The title of this video pretty much speaks for itself.
Amtrak names new CEO in the form of former Delta Airlines CEO Richard Anderson to replace Mooreman on July 12th.
What are your thoughts on this?
Enjoy!
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Wick had said he never planned on staying around very long. But, I thought it would have been longer than this.
I am sure that Amtrak employees are having very little faith in the company these days with another CEO coming onboard. This is no way to run a railroad or any other business for that matter. With the October end of the fiscal year approaching who knows what Amtrak will be like. If anyone has Amtrak points though the Bank Of America Amtrak MasterCard as I do I would suggest using those points toward Amtrak travel soon. I just did two weeks ago but I still have points left so another trip is being planned.
Ed G. (Along The New Haven Line Of Metro-North and Amtrak In Westchester County, NY)
Modern commuter train travel is thoroughly uninspiring. I rode the MARC train to DC for five years. It was nothing to wax nostalgic about
I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
J 611 posted:I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
Just don't use our tax dollars to support them.
J611. Just because you don't like Amtrak long distance trains, too bad, I love them. I have an Amtrak Bank of America card and I love it. I just used my points on my trip to Key West in Jan. There are a lot of people that don't fly, & they depend on the trains.
J 611 posted:I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
The highways that cross the country do not make a profit either, do we get rid of them? One reason why we have Amtrak long distance routes is because for many smaller communities along those routes the train actually works out better than the highways for the traveler.
J 611 posted:I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
Except that the interstate routes that come through Nebraska are almost always sold out trains. I agree that if Amtrak were to contract to the Northeast Corridor, they may be profitable. However, I could also argue that if they had more equipment, they could sellout more cross-country routes through the midwest. Amtrak's achilles heel has always been that basically anywhere except the northeast, they don't own their own track. The "priority" given to Amtrak on other lines ensures that they are late pretty much every time they get past the Rockies westbound.
Every time I have traveled the south west chief & the California Zephyr & the Silver meteor it has been sold out.
J 611 posted:I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
Hey, them's fighting words! 
BobbyD posted:J 611 posted:I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
Just don't use our tax dollars to support them.
I'm always amazed at people's comments about tax dollars supporting Amtrak. Other forms of transportation in this country receive major support from tax dollars yet nobody seems to give those a second thought.
Keeping partisan politics out of it, it seems that any Amtrak CEO has to wear three hats. First and foremost, he's a railroader since he's running a railroad.
Second, he's a lobbyist since the purse strings for the NRPC come from Congress.
Third, he's a businessman whose responsibility is to sell his company's products to current and prospective customers.
Even if money were not an issue, any corporation has a responsibility to it's shareholders. In this case the shareholders are u s.
It's pretty easy to make the NEC successful. It works well and it emulates most of the euro rail systems, notwithstanding it's 19th century PRR real estate alignment.
I'd like to see them make the rest of the system more successful. Train travel simply can't replace flying or driving.
It has to be the first class alternative to them.
Do you think there are no tax dollars in the interstate highway system? Or the Air Traffic Control system? Or airports, harbors and waterways? The "No tax dollars for Amtrak!" is a nonsensical argument. Tax dollars already support every other mode of transport, so why not passenger rail?
Passenger rail transport is supported by tax dollars or government subsidies in every other country in the world where rail transport is used. We are the only country that thinks our passenger trains should make a "profit." That is never going to happen. We had better realize this and decide once and for all to either fully support Amtrak with tax revenues or return it to the private sector, where it will die a slow death.
I totally agree, Rich and I am tired of the argument. The passenger hauling business has never been profitable-ever- and won't be. To expect otherwise is really stupid. All these other countries with the fancy rail systems spend lots on the people's money on them. Of course, they don't carry the defense expense burden the US does or the space exploration money that is squandered. We would be better off spending the space money improving our infrastructure. Some years ago I was in Virginia talking to a woman who was very knowledgeable about the highway construction industry and lobbying. It is massive and the pols are well taken care of. There are about 4-5 basic industries that make a lot of money off highway constructio-much more than rail construction.
J 611 posted:I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
You may not see the need, but you may be uninformed. One example: A number of years ago there was a move to eliminate the Texas Eagle, the train that runs from Chicago to St. Louis to Dallas and Ft. Worth to San Antonio (where it meets the Sunset Limited, which goes on to LA, and New Orleans). Folks in smaller towns along the route (I knew some of the organizers in several East Texas towns) went on the warpath, and organized groups to get after their Congressional representatives to put a halt to the cancellation plan. A mayor in one to the towns became fairly well known for her work in spearheading the East Texas effort. Obviously these efforts were successful, and the Eagle was saved.
As they argued, most of these smaller towns are not served with any kind of air service, and other than travelling by car, they are cut off from the world without the train. Some of their residents can't drive, for whatever reason, and many of those who can don't want to - or can't - drive long distances, and for them they're isolated without the train service. Understand that many of the folks in these towns don't necessarily ride the train long distances, but they may often ride it a hundred or two hundred miles to get to the nearest large city, which they may want to do to get medical attention, go shopping, see friends and relatives, or whatever.
Long distance trains aren't just for riders who are traveling long distances. Riders come and go at all the stops along the way. Of course, all this is could be out the window with the Trump administration's proposed elimination of all long distance Amtrak passenger train service. There will no doubt be a fight, if the proposal even gets any serious consideration. As many are aware, if enacted, hundreds of small communities across the United States would lose their last means of low cost public transportation to the outside world.
OGR Webmaster posted:Do you think there are no tax dollars in the interstate highway system? Or the Air Traffic Control system? Or airports, harbors and waterways? The "No tax dollars for Amtrak!" is a nonsensical argument. Tax dollars already support every other mode of transport, so why not passenger rail?
Passenger rail transport is supported by tax dollars or government subsidies in every other country in the world where rail transport is used. We are the only country that thinks our passenger trains should make a "profit." That is never going to happen. We had better realize this and decide once and for all to either fully support Amtrak with tax revenues or return it to the private sector, where it will die a slow death.
Rich,
Honestly I couldn't put it any better myself. Airlines, Highways, Rail, they are all government subsidized. And there are several other stories of small town people who don't have cars and who depend on Amtrak.
Example. A gentleman who lives in Toccoa, Georgia I met when riding the Crescent last year. This man takes the train from his home town and Atlanta, Georgia where he works. He has no car, and there are very few (if any) other transportation methods to get him to work like Amtrak does on a daily basis. And really and truly it works out well because the southbound train gets into Toccoa around 6:00AM and the northbound gets there after 10:00PM.
Amtrak may not be perfect, but it is something that several people depend on. You can talk about the NEC all you want, but the entire population of the country does not live along that route.
But that's just what I think.
Yeah, and the entire population doesn't live near a Amtrak, plane or bus route either and they get along just fine.
If tax dollars goes to something I like, it is a positive.
If tax dollars go to something I do not like, it is a negative, subsidy, or welfare.
Maybe everything in transportation, except for the local road network perhaps, needs to be sold off, made private and taxpaying. Then see what happens.
bw14 posted:BobbyD posted:J 611 posted:I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
Just don't use our tax dollars to support them.
I'm always amazed at people's comments about tax dollars supporting Amtrak. Other forms of transportation in this country receive major support from tax dollars yet nobody seems to give those a second thought.
Had a chance to take Amtrak between Indy and Chicago once. The schedule is so poor can't see why anyone would ride it. IIRC 5 hours to get to Chicago and the returning trains get into Indy at near midnight Ever been at that station holding a suitcase at 12AM? So I can see where folks don't want their dollars supporting someone else's ride. I doubt anyone is thrilled airlines get tax dollars for airports, convention centers, etc either.
How many road projects get built just because tax money has to be spent or some other local gets it and the contracts/jobs which lead to campaign contributions? A local government nearby erected a stone sign and afterwards it was discovered there was a crack in the stone. When a newspaper asked about the cost to fix it they replied it didn't matter as they didn't pay for it, it was Grant money and they would just knock it down.
J 611 posted:I don't see the need for long haul Amtrak routes. Focus on the NE corridor and other shorter more profitable routes. Get rid of the rest.
It never ceases to amaze that those within the beltway "don't see the need for" anything beyond, and desire to "get rid of the rest."
Passenger rail service has been set up to be unprofitable for along time. If Amtrak trains Could add a few freight cars to each consist they would make money. The thing that made passenger rail unprofitable decades ago was removing Mail from it. If they could get a contract with fedex UPS or even the postal service running trains across America might make money and get trucks off of the road. The money that Amtrak gets from the government is peanuts in comparison to what state and federal government invests in roads and airports. Here in Salt lake they are rebuilding the Airport at a cost of 3.5 billion. That is one of probably a couple hundred airports nation wide. Last year the federal government contributed 1.375 billion to Amtrak's operation. In the overall picture that is nothing. We spend hundreds of billions on Road and air travel. Like I said change the rules so Amtrak can compete and it makes money while increasing its ability to serve more people.
jethat posted:Passenger rail service has been set up to be unprofitable for along time. If Amtrak trains Could add a few freight cars to each consist they would make money. The thing that made passenger rail unprofitable decades ago was removing Mail from it. If they could get a contract with fedex UPS or even the postal service running trains across America might make money and get trucks off of the road.
What? Your being factitious, right?
OGR Webmaster posted:Do you think there are no tax dollars in the interstate highway system? Or the Air Traffic Control system? Or airports, harbors and waterways? The "No tax dollars for Amtrak!" is a nonsensical argument. Tax dollars already support every other mode of transport, so why not passenger rail?
Passenger rail transport is supported by tax dollars or government subsidies in every other country in the world where rail transport is used. We are the only country that thinks our passenger trains should make a "profit." That is never going to happen. We had better realize this and decide once and for all to either fully support Amtrak with tax revenues or return it to the private sector, where it will die a slow death.
I don't think anyone disputes that Rich.
The country is in debt up to it's eyeballs. Where is the money supposed to come from?
And with a nearly 50/50 election split how do you get two dissenting groups of people to agree on what to cut and what to spend.
And let's all be honest - how many of us regularly use Amtrak?
It's much like when I attend restoration of rail service hearings, which I often do. There is of course the consultant group with great ideas but limited long term capital. Surrounding them are folks like us who remember the glory days of rail transportation and want it restored to "try it once again because of all of the congestion and pollution".
Sadly, what is missing are the significant numbers of riders to justify the expenditures.
Rule292 posted:OGR Webmaster posted:Do you think there are no tax dollars in the interstate highway system? Or the Air Traffic Control system? Or airports, harbors and waterways? The "No tax dollars for Amtrak!" is a nonsensical argument. Tax dollars already support every other mode of transport, so why not passenger rail?
Passenger rail transport is supported by tax dollars or government subsidies in every other country in the world where rail transport is used. We are the only country that thinks our passenger trains should make a "profit." That is never going to happen. We had better realize this and decide once and for all to either fully support Amtrak with tax revenues or return it to the private sector, where it will die a slow death.
I don't think anyone disputes that Rich.
The country is in debt up to it's eyeballs. Where is the money supposed to come from?
And with a nearly 50/50 election split how do you get two dissenting groups of people to agree on what to cut and what to spend.
And let's all be honest - how many of us regularly use Amtrak?
It's much like when I attend restoration of rail service hearings, which I often do. There is of course the consultant group with great ideas but limited long term capital. Surrounding them are folks like us who remember the glory days of rail transportation and want it restored to "try it once again because of all of the congestion and pollution".
Sadly, what is missing are the significant numbers of riders to justify the expenditures.
What Rule292 said.
Cutting funding to Amtrak in terms of the overall federal budget is so close to a 0% reduction it might as well be 0%.
Ridership is at an all time high on Amtrak. They must be doing something right. Being in their 47th year of operation on a shoe string budget is an amazing accomplishment.
Most long distance trains run sold out or close to it. Mainly that is because there aren't a lot of long distance routes. The long distance trains are more expensive to operate as they require a whole extra level of staffing to maintain a quality service for meals and sleeping arrangements.
eddie g posted:J611. Just because you don't like Amtrak long distance trains, too bad, I love them. I have an Amtrak Bank of America card and I love it. I just used my points on my trip to Key West in Jan. There are a lot of people that don't fly, & they depend on the trains.
Too bad for you. How about YOU paying your own way and quit demanding that the rest of us subsidize your travel choices? Shall we kick in for your hotels and meals while we're at it?
jethat posted:Passenger rail service has been set up to be unprofitable for along time. If Amtrak trains Could add a few freight cars to each consist they would make money. The thing that made passenger rail unprofitable decades ago was removing Mail from it. If they could get a contract with fedex UPS or even the postal service running trains across America might make money and get trucks off of the road. The money that Amtrak gets from the government is peanuts in comparison to what state and federal government invests in roads and airports. Here in Salt lake they are rebuilding the Airport at a cost of 3.5 billion. That is one of probably a couple hundred airports nation wide. Last year the federal government contributed 1.375 billion to Amtrak's operation. In the overall picture that is nothing. We spend hundreds of billions on Road and air travel. Like I said change the rules so Amtrak can compete and it makes money while increasing its ability to serve more people.
"A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money." - the late Senator Everett Dirkson.
Rule292 posted:OGR Webmaster posted:Do you think there are no tax dollars in the interstate highway system? Or the Air Traffic Control system? Or airports, harbors and waterways? The "No tax dollars for Amtrak!" is a nonsensical argument. Tax dollars already support every other mode of transport, so why not passenger rail?
Passenger rail transport is supported by tax dollars or government subsidies in every other country in the world where rail transport is used. We are the only country that thinks our passenger trains should make a "profit." That is never going to happen. We had better realize this and decide once and for all to either fully support Amtrak with tax revenues or return it to the private sector, where it will die a slow death.
It's much like when I attend restoration of rail service hearings, which I often do. There is of course the consultant group with great ideas but limited long term capital. Surrounding them are folks like us who remember the glory days of rail transportation and want it restored to "try it once again because of all of the congestion and pollution".
Sadly, what is missing are the significant numbers of riders to justify the expenditures.
Don't confuse nostalgia with the reality that a multi-modal transportation network has benefits that this country now sorely lacks. The culture shift away from rail transit was in hardly mirrored in Europe where developed and rural communities have not only access to air, road and water, but rail, too. I don't advocate for "glory days" or the Golden Age of railroading to return - I want connected communities with multiple transportation options available to people of different incomes and backgrounds and that's a pretty common theme among my demographic.
Meanwhile, the culture shift against cars and highways has already begun: http://www.uspirg.org/blogs/bl...99t-just-millennials. Where does this shift eventually end up? On a demand for options - bike lanes, passenger rail, public transit etc.
From: http://www.uspirg.org/issues/u...ntury-transportation
"Public transportation ridership nationwide is hitting record highs. This trend is greatest among younger Americans — who will be the biggest users of the infrastructure we build today. Since the 1950s — despite knowing that buses and rail use far less energy and space — we have spent nine times more on highway projects than on public transportation.
In 2015, more than half of Americans — and nearly two-thirds of Millennials, the country’s largest generation — want to live “in a place where they do not need to use a car very often.” Similar trends exist for older adults. Older adults in general put the creation of pedestrian-friendly streets and local investment in public transportation in their top five priorities for their communities."
This myopic attitude of thinking passenger rail should be treated differently than airlines, highways, etc is a little much considering that people who value their tax dollars so much want it spent in areas where the ROI is much lower and the total cost of car ownership far exceeds its purchase price.
The only thing nostalgia does is recall an era when high speed, passenger rail actually existed in this country. The more people who recognize where and how the country expanded and developed in the 20th Century, the less out-of-reach that type of transportation network seems. It'll never be like it was - but that is NOT the point.
Nick Chillianis posted:eddie g posted:J611. Just because you don't like Amtrak long distance trains, too bad, I love them. I have an Amtrak Bank of America card and I love it. I just used my points on my trip to Key West in Jan. There are a lot of people that don't fly, & they depend on the trains.
Too bad for you. How about YOU paying your own way and quit demanding that the rest of us subsidize your travel choices? Shall we kick in for your hotels and meals while we're at it?
Unfortunately this line of logic is faulty. I don't particularly want to pay for the subsidized roads you drive on,the subsidized airports you fly out of, the subsidized sports venues, or the heavily subsidized oil all modes of transport use. However we are one nation and we all must pay our fair share to keep it whole. Amtrak's 15 long distance trains hardly factor into any federal budget since Amtrak's inception.
This thread has focused on 15 trains. How silly is that?
Amtrak's long distance routes may in fact be only 15 trains and it is true the overall impact on the budget will be negligible, but do these routes really serve much of a purpose? Rarely on time, competing with freight and slower than a bus or automobile, the long distance routes have lost their function. Amtrak works well when the regions mimic Europe or Japan in terms of distance. Boston to Washington, Northern California, Southern California, Texas eventually, perhaps Chicago, routes that are 300-450 miles max and can be traveled in a day deserve the funding and support. If there is a demand for long distance travel then let some private company have a shot, let the charge what the real cost is and let's see how much support these trains receive. For example, today July 3rd, eastbound sunset limited almost 3 hours late already, Zepher to Chicago, almost 4 hours late, further west another Zepher almost 4 hours late, Westbound Zepher 4 hours late, Texas Eagle over 2 hours late, who wants to get on a train with the express purpose of getting somewhere on time knowing there is little chance of that happening? Spend the money on the north east corridor, spend the money on the other corridor services, let the long distance trains fade away.
Again by the same logic, let's charge higher taxes to cover roadway repair and maintenance in the north where freeze thaw cycles cause the roads to repaired more frequently. In the south, roads last a lot longer, especially here in the southwest. Having driven the PA Turnpike numerous times, it's not a cheap road to drive on. It does more closely reflects its actual cost and one has to pay for their own gas and vehicle to use it. Is that the model roads should have?
The point of a journey is not always to arrive. There are a lot of intangibles that make long distance train service worthwhile.
GG1 4877 posted:Again by the same logic, let's charge higher taxes to cover roadway repair and maintenance in the north where freeze thaw cycles cause the roads to repaired more frequently. In the south, roads last a lot longer, especially here in the southwest. Having driven the PA Turnpike numerous times, it's not a cheap road to drive on. It does more closely reflects its actual cost and one has to pay for their own gas and vehicle to use it. Is that the model roads should have?
My answer: YES!
And we should have listened to Lucky Lindy" of the SPIRIT OF ST LOUIS fame. We wanted the airline industry run without government subsidies. Smart man.
Dominic Mazoch posted:GG1 4877 posted:Again by the same logic, let's charge higher taxes to cover roadway repair and maintenance in the north where freeze thaw cycles cause the roads to repaired more frequently. In the south, roads last a lot longer, especially here in the southwest. Having driven the PA Turnpike numerous times, it's not a cheap road to drive on. It does more closely reflects its actual cost and one has to pay for their own gas and vehicle to use it. Is that the model roads should have?
My answer: YES!
You should hear the complaining when tolls go up on the Indiana Toll Road (the private operator recently filed for bankruptcy,) Illinois Tollway and the Chicago Skyway toll bridge (which is operated by a private company ...)
Rusty
I am conservative on most political issues but not when it comes to transportation. All transportation modes have enormous infrastructure cost and I believe all Americans should be able to travel this country with comfort, speed and cost options. If you believe Amtrak and all modes of transportation should pay their own way then we should put toll booths at the bottom of our driveways. Some years ago I did some research and found that gas taxes and vehicle registrations paid less than 60% of what is required to build and maintain roads and highways. And I am pretty confident this funding gap has grown.
I often wonder what the state of U.S. passenger rail travel would be like today if it were not for the unfair government push and advantage given to the highway and air modes of transportation that started after WWII. The highway and air modes of transportation have benefited greatly from huge government subsidies to the detriment of passenger rail travel. This is 70 years of a competitive advantage given to the highway and air modes. And we wonder why we see many of our passenger trains in disrepair, running late, and not going to towns and cities they once called on? As one obvious example of where some federal funding could have helped both passenger and freight railroads is in double-tracking. Would our passenger trains run more efficiently and timely if some federal funding had been allotted decades ago to the freight railroads to help double track our national rail system?
Are people happy with what we have now? Crowded highways and road rage. Airline seats you can barely fit in and with testy flight crews? No disrespect intended for airline employees as they really do have a tough job with current airline overcrowding. I don't know if Amtrak will ever be able to overcome any of the disadvantage from the decades long underfunding. As mentioned here a few times, many Amtrak routes do sell out and I am hopeful that Americans are rediscovering rail travel. But before there is any big improvement in passenger rail, we may have to wait for the highway and air modes of travel to get even more stressful than they already are.
R. Hales posted:Are people happy with what we have now? Crowded highways and road rage. Airline seats you can barely fit in and with testy flight crews? No disrespect intended for airline employees as they really do have a tough job with current airline overcrowding. I don't know if Amtrak will ever be able to overcome any of the disadvantage from the decades long underfunding. As mentioned here a few times, many Amtrak routes do sell out and I am hopeful that Americans are rediscovering rail travel. But before there is any big improvement in passenger rail, we may have to wait for the highway and air modes of travel to get even more stressful than they already are.
I don't believe this is a conservative or liberal issue. It is all about a interconnected transportation network where the consumer has choice and all modes of transportation are given an even playing field.
NY Penn Station Renewal Update With Amtrak CEO Wick Moorman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...ature=em-uploademail
Published on Jul 14, 2017 Source: Amtrak on YouTube
Gary
