Bush 2006 proposed budget plans to end Amtrak subsidies

[Ma Deuce]

Linky

Bush Budget to Scrap Subsidy for Amtrak-Sources

Tue Feb 1, 8:20 PM ET

By Caren Bohan and Adam Entous

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration will for the first time propose eliminating operating subsidies for passenger train operator Amtrak as part of a push to cut budget deficits, people close to the budget process said on Tuesday.

President Bush (news - web sites)'s fiscal 2006 budget, which he will send to Congress on Monday, will allocate no subsidy for Amtrak to run its trains. But it will offer $360 million for maintenance on the flagship Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston -- which Amtrak owns -- and for commuter services.

The proposal must be approved by Congress, and the administration faces a fight in getting approval for a budget that aims to nearly freeze the growth of domestic spending not tied to national defense.

An influential Democrat warned that if enacted, the Bush administration's budget would set the nation's only city-to-city passenger service "on a course to bankruptcy."

Last year, the Bush administration proposed $900 million in subsidies, but Congress increased that to $1.2 billion after the railroad said the administration's proposal would force it to shut down.

An Amtrak spokesman would not comment when asked about the possibility of the rail service losing the bulk of its federal allocation.

Senior administration officials declined to discuss the 2006 budget figures, but described the decision as part of Bush's broader push to restrain government spending and eliminate what they see as wasteful programs.

"The approach in the budget is to make clear that we cannot support an approach that does not work and calls for increasing burdens on federal taxpayers. But we'd feel differently if reforms are accomplished," an administration official said.

Another senior administration official added: "Amtrak should be treated like any other form of transportation and funded like any other form of transportation. The other forms don't get operating subsidies."

An official said the Bush administration would continue to support commuter rail services, "if necessary, even in the absence of reform."

NEVER MADE MONEY

The administration has long hoped to wean Amtrak from federal subsidies, criticizing the state of its infrastructure and service. It wants to open its rail lines up to competition.

Amtrak employs 22,000 people and operates 265 trains a day, excluding commuter service, in 46 states.

The administration budget has proposed funding levels over the previous two years that the railroad said were unsustainable. Each year, Congress came through with extra money at the last minute to boost Amtrak's appropriation to levels the railroad said it could live with but still far below what it sought.

Amtrak has never made money in its 34-year history.

To get its subsidy in recent years, Amtrak has had to agree to much closer Transportation Department oversight of its books and its operations.

Sen. Patty Murray (news, bio, voting record) of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the appropriations subcommittee on transportation and a strong Amtrak supporter, said she was deeply concerned about the budget move.

"For four years they have played budget games and fought congressional efforts to keep Amtrak afloat," Murray said.

"Now, despite the fact that Amtrak has gone to great lengths to get their costs under control and run more efficiently, the president is again offering a budget that sets the rail service on a course to bankruptcy," she added.

Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation said the move was long overdue.

"The White House is saving money for the taxpayers and hopefully serving notice to other agencies that they must be efficient and effective in order to continue receiving tax dollars," Riedl said.

(Additional reporting by John Crawley)

Take note of the bolded text: What the fuck do they mean the other transportation modes "don't get subsides"? How can they not know where the money comes from to build new airport terminals or to maintain the Interstate Highways?

[Crayz9000]

Well, trains don't make much sense for travel over long distances anymore, unless you're really into sightseeing. You can't beat them for moving unwieldy amounts of cargo cross-country however, and fuel efficiency is better than the fleets of semis we have.

On a local scale trains are decent, though prone to the occasional derailment usually caused by stupidity. But it's nowhere near the accident rate of motor vehicles.

I'd be just as happy if Amtrak died and we simply used the freed subsidies for maintaining the freight rail network like we maintain the highway system.

[Chmee]

In Shanghai I was passed a couple times by the maglev train that runs from the airport into Pudong .... 250 mph .... you're doing 70 on the freeway parallel to this thing and it just leaves you in the dust.

And then ..... home to Amtrak. *sigh*

[Durandal]

You know, I'm inclined to say that Amtrak deserves this. They've been getting subsidies from the taxpayers, charge through the nose for tickets on top of that and still manage to be 20 minutes to a half-hour late consistently. Leave them to the wolves.

Two examples of a government-run corporation: Amtrak and the United States Postal Service, both are dismal failures.

[Iceberg]

You know, I'm inclined to say that Amtrak deserves this. They've been getting subsidies from the taxpayers, charge through the nose for tickets on top of that and still manage to be 20 minutes to a half-hour late consistently. Leave them to the wolves.

Two examples of a government-run corporation: Amtrak and the United States Postal Service, both are dismal failures.

On the other hand we also have Sallie Mae and Freddie Mac, both considerable successes.

[Sea Skimmer]

In Shanghai I was passed a couple times by the maglev train that runs from the airport into Pudong .... 250 mph .... you're doing 70 on the freeway parallel to this thing and it just leaves you in the dust.

And then ..... home to Amtrak. *sigh*

It also cost 1.2 billion dollars to build the thing, and its only a 19 mile line with a single track. Magleve won't be practical for anything but very short commuter routes, the sort of thing Amtrack doesn't operate in the first place, for a long time.

[SirNitram]

To speak against the flow for a moment, trains are only as good as their tracks. And I've seen those tracks, it's quite honestly scary at times. Especially when I realize there are six ways out of this state for the coal trains, and if they were to stop running for a day, signifigant chunks of the East Coast lose power.

But nothing's done. Are the tracks privately owned? It'd explain alot..

[Ma Deuce]

But nothing's done. Are the tracks privately owned? It'd explain alot...

The bulk the trackage used by Amtrak's routes are leased from private freight railways: naturally this means most Amtrak passenger trains must share the tracks with lumbering freight trains, many of which don't operate on fixed schedules (you see where this would create problems for trains on the same line that do follow a shedule).

IIRC, virtually all of the trackage Amtrak does own is part of the Northeast Corridor...

[SirNitram]

But nothing's done. Are the tracks privately owned? It'd explain alot...

The bulk the trackage used by Amtrak's routes are leased from private freight railways: naturally this means most Amtrak passenger trains must share the tracks with lumbering freight trains, many of which don't operate on fixed schedules (you see where this would create problems for trains on the same line that do follow a shedule).

IIRC, virtually all of the trackage Amtrak does own is part of the Northeast Corridor...

...Where Acela is pulling in a profit for Amtrak. Yea. Figured. The sensible thing to do would be to restore the track, but it's privately owned, and vital infrastructure in private hands is sacrosanct.

If someone actually got the railways maintained, it'd be cheaper for long hauls. But not the shitty collection of rail we have now.

[Master of Ossus]

If someone actually got the railways maintained, it'd be cheaper for long hauls. But not the shitty collection of rail we have now.

Evidence? Remember to factor in the costs of restoration and maintenance.

[Jason von Evil]

In Shanghai I was passed a couple times by the maglev train that runs from the airport into Pudong .... 250 mph .... you're doing 70 on the freeway parallel to this thing and it just leaves you in the dust.

And then ..... home to Amtrak. *sigh*

It also cost 1.2 billion dollars to build the thing, and its only a 19 mile line with a single track. Magleve won't be practical for anything but very short commuter routes, the sort of thing Amtrack doesn't operate in the first place, for a long time.

But imagine MagLev's in cities like NYC, DC and other major cities.

[Durandal]

But nothing's done. Are the tracks privately owned? It'd explain alot..

Yes, the private freight hauling train companies own the track. And if two trains, one Amtrak and another a freight train, are traveling on the same track on conflicting courses, guess which train gets priority on the track? Here's a hint, it's not the one carrying people.

[Civil War Man]

I'd have to say that IMHO the best niche for trains today is relatively short hops in and out of areas where taking a car can be a major hassle. Whenever I visit my sister in NYC, I typically use the train. The distance from where I am to NY is too short to make it worth taking a plane and traffic in and out is horrendous enough to make avoiding the roads worth it.

Of course it may be possible to have some rail lines fall under the jurisdiction of local transit authorities. Many subway systems like the DC Metro and the Boston T have lines extending way out past the city limits for people commuting to and from work.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Maglev would also be good in California, both LA-Sac-San Fransisco as well as a "Bay-Area Corridor".

[The Duchess of Zeon]

But nothing's done. Are the tracks privately owned? It'd explain alot..

Yes, the private freight hauling train companies own the track. And if two trains, one Amtrak and another a freight train, are traveling on the same track on conflicting courses, guess which train gets priority on the track? Here's a hint, it's not the one carrying people.

I've actually been on an Amtrak train which stopped to let a 200-odd car coal drag lumber past at about 15mph. It was amusing in a sick sort of way, but probably only because I had brought several Russian novels to read on the trip.

Seriously, the track is in good condition--it's just not intended to handle high-speed trains. For instance, over the summer in the west, the track is heated by the sun and the trains are limited to about 50mph (they can hit 90 easy in good conditions). Nobody bothers to upgrade the track to the point where that wouldn't be a problem, however, since even intermodal trains can beat the roads at 50mph, but passenger trains simply can't.

[Durandal]

But nothing's done. Are the tracks privately owned? It'd explain alot..

Yes, the private freight hauling train companies own the track. And if two trains, one Amtrak and another a freight train, are traveling on the same track on conflicting courses, guess which train gets priority on the track? Here's a hint, it's not the one carrying people.

I've actually been on an Amtrak train which stopped to let a 200-odd car coal drag lumber past at about 15mph. It was amusing in a sick sort of way, but probably only because I had brought several Russian novels to read on the trip.

Amtrak has other problems as well. Union problems. I was on my way to pick up my cousin at Union Station in Chicago only to find out that his train was stopped 5 minutes outside of the city. The reason? The conductor had already worked his maximum 12 hours per day and couldn't work a minute more. The union wouldn't let him take the train in to Chicago. So it took about an hour to drive another conductor out there to take it in.

Utterly absurd.

[Thinkmarble]

Amtrak has other problems as well. Union problems. I was on my way to pick up my cousin at Union Station in Chicago only to find out that his train was stopped 5 minutes outside of the city. The reason? The conductor had already worked his maximum 12 hours per day and couldn't work a minute more. The union took about an hour to drive another conductor out there to take it in.

Utterly absurd.

Sorry, that is not a problem with unions but rather a problem with the guy who has been responsible to make the planning.

[Master of Ossus]

Sorry, that is not a problem with unions but rather a problem with the guy who has been responsible to make the planning.

While it was poor planning, the Union is ultimately responsible for the cap rule. Besides, the conductor could easily have been delayed while on a train, and thus prevented from completing his run on-time. We're only talking about a delay of 5 minutes, here.

[Dahak]

In Shanghai I was passed a couple times by the maglev train that runs from the airport into Pudong .... 250 mph .... you're doing 70 on the freeway parallel to this thing and it just leaves you in the dust.

And then ..... home to Amtrak. *sigh*

It also cost 1.2 billion dollars to build the thing, and its only a 19 mile line with a single track. Magleve won't be practical for anything but very short commuter routes, the sort of thing Amtrack doesn't operate in the first place, for a long time.

Well, the Chinese plan to build a Transrapid connection from Shanghai to Hangzhou (~170km).
They seem to like the idea of maglev, and I guess have made certain they get the technology for it from ThyssenKrupp...

Btw, does the USA have a highspeed-train?

[Rogue 9]

Btw, does the USA have a highspeed-train?

Not like that, no. There are some fairly fast ones in areas like Chicago, but none of the really high speed bullet trains.

[Col. Crackpot]

Two examples of a government-run corporation: Amtrak and the United States Postal Service, both are dismal failures.

On the other hand we also have Sallie Mae and Freddie Mac, both considerable successes.[/quote]

actually, Sallie Mae is in the midst of a corruption scandal:
linky

[Enforcer Talen]

lets hear it for libertarians, then

[Ma Deuce]

Btw, does the USA have a highspeed-train?

Not unless you count the Acela Express that runs the Northeast Corridor between Washington DC and Boston, and the Acela never runs at speeds greater than +/-200kph anyway, (usually less due to the limits of the tracks), even though it's designed to operate at speeds up to 265kph.

[AMX]

It also cost 1.2 billion dollars to build the thing, and its only a 19 mile line with a single track.

Actually, it's double-track.

Magleve won't be practical for anything but very short commuter routes, the sort of thing Amtrack doesn't operate in the first place, for a long time.

Well, Transrapid International has a few proposals which are, theoretically, competitive in the long-distance sector.
Theoretically because anyone who wants to go cheap can use the train, and anyone who wants to go fast goes by air; maglev is right in the middle on both speed and fare, and would need an extra edge to actually become competitive (like flying becoming more expensive; or becoming so common, while public shitheads keep the airport expansion down, that people are forced to take the second-fastest route, since the airport can't handle any more traffic).

[Durandal]

Btw, does the USA have a highspeed-train?

I think Amtrak actually started testing one a year ago.