Congressional update: House approves $4 billion for HSR

Pat blogged yesterday about Iowa Congressman Tom Latham’s amendment to strip down the high-speed rail funding in the housing and transportation bill to Obama’s original $1 billion rather than the $4 billion that was added in committee. It wasn’t looking good for a while, with HSR advocacy organizations such as the Midwest HSRA and Virginians High-Speed Rail putting out action alerts to their members. Fortunately, thanks to quick responses from those concerned about our nation’s rail infrastructure (or perhaps just the general spirit of the times), the amendment easily failed 136-284.

As The Transport Politic points out, this is a good indicator of the surprisingly high amount of bipartisan support high-speed rail seems to enjoy in the legislature. Maybe this is due to the wide number of states now vying for those funds, or perhaps, pathetically, it’s just the fact that there was no mention of “Amtrak” in the proposal.

If this language makes it through the Senate, that’s a 1/2 increase of the HSR money already allocated in the stimulus package. This runs together with Pat’s anniversary post the other day. If you had told me that the federal government approve $12 billion for high-speed rail with support from a number of likely and unlikely states back when I started in Spring 2008, I wouldn’t have believed you.

Filed under: Passenger Rail Politics, United States High Speed Rail , high speed rail, hsr

Congressional action on high speed rail due today, could be bad

This comes from Virginians for High Speed Rail. It mentions Virginia representatives, look up your congressman and contact them.

House Bill 3288, the legislation that has the transportation appropriations for fiscal year 2010 is being voted on today. The House Appropriations committee raised President Obama’s $1 billion for high-speed rail to $4 billion. Representative Latham has offered an amendment that would lower the appropriation back to $1 billion.

Please call your Congressman and ask them to vote NO on the Latham Amendment.

1st District: Rep. Rob Wittman: (202) 225-4261
2nd District: Rep. Glenn Nye: (202) 225-4215
3rd District: Rep. Bobby Scott: (202) 225-8351
4th District: Rep. Randy Forbes: (202) 225-6365
5th District: Rep. Tom Perriello: (202) 225-4711
6th District: Rep. Robert W. Goodlatte: (202) 225-5431
7th District: Rep. Eric I. Cantor: (202) 225-2815
8th District: Rep. James P. Moran: (202) 225-4376
9th District: Rep. Rick Boucher: (202) 225-3861
10th District: Rep. Frank R. Wolf: (202) 225-5136
11th District: Rep. Gerry E. Connolly: (202) 225-1492

Thank you for helping us keep this important funding for high-speed rail.

Filed under: Passenger Rail Politics, Passenger Rail Transportatio Policy

Sorting out Amtrak’s Sunset restoration report (again)

The recent comprehensive report on how to get the Sunset rolling east of New Orleans has drawn much reaction and heavy criticism. One intent critic has gone so far as calling for a general housecleaning at Amtrak because of the perceived inadequacies of this document.

This study was mandated by congress. You may look at it as either meddling or prodding, but the results are far from satisfying. That being said, it may be that the compilers have done about as good as might be expected under the circumstances.

Some of the report (available at this link) leaves the ordinary reader totally bewildered and parts are pointedly revealing. Before oiling up the guillotine for those incredibly inept bureaucrats (They’re bureaucrats, so they must be inept. Right?) We think we detect the presence of an elephant in the room.

One of the most serious obstacles to immediate renewed service between New Orleans and Orlando is the demolition of the previous station in Mobile, Ala. It is said to take 20 months to replace this facility, which appears to be the core element of Amtrak’s quickest timetable for getting the Sunset on its coast-to-coast route.

Hurricane Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast in August 2005 and the Sunset has used New Orleans as the east terminus ever since. Critics of Amtrak point to CSX’s prompt action to replace damaged road beds, bridges and signals. The operating railroad correctly anticipates ample revenue production from this major rail service area.

Amtrak, by contrast, sat on its hands until today. Put in the most specific terms, Amtrak’s inaction speaks volumes about the intention to let this service slip quietly into oblivion. How else could CSX interpret the failure to restore trains in a reasonable time?

Being a competent business, CSX moved on and demolished the old L&N station and sold the property to developers. Why not? Amtrak has displayed zero interest in running a train for which equipment and personnel were already allocated.

My suspicion, and I could be very wrong, is that the station situation in Mobile is a bit worse than we might suspect. There must be some new hindrance to gaining access to the platform, which Amtrak critics claim still exists. (I have not inspected the site, so I have no idea.)

One has to believe that, if it were nothing more than putting up a “temporary” Am-shack, that would be among the options. It makes one wonder if the previous site is entirely unavailable. If this is so, some responsibility has to be placed at Amtrak’s doorstep.

There is doubtless much behind-the-scenes history on this matter, and railroading is just tied up in minutia. It is notable that David Gunn was fired as Amtrak president in November 2005. This is a crucial time in which plans for the renewed Sunset should have been high on the corporate agenda.

While not wishing to make excuses for Amtrak management, it was one full year before Alex Kummant was hired as the new CEO. Kummant rode the wild bull for 24 months and departed with a stark suddenness. At minimum, the unbiased observer may witness an instability in top leadership which is very detrimental to the railroad’s operation.

Taking into account the board vacancies and the continuing all out war against Amtrak mounted by congressional critics, it is understandable that there was hesitation on this decision. It is easy to say that caretakers should have moved boldly; however, it was not like starting up some completely new service.

We should also keep in mind that, after Gunn’s departure, it is likely that the Amtrak board explicitly forbade restoring the Sunset. Pressure to split up the system is reportedly what led to his dismissal.

The most recent study, which is so soundly denounced in some quarters, puts forward some unpleasant realities, in addition to the Mobile, Ala. terminal situation.

• the train operates over “dark” territory for hundreds of miles
• the pending PTC requirements
• the difference in rail miles versus highway miles and the variation in travel times (NO-Orlando 18,5 hours on Amtrak, double the driving time).
• Amtrak’s lack of equipment and operating funds (which effects every management decision)
• a larger question as to the necessity or desirability of a 59 mph train.

The report has several notable failures, which are not limited to these.

• A puzzling proposal for new maintenance facilities in Sanford, Fla.
• A mysterious financial comparison between the three final options, which fails to show why a stand-alone train operating on an almost identical schedule with the other two options performs at a substantially lower level.
• A lack of explanation as to what might demand 20 months of preparation to begin the renewed coast-to-coast service (other than the Mobile station, which was discussed above).
• The seeming lack of an analysis of daily coast-to-coast through service between Los Angeles and Orlando.
• Emphasis on expenses not directly connected to restoration, such as Sanford station construction.

The report does not directly say so, but it seems to set up a  business decision concerning the desirability of restoring one route against another. Put in straight talk, it is the Pioneer versus the east leg of the Sunset. Of course the decision is not so simple.

The Pioneer has some advantages.

• To the best of my knowledge, UP mainline between Salt Lake City and Portland is signalized territory and trains operate at 79 miles an hour.
• There has been strong political support in Idaho
• This route opens the inter-mountain region to the northwest Portland-Seattle corridor
• Connections in Denver with the premiere California Zephyr

Returning service between New Orleans and Orlando provides a connection from Florida to both California and the Midwest. Three important cities go back on the Amtrak map: Mobile, Pensacola, and the state capitol of Tallahassee.

The selection of either alternative seems to imply that the service improvements discussed previously for the upgraded daily Sunset west of New Orleans are off the table.In other words, the equipment is now running on the new daily “Sunset-Eagle.”  Failure to promptly implement this service improvement would be a serious error.

Some of Amtrak’s harshest critics on the internet have proposed resolving this dilemma with the rule of “first come, first served.” Using third grade logic dispenses with the often messy process of making hard business decisions. There may be a better way.

It is a false choice to set up one system route against another. both are important and neither can be instantly restored. This is the kind of important decision that languishes while waiting for Amtrak’s next new president, who will be (I think) the fourth in the 21st. century.

The latest report has a tone of tentativeness one might expect in an overly-cautious environment. The latest conceptions for the Eagle-Sunset operation shows some creativity and that is to be commended. The rest is going to take courage.

We think the Sunset-Eagle proposal should be implemented at the Fall timetable change. It looks doubtful from here that any expansion east of New Orleans can occur once this upgrade is put into effect without an infusion of equipment. Fortunately, this is happening with the repairs and announced RFP’s.

It is foolish to ignore the 18 hours needed to travel by rail from New Orleans to Orlando. Likewise, PTC issues can not be set aside, although one might presume that the CSX estimate of $20 million is their opening shot in negotiating a more reasonable price. This is also an issue that must be addressed on a system-wide and industry-wide basis.

Until Boardman’s situation t is settled, it does not seem likely that Amtrak will move on such a provocative and difficult question. With new equipment, Amtrak may be able to entertain modest expansion plans.

Although the report under consideration  has frustrating shortcomings, the  beheadings should probably be postponed. It is also obvious that the writer has  shortcomings and may need enlightenment.

Filed under: Amtrak, Regional USA Passenger Rail

July 2009, State of the Trains for America blog

My fellow Americans and citizens of the cosmos,

First and foremost, we at Trains for America try not to take ourselves too seriously, In the current political and economic climate, that is no small task. As this is being written, this internet conversation approaches two important hallmarks. TFA is now two years old and is approaching a milestone of 200,000 hits.

For many larger sites, this may not seem like much but we think it is quite a privilege to address around 800 readers on a typical working day. It is also noteworthy that around 15% of these visitors are from foreign countries. Each of you is appreciated.

TFA was born out of my desire to ventilate a strong personal opinions about rail passenger issues. My newspaper editors and radio employers would probably expect a more diverse coverage of events and issues, but my own blog was to be a sanctuary for my “quirky” interests.

It seemed apparent that, if I was going to need to be more than a nostalgic yearning for the days that are long lost. It was also clear that the site would take on a strong contrarian tone in view of the domination by aviation and trucking, coupled with the stout opposition of most operating rail companies.

All of this was changed by the election of Barack Obama. The most immediate and noticeable consequence of this event, for the personal perspective, is the explosion of readership on the TFA blog, which was previously 300 readers on any outstanding day.

While it is a pleasure to have, for once, an occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue who appreciates the social and economic benefits of decent ground transportation, the times are still full of danger. Republicans unambiguously state their desire to “break” the president.

The political climate is overly influenced by an elitist neo-conservative faction that is completely insulated from all economic fallout from bad policy and does not give a tinker’s damn what happens to regular people. For proof, I propose the subprime mortgage collapse in whch millions of small people suffered and the people who caused it drifted away on golden parachutes.

The current battle over health care reform is for all the marbles. If there is not some sort of strong federal option (single payer?), the drug manufacturers and health insurance companies will have won a magnificent victory at the cost of working people and small business. Should this occur, aviation and highway interests will move quickly to crush HSR developments and improvements in Amtrak.

Transportation policy is very much connected to health care reform and larger fiscal issues that congress must decide. Of course, infrastructure is a thousand times more effective than income redistribution to bankers, but we should never expect simple rationality to triumph in political debate.

The truth is that, in a country that enshrines free speech as one of its highest virtues, it is just about impossible to have an honest discussion on anything. That is because “some people” have elected to pursue the option of winning at any cost.

From the more parochial standpoint, high speed rail seems to have emerged from the slums of public policy consideration. Even if that revival is on account of perceived benefits to the wealthy, we must not question good fortune.

Let us consider the times. Amtrak is preparing for a significant purchase of motive power and long distance passenger cars. Ground has been broken on a new Autotrain terminal. Beaumont will soon have a new station and its location hangs entirely on the will of local politicians.

Progressive Railroading reports the FRA “has received 278 pre-applications for high-speed rail (HSR) grants totaling $102 billion.” Now that is a lot of interest. When conservative Oklahoma gets in the discussion, things are really changing.

Nonetheless, truckers and aviation interests stand ready to oppose all improvements in alternative transportation at all costs. The elephant in the room is that highways do not begin to cover their costs and will demand support, no SUBSIDIES, from other sources.

Of course, in the trucker’s alternate universe, the rest of us are not entitled to any say on how the money is spent. Should drug manufacturers and health insurance companies succeed in “breaking” President Obama, there is little to prevent the final destruction of sensible transportation. Our battle is a tiny skirmish in the larger political landscape.

Nonetheless, there is some reason for optimism. Some big money special interests seem rail improvements as an aid to economic development, especially real estate. It is also notable that airlines have not protested the latest push for HSR in Texas, and Southwest is officially “neutral.”

TFA will be favorable to HSR connectivity with local transit and airports. We also like the “incremental” approach and the need to grow a rail passenger culture along many corridors. This is exactly the NARP position and the outlook from the Midwest High Speed Rail Association.

Long distance trains are an important part of a balanced national system and those trains should, over time, be expanded and improved to connect the regions and states. It appears that Amtrak shares this vision.

Amtrak has enjoyed something of a respite from the more than 30 years of non-stop struggle for survival. This has resulted in a comprehensive plan to provide daily Sunset service west of New Orleans and upgraded service between the Eagle and the Sunset. A report on alternatives for restoring service east of N. O. has been released. Equipment purchase have been proposed. Management has begun to manage. It’s tentative, but generally positive.

These developments have given TFA a wealth of material. The addition of Logan Nash as a regular contributor has contributed an informed and useful viewpoint for this conversation. Logan is a great writer and a clear thinker. The “generation gap” that exists between us has been nothing but favorable for the readers.

This site provides a source of current rail passenger news and commentary. My wish is that we could agresssively provide more independently generated stories and opinion pieces. There are important conferences that go uncovered for lack of resources. This is the “next level” and I have not figured out how to get there – yet.

It is most gratifying to be interviewed by journalists looking for pithy quotes of good background on rail stories. I am always available for that and I would like to develop an informative (“dog and pony”) multi-media rail passenger presentation to take on the road. (Or, maybe I could settle for a dancing bear.) I think there may be a “market” for this kind of overview.

It is our goal to create a favorable atmosphere in which people who support sensible transportation policy can meet and develop the language and background to successfully advocate a positive rail passenger position. There is no logical reason to accept insult and dismissal for holding a position that is readily embraced everywhere else on earth.

Your loyalty and comments are always appreciated. Thank you for reading Trains for America.

Filed under: Amtrak, Passenger Rail Politics, Passenger Rail Transportatio Policy, United States High Speed Rail

Oklahoma thinking about high speed rail

This subject got some discussion over at TrainOrders, and much of it was fairly derisive. My Arkansas friends will not like this much, but I continue to believe that Oklahoma has some legitimate qualifications for passenger rail improvement.

Please understand that Oklahoma owns over 800 miles of track. That is not generally suitable for European-style HSR, but those lines are certainly candidates for what FRA calls “high performance rail.”

The story in the Oklahoman is comprehensive and the reporter, Julie Bisbee, is to be commended for wading into a subject that has proven to be the downfall of many less attentive journalists.

Officials with the state Transportation Department have submitted a preliminary application for funds to make rail lines from Tulsa to the Texas state line part of a national high-speed rail corridor under the American Recovery and Rehabilitation Act. The plan would call for trains to travel between Tulsa and Oklahoma City reaching speeds as high as 150 mph. The average speed would be 110 mph.

The lines that connect the Heartland Flyer from Oklahoma City to Fort Worth, Texas, would average more than 60 mph in Oklahoma, transportation officials said.

This concept suggests a corridor from Fort Worth to Tulsa, TFA has previously commented on an Oklahoma City-Tulsa service, noting the favorable possibilities.

• driving distance is about 100 miles
• state owns much of the existing rail line (which needs lots of work)
• state owns turnpike right-of-way (could this land be used? It’s straight as an arrow.)
• Oklahoma City pop. 1,200,000 plus
• Tulsa pop.685,000
• interfaces with an upgraded Heartland Flyer service to DFW.

The quality of public transportation in both cities would be an important factor and that is a subject on which I am not able to comment. It seems to make sense that Oklahoma should get moving on improving the existing track to “high performance rail” standards and start operating in the 100 mph range.

Oh, look at that! 100 miles at 100 mph gives you a travel time of about one-hour end-to-end. Why haven’t they figuted this out already? And here’s the good part; it would not cost anything approaching the afore mentioned $1.5 billion.

The total construction on this is probably more like $250 million. Trains departing each end on the hour all day and scheduled at a running time of around 75 minutes is a big winner.

Oklahoma should forget European-style HSR and get moving on “high performance rail” tomorrow. It will change that already vibrant region forever.

One of the keys is connecting the Will Rogers airport in OKC to DFW with Tulsa’s airport. Yes, this will increase the cost and it will probably triple the benefit and the possibility of private sector involvement.

Filed under: Amtrak, Regional USA Passenger Rail, United States High Speed Rail

Amtrak seeks bids for 130 new Viewliner 2 cars

For those who believe Amtrak is neglecting long distance trains.

Amtrak intends to issue a competitive Request for Proposal for a vendor to design, manufacture and deliver 130 “Viewliner 2” Long Distance Single-Level Passenger Cars, with an option for Amtrak to purchase up to an additional 70 cars.   The “Viewliner 2” rolling stock which is fully described in the Technical Specifications, will be used as Amtrak passenger trains, primarily in long-distance service, but capable of operating anywhere within Amtrak’s system.  There are four (4) “Viewliner 2” car types: Diners, Sleepers, Baggage-Dorms and Baggage cars. The “Viewliner 2” cars will be modeled on the concept of the Amtrak “Viewliner 1” cars.

Filed under: Amtrak