How Amtrak Derailed the Passenger Train

[Blazeman]

http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/amtrak-acela-high-speed-trains-20150417

[victor miranda]

"why can't America have great trains?"

Because some people are allowed to be greedy.
They forget that what makes so many things great is sharing....
a word they often call 'taxing'.

so until the rail companys are forced to share the rails,
amtrak will suffer as second rate in all matters

victor

[John]

your definition of taking private property is not "taxing" .. its plain confiscation .. If CSX owns rails, and they don't want to run passenger trains on them, that is their right ..

If I own a car, and drive past your place of work every day, and you come up to me and tell me that you are going to "share" my property with me -- I will likely ignore you, or possibly run you over if you try to get in

[victor miranda]

John,
I suspect you misunderstood what I said.

while you are considering why I suspect what I suspect....

add this to the consideration...
the the many companies that eventually came to be owned by csx made an agreement
about the land on which they operate. the agreement conveyed along with the rolling stock and buildings.

the companies asked to be relieved of the burden of operating passenger trains.

yep, they were asking for a tax relief...

victor

[eric220]

Well, that took two posts to get highly political.

That's probably the biggest problem: whether or not we get passenger rail service, and what kind of service we get, is a highly political issue. Until we can agree what we want, there will be enough pressure from one side to keep it alive, and enough pressure from the other side to cripple it.

Given how likely Americans are to find common ground about just about anything these days, I'm not holding my breath.

[victor miranda]

that is funny.

I didn't think it was political at all.

the problem with passenger trains, planes, and automobiles
is that ALL are clearly supported by 'sharing'

airports have user fees and government supports
autos have user fees and government supports

we could drag the trucking industry into this as well.

the fact is that the railroads no longer wanted to operate passenger service.
once you look at why...

well they asked the us taxpayers to carry those losses.
one thing the rail companies did was claim that they have first priority to the road....

so while I might have agreed to pay for my own train service
(in the form of tax relief to the rail companies)

I did not agree that I was a second class citizen on those rails.
.... this is the reason greatness avoids us in passenger trains.

ownership and exactly what you 'own' is a very interesting subject
and that all by itself can be quite political.

victor

[Philip H]

your definition of taking private property is not "taxing" .. its plain confiscation .. If CSX owns rails, and they don't want to run passenger trains on them, that is their right ..

If I own a car, and drive past your place of work every day, and you come up to me and tell me that you are going to "share" my property with me -- I will likely ignore you, or possibly run you over if you try to get in

Not to pick nits . . . but all of those private railroad companies operate on rights of way granted to them by Congress on public lands.  So, while they have every "right" to operate or not operate trains that make a profit for them, if America as a country decides we want rail passenger service then Congress COULD (but probably wouldn't) amend all those land grants to require said operation.  And the railroads wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on because they don't, in fact, own the underlying land. Is such a take back realistic or likely - hardly.  But we do need to be clear on our history.

That said, Amtrak is not the problem - as Eric pints out its a political discussion and decision.  When America decided to build interstate highways in the 1950's and 1960's we made one type of decision about how we expect to transport goods and people.  Everytime tax revenues are used to expand a runway at an airport we make a transportation decision.  And every federal budget debate - where Congress collectively tells Amtrak to make a profit BEFORE we give then what we need to grow meaningfully, we as a nation make a transportation decision.  In a revenue neutral environment - where there are no new taxes- those are the things that have to be dealt with to have a different passenger rail outcome.

[John]

Not to pick nits . . . but all of those private railroad companies operate on rights of way granted to them by Congress on public lands.  So, while they have every "right" to operate or not operate trains that make a profit for them, if America as a country decides we want rail passenger service then Congress COULD (but probably wouldn't) amend all those land grants to require said operation.  And the railroads wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on because they don't, in fact, own the underlying land. Is such a take back realistic or likely - hardly.  But we do need to be clear on our history.

So, lets take the amtrak politics out of this .. quick research shows that the B&O purchased the land outright, or leased right of way from private owners.  The primary use of "land grants" appears to have been for the building of the Transcontinental Railroad .. 10sq miles of land, for each mile of track.  the idea was for the company to sell the land to finance construction ..  IANAL but it seems to me the only way you could force a railroad to cooperate then is to pass a law forcing that to happen --  , eminent domain, or outright purchase of the ROW... there are a couple of laws in the late 1800s that seem to support the railroads.

[John]

I think the best way for the govt to build the high speed rail is to use some of those railbanked lines, and put their money theree .. the grading is done, would just need to upgrade the ROW

[victor miranda]

"quick research shows that the B&O purchased the land outright, or leased right of way from private owners."

the fact is that even if the land is acquired by writ of eminent domain that land will also be purchased.
Stating the land was purchased is truth and it does not matter how the sale was pushed into reality.
so the land was purchased...

Believe me you will NEVER be allowed to do as you please on your land in this country.
There are many examples of that.  One of the agreements the railroad companies made was to carry passengers
on the right of way they were granted.  it is a tax... ok it was a tax and they were relieved of it.

This is exactly why the companies had to petition for relief from the burden of losing money in passenger service.
Any requirement by the government to spend money that does not lead to bigger profits is viewed as a tax by corporations.

so amtrak was created...
 
the tax relief part... I am not too concerned.
I have a quiet interest in passenger service.
what has come to pass is that railroad companies have the opposite of
an interest in passenger train service existing.  it interferes with 'profit.'

I do not see this happening.
High speed passenger rail lines should be created.
No Freight.

you think that will be allowed?  I bet you a large fortune
that if the U.S. taxpayers built a passenger network
the current freight rail companies would do EVERY thing possible to take control of it.

victor
 

[John]

I don't think we will ever see high speed rail of a scale in other countries -- unless China builds them ... 

[conrail98]

I think the best way for the govt to build the high speed rail is to use some of those railbanked lines, and put their money theree .. the grading is done, would just need to upgrade the ROW

No the best way is to utilize the medians of all those interstate highways. You've already got grade separation and since these are passenger trains, some of the grades on these roads shouldn't be a problem. The article stated, in a parentheses no less, the main reason why Amtrak fails. First, they want it to make a profit. No passenger railroad anywhere in the world does that, period. Second, roads and airports (which are specifically there for private industry) get 45 TIMES the amount of funding as Amtrak. That's it, that's the reason, period,

Phil

[VonRyan]

Amtrak did some high-speed Acela tests late a night on a section of the NEC. I think they were pushing 160+Mph

[conrail98]

Amtrak did some high-speed Acela tests late a night on a section of the NEC. I think they were pushing 160+Mph

Yes, it's in the stretch between Trenton and Newark as mentioned int he article. There are a few infrastructure projects they need to do which will actually separate the local line used by NJ Transit with the Amtrak center tracks allowing for that speed to be obtained without worry of commuter traffic,

Phil

[Blazeman]

As I recall, the government awarded a checker board pattern of property to some of the railroads for constructing lines. For that, the RR's had to haul government freight and passengers at reduced rates.

Of course, on many of the granted land parcels, mineral deposits were found. It wasn't feasible economically to develop those assets because the property lines abruptly stopped and the owner would want to sell those rights or property at a high price. In many instances, the owner was the federal government. So the RR involved arranged a swap of parcels....the RR would take the parcel with minerals and swap supposedly worthless parcels (at least for minerals) to Uncle Sam. Uncle was OK with that...it produced jobs, taxes, and developed wilderness areas.

Passenger carriage was part of the RR's certificate of public convenience and necessity. By law, passengers and cargo were required to be transported. Only if able to prove that service was a burden financially and threatened the rest of the system, and there was no demand or alternative means existed could that obligation be excused.

Some consider the incentives from Uncle Sam to be the RR subsidy. But only the RR's provide their own right-of-way. Imagine what a plane ride would cost if Delta and SW had to build their own airports and employ their own controllers. Or if barge lines built their own locks, motor carriers their own roads. But that's not how it works as we know. Now the RR's get tax relief for investments, especially short lines, and state governments subsidize passenger operations within their borders be it Amtrak or regional transit lines around the country.

Europe has those wonderful services because the distances are right, there is density of demand, and high fuel taxes fund the infrastructure and operation while making auto travel more expensive. China is doing what they do because there is a need and a market ready to use the service and they have buildings full of dollars they can use to fund it, employ their citizens, and develop technology that showcases their talent to the world (like we did with NASA) and can be marketed.

Let's simply say that here, there are differences of opinion