appointed by the President after consultation with Capitol Hill leaders of both parties. In making nominations, the President is to consult with the leaders of both parties in both the House and the Senate, but all four board members are Republicans; the term of the last Democratic voting member of the Amtrak Board expired more than a year ago. RESOLUTION OF CONCERN REGARDING CREATION OF NORTHEAST CORRIDOR INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIARY
RESOLUTION URGING THE WHITE HOUSE TO APPOINT MEMBERS TO THE AMTRAK BOARD OF DIRECTORS Nov 03, 2005: Senate’s 93-6 Pro-Passenger Rail VoteRelease #05-33—November 3, 2005 Washington, D.C.—The Senate today voted 93-6 in favor of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act. Originally S. 1516, the passenger rail bill today was “Lott Amendment SA 2360” to S. 1932, the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005. The bill was developed jointly by Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS), who chairs the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation of the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), a subcommittee member and the leading Democrat on passenger rail issues. The bill passed the full committee July 28 with the strong support of both Chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK) and Ranking Member Daniel Inouye (D-HI). Capon continued, “Today’s Senate vote is consistent with strong ridership growth on Amtrak and mass transit, coupled with concerns about gasoline price and availability. The traveling public understands the connection between the need for a strong rail passenger network and the world energy situation.” Nov 03, 2005: NARP Criticizes GAO Report and Creation of T&I Working GroupRelease #05-34—November 3, 2005 (second news release of the day) Washington, D.C.—The National Association of Railroad Passengers today criticized the creation by House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young (R-AK) of a so-called “Amtrak Working Group.” The Group is to “determine whether there is sufficient information to warrant the establishment of a formal Congressional taskforce to address” new GAO allegations about Amtrak finances. Oberstar said, “I don’t understand why we need a special working group to study this report when we already have a Subcommittee on Railroads… An Oberstar release said that he appointed three Democrats to the working group “despite these reservations” because he wanted “to make sure that the GAO report [released today] is thoroughly and fairly vetted.” Those three are Elijah E. Cummings, MD; Jerrold Nadler, NY; and Brian Baird, WA. Amtrak’s total revenues increased $18 million or 0.9% in Fiscal 2005 vs. the previous year, while total expenses increased $12 million or 0.4%. FY05 revenues were $1.883 billion, expenses $2.962 billion. Expenses include “depreciation net of amortization,” a non-cash expense which exceeded $500 million in both FY03 and FY04. Nov 08, 2005: Railroad Passengers Challenge Mineta’s StatementRelease #05-35—November 7, 2005 Washington, D.C.—The National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP) strongly disagrees with this morning’s remarks and directives from Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta. NARP recognizes the need for effective, judicious oversight of Amtrak, but believes that more layers of bureaucracy will not help Amtrak improve and grow. NARP Executive Director Ross B. Capon said, “It seems ‘Rube Goldbergesque’ for Secretary Mineta, an Amtrak Board member, to direct FRA to secure still more information from Amtrak on top of what is already required and likely to be required by Congress, and ask FRA to write an annual report for Mineta to read. Secretary Mineta should focus on his most pressing Amtrak responsibility—working for a full, bipartisan slate of seven, voting board members.” As things now stand, when Congress adjourns, the board will have just two members—Mineta (in practice, his representative Jeffrey Rosen) and Chairman David Laney. The other two current members (both Republicans) are recess appointments which expire with Congress’s adjournment. Capon noted, “Secretary Mineta has been on the Amtrak Board since June 28, 2001—over four years. If Amtrak is really the mess he claims, you would expect him to show a real hands-on interest and to acknowledge some responsibility. But he has not attended one board meeting over that 52-plus-month period.” Mineta’s comments about Amtrak are not credible and must be measured against Amtrak’s considerable progress of recent years. Evidence of progress was in our release 05-34 (Nov. 3); more is in bullet form at the end of this release. Even DOT General Counsel Jeffrey Rosen, a harsh critic, testified September 21, “In 2005, the independent audit was completed in March instead of September and no material weaknesses were found. While Amtrak’s auditors still find significant areas for improvement, they comment favorably on developments over the last three years.” Amtrak has complied with much-strengthened accounting controls under the terms of the July 2002 emergency $100 million DOT loan, and subsequent appropriations bills. Now, the Senate’s appropriations bill earmarks $5 million for “development and implementation of a managerial cost accounting system, which includes average and marginal unit cost capability” which should further enhance Amtrak’s ability to control and monitor costs. The Administration’s “plan” for intercity passenger rail was “dead on arrival” at Capitol Hill. The Senate on November 3 voted 93-6 for a version of reform with no significant ideas from the Administration’s bill. The Administration’s attack on long-distance trains (the only trains serving 25 states, all but one of which voted for President Bush in 2004) has not resonated on Capitol Hill. The House on a June 29 voice vote rejected Administration and committee efforts to scale back Amtrak funding sharply, and voted 269-152 to drop “kill-long-distance-trains” language. Regarding evidence of progress, beyond items in our release 05-34, Amtrak:
Nov 09, 2005: NARP President Praises Gunn, Expresses Concern Over Amtrak GovernanceRelease #05-36—November 9, 2005 Washington, D.C.—The following statement regarding David Gunn’s departure from Amtrak is by George Chilson, President of the National Association of Railroad Passengers: “David L. Gunn leaves a lasting legacy. In just over three years, he transformed Amtrak in positive ways that will shape its future long after his departure. He inherited an organization on the verge of collapse. He systematically created order from chaos. Faced with myriad problems, he focused on the most important issues and set priorities. He simplified the management structure, dropping ‘vice-president’ from the titles of many. He created organization charts that identified all authorized positions. He established performance goals and measures. He installed discipline in finance, planning and budgeting—discipline that was essential for effective management but missing when he arrived. He installed transparent and GAAP compliant accounting. His competence and plain spoken honesty brought credibility to a discredited organization. Without David Gunn, it is quite possible that Amtrak – and U.S. intercity passenger rail – would not exist today. David Gunn’s leadership has put Amtrak on a solid footing where it can be poised for growth. “The Amtrak board’s decision to replace Mr. Gunn comes at an unfortunate time. Amtrak has overcome significant problems and begun to gain forward momentum. Changing the top leadership jeopardizes that progress. It remains to be seen whether the Board can find a new president who can accelerate Amtrak’s transformation into a growing, relevant and cost efficient national passenger rail system. “There is obvious concern that removal of Mr. Gunn is the first step in an effort to kill the rail passenger business. However, Amtrak Chairman David Laney, in a message to employees today, cited Amtrak’s April strategic plan and budget request and wrote: ‘The good news in this strategic plan is that we can improve Amtrak, upgrade service in the vital Northeast Corridor, expand rail services in densely populated and increasingly congested corridors across the country, and bring more economic discipline to Amtrak’s long distance services.’ “We endorse those goals so long as ‘economic discipline’ does not mean route cuts, or making the trains unattractive to travelers. “Attaining Laney’s stated goals will require meeting big challenges: the management transition, the fact that the Amtrak Board is about to drop to just two members, and Bush Administration opposition to adequate passenger rail funding in spite of strong support for it on Capitol Hill.” [Notes:
Nov 22, 2005: Letter from NARP President George Chilson to NARP membersDear Fellow NARP Member: I am writing to explain the position NARP has taken in the aftermath of David Gunn’s dismissal as Amtrak’s president. Our mission is to represent the passenger and to advocate for the improvement and expansion of passenger train service throughout the nation. That mission is greater than any single individual or even Amtrak itself. I believe that David Gunn was the right man at the right time. He saved Amtrak from certain collapse, implemented significant reforms and reframed the debate about intercity passenger train service. Most importantly, he restored Amtrak’s credibility on Capitol Hill, achieving a string of favorable votes in Congress this year, culminating with the stunning 93-6 vote in the Senate last month to reauthorize Amtrak. The strong and growing Congressional support has upset Administration plans to “reform” Amtrak in ways that would eliminate intercity passenger train service for most or all Americans. Gunn opposed the Administration’s plan, so it was only natural that his termination raised suspicions. Was his firing part of a larger scheme to break up Amtrak and eliminate the national network? The uncertainty created a firestorm of criticism. NARP did not join this chorus because our research indicated that Amtrak Board Chairman David Laney is setting a direction that is independent of the Administration’s destructive agenda and that Gunn’s dismissal did not result from a conflict over policy. Indications:
Your Association will be monitoring board actions closely, particularly:
NARP is recognized as a responsible advocacy organization. We must maintain a professional demeanor so that we are in a position to work effectively with Chairman Laney, the Amtrak Board and Amtrak’s President. —George L. Chilson |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
