December 1997In this issue:
On November 13, the House and Senate passed the "Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997" and the resulting bill was sent to President Clinton, who was expected to sign it.
Arizona Senator McCain had this to say: "I realize that my pessimistic view of Amtrak's future, based on its track record, is not shared by the majority of the Congress. That is why I have worked with my colleagues to bring some semblance of legitimacy to this operation. The bill before us does not go as far as many of us would like. For some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, they may say it goes too far. Regardless of the position held, the bill does provide for some comprehensive changes.
"According to a November 5, 1997, letter from Tom Downs, 'enactment of the Amtrak Accountability and Reform Act of 1997 would be the single-most significant action the Congress can take to aid Amtrak in achieving operating self-sufficiency by 2002.' He goes on to say, 'The legislative reforms contained in the bill will allow Amtrak to operate in a more businesslike, cost-effective manner, thus allowing greater productivity and increased savings.'
"I want to remind my colleagues that even if Congress approves the statutory reforms and the $2.3 billion for capital improvements is released, Amtrak's viability remains uncertain… I strongly support passage of this reform measure. However, I will continue to hold strong reservations over Amtrak's ability to ever turn Amtrak into a profitable, subsidy-free operation. One of the most important elements of this bill is that it provides the opportunity for us to shut off the spigot if and when it is clear the promise of financial viability will not or cannot be achieved.
"And I commit now that if this reform and reauthorization plan does not make Amtrak financially viable, I will do everything in my power as a Senator and as chairman of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee to see that it comes to an end.
"I wish Amtrak every success with the passage of this legislation by the House. I will hope and pray that Amtrak succeeds. But I must tell you I am not optimistic that they will succeed and I hope to God that this is the last trip to the taxpayers' pocket book that we make on behalf of Amtrak."
Representative Jim Kolbe wrote the following to ARPA member Anthony Haswell:
"The proposed legislation authorizes $3.37 billion over fiscal years 1998-2000… · The current Board of Directors would be replaced by a new reform board. The new board would have the authority to recommend to Congress a plan to reform Amtrak and may also consider the recommendations of the 1997 Working Group on Intercity Rail regarding the transfer of Amtrak's infrastructure assets and responsibilities to a new, separately governed corporation. · Amtrak's non-voting common stock (now held by freight railroads) and voting preferred stock (held by the federal D.O.T.) would be redeemed. This action allows the new reform board a fresh start in capital structure and stock offerings, including a possible Employee Stock Ownership Plan…
"Once this reform package is enacted, an additional $2.3 billion [the "tax refund"] will be made available to Amtrak to help reduce its debt and make much needed capital investments. Without these reforms, however, I will not lift a finger to save Amtrak.
"…With a capital deficit of over $4 billion and saddled with the fact that now one Amtrak route runs a profit, this rail service has become a very costly venture. We can no longer afford to throw good money after bad."
Stating that "This bipartisan reform bill removes Amtrak from its crippling statutory straitjacket and allows the company a chance to operate on a more business-like basis," Congressman Bud Shuster (R-PA), Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee today applauded House passage of legislation to fundamentally reform and reauthorize Amtrak.
"Passage of this bill demonstrates our resolve to fundamentally reform Amtrak and give it a chance to survive. This is solid legislation that is the product of all the parties — labor, management, and Members — sitting down and hammering out a fair and reasonable compromise. Moreover, this bill is the first top-to-bottom reform of Amtrak since 1971. It eliminates the statutory straitjacket that has handicapped Amtrak at every turn and will allow the railroad to run on a more business-like basis. And, the bill explicitly provides that the Amtrak labor protection reforms have no affect on freight railroad or transit workers.
"The bill also comes at a crucial turning point for Amtrak… Amtrak is in precarious financial shape and headed down a steep path towards bankruptcy. This deteriorating state of affairs has been verified by no less than Amtrak's President, Tom Downs, by the General Accounting Office, and by the bipartisan advisory group constituted by the Committee, the Working Group on Inter-City Rail. Every one of these parties has confirmed that without major structural reform, Amtrak is four to six months from bankruptcy.
"The amendment is straightforward in its aims:
- "It takes the Senate compromise on labor protection, contracting out, and liability with no change. This includes provisions that repeal the statutory guarantee that Amtrak provide up to six years of labor protection to any employee who is laid off due to a route elimination or frequency reduction below three times a week. This issue would be sent to collective bargaining, under a 180-day accelerated bargaining process.
- "Also repealed would be the current ban on contracting out work [other than food and beverage service] if it would result in the layoff of a single employee. This issue would be sent to collective bargaining, but would not be negotiable until the next round of contract negotiations, unless the parties mutually agreed to take it up before then.
- "The bill provides for a global cap of $200 million on tort liability for death or injury to a passenger, or damage to property of a passenger. It also includes a requirement that Amtrak maintain insurance of at least $200 million.
- "It repeals the requirement that Amtrak operate the basic system of routes inherited from private railroads in 1971. This means that unprofitable routes can be shed and profitable routes can be opened. [It also appears to lift the Amtrak monopoly clause which prevented other operators from offering intercity passenger rail. — Ed.]
"…Amtrak's current condition is due in part to chronic federal interference by statute. Congress has specified almost every aspect of Amtrak's finances: where it should operate, when it is allowed to reduce or eliminate service, who its directors are, what kind of stock it may issue, restrictions on its borrowing and capital formation, what benefits it must pay employees, when it can contract with private-sector railroads and businesses, who must audit its books, which law governs all of its contracts, and even who can get reduced-fare transportation on Amtrak trains.
"…Finally, this bill represents a victory for Amtrak and for the future of intercity passenger rail," concluded Shuster. ]
November 15th
This year's Annual Meeting was a time to reflect upon our achievements and the challenges ahead of us. Several guests, who saw in the Arizona Republic the notice of our meeting, came to hear Joe Neblett of ADOT describe high-speed rail. Our treasurer reports at least one new membership was received from the meeting.
Robert Bohannan, having just been elected President at the Board of Directors meeting, chaired the Annual Meeting. He announced that the Directors as printed were elected.
The Board chose as officers for this year: Rob Bohannan as President; Sam Morse as Vice-President; Marc Pearsall as Secretary; and Rob Lindley as Treasurer.
Treasurer Rob Lindley presented a report on ARPA's finances. Copies of ARPA's 1997 Annual Report are available from the ARPA office.
Bill Lindley then gave an update on Amtrak, regional rail, and the Fall 1997 National Association of Railroad Passengers convention in Santa Fe, NM. Anthony Haswell reported on his attending the "Passenger Trains on Freight Railroads" conference.
Our guest speaker, Joe Neblett of the Arizona Department of Transportation, then presented the Status of the High Speed Rail Study. ADOT is conducting a high speed rail feasibility study to develop long-range transportation alternatives for the I-10 corridor between Phoenix and Tucson. The study, started in July, is expected to run through March '98.
The study is evaluating several options, from no-build through highway widening and conventional rail to high speed alternatives.
More information about the High Speed Rail Study
Mr. Neblett invites all Citizens to send their comments to him at:
Joe Neblett, ADOT 206 S. 17th Ave, Room 330-B Phoenix, AZ 85007.
You may also call 602/255-8871 or fax 602/256-7563.
Amtrak has announced a fourth Texas Eagle will be added on February 6, 1998. A fifth may be added in April should express traffic warrant it. (The Sunset Limited will remain tri-weekly.)
However, at the Fall 1997 NARP convention in Santa Fe, Michael Ongerth of UP indicated UP will resist any additional frequencies (above the current three per week) until such time as UP believes it is fairly compensated for the current trains. UP maintains the cost of providing Amtrak trains their mandated priority is several dollars per train mile higher than the current agreement allows.
According to California's RailPAC, "The goal is daily service for the Eagle but daily Sunset Limiteds have no priority." Tom Downs of Amtrak has indicated several times recently that Amtrak must either run a train daily or not at all. It remains to be seen what this means in respect to the Sunset, especially in light of the recent Amtrak reauthorization bill which decreases the cost to discontinue trains. ]
From Ken Prendergast's column in the OARP News:
"Amtrak is [extending the Pennsylvanian] because Chicago has some mail and express shipments to offer. Ohio just happens to be along the way...
"For some reason, Amtrak officials think we'll keep riding, regardless of how many 3 a.m. trains they throw at us. Give decent arrivals and departures to a city, with good advertising and an attractive station, and you get great ridership, as has occurred at Toledo. Ridership this year may double last year's 100,000. When the Capitol Limited was arriving Cleveland before midnight, 76,000 people got on and off it. When it was rescheduled to arrive hours later each night, ridership plunged by 25,000.
"I guess they didn't learn before sending a proposal to the Ohio Rail Development Commission for a Cleveland/Cincinnati/Columbus train. The train's schedule would have been as inconvenient as trains already serving Ohio. 'Why must we pay to get more bad service?' ORDC smartly reasoned.
"Need more evidence of Amtrak's disregard for Ohio? This fall, Amtrak is airing 30-second TV commercials in 46 U.S. cities, none in Ohio. So Amtrak keeps running past a golden opportunity called Ohio. That's too bad, especially for a company that's trying to grow its business. Sometimes, you just don't know what you're missing when you're asleep." ]
[Editor's note—Some have observed that Arizona is similarly "in the way" between California and the East. Read Irv Collins' report below…]
On May 29 we left Phoenix at 6:25 pm to take the Sunset to Los Angeles. There were 10 people on the Thruway bus... a very hot ride, the a/c did not cool us until we were almost to Tucson. I am sure if Thomas Downs had to ride this bus he would have the train in Phoenix in a short time.
The Sunset was supposed to leave at 9:05 pm but we finally left at 11:30 pm. We did arrive in time to connect with the Starlight, Amtrak's flagship train. They even have a separate parlor car for sleeping car passengers. The scenery along the ocean was terrific, and the train was crowded...
Returning from Tucson were about a dozen people on the Thruway bus.
On our Houston trip, we arose at 3 am to catch the 4:45am bus to Tucson. The station looked deserted and very dreary. Again ten on the bus... we found the dining car staff and sleeping car attendants very friendly and helpful. The Sunset Limited is much improved...
The trip to Houston is not very scenic but we enjoyed it. Our train got back to Tucson at 11:30 pm, and we arrived at Phoenix at 2:30 am. I will never be happy until the Sunset returns to Phoenix.
[Editor's Note: While the Sunset Limited still stopped in Phoenix, annual ridership in the Valley was 31,000 — an average of about 50 people on and 50 off the train. ARPA understands that the 10 or so people Mr. Collins saw on the bus was a higher than average number. In any case, 10 people on the Thruway bus represents an 80% decline in Phoenix ridership. With UP having announced that the Phoenix West Line will not be abandoned, I see no reason the Sunset should not serve this nation's sixth largest city.]
Calif. / NevadaAs of October 26, there are ten daily San Diegans. Capitol corridor trains now carry over 500,000 annually. Los Angeles' Metrolink recorded over 900 riders on its trial Saturday Lancaster line service, almost 1/3 of weekday ridership on that line (with 3 roundtrips instead of the usual 5). All Metrolink's lines posted ridership gains this year. Los Angeles — Las Vegas service should begin Summer 1998 using San Diegan equipment until the new Talgo trains are ready. With the advent of the Las Vegas service, Amtrak West has "adopted" Nevada, according to Gil Mallery at the NARP convention. (Asked whether Amtrak West could proceed to take over the states west of the Mississippi one-by-one, Mallery declined to comment.) IllinoisThe Chicago METRA North Central service—serving communities from Antioch to Chicago via the O'Hare transfer station, doubled its ridership in its debut year. As Chicago's first new rail line since 1928, it saw an average of 1,905 daily trips in August 1996. As ridership grew, an additional round-trip was added; and ridership by August 1997 had skyrocketed to 3,773. METRA plans to double-track much of the line to allow over twice as many daily trains (22 vs. the current 10). Ken Bird, president of the Illinois Association of Railroad Passengers, says the North Central experience demonstrates that "there's always been a pent-up demand for this, and it's only going to increase. People are tired of cluttered highways. Once you get on a train, you don't want to go back." MassachusettsOn September 29, the MBTA opened the Boston-Plymouth/Kingston and Boston-Middleborough/Lakeville segments of the "new Old Colony" commuter rail line. Initial ridership bears out the expectation that these trains will be a popular alternative to the highly congested Southeast Expressway. TrainRiders/Northeast says the cost of completely rebuilding the railroad with new track, signal systems and grade crossings, and 13 new stations was $537 million. Northwest"August ridership on the trains running between Vancouver, BC, Seattle and Portland and Eugene hit the highest single-month total in Amtrak's history. Just under 56,000 people rode our three Northwest Corridor trains or the Coast Starlight in the corridor... DOT estimates 5 million passenger miles were eliminated from I-5." [Washington ARP Rail News] |
OhioCommuter rail trials in Ohio, from Madison and Lorain to Cleveland, were judged successes this November. According to the Akron Beacon-Journal, "more than 500 people took advantage of the one-day [Madison] demonstration... filling most seats. Laketran General Manager Frank Polivka said it was fitting that the long-anticipated commuter rail demonstration Wednesday between Cleveland and Madison came on a day when heavy snow and icy roads snarled car and truck traffic: "...Never in our wildest dreams did we think there would be this kind of interest in this." Similar crowds greeted the run between Cleveland and Lorain, says RTA General Manager Ron Tober: "There's tremendous interest in commuter rail." The Beacon-Journal reports, "The suburban commuter rail experiment, which is expected to cost about $65,000, was held to show federal officials that it's possible to establish such service on existing Conrail tracks... With the anticipated breakup of Conrail, Tober said, RTA and Laketran want to ensure that federal officials reviewing the future of area rail lines are aware of the region's desire to establish commuter rail service." Ken Prendergast of Ohio ARP recorded these comments from riders: "The movement of people into the city, and from the city out to outlying communities is vitally important. (But) it makes no sense to put more money into roads that bring more congestion and pollution when there are tracks already available." – Jay Westbrook, President, Cleveland City Council "Transit was an afterthought when it comes to development. There is a growing awareness that we should use rail to get people to where the jobs are." – Thomas Coyne, Mayor, Brook Park "It's a quick, efficient way of moving people. We should pursue it." – Dennis Clough, Mayor, Westlake "This is really thrilling. The opportunities that go through your mind in terms of economic development are really exciting." – Vince Urbin, Mayor, Avon Lake Other officials, like Bay Village Mayor Tom Jelepis and Lakewood Mayor Madeline Cain, were overheard as saying that the commuter demonstration whetted their appetites for seeking a permanent service. Mr. Prendergast notes an interesting point from the above quotes: Unlike many highway widenings, which tend to occur in developing areas, a new commuter rail service, such as these, represents a simultaneous investment in both established and developing communities. |
by Dr. Adrian Herzog, Vice President, URPA
Agreed, we as rail passenger advocates are all in this together, but what now? The loss of service on the Desert Wind and Pioneer is an inconvenience for rail advocates but a complete catastrophe in those communities where we asked the local community to invest in station improvements. The loss of some frequency will, of course, undermine support for Amtrak anywhere; the complete removal of service has the effect of turning off support and making neutral observers actively hostile to Amtrak funding.
This is the situation in the Southwest, where the political support for Amtrak is essentially ZERO, but the interests of states like Arizona in regional rail are rapidly growing. Now, should Arizona RPA ally itself with an Amtrak that has no political support, or with the emerging local forces that are in favor of regional rail? This is not an easy decision to make since we all were part of the creation of Amtrak, but politics being what they are, and Associations needing to work with local politics, the result has been a rapidly emerging alliance with local politics in support of regional rail in which Amtrak has actively taken itself out of the picture by:
- Indicating that they don't do these things in places like Arizona while bidding against the UP for the contract to run Metrolink trains in L.A.
- Taking the only train they had out of Phoenix just before the next local pro-rail ballot attempt to pass a regional sales tax initiative similar to the ones in California.
In California, Amtrak has never been supportive of efforts to improve service. At no time have they made any significant dollar investments in our corridors. Infrastructure work on the LA-San Diego line, essentially double tracking 80+ miles of the line, is now in full swing with only extremely marginal and reluctant Amtrak participation. The bulk of the investment is from the State and from our local sales tax initiatives. The situation is even more stacked politically against Amtrak here. Due to Amtrak's constant lack of cooperation with the cities and counties that own the corridor, the local political powers are eager to "get rid of Amtrak ASAP." The UP and BNSF have already indicated that they will submit operating proposals to compete against Amtrak for the contract to operate Metrolink. Now, should we at RailPAC ally ourselves with Amtrak in this situation?
Amtrak has wasted the last 25 years during which they should have built a strong national political base. Asking rail passenger supporters to build this base, when at the same time they undermine it, is a bit difficult. Western rail passenger associations are in open revolt for a simple reason. We have gotten nothing from Amtrak except hostility and outright sabotage of our efforts. Amtrak must therefore be either reformed or replaced so that we have an institution that realizes that the game is not only to run a few trains, but to constantly work with local advocates and each and every community served so that politically every community from Boston to Laramie and L.A. feels that these trains belong to them and that they should support them with ridership, with political and financial support. It is the neglect of this fundamental rule of politics that has brought Amtrak to the present crisis.
Attacking Arizona RPA or URPA or RailPAC for distancing themselves from Amtrak without knowing the political reasons is counterproductive. Asking us to blindly support the current system is a waste of time.