Published Friday, June 28, 2002, on the Washington Post Online

The Future of Amtrak

With Don Phillips
Washington Post Business Staff Writer

"Amtrak and the Bush administration agreed last night on a plan to
prevent a shutdown of nationwide passenger rail service and many
commuter operations that could have begun during the Independence Day
weekend, though Congress will have to act after the holiday recess to
make the deal complete." Read the full story U.S., Amtrak Agree to
Keep Trains Going (Post, June 27).
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52243-2002Jun26.html>

Post Business staff writer Don Phillips has been covering Amtrak and
was online Friday, June 28 at 11 a.m. EDT to field questions and
comments on the future of Amtrak and U.S. rail travel.

Below is the transcript.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions
for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer
questions.

* * *

San Francisco, Calif.: A man from Reno, Nev., wrote to the San
Francisco Chronicle that only 20 of the 46 states where Amtrak runs
provide funds for short and medium distance trains. As an example, he
advised that the California Zephyr between the bay area and Chicago
covers seven states but only California and Illinois provide funds. If
this is true, doesn't it make sense to ask all states where Amtrak
runs to provide funds? Please comment. Thank you. A long distance
train fan. John

Don Phillips: That is one of the main questions that the political
process must answer in the next few years. Already a lot of states
contribute to run Amtrak service within their states. And I think it
is inevitable that more states will do so. But what do we do for
multi-state runs? You mention the California Zephyr. I don't think
either Illinois or California contribute to that specific train. So
what happens if the federal government says all states must contribute
to keep it running. Suppose Nebraska refuses? Do we simply not stop in
Omaha? But suppose someone from Illinois wants to go to Omaha on the
train? Isn't the subsidy-paying Illinois citizen being cheated? The
problem is not simple.



Atlanta, Ga.: If you're the Bush administration, why not push Amtrak
into bankruptcy? Give them enough cash to run the NE corridor while in
bankruptcy (like all those airlines that continue to operate) and
reduce long-distance service -- or keep it running, even. But
bankruptcy would help discharge Amtrak from some of its cost
obligations, and isn't that part of the answer?

Don Phillips: Perhaps, but it's a really messy answer. It would take
years for the rail system to recover, if it ever did. In a way, it
would be the coward's way out, admitting that the political system
doesn't have the intelligence to decide on a role for the passenger
train in America, how much it would cost and how to pay for it. If the
government can't handle that problem, why should we trust it to fight
a war on terrorism?



Madison, Wis.: What do you think this ongoing saga about possible
shutdown is doing to Amtrak's future ticket sales? What will be the
impact on Amtrak meeting their revenue targets?

Don Phillips: So far I'm told ticket sales aren't dropping
precipitously. I don't think the public believes Amtrak could actually
shut down.



Morehead City, N.C.: Why don't they keep the high density and helpful
commuter area sevice and delete the wandering and heavily losing long
distance?

Don Phillips: That, of course, is a political question. But you should
understand that the Northeast Corridor and commuter services lose far
far more than the long-distance trains. That's because the
long-distance trains have only operating expenses. While some corridor
trains may break even operationally, they do not cover the billions of
dollars in capital costs. No commuter rail line comes even close to
making money. The question, therefore is, what trains do we a
taxpayers NEED, and what trains do we as taxpaters WANT?



Gaithersburg, Md.: Will MARC train service still continue to Union
Station?

Don Phillips: If Amtrak shuts down, no. Perhaps a deal could be worked
out in some future crisis.



Philadelphia, Pa.: Do you think Sen. Hollings' funding plan has a
chance of passing when Congress returns? Do you think some type of
long range funding plan will be adopted?

Don Phillips: That's an unanswerable uestion right now. The Hollings
plan has a good chance in the Senate, but not the House. And Amtrak
has survived without a long-range funding plan for 31 years. I don't
have mucb faith in the politcal process to produce one now.



Arlington, Va.: Mr. Phillips, I always enjoy your knowledgable writing
on rail and air transport.

Mr. Gunn seems like a breath of fresh air. A weakness that some may
perceive -- his unwillingness to play political "games" -- is to me
his main strength and just what is needed at Amtrak now. But do you
think with his honesty that he'll be able to stay around long enough
to make a difference, or will he be forced out?

Do you think he'll last?

Don Phillips: David Gunn has really made a name for himself at Amtrak
in just six weeks on the job. He has already begun a major management
restructuring and is moving quickly to get a handle on finances. The
employees of Amtrak in the Washington area have had t-shirts printed
with the slogan: "Amtrak employees: Proud to be working under the
Gunn." Will he last? Probably. The government may get upset and angry
with him, but they know they need him. If they pushed him out, who
else would they get? After all, he has already started doing what the
government is demanding he do. It's sort of like the government
ordering him to keep running in the same direction.



Arlington, Va.: How risky is it to book a trip in mid-July from Union
Station to Williamsburg, Va.?

Don Phillips: Ask me that in a few days. I think you're OK.



Reston, Va.: Is the focus on Amtrak missing the point? Of all the
transportation systems in this county I believe the railroads are the
least subsidized. Do the freight railroads get any federal/state
support? The issue should be about a broader railroad infrastructure
in the U.S. and not just about Amtrak.

Thanks.

Don Phillips: Freight railroads get only a tiny amount of federal
help, mostly for public purposes such as eliminating grade
crossings. But your querstion will be one of the major ones facing
Congress next year when surface transportation legislation is
reauthorized. Highways in the Northeast are getting clogged with
trucks and cars. Can railroad expansion with federal help do something
about that? Stay tuned.



Sterling, Va.: I see only two major markets for intercity rail
passenger service: The Northeast and the California coast. Other than
national security and public service, what justifications are there
for intercity rail over long distances?

Don Phillips: You'll get a lot of answers depending on who you ask. To
me the only answer is that for 31 years, the people, speaking through
the political process, have said they want them. People do ride
them. Don't ever believe they run around empty, as some say. Just try
to get a sleeping car space in the summertime. But if they disappeared
tomorrow, the effect on national mobility would be minimal.



Chicago, Ill., rail commuter: What I don't understand is, why are
rails expected to pay for themselves while no one recognizes that
roads are 100 percent taxpayer subsidized (I make that statement in
the context of Mineta's comments and the argument that is made when
cities consider light or heavy rail -- that it will never pay for
itself.) Also, don't the airlines get a big cost break in that the
feds run the air traffic control system -- and now security? It seems
as if we as taxpayers have decided roads and air are worth
subsidizing, but for some reason rail is not, and I'm not sure why
that is.

Don Phillips: Expect an argument if you say that to airline or highway
people. But you're basically right. The problem is that our
transportation system has grown up as separate modes.There are trust
funds for highways and airports, and frankly those trust funds should
be much larger. We need as much of those systems as can be built in an
environmentally sound way. But there is no fund for rail. So instead
of making a rationsl decision, on a case by case basis, on how best to
move people and freight, the different modes duke it out. Sad. People
are waking up, but slowly.



Durham, N.C.: Is the Bush administration asking for labor concessions?

Don Phillips: Depends on your definition of concessions. They want
Amtrak to promise not to make any labor agreements that would prevent
future contracting-out of services now performed by rail labor. Not a
giveback, but drawing a line. A lot of labor folks and members of
Congress thing this is just the first bite, however, and the
administration will go for more concessions later.



Providence, R.I.: Why can't the administration provide financing to
the end of the fiscal year and take up the various reforms during that
time for funding for the new fiscal year?

Don Phillips: That's what's been tentatively agreed to. But the devil
is in the details. The contracting-out proposal I just mentioned is
now holding things up. I would give you a complete rundown on the
negotiating situation but it might have changed twice before I'm able
to pick up the phone again.



Washington, D.C.: I must say, I wasn't pleased that the administration
decided to bail out Amtrak. I rode it for one full week from D.C. to
New York and back. That was the worst week of my life. Malfunctioning
trains, incompetent and sometimes rude staff, and trains that never
ran on time. Why can't we just sell off the pieces of Amtrak to
private corporations and let them run it? If Amtrak really will never
make money, then corporations won't buy it and we'll get rid of
it. Seems better then every couple of years throwing emergency aid at
the ailing system.

Don Phillips: You're right to be frustrated. Amtrak trains are getting
shoddy, although I keep hearing stories of helpful and dedicated
employees who make it better. One of the unfortunate things about this
two-week flap over bailing out Amtrak is that David Gunn was about to
start getting a handle on the problem you mention. He's spending his
time on survival now. As for privatization, I can't understand why
ANYONE would want to take over an Amtrak route, Unless, that is, thers
are lots of hidden subsidies. And then it's not really private any
more, is it? I'm a skeptic on privatization.



San Francisco, Calif.: Do you really believe that long distance train
routes will be cut this time around?

Don Phillips: No. No way. Congress won't let it happen. But who knows
in the future. Everything depends on whether the political process
makes a rational decision about Amtrak's future or jusr keeps rocking
along as it has for 31 years.



Washington, D.C.: Why doesn't the government take care of all
infrastructure, rails, stations like they do with the road system?
Then, Amtrak's Northeast Corridor service would undoubtedly make
money, perhaps more under private ownership. Someone pointed out that
our passenger rail system is the opposite of other successful modes of
transportation. The government builds and maintains roads, provides
air traffic control and radar, but not the rails and train stations.

Don Phillips: You ask one of the key questions that the political
process will be asking over the next few years. I'm still listening to
the arguments. I'm not smart enough yet to offer an opinion.



Reston, Va.: I haven't seen any news reports questioning "where has
the money gone"?

I've seen reports talking about all the people that use Amtrak and
need it.

If so many people are using it, and paying, why is it going belly up?
Bad money managment?

Don Phillips: No passenger rail in the world makes money. And don't
listen to any that claim they do. In every country in the world except
the United States, rail is considered a public service that also helps
avoid building even more expensive highways and airports. This country
just needs to be honest about the fiction of passenger rail
"profitability" and make a social and political decision over whether
we want trains and what servicethey are expected to provide.



Albuquerque, N.M.: I go to a college in a small town where my best way
to leave is by using Amtrak. Seeing how this is in Pennsylvania, where
I believe the rails are owned by one of the freight companies, would
Amtrak in general be better off if it had ownership over all the rails
it uses?

Don Phillips: NO. The cost of keeping up such an extensive national
passenger-owned system would be prohibitive. Besides, this country
needs freight trains far more than it needs passenger trains. Freight
trains are a vital part of the economy.



Fort Belvoir, Va.: I've used Amtrak for business and non-business
travel on many occasions in the past 31 years. I do believe we should
have a good national intercity rail passenger system -- subsidized by
government.

Amtrak and their employees should take a lesson from their Canadian
equivalent -- Via Rail Canada. I find the quality of Via's onboard
service much superior to that provided by Amtrak.



Question: How come no one seems to be talking about that Railroad
Retirement system financial problems that would be created by shutting
down Amtrak, or eliminating the overnight long distance trains?
Amtrak's union employees have incredibly generous labor protection
provisions in their collective bargaining agreements. In addition, if
their jobs are eliminated, they would no longer be contributing
withholding into the system?

Don Phillips: VIA really is riding high these days. I need to go up
there and ask why--IF I can get my company to pay for
it. Hint. Hint. As for your last paragraph, read it to yourself again
and you have your answer. You state the problem well.



Arlington, Va.: Has customer service emerged as a theme in the latest
Amtrak debate? The last time I took the train, to Philadelphia for the
weekend, led me to decide never to do so again. There was almost no
personnel available to tell you where to stand in line, when the train
was coming, where to board. Other than the bartender, I think there
was only one Amtrak person on the train. No wonder more people take
the bus.

Don Phillips: Spotty service is a perennial Amtrak problem that
Mr. Gunn must address as soon as he can get away from the political
game of survival. I've generally run into great Amtrak employees, but
when you get a bad one, it ruins the whole trip.



Alexandria, Va.: During the 1980s the railroads were
horrendous. People were smoking wherever they wanted to, the restrooms
were dingy, and the food service was limited.

But for the past dozen years trains have been a pleasure to ride.

Will Amtrak run fewer trains along the northeast corridor, or will the
quality decrease as well? Will the smokers return and start lighting
up wherever they want to just like before?



Don Phillips: Your memory is sharp. Things are much better now. No,
smokers won't return unless our whole society changes. And I would
predict that no matter who runs it, the Corridor will continue to
grow.



Bowie, Md.: Wasn't Amtrak's shutdown threats like those practiced by
government agencies threatened with funding problems:

Instead of closing down small inefficient operations, say you'll have
to cease the operations the public would most miss, even if they make
money. Amtrak threatened to shut down its NE Corridor operations and
support for local commuter rail lines, on which it makes money,
instead of its losing routes in sparsely populated areas.

Couldn't we shut down 90% of Amtrak with hardly anyone noticing, and
long as its NOT THE PART AMTRAK SAID IT WOULD CUT.

Don Phillips: Just to repeat, the Northeast Corridor does NOT make
money. Just the opposite, big time. And no, I'm persuaded that this
crisis was not manufactured. Amtrak really IS running out of cash.



Knoxville, Tenn.: Do you think that Amtrak will ever be allocated
enough funding to increase it's capacity and frequincies? I think
those are the real solutions to the long distance trains not
eliminating them.

How is Gunn percieved on the Hill now?

Thank you.

Don Phillips: So far, everyone I've talked to on Capitol Hill has
become a Gunn fan. The Bush administration is really upset with
him. As for your first question, I have enough trouble predicting what
will happen to Amtrak in the next few days. Long-term solutions? If
one shows up at Amtrak headquarters, they should treat it kindly. It
would be in an unfamiliar place.



Reston, Va.: Don, you said, "I'm not smart enough yet to offer an
opinion." I disagree. You are smart enough and it is your
responsibility as a journalist to challenge the public and political
system to do the right thing. Speak your mind! I've always found your
columns insightful and thought provoking.

Don Phillips: OK, I'll accept your challenge. Just on the basis of
what I know (and with the caveat that I might change my mind), it
makes no sense to have some entity own the corridor and another entity
operate it. But I think it might be possible to work out a compact
between all the users (Amtrak, commuters, freight), to own and
dispatch the Corridor. The USERS, not some outside agency, would have
to be in charge. But I'm also not persuaded that Amtrak under David
Gunn can't do the job right. We should all be watching over the next
couple of years. Now that's not exactly an unequivocal answer, but
it's my best thinking at the moment.



Wilmington, Del.: Did the Bush administration come up with any new
policy ideas for Amtrak or are they merely using the Amtrak Reform
Council Report?

Don Phillips: The two proposals are quite similar. But the
administration only offered vague principles, not a detailed plan. So
it's not possible to do a direct comparison.



Brunswick, Maine: Mr. Phillips: Do you see a congressional, Penn
Central USRA-type structure formed to look into passerger rail
problems? Or are we looking at business as usual with Amtrak?

Don Phillips: I don't see it yet. But I think it would be a great
idea, if done right. Most people don't know it, but the country owes a
real debt to the U.S. Railway Association people who came to
Washington and straightened out a much worse mess than Amtrak. Most of
them left government immediately and went on to high-ranking jobs in
transportation where they continued to contribute.



Severn, Md.: Don, why can't we get Congress to see that spending money
on high speed trains is more cost effective than building more
highways?

Don Phillips: The political process moves slowly on this subject. It
costs a LOT of money (but then, highways cost more). There are only a
few places in this country where true high-speed rail could work (the
Northeast, California, perhaps the Chicago area, Florida, MAYBE
Texas). Some day some state (maybe California) will make the
leap. Then, if the first one is successful, then expect the idea to
spread.



Chicago, Ill.: I am puzzled why Amtrak is so much more controversial
than other government subsidized rail lines. Here in Illinois we have
Metra commuter rail service, which is very popular and also heavily
subsidized. I am sure that if the state threatened to slash the
subsidy the commuters who depend on Metra would be up in arms. I guess
my question is, why does Amtrak have so many critics and so few
defenders?

Don Phillips: Actually, it's the other way around. Critics are vocal,
but defenders far outnumber them. That's about the only reason Amtrak
survived for 31 years. As for Metra, it's a great system, a model for
the country. Well-run, well-maintained and erll-used.



Manassas, Va.: If Amtrak is in such trouble, why don't they just give
up and liquidate their assets as they did with Penn Station (or
whatever it was in New York), and let the freight companies like CSX
have control of the railroads?

Don Phillips: Except for the Northeast Corridon, freight railroads do
control the railroad system. But neither CSX nor any other railroad
woulg get within rock-throwing distance of passenger trains. They run
freight trains, which are far more numerous and far more important to
the economy.



Bethesda, Md.: I don't understand how Amtrak can hope to survive when
fares are at least as expensive, and sometimes more expensive, than
airfares, and the trip takes so much more time. Why on earth should
people train when flying is faster and cheaper, and how does Amtrak
hope to overcome this?

Don Phillips: You must mean long-distance trains. Fares are generally
lower than air in the Northeast Corridor, although you can often pick
up some pretty low bargain air fares. In the rest of the country,
Amtrak does charge what the traffic will bear. It is expensive,
especially in sleeping cars, but people do fork over their
money. Sleeping car space is sometimes hard to get.



Boulder, Colo.: If Amtrak is not to be allowed to enter Chapter 11 and
have its viable assets redistributed among those who might be able to
use them more effectively, why not give it one more chance to redeem
itself by providing enough capital to support some real progress (such
as track repair and replacement)? Just providing enough for Amtrak to
make it to the next crisis seems both cruel and foolish.

Don Phillips: That loud chorus you hear out your window is millions of
people saying, Amen. Indeed, why not? IF Amtrak is worth doing (a
political decision), then it's worth doing well. That's a foreign idea
in the U.S. political process.



Manassas, Va.: What's the likely impact if VRE and other commuter rail
companies don't choose Amtrak as their operator when the contracts are
up?

Don Phillips: It would deny Amtrak some revenue, but it wouldn't be a
fatal blow.



Carbondale, Ill.: Is Amtrak considering new technologies such as
MagLev in the Midwest high-speed rail corridors? It seems like that
technology would make a lot of sense out here (as opposed to commuter
service between Baltimore and Washington).

Don Phillips: Maglev is a tough question. It has its proponents, but
it would be very expensive to build.A lot of people wonder why spend
money on Maglev when the country can't even provide enough money for
Amtrak. Maglev probably does have uses, such as connecting all the
various airports in the Los Angeles basin. But I doubt the economics
would work over longer distances in crowded areas such as the
Northeast, where it would be essentially redundant to existing means
of rail transportation. (Believe me, I will hear about this answer
from my friends in the maglev industry).

By the way, my father grew up in Carbondale.



New York, N.Y.: Please help me with a question I've been wondering
about for a long time. Why is it that the Acela goes so slowly from
New York to New Haven? I know they don't own the tracks and there are
some tight curves, but that never seems to explain the very slow pace
relative to elsewhere on the line. What do you think?

Don Phillips: Those tracks are owned by New York and Connecticut, and
are mainly used by Metro North commuter trains. the commuter agency
says a lot of money would have to be spent on that line to allow such
high speeds.



Arlington, Va.: What impact, if any, will the shutdown of Amtrak have
on the USPS? As I understand, Amtrak has been delivering Priority Mail
free of charge as some condition of federal funding. Isn't the USPS
dangerously close to having serious funding issues?

Don Phillips: Some mail moves by Amtrak, but the freight railroads
move far more. I don't think it would be a problem at all.



Bethesda. Md.: I bought a one way ticket from Toronto to Washington
D.C. for July 31, and I just wanted to know if I could be sure taht I
will be able to get to D.C. by train, or should I buy now an airplane
ticket?

Thanks!

Don Phillips: By then, the issue should be decided for now. I think a
train ticket is safe.



Washington, D.C.: Why did Amtrak spend so much on the new Accela
trains, yet they are only about five minutes faster than the old
Metroliners? When are we going to get a true high-speed connection
(i.e., two hours or less)?

Don Phillips: The problem is the roadbed and the overhead electrical
propulsion system. Until a few billion is spent on that, the Acela is
held to 135 mph maximum instead of 150. Besides, the Mtroliner was
already pretty fast. The curvy New York-Boston "shore line" is where
the Acela really makes up time.



Cape Coral, Fla.: Your column earlier this week mentioned that the
administration was upset with David Gunn for turning things into a
"national spectacle." But isn't that exactly what is needed to bring
this matter to the public? Public opinion drives the political
process. What can the entire railroad industry be doing to change the
general perception of the American public that railroads are not
fading American history, but a key element for future growth?

washingtonpost.com: Mineta Is 'Confident' On Future Of Amtrak (Post,
June 25)
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38670-2002Jun24.html>

Don Phillips: Why do you think the administration is upset? Gunn says
he isn't a politician, but I'm beginning to question that statement.



New York, N.Y.: What do you think are the chances that the high-speed
rail corridors around the U.S. designated by the Department of
Transportation will be upgraded to allow significantly higher average
speeds in the near future? Thanks.

Don Phillips: In the near future? No. That was basically a political
exercise. Now comes the hard (and slow) part.



Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: I come from Alaska as does Don Young, the chairman
of the House Transportation Committee. How important is his support
for any legislation -- that improves/sustains/supports/redesigns this
agency -- to actually make it to the floor of the House for a vote?
And since AMTRAK doesn't serve Alaska, how likely is it that
"Ft. Yukon Don" will let this legislation out of his committee for
consideration by the full House? Thanks much.

Don Phillips: Don Young has shocked a lot of people who didn't know
him with his support for rail passenger service. Young is also one of
the major proponents for "reform" of Amtrak. I can't predict the
future, but I think history will probably record that for railroads in
general, it was lucky that Don Young was in Congress at this time.



Philadelphia, Pa.: Why does the government spend excessively for
roads/highways and air transportation? United Airlines asks for $2
billion and no one in government blinks.

Don Phillips: Frankly, I don't think it's possible for the government
to spend too much money on any form of transportation. We need them
ALL. Congestion will eat us economically if we don't step up the pace
of support for transportation.

Don Phillips: I'm really sorry I have to stop now. Many dozens of good
questions remain unanswered. The response to this topic was
overwhelming. Thank you all.



San Francisco, Calif.: How many years have you been writing on Amtrak
and rail?

Don Phillips: Oops, one more. Roughly 40 years, either as a job or as
a freelance subject.