More Wishes and Dreams

City Triplets. No, I am not advocating multiple births by urban dwellers. I am talking about groups of cities that would be an excellent starting point for new Passenger Rail routing. Just about every state has a set of city triplets, and I am sure my readers will know of more. Some triplets don't fit into just one state, they are bi-state or tri-state triplets. Let me give two examples and then a list.

My home state of New Mexico now has the beginnings of a triplet routing. We have a true intercity commuter between Albuquerque and Santa Fe. The south end of the line doesn't count. Belen isn't big enough to fit my idea. But Santa Fe - Albuquerque - Las Cruces does. And there is already talk.

Another example, from my former state, would be Chicago - Springfield - St. Louis, which does exist to some extent. Chicago - Peoria - Moline would be another. My point in getting together these triplet is: If we start here, it is a good place to then connect the dots by connecting the triplets. And it gives each state a chance to decide what routes they want and then go for the gold in getting their triplet into the new national network.

Others (mostly where there is no or limited Passenger Rail now):
Boise - Pocatello - Idaho Falls
Tucson - Phoenix - Flagstaff
Pueblo - Colorado Springs - Denver
Grand Island - Lincoln - Omaha
Topeka - Wichita - Oklahoma City
Amarillo - Lubbock - San Angelo
New Orleans - Baton Rouge - Shreveport
Memphis - Nashville - Knoxville
Evansville - Indianapolis - South Bend

I could go on. There's no trick other than finding a triplet that has some population in between towns that would ride the train and stir up some economic activity by doing so. With few exceptions in the one's I've named, this would also take passenger cars off the Interstates.

©2009 C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Wish List 2

Please, Mr. Obama, while you are printing more money, please fund the following:

1. All-rail passenger service from Chicago to Green Bay.
2. More than one train each day out of Chicago to each and every route end, including the long ones.
3. Buy up enough nearby real estate to increase the capacity of Chicago stations for Amtrak. As fantasies go, this is a big one. It would require one or all of a) increasing the number of available tracks in Union Station; b) spreading out Amtrak among the several stations (only Union Pacific has northbound tracks), which would also require; c) improved light rail (non-CTA) between Randolph, LaSalle, Union Pacific (all Metra) and Union (maybe a light rail circulator on dedicated elevated right of way?).
4. While we're fantasizing feeders, new ones from O'Hare and Midway right to Amtrak! Now there's a transportation concept. As it is right now, you can't do this via rail alone.

More next time

© 2009 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Wish List 1

Don't get me wrong. I am dead against the way our politicians are hustling every pet project they can think of in order to get them in front of Mr. Obama for a piece of the "economic stimulus" pie.

But I am attracted by the fantasy of having some favorate Passenger Rail-related projects funded, so I am going to start on my wish list.

Dear Mr. Obama:
Please print money for the following projects to stimulate the economy.
1. Passenger Rail service along the front-range corridor from Cheyenne, Wyoming, to El Paso, Texas.
2. At least two daily trains each way on this corridor.
3. Passenger Rail service that would get me from Albuquerque to Phoenix in under 24 hours, without going part way by bus.
4. A short intra-state local running Las Cruces to Las Vegas, NM.
5. Passenger Rail from Albuquerque to Las Vegas, Nevada.

Next time: Wish lists for other areas.

©2009 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Winter and Amtrak

Now that the early-winter holidays are past, it is worth noting that Winter has been upon much of the country with a vengeance since well before the holidays came and went. And what has Amtrak been able to do about it? Not much.

I have opined on this blog in past winters that Amtrak should focus more on keeping its equipment winter-operable and on getting new equipment that is more weatherproof. Nonetheless, the norm seems to be to shrug when weather sidelines equipment or makes it inoperable enroute, and to make the poor passenger endure the hell that results.

Several winters ago, I experienced what happens to Superliner sleepers when snow and ice get up between the cars and into the high-voltage house power connections. The resulting explosion and showers of sparks are certainly memorable, but sitting for hours on the track while crews use every imaginable spit-and-baling-wire fix to try to get things working again, all the while freezing in a train with no heat or light, is not the makings of a pleasant trip. There should have been spare parts on board. And it wouldn't hurt to have at least one crewmember who is also trained as a car mechanic, at least on paper.

But that winter has been repeated many times this year, according to reports, in lower Michigan and the Northeast. There are horror stories of a four-hour trip taking 16 hours with no available toilet facilities and no adequate communication from Amtrak. The intertia that this represents in Amtrak's approach to such things is staggering.

We, the sheep . . . er, taxpayer . . . shouldn't stand for this kind of management in Our Passenger Rail System! I'm imagining that all Amtrak trains that have a longer than 2-hour run should have a passenger representative appointed by random draw of ticket stubs to be empowered to summarily fire any employee of Amtrak that lets this kind of thing happen. Nice fantasy, but it won't happen. Too many bureaucrats (with really heavy ass inertia) standing in the way.

Amtrak needs to get it's crap together or be modified out of existence into some new form, with a new charter and a new commitment to passenger service. It could happen. Change should be forthcoming. Let's hope it's real.

©2009 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Passenger Rail Is Not Always The Answer

Much as I would like it to be, Passenger Rail isn't the answer to every transportation question. As I often push for more Passenger Rail in this blog using an argument that it is sound policy from both a conservation and an environmental standpoint, I would like to be careful not to push too much.

As Mr. Obama's presidency nears and we are every day promised dollars for public infrastructure projects, some local politicians are taking their heads out of their arses only long enough to see the dollar signs. Yes, they have heard that trains are sound policy, so if there's anywhere they can put one, they are going to ask for money for it.

So a little education while you guys aren't busy watching your own colons:

1. Light rail only is a good idea only for large cities. I am talking cities the size of Milwaukee or better, not those on the borderline of "medium to small." The economies will just never catch up with the initial cost and the burden of subsidy. Mayors who want this and get it will be ruining their economies unless they have a dedicated line in mind, say from one airport to another.
2. Commuter rail is usually a little less costly for right-of-way and more costly for equipment. It, too, makes no sense for a small city with small ridership. New Mexico Rail Runner Express is not really commuter rail any longer, it is state sponsored intercity (Santa Fe - Albuquerque - Belen) with no help from Amtrak. It will leave a burden of subsidy too large for a low pop state like New Mexico to bear. If it has to go belly up, it will be money down a rathole.
3. Long distance Passenger Rail only makes sense on a more frequent basis than Amtrak can provide at this time. Amtrak has gone into the commuter business to find money, and it does a good job in the northeast, midwest, and California. But there's no local government seeking stimulus money for an Amtrak route, so Amtrak won't benefit from this unless local government seeks infrastructure improvements that will facilitate Amtrak.

Is anybody listening?

© 2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

No Cure From Amtrak

Something that Amtrak has not been able to cure in all of its three decades plus of existence is the public perception that the days are numbered for the train. I'm talking about any train.

Throughout the decade preceding Amtrak, those of us old enough to remember will recall that news of one or another passenger train's demise came out almost weekly. Unless you were a train nut trying to get mileage that would become unavailable onto your log book, you weren't very enthusiastic about riding a train that you knew wouldn't be there in the very near future. It was a protective reaction, really, because you knew that if you liked it you would be sad not to do it again, and if you didn't like it, it was probably because you waited too long to try it.

The same thing has been going on throughout the Amtrak era. There is always a rumor of a certain train in danger of discontinuance, and the press makes no bones about putting it out there when it's just a rumor. Some of this has got to stop if Passenger Rail is going to grow and if public confidence is going to grow with it. Amtrak should spend some new money on public relations initiatives that will tell the public, not just the train nuts that watch for the info, like me, what is in store for them if things go right. What new trains can we expect? How will this help my life and how will this help the country and the environment?

Today, even the reporting and the editorial slant for potential new trains is in the negative. It's about what might go wrong, how horrendously large is the needed money, or how it's just a "study" that will cost lots and no train is likely to result.

As a society, we are now conditioned to breath a sigh of relief when things don't go too wrong. So we don't expect to hear about what could go right. We rejoice over $2 gas, we turn handsprings when the train schedule doesn't get cut back, we thank God and Southwest Airlines that somebody still gives us peanuts during a long flight. It's ridiculous, and we should all expect more.

Wouldn't it be a lot more fun to rejoice over Amtrak doubling its route structure and its on-board amenities? And somebody at Amtrak needs to get their head out of whatever dark hole its up and start to let the public know how good things could be, not just how bad they could get.

I look forward to it.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Political Momentum

Big Ideas aren't going to get done with the kind of thinking that exists in our legislative branch today. And they won't get done with the kind of thinking that is scheduled to exist tomorrow.

Political momentum says that Congress will continue to think along the lines of "no new Passenger Rail lines unless states or local governments put in the money." That's not going to work, and that is no longer a Big Idea. It was a good way to keep Amtrak moving when states were flush with cash, but that's not going to happen for the foreseeable future. Call it momentum or call it a head in the sand. Call it what you will, our newest congressmen and senators, as well as the re-elected ones, are going to have to stop thinking like we are going back to a Clintonian White House. The economy is already dictating that the rest of this decade is going to be very different from the 1990s.

As much as Radical Environmentalism - as a movement - is against the free market, neither will it want to see us slide back into a transportation policy where the only way to get somewhere is by passsenger auto or jet-fuel guzzling airlines. And the auto fleet will be aging - therefore less environmentally friendly - if none of us can afford to buy a new one.

As I have said before on this blog, our transportation policies must be coordinated and include a higher proportion of funding for Passenger Rail. This must also occur with any economic stimulus plans. Mr. Obama, please listen: If we are going to put people to work ala 1930s style WPA, it must be on building and repairing rail infrastructure as well as other kinds, and maybe even on building railcars, streetcars, and locomotives, too. (GM should not have sold Electro Motive is a topic for another day.)

+++++

Thank you all for your very astute comments and emails on my Big Ideas title. Now please write to your politicians - all of them - from the local know-nothings on up.

© 2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Something Big

Since the inception of Amtrak, the model for Passenger Rail in this country has been - with few exceptions - one of subsidize and recover. This means subsidize as much of the train operations budget as is politically possible, and recover as much as possible of the costs of train operations from the farebox. The few exceptions are excursion trains, since even commuter rail is handled in the "subsidize and recover" model.

Perhaps we are ready for a new model. A big idea.

Looking at some photographs of New York Central varnish from the 1930s and 1940s got me thinking: We could look at this the same way banks are required to look at deposit insurance. Banks take a percentage of every dollar and put it into the FDIC.

Think about this: Instead of taking money out of transportation taxes and out of other general taxes to fund Passenger Rail, why don't we just require every railroad to pay a percentage of their profits towards passenger service.

You may say that was how railroads got in trouble with passengers to begin with. And I would say you are right. But railroad of the time were trying to serve every community on most routes and were doing it with lots and lots of equipment and heavy schedules. I think that if the current Amtrak route structure were imposed on the host railroads, a percentage of freight revenues would be enough, in our day, to operate most, if not all of Amtrak, maybe even double the routes currently available. I believe that it would not cramp the style of the profitable railroads.

You may also say this is a bad time to start imposing an effective tax on profitable businesses, as the times are telling us that profitable businesses are going to be few. But what better time than when railroads are flush with cash? Should we wait until the whole economy is in shambles?

If it worked, this would be a way to ease railroads back into the habit of operating and funding passenger service, not just grudgingly allowing passenger trains to operate on tracks built in the public interest.

Yes, there are consequences. Shippers would effectively be paying for passenger rail in rates that might be higher. Congress would have to resist the temptation to allow (or worse, mandate) that all costs thus incurred be passed on to the shippers. And initally, reduced service would result on already crowded lines. Benefits would be forthcoming with patience. Business would benefit from increased availability of travel and lower cost. Removing automobiles from roadways would relieve environmental pressures on all businesses. Fuel savings would be great, and all businesses would benefit from a reduced dependence on foreign oil.

I'm sure I haven't thought of all the positives and negatives here. Anyone want to jump in and enlighten me if you think this is a bad idea? Otherwise, maybe we can write some letters to the new Congress and the new president. Maybe there are other new and better ideas out there. But the old model isn't working, hasn't for a long time. Let's start something big.

© 2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Turning Point

Passenger Rail, like a train poised at the switch ready to take one track or the other, will be rolling onto a different track as a result of the events of this month.

First, the pundits say that the administration of President-Elect Obama is likely to be much more pro-Passenger Rail than several of its predecessors. This is based in part on Joe Biden, who is seen as pro-passenger in part based on his voting record, but mostly because he likes to ride the trains himself. It is also based on the undisputable fact that Mr. Obama came up during the campaign as more knowledgeable as to the potential of Passenger Rail in general and HSR in particular.

Today, it appears that Rep. James Oberstar is the likely choice for Secretary of Transportation. Whether this is 'change' or a step forward is arguable. Mr. Oberstar's voting record in the House is to support Amtrak reauthorization, to vote against reductions in funding, but never, as far as my research can find, to take a positive forward move in sponsoring any legislation that would get Amtrak and Passenger Rail over the hump to where it should be in this century.

The next development is the resignation of Alex Kummant as CEO of Amtrak. This writer was thoroughly skeptical about Mr. Kummant when he came on board. I have been pleasantly proven wrong. But he also had the luck of the draw, with Amtrak ridership increasing as a result of high fuel prices, giving him extra revenue to work with. Now that gas prices are falling, will ridership stay at this level?

My guess is that Mr. Kummant has trained his executive team well, and the interim CEO William Crosbie will carry on some of the same policies. Also my guess: President-Elect Obama will likely appoint a new CEO from outside Amtrak.

That's not a bad thing. In the spirit of change that the recent election is supposed to have fostered, I am hoping that whoever it is will agree with Secretary-in-waiting Oberstar and with the new Congress on the direction Amtrak should take. I think we would all have to agree that the only 'change' that would be good for Amtrak and good for the country is increased funding for train frequency, equipment, on-time performance, service, and new routes - without the redundancy of Congress repeating over and over, year after long year, that it thinks Amtrak should make money.

Mr. Oberstar - if you are appointed as expected - and Mr. Obama . . . the train is running on your track now. Please don't derail it at the switch.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

It's Too Bad

It's too bad that in the current political climate our passenger railroads are not still run by private corporations. Do you see where we're going with this.

If Amtrak were a private corporation, all it would have to do - other than pay its executives scads of money to run it into the ground - would be to whine about how it is too big and important to the United States economy to fail. Bingo. The government would be buying up equity with taxpayer dollars and there would no longer be a question of getting appropriations in Congress.

With Congress ready to pour money into 1. banks; 2. insurance companies; and 3. anything else that moves and has assets to control, the freight railroads are already lining up at the door to the treasury. (We once had an uncle who used to do what Congress does to number 3, but we called it something different.)

It may bode well for rail infrastructure, but again we fall back on the questions: How far can government money go? How is all this going to happen without huge tax increases? If we are all out of a job, how are we going to pay taxes?

Neither candidate for president seems to have these answers.

We spend a lot of time worrying these days.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Two Questions Redux

With the events of the past two weeks smoldering in our collective brains - or whats left of our brains after the political ads slam them against the wall with every television or radio break - we now know that we should not have asked, "Will there be any money left for Passenger Rail?" What we should have asked was, "Will there be any money left? Period."

Fact One: The current economic crisis and the resulting bailouts are spending taxpayer dollars that have to come from somewhere and that would otherwise have gone elsewhere.

Fact Two: The economic situation will tend to elect Democrats in four weeks.

Fact Three: Democrats have run on the promise of extensive spending programs to right the supposed wrongs of previous administrations.

Fact Four: Democrats have also established the balanced budget idea that says basically that no new spending will occur without taking money away from old projects.

Fact Five: Amtrak and Passenger Rail are not as politically sexy as road, bridges and airport facilities.

There will be huge temptation to take money away from Passenger Rail sooner than from other infrastructure projects. We hope it doesn't put a revived intercity rail system on the back burner just when it was starting to cook.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Waking Up

It's a good thing that some in this country are waking up. This opinion piece from the Baltimore Sun does a pretty good job of repeating some of the things that we have been saying for years. It is good to see ordinary journalists waking up to the transportation crisis.

First, there is new technology, and many new ideas for new technology, for Passenger Rail and for freight rail. For our political establishment to suddenly mandate any one of the technologies that is still in the testing stage, and do that as a knee-jerk reaction to current events, is idiocy. But that is what Congress specializes in.

We don't think mandating PTC for all Passenger Rail for all lines with a target date somewhere in the future and no specifications for a particular system attached to the mandate is particularly idiotic. PTC in one form or another is certainly a probability. There are no particular hurdles to the engineering of PTC, other than making sure it works as needed and making sure that various systems are compatable. The latter is like getting a DVD player to read all the various types of disks that have been developed. Not a sure thing unless you buy the right player, but certainly not impossible.

What scares the hell out of us is that Congress would mandate a particular system built by a particular bidder and then squeeze the cash out of the deal so that the final system on line would be nothing like what could be developed if Congress would just leave the specs to the open market.

Second, with respect to suddenly upping the ante on train protection when a particularly deadly accident occurs, let's get real. All modes of transportation carry some risk, and the way to minimize that risk is "safety first," not after the accident occurs. There are technologies other than PTC that are either on line or being tested, such as electronic braking, that will make Passenger Rail safer. It will be by a combination of available tech, not by one system of signalling, that Passenger Rail and rail in general will be made safer. Congress probably will never wake up.

That's why Mister Trains urges all voters: Do not vote for the incumbent. Pick the independent, the green, the Naders or the Ron Pauls, but don't pick the incumbents.

But we always welcome it when somebody wakes up and smells the coffee with regards to our failing transportation policy and the value of Passenger Rail in particular.

© 2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Two Questions

Question One: Will there be any money left for Passenger Rail?

There is a need for a comprehensive United States transportation plan. We think this statement is unarguable. We also think that the only way such a plan can be implemented is through focused government subsidy for expanded Passenger Rail. This should move into the realm of public-private partnerships and finally, if successful, one day into the realm of pure private enterprise.

Right now, we are not moving in the direction of private enterprise. It wouldn't surprise us if there were a need - in a very short time - to nationalize the transportation system to keep it from melting down in the same way that AIG and the credit markets almost have, or almost did.

If we do that, the question comes as to how much money will be put into Passenger Rail. Or will the government just support new highways and airways and revamp air transport? In our opinion, we cannot do the latter without leaving our transportation systems vulnerable to attack. Only a balanced Passenger Rail component secures the system against such attack.

Question Two: Is Joe Biden pro rail just because he commutes on a train?

We think not. Biden has been critical of Amtrak, just as have many legislators, without offering a solution that demonstrates a comprehensive knowledge of the problem. We know lots of folks who bitch about the service but have no idea what it really takes to run a passenger train, let alone a railroad.

We do not see a presidential or vice-presidential candidate that can truly be called pro rail. Transportation won't become glamorous enough to catch the eye of the media, and hence of the voter, unless it is interrupted in the same way that failure of Fannie and Freddy would have interrupted the financial markets. (And please do not think we are advocating this. We are just saying.) It is a pity, but keep it in mind when you vote.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Precursor

It is too soon after the disasterous wreck of this past Friday to lay blame.

This is why we disagree with Metralink blaming the engineer. Again, it is too soon, and all sorts of things might have gone wrong. If experience is any teacher, it usually takes more than one thing to go wrong to cause such a disaster or contribute to it.

However, please pray for the injured and for the newly departed. These include the poor engineer of the Metralink train.

We would just like to ask our readers if, after prayer please, you would think about the future of Passenger Rail in this country. On its present course, most, if not all, passenger trains will be sharing the rails with the already overburdened freight transportation industry. And all will be running across barges and trucks during their journeys. Will both sides - passenger and freight - be safe? What do we - as a nation - need to do to keep this from being the precursor of even more such disasters as almost every one in the past has been?

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Breather

Now that we have vented about what - historically - has been done wrong. Let's take a breather and think about what might be done right.

Let's think about doubling. What part of Passenger Rail and Amtrak in particular should we fund to double the current status and how efficient would that be?

It is reported that Amtrak ridership is growing in spite of stagnent numbers of routes (with the exception of new, state funded routes) and stagnent amounts of passenger cars available to the fleet.

Doubling Route Miles

This would probably result in a better than doubling of passenger miles, but would require doubling or better the amount of equipment and the service facilities that go with more equipment. It would probably require more than doubling the payroll. Would it result in double the revenue? We doubt it.

Doubling Train Frequency

This would probably result in more passenger miles. It would not require twice the equipment and probably could be done without doubling employment in on-board crews. However, it would result in higher maintenance costs.

Doubling Track Speed
A necessity if train frequency is to be doubled. Better signalling would help with this, so this would probably require double the expenditures of host railroads on track and signals.

Doubling The Amount of Equipment
This would be a first step in doubling the availability of all passenger rail and must be done no matter what the cost.

Doubling The Size of Management
A real danger if we start pouring money into the system.

We start to see how interconnected is the network that we dismantled by nationalizing the Passenger Rail system. If Congress can come up with not double the money but enough money to double the system, it's really hard to say where it should go. It should not go into administration and/or management.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

No. 4 - Manufacturing and Industrial Design

What is it about North American freight railroading that makes it unique? It has a look and esthetic that is unlike railroading anywhere else in the world.

Passenger Rail in North America used to be the same way.

Actually, with most of Amtrak, it still is. But with commuter rail not so much any more. And we have probably long given up the possibility that the coming revival of intercity Passenger Rail will look anything more that Global, or worse, European.

The extraordinary hiatus in development of purely American intercity passenger trains has given the rest of the world a leg up. Worse, we will never know what the evolution of the passenger train would have been had we just continued to run them in a quantity and at a speed that kept them in the public eye and mind. For instance, the trend toward bi-levels started with the Santa Fe equipment might have been more incentive for eastern routes with increased clearances. Fifteen years ago, Amtrak still had to devise Superliner-like interiors to fit into single-level cars still having to squeeze through tunnels that couldn't clear Superliners.

With the increase in sizes, would we now have a third or fourth generation of Super-Superliners that make Passenger Rail even more fuel efficient than it already is with broken-down antiques? With a continuity in design and volume of use, would green locomotive builders be targeting passenger use instead of just freight? We will never know.

Had we been building North American passenger cars right along, the cost of including integrated, state-of-the-art amenities (the full range of electronic media, the best of human creature comforts) might not be as great as it is now for single, disgustingly small (by car count) orders that come only once every two decades.

We The People have done ourselves a great disservice in settling for Amtrak.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

No. 3 - Marginalization and Demonization

Third on Mister Trains' list of what the United States should have done to ensure that Passenger Rail was viable in the twenty-first century is a two-parter. Because they are two sides of the same coin, we have put them together; but they just as easily could have been No. 3 and No. 4.

Marginalization: The act of diminishing the importance of something by shoving it off to the margins of public consciousness. In our society today, the homeless, the harmless insane, the elderly poor, and Passenger Rail are all marginalized. When public policy evolved (or devolved) to support air and highway transport at the expense of rail, the policy makers found themselves with a nightmare of complaints from those who still viewed rail as the way to get from here to there. Train-offs were always made after loud public outcry from those who did not want to lose the passenger train.

So we dealt with it by convincing ourselves that those loudmouths were not riders but complainers and that they probably would not use the trains if they were left on the timetable. We then marginalized the communities that suffered and sometimes died because of the train-offs. We told ourselves that they were little hayseed towns that didn't have an economic future anyway.

During the process of marginalization, the media always presented the railroads as an archaic form of transportation. Likewise, successful European or Asian passenger trains were characterized as quaint and touristy. Not until our trains were long gone and the rest of the world's weren't did the media start showing us the "modern and space age" trains of France, Japan, and etc. Now the only experienced passenger car builders come from places other than the United States.

Demonization is an extreme form. Not only were railroads characterized as archaic and outdated, but they were placed in a blame situation for almost every possible annoyance that a transportation form could have. They were too hot, too cold, unsafe, they contributed to noise, pollution, they dispoiled the land, they were founded by robber barrons who never repaid their debt to society.

Trains retreated, they retrenched, and they kept a low profile. Today they do their jobs without the high advertising budgets of airlines and auto manufacturers. Throughout the world, however, railroads haul more passengers more miles and more comfortably than do today's airlines. But they don't do it here.

Mister Trains still gets comments from people who don't get it. From those who say rail is archaic. We bet that fewer people in the rest of the world feel that way. Where Passenger Rail was never marginalized or demonized, it flourishes.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

No. 2 - Regulation

We shall reach back a little further in time for the second item on our list of things we, the United States, should have done to foster a vital Passenger Rail system over time.

Regulation of the rail transportation system, in general, should have ended after the Robber Baron era. We are sure that the public of the late nineteenth century saw abuses by the railroads. The system of regulation that continued without mercy into the third quarter of the twentieth century abused the so-called private-sector railroads far more.

In today's economy, we are having a healthy discussion about the relative merits of free markets v. regulation. Movements are afoot to re-regulate rail and big oil and big drug and big any other business that is seen as making a buck off the Little Guy. But every dollar made in this country originates with the Little Guy.

By regulating the health out of the railroads, Government deprived the Little Guy of a vital form of transportation. The Little Guy no longer had the choice of taking a passenger train from Point A to Point B. Indirectly, Little Guy and Girl were deprived of truck-free highways good for a Sunday afternoon spin. We were deprived of the clean environment that trains foster and trucks do not. We were deprived of all of the potential advancements in rail service that many other parts of the world have or will have. Because even while regulating rail, and with the exception of national emergency (read World War), Government refused to run the trains. Via ridiculous yearly Congressional debates over funding Amtrak, Government still refuses to run the very corporate entity it set up to be the trains.

Would we have done better without regulation? You bet. First, the railroads that ran the passenger trains would have had a fairer chance to remain solvent. Though solvency in railroad terms is an interesting accounting theory probably served more by a whole book than by this blog, suffice it to say that a fully solvent corporation, one making money for its investors, is less likely to have to cut off marginal parts of the business.

Did we say marginal? Yes, because although Passenger Rail does not make money on a fully allocated cost basis, there was a time when it did make money on an avoidable cost basis. Basically that means that, if freight is solvent and paying all fixed and avoidable costs (trains, track and infrastructure), then Passenger Rail has only to pay avoidable costs to make money. What once was an accounting ploy by the railroads to show regulators how badly they needed to raise the rates became common practice and had everybody convinced that passengers were dragging freight down. (They were - but only because freight rates were regulated too heavily to make a profit from the combination of both freight and passenger service.)

Without regulation, passenger rates would also have risen with the economy. The railroad that wanted to lure pasengers from airlines and automobiles would have been free to hold the bargain-basement sale (at the expense of freight, which would have been paying its way in any case). Without regulation, freight would have been able to maintain its competitive edge with truck and barge, and been able to "do a deal" on rates where needed to snag the business. (As opposed to going to the government hat in hand to ask mother-may-I when a rate change seemed appropriate.)

In its own way, and with the help of the NIMBYs and environmentalists, Government still regulates the rails. Freight has been free to flow at market rates for decades, but building more infrastructure is a daunting task. So you won't see new rail routes blazed out of virgin territory any sooner than you will see new oil refineries in cities that never had them, or new oil rigs off the coast of California.

We are a nation of contortionists, my friends. Because we have been screwing ourselves for years.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

What We Should Have Done - No. 1

The decline of the passenger train in the United States did not come as a shock to anyone.

Just as it should be obvious to anyone today that the passenger airliner is on the ropes, so it was clear in the early 1950s that Passenger Rail would not survive the private passenger auto. The precipitous drop in rail travel numbers after World War II should have engendered a national transportation policy that included saving the trains.

The National Defense Highway system, subsequently the Interstate Highway system, was first and foremost supposed to be a device to enhance national security. Yes, troops and equipment could move fast by rail, and had moved faster by rail during the war than they had ever before. But our Government foresaw that war materiel could move faster on a system of limited-access highways.

Instead, what our Government should have done was establish a national defense transportation policy - a policy whereby private citizens, commerce and industry, and Government and the military could be assured that, no matter what the disaster, all would have access to the transportation necessary to their needs.

While establishing a route system for the highways, the Government should have been identifying essential passenger routes for all modes of transport and weighing the cost benefits against what would happen if one or more of those modes became undesirable or unuseable for reason of some national emergency.

Instead our money went into a distinctly inferior system of highways that ultimately saddled us with spiraling maintenance costs and accelerating depreciation precisely BECAUSE we did not establish balanced and well-considered policy towards other modes of transport. And it did this while using public money to effectively cut many communities off from both motor commerce and passenger rail. (Count the number of communities that any Interstate bypasses by looping around them, and see how many of these still have Amtrak service.)

The unheeded and nonetheless inevitable decline in the railroads' passenger service during the next 15 years certainly was not headed off. And Amtrak, instead of being well-considered policy, was instead a political stopgap. What happened with the creation of Amtrak - saving a few routes for political and popular expediency - was nothing like what should have been done a decade or two before. It was an emergency measure that did ALL modes of passenger transport a disservice. To say nothing of what it did to We The People.

Next time, No. 2.

© 2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com

Bleak Future

Don Phillips is an internationally recognized authority on transportation. He writes a monthly piece in Trains Magazine, and he has a doozy in the current (August 2008) issue.

Whether or not he is right in blaming President Bush for the transportation policies of the past 8 years - and Congress is at least as responsible - you have to listen to the truths he tells.

Truth No. 1 - U.S. transportation policy is a mess. We would go one step further and say we have none, but we guess that maintaining the status quo with a minimum of funding and no new taxes is policy. Unfortunately, the status quo just won't cut it. Highways are just about at the breaking point, the air traffic system is as archaic as the California Zephyr was when the first jet passenger aircraft were in diapers, and we need all the intercity rail routes we have just to move freight. In fact, there are some parts of the country where starting up Commuter Rail to take cars off the roads will just put trucks on the roads in their places. It is just that bad.

Truth No. 2 - The public is in the dark as to transportation policy and transportation options. We are not talking about deciding whether to fly or drive - we are talking about whether we will have the option of getting there at all. The public sees rail transportation as an anachronism. We can see that in some of the responses we get to our blog. The public is not disturbed by the lack of options until the public is stuck in truck traffic on the way to an important meeting. The public sensitivity is so dulled by the continual squandering of tax money that it doesn't give a fig any more.

Truth No. 3 - Our leaders, the President, Congress, and state governments, would just as soon keep it that way. That's because if the public knew of the options and opportunities for a first-class transportation system that have been passed by - by elected officials more concerned about their re-elections than about the Re-public - then we, the people, would probably throw the whole lot of 'em out and start over.

Truth No. 4 - Nothing will get better if we ignore it. The way Mister Trains sees it: Fuel prices will level out or continue to rise, but they won't fall significantly and will never again drop to as low a percentage of costs for goods and services as they once were. We are beyond the break point, and some transportation companies, particularly those with no hedge on energy costs and with customers who cannot withstand any significant increase in fuel surcharges, will have to merge or quit business. That is true across the board, and we have already seen the bankruptcies in the air transport business. Any failure in one mode will put more pressure on another, and hence more costs through excess loading, wear-and-tear, and penalties on missed deliveries.

The cascade of chaos is awesome to contemplate. Eventually, we can see a few truck lines carrying on over highways to which we cannot devote any money because use taxes have dropped. We can see trains parked in sidings for days or weeks waiting for capacity. If that happens, you will see empty shelves in all retail establishments, even Walmart. We can see air traffic cut to a half or a third of what it is today. We can see Amtrak unable to get a train from one city to another because of the congestion. And we can see idle commuter trains in idle terminals, because half the work force that needed them won't have jobs. This one could make the Great Depression look like a cakewalk.

Our Enemies - and they are Legion - are licking their chops.

Bleak? Yes! Possible to turn around? Maybe. Don Phillips doesn't think so, and he has a lot more credentials than Mister Trains.

The scariest part of all is this: Not one average Joe or Jill who reads this has a clue what opportunities have been missed - what could or should have prevented this Bleak Future.

Down the road, we will attempt to tell you, if the First Amendment holds out that long.

©2008 - C. A. Turek - mistertrains@gmail.com