Transportation bills and competition

Recent news has centered around a couple of transportation bills--HR7 and MAP-21. The best description is that sausage-making has never been uglier.


The House was up first
For much of the last quarter, there was a lot of outcry over what the House bill planned to do with transportation. In other words, a completely anti-transit bill that would have made a mockery of any mode of transit not related to highway spending. The bill proved to be so unpopular that a handful of House Republicans rebelled against Speaker Boehner.


Then, the Senate 
The upper chamber countered with a bill that would have been much more favorable to transit and would have implemented a new transportation bill since the last one expired 2 1/2 years ago. The end result is that the Senate was countered by the House passing yet another extension.


What wasn't being reported
The two bills presented a paradox that no one seemed to notice: A horrible bill with language that encouraged competition versus a great bill that would have been detrimental to intercity rail as a whole (Source #1)


HR7 would have reduced regulatory burdens and streamlined the delivery process for rail projects while MAP-21 would have disproportionately tilted the field in favor of Amtrak that to the point of restoring a statutory monopoly in both the intercity and commuter rail industries (Sources #2, #3 & #4). That action showed me that some True Believers are upset over Amtrak's recent losses of commuter rail contracts and used the Senate to get back at agencies that may one day replace Amtrak as the operator of state corridors. This whole thing was a matter of the cure being no better than the disease.


What needs to be done
For starters, cut out the anti-competitive language and amend the liability burdens so that it doesn't cost an arm and a leg for a newcomer to launch operations. Second, get the FRA on the case and tell them to impose common sense equipment requirements instead of forcing everyone to produce bulky cars. Finally, pass a real transportation bill that resembles MAP-21 instead of passing these rinky-dink extensions.

FEC plans its return to passenger service

A day and a half ago, FEC announced that it was getting back into the people carrying business.


Sources: 
1
2
3


I'm no longer speechless, but I'm still pleasantly surprised that the Class II railroad has done this. Previously, I suggested that FEC would eventually tire of Amtrak and the Florida DOT dragging their feet--the former still demanding no-fault liability and the state continuing to slack off--and implement passenger service themselves.


Who knows what will become of the proposed Amtrak FEC service? Perhaps, the people in D.C. will be more motivated to implement that route since FEC is planning to serve Orlando before Jacksonville since the Class II will take a westward detour. How about the state? Maybe, this private venture will force Tallahassee officials to seriously consider corridor service.

Connecticut update

New England Central is interested in operating service (check out pages 2 & 3) between New London, CT and Brattleboro, VT on the Central Corridor. I talked about this a bit last spring, but what I didn't discuss is that the leaders who wanted New London's mayor to be quiet were more interested in securing money for the Knowledge Corridor between Springfield, MA and Brattleboro to reroute the Vermonter. 


Amherst
As MA and VT get ready to reroute the Vermonter, residents in the college town are up in arms over the pending loss of Amtrak service. The NECR move makes sense because residents and students from five colleges and universities would see passenger service continued, albeit with a different operator. 


NECR's possible path
The Class II railroad will be free to add frequencies and staff stations like Amherst and Brattleboro because it wouldn't be subject to the same limitations as Amtrak. Also, NECR is very likely to use refurbished Budd Cars so there'd be no issues with equipment.


NECR's motives
Some have raised the possibility that NECR could be using passenger service as a way to improve its infrastructure between New London and Amherst. In my humble opinion, the move justifies my point that railroads are businesses first, and if it's a business decision that leads to the Central Corridor having restored rail service, so be it (old time riders of the now-defunct Montrealer often complained about bumpy tracks by NECR's predecessor when the train used that routing). 


An important segment of riders won't be left behind once Amtrak's stimulus improvements are in place. It is also worth pointing out that the University of Connecticut and the Mohegan Sun Casino are also along the route, so having passenger service restored is no small deal.


Transitions
Knowledge Corridor improvements are expected to be done by late 2013. Theoretically, Amtrak would shift the Vermonter to serve Northampton and Greenfield in MA in the spring of the following year unless the operator says otherwise. Perhaps, a six-month overlap could take place--both Amtrak and NECR run trains between Amherst and Brattleboro, then the regional railroad takes over once Amtrak shifts westward.


Sharing stations
Of all the stops that would host both Amtrak and NECR trains, only New London is currently staffed by Amtrak. No problem, the Class II railroad would staff the facilities with its own employees or contract such duties to volunteers who would be able to sell tickets and check baggage. Palmer, MA is a place where the NECR and CSX lines--the Lake Shore Limited--intersect. The city's Union Station is currently a restaurant but the tracks of both railroads are right at the station. So, the end result is that MADOT building a platform on the south side for NECR and a platform on the north side for Amtrak. 

Tackling the Headlines 31

Greenbrier Express gets the green light after all
Take: Good news that the service will get under way, however, the price is too much for me and the fact that the Buckingham Branch is single-tracked with apparently no plans to add more trackage on the old C&O line.

Electrification in the Bay on the way
Take: It only makes sense. Just get it done already! This is reason #1 why CAHSR does not need its own tracks in the Bay Area.


PTC could get a five year extension
Take: In an effort to pass passenger rail reform in the wake of the Chatsworth disaster, the requirement was a bit hasty (after all, the railroads are paying for Positive Train Control out of their own pockets thanks to Congress deciding that megabanks were more important to give money to). Hopefully, by 2021, we will see more passenger trains once the Class Is have gotten their act together.

The on-again, off-again plans to break up Via Rail

Take: As bad as things have been in this country with Amtrak throughout the decades, they are worse up north.

For a change, Amtrak wants LESS money

Take #1: Boardman may be trying to use reduced FY13 funding as an insurance policy in the event President Obama isn't reelected. Of all of the Republican presidential candidates--all of whom want to END Amtrak subsidies--Mitt Romney is the most vocal Amtrak opponent. So, by hedging his bets, Boardman must have the mindset that the next president will ease his attacks on Amtrak if the operator asks Congress for less money.

Take #2: The problem is that even if that happens, the next president would eventually know that Boardman would only be around for several more months. So as soon as 2014 rolls around, Amtrak will be looking for a new president yet again. The end result is that Romney (or whoever) will only step up his attacks on Amtrak, just in time for FY14 funding. The interim Amtrak president could walk away empty-handed for that year's funding if Romney has a majority in both houses.

Manitoba-Minnesota route could be on the way

Take: If nothing else, the governments in St. Paul and Winnipeg could pave the way in providing North America with its own version of Eurostar--as long as Amtrak, Via Rail, and Canadian Pacific can reach an agreement with the governments and each other. This operator could also serve as the template for a proposed Chicago-Detroit-Toronto HSR that could be run by SNCF.

Station Issues Part 5: Cautionary Tales

Problems in the Mile High City

Denver Union Station is undergoing redevelopment that will allow for the Regional Transit’s FasTracks to utilize the station for light rail and commuter rail routes. 

ColoRail has brought up a number of issues from the beginning of the DUS redevelopment project. It’s one thing to make the historic station as a hotel in order to produce revenue and to draw travelers, but Denver’s leaders and planners have to look at Kansas City as the example on how not to redevelop an old train station. As a result, it is imperative that the Mile High City gets it right and doesn’t end up with a major mess on its hands that would diminish its original role.

A Less Perfect (D.C.) Union Station

The Union Station in the nation’s capital has its own problems: 

• Navigating the D.C. facility is an issue 
• Fixing up the plaza has run into years long delays 
• DC’s DOT and Amtrak getting into a conflict over the former’s desire to build a streetcar stop at Union Station vs more slots for future Express HSR service from the latter 
• Some bus companies wanting to stop in the parking deck as opposed to the streets around the station

Despite all of these problems, at least something is being the way of renovation.

What This All Means

For both cities, new stations may be built out of necessity due to redevelopment issues in Denver and overcrowding in Washington, D.C. Both cities have the chance to avoid this scenario if they just get their renovations right.

Amtrak takes (yet) another step in the wrong direction

There are two stories from RailPAC that actually confirm that: 1) Amtrak management simply does not get it and 2) the agency is in serious danger of being left behind once true competition begins.

The first one is from the group's president while the second one points out doublespeak from a national operator that contains Northeast-centric management. 

In regards to Paul Dyson's commentary, Joe Boardman clearly has one foot out the door since he is ripping his own staff while he refuses to go after Union Pacific. It also shows that the Amtrak boss has revealed himself for what he really is--a career bureaucrat who is angling for the next available government job. Given that Amtrak doesn't really care about expanding on its own (i.e., adding non-state supported routes to the National System), it's time for the company to retire the "America's Railroad" gimmick. Let's be honest: Boardman only began using it when SNCF and JR Central drew up their own plans and posed as real threats in 2009. Even though High Speed Rail Mania is over, Amtrak has to deal with the likes of Virgin, First Group, and various AIPRO members bidding for corridor and long-distance services.

If Amtrak senior management really cared about cutting the company's costs, someone over in D.C. would have figured out a way to put rehabbed Superliners in Beech Grove, IN back into service while also adding equipment to help out the western states. It's really sad that those states are forced to supply cars for long-distance trains because the national organization is unwilling to do so.

I applaud Dyson's advocating a breakup of Amtrak for at least getting a conversation going on how to break the monopoly. Proposing a breakup of Amtrak has been dormant since 2002 when Amtrak, Congress, the Bush Administration, and rail advocates completely ignored the recommendation from the Amtrak Reform Council. The rail unions are also a part of the problem since they were on the forefront in turning back any breakup plans then and again last year when the divestment of the NEC was seriously being discussed. Just separating the long-distance network from the Northeast Corridor would produce more jobs and let the non-NEC network grow. If the private competitors are stymied by legislation and/or the FRA, this would have to be the option of last resort because people are tired of being led by the nose of an organization that pretty much says that only passengers on a 457-mile line between Washington and Boston mean anything while they are screaming for better train service in their own communities. Personally, I still think that my consortium idea would be a better fit if we are to get a national rail network going again in this country.

Not only does NARP need to be called out but so do the various organizations that hate competition because they claim to want better train service but they throw their hands up when pressed for solutions and they tend to ignore anything that is outside of the scope of Amtrak when others provide ideas.

Regarding a conspiracy: I wonder if the real conspiracy was for the feds to gauge interest from foreign and independent operators, only to pull the rug when times got rough. Such a move would then lead to the current monopoly being preserved.

Here's what the public needs to know about Russ Jackson's commentary:

• Amtrak's so-called "aggressive agenda" is virtually centered in the NEC (where else?) with a few bones thrown in for eastern long-distance and Cascade routes (10 of the 13 listed items were NEC first or NEC only)
• Boardman's refusal to press UP on making the Sunset Limited daily is proof enough that this route needs to be transferred pronto and that Congress has to act by letting the private sector handle other long-distance routes. It also shows that the Amtrak president/CEO is unwilling to fight the big boy railroads when the hosts' price tags are exaggerated at best and full-out extortion at worst
• Amtrak is not interested in expansion. If anyone wants to make a claim to that giving the agency more money will make things better, I have a rail tunnel to sell you. All or almost all of the non-NEC work is coming out the pockets of one state or another
• “One of the things I learned in the transit business before I came to Amtrak is that as I added more trains during the peak hour my losses increased. Right now, the business model that exists for long-distance trains is that as you add trains your losses increase, and that is our policy direction coming from the administration and Congress, so Amtrak believes that is achieved by rebuilding the equipment we have.” As for that quote, I have this to say: If that is true, Mr. Boardman, then your company is clearly doing something wrong. What about that record ridership that you bragged about last fall? What about the fact that western trains like the Zephyr and the Builder are so packed that people are turned away during the summer? And your organization doesn't want to make all overnight trains daily? I'm sure that someone with a better business plan could--I don't know--find a way to make a profit and add frequencies along congested routes

Tackling the Headlines 30

Norfolk service gets moved up
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell has announced that an Amtrak extension from Richmond to Norfolk via Petersburg will be launched by the end of this year--10 months ahead of schedule!


Take: For once, an Amtrak service is scheduled to start ahead of schedule rather than behind. While it's long overdue, there are some flaws: neighboring Suffolk will be skipped as will Richmond's Main Street Station. Also, it is still undetermined if the station in Virginia's second-largest city will be staffed.


On the bright side, the state hopes to expand to three roundtrips between Norfolk and Boston in the long term. This would mean that Amtrak's first real expansion since the '90s.


Pennsylvania city wants station
The city of Coatesville is entering negotiations with Amtrak to acquire the historic station for future redevelopment. The current facility is not up to ADA standards and Amtrak closed the station more than two decades ago.


Take: The new station will take up to three years to be completed. It's hard to believe that the current station was built in 1885 by the Pennsylvania Railroad though! I just hope that Coatesville is far more successful in redeveloping the area around its own station than what Philadelphia had to put up with surrounding the North Philadelphia station.