Random thoughts #17

1. As an appendix to my last post: The open access model would also apply to any operator who wants to take on Amtrak in its most favorable region, the NEC.
2. What was notable in Wisconsin was which funded route Senator Baldwin omitted--namely, the West Central Wisconsin route. It's almost like these elected officials only recognize Amtrak as a legitmate operator even though they themselves signed off on legislation that makes it easier for other operators to get federal funding for routes.
3. Improving the existing Cascades vs investing in the ultra HSR Cascadia Rail service is a good problem to have on the other side of the country.
4. Competition for Channel Tunnel service is coming.
5. AMLO is trying to reverse a gigantic mistake that was made by the Mexican government almost three decades ago when NdeM was privatized and then curtailed passenger service.
6. It would be so ironic if the Fort Worth-Dallas section of high speed rail turned a wheel before the Dallas-Houston one given all of the focus on the latter until last month.
7. Operators like SEPTA and METRA are sending the wrong message in closing their ticket windows and incovniencing their passengers who may walk up at the last minute.

Random thoughts #16

1. The FRA Long-Distance Study is definitely a nice start, but the whole thing of Amtrak being the only operator of the revived routes rubs me the wrong way (entities like AIPRO operators partnering with other companies as part of my rail consortium should also be a part of new long distance routes). That issue aside, I am willing to give this a shot because adding back some long distance routes is something that should have been done more than a decade ago. Existing areas should be amplified and other regions without service should be represented so people aren't forced to make lengthy transfers to New York, D.C. or Chicago.
2. The feds could be forcing Amtrak to focus more on overnight routes than state-supported routes, which would reorient the company into focusing on serving the entire nation rather than just the Northeast. 
3. Another thing about this possible decentralization of Amtrak is that a future Congress could split Amtrak into two or three units and that Stephen Gardner or his successor could subsequently be the leader of only the Northeast Corridor once competition for intercity services is underway while the long distance person ends up being more tuned into the overnight trains.
4. There's no excuse for North America not being more electrified.
5. Ever since the threat of a rail strike loomed back in the fall, there have been calls to nationalize the railroads with one YouTuber even wanting the feds to recreate Conrail at the Class I level. I've been mixed on the idea. I've long understood that railroads are businesses first, but on the other hand, the major railroads have shot themselves in the foot way too many times--lobbying to keep a late 1860s braking system in place rather than adjusting to the 21st century, Precision Scheduled Railroading, the sick day fiasco that almost led to the railworkers striking in the first place.
6. Regarding the station situation in Jacksonville, the Regional Transit Center opened in May 2020 to buses and the elevated Skyway trains. The JTA and FDOT have discussed moving Amtrak closer to downtown since the late '00s. The city's proposed commuter services list the JRTC as the downtown location rather than the Prime Osborn Center. 
7. Speaking of the Osborn Center, the city has deemed the site of the historic Union Terminal as too small given that Jacksonville has lost out on events to cities the size of Daytona Beach. The city is pondering a new, larger convention center.
8. Once the City of Jacksonville has a new convention center in place, it will be possible for both Union Terminal and the JRTC to host passenger rail. Union Terminal: Amtrak, FDOT intra-Florida corridor service, Rail Consortium East, Rail Consortium Central. JRTC: Brightline, future HSR, Nightjet, JTA commuter rail.

2022 Midterms and Rail

Given that transit agencies are still in various phases of recovery from the pandemic, there's very little to offer in the way of the future direction of commuter/regional rail outside of Florida.

Here's a link to all of the transit-related referenda that were on the ballot last month. Based on the results, we don't have to worry about this particular nightmare scenario any time soon. However, it could still be in play over the next few years as the Senate and presidency could flip in '24.

Addendum: Congressional testimony on Amtrak and the states

Trains Magazine last fall
House transcripts 

Revolting Against Amtrak Part II

Is Amtrak the only state option?

To answer the article in the April edition of Trains Magazine: It shouldn't be.

Testifying at a U.S. House of Representatives rail subcommittee hearing on Amtrak operations, [Stacey] Mortenson said she found it "absolutely astonishing" when Amtrak officials told her in a meeting "that service cuts or reducing the number of railcars would not necessarily same us any money."

But yet at certain times, bean counters in Washington go ahead and cut service under the guise of "saving money" anyway.
For all of the flak, NCDOT gets from some rail activists for using refurbished pre-Amtrak era equipment, it looks as if it made a smart move since it only pays Amtrak for Carolinian equipment. For instance, look at all of the trouble the Midwestern states went through with Nippon-Sharyo's double-decker equipment.
Bob Johnston pointed out that advertising and corridor-specific marketing among other things have fallen off a cliff since the late '90s. Here in North Carolina, advertising for the Piedmont and Carolinian are handled by NCDOT, and the only Amtrak presence came in the form of radio ads in the mid '10s.
Amtrak may have the statutory right of access to the host railroads' tracks but if the states had done their homework in the early '10s, they could have dumped Amtrak, used the commuter rail model for AIPRO operators and saved themselves a lot of money. The refusal by the states to consider AIPRO operators means that these DOTs shot themselves in the foot in regards to expansion and using their imagination.

It must be pointed out the reason why the Hoosier State failed was because it was the only corridor route that had less than daily service, Indiana officials were half-hearted with their support--the cities and universities along the route did most of the heavy lifting--and the trains stopped at unmarketable times.

Bennett Levin pointed out to Trains Magazine that Amtrak's liability advantage was eradicated after the Train #188 derailment five years ago when the cap was raised from $250 million for only Amtrak to $294 million for all passenger carriers.

In any case, heightened scrutiny of Amtrak's costs an responsiveness will clearly be a contentious element of upcoming re-authorization discussions.

Congress needs to keep the pressure up on Amtrak because it has gotten away with saddling states with high cost, low revenue studies that all but guarantee no expansion of existing services and no new routes. On top of that, the other states need to stand up to bureaucrats in D.C. who know nothing about their needs and only care about the 457 miles between Washington and Boston.

Bennett Levin's Visit to Pennsylvania Legislators

In the First Quarter issue in Passenger Train Journal, Kevin McKinney analyzed Levin's testimony in the Pennsylvania House Transportation Committee at the end of last year.

[Levin] adds that "SEPTA gives Amtrak attributable to the Harrisburg Line is not being used by Amtrak on the Harrisburg Line, but is being used by Amtrak for other purposes."

Is it any wonder why Levin wants SEPTA to run the trains? A slight variation should result in a new PENN RAIL running the trains instead.

Levin also pointed out just how out of touch the Amtrak Board is with the people who are on it and have no railroading experience. It's worth noting that both Levin and Mortenson told the legislative bodies in question that Amtrak's accounting is absolutely opaque.

Levin is right in that "Amtrak is running on auto-pilot" and the states "are getting shortchanged." The former is due to "America's Railroad" getting all of that PRIIA money from the states and feeling no need to improve the state-supported routes without needless studies.

Revolting Against Amtrak

Two months ago, Stacey Mortenson of the San Joaquin JPA spilled the beans to Congress on how Amtrak overcharges state-supported routes--namely, her San Joaquin service. I'm pretty sure that Herzog would do a much better job operating the San Joaquins than Amtrak. Also, the SJ JPA plans on rerouting the trains to serve multiple parts of Sacramento. I really hope that Mortenson can pull off the transfer and even if this just a negotiating ploy, it would further show Amtrak's Northeastern-centric managment and board that California's JPAs are not fooling around--after all, the state's three JPAs were the only agencies that refused to go along with Amtrak Corporate's boneheaded moves to eliminate discounts in 2018.

Last month, a rail advocate told a Pennsylvania House committee that the commonwealth could do a better and cheaper job operating intercity rail than Amtrak. Whatever happens in Harrisburg, it's mandatory that there is at the very least a restoration of a second frequency between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh.

Despite Richard Anderson's bluster, this is the clearest sign that Amtrak's "valued state partners" are getting fed up with an agency that only cares about the Northeast Corridor and is only interested in shaking down the states for money while refusing to expand or provide new equipment.

That said, the states should have rebelled against Amtrak during the Section 209 fight seven years ago. California needed to be the guinea pig for private operators getting into corridor service, not Indiana. A state with three distinct corridors would have made it much more appealing to other state DOTs to ditch Amtrak instead of the only state to have a less than daily corridor service.

The dustup with the San Joaquins and Pennsylvania may very well prove what Amtrak critic M.E. Singer has said about PRIIA: That the 2008 law is the problem an may need to be repealed or reformed.

Outside of the box thinking is needed now more than ever because a continued reliance on Amtrak instead of turning to AIPRO members or Virgin Trains will squash any hopes of a passenger rail renaissance. States with limited or no corridor service need to pay attention to what's happening on both coasts so they can know what to avoid if they want to expand their routes.

A wasted decade

Around this time a decade ago, the passenger rail community was gearing up for President Obama's announcement of high speed rail funding and it looked like a renaissance was upon us. Rather than the sky being the limit, here's what actually happened:

• The infamous Tea Party backlash that resulted in Wisconsin (Hiawatha extension to Madison), Ohio (3C Route) and Florida (Express HSR Tampa-Orlando-Miami route) returning their stimulus money to the feds
• A trade group composed of Amtrak's commuter competitors being formed but ignored by the press and blacked out among most rail activists
• A failed attempt by Senators Dick Durbin and Harry Reid to drive private operators out of the commuter business
• A successful power play by Joe Boardman, the NEC congressional slate and NARP that kept the Northeast Corridor from being rehabbed based on a clever yet deceitful PR campaign
• The Hoosier State being eliminated
• The loss of the Silver Star diner
• No advocacy for the long distance routes from the people who matter the most
• Congress passing another rail reform bill but failing to enforce competition provisions
• Amtrak stripping ticketing and checked baggage from numerous stations throughout the country
• An ex-airline executive currently runs Amtrak and has alienated almost everyone with his moves

The status quo has prevailed and there has been little progress in the 10 years since. The vast majority of rail advocates have exposed themselves as little more than a bunch of Amtrak shills. As far as NARP, its name change is pretty much an indication that it is taking a step backward.

All you need to know about Amtrak's limited vision

The end of the Hoosier State

Amidst much scrutiny, the final Hoosier State left Chicago on June 30. In late April, the Indiana General Assembly slashed $3 million a year (total $6 million until 2021) set aside for Trains #850 and #851 following Governor Eric Holcomb's own exclusion of the train route in his budget.

Thus ends a six-year debacle that started when Indiana balked at PRIIA Section 209 requirements. I will analyze the big players' roles starting with...

...Amtrak

• Management reportedly told ex-CEO Joseph Boardman to not pursue CSX on making the Cardinal daily
• Responsible for Section 209 in the first place
• Delayed handing the Hoosier State over to Corridor Capital
• Offered free amenities when Corridor Capital was yanked and then rescinded them after five months
• Briefly provided Business Class after IPH pulled out

Indiana

• Was the only state to hold out of Section 209 payments
• Conducted a bidding process for the Hoosier State
• Passed on Herzog, who wanted to operate the train in favor of contracting out the route while keeping Amtrak crews
• Almost sabotaged the route before partial private service even began
• Made no effort to upgrade the route to daily
• State officials at best merely tolerated the route while it was the cities who exhibited far more interest in it
• Imposed onerous requirements that made it impossible for IPH to operate the Hoosier State at a profit

Corridor Capital

• Had the cars to operate the route
• Maybe not much the expertise
• Had to deal with a saboteur

Iowa Pacific

• Had the equipment and made good use of it on the Hoosier State
• Also made the best of its limited situation
• Ran out of money in 2017

D.C.

• The FRA attempted to classify states as rail carriers in early 2015
• Congress had the power to enforce PRIIA and FAST Act provisions encouraging private sector competition but did nothing

Railfans

• Most of them hated the idea of anyone other than Amtrak even touching this route from the beginning
• Rejoiced when Corridor Capital was booted and when IPH handed the Hoosier State back to Amtrak

The final verdicts
Thumbs down to Amtrak: If it wanted to, it could have made either the Cardinal or the Hoosier State daily. That it made such a fuss about keeping the train when others made bids on it says a lot about management and its culture. Yet another part of the country has been ceded to a startup bus company.

Thumbs down to the state of Indiana: Misstep after misstep led to the route's demise and state officials botching things. It is worth noting that all alternatives to Chicago-Indianapolis are either circuitous or they no longer exist.

Thumbs in the middle to Corridor Capital: It never got to prove itself. Hopefully that changes with the planned Eau Claire-Twin Cities route.

Thumbs up to Iowa Pacific: It was able make the best out of a bad situation. Unlike middle mangers in D.C. and Chicago, you can't deny the passion that Ed Ellis had for providing more than decent services on the Hoosier State.

Thumbs down to D.C. politicians: First, the executive branch under Obama cooked up a harebrained idea of making states rail carriers. If the intention was to prevent the states from selecting AIPRO members or any other non-Amtrak operator, then, mission accomplished. The attempted power play just set passenger rail back another 5-10 years when we couldn't afford to waste any more time.

Next, the legislative branch. Congress has no excuses because it has heard from enough experts so it needed to make sure that anyone bidding on existing Amtrak routes had a fair shake. Instead, state departments are more scared and even more risk averse all because our so-called leaders were willing to sit on their hands while a previously tolerated status quo could now lead to intercity rail crumbling from within.

Thumbs down to railfans: Their attitude over the nation's only non-daily corridor service vindicates everything I said  5 1/2 years ago.

Gulf Coast Service: The Latest

Recently, part of the Sunset East Route between Pensacola and Jacksonville was sold by CSX to RailUSA-owned Florida Gulf & Atlantic Railroad.

Just when railfans were trying to figure out what the sale meant for the odds of passenger service being restored, Mississippi Senator Roger Wicker announced that service will return to the western portion of the Sunset East Route between New Orleans and Mobile.

The catch is right there: Only the CSX portion of the Sunset East is involved. It would be up to FG&A to restore the easternmost portion and even then, there would still be a gap between Mobile and Pensacola because neither Alabama nor Florida has shown an interest in restoring passenger service. If only the affected states (Louisiana, which is also paying for the restored service, is the fourth state involved) had actually talked to SNCF, that portion of the country would already have some kind of passenger service. After all, it was Virgin's interest in a Charlotte-Atlanta route for example that forced Amtrak to look at that same area for expansion earlier this year. Had SNCF tapped Keolis to run the 620-mile route, it may have motivated Amtrak management to at least restore the Sunset Limited or produce an entirely new route.

So, what we'll end up with is a third incarnation of the Gulf Coast Limited--the first one ran in the mid 1980s and the second one ran in from mid 1996 to mid 1997. The second version didn't even operate on a flipped schedule vis-à-vis the Sunset Limited--Train #24 operated about two hours earlier than #2 while #23 operated 2-3 hours earlier than #1. That said, an opportunity arises where dueling roundtrips could provide consistent ridership. Not to mention, a revived Gulf Breeze that is extended to the Crescent City should also be on the table after 2021.

Cascades #501 Crash & PTC

Last month's crash in Lakewood, WA has sparked a rash of overreactions nationally and a bunch of unnecessary "I-told-you-sos" from locals.

Let's Get Something Out of the Way

First off, the reroute was not a mistake, it was something that the state thought out in advance. As scenic as the Point Defiance route was, it was also single track.

Second, the blame for what happened last month can be attributed of a deficient safety culture inside Amtrak.

The PTC Bug

Certain members of Congress have urged the UDSOT to make December 31 a hard deadline for all railroads to install Positive Train Control (under the 2015 law, extensions to the end of 2020 will only be granted under certain circumstances).

I find this to be a bit of pretentious grandstanding by Congress since it created the problem by overreacting to another tragedy! For those unaware, the tragedy that sparked PTC in the first place was the Chatsworth disaster in 2008. The problem with the way it was implemented was that Congress told every railroad that it not only had to install the device but that said railroads would have to pay out of their own pockets. That demand reflects just how much of an anti-government attitude Washington has had since 1981. If Congress had taken the lead, it would have footed the bill instead.

Tackling the Headlines 89

Caltrain grant blocked
Take: Despicable move by the state's Republican congressional delegation.


Latest Tri-Rail news
Take: Just get that contract situation straightened out, guys.


Brightline critics beginning to face the music
Take: Even though the bashers are trying shenanigans like attempted regulations, it's a foregone conclusion that trains will not only run but will also be extended northward and westward.

The Obama Legacy on Rail & the Next Four Years

Looking Back
In a matter of days, the POTUS who was the friendliest towards Amtrak will be leaving office and along with will be carrier's #1 fan, Vice President Biden. The stimulus funding was a much needed boost, but it should have only been the beginning as passenger rail has been underfunded and undermined for decades. In retrospect, all of the HSR portion of the stimulus money should have been allocated to California, and on the Amtrak front, Obama should have appointed Biden to assist the rail company.

Two other things about the Obama Administration that I lament are: 1) overcompensation and 2) Buy America. When I talk about overcompensation, I'm talking about Obama being too friendly towards Amtrak to the point that he awarded 97.4 percent of the stimulus projects to the national carrier. The competition portions in PRIIA should have been enforced. As for Buy America, the FRA has been the biggest barrier to moving forward by forcing commuter and intercity carriers to adhere to those provisions and to build heavy railcars. This country needs more railcar manufacturers so we don't end up with fiascoes like Nippon-Sharyo's Midwestern car order. I just don't think the way the current path is the way for diverse railcars.

Looking Ahead
Rail advocates may be fretting the next four years since Congress and the White House are in the hands of the same party that has historically shown hostility towards Amtrak. 

If some of their fears come to pass, then, most of them should take a look in the mirror because they didn't take my Grand Bargain advice after the collapse of the Florida HSR project and two Midwestern governors returning stimulus money to the White House (as well as Rick Scott). 

As far as being advocates for all rail carriers is concerned, what I've seen from most of these people isn't promising so far. Other than some praise for Brightline, the attitude towards other non-Amtrak carriers has ranged from skepticism to outright hostility. Their silence (and NARP's support) towards a 2012 Senate measure that would have driven other companies out of the U.S. market is an indicator that they should not be picking sides unless they want to be on the outside looking in whenever the rail renaissance happens.

On the other hand, a Congress and president who have far less faith in government's role could be a boon for independent operators. For starters, the True Believers have to get used to the fact that Amtrak is not going get anywhere close to a quarter of the $117 billion it says it needs for a brand new Northeast Corridor.

Some Consistency Please
In any case, the Trump Administration and Congress need to get the message that the passenger rail model as it's currently set up is broken and needs to be fixed because this stasis that has been in place since 1971 cannot continue. 
Consider what former Amtrak Reform Council Board member Bruce Chapman once said: 

The Bush folks knew we needed reform, but couldn’t deliver it, and wouldn’t fund the transition to a public-private partnership. The Obama people are prepared to spend plenty, but not to reform the system.

The previous president realized that the passenger rail model was broken beyond repair but was unwilling to fix it beyond talking about privatizing Amtrak. The current president spent tens of billions of stimulus and TIGER grant money so Amtrak could basically get a facelift (the CAHSR project and future NECR conventional service being the only non-Amtrak intercity routes to be funded) while paying no attention to Virgin or JR East on the HSR front nor to AIPRO members on the conventional rail front.

The bottom line is that we now need leadership in Washington to realize that both the public and private sectors are needed to boost passenger rail to the next level--from surviving to thriving, from just Amtrak to a number of different operators providing their special spin on service. Like I have said in the past, there are some routes that would be better off operated by someone other than Amtrak.

Trump, Shuster, and company need to realize that a separation of operations from infrastructure can be done while Amtrak apologists need to realize that efforts like AIRNet-21 will result in a separate public owner of infrastructure along the NEC, which would allow Amtrak to run its trains without worrying about the costs of tracks and bridges along the 457-mile route.

Fragmenting Long-Distance Passenger Trains?

Railfan & Railroad, August

NEC a different matter 

• Not only is the NEC huge but the region but the region's congressional delegation would block any effort by AIPRO members to compete against Amtrak
• Maybe when the folks in D.C. get serious about infrastructure, then, we'll see Amtrak face competition in its home region. Until then, I wish the LEO Express people good luck because they'll need it
• By avoiding the NEC, Chambers is sticking to what he knows since the bulk of the AIPRO's commuter contracts are outside of Amtrak-friendly Northeast and Chicagoland territories

Opaque

• By opening the overnight routes up to competition, we'd finally be able to find out the truth about the financial condition of the routes

Cutting a deal?

• By capping the subsidy at 90 percent, the FAST Act is actually doing all potential Amtrak competitors a favor because these newcomers will be hungry and eager to demonstrate that the long distance train of the future is better off without Amtrak

Amtrak--another shot at the target

• "America's Railroad" may get the chance to counterbid but it'd be wise to figure out just which three routes it can do without

Role of Class Is

• As far as the major railroads go, Sections 209 & 214 of PRIIA as well as Section 205 of the FAST Act supersede their long-held Amtrak-only stance
• If the major railroads (continue) flout(ing) the laws, then Congress will have to play hardball: Allow non-Amtrak operators who fairly get contracts for state-supported or overnight routes on your rails or you'll be in charge of every intercity route outside of the Northeast--and in the process, reducing Amtrak to an NEC-only entity

Who bids?

• To me, it's simple: A partnership between independent and Class I railroads--shades of my rail consortium

Another thorny complaint

• Vernon discusses how the major railroads have griped about how Amtrak has never paid them market rates for access on their tracks. As it turns out, a fellow AIPRO member Stan Feinsod advocated a scenario in which other operators would use the commuter model in order to access freight tracks
• In the event the AIPRO is able to see its vision happen, then perhaps we could actually see some of its members revive and actively push for the restoration of service along routs Amtrak abandoned

High mountains to climb

• As far as the RRIF loan scenario goes, whatever it takes

The New Passenger Paradigm

Railway Age, July

Initial takeaway: Rail activists would be keen to read and reread the first sentence on what really led to the creation of Amtrak so they can stop spewing their defeatist nonsense whenever someone tries to propose out of the box ways to expand passenger travel in this country.

Third paragraph: Herzog was prescient and took notes before anyone on Capitol Hill even drafted PRIIA. Even though the AIPRO is small, it should say something that its members have the bulk of commuter rail contracts when a couple of decades ago, Amtrak had a near monopoly outside of the Northeast and Chicago.

Fourth paragraph: This expert nails it: The status quo cannot be maintained after 45 years when multiple operators have expressed interest in running intercity trains.

Fifth paragraph: The New Passenger Paradigm matches up with the late Gil Carmichael's Interstate II and my rail highway concepts.

Sixth paragraph: Based on what Mr. Chambers is saying, all that's needed is for the feds to actually enforce the laws and end the stasis once and for all. After all, when the time came to enforce the Pilot Program in accordance to PRIIA guidelines, the FRA waited a full two years to do so and by that time, there were too many loose ends that the old program just withered away despite immense interest. Another thing is to make sure that the feds do not play favorites--i.e., rig the process to maintain Amtrak's near monopoly (the 2012 near miss comes to mind).

Second column: Regarding the push for new legislation, somebody has to do it because the resident rent seekers sure won't. When it comes to Section 301 not being enforced, one can only look at the executive branch and ask: What happened, President Obama, USDOT, FRA? Was it in any way retaliation to some states returning stimulus money? Was the lack of enforcement actually stimulus related?

If the feds had followed the German model, we would already have: 1) states having greater flexibility to select operators and set their own standards and 2) Amtrak having a surplus amount of equipment due to it experiencing the same type of contract losses of its intercity routes that it's had with its commuter service. The next president and Congress would be very wise to adopt AIPRO's statutes. The second proposed statute would be an excellent way to make money. JR West does this now and Brightline and Housatonic plan on turning their station areas into prime real estate.

Tackling the Headlines 82

Long distance competition at last?
On Wednesday, the FRA finally complied with Section 205 of the FAST Act and set the standards for bidding on long distance routes

TL;DR analysis: For once, the FRA is following the law on time. I want to see what the Ed Ellises and the AIPROs of the world do with overnight routes. 

Full analysis: Go to Tumblr.

More destaffings
Recently, Amtrak has been turning staffed stations into unstaffed stations. Now, Homewood, IL and Wolf Point, MT have been added.  

Take #1: I seriously wonder if Joe Boardman has enacted some kind of a scorched earth policy on his way out. The rash of destaffings and stripping the Silver Star of its dining cars come to mind as possible ways the lame duck Amtrak president is getting back at a lot of people. The latter act is also justification for the FRA's actions a couple of days ago.

Take #2: I am also getting tired of know it all railfans justifying small towns and suburban locations losing agents. Not everybody has access to technology and not everyone wants to handle computers. That mentality is exactly why so-called "flyover country" is in open rebellion against city folks. Instead of reducing staffed stations, a responsible company would be adding staffed stations.

Alabama rising?
Earlier this month, news broke that Corridor Capital was planning a regional rail system for Alabama and two other states and headquarters in Montgomery. As it turned out, Alabama media ran with this story big time. However, last Friday's NARP's newsletter poured cold water on exactly who was backing Corridor Capital's efforts. The Southern Rail Commission not only denied supporting CorrCap but also decided to stress how it was working with Amtrak among others.

Take #1: I had to reread the stories from the Alabama press and not once did I ever get any idea that CorrCap was even mentioned as an operator.

Take #2: A comment on the Trains Magazine page on the SRC's disavowal of CorrCap says it all: "So I guess if you are a private sector entity seeking improved passenger rail service the politicians don't want you." When I said that advocacy groups needed to adapt to a post-monopoly era rather than going all in with Amtrak, I didn't think that I'd have to also apply this to the states but given this development and Minnesota picking Amtrak to run the Northern Lights Express even though the planned second Chicago-Twin Cities frequency won't serve Minneapolis, I guess I have to.

Take #3: I wonder if NARP got into the SRC's ear and told them to distance themselves from Corridor Capital given how attached to Amtrak NARP really is.

Take #4: There is no excuse for the New Orleans-Orlando route to still be "suspended" after 10 1/2 years! If someone else can come along and get something going, that group should be commended not ridiculed the way CorrCap is now.

Take #5: Going back to Mr. Norton's comments in the Trains article, he's right on. The Floridian (1971-79), Gulf Breeze (1990-95), and the Gulf Coast Limited (1984-85 & 96-97) have all come and gone. If an entrepreneur is trying to provide a service that is absent and the only thing the current operator is doing is subjecting states to endless feasibility studies, sooner or later, the public will have to go with the person who is thinking outside of the box.

St. Louis Union Station excursions
Links can be found here, here, and here.

Take: Until non-Amtrak operators are allowed to run overnight trains and America gets serious about European-style high speed rail, this might be as good as it gets. But at least, Union Station is finally being used for its original purpose 38 years after Amtrak left.

A Real Rail Agenda for the 114th Congress

As a new Congress begins its session, here are some areas it should tackle when it comes to passenger rail re-authorization:

State corridors and competition
I sincerely hope that Congress is serious about letting the states the freedom to select other operators. The new bill has to figure out how state corridors are handled, and there are two options: Uphold the Section 209 measures as laid out in the 2008 law or strike down the measures. 

If Congress decides to leave the provisions as they are, states should be allowed to have greater flexibility if they want to dump Amtrak so there won't be a repeat of the 2013 scarefests.

On the other hand, if the feds decide that funding state-supported trains is their responsibility, then, Congress has to look to Germany as an example on how to protect the states.

When it comes to bidding for passenger routes, Congress would be wise to consider setting up separate processes for corridors and long distance routes.

Northeast Corridor
The 2011 proposal that Ignacio Jayanti put forward to the 112th Congress was practical but got muddled by cries of "privatization." Having someone else fix up the crumbling infrastructure will solve the "Hudson River Tunnels will collapse in 20 years problem."

National outlook
Letting public and private entities compete against Amtrak should be a top priority for a Congress that purports to advocate smaller government. Grand bargaining could result in the the spinoff of NEC infrastructure from operations as mentioned above but could keep other operators off Amtrak's prized jewel while the national operator has to give up routes in other parts of the country.

Finally, Congress and the White House should lay the groundwork for a new national rail network because it would far more practical, connect far more parts of the country, and may cost much less money than having 10-15 separate, disjointed corridors.

DOT vs AAR

I don't even pretend to understand the minutiae of PRIIA Section 207 but the case that was recently discussed may in its own way alter the future of passenger rail. The thing is that I'm not sure if I'm supposed to side with the USDOT the way NARP has given that its friend of the court brief was the only one that supports the DOT's effort to overturn the Court of Appeals ruling.

The AIPRO filed its own friend of the court brief, asking the high court to uphold the appeals court ruling. The case could be made that keeping Section 207 of the 2008 law could actually be a bigger detriment to the future of passenger rail than striking it down.

Some excerpts from the brief:

ARGUMENT
SECTION 207 OF THE PRIIA IMPERMISSIBLY CONFERS
ON AMTRAK REGULATORY AUTHORITY OVER ITS COMPETITORS
IN THE PASSENGER-RAIL INDUSTRY.
A. The Provision Of Passenger-Rail Service
Is A Competitive Industry In Which
Amtrak Is But One Competitor. 
The first important move toward this new competitive
regime was Congress’s enactment of the
Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997, Pub.
L. No. 105–134, 111 Stat. 2570, which terminated 
Amtrak’s monopoly over intercity service.
Section 217 authorizes States to select “an
entity other than Amtrak to provide services
required for the operation of an intercity passenger
train route * * *.” PRIIA § 217, 49
U.S.C. § 24702 (note).
 Section 301(a) authorizes the Secretary of
Transportation to “make grants * * * to assist
in financing the capital costs of facilities,
infrastructure, and equipment necessary to
provide or improve intercity passenger rail
transportation.” PRIIA § 301(a), 49 U.S.C.
§ 24402(a)(1). A State that applies for a grant
must either “select[] the proposed operator of
its service competitively” or “provide written
justification to the Secretary showing why
the proposed operator is the best, taking into
account price and other factors, and that use
of the proposed operator will not unnecessarily
increase the cost of the project.” PRIIA
§ 301(b), 49 U.S.C. § 24402(b)(3). 
Section 214 directs the Federal Railroad Administration
to establish an Alternate Passenger
Rail Service Pilot Program, under
which “a rail carrier or rail carriers that own
infrastructure over which Amtrak operates
a[n] [intercity] passenger rail service route”
may “petition the Administration to be considered
as a passenger rail service provider
over that route in lieu of Amtrak * * *.” PRIIA
§ 214(a), 49 U.S.C. § 24711(a)(1) (emphasis
added). 

Translation: The days of only one company operating trains are over because Congress said so--twice. The best way for passenger rail to progress is to let each route be open for bidding.

B. Section 207 Unconstitutionally Delegates
To Amtrak Regulatory Authority Over
Amtrak’s Direct Competitors In The Passenger-Rail
Industry. 
1. Amtrak’s Section 207 standards expressly
apply to all intercity passenger trains, not
just to Amtrak’s trains. 
Adding to the unfairness is the fact that, although
Section 207 directs Amtrak and the FRA to
consult with certain other stakeholders in developing
the performance standards, the statute does not afford
even this limited right to Amtrak’s competitors
in the provision of passenger-rail service before permitting
Amtrak to impose regulations on them. See
PRIIA § 207(a), 49 U.S.C. § 24101 (note) (listing
stakeholders with consultation rights). Thus, when
Amtrak and the FRA initially proposed the Section
207 metrics and standards in March 2009 (see J.A.
11), they solicited comments from the stakeholder
groups specifically identified in the statute (see J.A.
75) but did not afford Amtrak’s competitors in the
passenger-rail industry any opportunity to comment—even
though these competitor passenger railroads
would be directly subject to the new regulatory
standards. 

Translation: That the feds did not allow Amtrak's competitors to even comment on the metrics as laid out in PRIIA is disturbing. How was this any different than what the Senate attempted to do to private operators in 2012 (Hint: It's the same thing)?

2. Amtrak’s Section 207 standards may trigger
STB investigations and enforcement actions
against Amtrak’s competitors.
Section 213 of the PRIIA provides for investigation
and enforcement actions by the STB any time
that “any intercity passenger train”—not solely those
operated by Amtrak—fails to achieve 80 percent ontime
performance or fails to meet the Section 207
service-quality standards for two consecutive quarters.
PRIIA § 213(a), 49 U.S.C. § 24308(f)(1).

Translation: The idea that other operators could be penalized by the STB for delays even if they were caused by Amtrak is akin to some of the battles that took place in Florida earlier this decade when SunRail was held up due to liability provisions Amtrak initially found objectionable.

Final thoughts

• The dueling briefs by NARP and the AIPRO could actually be a clash of the past vs the future since the former posits itself as an advocacy organization while the latter is a trade group for other passenger carriers in the same manner that Airlines for America is for the airline industry
• The USDOT's attorney did its side no favors with the way he argued its case--even sympathetic justices were a bit perplexed
• We will find out next June just what SCOTUS will do
• Eventually, the new Congress will have to redraft the metrics in order to avoid a repeat in the future

Rail and the 2014 Midterms

Florida

Part 1

Only in the Sunshine State can up be down. Over the summer, Rachel Dovey and Fred Frailey talked about how backwards the rail picture was in the state--the Tea Party-backed incumbent governor Rick Scott backing the private All Aboard Florida against ex-governor Charlie Crist who clearly prefers the high speed project Scott scuttled.

Other actors in the AAF saga are Treasure Coast residents and politicians who have exhibited a nasty form of NIMBYism. It's like these people have never seen a train before. They chose to live near an area where a major railroad frequently runs trains so it's ridiculous for them to make all of those demands. I can't help but wonder if these residents are actually upset that after 14 years of unfulfilled promises Amtrak is still nowhere close to implementing East Coast service between Jacksonville and Miami. If Treasure Coast residents want someone to blame, they should be pointing the finger at the feds for not funding the route during stimulus mania. These alleged problems would have never come up if Amtrak were already running trains through the area.

Part 2

Now that Scott has been elected to a second term, All Aboard Florida should all but be in the clear to proceed so Treasure Coast residents need to get over themselves. It really is strange that the same governor who relied on a highly biased study to finish off an HSR project that operators like Virgin were ready to run could go down in history as the guy who restored Florida's status as a major passenger rail hub--albeit accidentally. 

As for Crist, it would have been next to impossible for him to have revived the Florida High Speed Rail route just due to the fact that he would've at best dealt with a House of Representatives who has zeroed out federal HSR funding ever since it flipped to the GOP four years ago. His adversarial stance towards AAF demonstrates the overall problem I have with most Democrats. The TC residents' resistance to private sector operators hurts passenger rail (a Metro Jacksonville moderator hit the nail on the head).

The biggest thing missing over the "which train project is better" debate is the fact that neither Crist nor Scott showed any interest in corridor service along existing routes. The way to have a robust system is to work with what you have. The infrastructure is in place so foresight and selecting operators committed to producing world class service are the only things needed.

Midwest

The only way passenger rail is going to advance in the Buckeye State is for communities and advocacy groups to continue taking the lead since John Kasich is guaranteed to leave Columbus in 2019. Given the recent fiasco in Indiana over the operation of the Hoosier State, I hope that All Aboard Ohio and other groups have enough foresight to talk to other operators about the Hoosier Extension and the Columbus-Chicago routes especially if Amtrak's a no-go.

Mark Dayton and Scott Walker won their reelection campaigns as well but by single digits. Dayton's DOT will continue picking up the whole price tab for not only the feasibility studies of a second Chicago-St. Paul frequency but when the trains actually operate. 

When it comes to the new equipment for the Midwestern trains, IL and MI will get their share and give WI leftovers. If anything, the Hiawathas will consist mostly of leftover Horizon Cars. Any Badger State resident hoping for rail service off of the Chicago-Milwaukee-La Crosse-St. Paul route had better pray that Ed Ellis not only turns the Varsity into a regular route but expands his shortline empire.

North Carolina

In Wake County, Democrats turned a 3-4 disadvantage on the Board of Commissioners into a 7-0 board. These results will make having a referendum on light rail easier. The trick will be convincing the voters to join its northwestern neighbors.

National Outlook

Barring a 2006-like backlash against right wing rule in D.C., HSR won't be getting a dime until 2023 at the earliest. Even though anti-HSR Californians will hold some powerful positions in the House and continue making life miserable for the CAHSR project, the nation's only Express HSR project to be funded with stimulus funds will rely on state and private sector financing until it begins service.

Amtrak will likely see its funding slashed--maybe even significantly--but the real question is whether the new Congress will allow real competition, which would be the national operator's primary threat. With both houses soon to be in the opposition's hands, the Grand Bargain should be front and center as the alternative to the now-myopic national HSR vision President Obama laid out 5 1/2 years ago. 

Noel Braymer's editorial on how Republicans are the only ones who can save the long distance trains may very well be tested now. In order to prove Amtrak's advocates wrong, the GOP should implement any one of the three suggestions Braymer laid out. Second, congressmen and women should talk to their constituents who are starving for more train service as well as advocacy groups who want more trains in their states but aren't relying on "America's Railroad."

TIGER grants will be phased out in all likelihood. The currently negotiated TIGER VII grants will be the last funds the Obama Administration gives out to rail operators of all stripes.

TIGER VI Grants

Central Corridor in Connecticut

After about three years of efforts, another part of New England is about to get privately run passenger rail--and not a moment too soon. Yes, the $10.2 million was for freight improvements along the line between New London, CT and Brattleboro, VT, but the added bonus will be passenger service for residents and college students in Amherst, MA, which will be dropped by Amtrak next year. NECR will scoop in and serve the city but it's a question of when.

Southwest Chief

Another big surprise is that the beleaguered Raton Pass route received funding. The kicker is that only 20 percent of the needed improvements will be covered and as a result, the reroute via Amarillo is still in play. As a result, my proposals are still better than the recent reprieve.

M-1 Streetcar

Detroit's streetcar project got a boost in the public portion of the PPP.

Viewpoint

I'll use this space to get something off of my chest. TIGER has been a great benefit to rail and transit in general over the last five years. If the prognosticators are correct about the Senate changing hands in ;less than two months's time, this grant program is DOA because the Tea Partiers have tried to gut TIGER over the last three years. Congress had better come up with a way fund transportation projects moving forward or it will be held responsible for whatever happens to the decline of affordable transportation solutions.