# 1.5 billion for Amtrak in stimulus with daily service mandate (Passed in Congress)



## Amtrakfflyer (Feb 10, 2021)

Being marked up today in the House. Not surprisingly unfortunately some GOP members are fighting it as ideologues or under the guise of fiscal conservatism. Amazing how their tune changes when they are the minority.
This guy specifically wants to zero funding completely as per RPA.


Ask them to *oppose the amendment offered by Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA),* which would entirely strip out all funding and restoration mandates for Amtrak.


----------



## Steve4031 (Feb 10, 2021)

I called my democratic representative already. When do they require daily service to be return?


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Feb 10, 2021)

Steve4031 said:


> I called my democratic representative already. When do they require daily service to be return?



from RPA 2/10/21
*Details: S. Con. Res. 5 - TITLE VII – Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure*

Amtrak - $1.5 billion
NEC - $820,388,160
National Network - $679,622,840
Not less than $165,926,000 from the combined amounts of the NEC and National Network shall be used to restore all long-distance service in effect as of July 1, 2020, and to recall all workers put on furlough on or after October 1, 2020. Restoration and re-employment to occur *within 90 days of enactment.*
Not less than $109,805,000 from the combined amounts of the NEC and National Network shall be used in lieu of capital payments that the state supported routes and commuter authorities were required to pay.
$174,850,000 from the National Network funds shall be used by Amtrak to offset amounts required to be paid by States for covered State-supported routes.

Mass Transit - $30 billion
Funds shall be used to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus; includes eligibility for operating expenses to prevent layoffs and avoid cuts to service.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 10, 2021)

Assuming things go fairly smoothly, any idea on the timeframe for getting this signed into law?


----------



## Cal (Feb 10, 2021)

Is it looking good for Amtrak so far? And would traditional dining be under "restoration"...


----------



## zephyr17 (Feb 10, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Assuming things go fairly smoothly, any idea on the timeframe for getting this signed into law?


Well, it is an amendment to to big COVID relief package that the President and Democratic leadership want to move quickly. It will likely be done under budget reconciliation rules and so not subject to filibuster in the Senate. Given those circumstances, my guesstimate would be the first half of March.


----------



## NSC1109 (Feb 10, 2021)

I wish the House would’ve done this sooner so it was ready for the new Admin in January...it would’ve significantly changed my career plans.


----------



## MARC Rider (Feb 10, 2021)

NSC1109 said:


> I wish the House would’ve done this sooner so it was ready for the new Admin in January...it would’ve significantly changed my career plans.


Welcome to the world of Washington.  That's just the way government process works, even things for which there is general agreement take time. First they had to pass the Budget Resolution. But then they need to actually appropriate the money. Plus they need to write an extremely complicated bill that is legally sound and doesn't have any unwanted surprises in it. The new administration has only been in office for 3 weeks and has had to spin up everything from scratch. In any event, the House wasn't in a position to do anything until they had the support of the new president and they had an idea of what the Senate was going to be like. The new Congress has barely been organized. (The Majority party didn't really become the Majority party until three new senators were sworn in after the presidential inauguration, and then the former Majority played political games to slow the reorganization of the Senate under the new Majority.) They also have a lot of other work, including confirming the new president's appointments and the impeachment trial. Actually, I think they're working on this pretty quickly, given the circumstances.


----------



## NSC1109 (Feb 10, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> Welcome to the world of Washington.  That's just the way government process works, even things for which there is general agreement take time. First they had to pass the Budget Resolution. But then they need to actually appropriate the money. Plus they need to write an extremely complicated bill that is legally sound and doesn't have any unwanted surprises in it. The new administration has only been in office for 3 weeks and has had to spin up everything from scratch. In any event, the House wasn't in a position to do anything until they had the support of the new president and they had an idea of what the Senate was going to be like. The new Congress has barely been organized. (The Majority party didn't really become the Majority party until three new senators were sworn in after the presidential inauguration, and then the former Majority played political games to slow the reorganization of the Senate under the new Majority.) They also have a lot of other work, including confirming the new president's appointments and the impeachment trial. Actually, I think they're working on this pretty quickly, given the circumstances.



I don’t disagree (and as an avid West Wing fan I’d like to think I’ve learned a decent amount of how things work in DC) but had this happened sooner, I probably wouldn’t have accepted with a major Class I and waited to see if Amtrak was going to start hiring conductors again.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Feb 10, 2021)

Passed the committee today. On to the full House and Senate now.


----------



## Cal (Feb 10, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> Passed the committee today. On to the full House and Senate now.


Is it looking good?


----------



## WWW (Feb 10, 2021)

FROM: Rail Passengers Association Forum


 

 *Association News*

 

 

 *Service Restoration Takes Big Leap Forward*

Restoration of Amtrak service to pre-pandemic levels took an important step forward today with passage of a pandemic relief bill out of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The bill includes $1.5 billion for Amtrak—along with Congressional mandates to restore daily service on the long-distance routes and bring back employees furloughed due to COVID-19—and $30 billion for transit.

These funds will be essential to restoring the trains we all count on. For long-distance trains, Amtrak is required to bring back daily service within 90 days of the passage of the bill into law.

Prior to passage, passengers had to overcome two anti-Amtrak amendments. Rail Passengers asked our members to call their members of congress, and YOU DELIVERED!

 
Rep. Scott Perry's (R-PA) amendment to eliminate all funding for Amtrak was *DEFEATED*! Thanks to everyone who reached out to their Rep on the T&I Committee to stand up for passengers!
 
Rep. Rick Crawford (R-AR), Ranking Member of the Rail Subcommittee, *agreed to withdraw* his amendment transferring Amtrak funds to a highway-rail grade crossings program after Chairman DeFazio agreed to work with him on the issue in the upcoming reauthorization bill.
From here, the full House will have to advance the coronavirus legislation, and the Senate will have to take up its counterpart version. *If you haven’t had the chance, now is the perfect time to reach out to your elected officials and encourage them to pass this bill into law.*






*Happening Now *


* House T&I Advances Bill to Restore Service *







* February 10, 2021 *
Restoration of Amtrak service to pre-pandemic levels took an important step forward today with passage of a pandemic relief bill out of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The bill includes $1.5 billion for Amtrak—along with Congressional mandates to restore daily service on the long-distance routes and bring back employees furloughed due to COVID-19—and $30 billion for transit. 








Restoration of Amtrak service to pre-pandemic levels took an important step forward today with passage of a pandemic relief bill out of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The bill includes $1.5 billion for Amtrak—along with Congressional mandates to restore daily service on the long-distance routes and bring back employees furloughed due to COVID-19—and $30 billion for transit.
These funds will be essential to restoring the trains we all count on. For long-distance trains, Amtrak is required to bring back daily service within 90 days of the passage of the bill into law.
Prior to passage, passengers had to overcome two anti-Amtrak amendments. Rail Passengers asked our members to call their members of congress, and YOU DELIVERED!

 
Rep. Scott Perry's (R-PA) amendment to eliminate all funding for Amtrak was DEFEATED! Thanks to everyone who reached out to their Rep on the T&I Committee to stand up for passengers!
 
Rep. Rick Crawford. (R-AR), Ranking Member of the Rail Subcommittee, agreed to withdraw his amendment transferring Amtrak funds to a highway-rail grade crossings program after Chairman DeFazio agreed to work with him on the issue in reauthorization.

From here, the full House will have to advance the coronavirus legislation, and the Senate will have to take up its counterpart version. *If you haven’t had the chance, now is the perfect time to reach out to your elected officials and encourage them to pass this bill into law. *


----------



## Dakota 400 (Feb 11, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> Passed the committee today. On to the full House and Senate now.



I am impressed that a congressional committee could do its work that quickly. Who's the Chairperson of the Committee? Someone who must have been "cracking the whip".


----------



## McIntyre2K7 (Feb 11, 2021)

Dakota 400 said:


> I am impressed that a congressional committee could do its work that quickly. Who's the Chairperson of the Committee? Someone who must have been "cracking the whip".




Peter A. DeFazio is the chairperson. I had the meeting on in the background yesterday while I was working. I kept hearing "no's" so I thought it didn't pass. Little did I know that "no's" were FOR Amtrak and not against.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Feb 11, 2021)

McIntyre2K7 said:


> Peter A. DeFazio is the chairperson. I had the meeting in the background yesterday while I was working. I kept hearing "no's" so I thought it didn't pass. Little did I know that "no's" were FOR Amtrak and not against.



Thanks for responding. Checking on him, he has been a member of the House since 1987. He knows "where the bodies are buried" and knows "the ropes". Being the Dean of the Oregon Congressional delegation, he knows how to get "things done". That's what this country--regardless of one's political position may be--truly needs to happen.


----------



## zephyr17 (Feb 11, 2021)

It is pretty much what Flynn had asked for, plus the Democratic relief proposal before the election which passed the House before being ignored in the Senate, had a funding proposal to restore daily service. They had the language for the amendment teed up and ready to go


----------



## Willbridge (Feb 11, 2021)

Dakota 400 said:


> Thanks for responding. Checking on him, he has been a member of the House since 1987. He knows "where the bodies are buried" and knows "the ropes". Being the Dean of the Oregon Congressional delegation, he knows how to get "things done". That's what this country--regardless of one's political position may be--truly needs to happen.


DeFazio represents Albany and Eugene as well as some Thruway stops so I'm sure that he has heard about the service cutbacks,


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 12, 2021)

Does this appropriation and the daily service mandate have any impact on state sponsored service? Or is that a completely separate thing?


----------



## jis (Feb 12, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Does this appropriation and the daily service mandate have any impact on state sponsored service? Or is that a completely separate thing?


It has money to fund all state supported service through the end of this fiscal year, thus reducing the financial burden of the states.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 12, 2021)

jis said:


> It has money to fund all state supported service through the end of this fiscal year, thus reducing the financial burden of the states.


Interesting. I wonder what will happen if a state does not want the service. I am thinking of the Vermonter, in particular.


----------



## jis (Feb 12, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Interesting. I wonder what will happen if a state does not want the service. I am thinking of the Vermonter, in particular.


Then the Feds will simply save the money. The states have to bill the Feds for service provided on a quarterly or some such basis as far as I can tell. Unless Vermont just lies to the feds to try to pocket the money that money will stay with the Feds for deployment elsewhere.


----------



## McIntyre2K7 (Feb 12, 2021)

jis said:


> Then the Feds will simply save the money. The states have to bill the Feds for service provided on a quarterly or some such basis as far as I can tell. Unless Vermont just lies to the feds to try to pocket the money that money will stay with the Feds for deployment elsewhere.



Can Florida take the funds and trainsets to start on that Tampa/Orlando/Jacksonville route haha? I would be nice to take a day trip to Orlando once Covid is over and go to the theme parks. The timing of the Silver Star into Orlando doesn't work and sometimes I don't feel like driving down I-4.


----------



## jis (Feb 12, 2021)

McIntyre2K7 said:


> Can Florida take the funds and trainsets to start on that Tampa/Orlando/Jacksonville route haha? I would be nice to take a day trip to Orlando once Covid is over and go to the theme parks. The timing of the Silver Star into Orlando doesn't work and sometimes I don't feel like driving down I-4.


No. This fund is for restoring and maintaining existing service that was suspended or otherwise affected because of the pandemic. Not for starting new service.


----------



## Hepcat66 (Feb 12, 2021)

Dakota 400 said:


> Thanks for responding. Checking on him, he has been a member of the House since 1987. He knows "where the bodies are buried" and knows "the ropes". Being the Dean of the Oregon Congressional delegation, he knows how to get "things done". That's what this country--regardless of one's political position may be--truly needs to happen.


I think Defazio is a good guy and was my Rep while I lived in Eugene for many years. His opposition always brings in lots of outside $ during his elections. His '63 Dodge Dart was legendary.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Feb 12, 2021)

Not nearly as bipartisan as it’s been the last few years. According to RPA today, 22 of 30Republicans voted YES on the amendment to zero out ALL Amtrak funding in the bill. All Dems voted in favor of Amtrak.


----------



## neroden (Feb 12, 2021)

Cal said:


> Is it looking good?


It'll pass the House easily and quickly. In the Senate, it has to get through committees again. Biden is cracking the whip to get the Senate to move quickly, as is Majority Leader Schumer, but we could still see either delays or attempts to attack Amtrak in the Senate markup process. I don't expect either, though. Should pass sometime in late February or early March I'd guess.


----------



## Cal (Feb 12, 2021)

neroden said:


> It'll pass the House easily and quickly. In the Senate, it has to get through committees again. Biden is cracking the whip to get the Senate to move quickly, as is Majority Leader Schumer, but we could still see either delays or attempts to attack Amtrak in the Senate markup process. I don't expect either, though. Should pass sometime in late February or early March I'd guess.


Okay. Thanks


----------



## joelkfla (Feb 13, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> Not nearly as bipartisan as it’s been the last few years.


Nothing is. If the opposite party supports it, it must be evil. Red is red, and blue is blue, and never the twain shall meet.


----------



## WWW (Feb 13, 2021)

And then there is "PURPLE" - I am not sure how that is blended partisanship.
In Minnesota - the Executive branch is Democrat - as well as the House - the State Senate is Republican.
Currently have issues with Light-Rail in the western suburbs - trying to resurrect the North Star service to Duluth
and add Amtrak Chicago trip.


----------



## zephyr17 (Feb 13, 2021)

Under PRIIA a Duluth train would have to be funded by Minnesota and a Chicago train by Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Illinois (though any single state could fund whole cost if it wanted).

Looks like Amtrak wants the 750 mile limit changed or lifted in the next authorization, but that hasn't happened yet.


----------



## IndyLions (Feb 13, 2021)

I’ll have to admit that I am a little bit torn on the return of a full schedule.

First, the current LD schedule is garbage. Cutting back during the pandemic makes perfect sense, but the current schedule makes zero sense. I could list examples, but we all know them.

To me, what makes more sense is a “sensible” schedule that is probably about 75% of normal. Combining trains where possible, making sure there are daily connections where they need to be, etc. That includes state services.

Where I would be seeking to spend my money right now if I were Amtrak is in maintenance of my rolling stock, employee training, planning and lobbying for new corridor services, evaluating higher quality economically viable food services, etc.

I understand the stimulus money is really all about bringing employees back to work as much as anything, and I’m not against that.

It just seems that Amtrak’s biggest need right now is to get their house in order and “up their game” so they can be a more relevant, effective travel option in the future. Hopefully, they ARE doing those things in the background and we just don’t know it. Flynn’s open letter was certainly encouraging, at least to me.


----------



## jiml (Feb 13, 2021)

IndyLions said:


> I’ll have to admit that I am a little bit torn on the return of a full schedule.
> 
> First, the current LD schedule is garbage. Cutting back during the pandemic makes perfect sense, but the current schedule makes zero sense. I could list examples, but we all know them.
> 
> ...


Not a bad idea at all, but would the wording of the legislation permit this? If the money was requested specifically to restore pre-pandemic service line item by line item does it have to be used that way?


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Feb 13, 2021)

Looking forward it won’t happen overnight, the legislation says service must be restored within 90 days of passing. Assuming that’s in March reservations would be taken for service beginning in June (start of summer). The vaccines seem to be promising new evidence is showing that vaccinated people probably can’t spread the virus either. Obviously time will tell. But getting Amtrak set up to have a summer season is in my opinion the right thing to do. Sleeper travel for those who can afford it, is the safest transportation out there.


----------



## PaTrainFan (Feb 13, 2021)

IndyLions said:


> I’ll have to admit that I am a little bit torn on the return of a full schedule.
> 
> First, the current LD schedule is garbage. Cutting back during the pandemic makes perfect sense, but the current schedule makes zero sense. I could list examples, but we all know them.
> 
> ...



Couldn't agree more. I would like to think with all the idled equipment they are doing at least light maintenance on the rolling stock to get it up to snuff, but probably not. Heavy overhauls probably not practical and not in the budget. But, yes, there's much they could be doing to improve service during the downtime. Just hope that the recalled workers don't return in foul moods.


----------



## jis (Feb 13, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> The vaccines seem to be promising new evidence is showing that vaccinated people probably can’t spread the virus either.


Vaccinated people who get infected can spread the virus, and vaccinated people can get infected. None of the vaccines have 100% efficacy. It is just that a vaccinated person is less likely to get infected than an unvaccinated one.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Feb 13, 2021)

Things are trending more and more positive on vaccinations and their implications however. Time will tell.



https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2021-02-12/vaccinated-covid-19-patients-appear-less-contagious-arthritis-drug-in-spotlight


----------



## railiner (Feb 13, 2021)

jis said:


> Vaccinated people who get infected can spread the virus, and vaccinated people can get infected. None of the vaccines have 100% efficacy. It is just that a vaccinated person is less likely to get infected than an unvaccinated one.


And like the flu vaccine, if you are infected, your symptoms will likely be much milder...


----------



## jis (Feb 13, 2021)

railiner said:


> And like the flu vaccine, if you are infected, your symptoms will likely be much milder...


Continuing discussion of COVID vaccine issues posted at: https://www.amtraktrains.com/thread...-general-discussion.76916/page-84#post-876601


----------



## Cal (Feb 13, 2021)

PaTrainFan said:


> Couldn't agree more. I would like to think with all the idled equipment they are doing at least light maintenance on the rolling stock to get it up to snuff, but probably not. Heavy overhauls probably not practical and not in the budget. But, yes, there's much they could be doing to improve service during the downtime. Just hope that the recalled workers don't return in foul moods.


Is there any chance that we will see Superliners overhauled to match the interior of Viewliner 2s? Maybe not the sink, but the finishes, carpet, seats, tray table, etc.


----------



## zephyr17 (Feb 13, 2021)

Cal said:


> Is there any chance that we will see Superliners overhauled to match the interior of Viewliner 2s? Maybe not the sink, but the finishes, carpet, seats, tray table, etc.


Well, they pretty much matched the Viewliner I's upholstery in the roomettes back in the 90s, replacing the Superliner I's original Retinal Burn Orange with blue, so I'd say there is a reasonable chance.


----------



## me_little_me (Feb 13, 2021)

zephyr17 said:


> Well, they pretty much matched the Viewliner I's upholstery in the roomettes back in the 90s, replacing the Superliner I's original Retinal Burn Orange with blue, so I'd say there is a reasonable chance.


New carpeting every 30 years whether it needs it or not? Whoo!


----------



## IndyLions (Feb 13, 2021)

Cal said:


> Is there any chance that we will see Superliners overhauled to match the interior of Viewliner 2s? Maybe not the sink, but the finishes, carpet, seats, tray table, etc.



My fearless prediction with absolutely no inside knowledge or general soothsaying ability whatsoever:
We will see a complete overhaul of at least a portion of the Superliner equipment for premium services on a route or two out west.


----------



## zephyr17 (Feb 13, 2021)

me_little_me said:


> New carpeting every 30 years whether it needs it or not? Whoo!


If you want peace of mind traveling Amtrak, never, ever look underneath roomette seats. 30 years of accumulated...whatever. Home of the Dust Godzillas.


----------



## Cal (Feb 13, 2021)

IndyLions said:


> My fearless prediction with absolutely no inside knowledge or general soothsaying ability whatsoever:
> We will see a complete overhaul of at least a portion of the Superliner equipment for premium services on a route or two out west.


Hoping so...


----------



## jis (Feb 13, 2021)

IndyLions said:


> My fearless prediction with absolutely no inside knowledge or general soothsaying ability whatsoever:
> We will see a complete overhaul of at least a portion of the Superliner equipment for premium services on a route or two out west.


Most likely it will be the Superliner IIs first since they have never seen a good complete refurbishment. Superliner Is went through a cycle of that when they got the wood paneling stuff IIRC.


----------



## Cal (Feb 13, 2021)

jis said:


> Most likely it will be the Superliner IIs first since they have never seen a good complete refurbishment. Superliner Is went through a cycle of that when they got the wood paneling stuff IIRC.


I just want to see the Superliner's be upgraded to match as closely as possible to the Viewliner II's. I don't know if you've seen a good pictures/video of it, or been in it. I personally hadn't before yesterday. And it is so much nicer.. Just having the better tray table, ugpraded seats, and the better temperature system (if it works well) would be a big upgrade. The finishes also are much more appealing.


----------



## Barb Stout (Feb 13, 2021)

Cal said:


> I just want to see the Superliner's be upgraded to match as closely as possible to the Viewliner II's. I don't know if you've seen a good pictures/video of it, or been in it. I personally hadn't before yesterday. And it is so much nicer.. Just having the better tray table, ugpraded seats, and the better temperature system (if it works well) would be a big upgrade. The finishes also are much more appealing.


Which Viewliner II were you on yesterday?


----------



## Cal (Feb 13, 2021)

Barb Stout said:


> Which Viewliner II were you on yesterday?


Lol, I haven't been in one yet. But I've seen pictures and videos and they simply look much nicer. Much more appealing


----------



## lordsigma (Feb 14, 2021)

I believe there was an Amtrak town hall earlier this week. While I was of course not there I heard “through the grapevine” that management mentioned that long distance bookings for the summer are greater than projected. June 1 is the date management apparently was saying their target is for daily service restoration.


----------



## Barb Stout (Feb 14, 2021)

jis said:


> Vaccinated people who get infected can spread the virus, and vaccinated people can get infected. None of the vaccines have 100% efficacy. It is just that a vaccinated person is less likely to get infected than an unvaccinated one.


I don't understand why some immunologists will say that vaccinated people can still spread the virus. When a person's immune system has been activated against a particular virus, then that virus is less likely to get into cells where they have to be in order to replicate. Even if they still do get into a few cells, the immune system, both innate and induced, have many ways of detecting those infected cells and eliminating them. Plus, both the induced and innate immune systems engage in a lot of what cell biologists call crosstalk in order to ramp up the other side (induced vs innate host defenses) or also to calm the other side down. Anyways, the end result is virus replication is far, far less in a vaccinated person compared to an unvaccinated person and where replication goes, so does transmission from one person to another.


----------



## me_little_me (Feb 14, 2021)

Barb Stout said:


> I don't understand why some immunologists will say that vaccinated people can still spread the virus. When a person's immune system has been activated against a particular virus, then that virus is less likely to get into cells where they have to be in order to replicate. Even if they still do get into a few cells, the immune system, both innate and induced, have many ways of detecting those infected cells and eliminating them. Plus, both the induced and innate immune systems engage in a lot of what cell biologists call crosstalk in order to ramp up the other side (induced vs innate host defenses) or also to calm the other side down. Anyways, the end result is virus replication is far, far less in a vaccinated person compared to an unvaccinated person and where replication goes, so does transmission from one person to another.


Read the article quoted in this post:




__





Are you scared to take the train now?


No, I'm not afraid and I'm confident I'll be vaccinated by this summer.




www.amtraktrains.com


----------



## Cal (Feb 14, 2021)

lordsigma said:


> I believe there was an Amtrak town hall earlier this week. While I was of course not there I heard “through the grapevine” that management mentioned that long distance bookings for the summer are greater than projected. June 1 is the date management apparently was saying their target is for daily service restoration.


That is great.


----------



## jis (Feb 15, 2021)

Barb Stout said:


> I don't understand why some immunologists will say that vaccinated people can still spread the virus. When a person's immune system has been activated against a particular virus, then that virus is less likely to get into cells where they have to be in order to replicate. Even if they still do get into a few cells, the immune system, both innate and induced, have many ways of detecting those infected cells and eliminating them. Plus, both the induced and innate immune systems engage in a lot of what cell biologists call crosstalk in order to ramp up the other side (induced vs innate host defenses) or also to calm the other side down. Anyways, the end result is virus replication is far, far less in a vaccinated person compared to an unvaccinated person and where replication goes, so does transmission from one person to another.


Responding to this in the COVID Pandemic Generic thread instead of hijacking this thread further....



https://www.amtraktrains.com/threads/covid-19-coronavirus-pandemic-general-discussion.76916/page-84#post-876800


----------



## Barb Stout (Feb 15, 2021)

jis said:


> I think the issue is that there are still a few people whose immune system is not adequately activated even after being vaccinated. They are few and far between and they still do exist, and they could get infected and spread. These are the ones that are eventually supposed to be protected by herd immunity, if the herd chooses to immunize itself adequately that is, which is another thing that is not clear at present.
> 
> The other thing that is not known for sure is what proportion of vaccinated people are getting asymptomatic infections and spreading, since this has not been specifically measured in all the trials. The focus has been on preventing severe symptoms. Additional trials are needed to quantify how good the vaccinations are in preventing transmission. It is quite certain that a 95% vaccine should be reducing transmission drastically, but the exact numbers are yet to be experimentally confirmed.


I suppose that the ones who say that the effect of vaccination on transmission is unknown are being conservative for those apparently substantial amount of people for whom things have to be black and white; grey not being big part of their reality.


----------



## jis (Feb 15, 2021)

Barb Stout said:


> I suppose that the ones who say that the effect of vaccination on transmission is unknown are being conservative for those apparently substantial amount of people for whom things have to be black and white; grey not being big part of their reality.


I guess my attempt to move this discussion out of an Amtrak funding thread to a COVID thread failed. Sigh!


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Feb 15, 2021)

McIntyre2K7 said:


> Peter A. DeFazio is the chairperson. I had the meeting on in the background yesterday while I was working. I kept hearing "no's" so I thought it didn't pass. Little did I know that "no's" were FOR Amtrak and not against.


This is certainly 'music' to my well 'trained' ears  

I pay my taxes... now gimme back the passenger rail service!

Sorry to be so pushy and greedy for more trains... but now let's expand the system! Let's extend the Sunset back to Orlando; let's get HS up and running; let's bring back full meal service, ooooh so greedy for more train service!


----------



## jis (Feb 15, 2021)

20th Century Rider said:


> This is certainly 'music' to my well 'trained' ears
> 
> I pay my taxes... now gimme back the passenger rail service!
> 
> Sorry to be so pushy and greedy for more trains... but now let's expand the system! Let's extend the Sunset back to Orlando; let's get HS up and running; let's bring back full meal service, ooooh so greedy for more train service!


Wrong thread for discussing expansion.  This $1.5 billion is merely for restoring service and recalling employees from furlough, and is funding to keep the system together until the end of this fiscal year. Any expansion discussion really belongs to the Infrastructure Bill which is just starting to be discussed, and then the 2022 fiscal Appropriation bill.





__





2021 Infrastructure Bill


Discussions are starting in right earnest for the 2021 Infrastructure Bill, the much promised bill that might contain many goodies for passenger rail and Amtrak https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/538419-biden-meets-with-bipartisan-senators-to-discuss-potential




www.amtraktrains.com


----------



## Abe26 (Feb 15, 2021)

IndyLions said:


> I’ll have to admit that I am a little bit torn on the return of a full schedule.
> 
> First, the current LD schedule is garbage. Cutting back during the pandemic makes perfect sense, but the current schedule makes zero sense. I could list examples, but we all know them.
> 
> ...


 Couldn’t agree more


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Feb 15, 2021)

jis said:


> Wrong thread for discussing expansion.  This $1.5 billion is merely for restoring service and recalling employees from furlough, and is funding to keep the system together until the end of this fiscal year. Any expansion discussion really belongs to the Infrastructure Bill which is just starting to be discussed, and then the 2022 fiscal Appropriation bill.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Tongue and cheek euphoric humor that at least we are getting back to square one. We're pretty much united on our hopes and wishes for the future of rail travel... and I'm sure that thread will find enthusiastic discussion.


----------



## Cal (Feb 15, 2021)

jis said:


> I guess my attempt to move this discussion out of an Amtrak funding thread to a COVID thread failed. Sigh!


Yes, it did.


----------



## Qapla (Feb 15, 2021)

20th Century Rider said:


> let's get *HS* up and *running*



 What does Amtrak funding have to do with *H*igh *S*chool sports?


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Feb 15, 2021)

Qapla said:


> What does Amtrak funding have to do with *H*igh *S*chool sports?


High Speed Rail. "Let's get HS up and running."








High-Speed Rail in the U.S. Remains Elusive: Illinois Shows Why


A $2 billion Chicago-St. Louis project will offer a top speed of just 110 mph and shave an hour off the trip. Few people are expected to use it. One problem: having to share the track with freight railroads.




www.wsj.com


----------



## Qapla (Feb 15, 2021)

That map still needs something from Chicago to Atlanta


----------



## me_little_me (Feb 15, 2021)

Qapla said:


> That map still needs something from Chicago to Atlanta


Chicago to Atlanta; Nasheville to Atlanta; and Atlanta to NYP. Everything else can wait.


----------



## Cal (Feb 15, 2021)

me_little_me said:


> Chicago to Atlanta; Nasheville to Atlanta; and Atlanta to NYP. Everything else can wait.


I wish there was a Florida-Chicago train that went through those both, then connects with the CONO. 


And ofc the desert wind, pioneer, etc


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Feb 15, 2021)

Cal said:


> I wish there was a Florida-Chicago train that went through those both, then connects with the CONO.
> 
> 
> And ofc the desert wind, pioneer, etc


So... let's all think positive with a pro Amtrak government... vaccines being rolled out... and a lot of optimism!


----------



## west point (Feb 15, 2021)

Nothing could be done in congress until Jan3rd due to it being a new congress. All 2020 bills not passed or not signed died on Jan 1. The funds as I understand is only for restored service until Oct 1st when the new fiscal year for all government including Amtrak will need a new appropriation.


----------



## Cal (Feb 16, 2021)

20th Century Rider said:


> So... let's all think positive with a pro Amtrak government... vaccines being rolled out... and a lot of optimism!
> 
> View attachment 20705


How long till these are rolled out? May be on the east coast in July and I really want to know if I should book on the regional or acela..


----------



## Cal (Feb 24, 2021)

Updates on the mandate?


----------



## jis (Feb 24, 2021)

Cal said:


> Updates on the mandate?


The bill is slowly making its way through Congress.


----------



## Cal (Feb 24, 2021)

jis said:


> The bill is slowly making its way through Congress.


Alright


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Feb 24, 2021)

Cal said:


> How long till these are rolled out? May be on the east coast in July and I really want to know if I should book on the regional or acela..


Don't know. I called today and hang up after over an hour of elevator music and announcements made in many different languages. But I was able to sign up online. Hmmm... patience patience... no choice... but at the same time choosing to take all precautions I can.

Because I want to survive.

And because I consider myself a survivor.

Of options available... this is my well chosen path.


----------



## MARC Rider (Feb 24, 2021)

My understanding is that this Covid Relief Bill needs to be a done deal (i.e. passed by Congress, signed by the President) by the middle of March so that the extension in unemployment benefits doesn't suffer another hiatus. This is a top priority of congressional leaders to get done, and, despite some semi-sensationalist press reports that the Democrats are in disarray and arguing over stuff, the issues will be solved and the bill passed on time.


----------



## MIrailfan (Feb 25, 2021)

Why shoud govt fundamtrak? Thats anunfair advantageover the airlines.


----------



## Cal (Feb 25, 2021)

MIRAILFAN said:


> Why shoud govt fundamtrak? Thats anunfair advantageover the airlines.


I believe the airlines are getting plenty of funds..


----------



## MIrailfan (Feb 25, 2021)

yes thats called fares.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Feb 25, 2021)

MIRAILFAN said:


> Why shoud govt fundamtrak? Thats anunfair advantageover the airlines.


Amtrak gets very little from the government compared to what airlines & buses get from the government. Take a look at the bill waiting to be passed.


----------



## IndyLions (Feb 25, 2021)

MIRAILFAN said:


> yes thats called fares.


While they do collect airport fees – there are all kinds of costs that are not airline funded. Here’s just one illustration of what the government paid for the FAA in its 2019 budget.

2019 FAA Funding article

Of course, there’s also the 2020 stimulus. That’s a more obvious thing you can see in black-and-white.


----------



## PaTrainFan (Feb 25, 2021)

The new House stimulus bill includes $26 billion for airlines, airports and manufacturers. That's on top of the several billion they have received previously. Compartively speaking, Amtrak has table scraps.


----------



## Acela150 (Feb 25, 2021)

MIRAILFAN said:


> Why shoud govt fundamtrak? Thats anunfair advantageover the airlines.



Because ALL forms of transportation NEED a subsidy!! Operating, Capital, or BOTH! Airlines, Trucks, Highways, etc. NEED a subsidy! 

It should also be noted that Amtrak is such a minuscule part of the budget compared to other things that always gets "called out". 

The Europeans, Japanese, and Chinese give the subsidy to their High Speed Rail without any hesitation. America has always been reluctant to do so.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 25, 2021)

AmtrakBlue said:


> Amtrak gets very little from the government compared to what airlines & buses get from the government. Take a look at the bill waiting to be passed.


I highly doubt this is true on a per-passenger or per-mile-traveled basis. At least as far as the airlines go.


----------



## Acela150 (Feb 25, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> I highly doubt this is true on a per-passenger or per-mile-traveled basis. At least as far as the airlines go.



Does it really matter?


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 25, 2021)

Acela150 said:


> Does it really matter?


Not to me, but people tend to get very competitive when it comes to Amtrak versus the airlines.


----------



## Qapla (Feb 25, 2021)

MIRAILFAN said:


> Why should govt fund Amtrak? That's an unfair advantage over the airlines.



Maybe because the Gov't owns Amtrak and they do not own the airlines ...


----------



## Acela150 (Feb 25, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Not to me, but people tend to get very competitive when it comes to Amtrak versus the airlines.


And those that get "competitive" about Amtrak don't understand how many communities that are served by Amtrak don't have access to a major airport. 



Qapla said:


> Maybe because the Gov't owns Amtrak and they do not own the airlines ...


BUT, they do regulate certain aspects of the airlines.


----------



## Qapla (Feb 25, 2021)

Yeah, they also regulate the building codes but they sure don't fund something a company wants to build

Just because they regulate it does not mean they should fund it ... they own Amtrak so they should fund it


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 25, 2021)

Acela150 said:


> And those that get "competitive" about Amtrak don't understand how many communities that are served by Amtrak don't have access to a major airport.


I don't see many aviation fans complaining about Amtrak subsidies. However, I frequently see railfans complaining about air subsidies.

According to the non-partisan CBO, per passenger mile, Amtrak receives 23.6 cents in net federal subsidies whereas commercial aviation receives 0.2 cents per mile. Highway users, whether in cars or buses, receive 0.1 cents per passenger mile.
Source: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2018-10/41955-Amtrak.pdf

So let's be honest, Amtrak is not treated more poorly than other forms of transportation. Whether they should receive more is a fair discussion - but you aren't going to get very far by claiming that they are treated worse than air or highway.

I have always maintained that government should support various forms of transportation. Choice is good for the public.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Feb 25, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> I don't see many aviation fans complaining about Amtrak subsidies. However, I frequently see railfans complaining about air subsidies.


Why would someone getting $1000 dollars complain about someone getting $100?


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 25, 2021)

AmtrakBlue said:


> Why would someone getting $1000 dollars complain about someone getting $100?


Did you not read the statistics that I provided?

According to the non-partisan CBO, per passenger mile, Amtrak receives 23.6 cents in net federal subsidies whereas commercial aviation receives 0.2 cents per mile. Highway users, whether in cars or buses, receive 0.1 cents per passenger mile.

If you are asking why Amtrak fans complain so much about what other forms of transportation receive, I do not know. There are much better ways to argue that Amtrak needs more assistance. Complaining about commercial airline subsidies, when Amtrak receives 11,700% more in subsidies per passenger mile, seems absurd to me. I believe that Amtrak should be robustly supported - but my reasons for that belief are not rooted in jealousy. I have that belief because I believe in Amtrak, its mission, and its importance.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 25, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> I don't see many aviation fans complaining about Amtrak subsidies. However, I frequently see railfans complaining about air subsidies.
> 
> According to the non-partisan CBO, per passenger mile, Amtrak receives 23.6 cents in net federal subsidies whereas commercial aviation receives 0.2 cents per mile. Highway users, whether in cars or buses, receive 0.1 cents per passenger mile.
> Source: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2018-10/41955-Amtrak.pdf
> ...



Did you genuinely think that nobody would click on your link to check your claims, or are you legitimately quoting a 40 year old study as proof of what's happening today?

Either way, you fail.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 25, 2021)

Ryan said:


> Did you genuinely think that nobody would click on your link to check your claims, or are you legitimately quoting a 40 year old study as proof of what's happening today?
> 
> Either way, you fail.


Weird. The link says 2018. I went by that.

That said, the fact remains that Amtrak receives significantly more subsidies per passenger mile. No “fail” there.

Here are the updated numbers:

In 2018/2019 commercial aviation subsidies were 1.06 cents per passenger mile.
Sources:





Transportation Revenues by Mode and Level of Government, Fiscal Year | Bureau of Transportation Statistics







www.bts.gov








__





Transportation Expenditures by Level of Government and Mode from Own Funds, Fiscal Year | Bureau of Transportation Statistics


KEY: R = revised.




www.bts.gov








__





U.S. Passenger-Miles | Bureau of Transportation Statistics


KEY: N = data do not exist; U = data are not available.




www.bts.gov





Amtrak 2019 subsidies were 35.6 cents per passenger mile.
Sources:


https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45942/7




https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/public/documents/corporate/monthlyperformancereports/2019/Amtrak-Monthly-Performance-Report-FY2019-Final.pdf



The claim that government favors commercial air travel over Amtrak is demonstrably false.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 25, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Not to me, but people tend to get very competitive when it comes to Amtrak versus the airlines.





Exvalley said:


> I don't see many aviation fans complaining about Amtrak subsidies. However, I frequently see railfans complaining about air subsidies.


Nobody you responded to was attacking airlines and few are as competitive about splitting hairs as you are.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 25, 2021)

I'm going to go ahead and ask you to show your work on those figures.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Ryan said:


> I'm going to go ahead and ask you to show your work on those figures.


Are you seriously doubting that Amtrak receives much more subsidy per passenger mile? 

Table 2-32 says that the federal, state, and local governments collected $38.5 billion in airline ticket fees and similar revenues, while Table 2-35 says that those governments spent $46.5 billion, for a net subsidy of $8.0 billion. When divided by 2019 domestic air travel passenger miles shown in Table 1-50 that works out to 1.06 cents per passenger mile. Note that international travel isn’t included and would push the average subsidy downward.

Amtrak’s year-end report for fiscal year 2019 indicates passengers traveled 6.475 billion passenger miles. The report also says that state operating subsidies (which Amtrak includes with “passenger related revenue”) were $234.2 million and that “state capital payment amortization” was $127.4 million. For federal subsidies, the Congressional Research Service Report says that Congress gave Amtrak $1.942 billion in 2019. Total 2019 subsidies, then, were $2.3 billion, or 35.6 cents per passenger mile.

People should be VERY careful when they argue that government should not favor one form of transportation over another, because government does, and the beneficiary is clearly Amtrak.


----------



## lordsigma (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> People should be VERY careful when they argue that government should not favor one form of transportation over another, because government does, and the beneficiary is clearly Amtrak.


While I agree with your premise that passenger rail advocates should not complain about subsidies of other transportation modes for this reason (Though I do think it's legitimate to point out that other transportation modes are subsidized when people complain about Amtrak not making a profit), I think you have to look a bit deeper. That's also taking a viewpoint that the only legitimate measure of government "favoring" a transportation mode is with calculating the per mile passenger subsidy. To really get the full picture though you have to look at things from a policy perspective as well - things that have been done over the years to position the automobile as the dominant form of transportation in the US - from the building of the interstate system and the influential position of the petroleum industry in the US. In America - from government down we undoubtedly favor the automobile and air travel over passenger rail. While it's true we subsidize Amtrak, we subsidize it to keep the lights on - we have not made the investments needed to advance passenger rail beyond the 1950s into the modern passenger rail that many other countries have that can be more competitive with air and road travel. Some of this is simply societal - there is no transportation method more American than road travel - its a symbol of freedom of movement and individual liberties and the spread out nature of our country and where we live. And I'm also not saying we should change that - while I think we should make investments to increase the value of our passenger rail network - I also don't think we should become Europe either with their much more centrally planned society.


----------



## lordsigma (Feb 26, 2021)

As much as I love taking my train trips on Amtrak - I equally love loading my ATV in the back of my truck and driving up north for the weekend to hit the trails. I think train travel can be improved in the US - but we also should stay America.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

I agree with you from a policy perspective. That was my point, actually. The policy basis should stand on its own merits.

The reality is that the government spends a whole lot more for a passenger to travel a mile on Amtrak than it does for other modes of transportation. So we need to justify that rather than whining that Amtrak isn’t treated as well as commercial aviation.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51 (Feb 26, 2021)

Any time someone use “Loss per passenger mile” it’s a hit job on Amtrak. Sadly even Amtrak will use this to attack there own services. This false and misleading attack has been proved to be wrong way to account for loses. However it just keeps on living, just waiting for someone to use it again, and again. So tiresome.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Are you seriously doubting that Amtrak receives much more subsidy per passenger mile?



I don't actually have a dog in the fight, but given that it's demonstrated that you're barely reading the documents you're throwing around as references, I'm not just going to press the "I believe" button on whatever figures you're throwing around to try and prove your point. You're going to have to earn some credibility before that happens.

At a cursory glance, you haven't even gotten the table numbers correct in your argument, so I'm not even going to try and delve into the actual tables themselves to see what you've managed to screw up (hint: they're tables 3-32, 3-35, and 1-40, not 2-32, 2-35, and 1-50). All of that assumes that you've actually chosen the right dataset and methodology, which I'm also not going to blindly believe given your poor track record (no pun intended). For example, these figures do nothing to account for any tax incentives or waiving of fees that would artificially depress government revenues and do nothing to capture expenses that the government takes onboard that the airlines benefit from (such as the lucrative pipeline of fully trained and experienced pilots that the military provides to the airlines).


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Any time some use “Loss per passenger mile” it’s a hit job on Amtrak.


When comparing two forms of intercity travel, the passenger-mile metric seems about the best metric to use.

If anyone wants to disprove that Amtrak receives much greater subsidies than commercial airlines per passenger mile, *I am all ears*. I hear the claim thrown around a lot, but have never seen a shred of proof - at least when you adjust for the number of people and distance travelled.

Ryan, you can nitpick my methodology, but you haven't come remotely close to demonstrating that my overall point is invalid - which is really what matters here. I understand that you are defensive (I used to be too!), but the reality is what it is. Citing one small subsidy by the Missoula County Airport Authority is not going to erase the nearly 35x advantage Amtrak enjoys - even if we assume that the subsidy was not included already in my numbers. Keep in mind that I did not include federal subsidies for freight infrastructure that Amtrak benefits directly from.

This isn't meant to be anti-Amtrak. On the contrary, it is meant to make Amtrak advocacy more effective by focusing on arguments that have legitimacy. I've never understood why people believe that the best argument is based on a demonstrably false claim.


----------



## me_little_me (Feb 26, 2021)

Amtrak is also providing a public service and does not have sufficient quantity of trains or coverage (cities with service) unlike the roads and airfields built to serve the cars, trucks and airlines (nearly all at government expense. Remember that the railroads (now running virtually only freight) were also provided with huge government subsidies both in cash and in land. Amtrak has not and was required to provide certain services without being given the money to provide them. Those services, IMHO, are necessary.

So if anyone complains about money per mile or money per passenger, wait until Amtrak has gotten the equivalent to the subsidies given the other forms of transportation and allow it to build a real national network, then compare its subsidies with those of the other forms.

And as to money per mile, why not compare some of our large western states with small populations and huge distances and ask why they should get as much as they do to build those long, less used roads when compared to the small, dense states? For example, should the government not have paid for interstate 25 through less populated NM and even lesser populated Wyoming because their subsidy per car mile is higher than the 24 miles of I-95 in Delaware?

One has to ask the question, not only of fairness, but of need.


----------



## Ryan (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Ryan, you can nitpick my methodology, but you haven't come remotely close to demonstrating that my overall point is invalid - which is really what matters here. I understand that you are defensive (I used to be too!), but the reality is what it is.


You missed the part where I said that I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm not defensive about anything other than you made a claim, and you're failing to back that claim up with data (in truth, you're likely right, although not by the margins that you believe). 

You're making the claim that Amtrak receives significantly more in subsidy, the onus is on you to prove that. When you can't read a document closely enough to realize that it's 40 years old or what the right table numbers are to go look at, your credibility suffers. If you want to be taken seriously, make a compelling argument with data without making stupid and easy to find errors. It's not nitpicking to point out fundamental errors in your inability to take numbers from a data source, understand them, and make a cogent argument.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Ryan,

I made a credible argument with recent data. Your quibble was over the table numbers, not with the data in those tables - which seems rather petty at this point.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Ryan,
> 
> I made a credible argument with recent data. Your quibble was over the table numbers, not with the data in those tables - which seems rather petty at this point.


You lose credibility when you do not show adequate attention to details, like the table numbers. If you point someone to table A, but quote table B, how are they supposed to trust your source and your analysis of that source.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

me_little_me said:


> Amtrak is also providing a public service and does not have sufficient quantity of trains or coverage (cities with service) unlike the roads and airfields built to serve the cars, trucks and airlines (nearly all at government expense.


Airports and highway systems don't provide a public service? 

You are also slipping back into the, "We should get exactly what they get!" mentality. The problem with that argument is that the public does not want everything to be exactly even. Whether we like it or not on this forum, the public prefers air and highway travel. A responsible government would allocate resources based on the desires of the populace. That said, the average Amtrak passenger gets a much greater government subsidy than the average airline or highway passenger - at least based on each mile traveled.




me_little_me said:


> Remember that the railroads were also provided with huge government subsidies both in cash and in land.


Which Amtrak directly benefits from since they run over those railroads.



me_little_me said:


> And as to money per mile, why not compare some of our large western states with small populations and huge distances and ask why they should get as much as they do to build those long, less used roads when compared to the small, dense states?


Do you really want to go there? You may not realize it, but you are making a tailor made argument in support of eliminating long distance rail service.


----------



## jebr (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Whether we like it or not on this forum, the public prefers air and highway travel.



Do they actually prefer it, or is it just what they use because there's not enough train service to be a usable option for most people? It's a bit silly to say that people prefer air or highway travel over the train when, using MSP - CHI as an example, the train only runs one time, three days a week, but there's 11-13 flights per day and multiple highway options that will get you there whenever you want to go. Get outside of the big cities, and driving is almost a necessity because even if you can get to the local town or city without a car, local public transit, if it exists at all, is infrequent and doesn't go to lots of places within that area. Of course people are going to prefer the option that has had plenty of investment and can be relied upon due to that investment; that says nothing about what people would prefer if both were on semi-equal footings in terms of usability.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Americans have always had a love affair with their cars.

Unfortunately, our communities are now designed with car travel in mind. We are just too spread out for that to change.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

AmtrakBlue said:


> You lose credibility when you do not show adequate attention to details, like the table numbers. If you point someone to table A, but quote table B, how are they supposed to trust your source and your analysis of that source.


While I am guilty of referring to old notes, what matters is that the underlying data is correct.

Bottom line: The airlines would absolutely drool over the subsidies that Amtrak gets on a per passenger mile basis.

I am fine with that. I just get tired of people saying that the airlines make out much better when that is patently false.


----------



## jis (Feb 26, 2021)

Bringing the thread back to its original topic....

It looks like the kerfuffle over the $15/hr minimum wage will require an additional post reconciliation vote since the House and Senate at present are slated to pass different bills. They will probably still be able to get it done by 15th March.









House set to approve Biden’s $1.9 trillion stimulus package, send bill to the Senate


Democrats are trying to pass the $1.9 trillion relief bill, which includes direct payments and unemployment benefits, by March 14.




www.cnbc.com


----------



## jebr (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Americans have always had a love affair with their cars.
> 
> Unfortunately, our communities are now designed with car travel in mind. We are just too spread out for that to change.



Designs can change. We literally plowed down parts of inner city neighborhoods and displaced thousands of people to make car travel as easy as possible. The layouts we have now are not permanent. City layouts change and adapt, and that can happen in 2021 just as it did in 1971.


----------



## fdaley (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> When comparing two forms of intercity travel, the passenger-mile metric seems about the best metric to use.



To me, the passenger-mile metric is one that's stacked against rail, because it disregards the fact that tons more people currently travel by air and highway than by train. The higher subsidy per passenger-mile for rail is a function of having a skeletal national rail system with high fixed costs -- such as maintaining and staffing lots of stations for trains that only run once a day or even less. The fact that highways and airlines carry many more people at lower subsidy per customer per mile is a function of the fact that, in raw dollars, we spend tons more public money to maintain those systems, and consequently those systems are useful to many more travelers. It doesn't mean that air and road travel is inherently more efficient than rail -- in fact, the opposite is true.

I haven't gone hunting for the latest statistics, but when I last delved into this, which is probably a few years ago, Amtrak was carrying less than 2 percent of intercity travelers and was also receiving less than 2 percent of federal transportation dollars. It had been in the 1-to-2-percent range in both categories for a few decades. If we keep spending nearly all of our transportation dollars on highways and airports, that's what most people will continue to use. But if we started spending, say, 5 percent of our transportation dollars on rail, we'd be able to have new and more frequent services that would attract more riders, and the cost per passenger-mile would go down. And we'd have a more efficient and environmentally better transport system overall.


----------



## TrackWalker (Feb 26, 2021)

Over the years every time I've had to deal with charts and statistics this book and my "Carl Sagan Baloney Detector Kit" have served me quite well.


----------



## Trogdor (Feb 26, 2021)

One of the problems I have with the passenger-mile metric is that it assumes distance = utility. That isn't really true. You can move 1000 people 1 mile, or 1 person 1000 miles, and the number of passenger-miles would be the same. Which is ultimately more useful? (I suppose that's subject to debate for any number of reasons)

It gets into a higher level philosophical discussion of whether we really need to move people such long distances in the amounts that we do, and what consequences it has throughout our society, environment, etc. If it costs $100 to move a group of people 100 miles, and $199 to move that same group 200 miles, then on a passenger-mile basis, the longer trip is cheaper. But it also cost $99 more in absolute terms. Instead of dollars, let's say that was an amount of fuel burned or air pollution emitted, etc. Airplanes, for example, are more efficient on longer flights than shorter ones because takeoff burns a lot of fuel, and cruise relatively little by comparison. Yet a plane is still going to burn more fuel flying 2000 miles than 1000 miles (all else being equal). Using a passenger-mile metric means we all ought to be flying as far as possible. Using an environmental concern metric, we ought to be keeping our flights as short as possible (which, really, also means limiting unnecessary travel) because the environment cares about total emissions, not a per passenger-mile rate.



jebr said:


> Designs can change. We literally plowed down parts of inner city neighborhoods and displaced thousands of people to make car travel as easy as possible. The layouts we have now are not permanent. City layouts change and adapt, and that can happen in 2021 just as it did in 1971.



This goes towards the point I noted above about reducing total miles traveled. The way our cities are designed forces long commutes, and actually subsidizes suburban living at the expense of the cities that are the hub of regional activity. The amount of space our highways take up, even right into the downtowns of cities, in order to accommodate more "passenger-miles," means we lose a lot of usable space that could house lots of people, thereby significantly reducing the number of "passenger-miles" people need to travel on a regular basis to go about their daily lives. The result, if you were to add it all up, might be a significantly worse financial performance of our road/highway network on a cost/passenger-mile basis.

Aviation (at least, pre-COVID) does fairly well in the US because it is significantly supported by high-revenue business travel, and also adds lots of miles very quickly (i.e., passenger-miles are more heavily influenced by the miles than by the passengers). A lot of that business travel may turn out to be unnecessary even as COVID no longer becomes a factor. If businesses determine they can do a lot more work remotely, the number of passenger-miles will decline, and their revenue will decline with it. Since a lot of that is the high-RPM (revenue per passenger-mile) travel, this means their overall financial performance on a passenger-mile basis will be worse. This will mean some flights that were marginal in their economic performance will no longer be sustainable, and others may still be profitable, but not as much so. Some might look at this turn of events as a bad thing. Yet, from an environmental point of view, it's probably a good thing. From a societal point of view, it will probably just be a thing, neither good nor bad. If the funding into aviation was maintained at current levels, with reduced passenger-miles, then it would look like aviation got less efficient. And so what?


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Trogdor said:


> One of the problems I have with the passenger-mile metric is that it assumes distance = utility.



Well, let's look at cost per trip.

A bit dated, but here are some statistics compiled in a report that looked at subsidies between 2002 and 2009. From the report:
_ Amtrak passengers received $57.04 per trip. 
 Private sector commercial air passengers received $6.35 per trip. 
 Mass transit riders received $0.95 per trip. 
 Private sector commercial bus passengers received $0.10 per trip._

The report can be found here:


https://www.buses.org/assets/images/uploads/general/Report%20-%20Modal%20Subsidies%20-%20ABA.pdf



Please understand that I am not being critical of what Amtrak receives. I am pointing out that it is false to say that airlines have a tremendous advantage in terms of subsidization - at least in terms of spending public resources to get people from point A to point B.

I appreciate the debate over how we let this happen, however.


----------



## me_little_me (Feb 26, 2021)

me_little_me said:


> Amtrak is also providing a public service and does not have sufficient quantity of trains or coverage (cities with service) unlike the roads and airfields built to serve the cars, trucks and airlines (nearly all at government expense. Remember that the railroads (now running virtually only freight) were also provided with huge government subsidies both in cash and in land. Amtrak has not and was required to provide certain services without being given the money to provide them. Those services, IMHO, are necessary.





Exvalley said:


> Airports and highway systems don't provide a public service?
> 
> You are also slipping back into the, "We should get exactly what they get!" mentality. The problem with that argument is that the public does not want everything to be exactly even. Whether we like it or not on this forum, the public prefers air and highway travel. A responsible government would allocate resources based on the desires of the populace. That said, the average Amtrak passenger gets a much greater government subsidy than the average airline or highway passenger - at least based on each mile traveled.


I said "also". That means Amtrak should get sufficient money - I did not say the same amount . And I mentioned fairness and need, not equality. That's why I used the Interstate example. The distances are greater and even if the roads have to be longer, the need is there. Please don't misstate what I said.




Exvalley said:


> Which Amtrak directly benefits from since they run over those railroads.
> 
> 
> Do you really want to go there? You may not realize it, but you are making a tailor made argument in support of eliminating long distance rail service.


No, they don't really "benefit" from them. They pay very high prices to use that track and the RR's services. The only thing Amtrak is "guaranteed" to get is priority because that was the deal the railroads agreed to but that is a joke and they do not get it. It's more like a tollway than a "free" road.


----------



## Qapla (Feb 26, 2021)

What difference does it make how much $$ppm is "subsidized" for Amtrak. The fact is, Amtrak is not "subsidized" at all. 

The US Gov't does not own the trucking industry - yet they provide the Interstate Highway System the trucking industry uses to make money
The US Gov't does not own the commercial airlines - yet they do provide funding for ATC, HLS and other things the airlines use to make money
Monetary support of any kind that benefits these private businesses is a "subsidy" 
The US Gov't *does* own Amtrak. Therefore, the money provided to Amtrak is not really a "subsidy" - it is "operating expense". To say that Amtrak is subsidized is like saying that Walmart is "subsidizing" their own warehouses.

To say it is "unfair" for the Gov't to give money to Amtrak over other forms of travel would be like saying it is unfair that Walmart does not give Target or Amazon money for their operation.

The fact is, for a "company" that is solely owned by the Gov't, Amtrak is grossly underfunded and should be funded (not "subsidized") to, not only "operate", but to expand and improve the service they provide. It would be different if Amtrak were a private business like the airlines and trucking - but it isn't.


----------



## Qapla (Feb 26, 2021)

Just curious ...

When the amount of "subsidy" is calculated - is the the amount of acreage taken off the tax rolls calculated into the mix? The loss tax revenue for a massive Interstate interchange or a city-owned airport must have an impact on the overall tax-base there is to work with. In addition to the cost of building and maintaining the nations highways - how many tax dollars are no longer being collected from all the land these roads occupy? Passenger rail would need far less land to build tracks on than even a two-lane road needs ... not to mention the massive 4-lane and larger roads with medians.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Americans have always had a love affair with their cars.
> 
> Unfortunately, our communities are now designed with car travel in mind. We are just too spread out for that to change.


This is changing rapidly! Even Car Loving Cities like LA, and all of the Major Texas Cities, except San Antonio, are building and expanding Rail Services,Trolleys and Electric Buses.

And the popularity of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles, ( most Vehicle Manufacturers are getting out of the Fossil Fuel powered Vehicle Business) it wont be long before a Gas Station on every corner will go the way of Block Buster!


----------



## jis (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Please understand that I am not being critical of what Amtrak receives. I am pointing out that it is false to say that airlines have a tremendous advantage in terms of subsidization - at least in terms of spending public resources to get people from point A to point B.
> 
> I appreciate the debate over how we let this happen, however.


That is a very important point....

I think when people talk about advantages that airlines have they really are implicitly driven by information about the past as to how things came to be this way, more than what it is now. That is why I suspect people are possibly talking a bit past each other in this discussion.

During the transition from the supremacy of rail to road and air it is alleged that taxes collected from rail were used significantly to fund development of the other two modes. As to whose fault it was, can be a major separate discussion. The railroad management had not exactly earned themselves great kudos in either being user friendly or being community friendly. They were indeed often seen as the rogues. So when there was a chance to get back at them, it is possible everyone piled on both through diversion of resources and exercising unreasonable government control on them. This is something that was finally addressed in the '70s in the 3R and 4R Acts, which among other things created Amtrak and Conrail and transfered commuter service to half a dozen state agencies.

So in some sense, both sides in this argument about who has and had advantages are probably correct, depending on the time span over which one is focusing.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Qapla said:


> The fact is, Amtrak is not "subsidized" at all.



While I appreciate the creativity of your argument, I will respect what budget analysts and economists say.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

jis said:


> So in some sense, both sides in this argument about who has and had advantages are probably correct, depending on the time span over which one is focusing.


Well said.

In my opinion, effective advocacy spells out why passenger rail is important to our country moving forward rather than looking the rear view mirror toward a past that cannot be changed. It's not enough to complain that airlines and highways are subsidized. They are subsidized because politicians believe in them. If you want more subsidy for Amtrak you need to lay out the case why more is needed. You aren't going to convince politicians that airlines and highways should suffer at the expense of Amtrak. It's doesn't have to be a zero sum game.


----------



## v v (Feb 26, 2021)

Should eviromental costs now be added into the equation for subsidies?

A nod to Bob Dylan's Post #119


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

v v said:


> Should eviromental costs now be added into the equation for subsidies?


This is what I am getting out. Emphasizing the environmental benefits associated with train travel is effective advocacy.


----------



## MARC Rider (Feb 26, 2021)

redacted


----------



## tricia (Feb 26, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> You bet. First, who runs air traffic control? Second, who funds nearly all airports? Finally, government bailouts for airlines in last year's COvid relief act. I also seem to remember about some sort of government airline bailout after 9/11 when ridership breifly tanked, though it has been twenty years, so my memory is a little fuzzy.


Airlines also kept a heaping pile of cash from tickets paid for early last year, cancelled due to Covid, and converted into vouchers with terms that make it a safe bet that many vouchers will expire before they're used.


----------



## jis (Feb 26, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> You bet. First, who runs air traffic control?


Last time I looked something like 15% of the cost of ATC that can be attributed to commercial air traffic use is funded out of general funds. The rest is funded through fees paid by users. The exact number might have changed since then but it is a relatively small percentage of the cost.


> Second, who funds nearly all airports?


It is quite a mix, but the same is true of train stations too. For example Amtrak did not spend much at all (like almost nothing) for the Moynihan Train Hall in New York.


> Finally, government bailouts for airlines in last year's COvid relief act.


I don't recall how much of it was grant and how much loan. As I seem to recall it was a mix.


> I also seem to remember about some sort of government airline bailout after 9/11 when ridership breifly tanked, though it has been twenty years, so my memory is a little fuzzy.


It was again a mix of grant and loan that was duly paid back. The government actually made out well on that one.

Actually I think government funding to bridge over force majeure difficulties is the right thing to do, and if it can be pulled off by loans rather than grants, it works out better for the tax payer at the end of the day.

From a rail passenger's perspective, at least as far as I am concerned, I think it is a fool's errand to spend endless time nitpicking about these "subsidies". It is better to accept that all modes are "subsidized" in various ways. Remove the negative connotation associated with such subsidies, and then focus on what transportation policies are good for the nation and its people, and figure out efficient ways of funding them through partnerships between government and private sources.


----------



## MARC Rider (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Americans have always had a love affair with their cars.
> 
> Unfortunately, our communities are now designed with car travel in mind. We are just too spread out for that to change.


Sure we can change. We were more spread out 100 years ago when a larger percentage of people lived in rural areas. Now, most of us live in urban areas, and we live a "spread-out" lifestyle enabled by publicly funded roads. There's no reason why we can't redesign our cities and towns to allow for a more pedestrian-oriented lifestyle where people don't need cars, and relying on public transportation can be more convenient than having $20-40,000 of your personal capital sunk into a depreciating asset and having to have a second, unpaid job as a self-chauffeur in order to have mobility.


----------



## Cal (Feb 26, 2021)

We are officially, off topic.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> You bet. First, who runs air traffic control?


The FAA runs air traffic control.
Air traffic control is paid for by the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The Trust Fund is funded principally from a variety of excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system. The excise taxes are imposed on domestic passenger tickets, domestic flight segments, and international passenger arrivals and departures, and on purchases of air travel miles for frequent flyer and similar programs. 



MARC Rider said:


> Second, who funds nearly all airports?


Passengers through Passenger Facility Charges and airlines through landing fees.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> Sure we can change. We were more spread out 100 years ago when a larger percentage of people lived in rural areas.


Except that the bulk of the growth has come in the form of never ending suburbs that have not been designed with public transportation in mind.

You want to see rail expand? Get people on zoning boards!


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 26, 2021)

MARC Rider said:


> Second, who funds nearly all airports?





Exvalley said:


> Passengers through Passenger Facility Charges and airlines through landing fees.


At my hometown airport PFC's and landing fees alone are nowhere near enough to cover all expenses.


----------



## Chris I (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> The FAA runs air traffic control.
> Air traffic control is paid for by the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The Trust Fund is funded principally from a variety of excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system. The excise taxes are imposed on domestic passenger tickets, domestic flight segments, and international passenger arrivals and departures, and on purchases of air travel miles for frequent flyer and similar programs.
> 
> 
> Passengers through Passenger Facility Charges and airlines through landing fees.











10 Ways Taxpayers Subsidize U.S. Airlines - Live and Let's Fly


U.S. airlines love to complain about Gulf subsidies, but how many subsidies do they receive? A look at U.S. Airline Subsidies by U.S. taxpayers. Shocking!




liveandletsfly.com





And as far as highways go, remember that all of the land the interstates are built on is not taxed, while railroads are taxed on the land their tracks occupy. Given that many interstates run directly through cities on valuable real estate, that means we're looking at trillions of dollars in land value that is given to highways. Ever wonder why truly private highways are basically non-existent in the US, and even when they do exist, they often have a history of bankrupcy and public funding?









How Are Your State’s Roads Funded?


State and local infrastructure spending covered by gas taxes, tolls, user fees, and user taxes varies widely by state. See how your state compares nationally.




taxfoundation.org


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Devil's Advocate said:


> At my hometown airport PFC's and landing fees alone are nowhere near enough to cover all expenses.


Which airport is that?

Keep in mind that there are numerous other sources of revenue, such as parking, concessions, rental car surcharges, selling advertising space, etc.


----------



## Cal (Feb 26, 2021)

This video explains how airports make money very well. This channel is great. Has three video on American trains as well

And it also states that about 2/3 of airports LOSe money.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 26, 2021)

Devil's Advocate said:


> At my hometown airport PFC's and landing fees alone are nowhere near enough to cover all expenses.





Exvalley said:


> Which airport is that?


I believe every major airport in Texas meets this definition.



Exvalley said:


> Airports are generally profitable. At least in normal times. This chart shows you just how profitable they can be: https://www.bizjournals.com/charlot...-profitability-by-operating-revenue/175/table


What is the source for this data and how was it normalized? How is a claim of profitability derived from raw income?


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Devil's Advocate said:


> I believe every major airport in Texas meets this definition.


Well... we have to start looking somewhere. Which is your local airport that you were referring to?

Regardless, the pertinent point is that the federal "subsidies" that airports get are primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system. Please take the time to familiarize yourself with the Airport & Airway Trust Fund and its primary income sources: Airport & Airway Trust Fund (AATF)

The federal subsidies that benefit Amtrak, on the other hand, are not primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the Amtrak system.

Trust me. This is not the hill you want to die on.


----------



## IndyLions (Feb 26, 2021)

jis said:


> ...I think it is a fool's errand to spend endless time nitpicking about these "subsidies". It is better to accept that all modes are "subsidized" in various ways. Remove the negative connotation associated with such subsidies, and then focus on what transportation policies are good for the nation and its people, and figure out efficient ways of funding them through partnerships between government and private sources.



I couldn't agree more with this. 

Why shouldn't we have the choice to drive / fly / train / sail / walk / bike, etc ? While all these forms of transportation are subsidized - they all cover a reasonable percentage of their costs and offer a unique experience.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

IndyLions said:


> I couldn't agree more with this.
> 
> Why shouldn't we have the choice to drive / fly / train / sail / walk / bike, etc ? While all these forms of transportation are subsidized - they all cover a reasonable percentage of their costs and offer a unique experience.


Exactly!!!!!!! My entire point has been that we need to stop being so competitive and playing into the zero sum game fallacy.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Well... we have to start looking somewhere. Which is your local airport that you were referring to?


What I know about my local airport is unfortunately considered privileged information but I'd welcome data that legitimately shows commercial airports break even on PFC's and landing fees because those details are hard to get.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Devil's Advocate said:


> What I know about my local airport is unfortunately considered privileged information but I'd welcome data that legitimately shows commercial airports break even on PFC's and landing fees because those details are hard to get.


No problem. I was going to do my own research. Which airport is it?

Also, everyone knows that airports rely on other revenue streams as well. Heck, I mentioned some above. While I could have listed all of those revenue streams in my initial response, I assumed that most people would have been comfortable with my listing the primary streams and that they would not engage in a distracting, pedantic and otiose game of “gotcha.”

As I said earlier, the pertinent point is that the federal "subsidies" that airports get are primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system. The federal subsidies that benefit Amtrak, on the other hand, are not primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the Amtrak system.

If you disagree with that please let me know.


----------



## v v (Feb 26, 2021)

@Exvalley 

'otiose' Never come across that word before, thank you.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> No problem. I was going to do my own research. Which airport is it? Also, everyone knows that airports rely on other revenue streams as well. Heck, I mentioned some above. While I could have listed all of those revenue streams in my initial response, I assumed that most people would have been comfortable with my listing the primary streams and that they would not engage in a distracting, pedantic and otiose game of “gotcha.” As I said earlier, the pertinent point is that the federal "subsidies" that airports get are primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system. The federal subsidies that benefit Amtrak, on the other hand, are not primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the Amtrak system.If you disagree with that please let me know.


Asking me to name this airport after I explained my situation paints me into a corner where defending my position will likely require me to release private information I am not authorized to divulge. I see no reason to play your own "gotcha" game. You can believe or disbelieve me as you please. Since you made the initial claim you are free to name whichever airports you have determined cover all their costs through airline and passenger fees without my assistance.


----------



## Qapla (Feb 26, 2021)

Regardless of where the subsidy comes from - the fact still remains that this subsidy comparison still falls in the "apple to oranges" area. Amtrak is OWNED by the Gov't while the other businesses are not.

That is where the term "mandate" should be a little more prominent when it comes to the funding for Amtrak. Instead of comparing the money provided to Amtrak with the money given to other forms of transport - why not compare it to the amount of money given to other Gov't operations.

What if the revenue provided for Congress (the House and the Senate) were based on the money they make and they would be required to "make a profit"? If their food budget were reduced so they only had "flex dining" provided for their meals. What if they were not allowed to redecorate or buy new furniture for their offices. What if their computer systems were still 50 years old?

Amtrak should be given the same level of budgetary consideration as any other Gov't service (and the Post Office should also receive this type of funding) instead of being treated like they are a commercial enterprise owned and operated by the "private sector" who needs "bailing out".


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 26, 2021)

I think the core problem is that Amtrak was probably never intended to "save" passenger rail so much as prevent it from dying too quickly. I believe the initial goal was to keep it just healthy enough to die on someone else's watch. On the surface Amtrak seems to have everything it needs to succeed. Hardware, trained staff, route access, maintenance facilities, priority scheduling, and sufficient funding. It's only when you realize that the budgets can't be depended upon or borrowed against, the priority status is virtually unenforceable, and the staff are perpetually demoralized that you start to realize why Amtrak struggles so hard just to reach some sort of sustained relevance to the average consumer.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Asking me to name this airport after I explained my situation paints me into a corner where defending my position will likely require me to release private information I am not authorized to divulge.



Permit a very simple question. Do you agree or disagree with my earlier statement?

_The federal "subsidies" that airports get are primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system. The federal subsidies that benefit Amtrak, on the other hand, are not primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the Amtrak system._


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Permit a very simple question. Do you agree or disagree with my earlier statement?
> 
> _The federal "subsidies" that airports get are primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system. The federal subsidies that benefit Amtrak, on the other hand, are not primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the Amtrak system._


I think it's _mostly_ true but I also think it ignores the fact that Amtrak is a disowned stepchild that is essentially mandated to run inefficiently, with weaker tools to resolve disputes, fewer options for expansion, and clumsier cost controls. The really maddening aspect is that Amtrak should probably be a modest success on paper. The devil is in the details.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 26, 2021)

Devil's Advocate said:


> I think it's _mostly_ true but I also think it ignores the fact that Amtrak is a disowned stepchild that is essentially mandated to run inefficiently, with weaker tools to resolve disputes, fewer options for expansion, and clumsier cost controls. The really maddening aspect is that Amtrak should probably be a modest success on paper. The devil is in the details.


Fair enough. We can move on.


----------



## fdaley (Feb 26, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> The federal "subsidies" that airports get are primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the national airspace system. The federal subsidies that benefit Amtrak, on the other hand, are not primarily funded through excise taxes paid by users of the Amtrak system.



This is largely true (in the case of Amtrak, entirely true), but again it ignores the huge difference in the economies of scale of the two systems. The differential is even more enormous when we compare Amtrak funding with the "user fees" that sustain a large part of the highway system's costs. A comparatively modest tax on a very large pool of users can generate gobs of money, but a tax on Amtrak's comparatively tiny pool of customers would have to be astronomically high to generate the kind of revenue needed to sustain the national rail system.

Defenders of the status quo like to use the "user fee" system to suggest that there's some sort of market choice going on in which nearly all travelers are choosing to use highways and planes -- and declining to use trains. In reality, under the current system, the train isn't even an option for the vast majority of trips. Lots of people might like to go by train, but for the trip they're taking, the train hasn't been a option for the past 60 or 70 years.

I take many, many trips by car when the train isn't a practical option, and all of the gas tax money I pay for those trips gets put into a pot to be spent to keep the roads paved -- and to build more and wider roads to keep me trapped behind the wheel on all my future trips. Where is the market choice in that? Definitely I'd like to see a chunk of my "user fees" from these other systems put to use developing more and better rail service, and I'm sure lots of other users feel the same way.


----------



## jpakala (Feb 26, 2021)

Railroads got going before government (federal, state, local) began funding all other modes (including dredging rivers and providing ports & their maintenance). Railroads also suffered from old patterns of advancement based on seniority, which moved people competent in operating equipment to positions for which they lacked competence, especially as the world was changing and doing so ever more rapidly. Airlines and highways cost much more than rail both in harm to the environment and construction/operation/safety plus maintenance.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Feb 26, 2021)

Bringing the thread back on topic, how is this stimulus going to impact state-supported service? I know it was discussed early in the thread that it would allow the states to bill the federal government for their portion of the cost, but is this likely to result in increased service or just lower the cost to the states? Although the most important service restoration IMO is daily LD service, lower-frequency corridors aren't far behind, especially in the Midwest and Pacific Northwest on routes which have been reduced to once daily.


----------



## joelkfla (Feb 27, 2021)

jis said:


> Bringing the thread back to its original topic....


Nice try.


----------



## Cal (Feb 27, 2021)

joelkfla said:


> Nice try.


I agree


----------



## Josh M (Feb 27, 2021)

The bill just passed the House 219-212 just after 2:00 A.M. (Feb. 27th). No changes were made to the Amtrak funding provisions. I was in and out of listening to the debate, and I heard a swipe or two taken at the Amtrak funding. Nothing else really noteworthy, Amtrak-related or otherwise. On to the Senate!


----------



## Cal (Feb 27, 2021)

Josh M said:


> The bill just passed the House 219-212 just after 2:00 A.M. (Feb. 27th). No changes were made to the Amtrak funding provisions. I was in and out of listening to the debate, and I heard a swipe or two taken at the Amtrak funding. Nothing else really noteworthy, Amtrak-related or otherwise. On to the Senate!


Let's go!


----------



## nti1094 (Feb 27, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Interesting. I wonder what will happen if a state does not want the service. I am thinking
> 
> 
> Amtrakfflyer said:
> ...


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Feb 27, 2021)

In my observations the Senate GOP _generally_ doesn’t legislate for the common good when they are the minority. It will be interesting to see if even one GOP member votes for the stimulus. While I agree staunch Amtrak supporters like Jerry Moran will continue to advocate for the national network I don’t expect to see 94-6 Senate votes on specific Amtrak issues like we’ve recently seen. Maybe more in Amtrak’s favor of 78-22? Still a sold majority thankfully.

As far as new corridors go exactly what happened in the 2009-2011 era. With the feds offering a 90/10 match the GOP leaders of FL, OH, IA told the feds to pound sand out of what I can only say was spite for Obama and Democrats. It was a 90/10 match! It would have helped those red states immensely. Thats the gist of it, exact numbers and how it went down can be in the forum achieves on here or googling.

Im most familiar with Iowa since I live here.

“The Iowa extension was priced at $108.6 million, according to a previous estimate. Federal authorities would have covered $88 million, leaving the state’s share at about $20 million.”









Iowa slams door on Amtrak


Credit Gov. Terry Branstad for drawing the line that stopped Amtrak expansion at the Iowa border.




qctimes.com


----------



## nti1094 (Feb 27, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> When comparing two forms of intercity travel, the passenger-mile metric seems about the best metric to use.
> 
> If anyone wants to disprove that Amtrak receives much greater subsidies than commercial airlines per passenger mile, *I am all ears*. I hear the claim thrown around a lot, but have never seen a shred of proof - at least when you adjust for the number of people and distance travelled.
> 
> ...


One small point about the freight subsidy you mention... Remember they pay property taxes on their infrastructure that vastly exceed any subsidy they might get. (although that’s a local tax) The New York Central blamed opressive property taxes for a lot of their problems, and as a significant reason for not improving their lines or even downgrading or single tracking because the tax burden would go up
with improvements. 

And don’t forget Air Traffic Control costs. although admittedly spread over 2 billion passengers a year that might not be that great a costs, not to mention the trickle down benefits of the greater GDP resulting from it. 

Rail is significantly more efficient at moving both freight and passengers. The overall benefit would be much greater if we had a system that served a far greater share of passengers. But you would also want to balance those different needs (freight vs. passenger) and not favor one over the other. 

What advocates need to focus on is not modal subsidies, because you are right, that argument doesn’t make it out the gate. What they should focus on is economic benefit of service. Or quality of life. Or that there is a benefit in redundant modes of transport. There are large parts of the country that need more transportation choices. Essential Air Service has been shrinking ever smaller since deregulation, and that is hurting many communities. 
For economic development reasons both Amtrak and the EAS should be expanded a lot.


----------



## MARC Rider (Feb 27, 2021)

Devil's Advocate said:


> you start to realize why Amtrak struggles so hard just to reach some sort of sustained relevance to the average consumer.


Amtrak manages to be "relevant" in the Northeast. Maybe someone needs to see what makes it so and then duplicate that in other parts of the country. And even in the long-distance world, they manage to succeed in filling trains most of the time. There must be an interest in rail travel.


----------



## jis (Feb 27, 2021)

There is now an inherent divergence between the version of the Bill that the Senate will pass and the version that the House passed, and they will have to reconcile the difference. 

Since the Senate Parliamentarian has rules that the $15/hr wage thing cannot be done using Budget Reconciliation and there is zero hope of the bill passing as a regular bill, it seems inevitable that a bill minus the $15/hr is the only one that has any chance of becoming law in March. 

That is assuming no Democrats defect in the Senate and vote against the bill voted on in the Senate. Once that passes in the Senate, the House will either have to agree to swallow the bitter pill and basically accept that bill, go through another round of horse trading, or let it die. I don't think they will do the latter.


----------



## Barb Stout (Feb 27, 2021)

me_little_me said:


> And as to money per mile, why not compare some of our large western states with small populations and huge distances and ask why they should get as much as they do to build those long, less used roads when compared to the small, dense states? For example, should the government not have paid for interstate 25 through less populated NM and even lesser populated Wyoming because their subsidy per car mile is higher than the 24 miles of I-95 in Delaware?


Having driven I-25 on a regular basis through Albuquerque, your statement about I-25 in NM made me laugh, even though I understand your point.


----------



## MARC Rider (Feb 27, 2021)

Barb Stout said:


> Having driven I-25 on a regular basis through Albuquerque, your statement about I-25 in NM made me laugh, even though I understand your point.


I've driven I-10 from San Antonio to Fort Stockton, and later between Fort Stockton and Van Horn. Once you get west of Junction, there is literally nothing around along the road, but I was amazed at the amount of traffic, most of which I suppose was headed for El Paso. The trucks may have been headed to points beyond El Paso, too. The speed limit also jumps from 75 mph to 80 mph.


----------



## Willbridge (Feb 27, 2021)

jis said:


> That is a very important point....
> 
> I think when people talk about advantages that airlines have they really are implicitly driven by information about the past as to how things came to be this way, more than what it is now. That is why I suspect people are possibly talking a bit past each other in this discussion.
> 
> ...



This issue is well-described in Stephen B. Goddard's book _Getting There._ He also brings in an issue that modern discussions overlook: the negative reaction to the rail service cuts and efficiencies ordered by the USRRA in 1917-1920, right as the highway lobby and unregulated motor carriers were starting to roll. To a lot of the public there was no difference between the privately-run railways before the USRRA, the government run railways during the USRRA and the tightly regulated railways from 1920 into the 1980's.

This is an ad in the Ku Klux Klan paper for just one of the unregulated bus lines competing with the regulated SP&S trains. The public loved it because they thought they could have all of the bus AND rail service. The philosophy behind it was coincidentally reflected in the ad below -- highways meant local control.


----------



## toddinde (Feb 28, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> When comparing two forms of intercity travel, the passenger-mile metric seems about the best metric to use.
> 
> If anyone wants to disprove that Amtrak receives much greater subsidies than commercial airlines per passenger mile, *I am all ears*. I hear the claim thrown around a lot, but have never seen a shred of proof - at least when you adjust for the number of people and distance travelled.
> 
> ...


The passenger mile metric doesn't make sense. The airlines will always win because people fly longer distances. That is not the measure of value or utility of a transportation mode. Further, talking about the subsidy enjoyed by the Missoula County Airport doesn't have any relation to Amtrak since it doesn't serve the area. It doesn't matter what the dollars are, its the value that transportation brings. Amtrak has been proven to provide an outsize economic impact where it serves.


----------



## Exvalley (Feb 28, 2021)

toddinde said:


> The passenger mile metric doesn't make sense.


I also gave “per trip” figures. Amtrak comes out way ahead using that metric as well.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Feb 28, 2021)

As predicted the GOP is not as pro Amtrak as they were pre Biden. Viciously going after Amtrak in CoVid bill. Thankfully there’s a few level headed members of the GOP in the Senate and a slim Democratic majority. For the rest of the GOP that wants to keep our infrastructure in the Stone Age “aka 3rd world“ I hope they get voted out in 2 years to put it mildly. Infrastructure puts people to work.

“Rep. Ben Cline added the Amtrak spending to his list of "the most egregious provisions unrelated to COVID" in the stimulus bill.”









Republicans take aim at billions set aside in stimulus bill for infrastructure and transport projects, including Amtrak, BART, and a bridge to Canada


Republicans say funding for a New York-Canada bridge and an extension of San Francisco's subway are pork stuffed in the $1.9 trillion stimulus package.




www.yahoo.com


----------



## City of Miami (Feb 28, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> In my observations the Senate GOP _generally_ doesn’t legislate for the common good when they are the minority. It will be interesting to see if even one GOP member votes for the stimulus. While I agree staunch Amtrak supporters like Jerry Moran will continue to advocate for the national network I don’t expect to see 94-6 Senate votes on specific Amtrak issues like we’ve recently seen. Maybe more in Amtrak’s favor of 78-22? Still a sold majority thankfully.
> 
> As far as new corridors go exactly what happened in the 2009-2011 era. With the feds offering a 90/10 match the GOP leaders of FL, OH, IA told the feds to pound sand out of what I can only say was spite for Obama and Democrats. It was a 90/10 match! It would have helped those red states immensely. Thats the gist of it, exact numbers and how it went down can be in the forum achieves on here or googling.
> 
> ...


IIRC the difficulty was that the match only covered capital costs and the state would inherit 100% of operation costs which we know is a negative number with no hope of ever being otherwise. They choose not to add that into their budget.


----------



## jis (Feb 28, 2021)

City of Miami said:


> IIRC the difficulty was that the match only covered capital costs and the state would inherit 100% of operation costs which we know is a negative number with no hope of ever being otherwise. They choose not to add that into their budget.


Indeed, absent any help for operations at least for a significant startup period, some saw it as a poison pill they were unwilling to swallow.


----------



## City of Miami (Feb 28, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> As predicted the GOP is not as pro Amtrak as they were pre Biden. Viciously going after Amtrak in CoVid bill. Thankfully there’s a few level headed members of the GOP in the Senate and a slim Democratic majority. For the rest of the GOP that wants to keep our infrastructure in the Stone Age “aka 3rd world“ I hope they get voted out in 2 years to put it mildly. Infrastructure puts people to work.
> 
> “Rep. Ben Cline added the Amtrak spending to his list of "the most egregious provisions unrelated to COVID" in the stimulus bill.”
> 
> ...


It's all pork isn't it, by definition. That's the whole idea of stimulus. "Here, take this and go spend it somewhere".


----------



## John Bredin (Feb 28, 2021)

We know Amtrak has suffered due to Covid and has at least as much (political, not legal) "claim" on relief funds as any other industry. But the GOP schtick with any stimulus or relief bill is to describe the emergency incredibly narrowly and then loudly and repeatedly condemn anything in the bill they _claim_ to be unrelated to the emergency.

I heard a GOP congressman on one of the Sunday morning network political shows condemning that the Covid relief bill has arts funding, disingenuously (IMHO) ignoring that theaters and museums have lost patrons to Covid just as much as restaurant and bars, even more so as restaurants still get paid for takeout but not many theaters or museums get paid for online prerecorded (past) performances or art shows.

To bring my point back a bit more to transportation, I remember GOP Congressmen condemning the Superstorm Sandy relief bill for funding the New York City subway, studiously ignoring that the money was to _repair flood damage_ to the subway tunnels, electrical equipment, etc. To hear them speak, the only appropriate purpose of federal relief funds was to evacuate, feed, shelter, clothe and treat immediately-affected persons during and immediately after the storm, and public money that went to anything but flooded homeowners and reimbursing first responders was nigh-fraudulent pork.


----------



## jis (Feb 28, 2021)

John Bredin said:


> To bring my point back a bit more to transportation, I remember GOP Congressmen condemning the Superstorm Sandy relief bill for funding the New York City subway, studiously ignoring that the money was to _repair flood damage_ to the subway tunnels, electrical equipment, etc. To hear them speak, the only appropriate purpose of federal relief funds was to evacuate, feed, shelter, clothe and treat immediately-affected persons during and immediately after the storm, and public money that went to anything but flooded homeowners and reimbursing first responders was nigh-fraudulent pork.


That was Ted Cruze who is now falling all over himself trying to get the outcome of Texas' own stupidity funded adequately by the Feds. The hypocrisy knows no bounds with these scumbags.


----------



## me_little_me (Feb 28, 2021)

jis said:


> That was Ted Cruze who is now falling all over himself trying to get the outcome of Texas' own stupidity funded adequately by the Feds. The hypocrisy knows no bounds with these scumbags.


Unfortunately, hpocricy-itis is far more widespread and infests both sides. Witness our mayors, congresspeople and governors who speak one way but practice another. True, when all you care about is being heard, it's hard to make that happen with a mask on but when you open your mouth without one, you are spreading hypocrisy faster and further than covid because Covid can't be transmitted by video.


----------



## west point (Mar 1, 2021)

Airliners might have a lower subsidy but the private aircraft are getting a much bigger one than Amtrak has ever gotten.. Think what the private jets get ! BTW government will not gladly produce those figures.


----------



## neroden (Mar 1, 2021)

jis said:


> There is now an inherent divergence between the version of the Bill that the Senate will pass and the version that the House passed, and they will have to reconcile the difference.
> 
> Since the Senate Parliamentarian has rules that the $15/hr wage thing cannot be done using Budget Reconciliation and there is zero hope of the bill passing as a regular bill, it seems inevitable that a bill minus the $15/hr is the only one that has any chance of becoming law in March.
> 
> That is assuming no Democrats defect in the Senate and vote against the bill voted on in the Senate. Once that passes in the Senate, the House will either have to agree to swallow the bitter pill and basically accept that bill, go through another round of horse trading, or let it die. I don't think they will do the latter.


Manchin has ludicrous power. He doesn't seem to understand which side his bread is buttered on, though. His constituents support $15/hr minimum wage and have no interest at all in maintaining the filibuster. But he's the one who's preventing the Democrats from overruling the parlimentarian (something VP Hubert Humphrey apparently did routinely).


----------



## neroden (Mar 1, 2021)

City of Miami said:


> IIRC the difficulty was that the match only covered capital costs and the state would inherit 100% of operation costs which we know is a negative number with no hope of ever being otherwise. They choose not to add that into their budget.


Yeah, the Republican extremists in the Iowa state legislature chose not to bring business into Iowa (which the train would have brought), and to forego all the tax revenue they would have gotten, out of a shortsighted concern over the much smaller operating subsidy. Iowa City government was *furious*. Iowa's loss (particularly Iowa City) as people and businesses will continue to move out of Iowa; Illinois's gain.


----------



## Trogdor (Mar 1, 2021)

west point said:


> Airliners might have a lower subsidy but the private aircraft are getting a much bigger one than Amtrak has ever gotten.. Think what the private jets get ! BTW government will not gladly produce those figures.



What do private jets get in subsidy?


----------



## jis (Mar 1, 2021)

Trogdor said:


> What do private jets get in subsidy?


I am very curious to learn about those too, Specifically the ones that government actively tries to hide, and how they manage to avoid blurting them out under an FOIA request.


----------



## tricia (Mar 1, 2021)

neroden said:


> Manchin has ludicrous power. He doesn't seem to understand which side his bread is buttered on, though. His constituents support $15/hr minimum wage and have no interest at all in maintaining the filibuster. But he's the one who's preventing the Democrats from overruling the parlimentarian (something VP Hubert Humphrey apparently did routinely).



I'm pretty sure that the only "constituents" Manchin cares about are his funders. 

Years ago, I watched him lie to a man who was staging a sit-in outside his office because his granddaughter was sick from attending an elementary school adjacent to a large coal processing plant. Manchin must have had his empathy cauterized before running for office.

End rant. Back to the thread's actual topic.


----------



## IndyLions (Mar 1, 2021)

Trogdor said:


> What do private jets get in subsidy?



I doubt there are any direct subsidies to private jets.

However, the poster could have been talking about subsidies to private aviation. Yes, private aircraft pay landing fees etc. at the airports that they use. However – not all small airports make enough in landing fees to pay for their existence. Therefore, a lot of airports would go under without federal subsidy. Therefore, the private jets would have a lot fewer places to land. Not being able to land in as many places, and having to use less convenient airports instead – would take a lot of value out of owning a private jet.

That being said – do I support subsidizing private aviation via small airports? Yep.


----------



## PaTrainFan (Mar 1, 2021)

neroden said:


> Manchin has ludicrous power. He doesn't seem to understand which side his bread is buttered on, though. His constituents support $15/hr minimum wage and have no interest at all in maintaining the filibuster. But he's the one who's preventing the Democrats from overruling the parlimentarian (something VP Hubert Humphrey apparently did routinely).



The Senate Democrats caved and are taking the minimum wage out of the stimulus bill. Bad news for low wage workers, but this at least enhances that odds of the bill being approved.


----------



## jis (Mar 1, 2021)

PaTrainFan said:


> The Senate Democrats caved and are taking the minimum wage out of the stimulus bill. Bad news for low wage workers, but this at least enhances that odds of the bill being approved.


Given the almost non-viable razor thin majority with the help of the VP that Democrats have in the Senate this was a completely predictable outcome. I suspected all along that the $15/hr was going nowhere given the composition of the Democratic caucus in the Senate. 

Also, at least in my book changing the minimum wage is not really something one should be doing in a budget reconciliation, but I guess the entire country is well passed the point where anyone is bothering with discussing what is or is not proper anymore 

They could of course also take a potentially disastrous course and refuse to pass the bill without the $15, but that would be a rather spectacular exercise in cutting ones nose to spite ones face unfortunately.

What I find fascinating is that some people are going into this with expectations that are commensurate with the Democrats already having a 2/3rd majority in the Senate.


----------



## Willbridge (Mar 1, 2021)

IndyLions said:


> I doubt there are any direct subsidies to private jets.
> 
> However, the poster could have been talking about subsidies to private aviation. Yes, private aircraft pay landing fees etc. at the airports that they use. However – not all small airports make enough in landing fees to pay for their existence. Therefore, a lot of airports would go under without federal subsidy. Therefore, the private jets would have a lot fewer places to land. Not being able to land in as many places, and having to use less convenient airports instead – would take a lot of value out of owning a private jet.
> 
> That being said – do I support subsidizing private aviation via small airports? Yep.


Subsidies to general aviation may have changed since my ODOT days but likely not. Here's how it worked: the state aviation program is financed by taxes on aviation fuel and property. BUT, if your plane was licensed in Oregon, the fee went to the aviation program and your plane was now exempt from ad valorem taxation (same as autos, trucks, buses and boats). Most of the state aviation revenue comes from commercial air carriers; most of the expenditures benefit general aviation. This started fairly equitably when commercial air service was provided at many small cities and aviation fans dreamed of the "all up" world where there would be even more air served cities.


----------



## Acela150 (Mar 2, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> As predicted the GOP is not as pro Amtrak as they were pre Biden. Viciously going after Amtrak in CoVid bill. Thankfully there’s a few level headed members of the GOP in the Senate and a slim Democratic majority. For the rest of the GOP that wants to keep our infrastructure in the Stone Age “aka 3rd world“ I hope they get voted out in 2 years to put it mildly. Infrastructure puts people to work.
> 
> “Rep. Ben Cline added the Amtrak spending to his list of "the most egregious provisions unrelated to COVID" in the stimulus bill.”
> 
> ...



I've said it recently, and I believe that it was in this thread. Why the GOP goes after things like Amtrak when it's such a miniscule part of the budget and in this case, stimulus package is beyond me. I'm sure they'd like the result if their wasn't a stimulus package for Amtrak. Which a guess says would cost taxpayers billions more than if there was no stimulus package for them. 

And I'm sure that Rep. Cline's constituents appreciate his attempts to remove the service from his district. *eye rolls*


----------



## neroden (Mar 2, 2021)

tricia said:


> I'm pretty sure that the only "constituents" Manchin cares about are his funders.
> 
> Years ago, I watched him lie to a man who was staging a sit-in outside his office because his granddaughter was sick from attending an elementary school adjacent to a large coal processing plant. Manchin must have had his empathy cauterized before running for office.
> 
> End rant. Back to the thread's actual topic.


Wow. If Manchin's like that, then we should be able to work out his price. Most members of Congress who are like that are *cheap*. Buy him off to get rid of the filibuster. If the filibuster is removed, Manchin gets even *more* power than he has now, so even if he's just power-hungry, he should want that. The only thing the filibuster gains him is the ability to hide and pretend that he supports bills he opposes, and that shouldn't be worth that much to him. $50K? $100K?


----------



## MARC Rider (Mar 2, 2021)

jis said:


> That was Ted Cruze who is now falling all over himself trying to get the outcome of Texas' own stupidity funded adequately by the Feds. The hypocrisy knows no bounds with these scumbags.


Oh, he's trying to get reimbursed for his trip to Cancun?


----------



## MARC Rider (Mar 2, 2021)

neroden said:


> Wow. If Manchin's like that, then we should be able to work out his price. Most members of Congress who are like that are *cheap*. Buy him off to get rid of the filibuster. If the filibuster is removed, Manchin gets even *more* power than he has now, so even if he's just power-hungry, he should want that. The only thing the filibuster gains him is the ability to hide and pretend that he supports bills he opposes, and that shouldn't be worth that much to him. $50K? $100K?


I'm not sure that this is all Manchin's doing. I think that a lot of people in the Democratic leadership, even some who may approve of getting rid of the filibuster in concept, are a little antsy about doing it under the current circumstances, i.e. a razor-thin Democratic majority in both houses. The 2022 elections aren't that far off, and there's a good chance the Republicans could take one or more of the houses of Congress. If the Democrats have already set a precedent for eliminating the filibuster, imagine what sort of mischief the Republicans could do if they got back into control. We've seen what they did with judges, and how the Supreme Court has changed. Maybe after the 2022 elections, if the Democrats win it with larger majorities than they have now, there might be more interest in doing it.

In the short term for Amtrak funding, it probably doesn't matter, as there are the votes for that in this current bill, whatever posturing the opponents are doing on the media. And people working to increase the minimum wage can continue to work through the states, as I recall that minimum wages have gone up in some through referendums.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 3, 2021)

Two transportation projects have been removed from the bill. The BART extension and a bridge in NYS.









Pelosi's office says 2 controversial projects will be pulled from Covid bill | CNN Politics


Two big projects originally slated to be part of the Covid-19 relief bill but criticized as being unrelated to coronavirus relief will be pulled from the package, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office confirmed to CNN on Tuesday.




www.cnn.com


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Mar 5, 2021)

Apparently the draft bill from the Senate increased the funding for Amtrak from the $1.5 billion allocated in the House bill to $1.7 billion. $150 million of the extra funding is specific to the NEC.





__





Redirect Notice






www.google.com


----------



## Ziv (Mar 5, 2021)

I drove a 1981 Toyota Tercel from Miami to San Diego back in 1989 and it nearly killed me it was so boring. Back then there was almost no traffic. My car didn't have a cassette player and there was no good radio station most of the time. I was so bored I tried to see how many miles I could go without touching the steering wheel. I was leaning left and right to keep the car in the lane. I think I got to 40 miles without touching the wheel. The worst part was that if I went faster than 62 mph the car started to scream like it was going to fly apart. And 62 mph on I-10 felt like I could get out and run alongside the car. 
Good times. LOL!



MARC Rider said:


> I've driven I-10 from San Antonio to Fort Stockton, and later between Fort Stockton and Van Horn. Once you get west of Junction, there is literally nothing around along the road, but I was amazed at the amount of traffic, most of which I suppose was headed for El Paso. The trucks may have been headed to points beyond El Paso, too. The speed limit also jumps from 75 mph to 80 mph.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Mar 5, 2021)

Don’t be surprised if the Dems negotiate with themselves and Amtrak’s money gets slashed with the pretense of being made up in another bill. They just don’t know how to govern with a strong hand. All the cuts and negotiations we have seen with unemployment yesterday and today have been the Dems negotiating against themselves.

What really scares me and may be the reason for the above is Joe Manchen. He’s from what is arguably the poorest, least well off State and yet he is demanding cuts to aid/unemployment and against a true minimum wage increase. He’s no more a Dem than Lieberman was.

I don’t think it’s a matter of if but when he switches parties and becomes a “R” sinking Biden’s first 2 years (at least) and any hope of infrastructure stimulus. I’m sure McConnell and corporate interests are willing to give him whatever he wants to make the switch. Time will tell my bet sooner then later unfortunately.


----------



## jis (Mar 5, 2021)

Senate Democrats have just negotiated with themselves an additional $200 million for Amtrak, bumping up the total to $1.7 billion.









Highlights: What's changed in the Senate's COVID relief bill


Senate Democrats have come out with their version of the $1.9 trillion COVID-relief bill




www.baynews9.com


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Mar 5, 2021)

Touché. I hope it all stays in there and we have a robust meaningful infrastructure bill soon.


----------



## jis (Mar 5, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> Touché. I hope it all stays in there and we have a robust meaningful infrastructure bill soon.


The Infrastructure Bill is a different one from the current Bill. I suspect it will face much higher hurdles in the Senate since it will be subject to 60 votes. There is no way that anyone with a straight face can claim that one to be a budget reconciliation. It will require some amount of bi-partisan support, and will thus have to reflect the desires of those from across party lines that are voting for it to a requisite extent to get them to vote that way.

One needs to remember that Democrats barely have a majority, and people need to moderate their expectations, specially on money bills, based on that reality


----------



## PaTrainFan (Mar 5, 2021)

jis said:


> The Infrastructure Bill is a different one from the current Bill. I suspect it will face much higher hurdles in the Senate since it will be subject to 60 votes. There is no way that anyone with a straight face can claim that one to be a budget reconciliation. It will require some amount of bi-partisan support, and will thus have to reflect the desires of those from across party lines that are voting for it to a requisite extent to get them to vote that way.
> 
> One needs to remember that Democrats barely have a majority, and people need to moderate their expectations, specially on money bills, based on that reality



Infrastructure is something everyone likes to talk about but nobody can agree on the terms. The goals may be bipartisan, paying for it will never be. Love the idea of it; cyncal about the execution. Trump couldn't get it done when he had firm control of both houses.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 5, 2021)

jis said:


> Senate Democrats have just negotiated with themselves an additional $200 million for Amtrak, bumping up the total to $1.7 billion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But they did kill the Minimum Wage increase and are keeping the Weekly Unemployment Weekly Amount @ $300 since $10 an hour is so much itll make lazy people stay home instead of working! ( Sarcasm intended!)


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Mar 5, 2021)

4 anti Amtrak amendments tonight and tomorrow, 2 of which zero out Amtrak funding according to RPA. Now it gets interesting. Will Dems stay united on all 4. I’m honestly not sure.

Also not sure difference between the two zero funding amendments and why they aren’t combined into one. That’s all the info RPA gave out tonight.



Hagerty #893 – Strikes all Amtrak funding.
Johnson #1102 – Cuts Northeast Corridor funding from $970,388,160 to $742,500,500
Johnson # 1003 – Cuts National Network funding from $729,611,840 to $607,500,000.
Lee #1132 – Strikes all Amtrak funding


----------



## Cal (Mar 5, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> 4 anti Amtrak amendments tonight and tomorrow, 2 of which zero out Amtrak funding according to RPA.


----------



## TrackWalker (Mar 5, 2021)

jis said:


> Senate Democrats have just negotiated with themselves an additional $200 million for Amtrak, bumping up the total to $1.7 billion.



That $200M should be dedicated to returning dining cars to service and better food. 🍽


----------



## chrsjrcj (Mar 5, 2021)

I think Amtrak has enough bipartisan support today that I'd be beyond shocked if any of the anti-Amtrak amendments come close to passing. Also, don't the amendments need 60 votes to pass?


----------



## Ryan (Mar 5, 2021)

PaTrainFan said:


> Trump couldn't get it done when he had firm control of both houses.


Let's be honest, Trump's inability to do something has no bearing on how hard it is.



Amtrakfflyer said:


> Also not sure difference between the two zero funding amendments and why they aren’t combined into one.


The idea is to slow things down as much as possible, not actually do anything useful (see also: reading the entire bill aloud to an empty chamber).


----------



## lordsigma (Mar 6, 2021)

So far one amendment that involves Amtrak was brought to the floor - it cut the Northeast Corridor funding in the bill and redirected it to the Coast Guard - there were a few pro Amtrak republicans I was surprised voted for it - although it appeared to carefully avoid the Long Distance and State Supported funding and only target the NEC money - which of course mainly involves democratic northeast states. One Republican senator, Moran, who is a big Southwest Chief guy, voted with the Democrats against this one - it did not pass. The four mentioned by RPA have not made it to the floor yet (and may not.) Amendments submitted in writing in advance are initially tabled and may or may not actually be brought to the floor - Im guessing the leadership decides which amendments are to actually be brought forward in this case.

An Amendment that cut all Amtrak funding or cut LD and State Supported Corridor funding might draw out additional Republican no votes who have routes in their states.


----------



## jis (Mar 6, 2021)

TrackWalker said:


> That $200M should be dedicated to returning dining cars to service and better food. 🍽


If I understood it correctly this addition is directed with a specific purpose and is not available for Amtrak to use however it wishes. I have not read the bill yet so I don't know the details about it.


----------



## Barb Stout (Mar 6, 2021)

Ziv said:


> I drove a 1981 Toyota Tercel from Miami to San Diego back in 1989 and it nearly killed me it was so boring. Back then there was almost no traffic. My car didn't have a cassette player and there was no good radio station most of the time. I was so bored I tried to see how many miles I could go without touching the steering wheel. I was leaning left and right to keep the car in the lane. I think I got to 40 miles without touching the wheel. The worst part was that if I went faster than 62 mph the car started to scream like it was going to fly apart. And 62 mph on I-10 felt like I could get out and run alongside the car.
> Good times. LOL!


Reminiscent of several highways in ND and SD that I have driven on where I probably could have napped for a bit while driving due to no curves, flat road (and countryside), and little to no traffic.


----------



## gtalum (Mar 6, 2021)

PaTrainFan said:


> Infrastructure is something everyone likes to talk about but nobody can agree on the terms. The goals may be bipartisan, paying for it will never be. Love the idea of it; cyncal about the execution. Trump couldn't get it done when he had firm control of both houses.



To be fair, as with most things Trump never _tried_.


----------



## Cal (Mar 6, 2021)

The bill has passed the Senate believe, not sure what Amtrak amendments came.


----------



## McIntyre2K7 (Mar 6, 2021)

Cal said:


> The bill has passed the Senate believe, not sure what Amtrak amendments came.





Here's what's included in the bill: 

(a)
Northeast Corridor appropriation

In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated for fiscal year 2021, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $820,388,160, to remain available until September 30, 2024, for grants as authorized under section 11101(a) of the FAST Act (Public Law 114–94) to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.


(b)
National Network appropriation

In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated for fiscal year 2021, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $679,611,840, to remain available until September 30, 2024, for grants as authorized under section 11101(b) of the FAST Act (Public Law 114–94) to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.

(c)
Long-distance service restoration and employee recalls

Not less than $165,926,000 of the aggregate amounts made available under subsections (a) and (b) shall be for use by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation to—

(1)
restore, not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the frequency of rail service on long-distance routes (as defined in section 24102 of title 49, United States Code) that the National Railroad Passenger Corporation reduced the frequency of on or after July 1, 2020, and continue to operate such service at such frequency; and

(2)
recall and manage employees furloughed on or after October 1, 2020, as a result of efforts to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.


(d)
Use of funds in lieu of capital payments

Not less than $109,805,000 of the aggregate amounts made available under subsections (a) and (b)—

(1)
shall be for use by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation in lieu of capital payments from States and commuter rail passenger transportation providers that are subject to the cost allocation policy under section 24905(c) of title 49, United States Code; and

(2)
notwithstanding sections 24319(g) and 24905(c)(1)(A)(i) of title 49, United States Code, such amounts do not constitute cross-subsidization of commuter rail passenger transportation.


(e)
Use of funds for State payments for State-supported routes

(1)
In general

Of the amounts made available under subsection (b), $174,850,000 shall be for use by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation to offset amounts required to be paid by States for covered State-supported routes.

(2)
Funding share

The share of funding provided under paragraph (1) with respect to a covered State-supported route shall be distributed as follows:

(A)
Each covered State-supported route shall receive 7 percent of the costs allocated to the route in fiscal year 2019 under the cost allocation methodology adopted pursuant to section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–432).

(B)
Any remaining amounts after the distribution described in subparagraph (A) shall be apportioned to each covered State-supported route in proportion to the passenger revenue of such route and other revenue allocated to such route in fiscal year 2019 divided by the total passenger revenue and other revenue allocated to all covered State-supported routes in fiscal year 2019.

(3)
Covered State-supported route defined

In this subsection, the term covered State-supported route means a State-supported route, as such term is defined in section 24102 of title 49, United States Code, but does not include a State-supported route for which service was terminated on or before February 1, 2020.

f)
Use of funds for debt repayment or prepayment

Not more than $100,885,000 of the aggregate amounts made available under subsections (a) and (b) shall be—

(1)
for the repayment or prepayment of debt incurred by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation under financing arrangements entered into prior to the date of enactment of this Act; and

(2)
to pay required reserves, costs, and fees related to such debt, including for loans from the Department of Transportation and loans that would otherwise have been paid from National Railroad Passenger Corporation revenues.

(g)
Project management oversight

Not more than $2,000,000 of the aggregate amounts made available under subsections (a) and (b) shall be for activities authorized under section 11101(c) of the FAST Act (Public Law 114–94).


----------



## Cal (Mar 6, 2021)

Thanks!


----------



## Qapla (Mar 6, 2021)

OK - now if someone can translate that into normal English for those in the cheap seats ...


----------



## Cal (Mar 6, 2021)

Qapla said:


> OK - now if someone can translate that into normal English for those in the cheap seats ...


LOL, I mainly looked at the price tags.


----------



## jis (Mar 6, 2021)

Qapla said:


> OK - now if someone can translate that into normal English for those in the cheap seats ...



NEC $820M
National Network $680 M - of this $175M to pay for state supported routes operation
LD Service Restoration $166M with the stipulation that service must be restored within 90 days of the enactment of the act.
Cover capital payments from states $110M
Debt repayment or prepayment $101M
Project Management Oversight $2M
A total finally of $1.8+ million.


----------



## Cal (Mar 6, 2021)

So does that mean we can expect daily service by mid June? Maybe even early June?


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Mar 6, 2021)

Cal said:


> So does that mean we can expect daily service by mid June? Maybe even early June?


I've heard rumors from employees about restoration as of June 1st. Assuming this passes in the next week it would definitely have to happen by mid June.


----------



## Cal (Mar 6, 2021)

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> I've heard rumors from employees about restoration as of June 1st. Assuming this passes in the next week it would definitely have to happen by mid June.


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Mar 6, 2021)

Cal said:


>


Rumors? What rumors? Even if they cancel the 'beloved indulgent flex food' and provide no food at all... will there still be enough funding to fuel the engine that pulls the train???


----------



## Cal (Mar 6, 2021)

20th Century Rider said:


> Rumors? What rumors? Even if they cancel the 'beloved indulgent flex food' and provide no food at all... will there still be enough funding to fuel the engine that pulls the train???


?


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Mar 6, 2021)

McIntyre2K7 said:


> Here's what's included in the bill:
> 
> (a)
> Northeast Corridor appropriation
> ...


Gosh you're working hard... thought that job was for the Amtrak administrative bean counters... perhaps they may honor your efforts with a free coach seat between Albany and Schenectady!

Anyway... do hang in there... they may be listening.


----------



## 20th Century Rider (Mar 6, 2021)

Cal said:


> ?


Guess we'll see.


----------



## lordsigma (Mar 6, 2021)

The $200 million extra in the senate version was divided as follows - $150 million was added to the Northeast Corridor appropriation - $50 million was added to the national network appropriation. Here’s the full relevant text in the senate version:

SEC. 7101. GRANTS TO THE NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER 
CORPORATION.

(a) Northeast Corridor Appropriation.--In addition to 
amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated for fiscal 
year 2021, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
appropriated, $970,388,160, to remain available until 
September 30, 2024, for grants as authorized under section 
11101(a) of the FAST Act (Public Law 114-94) to prevent, 
prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.
(b) National Network Appropriation.--In addition to amounts 
otherwise available, there is appropriated for fiscal year 
2021, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
appropriated, $729,611,840, to remain available until 
September 30, 2024, for grants as authorized under section 
11101(b) of the FAST Act (Public Law 114-94) to prevent, 
prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.
(c) Long-distance Service Restoration and Employee 
Recalls.--Not less than $165,926,000 of the aggregate amounts 
made available under subsections (a) and (b) shall be for use 
by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation to--
(1) restore, not later than 90 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the frequency of rail service on long-
distance routes (as defined in section 24102 of title 49, 
United States Code) that the National Railroad Passenger 
Corporation reduced the frequency of on or after July 1, 
2020, and continue to operate such service at such frequency; 
and
(2) recall and manage employees furloughed on or after 
October 1, 2020, as a result of efforts to prevent, prepare 
for, and respond to coronavirus.
(d) Use of Funds in Lieu of Capital Payments.--Not less 
than $109,805,000 of the aggregate amounts made available 
under subsections (a) and (b)--
(1) shall be for use by the National Railroad Passenger 
Corporation in lieu of capital payments from States and 
commuter rail passenger transportation providers that are 
subject to the cost allocation policy under section 24905(c) 
of title 49, United States Code; and
(2) notwithstanding sections 24319(g) and 24905(c)(1)(A)(i) 
of title 49, United States Code, such amounts do not 
constitute cross-subsidization of commuter rail passenger 
transportation.
(e) Use of Funds for State Payments for State-supported 
Routes.--
(1) In general.--Of the amounts made available under 
subsection (b), $174,850,000 shall be for use by the National 
Railroad Passenger Corporation to offset amounts required to 
be paid by States for covered State-supported routes.
(2) Funding share.--The share of funding provided under 
paragraph (1) with respect to a covered State-supported route 
shall be distributed as follows:
(A) Each covered State-supported route shall receive 7 
percent of the costs allocated to the route in fiscal year 
2019 under the cost allocation methodology adopted pursuant 
to section 209 of the Passenger Rail Investment and 
Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432).
(B) Any remaining amounts after the distribution described 
in subparagraph (A) shall be apportioned to each covered 
State-supported route in proportion to the passenger revenue 
of such route and other revenue allocated to such route in 
fiscal year 2019 divided by the total passenger revenue and 
other revenue allocated to all covered State-supported routes 
in fiscal year 2019.
(3) Covered state-supported route defined.--In this 
subsection, the term ``covered State-supported route'' means 
a State-supported route, as such term is defined in section 
24102 of title 49, United States Code, but does not include a 
State-supported route for which service was terminated on or 
before February 1, 2020.
(f) Use of Funds for Debt Repayment or Prepayment.--Not 
more than $100,885,000 of the aggregate amounts made 
available under subsections (a) and (b) shall be--
(1) for the repayment or prepayment of debt incurred by the 
National Railroad Passenger Corporation under financing 
arrangements entered into prior to the date of enactment of 
this Act; and
(2) to pay required reserves, costs, and fees related to 
such debt, including for loans from the Department of 
Transportation and loans that would otherwise have been paid 
from National Railroad Passenger Corporation revenues.
(g) Project Management Oversight.--Not more than $2,000,000 
of the aggregate amounts made available under subsections (a) 
and (b) shall be for activities authorized under section 
11101(c) of the FAST Act (Public Law 114-94).


----------



## Cal (Mar 6, 2021)

I wonder when, and if, traditional dining will be restored...


----------



## joelkfla (Mar 6, 2021)

CNN says the House is expected to vote on Tuesday. So if Amtrak Joe signs it the same day, the 90-day deadline would be June 7.


----------



## lordsigma (Mar 7, 2021)

jis said:


> NEC $820M
> National Network $680 M - of this $175M to pay for state supported routes operation
> LD Service Restoration $166M with the stipulation that service must be restored within 90 days of the enactment of the act.
> Cover capital payments from states $110M
> ...


Hopefully you won't mind me reposting your clear summary with the updated Senate amounts:


NEC $970M
National Network $730 M - of this $175M to pay for state supported routes operation
LD Service Restoration $166M with the stipulation that service must be restored within 90 days of the enactment of the act.
Cover capital payments from states $110M
Debt repayment or prepayment $101M
Project Management Oversight $2M


----------



## lordsigma (Mar 7, 2021)

Cal said:


> I wonder when, and if, traditional dining will be restored...


According to the website, yes - it's still there for late May. I'd figure that if anything changes with F&B it would occur when trains go back to daily service - given the proximity of the posted flex dining end date to the likely timeline for daily service restoration - which would make the most sense logistically. I have to imagine though at best, traditional dining (or a pandemic friendly version of it) would only return to the trains that had it before the pandemic - I think Amtrak is going to stick with flexible dining in the east - but hopefully eventually make some further improvements.


----------



## PaTrainFan (Mar 7, 2021)

Basically, this saves the company from bankruptcy and puts it back on sound financial footing. According to a CNN story today, there may be enough vaccinatons by summer for herd immunity, just in time for peak travel season. With the pent-up demand for free movement, the timing for this couldn't be better.


----------



## McIntyre2K7 (Mar 7, 2021)

20th Century Rider said:


> Gosh you're working hard... thought that job was for the Amtrak administrative bean counters... perhaps they may honor your efforts with a free coach seat between Albany and Schenectady!
> 
> Anyway... do hang in there... they may be listening.



Thanks. I'm pretty much a newbie to trains and Amtrak. It's a hobby I picked up after I got laid off last April. They called me back last October so that was good and they allowed me to work from home(there's a good amount of downtime on Thursdays/Fridays so I use that as research time). I've never been on Amtrak and I would love to travel once this is over. My first ride will probably be this fall. USF plays NC State in Raleigh. Thinking about flying up to see the game and then taking the Silver Star back home the next day. (I apologize for going off topic).


----------



## Cal (Mar 7, 2021)

lordsigma said:


> According to the website, yes - it's still there for late May. I'd figure that if anything changes with F&B it would occur when trains go back to daily service - given the proximity of the posted flex dining end date to the likely timeline for daily service restoration - which would make the most sense logistically. I have to imagine though at best, traditional dining (or a pandemic friendly version of it) would only return to the trains that had it before the pandemic - I think Amtrak is going to stick with flexible dining in the east - but hopefully eventually make some further improvements.


All we can do is hope


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Mar 7, 2021)

We can hope Amtrak doesn’t wait til June1st to load the summer schedule of daily service. Reservations should be able to be taken within a week after the bill is signed. Unfortunately that language should have been written in the bill knowing this managements competence or lack there of. Every week reservations can’t be made for the peak summer season equals lost $$$.


----------



## west point (Mar 8, 2021)

At the end of MAY the rate of 2M vaccinations a day ( 86 days x 2 = 172M vaccinations ) + will enable every person over 16 years old that wants to be vaccinated to at least have their first one. That means that if there is a pent up demand for travel Amtrak may be overwhelmed. Now if distancing is still at 50% that is another matter. 

IHO the lack of vaccinations of 16 and under is a real drag on many person's ability to travel. A daughter is spending over an hour a day to get her 3 young ones into any trial but so far no luck.


----------



## Qapla (Mar 8, 2021)

Now that we've had a history lesson about how bills are passed (or not) maybe we can get back to discussing how the money granted to Amtrak will be spent.

Will Amtrak find some way to use the money to avoid enhancing the LD network?


----------



## jis (Mar 8, 2021)

Qapla said:


> Now that we've had a history lesson about how bills are passed (or not) maybe we can get back to discussing how the money granted to Amtrak will be spent.
> 
> Will Amtrak find some way to use the money to avoid enhancing the LD network?


That should be easy. The money is for restoring service to the pre-pandemic levels. It is not for enhancing the network.  

The national network and NEC amounts are " to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. ". Does not sound like there is much room for diverting anything towards any enhancements, specially considering these are some of the minimal amounts that Amtrak requested for tiding them over the pandemic dug financial hole.


----------



## Cal (Mar 8, 2021)

Qapla said:


> Now that we've had a history lesson about how bills are passed (or not) maybe we can get back to discussing how the money granted to Amtrak will be spent.
> 
> Will Amtrak find some way to use the money to avoid enhancing the LD network?


You and me think alike


----------



## Night Ranger (Mar 8, 2021)

Qapla said:


> Now that we've had a history lesson about how bills are passed (or not) maybe we can get back to discussing how the money granted to Amtrak will be spent.
> 
> Will Amtrak find some way to use the money to avoid enhancing the LD network?


Your post reminded me of this Schoolhouse Rock oldie but goodie, "I'm just a Bill." It's the way the system is SUPPOSED to work for Amtrak funding or anything else.


----------



## McIntyre2K7 (Mar 10, 2021)

BREAKING: The bill has enough votes to pass in the House (220 -211). Expect President Biden to sign the bill on Friday. Looks like full service will be returning.


----------



## jis (Mar 10, 2021)

It just passed the House and is on its way to the President. (3/10/21 afternoon)


----------



## Palmetto (Mar 10, 2021)

And if you try booking an LD trip at the end of May, it seems to be doable 3 days in a row, so I guess tri-weekly is already a thing of the past. Amtrak must have been ready to jump as soon as the bill passed.


----------



## Exvalley (Mar 10, 2021)

Weird. They added the Lake Shore Limited to 7 days per week, but it is not offering any sleeper accommodations on several days. October 25th is a good example.


----------



## PaTrainFan (Mar 10, 2021)

So the clock starts ticking on 90 days. I don't know the complexities of calling back their workforce but let's hope they can get it going earlier. And maybe they start some additional promotions to get people back on trains, though the covid capacity restrictions likely remain in place for some time.


----------



## CACharger262 (Mar 10, 2021)

Dates rumored for daily long distance restoration


May 24: _California Zephyr_, _Coast Starlight_, _Empire Builder_, _Texas Eagle_
May 31: _Capitol Limited_, _City of New Orleans_, _Lake Shore Limited_, _Southwest Chief _
June 7: _Crescent_, _Palmetto_, _Silver Meteor_, _Silver Star _


----------



## TheVig (Mar 10, 2021)

Yep. They are starting to load the calendar. Crescent is now available on the dates I want in October.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 10, 2021)

PaTrainFan said:


> So the clock starts ticking on 90 days. I don't know the complexities of calling back their workforce but let's hope they can get it going earlier. And maybe they start some additional promotions to get people back on trains, though the covid capacity restrictions likely remain in place for some time.


@Triley


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Mar 10, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Weird. They added the Lake Shore Limited to 7 days per week, but it is not offering any sleeper accommodations on several days. October 25th is a good example.


Even though the daily schedule has now been uploaded into the booking system, there are still adjustments that need to be made. Many connections are still not available to book on certain days, so I would assume that is a similar case and those trains will actually have sleeping cars.


----------



## JayPea (Mar 10, 2021)

Just in time for a trip I had scheduled in June. I was going to rent a car near me here in SE Washington state and take a few days exploring the corners of Montana I haven't been to yet. The three day a week schedule didn't work for me to take the EB into Montana from Spokane and rent a car from there. Now I can do a train-car combo. Add to that I will have had my Covid immunization(s) by then, so I will be good to go!


----------



## TC_NYC (Mar 10, 2021)

JayPea said:


> Just in time for a trip I had scheduled in June. I was going to rent a car near me here in SE Washington state and take a few days exploring the corners of Montana I haven't been to yet. The three day a week schedule didn't work for me to take the EB into Montana from Spokane and rent a car from there. Now I can do a train-car combo. Add to that I will have had my Covid immunization(s) by then, so I will be good to go!


Come on down to Pasco and board the train at a reasonable hour!


----------



## Cal (Mar 10, 2021)

WOOHOO 

Sorry, had to let it out


----------



## Qapla (Mar 10, 2021)

Why it will take until Friday for Biden to sign the bill .... who knows


----------



## tonijustine (Mar 10, 2021)

I realize that the bill does not address dining, but it does say that furloughed employees must be recalled. Do you think it safe to assume that since the staff is coming back (the biggest expense on the F&B side) that they won't have full staffs dedicated to microwave heating meals, right?


----------



## TrackWalker (Mar 10, 2021)

Qapla said:


> Why it will take until Friday for Biden to sign the bill .... who knows



I can wait one more day.


----------



## Cal (Mar 10, 2021)

tonijustine said:


> I realize that the bill does not address dining, but it does say that furloughed employees must be recalled. Do you think it safe to assume that since the staff is coming back (the biggest expense on the F&B side) that they won't have full staffs dedicated to microwave heating meals, right?


I mean, this is Amtrak we are talking about, so who knows


----------



## JayPea (Mar 10, 2021)

TC_NYC said:


> Come on down to Pasco and board the train at a reasonable hour!


There are times when it is very tempting to do just that.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Mar 10, 2021)

This is the same company that’s using brand new dining cars as axle counts on corridor trains. We can’t assume anything. It wouldn’t surprise me if they put them all back on payroll and had them sit reserve all month long doing nothing.

That being said I’m hopeful Flynn does start to do the right thing and put things back in order. He’s sent out the right press releases and thank you’s to all involved in congress. The two things that need to be addressed immediately in my opinion are food service and bringing sleeper fares back down to consistently reasonable levels.
Seeing they got what is essentially a get out of jail free card to operate til the end of the fiscal year they should eliminate the top 3 fare buckets and market the hell out of the sleepers. Lots of people are curious about “private rooms” aka sleeper car travel post covid and there is a pent up travel demand the likes of which our country probably hasn’t seen before. Introducing quality sleeper travel now to the masses could set the company for many years to come.



tonijustine said:


> I realize that the bill does not address dining, but it does say that furloughed employees must be recalled. Do you think it safe to assume that since the staff is coming back (the biggest expense on the F&B side) that they won't have full staffs dedicated to microwave heating meals, right?


----------



## CTANut (Mar 10, 2021)

The bill just passed the House this afternoon, and is guaranteed to be signed by Biden. I have been waiting for this day for a long, long, time. Looks like it will happen in May.




__





With Increased Demand and Congressional Funding, Amtrak Restores 12 Long Distance Routes to Daily Service


/PRNewswire/ -- As part of its COVID-19 recovery efforts, Amtrak announces full restoration of daily service for 12 long distance routes following...




www.prnewswire.com


----------



## joelkfla (Mar 10, 2021)

Qapla said:


> Why it will take until Friday for Biden to sign the bill .... who knows


They said paperwork, partially because it is so huge.


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 10, 2021)

Put these two things together in hopes it'll help figure out the current and future departure days:


----------



## HammerJack (Mar 10, 2021)

Any word on corridor services that had their frequencies reduced? Example: The Wolverine getting slashed from 3x to 1x per day is pretty inconvenient. The Hiawatha’s are also operating on a severely reduced schedule. I’m not aware of anything in the COVID bill that addressed corridor service frequency.


----------



## Cal (Mar 10, 2021)

HammerJack said:


> Any word on corridor services that had their frequencies reduced? Example: The Wolverine getting slashed from 3x to 1x per day is pretty inconvenient. The Hiawatha’s are also operating on a severely reduced schedule. I’m not aware of anything in the COVID bill that addressed corridor service frequency.


I am curious about that too. Cascades are only x1 per day, California Services are halved I believe as well


----------



## McIntyre2K7 (Mar 10, 2021)

Cal said:


> I am curious about that too. Cascades are only x1 per day, California Services are halved I believe as well




There was funding for the state sponsored services in the bill as well. So I would expect those go to back to normal service as well.


----------



## west point (Mar 10, 2021)

Memorial day this year is Monday May 31. It is a shame that all services will not start by Thursday May 27th to cover the holiday.


----------



## John Bredin (Mar 11, 2021)

HammerJack said:


> Any word on corridor services that had their frequencies reduced? Example: The Wolverine getting slashed from 3x to 1x per day is pretty inconvenient. The Hiawatha’s are also operating on a severely reduced schedule. I’m not aware of anything in the COVID bill that addressed corridor service frequency.


The States that fund the corridors decided to reduce service, and it's in their hands to restore it. Look at the train tracker map on any given day during daytime and California nearly looks like the Northeast Corridor. Conversely, there's been no Vermont service (_Vermonter_ or _Ethan Allen_) and no New York service north of Albany (_Adirondack_), so the Midwest cuts are somewhere inbetween.

Congress provided funds to the States, as noted, but I don't think it came with reopening conditions like the funds directly to Amtrak.


----------



## Exvalley (Mar 11, 2021)

I would not be surprised if Vermont restores Ethan Allen and Vermonter service by this summer. The vaccination rates in Vermont are going well, and the Governor has made it clear that he will start easing restrictions.


----------



## CTANut (Mar 11, 2021)

Seems like this may end flexible dining as well.
(c) Long-Distance Service Restoration And Employee Recalls.—Not less than $165,926,000 of the aggregate amounts made available under subsections (a) and (b) shall be for use by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation to—
(1) restore, not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the frequency of rail service on long-distance routes (as defined in section 24102 of title 49, United States Code) that the National Railroad Passenger Corporation reduced the frequency of on or after July 1, 2020, and continue to operate such service at such frequency; and
(2) recall and manage employees furloughed on or after October 1, 2020, as a result of efforts to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.


----------



## iliketrains (Mar 11, 2021)

As an Amtrakian, I just need to say, "WHOHOO!!!!".


----------



## tonijustine (Mar 11, 2021)

CTANut said:


> Seems like this may end flexible dining as well.
> (c) Long-Distance Service Restoration And Employee Recalls.—Not less than $165,926,000 of the aggregate amounts made available under subsections (a) and (b) shall be for use by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation to—
> (1) restore, not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the frequency of rail service on long-distance routes (as defined in section 24102 of title 49, United States Code) that the National Railroad Passenger Corporation reduced the frequency of on or after July 1, 2020, and continue to operate such service at such frequency; and
> (2) recall and manage employees furloughed on or after October 1, 2020, as a result of efforts to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.



How so? I am truly hopeful that is the case as I just booked my mid-October trip on the Builder last night and there is nothing on the Flex menu my son will eat. I know they were targeting the end of May for flex dining on the Western LD routes, but I would welcome language that doesn't let them wiggle out of that date. I assume that most of the losses they were trying to prevent during the reduced schedule was salary not actual cost of food and beverage, so I would be delighted to know that there were some teeth to getting the full menu back AND that I wasn't just being overly logical in my assessment.


----------



## Cal (Mar 11, 2021)

iliketrains said:


> As an Amtrakian, I just need to say, "WHOHOO!!!!".


See, I wasn't the only one.


----------



## Cal (Mar 11, 2021)

John Bredin said:


> Look at the train tracker map on any given day during daytime and California nearly looks like the Northeast Corridor.


Nearly? I usually see double the amount of trains on the NEC than all Amtrk trains in California combined.


----------



## John Bredin (Mar 11, 2021)

Cal said:


> Nearly? I usually see double the amount of trains on the NEC than all Amtrk trains in California combined.


True, but at some times of day when there are few Amtrak trains moving in the Midwest, all those California blips moving around the tracker map look like a hive of activity by comparison.


----------



## Cal (Mar 11, 2021)

John Bredin said:


> True, but at some times of day when there are few Amtrak trains moving in the Midwest, all those California blips moving around the tracker map look like a hive of activity by comparison.


True. Although _only _have 6 surfliners in each direction during these times is sad to see


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Mar 11, 2021)

Biden signs historic $1.9 trillion Covid-19 relief law


President Joe Biden signed his sweeping $1.9 trillion Covid-19 economic relief package into law on Thursday afternoon.




www.cnn.com


----------



## Exvalley (Mar 11, 2021)

Good news for Amtrak, that's for sure. $1.9 trillion equals $6,000 for every person in the country. I would have been okay if they just gave me an Amtrak voucher for that amount.


----------



## Cal (Mar 11, 2021)

Exvalley said:


> Good news for Amtrak, that's for sure. $1.9 trillion equals $6,000 for every person in the country. I would have been okay if they just gave me an Amtrak voucher for that amount.


Hah, that'd be great.


----------



## jis (Mar 11, 2021)

Cal said:


> Hah, that'd be great.


Yeah right. And then the states can increase your taxes to recover the money that was appropriated for them originally 

But of course this piece of random political commentary has nothing to do with Amtrak either


----------



## Cal (Mar 11, 2021)

jis said:


> Yeah right. And then the states can increase your taxes to recover the money that was appropriated for them originally
> 
> But of course this piece of random political commentary has nothing to do with Amtrak either


----------



## Dakota 400 (Mar 11, 2021)

It is to Amtrak's benefit as well as other mass transit systems that there is money in this Bill for them and not have to wait for, if, a bill dedicated for infrastructure is passed. Two moderate Democrat Senators, King and Testor, have said today that the time has come to begin to consider how what Congress is enacting will be funded. Add those two to Senator Manchin and Senator Sinema who seem to be the most conservative of the Democrat caucus and would likely support the other Senators' thoughts, the President and the Senate Majority Leader have a "problem" in getting additional big ticket legislation enacted. It's been reported that there are some House members in the Democrat caucus who are also expressing some concerns as well.


----------



## Tlcooper93 (Mar 11, 2021)

All things considered, 2021 is turning out to be a pretty decent year for Amtrak/rail in America:
-Moynihan Train Hall supplementing the terrible Penn Station
-Restoration of LD routes in a time when many would have said those routes were nearing the end
-Sleepers return to the NE Regional Train
-Maine voted yes on a feasibility study to extend the Downeaster to Bangor (As someone who goes to Maine 4 months a year, this would be huge)

Perhaps we can hope for the California HSR Project to make progress, and Brightline to restart ASAP.


----------



## PaTrainFan (Mar 11, 2021)

Dakota 400 said:


> It is to Amtrak's benefit as well as other mass transit systems that there is money in this Bill for them and not have to wait for, if, a bill dedicated for infrastructure is passed. Two moderate Democrat Senators, King and Testor, have said today that the time has come to begin to consider how what Congress is enacting will be funded. Add those two to Senator Manchin and Senator Sinema who seem to be the most conservative of the Democrat caucus and would likely support the other Senators' thoughts, the President and the Senate Majority Leader have a "problem" in getting additional big ticket legislation enacted. It's been reported that there are some House members in the Democrat caucus who are also expressing some concerns as well.



As with anything in a narrowly divided Congress, the devil is in the details in how to pay for it....









Biden wants bipartisan support for infrastructure, but GOP and Dems are already drawing battle lines


Democratic proposals to cover costs – including raising taxes on gas, corporations and electric vehicles – would likely only pass along party lines.




www.cnbc.com


----------



## MARC Rider (Mar 11, 2021)

PaTrainFan said:


> As with anything in a narrowly divided Congress, the devil is in the details in how to pay for it....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Aha, and the infrastructure bill will not just be pure deficit spending, they'll have proposed ways to pay for it. This should provide cover for the Democratic "moderates."


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 11, 2021)

HammerJack said:


> Any word on corridor services that had their frequencies reduced?


Why not do some dummy bookings to see if and when they'll be restored?


----------



## Tennessee Traveler (Mar 11, 2021)

The newly daily schedules are in the reservation system as of Wednesday, March 10, at least for the Empire Builder as I made my roomette reservation for Sept 5 Chicago to Seattle for total cost $502.50.


----------



## John Bredin (Mar 12, 2021)

Speaking of dummy bookings, I just checked the Hiawatha and the full slate of 7 round-trips (plus the Friday late night northbound train 343) reappears Fri. May 21! Alas, just that route, not the Lincoln Service, all-Illinois routes (Quincy and Carbondale), or Wolverine.


----------



## Cal (Mar 12, 2021)

John Bredin said:


> Speaking of dummy bookings, I just checked the Hiawatha and the full slate of 7 round-trips (plus the Friday late night northbound train 343) reappears Fri. May 21! Alas, just that route, not the Lincoln Service, all-Illinois routes (Quincy and Carbondale), or Wolverine.


Still only 6 round trips on the Surfline. I hate seeing it so dead


----------



## Cal (Mar 12, 2021)

It looks like traditional dining is coming back on May 24th to all western LD trains. On the 25th, train 4 shows traditional dining.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Mar 12, 2021)

Traditional, Flex, Contemporary, etc. If it does indeed comeback in May it probably won’t be the same as the old traditional dining and they will have another acronym for it. 

Amtrak is about to have an explosion of first time riders who have no clue what all the acronyms mean. My vote is the call the new service simply “cooked to order meals”.


----------



## Cal (Mar 12, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> Traditional, Flex, Contemporary, etc. If it does indeed comeback in May it probably won’t be the same as the old traditional dining and they will have another acronym for it.
> 
> Amtrak is about to have an explosion of first time riders who have no clue what all the acronyms mean. My vote is the call the new service simply “cooked to order meals”.


We'll see. I hope the new Amtrak management doesn't do that.


----------



## MARC Rider (Mar 12, 2021)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> Traditional, Flex, Contemporary, etc. If it does indeed comeback in May it probably won’t be the same as the old traditional dining and they will have another acronym for it.
> 
> Amtrak is about to have an explosion of first time riders who have no clue what all the acronyms mean. My vote is the call the new service simply “cooked to order meals”.


Um, even before they instituted flex dining, most of the meals weren't "cooked to order." In fact, about the only thing "cooked to order" was the steak. And good railroad food doesn't need to be "cooked to order," as all of the accounts I've read of the food served on VIA's _Ocean_ will attest.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Mar 12, 2021)

In addition to the return to more traditional dining, will the lounges also be returning to more standard operation? While this hasn't had much impact on the western trains, the CL has been running without a SSL and the seating in the cafe on single level LDs has been operating as take-out only with no seating available.


----------



## Cal (Mar 12, 2021)

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> In addition to the return to more traditional dining, will the lounges also be returning to more standard operation? While this hasn't had much impact on the western trains, the CL has been running without a SSL and the seating in the cafe on single level LDs has been operating as take-out only with no seating available.


 Only time will tell


----------



## Tony in Ann Arbor (Mar 13, 2021)

Michigan Service (Ann Arbor - Chicago is what I checked) resumes 3 per day commencing October 4th.


----------



## Cal (Mar 13, 2021)

Looks like 13 round trips on the surfline are to return on October 4th


----------



## JC_620 (Mar 13, 2021)

Tlcooper93 said:


> All things considered, 2021 is turning out to be a pretty decent year for Amtrak/rail in America:
> -Moynihan Train Hall supplementing the terrible Penn Station
> -Restoration of LD routes in a time when many would have said those routes were nearing the end
> -Sleepers return to the NE Regional Train
> ...


Yes but it also would be nice to get tri weekly service restored to the Gulf Coast on the Sunset Limited, or maybe even consider bringing back the Desert Wind for Las Vegas service but I realize that Rome was not built in a day so...


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Mar 13, 2021)

John Bredin said:


> Speaking of dummy bookings, I just checked the Hiawatha and the full slate of 7 round-trips (plus the Friday late night northbound train 343) reappears Fri. May 21! Alas, just that route, not the Lincoln Service, all-Illinois routes (Quincy and Carbondale), or Wolverine.


I believe that was the case before the stimulus passed. While I don't remember the exact date, I did some dummy bookings about a month ago and the Hiawatha was scheduled to return to it's full schedule in May.


----------

