Alternative History #2

Scenario

Railroads adopt the Ripley Plan--or are forced to accept regional consolidation

Point of Departure

1920-70

Storyline

A new bill passes Congress in 1925 to lift the most burdensome regulations.The Transportation Act of 1920 meant that tracks were obliged to carry heavy volume without much attention to replacement or maintenance. However, the 1925 bill puts the ICC in a position to make sure that the tracks are well-maintained (this is later transferred to the USDOT). In 1933, regional consolidation is mandated by both Congress and the new Roosevelt Administration in an effort to encourage further efficiency.

As the Interstate Highway System gets going in the early 1960s, the 21 regional railroads start merging. Prior to the effort to stay ahead of the taxpayer subsidized superhighways, the Class I railroads gradually formed seamless north-south and east-west systems by using gentlemen's agreements, but these systems became ironclad by 1966.

The Rail Deregulation Act of 1970 lifts the remaining burdens that were hung on the railroads a half century earlier. President Nixon also funds a selected number of intercity routes because completely nationalizing passenger service was deemed impractical. During this low point of rail travel, only the federally subsidized routes make any kind of a profit.

Today’s Likely Outcome

The Railroads Today

Twenty-one railroads are down to nine big railroads. As more states got interested in providing corridor service, the Class Is got Congress to pass the Rail and Corridor Reform Act of 1997, which transferred most short-distance routes less than 500 miles from the railroads to a state or group of states (in 2008, PRIIA increased the length to 750 miles to accompany the various regional pacts).

This was the ultimate win-win situation because the Class Is shed their money losing corridors and commuter routes to focus on their bread and butter, the overnight trains. Meanwhile, the states won because prior to the R&CRA, most of the overnight trains stopped in major metropolitan areas in the middle of the night--presumably to provide smaller cities and towns in less densely populated states with more marketable times.

Largely due to unconventional means, the railroads no longer need a subsidy from the federal government to make a profit.

The Big Picture

The commuter trains and corridors are run via contracts just as they are in our timeline. The corridors are given names of the Class I railroads that were absorbed into the major railroads (e.g. Pacific Northwest service between Vancouver, BC and Eugene is broken into the Spokane, Portland & Seattle and Oregon Electric routes respectively). The regional pacts are broken into the following: Northeast, Midwest, Southeast, South Central, West, and West Coast and are protected German-style.

Auto-Train Corporation still operates in the same time frame as it did in the official timeline, however, the Class I railroads didn't get serious about auto-ferrying service until gas prices shot up in 2005. Within three years, no fewer than five railroads have joined the Atlantic Coast Line in providing this type of service.

Historic stations in Jacksonville, Buffalo, Detroit, and Chicago are still serving trains today with some of them having new lives as Auto Rail USA terminals. Cleveland Union Terminal and St. Louis Union Station are complemented as shopping centers and hotels rather than having been converted for such uses.

Electrification is in vogue again as some railroads are now developing high speed systems. The New York Central completed its Water Level Route electrification three years ago while the Milwaukee Road's decision to remain electrified in 1974 serves it well as it strives to finish electrification to Seattle Union Station by year's end--nine months ahead of schedule.

Meanwhile, the other railroads have decided to separate freight and passenger trains by building an interstate rail system where the passenger lines will be electrified, double tracked and run with lighter equipment and the freight lines continue to operate as they normally do.

Tackling the Headlines 57

Southwest Chief latest

Earlier this week, Amtrak told New Mexico, Colorado, and Kansas that in order to keep the Southwest Chief on the current Raton Pass Route, they have to pay up. BNSF doesn't want to pay to upgrade the route between a junction south of Albuquerque and Newton, KS. If nothing happens, Amtrak will reroute the Chief to serve destinations like Amarillo, TX and Wichita.

Take #1: This is extortion--plain and simple! Amtrak knows that it should not be forcing the states to pay for intercity service. It looks to me that Amtrak is doing to the Mountain States--and the Gulf States four years ago--what Union Pacific did to it in early 2009 with that preposterous $750 million ransom to convert the Sunset Limited to daily service.

Take #2: The possibility of the Southwest Chief being rerouted in 2016 is partially the feds' fault because they took an eternity to just follow Section 214 of PRIIA. I have been a strong advocate of this provision because Amtrak needed (and still needs) a strong kick in the pants. Long story short, the FRA should have forced bidding on the long distance routes so other companies could present their case to drastically improve the national train system over what we have today. The provision expired last month along with the rest of the 2008 law.

Take #3: If the FRA, the USDOT and anyone else in Washington really care about passenger train travel, this is the time to show the American public what they are made of. 

My recommendations are as follows: First, pass a brand new rail reauthorization bill that mandates a competitive process for the overnight trains. Second, either the FRA or the USDOT should take over the nearly 700-mile stretch of track and redevelop it over a long period of time. Finally, get the Association of Independent Passenger Rail Operators and the shortline/regional holding companies involved. Let the AIPRO entities or the shortlines carry people while the holding companies haul goods. 

What Amtrak then does with a rerouted Chief afterwards will be up to Boardman or his successor.

The Vegas X-Train waves the white flag

Las Vegas Railway Express, also known as the X-Train, has given up its efforts to provide service between Metro Los Angeles and Las Vegas. CEO Michael Barron is now pushing Amtrak to restore the Desert Wind route.

Take #1: Good luck with trying to get Amtrak to restore even the Los Angeles-Las Vegas portion of the route. There has been nothing but talk on that front since 1997. 

Take #2: And then there were two. Paul Druce covered Vegas X-Train's financial troubles in March and was more than vindicated.

Take #3: Like I said back in April, the Pullman Palace Car Company knows something that we don't know.

European competition part 1

Hong Kong-based MTR is expanding its services in Sweden as it goes from solely operating Stockholm's Metro to also competing against the national operator on the Stockholm-Goteborg route.

Take #1: Hey, even in an egalitarian society like Sweden, the government has no problem with letting others face off against its own operator. This should be a lesson for all of you True Believers who continue to fear or ignore independent operators.

Take #2: MTR Express's vehicles kind of fall in line with what happens when more than one company runs trains along any given route--lots of equipment creativity.

European competition part 2

Things have gotten nasty in Italy between state-owned Trenitalia and the Ferrari-owned NTV, which operates the Italo.

Take: Italy shows that any country that plans on providing competition needs to have a concrete plan in place. Since the government didn't do this, Trenitalia is resorting to monopolistic tactics and sabotage, and it also shows that as bad as Amtrak's complacency has been towards other operators, it's worse in Italy.

Alternative History #1

Scenario
Rather than monopolizing their respective regions, the southern railroads and the coastal titans join forces to keep the rivalry going

Point of Departure
The 1960s

Storyline A
Southern and SAL merge into Southern & Seaboard while the ACL and N&W become the Norfolk Coast Line. Both merged entities operate a handful of trains during rail's dark days. North Carolina's subsidization of the Carolinian (Charlotte-Greensboro-Raleigh Semart Street-Henderson-Petersburg-Richmond Main Street [S&S returned to Main Street in 1971, leaving NCL at Broad Street]-Washington) leads to a networked Southeastern Rail System by 2010 and serves as the template for how states provide intercity corridors. Virginia's subsidizes routes with both the S&S and the NCL. Both railroads own 50% of the RF&P when that railroad decides to hang it up in 1991.

Storyline B
Atlantic Southern and Seaboard & Western are the merged railroads. The Atlantic Southern builds a line parallel to I-95 when the Seaboard & Western buys the RF&P. Both the ASR and the S&W stay out of Amtrak and produce long distance corridors via their redevelopment plans.

Both Storylines
Both merged railroads continue to be competitive with each other in Florida--and there are no track abandonments or reductions that affect passenger traffic. However, the FL DOT was a bit upset with the railroads in the 1990s because there weren't enough day trains. A compromise was worked out in 1996 to provide corridor service to fill in the missing gaps.

The Chessie System is absorbed into Conrail in 1990, resulting in three Class I railroads in the Eastern U.S. today.

Today’s Likely Outcome
Amtrak is reduced to one route in Virginia--a daily New York-Chicago Cardinal--and has no presence in Florida, Georgia or the Carolinas due to the efficiency and commitment of the railroads. The FL DOT picked up the tab for Sunset East route after Hurricane Katrina. Herzog worked out a deal to operate the service. As for high speed service in Florida, it is never brought up after the Florida Rail System trains began operation in late 1997.

Social networking

I have joined Google Plus. Anyone who has an account or plans to get one, here's my page. Over there, I plan to:

• Expand on blog posts. I will provide additional input on my posts if I feel that the topic is very important.
• Provide more personal views on rail topics. I also plan to provide my ideas on how passenger rail in America can be made better.
• Deal with news as it breaks. This could save me from posting others' blog entries and providing too little of an opinion. I will also deal with more local issues like streetcars and light rail--areas I have given little or no coverage.
• React to other viewpoints. If there is anyone who defends the status quo, I plan to refute it if the circumstances warrant me to do so.
• Provide random thoughts on issues that are too short for posts. This will allow me to retire the random thoughts blog entries as I have sometimes waited weeks to provide my opinion on stories that fade out of the public's view.

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.