Andrew, I recently read an article in the New York Times about the new head of Amtrak. It seems he is a "mystery man" with no apparent background or qualifications, so there's speculation that Bush put him there to administer the coup de grace that would implement the administration's vision of shutting down Amtrak and handing over the few profitable pieces to favored donors.

Colleagues,

It is my opinion that this "mystery man" was appointed just for the purpose of closing out the Long Distance routes and nothing else. Mark my works, 6-8 months from now, all that will be left will be a few 300 mile corridors unless the people speak real loud in this fall's elections. If it is possible (in my area it is not, there are no pro-rail candidates with a prayer of getting elected on account of other issues) elect pro-rail candidates. Congressional action is all that may work.

J. H. Sullivan

To keep this thread a little more non-partisan, I suggest simply that you email your congressperson and your two US Senators letting them know that you think Amtrak is important and should be funded and made an integral part of the US transportation network, even if it is not "profitable."

Andrew

Andrew, elected representatives have gatekeepers ordered to ignore any letters that don't include a large enough check to purchase the "access" available exclusively to donors. That's definitely a "nonpartisan" statement, as it applies to both parties.

Writing letters to your Congressperson or Senators can be useful because it lets you get the issue off your chest, which might make you feel slightly better. I've done it many times for that reason. I've received form letter replies about 50% of the time, including several instances where the flunky gatekeeper was apparently too busy to make sure he or she sent me the correct form letter!

Members of Congress have to spend so much time raising money for their next campaign and ensuring that their donors receive what they've paid for that they just don't have time to spend listening to the little people who aren't donors. That's the main reason Amtrak is moribund, since I strongly doubt that any donor ever sets foot on a train. And besides, I live in a gerrymandered Congressional district custom-made for one of the most conservative members of the House. He's probably among the most eager to remove Amtrak's feeding tube and "starve the beast."

There is no way to avoid politics when discussing Amtrak, as many of its difficulties are inextricably tied to political considerations.

Ever notice how no one on either side of this issue QUANTIFIES anything? Not just the Fodorites, but the politicians and railroadmen as well.

It seems to boil down to one side saying RRs are uneconomical and inconvenient, and the other side saying the RRs are economical and convenient.

But no one ever says why it takes 34 hours (LAX to SEA) to train it vs 20 hours to drive it in a car.

No one ever says what 1100 miles on a train in Europe would cost.

No one ever questions WHY, in this age of supercomputers, freight trains take precedence over passenger. Most freight trains, even the 100 car ones, seem to tie up intersections in a city for 5 minutes or so. So there must be an inordinate amount of time between any trains that could be shrunk.

No one ever seems to question WHY passenger cars have SO much mass for the number of passengers, compared to a bus or streetcar for example. Mass = energy use = money.

Now I'm sure someone will reply that RRs in Europe are subsidized, but really, think if you hooked eight buses together, put rail wheels on them, and just drove that route (in 20 hours). What's a bus get, 5 mpg? That's 220 gallons of diesel, say $500 of fuel to haul, say, 400 people. $1.25 per passenger, one way. Now yes, you'd have to add some employee cost, but that would also be spread over 400 passengers.

The whole thing smacks to me of an industry populated with people maintaining the status quo, not threatened with loosing their jobs if they didn't fix the problem.

One particular random letter to your elected representative will likely have no impact. But if they start getting a lot of mail pushing a particular issue, believe me, they will take notice. That doesn't mean he/she will support the position that a flood of letters advocates, but it does mean the rep will have to take it into account - and if the politician doesn't have any particular leanings on the issue, he/she may well choose at least not to vote against it or block it.

Believe me, every letter and email you write to a congressperson is read or at least scanned by SOMEONE, and they most definitely keep track of trends on particular issues. A flood of letters supporting Amtrak would be noted for sure, especially if a lot of congresspeople started getting them.

Andrew

Watch the number of politicians seeking (re)election use "whistle stop" tours or even special buses.

Were they to utilized "scheduled" train & bus service, and the services (bus & rail stations) maybe they'd think differently about the facilities others must use. They are too far removed from it. Too many always fly; there's no empathy.

Scheduled train service is, of course, too limited and unreliable for a politician implementing an optimized campaign schedule created by a high-priced consultant.

It would be more interesting, however, for politicians to "go Greyhound." It would certainly give them some exposure to the lower strata of society, for whom Greyhound is their only transportation option. It might even provide an eye-opening perspective that they'd never get from $1000-per-plate fundraising dinners and closed-door meetings with lobbyists and PAC donors. Maybe we ought to start agitating for a law that requires politicians to spend a specified minimum amount of time riding mass transit buses, Amtrak, and Greyhound as a balance on the wealthy donors with whom they normally associate. It just might happen-- some time after Messiah comes.

Faina: Good for you for choosing the train for your journey back to SF!! Along with the scenery and relaxation, one of the nicest aspects of train travel is the sociability - just chatting with fellow passengers, in the bar car or over your dining car meals. Will be eager to hear what you think of your trip.

To all:

I'm sorry it's taken me this long to get back to our thread! I actually had a chance to enjoy a few days off over the holiday (and I mean literal "days off"...without any electronic devices, to boot)!

I'd especially like to respond to J.B.H., Andrew and the "tomboy". We've seen quite a few subjective comments, here (and I'm as guilty as anyone); a bit of objective reasoning might be nice!

I will do my best to complete these messages before bedtime, tonight. Please be forewarned: what I wish to discuss is ultimately future-minded, since the current state of intercity passenger railroading in North America is so far from ideal.

Best,
Garl