Amtrak: Dan Zukowski

Amtrak's Problem Solved

Amtrak now has the two most powerful lobbyists in Washington on its side: the newly-inaugurated president and vice president of the United States.

When I began this blog four years, to counter the Bush Administration's attempts to dismember the national passenger railroad, I started with the premise that "Amtrak has a communications problem." I pointed out that "there is no strong national voice speaking in support of Amtrak." Only a few small, underfunded rail enthusiast organizations and the stepchild attention of environmental groups carried the flag for passenger trains -- constituencies easily ignored by most conservative Republicans.

In Washington, legislation is written by lobbyists, and as a government-owned corporation, Amtrak had no access to K Street firms. Now, the sitting president and vice president not only chose to ride into town on an Amtrak train, but they both referred to Amtrak in their acceptance speeches at the Democratic convention. Pennsylvania Avenue is a better address than K Street.

Now, let's see if they walk the talk. The first sign is not encouraging: transportation as a whole is only mentioned in a single paragraph under "Additional Issues" on the new White House Web site.

Amtrak has never had any more than lukewarm support from the White House. Nixon agreed to create the National Railroad Passenger Corporation in order to placate the freight railroads, and it wasn't expected to survive more than a couple of years. President Carter tried to severely curtail long distance service, Reagan tried to kill Amtrak altogether, and Clinton merely left the life support machine plugged in. President Obama and Amtrak Joe both support the national passenger railroad, and see it as part of the solution to energy efficiency and congestion mitigation. But there will be strong competition for federal dollars, even in an era when the printing press is running 24/7.

The previous administration's attack on Amtrak seemed particularly short-sighted to me at a time of rising oil prices and global warming. Moreover, it would have been an egregious waste of a national asset. We're talking dollars here, folks.

Amtrak is a unique and undervalued asset. By law, it is the only passenger railroad which has statutory authority to operate over the nation's network of freight railroads. It owns locomotives, cars, stations and shops which have a monetary value so long as there is a railroad to run. To have simply shut it down would have been to tear up taxpayer dollars.

With two big supporters in the White House, Amtrak now has an opportunity to prove itself. It needs funds to overhaul and upgrade equipment and service, but in a market economy, it can only be of value if it provides convenient, reliable, safe transportation at a competitive price.

This Train is Bound for Glory

Today's Amtrak train taking President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden to Washington was meant to evoke the historic ride to Washington, D.C. by Abraham Lincoln for his inaugural in 1861, but the story is more complex than that.

Lincoln was the target of an assassination plot by secessionists. As recounted in PI Magazine (February, 2005), the assassination was to take place at the station near Baltimore or on the railroad car while the train was en route. Complicating matters, the Baltimore chief of police was known to be a secessionist sympathizer. The Pinkerton Detective Agency, then making its name as the leading railroad detectives in the country, was hired to protect the incoming president. Among his bodyguards was a 28-year-old woman, Kate Warne, who is regarded as the nation's first female detective. According to PI Magazine, "Mr. Lincoln shed his tall hat for a shawl and small hat," and disguised himself as Ms. Warne's sick brother. He made it safely to Washington.

The railroad line Mr. Obama traveled today pre-dates the Civil War. This 1858 lithograph, reproduced from the book, "The Pennsylvania Railroad: A Pictorial History" (E.P. Alexander), reads in part, "Notice to Colored People: All Colored People (Bond or Free) wishing to travel on the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad, will be required to bring with them to the TICKET OFFICE, President Street Depot, some Responsible White Person, A Citizen of Baltimore, known to the undersigned, to sign a bond to the Company before they can proceed." Today, we can reflect on how far we as a nation have come.

The Pennsylvania Railroad's New York-Washington line has long been a route of senators and members of Congress. Many presidents rode these same rails before the airline age. It has also been the route of Pullman porters, most of whom were African-American. It was a Pullman porter, Edgar A. Nixon, who first had the idea of a bus boycott, and the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters that helped fund it. The Montgomery, Ala. boycott helped lead to the end of the despicable Jim Crow laws.

Today's simple train ride by the President-elect is not just symbolic of Lincoln's ride into Washington, but symbolizes America's journey as well. It is a journey we have all taken together, sometimes sliding backward, more often moving forward. It is a journey that tells us, with deference to Woodie Guthrie, this train -- and this nation -- is bound for glory, this train.

California High Speed Rail: Wrong Plan at the Wrong Time

Amid market upheaval and an uncertain economic future, California voters will be asked to authorize almost $10 billion in state borrowing next month for a poorly-designed and financially risky high-speed rail network. That's equal to the $10 billion in borrowing from future lottery revenue needed to reduce further budget shortfalls starting next year. More perspective: the California Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) projects the annual cost of servicing the debt on the high-speed rail bond at $647 million. That's more than the $510 million Gov. Schwarzenegger had to cut from this year's budget to make ends meet. Those cuts impacted programs to lower prescription drug costs and provide financial aid to elderly renters and homeowners. The money has to come from somewhere, folks.

I've surprised some with my opposition to the California high-speed rail plan, but there's a simple explanation: I can read a business plan. And this one is full of holes. We are supposed to believe that an 800-mile rail system through densely populated urban and suburban areas, national forests, mountain passes and high deserts can be built in 20 years for $40 billion. Heck, we've been trying to get the L.A. subway completed for 15 years, and that's only eight miles. The reality is that the high-speed rail project will take twice as long to build and cost two to three times as much as we're told. Proposition 1A will turn out to be a subprime mortgage on a sprawling, unfinished state-owned toy-train McMansion.

As the Pasadena Star-News wrote earlier this week:

We don't buy into the utter nonsense of the knee-jerk opponents who would be against this proposal no matter what. They call Proposition 1A "pork on a train" - but that's what they call any government expenditure whatsoever. A state that can't in good times invest in itself is a dying state.

But, the newspaper goes on to say:

Right now, though, when we need to find ways to simply balance our budget in order to pay teachers, keep health clinics open and operate other essential services, we're going to have to wait to get aboard this train.

I've been a leading advocate of passenger rail and public transportation, but this is the wrong plan at the wrong time for California. According to the state's LAO, "Over the past 12 years, the authority has spent about $60 million for pre-construction activities." What we've gotten from that, mostly, is a fancy Web site.

It's time to go back to the drawing board. Here is a way to move forward:

1. Start small. Plan for a route such as San Francisco - Sacramento or Los Angeles - San Diego (and not via Riverside) which has a ready market of intercity travelers and can be built at far lower cost. Show success, then build out a statewide system if it makes sense.
2. Engage private enterprise. The proven model in our country's history is for government to assist or undertake transportation infrastructure development and then allow private industry to operate it. California, with whatever federal assistance can be obtained, should fund the infrastructure and then contract with an operator to own, run and maintain the trains. The state should charge a fee to cover ongoing capital needs, and should enter into a long-term contract to encourage the operator to make investments in rolling stock, services and personnel.
3. No work should be undertaken on the project until a preliminary contract is signed with an operator. California taxpayers shouldn't be left holding the bag.

In the 19th century, we saw eager entrepreneurs ready to build railroads, spurred on by federal land grants. In the 20th century, we saw fledgling airlines and young trucking companies jumping at the chance to build transportation businesses as airports and Interstate highways were built. Here in the 21st century, we need to see private enterprise raise its hand. Unless there's a business case to spend billions of taxpayer dollars to build the California high-speed rail network, we should stick to Southwest Airlines.

Rail Riders for Obama

On June 4, 2008, this blog officially endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for President of the United States. I have formed "Rail Riders for Obama" and invite you to join.

Barack Obama is a strong supporter of Amtrak and understands the need for a balanced transportation network that includes passenger rail. He has laid out his plan for revitalizing America's transportation infrastructure, which includes "a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to expand and enhance, not supplant, existing federal transportation investments." The bank will fund transportation projects, including rail, creating up to two million new jobs a year.

On Amtrak, Obama states, "As president, Barack Obama will continue to fight for Amtrak funding and reform so that individuals, families and businesses throughout the country have safe and reliable transportation options."

The alternative: Sen. McCain has long been an Amtrak foe. His election will lead to four more years of neglect and hostility toward our transportation needs.

Communal Living

My friend Brian came up from San Diego this weekend for a visit. He left his Lexus at home and opted for the train -- two trains, actually. He rode the new Sprinter service to Oceanside and connected there with Amtrak for the ride into L.A.

It was his first train ride in more than a decade, and when asked if he would do it again, he was non-committal. The trains had been on time and he'd had the opportunity to read his morning newspaper on the ride up. But he was not, as he said, "master of my own domain" as he would be if he had taken his own car.

Count  Brian among the many  who are new trial users of passenger rail, commuter trains and mass transit. Just the day before his trip, the Los Angeles Times reported, "Commuter rail ridership broke an all-time record this week, and Caltrans reported a dip in freeway traffic as commuters across California struggled with record gasoline prices." Brian had calculated that the cost of gas and the cost of the round-trip train ticket was about equal, and there was the added benefit of not contributing more greenhouse gases to the planet by driving 200 miles solo.

Being master of our own domains is part of the American psyche. Since the end of World War 2, we've moved en masse to single-family suburban homes and supplied almost every adult family member with their own automobile so they can drive alone to work or school or Starbucks.

But perhaps that's changing. In the current housing crash, it's been the price of homes furthest from city centers that have fallen fastest and deepest. "Selling condos last year at the Mission Meridian Village next to the Gold Line - which runs from Pasadena to downtown L.A. - broker Dominic deFazio first thought South Pasadena's strong schools would be a key for the project," reports the Long Beach Press-Telegram. "But a survey of the new homeowners revealed that 55 percent bought condos because they are across from the Gold Line, deFazio said."

Major cities across the U.S. from New York to Seattle, Boston to San Diego and Chicago to Los Angeles have become trendy places to live and now boast revitalized, vibrant urban cores. Smaller cities and communities are imitating the pedestrian-friendly, transit-friendly model of these large cities. They are moving away from the suburban model of isolated living, shopping and working centers. This bodes well for commuter and passenger rail, as the more we become used to living in a community, the more we'll accept riding in a community.

Obama Outlines Support for Infrastructure Investments

In a speech given earlier this week in Flint, Mich., presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama outlined his plan for $60 billion in infrastructure investments over 10 years to "leverage private investment" and create two million new jobs. Echoing our sentiment here that great nations build, and that our nation has a proud history of federal leadership in developing infrastructure to benefit our economy, Sen. Obama said:

That's what our Founding Fathers did after winning independence, when they tied together the economies of the thirteen states and created the American market. That's what Lincoln did in the midst of Civil War, when he pushed for a transcontinental railroad, incorporated our National Academy of Sciences, passed the Homestead Act, and created our system of land grant colleges. That's what FDR did in confronting capitalism's gravest crisis, when he forged the social safety net, built the Hoover Dam, created the Tennessee Valley Authority, and invested in an Arsenal of Democracy.

The Illinois senator, whom we have endorsed for president, specifically mentioned passenger rail as one of his priorities. Speaking to the Michigan audience, he said, "We can invest in rail, so that cities like Detroit, Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Louis are connected by high-speed trains, and folks have alternatives to air travel."

All Changed

Yesterday I felt myself lucky to find gas at $4.71 a gallon for regular in downtown Los Angeles, as the prices I've been seeing in recent days were $4.85 and up. I wonder how nostalgic this post will make me feel when I read it a year from now.

Many consumers are in panic-reaction mode, trading in SUVs for hybrids and trying out mass transit for the first time. Auto manufacturers are racing to switch factories from large trucks to smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles. And businesses are struggling to cope with skyrocketing transportation, energy and raw materials costs.

This year's run-up in oil has many causes, some of which are short term -- such as commodities trading speculation and the fall of the dollar -- and therefore potentially reversible. In that way, this period is not unlike the oil shocks of 1973 and 1979. But the unfavorable supply-and-demand equation is not reversible; certainly not in the short term. Higher crude prices may bring new supplies on-line, and the pain at the pump may even overshadow environmental concerns to open up largely controversial deposits such as ANWR and off-shore oil. However, none of these will put more oil in the pipeline tomorrow, and they will not offset rising demand from growing economies in Asia.

What we're witnessing, then, is a disruptive event, one which will shape the future of business, economies and global politics for decades to come. The United States is in a rather weak position to respond to this new environment, as we've allowed decades of opportunity to slide by like so much oil sludge. Our petroleum reserves are not large enough to feed our hunger, we've engaged in wasteful practices and we're borrowing hand over fist to pay for our conspicuous consumption.

All of that presages a painful adjustment to the new circumstances we're faced with. We're already seeing that pain. Car buyers have lost tons of trade-in value on now-unwanted gas guzzlers. Businesses are seeing profits squeezed and many are experiencing a sales slowdown as well. The U.S. economy is teetering between recession and inflation, and we may get the unlucky combination of both in the months ahead.

When faced with a seemingly insurmountable problem, it's always wise to tackle the biggest obstacle first. In America, fully a quarter of our energy consumption is devoted to transportation.  In many ways, that's due to the geographical size of our  country and our active business and leisure economies. In other ways, it's due to gross inefficiencies that have been allowed to develop over recent decades.

Our antediluvian air traffic control system wastes countless flight hours and countless gallons of jet fuel.  The legacy air carriers' hub-and-spoke system was designed to enable them to serve smaller markets economically; today it is an inefficient and costly business model. Suburban sprawl contributes to wasteful land use, traffic congestion and global warming. Vehicles have gotten far safer, far less polluting and far more efficient, but size and horsepower wars have negated some of those advantages. And decades of neglect and hostility have left us with a weak, struggling rail passenger network incapable of stepping up to the demands of an oil-squeezed economy.

Consumers and businesses will try to make do, but they could use some leadership from Washington. Our transportation infrastructure is outdated, costing the U.S. economy billions of dollars in wasted productivity and direct costs. As Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria points out, "U.S. spending on infrastructure as a percentage of GDP is the lowest in the industrialized world today." That's not how we became a great nation, and it's certainly not how we will stay a great nation.

Congress Acts to Establish Amtrak's Future

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a long-sought multi-year funding bill for Amtrak by a 311-105 vote, following the lead of the Senate, which has already passed a similar bill. President Bush has threatened a veto, although both House and Senate versions passed with veto-proof margins.

Amtrak ridership is up strongly in the wake of record high gas prices, with May setting a new ridership record and the passenger railroad expecting to reach 28 million riders in 2008. There could be even more riders, but for 37 years of active neglect by Washington and continued attempts at derailing Amtrak by dead-enders like President Bush. A McCain administration will be no different: the Arizona senator is a longtime Amtrak critic.

Amtrak Seeks New Riders at National Train Day

If Amtrak's intent was to entice travelers weary of airport hassles and gas-price inflation to try the train, this weekend's one-day event at Los Angeles Union Station may have been a success. Attendance at this event was likely boosted by a busy Taiwanese cultural festival across the street from the station, but I witnessed many families touring the sample Coast Starlight consist and visiting the display and entertainment venues.

With ridership up on Amtrak as well as mass transit systems, this is an opportune time to catch the attention of Americans looking for alternatives to driving and flying. In addition to Los Angeles, the national passenger railroad held events in New York, Washington, Chicago and other locations around the country.

Getting From Here to There

The gas station on Alameda Street in downtown Los Angeles is offering regular for $4.45 a gallon. While that's high even for L.A., by next year it could seem like a bargain. Crude oil topped $113 a barrel today.

Beset by high fuel costs, Aloha Airlines, ATA Airlines, and Skybus all went out of business in just the past two weeks, while Frontier Airlines declared bankruptcy.

United and American grounded thousands of flights to catch up on FAA-mandated safety inspections. And with the announced merger of Delta and Northwest, "critics fear the merger will lead to higher airfares, a decline in customer service, the elimination of jobs and fewer flights, particularly to small cities," reports the Detroit Free Press. That's exactly what we reported almost three years ago: "...air service to small towns will have to go, along with the cheap fares Americans have gotten used to."

In the same story, we also warned that "[airlines and highways]  can not sustain themselves under their current operating model and may not be viable options to handle the expected 40% growth in passenger travel over the next two decades."

So how do we get from here to there? With the sorry state of our national rail passenger network, there aren't many options. At a time when we should be investing in transportation infrastructure to ensure that all three legs of our multi-modal network can support current and future travel loads, there's not a single, coherent, balanced plan emanating from Congress or the U.S. Department of Transportation. Of the three major presidential candidates, only Barack Obama speaks directly to our transportation needs. Neither Clinton nor McCain bother to address transportation issues on their campaign Web sites.

Leadership in Washington is thoroughly lacking and we can't count on market forces alone. It's never happened before: without direction and support from the federal government, neither railroads nor airlines nor automobiles could have become effective transportation systems. But what about the future? Unless the next administration takes charge of this challenge, it's hard to see how we will ever get from here to there.