The plan, which calls for $1.2 billikon in federal subsidies, reflects movement by Gunn and the Bush administration--whose relations have often been strained--toward common ground on stabilizing the railroad for the next year or two while they prepare for later decisions on the passenger train's long-term future.
Federal officials say they still want changes in an organization that has never made money in its 31-year history and long been criticized as inefficient. But Deputy Transportation Secretary Michael P. Jackson, who represents the administration on Amtrak's board, says the administration will work with congress to be certain that Amtrak avoids another cash crisis similar to the one that left passenger-train service within days of a nationwide shutdown in July.
"I don't think there'll be a fight over having enough money to survive," said Gunn, who has met with Jackson and other administration officials in the past few weeks.
He said that it will force Amtrak to delay many worthy projects, such as major track work on the Northeast Corridor. All new projects will be delayed or killed, including a plan by Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) to restore passenger-train service to his state's east coast through Daytona Beach. "All of that expansionary stuff is gone," he sais. He would not predict how many of the projects would be revive.
Gunn said he will insist, however, on continuing with a program to rebuild wreck-damaged passenger cars. More than 100 passenger cars have been sitting around for years, earning no revenue, because there was no money to repair them.
With anything less than the full $1.2 billion requested, "We're dead. Its over," Gunn said during an interview and in a meeting with Washington post editors and reporters.
All long-distance trains will continue to operate under the budget. Gunn said that the future of the long-distance train is a political decision for Congress and the administration but that he will not object if Congress sets financial performance guidelines for those services, with those that do not meet the standards being discontinued unless the states want to contribute.
quote:
"All of that expansionary stuff is gone,"
As someone who subscribes to the theory than Amtrak needs to grow to make money I find that disheartening. I hope it is only a temporary measure.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
Minus the freight stuff, the Pennsylvanian I rode recently had only four rattletrap cars - a doddering old Heritage baggage, a flea-bitten Amfleet II, a Horizon, and a charmingly dreary Amfleet cafe.
If Gunn cuts back any further, passengers are going to have to start riding on top of the engines.
[This message has been edited by dilly (edited 09-20-2002).]
Cheers
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
Back in the 1960's, I remember seeing several passenger trains that consisted of only two or three cars. I don't see it as being a problem for some of those east coast trains if they are short.
------------------
Elias Valley Railroad (N-scale)
www.geocities.com/evrr
Nope, they're just a money-machine for highways and airports...
I had initially supported the move to add freight, as it seemed they would be getting 'premium time sensitive' freight that the RRs had given up to trucks.
Is there a reason why the switching is so inefficeint? Are the Amtrak crews actually spotting the freight cars oncertain side tracks? Are there a bunch of safety checks that prevent the trains from quickly resuming travel after making brief stops? (Obviously I have never worked for a railroad).
Judging by the aggravating delays and the fact that it loses money, I agree the freight service should be dropped...