|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
» Welcome to the NARP Young Adults and Kids Site!All Americans from the young to the young at heart benefit from the mobility, freedom, and fun that rail travel offers. The purpose of this page is to provide resources of interest to families, to kids, and to young adults who want to learn more about trains and travel by train. Go back one page to begin your journey! » Golden Spike AwardGeorge Falcon, publisher of Key magazine (an entertainment and dining guide for the Los Angeles and Orange County area), got the idea for the Golden Spike Award in the mid-1960's from actress Debbie Reynolds, a train lover whose father worked as a conductor on the Southern Pacific Railroad. She was the first recipient. The second recipient was Walt Disney. Since then, the Golden Spike has been given to celebrities, elected officials, and others who have made important contributions to the passenger rail cause. The award itself originally was just a golden spike. Going back to the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad in 1869, golden spikes were used by railroads in ceremonies to mark the completion of important projects. By the 1970's, the award became a golden spike mounted on a wooden plaque with a brass inscription plate. Mr. Falcon was an active early member of NARP, which was founded in 1967. As he became more active in NARP, the Golden Spike evolved into a NARP award. Since 1984, the NARP Board of Directors Executive Committee has approved all choices for recipients. Mr. Falcon continued to provide the awards and publicize them in Key through 2003, the year he passed away.
Recipients of the Golden Spike Award
» NARP President’s “State of the Association” ReportPresented by George Chilson to the NARP Board of Directors at its October 2006 Meeting in Austin, TX and discussed in the January 2007 issue of NARP News Click here to download the presentation (Requires Adobe Reader) » Dr. Gary Burch Memorial Safety AwardThe Dr. Gary Burch Memorial Safety Award is an annual award from the Burch Family to the railroad worker who has done the most to improve the safety of railroad passengers. The award includes $1,000. Dr. Burch was chief of the Ear, Nose and Throat Clinic at Eisenhower Hospital at Fort Gordon, Ga. He was one of eight passengers who died July 31, 1991, at Lugoff, S.C., while traveling on Amtrak's Silver Star. It derailed at a switch that the National Transportation Safety Board later said was "poorly maintained." Dr. Burch's wife, Bette, was traveling with him and was injured. Later, she and her children (Michael Burch and Kathryn Burch Pettyjohn), after consulting with NARP, decided to establish the award, with the goal of improving passenger rail safety. NARP solicits nominations from railroads, commuter railroad agencies and rail labor. The Burch family consults with an advisory committee convened by NARP and then selects the award winner.
18TH ANNUAL DR. GARY BURCH MEMORIAL AWARDThe Burch family and NARP are pleased to invite your company or organization to submit nominations for the 18th Annual Dr. Gary Burch Memorial Safety Award. Please note that we welcome multiple nominations from the same organization, and also accept nominations from individuals. The Burch Family has funded and presented the award to honor the railroad employee judged to have done the most to improve the safety of railroad passengers. The award includes a plaque and one thousand dollars, and will be presented during NARP's Annual Spring Congressional Reception at the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, D.C.Nominations must be received at our office by Friday, March 16, 2012
CONDITIONS OF AWARD(Presented by the Burch Family) PURPOSE To recognize the individual railroad employee judged to have done the most to improve the safety of railroad passengers in the year just concluded. ELIGIBILITY All employees of railroads and agencies which operate or contract for the operation of intercity passenger or commuter trains (as distinct from local mass transit) or whose tracks are used by such trains. NOMINATION CRITERIA The choice of selection criteria shall be the prerogative of each nominating railroad, authority or union, but consideration should be given to the employee who: A. Identifies and reports or corrects a passenger-threatening hazard and thereby prevents a possible accident or serious injury. B. Initiates and fosters (by ideas, programs or other means) an atmosphere that promotes superior safety performance and awareness with respect to railroad passengers NOTES Organizations are encouraged to submit more than one nomination. This year, as was the case last year, nominations also will be accepted from individuals. Personal acts of heroism shall not be a consideration for this award. The committee is particularly interested in front-line workers whose job description duties are not specifically related to safety (e.g. “Safety Coordinator”), including track inspectors and track workers, and in work "beyond the job description" by all nominees. Please also note that the employee need not be directly involved in the operation of trains—the 2008 award winner was an Amtrak police officer. A nominating carrier need not run passenger trains for its own account; it is enough to simply host passenger trains operated by others. Operation Lifesaver activities should not be the only activity to recommend a candidate. NOMINATING PROCEDURE Nominations shall be submitted in the form of a typewritten letter not to exceed two pages in length. Nominations recognizing accomplishments in 2011 must be received by Friday, March 16, 2012. They must be sent to: The National Association of Railroad Passengers Attn: Burch Award 505 Capitol Court, NE, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20002-7706 Fax: (202) 408-8287 (Voice: 408-8362) E-mail: narp[at]narprail.org Such nominations will be forwarded to the Burch Award Advisory Committee.
Recipients of the Dr. Gary Burch Memorial Safety Award
» The NARP Grow Trains CampaignWelcome to the web home of the National Association of Railroad Passengers’ 40-year vision for rail in the United States. We aim to shift discussions over intercity passenger rail to emphasize connectivity and capacity expansion for both freight and passenger rail. Visit the links below for more information. Please do not hesistate to contact NARP if you want further information or to give us your feedback. We are particularly interested in your observations about specific proposed routes on our map, since you live closer to—and may know more about the potential—for many of this routes. You can also read our news release about our vision. » Organizations Endorsing the Grid and Gateway Vision
» Regional “Zoom In” Maps
Compare it to the existing system we have now. To improve image quality once you click on a link above, “zoom in” on the graphic to render it in full natural resolution. Consult your browsers help function for specific instructions. These graphics are internet-friendly. Please contact the NARP Office if you would like to have a high resolution copy of the map suitable for publishing and poster printing. » Download “packet” of Vision Material » Q&A About NARP’s Vision » Fact Sheet: The Grid and Gateway » Fact Sheet: Energy Efficiency » Fact Sheet: Environmental Impact
» Links and files referenced in the August 2007 issue of NARP NewsOne-stop shopping for all the weblinks and documents discussed in the August issue of NARP News. Alex Kummant’s July 11 testimony to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. » NARP Officers and Board of Directors MembersNARP Officers and Board of Directors, 2010-2012 NARP members may contact officers through the NARP office with comments or concerns. Click on the position title for a description of the position (some are PDF files) Officers
» NARP’s Membership DivisionsAre you passionate about giving Americans better transportation choices? Are you ready to play a greater role in our movement? If so, and you have been a NARP member for at least a year, please consider apply to become a member of the Council of Representatives, NARP's governing body.Applications are due on or before Thursday, December 1, 2011 for the State Representative election to take place in January 2012. Click here for information on how to apply.
At the October 2008 Board of Directors meeting, the NARP Board adopted major changes to the Association's bylaws. The former executive committee is now the Board of Directors. The former board is now the Council of Representatives and is set to grow from 80 to more than 120. Slots on the Council will be elected on a state-by-state basis, with state representation based on a formula that gives even weight to a state's NARP membership and general population. The first election under the new procedure is planned for 2012. The former 12 geographical regions are replaced with six divisions. A map and links to pages with more information, including Division Leaders, are provided below.  Links to Division pages: Northeast, Mid Atlantic, Southern, Midwest, Northwest, Southwest, At-Large Council Members Even though there are no longer regions, membership meetings continue! Any NARP member can attend any meeting. A full list of upcoming membership meetings is available here on our website. » NARP President & CEO Ross B. Capon
Under Mr. Capon’s leadership, NARP’s membership has grown to over 23,000, and the organization has achieved a level of recognition and credibility that results in frequent invitations to comment on railroad policy at Congressional hearings, administrative proceedings, and public conferences. Mr. Capon helped establish the Dr. Gary Burch Memorial Safety Award that the family of Dr. Gary Burch presents annually to a railroad employee judged to have done the most to improve the safety of railroad passengers. Capon also helped establish Amtrak’s Customer Advisory Committee. A recognized expert on passenger rail, Mr. Capon is a member of the Federal Railroad Administration’s Railroad Safety Advisory Committee, the Transportation Research Board’s Committee on Intercity Passenger Rail Systems, and the board of Travelers Aid International. His many speaking appearances have included such forums as Amtrak’s Customer Advisory Committee; Railway Supply Institute; American Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials’ Standing Committee on Rail Transportation; American Public Transportation Association Rail Transit Conferences; Society of Government Economists; and the Transportation Research Forum. He was a presenter at the 3rd World Congress on High Speed Rail in Berlin. Previously, Mr. Capon served as special assistant for Railroad Operations in the Executive Office of Transportation and Construction for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts where he helped save the commuter rail network of Eastern Massachusetts. He also worked in Philadelphia for the Religious Society of Friends. He received the Association’s George Falcon Golden Spike Award in 1985. In 2000, the Intermodal Passenger Institute honored Capon by presenting him its second annual Robert K. Pattison Partnership Award. In 2007, Railway Age Magazine awarded him the W. Graham Claytor, Jr. Award for Distinguished Service to Passenger Transportation. Mr. Capon received his B.A. from the University of Illinois (Champaign-Urbana) in 1969. A native of Newton, Massachusetts, Mr. Capon lives in Bethesda, Maryland, with his wife Louise and their three sons. A married daughter lives in Arlington, Virginia. » Congressional Testimony
» To Senate Commerce Chairman HollingsLetter from NARP to Senate Commerce Chairman Ernest F. Hollings Dear Mr. Chairman: Our Association greatly appreciates your recognition of the increased demands being placed on Amtrak in the wake of the September 11 tragedy, and particularly your initiative in introducing RAIL-21. Clearly, over-reliance on aviation and underdevelopment of intercity passenger rail has left the nation’s transportation system and its entire economy far more vulnerable than necessary. We think the closer any enacted legislation comes to RAIL-21, the better public policy it will be. We have the following comments about specific items: (1) The $998 million for tunnel fire and life safety work primarily in New York but also in Baltimore and Washington means that important work previously set for completion in 2014 could be completed by 2006. It should be recognized that, if allocated on a per-passenger basis, approximately 90% of the $898 million allocated to New York would be attributable to Long Island Rail Road and New Jersey Transit commuter train passengers. We need to remember this the next time someone attacks Amtrak for consuming “x” billion dollars. We also need to get the job done sooner than 2014, so this is a reasonable solution. (2) The $515 million will help Amtrak better secure its infrastructure and trains. Unlike airlines, the primary threat to railroads is to tracks, bridges and tunnels. Improvements to the security provided to this infrastructure will not be readily apparent to passengers, but nonetheless is of critical importance. Amtrak owns infrastructure not just in the Northeast Corridor but also about one-third of the Chicago-Detroit line and terminal trackage in several big cities. Amtrak’s nationally accredited police force is part of Amtrak’s corporate budget. (3) We strongly believe that any package should include capacity enhancements nationwide. Northeast Corridor capacity will continue to increase as more Acela Express trainsets are received, but the needs for more capacity are nationwide. The California corridors and the Pacific Northwest were running near capacity before September 11, so have little room for growth. Amtrak indicates that in early October, sleeping-car (4) The High Speed Rail Investment Act has been kicking around for over two years, and was the subject of a Senate floor colloquy at the end of last year’s session, on December 15, when both Senators Lott and Daschle promised action this year. There is no federal program for states that seek an investment partner for intercity passenger rail. This policy looked strange before September 11 and looks bizarre now. Air travel is down yet states that want to make aviation investments can get generous federal matches; rail travel is up, and no federal partnership is available for rail. Nonetheless, some states have projects ready to go, so HSRIA would be a legitimate element for inclusion in a stimulus spending package. (5) We thank you for the fact that RAIL-21 eliminates the operational self-sufficiency requirement, which originated as a compromise between legislators who wanted Amtrak “dead yesterday” and those who believe in passenger rail. I understand the government’s right to assurance that funds spent on Amtrak give “good value for money,” as the British say, but I agree with you that there is no value in saddling Amtrak with a mandate that causes the DOT Inspector General to testify as follows: “We have no doubt that Amtrak could make the kinds of draconian cuts necessary to meet its self-sufficiency mandate on time, but it should not do so at the cost of the assets and human resources necessary to maintain a healthy railroad beyond 2003. Such a victory would be hollow and have serious repercussions for the future of intercity passenger rail.” The most dangerous part of the current law is the ‘trigger’ mechanism which requires Amtrak under certain circumstances to draft a “liquidation plan” for Congress to consider. The mere creation of such a plan could frighten the holders of Amtrak’s debt and create a crisis that jeopardizes continuance of the service. In this context, it is of great concern that the Amtrak Reform Council has announced that its November 9 meeting will include discussion of members’ “views on whether Amtrak is likely to meet the statutory self-sufficiency requirement set forth in section 204 of the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997 (Reform Act).” (6) We support Senator McCain’s amendment applying longstanding penalties for aviation terrorism to those who perpetrate or attempt to perpetrate terrorism against railroads, freight or passenger. We thank you again for your efforts in these matters and stand ready to help the Committee and the Congress be responsive to the needs of the traveling public. We would appreciate it if the record of tomorrow’s hearing could include this letter. Sincerely, Ross B. Capon, Executive Director
» To Senate Appropriations Chairman ByrdLetter from NARP to Senate Appropriations Chairman Byrd The Honorable Robert C. Byrd, Chairman Dear Mr. Chairman: As you know, the traveling public has increasingly relied on Amtrak since September 11. February was the sixth straight month in which the percentage change in Amtrak passenger-miles was far more positive than for the airlines-Amtrak up 8.6%, domestic airline services down 10.3%. It is more important than ever that passenger rail continue across the nation, and-in particular-that Amtrak survive the current fiscal year. Therefore, we ask you to include funding for Amtrak in the emergency defense appropriations supplemental. While Amtrak has said it has enough cash to last through September 30, we think the company may be so “close to the edge” that an incident or two (for example, terrorist event or derailment) could push it over the edge and force a permanent, nationwide shutdown at a time when most people think Congress has complete authority to decide what will happen in Fiscal 2003. Indeed, a non-fatal derailment played a key role in the series of events that led to the private sector Auto-Train Corporation’s 1981 end of service. To put it another way, we fear that Amtrak’s survival to the end of Fiscal 2002 depends on “everything going right,” much like Amtrak’s erstwhile hopes of meeting the ill-advised operational self-sufficiency target. Some of Amtrak’s recent cutbacks are disturbing. Amtrak on March 1 eliminated checked baggage service and reduced staffing hours at significant cities including Austin, Detroit, El Paso, Fargo, Houston, Lamy (which serves nearby Santa Fe), Little Rock and Tucson. Since Maricopa, the new station serving Phoenix, never had checked baggage service, there now is no such service at any intermediate station on the 1,423-mile San Antonio-Los Angeles segment. Effective April 1, Amtrak will eliminate checked baggage at Cincinnati. These are not the actions of a company with confidence in its future, or a company that gives customer service proper importance, and these are only the most immediately visible cutbacks. I enclose a letter published March 19 in The Indianapolis Star about cutbacks in Amtrak’s shops. We cannot judge the amount of funding essential to maintaining reasonable service through September 30, but the $54 million bottom-line hit which George Warrington says resulted from the Amtrak Reform Council finding on November 9, 2001, sounds like the absolute minimum. With the right guidelines, a much larger amount could both insure successful completion of the fiscal year and act as a down payment for FY 2003. We believe the first priority beyond bare survival should be restoring to service the modern cars parked at Beech Grove, Indiana, because Amtrak so far has not found the funds needed to repair them. Thank you for considering our views. Please let me know if we can help further in your consideration of and action on this issue. Sincerely, Ross B. Capon, Executive Director Attachment: The Indianapolis Star, March 19, 2002 Letter Amtrak budget cuts impact rail safety Is the government systematically destroying the only passenger rail system in this country? It sure seems like it. It is laying off the very people who keep the trains running in a safe manner. It is tying the hands of very skilled tradesmen, whose job it is to see that the cars are safe to carry the public from one place to another. Management and supervision are lolling in a state of complacency while the tradesmen are begging for parts and enough men and women to accomplish the intricate task of making sure every car gets all the repairs needed. “If it rolls it goes” seems to be the call going out from the powers-that-be at Amtrak. What happens when people are injured or, worse yet, killed because the resources were not available to assure safe travel by rail? There are many people who will never travel by air again. This is a golden opportunity to take advantage of that fact and increase a valuable resource. Over 250 of the layoffs have been at Beech Grove, the only heavy repair facility in the country. If Beech Grove is stripped of its ability to function, you in effect cripple the entire country. I would not like that on my conscience. Julie Agard, Indianapolis » To House Appropriations Chairman Bill YoungSeptember 25, 2002 The Honorable C. W. “Bill” Young, Chairman Dear Mr. Chairman: As you prepare to mark up the Fiscal 2003 appropriations bill, we wish to underline three key points: * As indicated in our August 22 letter to members of your transportation subcommittee, we strongly support Amtrak’s request for $1.2 billion for Amtrak in Fiscal 2003. Amtrak President Gunn, who inherited this budget request, has said it is too low. It is clear to us that Amtrak is having a difficult time arriving at a Fiscal 2003 budget based on a $1.2 billion federal grant, thus we think anything even lower will raise serious questions about the organization’s ability to survive. * With regard to report language calling for an end to certain routes on July 1, 2003, we emphasize that the existing system is so skeletal that elimination of any major route means total cessation of service to entire states and major metropolitan areas, and threatens to start a “falling-domino” process. We strongly oppose such eliminations, particularly on the eve of what we presume will be next year’s reauthorization. Discontinuance of the Sunset Limited, for example, would shift some New Orleans terminal costs to the two other trains that serve New Orleans—City of New Orleans to Chicago and Crescent to Atlanta/Washington/New York. Those trains would be hit with higher costs and loss of connecting revenues from Sunset Limited connecting passengers. Finally, route eliminations do not create near-term net cost savings and thus would not help close any budget gap in FY03 or even FY04. * Even if a threshold were to be established, “subsidy per passenger” is a measure with no economic basis. “Operating ratio” (costs divided by revenues) would make more sense, or possibly “subsidy per passenger-mile”—both are standard measures in intercity transportation. “Subsidy per passenger” has certain uses in the local transit industry where trip length variations are small, but even for commuter railroads subsidy per passenger-mile (and operating ratio) are standard since these trips tend to be longer, and the financial performance is clearly distance related. The best illustration of the third point is the Chicago-Los Angeles Southwest Chief. It has the fifth best operating ratio among long-distance routes, but the fifth worst subsidy per passenger. The disconnect between these two metrics results from the fact that this train carries a relatively small number of passengers relatively long distances. To some extent, subsidy per passenger is a measure of average trip length of the passengers on a route, but certainly not a measure of economic efficiency. Both the Southwest Chief and Three Rivers are linchpins in Amtrak’s mail carriage business, which Mr. Gunn has confirmed is profitable and which he wants to continue. The Sunset Limited and Texas Eagle have been victims of dismal Union Pacific on-time performance. In fact, Union Pacific is distinguished by having earned no Amtrak on-time performance incentives over the past two years. This has an impact on ridership and we strongly believe the correct next step is to correct the performance problems rather than to excuse Union Pacific from its legal obligations. Finally, all the numbers include allocations of corporate overhead, an extremely inexact science at Amtrak and another indication that many costs assigned to individual routes will not disappear if routes are dropped, but simply be shifted to surviving routes, “fattening them up” for the next “kill.” David M. Laney, President Bush’s nominee to the Amtrak Board, said at his September 5 confirmation hearing what many of us believe: The appointment of David Gunn was “a very positive statement by the board” and “so far, there has been a significant step-up in [Amtrak’s] credibility” as a result of Gunn’s appointment. We believe Mr. Gunn should be given time to show what he can do to improve productivity and reduce costs, and should not be forced to immediately switch to dealing with the possibly fatal ramifications of eliminating all service to Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Arkansas and New Mexico. (Technically, the Oklahoma City-Fort Worth Heartland Flyer is not on the committee’s “hit list” but a substantial part of its revenue comes from Texas Eagle connecting passengers and no one believes the Flyer could survive in isolation.) Thank you for your past helpfulness to the intercity passenger rail business, and for whatever you can do to ameliorate the problems raised by the Committee’s report. Sincerely, Ross B. Capon cc: The Honorable David Obey » To House Appropriations Chairman Bill YoungJuly 17, 2003 The Honorable C. W. “Bill” Young, Chairman Dear Mr. Chairman: Our Association strongly supports Amtrak’s request for $1.8 billion in FY 2004. We are shocked and outraged at the July 11 action of the subcommittee, cutting David Gunn’s tight budget from $1.8 billion to $580 million, and claiming that it “provides for continuing Amtrak operations.” All the evidence before the subcommittee indicates that even a repeat of this year’s $1.05 billion would cause a shutdown which will cost the government more, and create a much bigger burden than what is in the bill. Gunn’s budget reflects closure of one of Amtrak’s three call reservations centers and elimination of under-performing routes. Also, his analysis of the multi-year cost of bringing Northeast Corridor infrastructure to a state of good repair is $1 billion less than his predecessor’s. In general, he has brought credibility and efficiency to Amtrak, as well as a plan to stabilize the company. We believe the committee has a responsibility to see that the U.S. has balanced transportation which maintains the rail choice. We would be happy to provide further information, or be helpful in any other way to the subcommittee and/or individual members’ offices. Sincerely, Ross B. Capon cc: The Honorable David Obey » October 2, 2003 - Senate Commerce written record, passenger rail reauthorizationRoss B. Capon, Executive Director National Association of Railroad Passengers Submitted to the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation U. S. Senate The Honorable John McCain, Chairman
Passenger Rail Reauthorization October 31, 2003 (for record of October 2, 2003)
The National Association of Railroad Passengers shares the commonly held view that David L. Gunn as Amtrak president and CEO is doing an excellent job. We believe the increased credibility that Amtrak seems to enjoy in many quarters is well deserved, but we recognize the challenges that lie ahead in terms of the need for adequate funding both for Amtrak and for a corridor development program. Corridor Development The National Association of Railroad Passengers agrees that there is a crying need for increased short-distance corridor development. Indeed, much of the corridor development that has taken place thus far is the result of efforts by our members -- with our support -- to secure and maintain the requisite state funding. Today, states are playing a more active role than ever before. Federal policy should be designed to encourage states to continue those efforts. Shifting virtually all costs to the states would risk losing ground already gained. To cite two specific efforts in which our members played important roles, the much-vaunted California program grew out of a citizen initiative (Proposition 116) that in 1990 provided the state department of transportation with $2 billion for passenger rail. The hard work was done by the Planning and Conservation League and by Train Riders Association of California. Similarly, our members and the Washington Association of Railroad Passengers played a key role in the pro-rail swing in State of Washington policies a few years later that has led to the Cascades success. While we all would like to have seen more progress by now, the fact remains that considerable progress has been accomplished, as reflected in the table below. It is also worth noting that the much-maligned recent Northeast Corridor investments nonetheless have led to a doubling in Amtrak’s share of the Boston-New York rail-plus-air market (from 18% in July-December, 1999, to 36% in January-March, 2003; during the same period the comparable New York-Washington figure rose from 36% to 53%). Table One. Corridor Ridership (mill.), FY 1993 and FY 2003
FY03 ridership on the St. Louis, Detroit and Milwaukee lines were up, respectively, 13%, 9% and 3% from FY02. The last two work seasons have seen considerable track and signal improvements on the St. Louis line. Illinois funded the track work. Signal work was jointly funded by Federal Railroad Administration, Association of American Railroads, and the state. In addition, FRA-funded signal work on the one-third of the Detroit line that Amtrak owns has permitted top speeds to rise from 79 mph to 90 mph; they are expected to reach 110 mph within a few years. This progress has been achieved within the context of existing law and organizational structures. It is easy to wish that a different structure could produce better results going forward, but any change must be evaluated carefully. The Bush Administration's proposal to eliminate Amtrak's "right of access" to freight railroad tracks for new routes, and for new frequencies on existing routes, could make it difficult for states that already are "fiscally challenged" to add new service. The managing director of the Capitol Corridor (California) has said that his track charges might triple without the right of access law. The freight railroads already have the well-established ability to condition new services on appropriate infrastructure investment; this is not something that requires a change in the law. We do not have a principled stand against having another operator provide the service, but we are concerned about the amount of energy that could be wasted in pursuing this option, given the firmly established positions of the freight railroads and rail labor. Moreover, Economist Max B. Sawicky notes: "You don't save money or get competition just by virtue of using private vendors. Private vendors need profit margins. Thin markets can mean few bidders. And vendors can open with lowball bids, then -- after they've won -- raise costs over time." Obviously, it is important that Amtrak maintain the new confidence in its accounting and its overall processes which, as noted above, we have seen under David Gunn. Long-distance Trains Eliminating long-distance trains will not provide anywhere near the funds needed to establish new short-distance services. On the contrary, the result of such elimination might be a loss of Congressional interest in funding intercity passenger rail in general. It is commonly stated that only a small portion of passengers ride the entire length of most long-distance runs (except, of course, Auto Train, which has no intermediate stops). That observation should not cause people to overlook the very long average trip lengths on these trains. Table Two. Trip/Route lengths for certain long-distance routes
* Empire Builder mileage shown is for Seattle section. Chicago-Portland mileage is 2,257. All of the average trip lengths shown exceed the length of short-distance corridors as commonly defined, and these figures understate the actual length of many trips since 30 to 50 per cent of long-distance passengers connect with other routes. Any attempt to "chop up" these routes into smaller, daytime pieces will quickly run afoul of the high costs of establishing new terminals for crews and equipment and the considerable loss of existing business and revenue that would result because people will not accept forced transfers and overnight layovers. For example, one attraction of the Empire Builder for travelers from points west is that it arrives in the Twin Cities in the early morning and departs in the evening, enabling people to minimize their time away from their job, as well as their hotel costs -- one full day in Twin Cities with no hotel expense, two full days with only one hotel night, etc. Thank you for considering our views. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Printable Version
Ross Capon joined the staff of the National Association of Railroad Passenger (NARP) in 1975, and became executive director in 1976. In 2008, his title was changed to president and CEO. Mr. Capon’s duties as President of the only national organization advocating for the users of passenger trains and rail transit include testifying before Congress and working with members of Congress to increase funding for passenger rail service; briefing the media on passenger rail issues; and coordinating among state and regional associations of railroad passengers on local issues that affect passenger rail. 
