The need for passenger rail—who gets it and who doesn’t?

There has been a strong contingent of conservative thinkers in America who, even before the beginning of Amtrak, have rejected passenger rail as a modern, to say nothing of a necessary, form of transportation. The surprise is that there is a strong contingent of equally liberal thinkers who don’t really do much to advance the opposing view—I might add, my view—that passenger rail is a necessary and crucial part of a balanced transportation policy.

It’s no secret that political liberalism tends to concentrate on the coasts and in the big urban centers of the country. No New York politician would survive an election by advocating the cancellation of passenger rail in the Northeast. No California politician could suggest that the state pull all funding from High Speed Rail (HSR) or Pacific Surfliner and expect to get out of town without the unwanted benefit of a long pole, thick bitumen, and bird feathers. No Chicago mayor would propose cutting off funding for the Chicago Transit Authority. Yet these are three areas that could benefit mightily from a little conservative budgeting.

On the other end of the spectrum, conservatism tends to spread throughout rural, farm and ranch, small-town parts of the country. Ironically, this is the part of the country where the complete abolition of passenger rail would most hurt communities. Hence, while liberal politicians are voting for their constituent interests, conservative ones are voting against them. Amtrak gets torn both ways: It’s a must-have for the Northeast and an albatross for most of the rest of the country.

Does that mean that neither liberal nor conservative, Democrat nor Republican, members of Congress get it? To quote Sarah Palin, “You betcha!”

President Trump plays large to conservatives, and has therefore put forth conservative budget proposals. While the MEDIA (acronym standing for Moderately Educated Devoid of Intelligent Analysis) would have us believe that this means an end to Amtrak. I don’t think that’s what is intended. Mr. Trump also plays large to those who would have him negotiate matters from a position of strength. What better place to start with Amtrak than to take the position that Congress and Amtrak must find other ways to get to a viable long-distance passenger network than we now have?

More and more in the trade press favorable to rail and transit oriented development, I am seeing that passenger rail is expected to be a big draw. More and more I see even the general media (almost always clueless where passenger rail is concerned) note how Millennials to not want to own cars and are favorable to all forms of public transportation. More and more I see activists on the side of intelligently planned growth in passenger rail and Amtrak.

Ironically, this does not include HSR, though I think that HSR should eventually be a part of a balanced U.S. transportation policy. HSR is just too expensive right now, and the environmental problems may be too big for even California to overcome.

Who gets it, or not? Clearly the advocacy groups mentioned above get it. In my opinion, the Trump administration does, though it doesn’t quite know how to show it yet. Inevitably, larger city leaders and regional transportation districts get it. Congress most certainly does not get it. Neither do the freight railroads, who resist establishing or re-establishing Amtrak routes at every turn. (They are a business, they have a right to reasonable payment for their tracks and equipment, but the key word is reasonable. The freight railroads almost always set the bar too high.) The way the media have come down on Amtrak for maintenance at Penn Station, New York, they don’t get it, and probably never will. Finally, I think the general public gets it.

In another ironic twist, however, I suspect Amtrak doesn’t get it. Amtrak has gone for so long just muddling along on whatever bones are thrown its way by Congress, it exists just to try to make service marginally or just below adequate. I’m afraid it will continue in that rut unless there is a mightier shakeup than simply hiring a retired executive or two who have been good for freight railroads or airlines. Amtrak needs a CEO that “gets it.”

©2017 – C. A. Turek – mistertrains@gmail.com

(Charles A. Turek is a writer and novelist based in Albuquerque, NM. After four decades working in areas of the insurance industry related to transportation, he now writes on all aspects of American railroading. Charles is a political conservative but believes in public funding of passenger rail as a part of the federal government’s constitutionally conservative obligation to provide for defense and public infrastructure so that private enterprise may flourish.)