Section 209

On Tuesday, Indiana became the 19^th and final state agency to reach an agreement with Amtrak to pay more to keep the Hoosier State running. 

The provision in the 2008 law known as PRIIA Section 209 was the source of consternation for many state agencies and rail advocacy groups alike but it allows all states operating routes shorter than 750 miles to pay their fair share. Up until this month, Michigan and New York didn't have to pay a penny for Wolverines or Empire Service because Amtrak deemed both corridors as part of its system.

Time to Rant

Throughout the year, I have been keeping tabs on how the states would handle the October 1 deadline, and it appears to me that the states took it much better than the people who are supposed to represent train travel or the media.

This is what I read:

·         Washington State seriously considered cutting Cascades #513 & #516 back to Bellingham nearly two years after those two trains kept the Vancouver, BC portion that was tantamount to pulling teeth with the BC government in 2010 and ‘11

·         Conflicting reports during the last two weeks in August over whether the PA DOT had actually reached a deal with Amtrak to keep the Pennsylvanian running

·         Newspaper article after newspaper article detailing how all of these routes would go away on October 1 if the state in question didn't reach an agreement with Amtrak

·         Most members of the rail community acting like it was Amtrak or bust when actual options are available for most of the state agencies—i.e. any corridor that’s outside of the Wolverine and Empire Corridors

Outside of Indiana’s Hoosier State, all of this worrying was unnecessary and shows how wedded to Amtrak most members of the rail community really are when they should be advocating improved passenger service with as many entities the U.S. can bear.

The October Trains Magazine article went into detail about Section 209, but Bob Johnston also neglected to mention the possibility of competitors scooping in and replacing Amtrak as the operator of choice in these states. As a matter of fact, the AIPRO has spent the better part of the last 2 ½ years trying to get anyone who cares about train travel to listen and any politician in D.C. to pay attention to Section 214, which allows competition. As a matter of fact, one of its members expressed an interest in running California and Midwest routes. 

Johnston then went on to mention that as of July, none of the states had signed a contract with Amtrak for the new fiscal year (that number went up to seven a month ago  and up to 16 two weeks ago). Based on that Trains article, an Amtrak critic was right when he predicted the huge price increases for states that continue to contract their services out to Amtrak—which turned out to be all of them. 

California paid an extra $19 million for all three of its routes while Virginia’s Lynchburg extension of the Northeast Corridor went from making a surplus to “providing a significant subsidy” to Amtrak (as Johnston pointed out). I’m pretty sure that Veolia would have been able to save the Golden State tens of millions (nine figure savings=profit) if someone in Sacramento had taken the initiative to speak to the independent operator. As for VA, I’m at a loss for words since its (now former) money making route is attached to Amtrak’s spine (aka the Northeast Corridor).

In the end, the states played it safe rather than being bold—no one wanted to be the first state to dump Amtrak in favor of another operator. Perhaps, this is based on what happened to one of them a decade ago. 

Based on the states agreeing to stick with the status quo, additional frequencies and extended service will likely be subject to controversial Amtrak feasibility studies which will be time consuming and result in the states forking out even more money to the national carrier. The chief problem will be with the state DOTs who may get tired of spending lots of money to Amtrak and begin looking elsewhere if the economy doesn't pick up.

Ironically, states with sparse passenger train service or none at all may end up as the big winners because they have a template of what to expect from Amtrak so they could then choose to lease their routes out to independent operators as the demand grows. Ten years from now, All Aboard Florida could be such a success that the FL DOT provides corridor service with an AIPRO member or another non-Amtrak entity while historic leaders like Washington and Oregon could stagnate or become laggards due to them paying extra to Amtrak and those costs busting their states' budgets.

All of this inside the box thinking by True Believers and state DOTs cannot hide the fact that the old one size fits all, solo entity model is crumbling and it’s best that they come to terms with multiple entities—just like how trains are operated in places like the UK, Germany, Sweden and Japan. The pendulum has swung back in this direction because people are once again demanding top notch train travel. I will say that I am one of the very few people in the reform Amtrak camp who opposes the company being abolished, so if anyone thinks that I am harsh to the company, check out almost anyone else who wants an end to the passenger rail monopoly and you will quickly realize that I am being quite generous with my statements calling the company out on its complacency.

What Now?

Now that the federal government has yet again averted a major crisis, Congress needs to work on a rail reauthorization bill that not only encourages competition but mandates it. I would suggest that separate bidding procedures are set up for corridors and long distance service so there is no confusion on which routes are up for bid whatsoever.

In any case, these new operating agreements could turn out to be nothing more than one to three year extensions which could allow states to talk to other operators and subsequently ink deals with them. Older members of Amtrak’s management team are genuinely afraid of other operators running existing routes because there’s the potential for a domino effect that could lead to Amtrak only operating Midwest and Northeast routes outside of the National System (i.e. the long distance routes). Once these operating agreements expire over the next three years, the next Amtrak president will need to figure out which (non-NEC) routes it should focus on and which routes would be better off with someone else.

Tackling the Headlines 56

Mexico to tender $7.4 billion in passenger train projects in 2014
Take: They're getting serious. Hopefully, the political situation will improve enough to provide connecting train service to the U.S.

The Adirondack Scenic Railroad saga takes an ugly turn
Take: When it comes to the fight to just preserve the tracks on the right of way, it is way beyond preposterous that a loud group of people who are having a hard time masking their hatred of trains. The sabotaging of the railroad's property and locomotive show how low some northern New Yorkers are willing to go just to turn perfect rail pathway into a trail very few people will use.

Bad news for anyone who hates passenger rail competition
Take: While the Labour Party could very well return to the topic of re-nationalizing passenger rail in the future, they aren't going to touch it when Brits have other more important topics on their minds. Mr. Lodge points out how the arguments True Believers use are very misleading. America would be wise to learn from Britain's mistakes once Congress finally gets around to addressing passenger competition as part of a new rail bill.

Passenger excursions along a part of the old Seaboard route
Take: If these excursions prove to be a hit, then, it could lead to something much bigger.

More All Aboard Florida news
Take #1: Now, it's time for the construction to get started, and hopefully, I will be one of AAF's first passengers in two years' time.

Take #2: Tampa officials need to understand that Jacksonville is naturally on the FEC route and that it only makes sense for AAF to look northward not westward once the trains are up and running. However, that doesn't mean that Tampa shouldn't get a look from the fledgling passenger entity. Perhaps, there will be some commuter option that eventually stretches into St. Petersburg as part of a future deal to provide that area with intercity service. Of course, there is always the possibility that state of Florida gets off its high horse and provides California-style corridor service that may not require AAF at all.

The Principle of Mediocrity

One of the biggest things holding passenger rail advocates back is a Principle of Mediocrity mindset where rail advocates are forever stuck in a 1970s mindset where passenger trains are always one step away from vanishing forever.

Exhibit A was Evan Stair's mind-numbing defense of the way Amtrak does business and NARP's passiveness while falsely suggesting that URPA has no solutions when in fact its spokespeople have provided plenty of solutions that are routinely ignored by the mainstream media (if some of these regional and state rail advocacy groups had actually forced Amtrak to adopt the "matrix theory," then the company may have more than a skeletal system today).

Exhibit B: The profit question will be left to the private operators, but is worth noting that other systems in the world do make money, so the mantra of "passenger rail isn't/can't be/won't be profitable" is absolutely false. Yet any talk about profitability and private operations will lead back to Wall Street CEOs who were rewarded for ruining their companies by getting huge raises. Such incidents are only indicative of those companies who don't really care about their customers because responsible companies do not allow their leaders to do greedy things. In other words, profit and private operators are not dirty words at all.

Exhibit C is the numerous people in the rail community who either incapable or unwilling to realize that running trains are part of a business and not a political guinea pig. The main reason why Amtrak was created was due to the federal government first placing burdens on the railroads during WWI and never lifting said burdens after that war ended. The famous 1959 Trains Magazine article "Who Shot the Passenger Train" further spells this out. If the burdensome regulations had been lifted by the end of WWII, the impact of the Interstate Highway System and airline travel may have been less damaging to both the freight and passenger industries.

Exhibit D: It's one thing for someone over the age of 40 to bemoan over lost routes but for anyone under that age to do it and not produce any type of solution is beyond ridiculous. The older people get a pass because of things like NARP's battle with Amtrak.

The bottom line is that the rail community has had a survivor mindset since the late 1960s. As a matter of fact, 2009 and 2010 were the only two years of the Amtrak era where rail advocates were in a real expansionist mindset due to the stimulus-fueled HSR chase (when Graham Claytor ran Amtrak, he had to deal with fiercely anti-Amtrak Reagan and Bush 41, who merely tolerated him). Even though we don't expect to see any European-style high speed rail outside of California, there is genuine interest in passenger rail by entities other than Amtrak.

Tackling the Headlines 55

More curveballs in the Pine Tree State

Just when it looked as though passenger rail was entering a stage of stagnancy in Maine, these reports seemed to contradict previous stories.

Take: Two, count 'em, two operators who want to provide Montreal service are not waiting for D.C. to hand out more money to passenger rail. Given that they would operate at opposite ends of the day means that Northern New England travelers will have a really interesting choice that doesn't even involve the federally designated Boston-Montreal HSR corridor that will serve the heart of New Hampshire.

Raleigh gets $10 million federal grant to help build Union Station

Take: It's better than nothing--and the Amshack idea that was floating around early summer.

Orange Blossom Express update

It seems that Orlando's other commuter train service will take longer to launch.

Take: I thought that the railroad responsible for eventually dispatching the trains would have its ducks in a row.

Rail advocacy in Ontario

Three areas in Ontario--the northern, eastern (operating as one) and southwestern regions--that have seen passenger service reduced or eliminated have developed advocacy groups to promote increased train travel.

Take: This is a good idea given the negative impact of Canadian train service at the national and provincial levels over the last 15 months.

The Hoosier State Debate: Who's Right?

Recently, I stumbled unto a debate over the future of the Hoosier State in regards to the PRIIA Section 209 provision that forces states to pick up the tab for routes that are less than 750 miles long. The Lafayette Journal-Courier column is calling for a more proactive role while the NARP Blog response says that playing defense is a better ploy.

Journal-Courier

If Lafayette has to sit through one more wistful trip down memory lane about passenger rail, dripping with images of porters, whistle-stops and relatives waving farewell at the station with their handkerchiefs, we’re all going to lose it.

Mr. Bangert's "memory lane" reference makes passenger sound like an outdated mode of travel when it has, in fact, made a bit of a comeback.

Don’t pound the lectern demanding some dusty right to passenger rail. Get in there and pound the table for better service. His upshot: Simply subsidize the Hoosier State in its current condition, and it will fail; improve the Hoosier State, and people will ride.

State Senator Hershman is right on with his remarks that just retaining the Hoosier State in its current condition is a recipe for failure. After all, Train #850 has an unmarketable time for Purdue University students.

Troy Woodruff, INDOT chief of state...blistered the federal mandate passed in 2008, calling Amtrak’s business model a loser and repeatedly indicated his unwillingness to touch an annual payment of $80 for every one of the 36,669 passengers who rode the Hoosier State during the most recent fiscal year.

IN DOT should have done its homework on the PRIIA provision because if it had, then, it would have consulted another operator to see how much cheaper that company could operate the Hoosier State.

But he did allow that INDOT would be willing to pay a slice, if local governments and others were willing to chip in, too. While INDOT and Amtrak stared each other down to see which would blink first, a handful of mayors of cities along the Hoosier State route wanted to know two things:
• If you’re asking us to contribute, how much?
• And if we contribute, what’s being done to make service better? In other words: What are we getting for our money?

Although I'm neutral on the idea of municipalities funding corridor routes, this could be a future funding mechanism.

He also said increasing the number of trains on the Hoosier State line is open for discussion, too.

When it comes to Magliari's statement on possibly adding frequencies on the route, this is such a no-brainer given this schedule from 1994.

Available Wi-Fi on the trains. Some sort of food service, even if that meant a grab-and-go setup. Partnering with a shuttle service in Chicago for seamless transfers to airports. (“Anecdotally, what we’re seeing are a lot of Purdue students using the train out of Lafayette, many presumably to fly out of Chicago,” Hershman said. “Wouldn’t you pay for an easier way to O’Hare from Union Station?”)

In addition to Hershman's suggestions, All Aboard Ohio was unto something with its recommendations in adding more Hoosier State trains and extending them to Cincinnati. The only quibble is that I would change two of the trains to a single Louisville roundtrip with the possibility of a further extension to Nashville. This move would help establish a Chicago-Louisville service early on as the MWHSR project progresses.

NARP Blog

 [I]t’s the simple fact that if the Hoosier State disappears, it becomes ten times more difficult to get better service on this important part of the Chicago Hub passenger train network.

The mantra of "once it's gone, it's difficult to get it back" has been demonstrated in the Gulf Coast with the eastern link of the Sunset Limited and in the inland West with the Pioneer and North Coast Hiawatha.

However, as train advocates have learned the hard way time and again, once you lose a passenger train service, there are many expensive hurdles to clear before it can be restored. As imperfect as it is, the existing Hoosier State serves as a necessary baseline off of which to build a quicker, more convenient and attractive train service.

This is squarely on Amtrak management for its botched handling of converting the Cardinal into a daily train.

That will continue to be the case even if the Hoosier State remains as-is, and even if it disappears, students will still use the tri-weekly Cardinal to get to and from Chicago. 

In the short term, it'd be in Amtrak's best interest to either make the Cardinal daily northwest of Indianapolis or move the Hoosier State to more favorable times for students.

All the improvements that the train’s riders and supporters seek will only come to pass if INDOT is willing to work with Amtrak as a partner, like the state DOT’s in neighboring Michigan and Illinois have done with great success.  Such a partnership can only be formed with maintaining the Hoosier State as its centerpiece. Once a partnership is established, INDOT will have the ability to do things like add food service and install WiFi on the trains.

Given the provisions in Section 209, the INDOT could still accomplish the things Kenton mentioned if it seeks a different operator.

SPUD and Unconventional Passenger Service

A couple of summers ago, Mike "Mulad" Hicks brought up the possibility of specialty passenger rail at the historic St. Paul Union Depot. Quite frankly, I agree with him because even with a second Empire Builder frequency between Chicago and St. Cloud, the planned Regional HSR route between Chicago and St. Paul, and Zip Rail, the facility could still use more passenger trains in the future. 

This picture shows that multiple platforms could be built to support other types of rail. I will now look at the various ways unconventional passenger rail could serve SPUD and the Midwest:

• Auto Train: This could be a terminus for passengers who want to take their cars to places like Wisconsin Dells and other tourist destinations, or it could be a stop where passengers can load and unload their cars and board without being required to have a car. An example would be South Dakota with Badlands National Forest and Black Hills National Park. The route would start at O'Hare and then serve a limited number of stops along the way before reaching SPUD. Afterwards, the train would head southwest towards Mankato, then head west to SD, where it would end in Rapid City near those aforementioned tourist destinations.

• International Service: Winnipeg service would actually start at the Oglivie Transportation Center and serve Eau Clare along the C&NW route. Meanwhile, future service to Alberta would actually start at SPUD as another way of connecting passengers of the U.S. and Canada.

• Special Themes: These trains would primarily traverse parts of the Midwest that have not seen passenger rail service since the '60s or '70s. 

• Cruise & Cruise Fun Trains: Due to proximity issues, neither one met the standard for service at SPUD.

Random thoughts #14

1. This map is a special track from Jacksonville Union Terminal to the former Atlantic Coast Line route. This will come in handy should Florida wise up and start corridor service.
2. Possible sites for a new station in D.C. Seven billion dollars to overhaul a historic station is still a lot of money even if it is a fraction of what Amtrak is telling everyone it'll cost to overhaul the Northeast Corridor and build a brand new HSR line between Washington and Boston. Also, if intercity rail is opened up to other companies, not all of them may want to have anything to do with Union Station.
3. Given that the Knowledge Corridor is being rebuilt, the Berkshires route is being advanced by movers and shakers, it's now time to get the Central Corridor going. MA Governor Deval Patrick has promoted the first two routes, he should join his counterpart in CT and back the latter route as well.