What's with Amtrak?

I’ve been harsh with Amtrak lately, and rightfully so. Social media is awash with comments and opinions about the many things Amtrak’s new CEO has decided to do since the beginning of 2018, most of which end or limit service or services provided. Many pundits, myself included, have suggested that Amtrak management wants to stop operating anything but corridor services, most of which operate with large portions of operating costs borne by the states. Curtailing service is just how the railroads before Amtrak convinced Congress that they could no longer run the extensive passenger system we had then.

If that’s the case, then trains like the Builder, Chief, Star and Meteor will be no more.

I’ve gone further, however, and suggested that the new CEO, Richard Anderson, an airline man who is, in part, responsible for the sorry, if superficially profitable, condition of domestic air travel today, wants to eliminate Amtrak as a competitor for the airlines.

Let’s take it back a step or two and look at this in a reasonable way.

Amtrak’s mandate always has been to run a “national” passenger rail network. That hasn’t changed. The only way it can change is if Congress changes it. It could be done, but Congress could also fly to the moon on the next SpaceX rocket; either is equally likely. (See illustration below.)

So, what is Amtrak (and Amtrak’s CEO) trying to accomplish?

He’s already accomplished the first objective; he’s got everyone’s attention. Fine, that’s a good start when you need everyone’s attention—when you need everyone’s attention to really accomplish something. Word is that Amtrak’s budget (read congressional appropriation) will fall off a cliff for fiscal 2020, and that’s too bad.

Unfortunately, in getting everyone’s attention, Mr. Anderson had alienated many friends. Both the existing associations of private car owners are hopping mad. Several scheduled steam and non-steam excursions, at least one of which would benefit the cause of PTC installation, have cancelled due to the uncertainties and outright impossibilities of negotiating terms for handling their trains. Costs for handling those private cars and special moves that will be made, and insurance that entails, have jumped like a politician being approached from behind by a sexual harassment accuser.

I get that the new guy at CEO wants to do everything he can to improve the bottom line; that’s why he was hired after all. Instead, what we’ll have is a public organization that runs trains for a living but doesn’t give a damn about the public. Where the CEO’s mission should be building a friendlier brand, the brand now becomes something like, “We’ll carry you if you buy an (expensive) ticket on our terms, but we won’t like it unless you’re riding one of our corridor trains, where we can’t muddy up the brand too much because the state money would go away.”

And, for Pete’s sake, what does eliminating dining car service—what HAS eliminating dining car service EVER—gotten Amtrak except a black eye and a costly scramble to put it back on the trains when the next CEO comes in office? It costs less to just keep it on and improve service. Why not just eliminate sleepers, too? You might? Gosh, then, I guess next you’ll have to eliminate seats. Then you can sell more spaces. (Didn’t the airlines think of this first? Strap ‘em to the walls!)

What about all the so-called new equipment on order? Well, I still figure that the new equipment, if it doesn’t have to be put into long-distance service, will make Amtrak a pretty penny on the remaining corridor routes, beefing up trains and schedules and commanding premium fares. (Did I just accuse Amtrak of trying to eliminate long-distance trains again?)

Oh, and, by the way. There WILL be another CEO at Amtrak. It may even be before the 2020 budget. Perhaps Mr. Anderson has a better offer. Some are already hoping so.

©2018 – 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.)