jis1@mtgzz.UUCP (j.mukerji) (01/12/86)
Here is something new to discuss on net.railroad: What will the effect of the next budget proposal on Amtrak in particular and passenger rail service in the USA in general? The proposal again contains $0.00 for Amtrak which probably means that by the time it gets through the legislative process Amtrak will take another 10 to 20 percent cut in its subsidies. Does this mean that the Amtrak route structure will be severely curtailed in '87? Or is it a possibility that alternative sources of financing the subsidy gap will be found? Or will Amtrak be able to put revolutionary new train operation methods in place to cut their expenses sufficiently. Here are some of my guesses about the questions posed above: (i) It would be unfortunate if the route structure were drastically trimmed, but the maintenance of the current route structure would depend on what the answers to the next two questions turn out to be. (ii) I think the states that get the most out of Amtrak will have to start coughing up more money if Amtrak really means something to them. The states that immediately come to my mind are: New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Virginia, Montana, Kansas, Missouri, N. Dakota, California, Oregon and Washington. How much? Perhaps as much as is required to cover 30 to 50 percent of the shortfall. (iii) Amtrak really has a long way to go in cutting its operating costs. In all my train travel experiences in various countries of the world, some of which run a much better passenger rail service than Amtrak, I have found Amtrak trains to be the most highly staffed. Moreover, half the people who man these trains do not ever seem to do anything constructive. Occasionally they do destructive things like getting into needless arguments with passengers. Amtrak should explore the possibility of paring down on the number of people that staff the trains. Amtrak could also try contracting out the operation of the Amcafes to McDonalds or Burger King, who are likely to do a better job of running them than Amtrak, at less expense to Amtrak. Well, that is all that comes to my mind at present. I think Amtrak is a wonderful idea, and I have enjoyed many many train trips on Amtrak. But I also think that it is only fair to ask Amtrak to cut its operating costs as much as possible, or look for alternative less visible subsidies, like the ones enjoyed by the Airlines and the Trucking industry. Comments? Jishnu Mukerji AT&T Information Systems Labs Middletown NJ mtgzz!jis1
tanner@ki4pv.UUCP (Tanner Andrews) (01/15/86)
One might get the impression that money was going to rain from heaven onto amtrak from their handling of express. The handling of express (packages w/o people) is, essentially, found money. They have, however, started to refuse to accept express at some stations. Ours (DeLand, city code DLD) is one of them. The agent received notice that, effective 01-Jan-86, he is not to accept outgoing express. He is still here to sell tickets (and sells plenty!) and handle baggage. The train still carries baggage cars (two: from TPA and MIA). Thus, no money is saved by refusing to handle express shipments from this station. I have written (address shewn below) but have, to date, received no explanation. I have also, to date, not seen the source from which money is to rain upon them. The address of the person in charge (feel free to write) is: Susan Payne, Director of Amtrak Express, 400 N. Capitol St. NW, Washington, DC 20001. If anyone writes, and gets a reasonable-sounding explanation, please feel free to pass the gist along to me at this electronic address. -- <std dsclm, copies upon request> Tanner Andrews, KI4PV uucp: ...!decvax!ucf-cs!ki4pv!tanner