Amtrak Finally Gets A Boost in Funding
by Andrew Posner, Providence, Rhode Island on 10. 6.08
Amtrak Finally Gets More Funding
The heavens are finally smiling on Amtrak, as a perfect storm of high gas prices, a slowing economy, concern over rail safety after the recent Los Angeles crash, soaring ridership and even Joe Biden's love of and support for Amtrak have helped push through the Senate a 5 year, $13 billion funding package. According to the Wall Street Journal, the bill passed the Senate by a veto-proof margin, and assuming the House approves and President Bush signs it, Amtrak will now have enough money to pay off some of its debt; cover operating expenses and the cost of buying new rail cars and expanding service; encourage states to invest in rail programs; and improve safety. In addition, the bill "contains provisions designed to make Amtrak's management more accountable, such as financial reporting standards."
We recently discussed the fact that everything was looking up for Amtrak--increased ridership and positive publicity--except for funding, and it took the aforementioned perfect storm to partially solve the problem of Amtrak being perpetually underfunded. Interestingly, the outcome of the presidential election might have some bearing on Amtrak's future, as John McCain is no fan of Amtrak, whereas Biden and Obama are very supportive of the rail company.
However, the most important question will be how well Amtrak leverages the new funds to improve service, expand rail capacity, and service new markets.
Via: Wall Street Journal
More on Amtrak
Amtrak Train Runs Out Of Fuel, Perhaps A Wake Up Call For America
Celebrate National Train Day on May 10th
Air Travel and Climate Change: Take the Train
Dual Mode Trains in Japan
Allison Rogers on Taking a Train from DC To Rhode Island
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- No Way To Run a Railroad: Amtrak Arrests Photo Contest Participant- For Taking Photos
- Will the Next New Deal be Transit-Based? Three Plans to Rescue the Economy and the Earth with Public Transportation
- Car Talk Calls for a Higher Gas Tax
- Ride a Bus in the Winter and Survive
Bioneers 2008: Nature and Technology Joining Forces
|
Copenhagen Cyclists Take Over Main City Thoroughfare
|
Hopefully they'll expand their schedules, too. I live outside of the Northeast Corridor, and I'd love to take the train -- but the schedule often isn't dense enough for me to get where I'm going and get back without spending a week and a half at my destination. As a guy with a job, I can't afford to take that kind of time off. Taking a whole day to travel (and an additional day to travel back) is generous -- but doable.
Those of us who live in the Midwest do have some hope, though:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwest_Regional_Rail_Initiative
I would ride amtrak more if it didnt take so long, was on time, and didnt cost as much as flying in some cases. In fact, the biggest problem is limited availability. It doesn't run through nashville anymore.
It is worth noting that when you compare the operating costs of Amtrak with Southwest Airlines per seat-mile.
Southwest Airlines:
Non-Fuel Cost: $0.07 per seat mile
Fuel Cost: $0.03 per seat mile (Hedge at $2.29/gal)
Amtrak:
Non-Fuel Cost: $0.26 per seat mile
Fuel Cost: $0.03 (at $3.96/gal)
(Source: Their respective financial reports)
So jet fuel would have to cost $28 per gallon before Amtrak has lower operating costs than Southwest Airlines.
Good news ... perhaps they can use some funds to clean and sanitize restrooms aboard trains now (which are unbelievably nasty).
Hi,
In don't know if Amtrak is a public or private company, but I guess it must suffer from the same kind of problems of the portuguese CP.
We all know what the issues are, so there's no point discussing them.
However I believe that the railroad transport has a great future -it's much more developed in USA than in Portugal even considering the obvious differences between both countries - since it's economical (or it can be), doesn't polute much and the material lasts long time.
With all these recent economical problems, maybe people will think twice before using their car instead of the public transports.
Have a great week,
José
Hi,
In don't know if Amtrak is a public or private company, but I guess it must suffer from the same kind of problems of the portuguese CP.
We all know what the issues are, so there's no point discussing them.
However I believe that the railroad transport has a great future -it's much more developed in USA than in Portugal even considering the obvious differences between both countries - since it's economical (or it can be), doesn't polute much and the material lasts long time.
With all these recent economical problems, maybe people will think twice before using their car instead of the public transports.
Have a great week,
José
Great news. Need about 10 times the funding though to make a real difference. A great way to create good green jobs in a slow economy.
Time to change the topic name from "Cars and Transportation" to "Trains and Transportation"
Make mine Amtrak.
Mike Z.
This is the advantage of faster trains. The non-fuel costs (staff for example) decreases per mile as the speed goes up.
So it is not the cost that must increase before the train is competitive, it is the speed of the train.
We can yap all we want about how the "per-seat cost" of an Amtrak trip (allegedly; I'm not believing just yet the figures cited below by another commenter) compared to flying; left out of the discussion, sadly, is that travel by train is much more environmentally sound. Much, much more.
Sad that so few here seem to reflect this fact.
America's rail system, compared to the rest of the world, is woeful and pathetic. It's way, way, way past time to fix that.
Wake up, fools. Flying is going to become a thing of the past, what with Peak Oil looming now.
Why does Amtrak need funding. It costs twice as much to take the train as to fly from Philadelphia to Boston. If they can charge that much and be funded as well and still not make ends meet, there is something seriously wrong with the business model in place. I would take the train everywhere if it was affordable. as it is, I just don't go anywhere if I can help it.
The US needs to improve on it's abysmal commitment to mass transit and this is a good step in the right direction.
I just hope Amtrak is less susceptible to the kind of fraud undertaken by staff on the Long Island Rail Road.
Wait, don't real businesses get money from customers and banks? If Amtrack is such a great deal, why can't they succeed like a normal business? Getting additional funding form Congress is just admitting that you are a failure and can't compete. Seriously, Amtrack needs to ask Congress if they can go independent and manage themselves into success. Amtrack has a lot to offer, but it is shackled by Congress with mandates, schedules, and other regulations.
As a boy growing up in Northern MN-Wisconsin, we rode the trains everywhere we went, familiies only had one car, some had none. The system worked well, so much less of our income was needed for transportation. We had more money for the rest of our needs. Now we have to feed as much as half of our income to a car, the ensuing repairs, insurance, taxation and associated fees. If we could free that money up by using rail, I beleive it would not be long before those savings filtered down to the rest of our economy. Alas, it would mean we have to give up that SUV though! Who knows we might even end up with a bit more discretionary bling in our pockets! Do ya think?