 |
Re: Restored Amtrak Service To Vegas? Don't Hold Your Breath!
Author: Michael Mahoney
Date: 06-30-2010 - 18:14
Let's dodge behind the counter until the crockery stops flying about, and then take a look at where this is going.
I think there is general agreement on the following:
(1) All forms of transportation are subsidized.
(2) Most observers would say that Amtrak receives an unfairly small subsidy, compared with other forms of transport, owing to years of Beltway abuse and indifference.
(3) Also because of said abuse and indifference, Amtrak managers have become tired and defeatist. Anyone who tries to get anything done, like Gunn, is swiftly shown the door.
(4) If Amtrak had more dough, it could either repair the Beech Grove wrecks or buy new equipment, whichever seemed to make more sense at the time.
(5) Amtrak service depends on the Class Is. If the Class I welcomes the Amtrak subsidy, service will be good; if it disdains the subsidy, service will be poor.
(6) Realistically, nothing can be done about this. We can't send U.S. marshals to the UP operations center to tell the dispatcher, "Put that freight on a siding, bozo, or we're putting the cuffs on you." (Nice to think about, however)
(7) Could the U.S. nationalize the railroads, as has been done in many other countries? (a) Hugely expensive; (b) Constitutional problems likely; (c ) A complete non-starter politically; (d) Anyway, freight is handled competently by the private sector, and the government would have no need to take it over. It's passenger that needs the help.
What we do, then, is build a new passenger railroad. The idea of running freight and passenger on separate rights of way seems wasteful of resources, but review (1) through (7) above. The new railroad would be run by go-getters, not Amtrak retreads. The Class Is would presumably not raise obstacles, as they would be losing their troublesome passenger service, and would have a shot at getting out of having to install PTC, since it is mainly aimed at passenger safety. The railroad would not have to be built all at once, and Amtrak service would continue where it was not operating. It would not run at high speed; that would come later. It would run at 100 mph max. Where would we find the money? We could, for one thing, get serious about raising the gas tax to European levels.
I think there is general agreement on the following:
(1) All forms of transportation are subsidized.
(2) Most observers would say that Amtrak receives an unfairly small subsidy, compared with other forms of transport, owing to years of Beltway abuse and indifference.
(3) Also because of said abuse and indifference, Amtrak managers have become tired and defeatist. Anyone who tries to get anything done, like Gunn, is swiftly shown the door.
(4) If Amtrak had more dough, it could either repair the Beech Grove wrecks or buy new equipment, whichever seemed to make more sense at the time.
(5) Amtrak service depends on the Class Is. If the Class I welcomes the Amtrak subsidy, service will be good; if it disdains the subsidy, service will be poor.
(6) Realistically, nothing can be done about this. We can't send U.S. marshals to the UP operations center to tell the dispatcher, "Put that freight on a siding, bozo, or we're putting the cuffs on you." (Nice to think about, however)
(7) Could the U.S. nationalize the railroads, as has been done in many other countries? (a) Hugely expensive; (b) Constitutional problems likely; (c ) A complete non-starter politically; (d) Anyway, freight is handled competently by the private sector, and the government would have no need to take it over. It's passenger that needs the help.
What we do, then, is build a new passenger railroad. The idea of running freight and passenger on separate rights of way seems wasteful of resources, but review (1) through (7) above. The new railroad would be run by go-getters, not Amtrak retreads. The Class Is would presumably not raise obstacles, as they would be losing their troublesome passenger service, and would have a shot at getting out of having to install PTC, since it is mainly aimed at passenger safety. The railroad would not have to be built all at once, and Amtrak service would continue where it was not operating. It would not run at high speed; that would come later. It would run at 100 mph max. Where would we find the money? We could, for one thing, get serious about raising the gas tax to European levels.
