# Amendment to CR blocking furloughs and thrice weekly long distance trains



## lordsigma (Sep 28, 2020)

Daines from Montana has filed an amendment in the Senate to the CR that would require Amtrak to delay any furloughs and LD cuts until the end of the CR period. See RPA for full details. Vote on amendment and bill will take place tomorrow.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Sep 28, 2020)

lordsigma said:


> Daines from Montana has filed an amendment in the Senate to the CR that would require Amtrak to delay any furloughs and LD cuts until the end of the CR period. See RPA for full details. Vote on amendment and bill will take place tomorrow.


Hopefully itll pass in time before the Trains are tied down and the Crews are furloughed!


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 28, 2020)

Hearing anything about otentially preventing the cutbacks is a good thing, but I have a few questions regarding this amendment. Perhaps RPA will answer them but I have yet to see anything from them.

1. If this were to pass tomorrow, would it actually be possible to just cancel the cutbacks or would there still be a short period of time with tri-weekly service?

2. Is any additional funding for Amtrak to be included? If not, would Amtrak cut back elsewhere such as on long-term infrastructure projects or NEC service?


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Sep 28, 2020)

Amtrak should cut back on routes that are incurring the most loses. From Amtrak’s own accounts that is the NEC and Acela.


----------



## Ziv (Sep 28, 2020)

Cutting the Acela and NE Regional schedules by 20% (perhaps another percentage would work better) would have much less of a negative impact on the region served than cutting the EB or CZ to just 3 times per week. The question is, would NEC cuts of 20% cause unacceptable crowding in the remaining scheduled trips. If it did, the idea is probably a non-starter.



AmtrakFlyer said:


> Amtrak should cut back on routes that are incurring the most loses. From Amtrak’s own accounts that is the NEC and Acela.


----------



## John Bobinyec (Sep 28, 2020)

Isn't the loading of each train capped so that unacceptable crowding can't happen?

jb


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie (Sep 28, 2020)

Is this a floor vote or a committee vote?

Does the House need to now also approve any bill amendments?


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Sep 28, 2020)

Plus as far as loading and crowding goes Amtrak management seems to be oblivious to the fact they can adjust consist sizes.

Smaller DAILY network trains and FEWER but LONGER NEC trains would seem to check a lot of boxes to mitigate the issues of today. It’s not rocket science people but this management really leaves a lot to be desired.


----------



## lordsigma (Sep 28, 2020)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Is this a floor vote or a committee vote?
> 
> Does the House need to now also approve any bill amendments?


Floor vote on amendments and the passing of the CR are tomorrow.


----------



## bms (Sep 28, 2020)

I guess any chance of continuing service is good news, but Congress has put Amtrak in a pretty terrible position of not knowing Tuesday whether trains are running Thursday. This amendment would only continue service through December 11, and would result in a lot of empty trains since Amtrak hasn't been able to sell tickets in advance. A railroad can't operate successfully on a month-to-month basis.


----------



## lordsigma (Sep 28, 2020)

One interesting note I just realized now after reading another article - the CR as passed by the house has one item related to Amtrak - it eliminates the Mica mandate. Subsection D of the Mica food and beverage section which is the effective portion (stating that federal funds may not be used for food and beverage operating losses) is removed by the CR.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Sep 28, 2020)

Kinda smart slipping it in now when it’s a moot point. Hopefully in a year we will see it pay off when Amtrak doesn’t have as hostile a DOT and as incompetent management as they do today.


----------



## Acela150 (Sep 28, 2020)

H.R.8337 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and Other Extensions Act


Summary of H.R.8337 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and Other Extensions Act



www.congress.gov


----------



## Siegmund (Sep 28, 2020)

Miracles never cease. Daines has actually managed to listen to his constituents, one time in six years.

It's fortunate that he introduced the amendment rather than Tester; it has a better chance of passing this way. Though not 100% clear to me whether it's an issue that the bigger states care about.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Sep 28, 2020)

Siegmund said:


> Miracles never cease. Daines has actually managed to listen to his constituents, one time in six years.
> 
> It's fortunate that he introduced the amendment rather than Tester; it has a better chance of passing this way. Though not 100% clear to me whether it's an issue that the bigger states care about.


Let's hope more than 50 Senators care about this issue, they seem to be hell bent on doing only two things,filling the Supreme Court Vacancy and getting re-elected!( Job #1 for all Politicians!)


----------



## lordsigma (Sep 29, 2020)

Kicking the can down the road on this issue so that it can be addressed and debated in a full year longer term bill before Amtrak moves ahead with changes makes some political sense. Having a bunch of layoffs before the election isn't helpful. Frankly I'm surprised there isn't more momentum to help the airline industry with at least a short term relief to get them through the next few months.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 29, 2020)

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Hearing anything about otentially preventing the cutbacks is a good thing, but I have a few questions regarding this amendment. Perhaps RPA will answer them but I have yet to see anything from them.
> 
> 1. If this were to pass tomorrow, would it actually be possible to just cancel the cutbacks or would there still be a short period of time with tri-weekly service?
> 
> 2. Is any additional funding for Amtrak to be included? If not, would Amtrak cut back elsewhere such as on long-term infrastructure projects or NEC service?


CAVEAT: There may be more than one proposal floating about, so I _might_ have the wrong one. I don't _think_ I do, but...well, it's DC. Here's what I see:

(1) That's not entirely certain. Depending on exactly _when_ it passes, there's a chance you'd see a few days of reduced service but I think if it gets through. There's _just_ enough of a lag that this might be avoided.

(2) Additional funding is included in at least one proposal I'm seeing (not sure if it's the same one, so caveats apply). Amtrak said they needed $219m for the LD trains (that's the anticipated additional losses), so one of the clauses is essentially "Here's $219m, now run the [BLEEP]ing trains you idiots." I think the total funding slug is about $2.4bn. _NOTABLY_ it also sets the state share of corridor funding at 7% of allocated costs from last year (and puts about $300m towards that as well), which would be a significant cut.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Sep 29, 2020)

Fingers crossed. This is the first of many hoops over the next few months and year. Election included.


----------



## Exvalley (Sep 29, 2020)

Unfortunately a lot of damage has already been done. I have cancelled two trips in October because Amtrak cancelled my trains.


----------



## Nick Farr (Sep 29, 2020)

AmtrakFlyer said:


> Amtrak should cut back on routes that are incurring the most loses. From Amtrak’s own accounts that is the NEC and Acela.



The NEC and Acela are:

1) The best viable alternative to all other forms of intercity transit for all potential customers.
2) Serve many more potential customers than the LD trains.
3) Have much higher utilization than the LD routes.
4) Are a kind of corridor we want to see repeated throughout the country

*The NEC is not the enemy of the LD trains. The only way we'll ever get true, viable intercity rail transit in the US is if the NEC pattern is repeated throughout the country.*


----------



## jis (Sep 29, 2020)

lordsigma said:


> One interesting note I just realized now after reading another article - the CR as passed by the house has one item related to Amtrak - it eliminates the Mica mandate. Subsection D of the Mica food and beverage section which is the effective portion (stating that federal funds may not be used for food and beverage operating losses) is removed by the CR.


They should have done that four years back. Back then they said it cannot be done in an Appropriation Bill. It must wait for an Authorization Bill. I guess they changed their mind after the entire fleet of horses have fled the barn. Typical of this country of late. Try everything that does not work first, before stumbling onto something that works, that has been obvious to many for a while, but still, a dollar short and a minute too late. Sigh


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 29, 2020)

Nick Farr said:


> The NEC and Acela are:
> 
> 1) The best viable alternative to all other forms of intercity transit for all potential customers.
> 2) Serve many more potential customers than the LD trains.
> ...


I definitely agree that the NEC is not the enemy, but in this instance cuts there seem to make more sense if it is a case of one or the other. As has been discussed extensively here, LD routes experience large demand reductions when service is cut to less than daily. Meanwhile, normal NEC service is roughly two trains per hour, so cutting that in half would still leave enough options so that demand wouldn't be as dramatically impacted.


----------



## jis (Sep 29, 2020)

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> I definitely agree that the NEC is not the enemy, but in this instance cuts there seem to make more sense if it is a case of one or the other. As has been discussed extensively here, LD routes experience large demand reductions when service is cut to less than daily. Meanwhile, normal NEC service is roughly two trains per hour, so cutting that in half would still leave enough options so that demand wouldn't be as dramatically impacted.


Have you perhaps noticed that NEC service has been seriously reduced too? There is no two trains per hour service for most of the day anymore, and there is no hourly Acela service either. 

The argument would appear to be that NEC should be cut further beyond what is already in place, based on of course no idea whether that would reduce net earnings or not.


----------



## jruff001 (Sep 29, 2020)

jis said:


> Have you perhaps noticed that NEC service has been seriously reduced too? There is no two trains per hour service for most of the day anymore, and there is no hourly Acela service either.


Yep, and indeed Acela trains were suspended completely for a couple of months during the lowest ridership around April / May.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 29, 2020)

jis said:


> Have you perhaps noticed that NEC service has been seriously reduced too? There is no two trains per hour service for most of the day anymore, and there is no hourly Acela service either.
> 
> The argument would appear to be that NEC should be cut further beyond what is already in place, based on of course no idea whether that would reduce net earnings or not.


While NEC service has been cut, the schedule is slowly returning to normal. If Amtrak is desperate for any reduction in costs, which is the argument they are using for cutting the LDs, why would they be adding service to the NEC? Based on a quick search for upcoming weekdays both before and after the LD cuts, there are still roughly 20 trains a day from NYP to WAS, which is still at least hourly most of the day. Even more frequent service is available north of PHL. Considering it appears that an average of fewer than 25% of available seats are being sold (as of a day in advance), the NEC seems like an easy place to reduce costs while not overcrowding trains or impacting demand too much. I'd be interested in seeing a study on the frequency level at which demand being to increase significantly, but I doubt even a 2 hour interval would be too much of a deterrent, especially given the that there are reduced schedules on competing modes as well. The LDs also normally provide 4 daily round trips over the southern half of the NEC, so it's not like the cuts don't impact the NEC cities as well. Finally, given Amtrak's ownership of most of the NEC and the aforementioned normally heavy ridership, Amtrak has both more control to expand schedules when demand warrants and the political pressure to do so.


----------



## Exvalley (Sep 29, 2020)

I've never understood the, "Amtrak should run more trains by reducing trains," argument.

If you want Amtrak to run daily long distance service, you should be embracing more NEC service. Don't make the argument that less service is bad.

Let's celebrate the victories and work on MORE victories rather than arguing for Peter to pay Paul.


----------



## jis (Sep 29, 2020)

Unless we can get access to the revenue and yield situation we have no way of knowing that Amtrak is being partial to NEC. I know in this forum that is not a popular position and belief in the magic of LD is the favorite theme here. So I will not try to lean against that windmill, beyond pointing out that the arguments being made based on the theme of NEC vs. LD is (a) destructive, and to those that are not invested into a preconceived position are (b) based on mostly hot air, absent more concrete information regarding actual yield, revenue and cost numbers.

Just as an aside, I am not an NEC person. I live in Florida getting hit with significant reduction of service. The way to fix that is not to attack the NEC though that is fashionable escape valve for some who are unwilling to spend the time to come up with an aggressive plan for overall growth of the system, i.e. those that have already declared defeat and now are trying to play the zero sum game. Good luck with that. You will lose all your service, which will mostly affect LD, since NEC, and the regional corridors will get funded some way or the other. just wait and watch. 

As it turns out within Florida regional corridors will get funded through public-private partnesrhips as thigns are evolving. Same is true in Texas as things evolve. Many other states may not be that fortunate, specially the more rural ones.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 29, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> I've never understood the, "Amtrak should run more trains by reducing trains," argument.
> 
> If you want Amtrak to run daily long distance service, you should be embracing more NEC service. Don't make the argument that less service is bad.
> 
> Let's celebrate the victories and work on MORE victories rather than robbing Peter to pay Paul.


Generally I agree, but in the current conditions some temporary cuts are virtually inevitable. I would strongly support improving NEC service in the aftermath of the pandemic. I just don't see an issue reducing frequencies on high-frequency routes when there is severely reduced demand, just as Amtrak has done for the past 6 months. Service may be slightly less convenient, but even if funding were available I'd much rather see it invested in long-term improvements rather than running mostly empty trains when there is still an alternative train within an hour. The LD cuts are different because cutting below daily service significantly reduces the usefulness of the service, and there are not alternative trains or in many cases not even any type of alternative public transit.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 29, 2020)

jis said:


> Unless we can get access to the revenue and yield situation we have no way of knowing that Amtrak is being partial to NEC. I know in this forum that is not a popular position and belief in the magic of LD is the favorite theme here. So I will not try to lean against that windmill, beyond pointing out that the arguments being made based on the theme of NEC vs. LD is (a) destructive, and to those that are not invested into a preconceived position are (b) based on mostly hot air, absent more concrete information regarding actual yield, revenue and cost numbers.
> 
> Just as an aside, I am not an NEC person. I live in Florida getting hit with significant reduction of service. The way to fix that is not to attack the NEC though that is fashionable escape valve for some who are unwilling to spend the time to come up with an aggressive plan for overall growth of the system, i.e. those that have already declared defeat and now are trying to play the zero sum game. Good luck with that. You will lose all your service, which will mostly affect LD, since NEC, and the regional corridors will get funded some way or the other. just wait and watch.
> 
> As it turns out within Florida regional corridors will get funded through public-private partnesrhips as thigns are evolving. Same is true in Texas as things evolve. Many other states may not be that fortunate, specially the more rural ones.


I don't necessarily even think they are being partial to NEC; the service cuts are roughly proportional on the LDs to those implemented on the NEC. You're right that we don't have the data, but given the low ridership it seems hard to believe that NEC trains would not be losing money at the moment. 

For an example of my point, look at the airline service requirements from the first stimulus bill. Airlines were allowed to cut frequencies, but were required to maintain service to all airports. While Amtrak's LD cuts technically do so as well, running one train a month would also maintain service to all stations. There has to be a minimum accepted service level, and to me that is once daily.

I don't see the issue with discussing funding distribution within Amtrak. I would certainly not be opposed to additional NEC funding, but if Amtrak has a set amount of money available I think it's reasonable to criticize where it is being spent. 

Since you mentioned you don't live near the NEC, I will say that I live in Chicago and use corridor service just as much as LD. The Lincoln Service has been running only twice daily for months now, while the Hiawatha Service frequency has also been cut roughly in half. Neither cut has deterred me significantly from travelling, despite my usual trains being cancelled. Meanwhile, the LD cuts would probably reduce my trips from every other month to once or twice a year.


----------



## nferr (Sep 29, 2020)

NEC frequencies have been cut. I don't even get the point of the argument against the NEC.


----------



## lordsigma (Sep 29, 2020)

jis said:


> They should have done that four years back. Back then they said it cannot be done in an Appropriation Bill. It must wait for an Authorization Bill. I guess they changed their mind after the entire fleet of horses have fled the barn. Typical of this country of late. Try everything that does not work first, before stumbling onto something that works, that has been obvious to many for a while, but still, a dollar short and a minute too late. Sigh


Technically this is both an appropriations bill and an authorization bill believe it or not. The first section is the appropriations CR - the second section consists of one year temporary extensions of various authorization bills including the FAST act. The Mica mandate alteration is under the section on the one year extension of the FAST act/PRIIA.


----------



## MARC Rider (Sep 29, 2020)

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Meanwhile, normal NEC service is roughly two trains per hour, so cutting that in half would still leave enough options so that demand wouldn't be as dramatically impacted.


Having just taken a trip on the NEC, I can assure you that service has been cut back to the point that there are a lot fewer than "two trains per hour."


----------



## lordsigma (Sep 29, 2020)

Today they just did the cloture vote on the bill and have not moved to the amendments/final passage. Well know tomorrow.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 29, 2020)

lordsigma said:


> Today they just did the cloture vote on the bill and have not moved to the amendments/final passage. Well know tomorrow.


Yeah, I spent 2 hours watching C-SPAN and it wasn't mentioned.
Does anyone have an opinion as to it's probability of passing? I would think it being proposed by a Republican may help it's chance of passing, but I'm not really familiar with the process and whether most similar amendments pass or not. RPA has also been very quiet over the amendment; I have only seen it mentioned briefly in the article about the poor performance of the SS and SM since their cuts.


----------



## lordsigma (Sep 30, 2020)

I honestly don’t know what the prospects of it getting into the bill are.


----------



## Ziv (Sep 30, 2020)

I can't speak for anyone else, but I would really rather see NEC trains cut from 20 per day to 16, or a similar number for Acela trains, rather than seeing the EB and the CZ cut from daily to 3x a week. I very much want a strong NEC with frequent trains but if Amtrak has to cut spending in these horrific times, I would rather see the NEC see a small cut rather than the LD trains going to less than daily service. 
LD trains going to less than daily is a huge problem. NEC trains going to roughly hourly instead of 2 an hour is not.



nferr said:


> NEC frequencies have been cut. I don't even get the point of the argument against the NEC.


----------



## Exvalley (Sep 30, 2020)

I am sure that Amtrak is keeping an extremely close eye on demand - and that they are scaling train service accordingly with the intent of preserving as much cash as they can.

It will be interesting to see if they reduce NEC service now that Covid appears to be resurging in the northeast.


----------



## toddinde (Sep 30, 2020)

This is absolutely the right answer right now. It’s clean, simple, can pass, and solves the immediate hurdle. Funding for the annual appropriation can be dealt with later.


----------



## toddinde (Sep 30, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> I am sure that Amtrak is keeping an extremely close eye on demand - and that they are scaling train service accordingly with the intent of preserving as much cash as they can.
> 
> It will be interesting to see if they reduce NEC service now that Covid appears to be resurging in the northeast.


Three day a week service doesn’t save money and does permanent damage to the system. Conserving cash doesn’t do any good if you don’t have a railroad to run anymore.


----------



## Exvalley (Sep 30, 2020)

toddinde said:


> Three day a week service doesn’t save money


The studies that argue that thrice-weekly service costs money are based on pre-Covid market demand and are not relevant to the current situation.

Trust me. Amtrak is in cash preservation mode right now.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Sep 30, 2020)

The people of our county are in preservation mode for the next 90 days or so. Unfortunately Trump trumps everything right now. We can’t let the infrastructure burn down in the mean time.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 30, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> I am sure that Amtrak is keeping an extremely close eye on demand - and that they are scaling train service accordingly with the intent of preserving as much cash as they can.
> 
> It will be interesting to see if they reduce NEC service now that Covid appears to be resurging in the northeast.


At least with the LD trains, this is BS. Adjusting for capacity constraints, the LD trains are running about where they were last year (the _Builder_, in particular, was back to where it was in the winter in terms of revenue in August). Moreover, RPA put together some hard data that ridership on the _Silvers _took a nosedive (particularly since transportation utility between RMT and SAV went to hell with how they chose to alternate the schedule (four days in a row of one train followed by three of the other is particularly idiotic, and the way it combines with the _Palmetto _cuts means there are days that stations along the A-line will have two trains, one train, or no trains in a given direction...it's the sort of insanity that shows up in Queensland).


----------



## jis (Sep 30, 2020)

lordsigma said:


> Technically this is both an appropriations bill and an authorization bill believe it or not. The first section is the appropriations CR - the second section consists of one year temporary extensions of various authorization bills including the FAST act. The Mica mandate alteration is under the section on the one year extension of the FAST act/PRIIA.


Good point! I had missed that. Thanks!


----------



## Exvalley (Sep 30, 2020)

Anderson said:


> At least with the LD trains, this is BS. Adjusting for capacity constraints, the LD trains are running about where they were last year (the _Builder_, in particular, was back to where it was in the winter in terms of revenue in August).


I'm not sure why you adjusted for capacity constraints since we are talking about real money here.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Sep 30, 2020)

Any word? RPAs midweek email didnt mention it at all? Kinda strange how hush they have been on it.


----------



## lordsigma (Sep 30, 2020)

The CR bill passed but I didn’t watch at all due to phone dying. Perhaps the amendment was not accepted.


----------



## 41bridge (Sep 30, 2020)

lordsigma said:


> The CR bill passed but I didn’t watch at all due to phone dying. Perhaps the amendment was not accepted.



Post Deleted


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 30, 2020)

41bridge said:


> Deleted


Do you mean the amendment was deleted or your post was deleted?

I was following the Senate all day and Senator Daines spoke once but it didn't relate to Amtrak.


----------



## Ziv (Sep 30, 2020)

Was it just the Mica rule revocation that was deleted or the entire delay of the reduction of daily service to 3x a week deleted?


----------



## jis (Sep 30, 2020)

Ziv said:


> Was it just the Mica rule revocation that was deleted or the entire delay of the reduction of daily service to 3x a week deleted?


HR 8337 was passed by the Senate by 86-10 apparently without any modification, because there was no time to get any modification approved by the House before Oct 1 when the government shuts down absent a CR signed into law.

Since the Mica language was axed by the following segment in the House Bill:


> SEC. 1104. Rail-related provisions.
> 
> 
> (a) Federal funding for operating losses.—Section 24321 of title 49, United States Code, is amended—
> ...


came from the House, it is still part of the adopted CR.

This removes the following from Section 24321 of Title 49:


> (d) No Federal Funding for Operating Losses.—
> Beginning on the date that is 5 years after the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015, no Federal funds may be used to cover any operating loss associated with providing food and beverage service on a route operated by Amtrak or a rail carrier that operates a route in lieu of Amtrak pursuant to section 24711.



Since no changes were made in the Senate the Daines amendment language is not in the final bill.

At least that is my understanding reading through the text of the final adopted bill.

The CR allows appropriations for Amtrak at the same rate of appropriation as for FY2020 for period Oct 1 through Dec 11, 2020.

In effect the can has been kicked down the road to after the election. In all likelihood there will be another CR at that point to cover the period between Dec 11 to whenever the new Congress picks things up.


----------



## lordsigma (Oct 1, 2020)

jis said:


> In effect the can has been kicked down the road to after the election. In all likelihood there will be another CR at that point to cover the period between Dec 11 to whenever the new Congress picks things up.


Yes this sounds like exactly the case. The only hope now to stop 3x daily before the election is the negotiations that have resumed between the Speaker and Treasury Secretary on COVID relief. The bill the house proposed yesterday does still include Amtrak funding and requirements that daily LD be maintained and avoiding furloughs. Not sure what will happen with all the furloughs if something eventually passes as some job abolishments have now taken place.


----------



## MARC Rider (Oct 1, 2020)

So no more Mica Rule? Does that mean that when the coronavirus restrictions are no longer needed, that Amtrak now has more flexibility on food and beverage service? Is it possible that, in the long run, they might actually restore quality food and beverage service as a way to rebuild ridership and revenue? Or at least that Amtrak management no longer has the excuse of having to have "profitable" food and beverage service to justify their cuts?


----------



## jis (Oct 1, 2020)

MARC Rider said:


> So no more Mica Rule? Does that mean that when the coronavirus restrictions are no longer needed, that Amtrak now has more flexibility on food and beverage service? Is it possible that, in the long run, they might actually restore quality food and beverage service as a way to rebuild ridership and revenue? Or at least that Amtrak management no longer has the excuse of having to have "profitable" food and beverage service to justify their cuts?


Yeah. It only means that Amtrak cannot say that there is a legal requirement for food service to be a non loss making P&L center on its own. That requirement has been removed. As for what the brilliant Amtrak management will or will not do with it is anybody's guess.


----------



## bms (Oct 1, 2020)

It's sad that our country has spent so much money to prevent layoffs from for-profit businesses, but they don't mind laying off all these people from a public service that provides essential transportation. Really shows you what the true priority is.


----------



## jis (Oct 2, 2020)

Upon reflection, IMHO they should have ejected 49 US Code 24321 in its entirety. The whole thing is silly micromanagement.

For reference 49 U.S. Code § 24321. Food and beverage reform


----------



## bms (Oct 3, 2020)

jis said:


> Upon reflection, IMHO they should have ejected 49 US Code 24321 in its entirety. The whole thing is silly micromanagement.
> 
> For reference 49 U.S. Code § 24321. Food and beverage reform



Thanks for the link! Impossible to say without knowing all the facts, but Amtrak may be in violation of section (c).

(c) Savings Clause.—Amtrak shall ensure that no Amtrak employee holding a position as of the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 is involuntarily separated because of—
(1) the development and implementation of the plan required under subsection (a); or
(2) any other action taken by Amtrak to implement this section.


----------



## caravanman (Oct 3, 2020)

It seems to me that the 3 days a week train service model can be the thin end of the wedge. Once it is brought into operation, after time it may just become the accepted norm, somewhat like the reduced dining car menus...
It will be easier to eventually just "pick off" these vulnerable LD routes for folk who want to see the end of Amtrak, or the selling off to private companies of the best routes. Some contributors here on A.U. seem to be rather anti-Amtrak to my way of thinking?


----------



## jis (Oct 3, 2020)

It all depends on what happens in the upcoming elections. Anything between complete destruction to stabilization and growth or any point in between is possible depending on how things turn out. Also given the fast moving events at present, a pre-election panic second COVID Relief bill is apparently a bit more within the realm of possibilities.

Selling anything off to private companies is within the realm of fantasies at present. It is not possible to do without significant new legislation, and that is pretty near impossible before the next Congress is seated after the election. Which brings us back to the first paragraph.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Oct 3, 2020)

caravanman said:


> It seems to me that the 3 days a week train service model can be the thin end of the wedge. Once it is brought into operation, after time it may just become the accepted norm, somewhat like the reduced dining car menus...
> It will be easier to eventually just "pick off" these vulnerable LD routes for folk who want to see the end of Amtrak, or the selling off to private companies of the best routes. Some contributors here on A.U. seem to be rather anti-Amtrak to my way of thinking?



We have seen the 3x week schedule and limited dining reverse course before. But it certainly isn’t a good sign.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Oct 3, 2020)

jis said:


> Also given the fast moving events at present, a pre-election panic second COVID Relief bill is apparently a bit more within the realm of possibilities.



I have read that others think this is more possible soon than it was a week or more ago. But, how? I thought the House just went into Recess. If the Senate accepts the most recent Bill the House passed, some "tunes" are going to have to be majorly changed by the Senate leadership.


----------



## Lonestar648 (Oct 3, 2020)

Will the Senate consider the CR with members out sick with Covid? Members can monitor discussion at home getting over Covid, but they have to vote in person. If a vote is done without the missing Senators, how will/will not change the bill?


----------



## jis (Oct 3, 2020)

Lonestar648 said:


> Will the Senate consider the CR with members out sick with Covid? Members can monitor discussion at home getting over Covid, but they have to vote in person. If a vote is done without the missing Senators, how will/will not change the bill?


There will be no more CRs before Dec 11. The CR has been signed. sealed and delivered. The President signed it Wednesday night, just in time before the new FY started.

We are talking about a separate stimulus bill. I don't understand how exactly that would happen either, specially at the larming rate at twhich Senators are going into quarantine after testing positive..


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 3, 2020)

To the best of my knowledge the only Senate business moving forward is the judicial confirmation process. Nearly everything else is being tabled or suspended for safety reasons. Time is running out but Senators who tested positive have indicated they will simply return to the office and vote in person before the 14 day quarantine window has completed. It seems doubtful that emergency funding bills will enjoy similar allowances.


----------



## Thunder (Oct 4, 2020)

The emergency funding bill ( CR8337) was sent over after Nancy messed up with HR2.

CR8337 was pressured by the unions involved here at Amtrak and commuter transit agencies. It STILL didn’t have the language to stop furloughs and keep daily service.

now we have another boondoggle “ COVID relief package” that they say will include this yet be so full of junk, that some may not go for it even in a lame duck session.

the representative union leadership is not pleased. I am pretty sure Nancy’s office heard all about it, as they should have.


----------



## Barb Stout (Oct 4, 2020)

Thunder said:


> The emergency funding bill ( CR8337) was sent over after Nancy messed up with HR2.
> 
> CR8337 was pressured by the unions involved here at Amtrak and commuter transit agencies. It STILL didn’t have the language to stop furloughs and keep daily service.
> 
> ...


What is the mess up in CR2 that you are referring to?


----------



## jis (Oct 4, 2020)

Barb Stout said:


> What is the mess up in CR2 that you are referring to?


Indeed I would like to know the specifics too instead of what I consider to be content free sweeping accusation.

And how is 8337 related to HR2. They are two very different bills.


jis said:


> We are talking about a separate stimulus bill. I don't understand how exactly that would happen either, specially at the larming rate at twhich Senators are going into quarantine after testing positive..


The problem may indeed be on the Senate side. But unlike for the SCOTUS issue, all those Republican members are not needed to pass a stimulus bill that the House has passed. Just a dozen or two Republican Senators would be sufficient one would imagine.

Nancy Pelosi said today (10/4/20) that if a deal is struck between the Administration and the House negotiating team then she will call the House members back to pass the resulting bill before the election.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Oct 4, 2020)

Devil's Advocate said:


> To the best of my knowledge the only Senate business moving forward is the judicial confirmation process. Nearly everything else is being tabled or suspended for safety reasons. Time is running out but Senators who tested positive have indicated they will simply return to the office and vote in person before the 14 day quarantine window has completed. It seems doubtful that emergency funding bills will enjoy similar allowances.



My understanding as well that the Senate will not hold any floor sessions for awhile with only the Judiciary Committee meeting. Not sure about any of the other Committees, but Senator McConnell seemed very clear about his plans for the Senate as I heard them reported. 

There are reports in the media about the ability of the Judiciary Committee to do its job. But, I don't understand why that would be an issue if only a couple of the GOP members are in quarantine.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Oct 4, 2020)

Dakota 400 said:


> There are reports in the media about the ability of the Judiciary Committee to do its job. But, I don't understand why that would be an issue if only a couple of the GOP members are in quarantine.


With these particular senators out the committee would have even numbers and the nominee cannot be passed onto the full senate without a majority. Hearings can still be held but not the actual confirmation. There's also the matter of running out of senators to establish a quorum. Unlike the House the Senate leadership resisted plans for remote voting so they still have to vote in person to keep the schedule they want. If they're delayed by more than a few days there's a risk the nomination won't be confirmed until the lame duck session. If a new justice has not been seated by the election only current justices could rule on election related disputes. Senate rules can be vague and complicated but this is a general explanation for why infected senators are promising to return in person no matter their medical status.


----------



## daybeers (Oct 4, 2020)

Devil's Advocate said:


> With these particular senators out the committee would have even numbers and the nominee cannot be passed onto the full senate without a majority. Hearings can still be held but not the actual confirmation. There's also the matter of running out of senators to establish a quorum. Unlike the House the Senate leadership resisted plans for remote voting so they still have to vote in person to keep the schedule they want. If they're delayed by more than a few days there's a risk the nomination won't be confirmed until the lame duck session. If a new justice has not been seated by the election only current justices could rule on election related disputes. Senate rules can be vague and complicated but this is a general explanation for why infected senators are promising to return in person no matter their medical status.


Thanks for this easy-to-understand explanation! I think it's so wild the Senate resisted remote voting. Is there no chance they'd start now with so many possibly infected?


----------



## PVD (Oct 4, 2020)

But the Senate leadership has such respect for precedent. How could they possibly consider going against a position they've already taken?


----------



## John Bobinyec (Oct 5, 2020)

I think you've answered your own question - they have no respect for precedent.

jb


----------



## PVD (Oct 5, 2020)

sarcasm alert


----------



## bms (Oct 5, 2020)

Devil's Advocate said:


> With these particular senators out the committee would have even numbers and the nominee cannot be passed onto the full senate without a majority. Hearings can still be held but not the actual confirmation. There's also the matter of running out of senators to establish a quorum. Unlike the House the Senate leadership resisted plans for remote voting so they still have to vote in person to keep the schedule they want. If they're delayed by more than a few days there's a risk the nomination won't be confirmed until the lame duck session. If a new justice has not been seated by the election only current justices could rule on election related disputes. Senate rules can be vague and complicated but this is a general explanation for why infected senators are promising to return in person no matter their medical status.



If a Senator of any party tries to take a commercial flight while infected, they should be denied boarding and voted out of office!


----------



## Dakota 400 (Oct 5, 2020)

bms said:


> If a Senator of any party tries to take a commercial flight while infected, they should be denied boarding and voted out of office!



If the airlines are doing any screening of boarding passengers, they probably would get "caught" and be denied boarding.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Oct 5, 2020)

Devil's Advocate said:


> With these particular senators out the committee would have even numbers and the nominee cannot be passed onto the full senate without a majority



Thanks for an excellent explanation. After I made my post, I was wondering if the absence of those two Senators might lead to equal numbers of members of both parties. 




PVD said:


> But the Senate leadership has such respect for precedent. How could they possibly consider going against a position they've already taken?



The Senior Senator from Kentucky, Senator Flip-Flop, doesn't seem to have a problem with doing such.


----------



## PVD (Oct 5, 2020)

see post #72


----------



## Thunder (Oct 5, 2020)

Simple. It was suggested a clean bill with the wording needed to stop “ try weakly” and furloughs. That was allegedly in HR2. She sent that over knowing that some would find it unpalatable.

yes the CR is different, but it’s the second go round that was supposed to “ save Amtrak”.

now we are up to round three.


----------



## jis (Oct 5, 2020)

An interesting observation that one of the RPA folks made the other day was, when they went to talk to the Senate Committee leadership about saving the Hoosier State, the Committee Chair spoke briefly with them and pointed out that no one in the Committee was willing to fight for it, or even mention it so naturally it is not in the bill. I would not be surprised if something akin to that is going on here, even on the House side. It is getting lost in the horse trading about bigger things.

I suspect the CR had to be clean in terms of money that needed to be appropriated, and adding the additional funding for daily would have broken that possibly causing problems on the Senate side. A similar parallel attempt to prevent post 1 October ailirlines furloughs has also failed. No one apparently thought it was a good idea to potentially face a government shutdown over this.

BTW, I cannot find anything in HR2 about COVID related supplemental appropriation for preventing furloghs. Maybe I need to look harder in non-obvious corners. It appears to be a straight 5 year Authorization and one year CR Appropriation at the 2019-20 level. In contrast 8337 is a clean stopgap CR with virtually nothing else in it, and certainly nothing else that needs additional appropriation beyond the CR levels. The food service language in it has no financial impact on the bill. Even the food service language was a small, most critical, extract from the more complete overhaul language in HR2.

I suspect that in all likelihood the Daines Amendment to 8337 if actually addressed might, have failed. Really what is needed is another COVID Supplemental and that at present is, shall we say, a bit stuck. That is where the funding for stopping the tri-weekly stuff is as has been acknowledged by several people, and the question is if it will see the light of the day in this Congress session, even as late as the lame duck session.


----------



## Lonestar648 (Oct 5, 2020)

It appears those in Congress have very little skin in the game when it comes to Amtrak. Some really want Amtrak to survive but are distracted right now with other crisis. I sincerely doubt Amtrak Management is actively lobbying to keep the company fully functioning with daily LD trains. I contact my Senators, Representative, and Governor regularly even though they do not respond or have a comment on Amtrak.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Oct 5, 2020)

Lonestar648 said:


> It appears those in Congress have very little skin in the game when it comes to Amtrak. Some really want Amtrak to survive but are distracted right now with other crisis. I sincerely doubt Amtrak Management is actively lobbying to keep the company fully functioning with daily LD trains. I contact my Senators, Representative, and Governor regularly even though they do not respond or have a comment on Amtrak.



I really would hope that Amtrak was pretty low on the list of priorities right now.


----------



## Exvalley (Oct 6, 2020)

Let's be honest. Constituents are not traveling like they used to. Their current needs do not make Amtrak a priority.


----------



## Siegmund (Oct 6, 2020)

The airlines are screaming a lot louder than Amtrak is.

But our one chance to do anything for Amtrak is to get it through at the same time as the next airline relief bill. I'd be very surprised if one wasn't forthcoming once Congress reconvenes.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Oct 6, 2020)

Lonestar648 said:


> I contact my Senators, Representative, and Governor regularly even though they do not respond or have a comment on Amtrak.



And, at least with one of my Senators and my Representative who belong to the same Party, if I get a response, it likely will have little to nothing to do about which I made my contact. That irritates me greatly! It's so disrespectful of me as a constituent!


----------



## John Bobinyec (Oct 6, 2020)

Well, DJT just blew up all negotiations for ANY relief package until after the elections. 

jb


----------



## IndyLions (Oct 7, 2020)

He’s pretty erratic - it could be a negotiating ploy - I wouldn’t put it past him.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Oct 7, 2020)

IndyLions said:


> He’s pretty erratic ...


Yep. Just saw this. 10-07-2020


----------



## Palmetto (Oct 7, 2020)

I would imagine he got some blow-back on his first decision, and rightfully so, IMHO.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Oct 7, 2020)

Palmetto said:


> I would imagine he got some blow-back on his first decision, and rightfully so, IMHO.


Plus the reaction on Wall Street probably didn't help his cause.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Oct 7, 2020)

I think it’s safe to say the balls been punted to the Biden Administrations DOT to determine Amtrak’s future. Many variables including who controls Congress and if the new DOT has the courage/desire/forethought to fire Amtrak’s management and shake up the Board.

Most on here have said probably not much will change either way, it never does.

It’s different this time though, the poison pills have been planted deep by Chao, the Board, Anderson and now Flynn. The status quo can’t go on. Ridership won’t return to what’s left of this sorry excuse for a company charging exhorbinate rates for at best a Greyhound type service.

Instead of touting Amtrak and Sleepers as a Covid safe way to travel they have literally burned the house down. All Amtrak needs to be successful is a niche to grab 2-3 percent of market share. The numbers may be off but regardless they aren’t much. Covid/safety/convenience could be their niche going forward. Make lemonaide out of lemons.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Oct 7, 2020)

AmtrakFlyer said:


> I think it’s safe to say the balls been punted to the Biden Administrations DOT to determine Amtrak’s future. Many variables including who controls Congress and if the new DOT has the courage/desire/forethought to fire Amtrak’s management and shake up the Board.
> 
> Most on here have said probably not much will change either way, it never does.
> 
> ...


Guessing you're not on Facebook. They've been doing a lot of advertising on FB related to safe way to travel, at least to those of us who 'follow' them. I can't say for TV because I turned off my TV back in April and haven't bothered to turn it back on.


----------



## Steve4031 (Oct 7, 2020)

crescent-zephyr said:


> I really would hope that Amtrak was pretty low on the list of priorities right now.



Really? What about all the people who work there and are losing their jobs. Same for airlines, hotels, and restaurants. These intellectual arguments involve real people and their livelihood. If the USA can’t take care of its citizens it’s no better than a second or third world country imho.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Oct 7, 2020)

Steve4031 said:


> If the USA can’t take care of its citizens it’s no better than a second or third world country imho.



Agreed. Where would you place Amtrak operating 3 days a week and not 7 on the list?


----------



## jis (Oct 7, 2020)

IndyLions said:


> He’s pretty erratic - it could be a negotiating ploy - I wouldn’t put it past him.


Or it could just be his Dexamethazone speaking err tweeting.  or some combination thereof...



Steve4031 said:


> Really? What about all the people who work there and are losing their jobs. Same for airlines, hotels, and restaurants. These intellectual arguments involve real people and their livelihood. If the USA can’t take care of its citizens it’s no better than a second or third world country imho.


The fact that the US by its own apparently considered choice, chooses to not take care of its citizens and works diligently to reduce how much it takes care of its people, is an unfortunate established fact. But the scope of that dalliance spreads well beyond the scope of this thread and forum I am afraid.


----------



## Steve4031 (Oct 7, 2020)

jis said:


> Or it could just be his Dexamethazone speaking err tweeting.  or some combination thereof...
> 
> 
> The fact that the US by its own apparently considered choice, chooses to not take care of its citizens and works diligently to reduce how much it takes care of its people, is an unfortunate established fact. But the scope of that dalliance spreads well beyond the scope of this thread and forum I am afraid.



India certainly has a vastly superior rail system compared to us in terms of frequency and number of routes. I know there are plans to build hsr.


----------



## Qapla (Oct 7, 2020)

Post Redacted


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Oct 7, 2020)

Qapla said:


> Just because you haven't watched TV since April doesn't mean the majority of people fit in that same situation. There are probably more people still watching TV than there are "following" Amtrak on FB


And, your point? I was just saying that *I *have no idea if Amtrak is advertising on TV - in my area - because I've not been watching TV for the past several months.


----------



## jis (Oct 7, 2020)

Steve4031 said:


> India certainly has a vastly superior rail system compared to us in terms of frequency and number of routes. I know there are plans to build hsr.


India also has absolutely no financial safety net for anyone, rich or poor. But I am not sure that any conclusions can be drawn about any correlation between that and the vastness and rapid current growth of the rail system, and also incidentally the highway system..


----------



## Steve4031 (Oct 7, 2020)

jis said:


> India also has absolutely no financial safety net for anyone, rich or poor. But I am not sure that any conclusions can be drawn about any correlation between that and the vastness and rapid current growth of the rail system, and also incidentally the highway system..



I’m aware that things are not working for some in India. Did not know it was that extreme so I avoided talking about that aspect since I knew little about it.


----------



## Qapla (Oct 7, 2020)

AmtrakBlue said:


> And, your point? I was just saying that *I *have no idea if Amtrak is advertising on TV - in my area - because I've not been watching TV for the past several months.



Sorry, I didn't mean to upset anyone


----------



## lordsigma (Oct 9, 2020)

Flynn has submitted a letter stating the end of the CR as a dead line for stimulus to avoid further cuts - they formalized a request for just south of $5 billion in operating subsidies and funding to help states keep corridors going as well as $5 billion in capital project stimulus. They are going to adjust capital spending to keep the lights on between now and December 11 but Flynn basically said something must be done during the lame duck to avoid permanent long standing damage to the company.


----------



## bms (Oct 9, 2020)

lordsigma said:


> Flynn has submitted a letter stating the end of the CR as a dead line for stimulus to avoid further cuts - they formalized a request for just south of $5 billion in operating subsidies and funding to help states keep corridors going as well as $5 billion in capital project stimulus. They are going to adjust capital spending to keep the lights on between now and December 11 but Flynn basically said something must be done during the lame duck to avoid permanent long standing damage to the company.



Fingers crossed. I highly doubt there are 51 votes in the Senate to kill off Amtrak, but it could be mortally wounded this way without a vote.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Oct 9, 2020)

bms said:


> I highly doubt there are 51 votes in the Senate to kill off Amtrak,



Assuming both Senators of a State supported Amtrak, there would be at least 84 votes in favor of whatever might need to be done to assist Amtrak. (I realize that my assumption is quite optimistic.)


----------



## bms (Oct 9, 2020)

Dakota 400 said:


> Assuming both Senators of a State supported Amtrak, there would be at least 84 votes in favor of whatever might need to be done to assist Amtrak. (I realize that my assumption is quite optimistic.)



I think a stand-alone bill would easily pass, maybe with 84 votes. Unfortunately legislation is not made in any rational way anymore. It seems that to be assured of funding for anything, one party must be willing to shut down the government over the issue.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Oct 9, 2020)

Vote! So this madness doesn’t continue. McConnell and his party need a “time out” for a few years.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Oct 10, 2020)

bms said:


> I think a stand-alone bill would easily pass,



I think it would have a very good chance. Don't know about our Congress, but in Ohio there is a Constitutional requirement that Bills passed by our General Assembly deal with only one topic at a time. That is totally ignored and I don't understand why there hasn't been a court challenge as to why the General Assembly is allowed to get away with this.


----------



## west point (Oct 10, 2020)

My concern is that if the present president looses that there will be a major retaliation of all states that voted against him until Jan 20th. Amtrak will be just one victim.


----------



## fredmcain (Oct 14, 2020)

So, group, what is the latest news on this three times a week service? I was trying to scan through the posts on our forum and nothing jumped out at me.

Realistically, what are the chances that daily service _WILL_ return? Slim to none? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

I tried to book a reservation from Elkhart, Indiana to Ottumwa, Iowa on October 22nd and found out that the westbound Capital Limited is only connecting to the Westbound California Zephyr _ONE DAY_ a week at Chicago. That's right ! That makes it pretty darn hard for potential passengers to bend their travel plans around a schedule like that.

Needless to say, I will be traveling on the highway this time.

Regards,
Fred M. Cain,
Topeka, IN


----------



## Maglev (Oct 14, 2020)

Here is the discussion:





__





Amendment to CR blocking furloughs and thrice weekly long distance trains


In effect the can has been kicked down the road to after the election. In all likelihood there will be another CR at that point to cover the period between Dec 11 to whenever the new Congress picks things up. Yes this sounds like exactly the case. The only hope now to stop 3x daily before the...




www.amtraktrains.com





MODERATOR NOTE: the 2 threads were merged


----------



## neroden (Oct 14, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> The studies that argue that thrice-weekly service costs money are based on pre-Covid market demand and are not relevant to the current situation.


They're entirely relevant now.

Three-a-week saves maybe 1/3 of costs -- if you're lucky -- and loses roughly *80%* of revenue. (If I have a trip where I can't change the dates, I have a 3/7 chance of being able to use Amtrak outbound and a 3/7 chance of being able to use it on the return == 18% chance of being able to use Amtrak. And that is if it's on a single train, like Syracuse to Chicago.) You do the math. Even at Covid demand levels, it's idiocy.

I will be blunt: *total suspension of service, followed by resumption of service later, would have been a financially sane thing to do. * That's what several states did with their state-supported services, including Vermont (still suspended), Pennsylvania, and New York. I have *no* complaints about that, because *it actually makes sense*.

*Three-a-week is either idiocy or sabotage,* and I use those terms correctly and not as hyperbole. I analyze business finances for my living. Three a week is *stupid*. Just like the Southwest Chief bus bridge idiocy was *stupid*. 

If you're going to try to save money, you have to suspend an entire train service, not chop it into pieces which cost the same to run as the whole train or run it on an unusuable schedule. 

Vermont is saving cash by suspending the Vermonter and Ethan Allen. Fine, I understand that. Go Vermont! Good work!

Amtrak management is choosing to bleed more cash and run out of cash *faster* with the three-a-week idiocy. That is sabotage.

I don't know how other advocates would have reacted, but if Amtrak had said "We're suspending the Sunset Limited, Cardinal, Capitol Limited, and Silver Meteor until the week before Thanksgiving, to save money; the Silver Star and Lake Shore Limited will be lengthened to help some of the riders reschedule their trips" I would have said that made business sense. This is not what they did.


----------



## neroden (Oct 14, 2020)

crescent-zephyr said:


> We have seen the 3x week schedule and limited dining reverse course before. But it certainly isn’t a good sign.


Basically, every time Amtrak management had a halfway-competent boss who wanted Amtrak to be usable or to cost Congress as little as possible, the halfway-competent boss demanded daily service and dining which was attractive to customers. It's just good business sense. (It's possible to do pre-packaged dining in an attractive way with high quality food. This is not it.)


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Oct 15, 2020)

neroden said:


> It's possible to do pre-packaged dining in an attractive way with high quality food. This is not it.)



Agreed. I am confident that anyone with experience in the food / hospitality industry could take the same budget, and same limitations and create a product that was attractive.


----------



## Anderson (Oct 15, 2020)

neroden said:


> They're entirely relevant now.
> 
> Three-a-week saves maybe 1/3 of costs -- if you're lucky -- and loses roughly *80%* of revenue. (If I have a trip where I can't change the dates, I have a 3/7 chance of being able to use Amtrak outbound and a 3/7 chance of being able to use it on the return == 18% chance of being able to use Amtrak. And that is if it's on a single train, like Syracuse to Chicago.) You do the math. Even at Covid demand levels, it's idiocy.
> 
> ...


Total suspension would probably have been a non-starter (at _least_ politically). There's a good chance it would have either wound up in court or otherwise gotten blocked.


----------



## Lonestar648 (Oct 15, 2020)

Question? Are the Host railroads under any obligation to give Amtrak back the slots they gave up going to 3x week if daily service is restarted. Back many months, I read that one host said what ever slots Amtrak might give up would never be returned without a major use charge increase. Has Amtrak, by reducing frequency to 3x from 7x, sealed their LD fate?


----------



## Willbridge (Oct 15, 2020)

Lonestar648 said:


> Question? Are the Host railroads under any obligation to give Amtrak back the slots they gave up going to 3x week if daily service is restarted. Back many months, I read that one host said what ever slots Amtrak might give up would never be returned without a major use charge increase. Has Amtrak, by reducing frequency to 3x from 7x, sealed their LD fate?


Whether or not there is a legal angle that the Class 1's can use there is a phenomenon that John Kneiling commented on called "lazy man railroading." It's a tendency for operating procedures to expand to fill capacity. In the late 1940's there were five passenger trains each way scheduled through the Moffat Tunnel, some of them with steam engines. Omaha would choke on their steaks if that was requested by Amtrak now.


----------



## fredmcain (Oct 16, 2020)

Lonestar648 said:


> Question? Are the Host railroads under any obligation to give Amtrak back the slots they gave up going to 3x week if daily service is restarted. Back many months, I read that one host said what ever slots Amtrak might give up would never be returned without a major use charge increase. Has Amtrak, by reducing frequency to 3x from 7x, sealed their LD fate?



Lonestar,

I too have wondered about the host railroads dragging their feet on any restored daily service. Remember that a few years ago Amtrak "studied" converting trains 1 & 2 The _Sunset Limited_ to daily service. Union Pacific made such high demands that Amtrak quickly and quietly scuttled the whole idea.

Also, VIA Rail reduced the frequency of the _Canadian _from daily to either three or four days a week a few years ago (I can't remember for sure now) then later they cut it again to two days a week and, guess what? The _Canadian_ has now stopped running altogether. I will be greatly surprised if it ever returns. I think the _Canadian_ is now permanently gone.

Come to think of it, this might just be the beginning of the end of Amtrak's LD trains and therefore Amtrak as well. As NARP had stated for years, the rest of the country simply will not support an Amtrak whose region of service is limited to the Northeast. Ain't happnin'


Regards,
Fred M. Cain


----------



## fredmcain (Oct 16, 2020)

neroden said:


> They're entirely relevant now.
> 
> Three-a-week saves maybe 1/3 of costs -- if you're lucky -- and loses roughly *80%* of revenue. (If I have a trip where I can't change the dates, I have a 3/7 chance of being able to use Amtrak outbound and a 3/7 chance of being able to use it on the return == 18% chance of being able to use Amtrak. And that is if it's on a single train, like Syracuse to Chicago.) You do the math. Even at Covid demand levels, it's idiocy.
> 
> ...



Neroden,

As I stated in an earlier post, for ANYONE living along the Capital Limited Route and wanting to go west over any portion of the California Zephyr route, those two trains only connect _ONE DAY_ a week at Chicago. This is beyond stupid.

It' also incredible that they'd do this on the eve of the end-of-year holiday rush that starts next month. Like you say, it must either be total idiocy or sabotage.

If it's sabotage, I wonder if the former presidents of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company, D.J. Russell and Ben Biaggini aren't smiling in their graves! What a GREAT idea! Total genius!

Regards,
Fred M. Cain


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Oct 16, 2020)

fredmcain said:


> Neroden,
> 
> As I stated in an earlier post, for ANYONE living along the Capital Limited Route and wanting to go west over any portion of the California Zephyr route, those two trains only connect _ONE DAY_ a week at Chicago. This is beyond stupid.
> 
> ...


Where did you hear that the CL and CZ only connect once per week? According to the website and the schedules I have the connection is possible on both Monday and Saturday.

As to the host railroads trying to stop service restoration, why would they be able to do so for LDs but not corridor trains? I had the same concern at first, but Amtrak does not seem to have had any issue restoring service on routes like the Pennsylvanian, Pere Marquette, or Pacific Surfliner. The case of the Sunset Limited is also different from current cuts in that all service on that line was cut and the service cut has lasted far longer than necessary for the event that triggered it, resulting in the deterioration of stations and the need to bring the line up to modern standards for restoration to occur.


----------



## fredmcain (Oct 16, 2020)

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Where did you hear that the CL and CZ only connect once per week? According to the website and the schedules I have the connection is possible on both Monday and Saturday.
> 
> <SNIP>



Brian,

What happened was, I tried to make a reservation for late October going west from Elkhart, IN to Ottumwa, IA and was told by the girl on reservation desk that the WB CL departs Elkhart on Tuesday, Thursdays and Saturdays and the WB CZ departs Chicago on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays.

But! Even if she was wrong or if I misunderstood and you are correct then that means the two trains only connect TWO days a week at Chicago which isn't a whole heck of a lot better!

I don't know about the connection between the Lake Shore and the CZ. I didn't ask about that but I was under the impression that Amtrak had stopped guaranteeing that connection sometime ago. You can do it but proceed at your own risk!

Regards,
Fred M. Cain


----------



## Sidney (Oct 16, 2020)

You can only get from NY/DC to Chicago the same three days of the week. You can get to Buffalo and Pittsburgh from NY daily. The fact that Cleveland and Chicago are only connected three days a week is beyond stupid.Same for Chicago to St Paul. Unbelievable.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Oct 16, 2020)

fredmcain said:


> Brian,
> 
> What happened was, I tried to make a reservation for late October going west from Elkhart, IN to Ottumwa, IA and was told by the girl on reservation desk that the WB CL departs Elkhart on Tuesday, Thursdays and Saturdays and the WB CZ departs Chicago on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays.
> 
> ...


Yeah, it's not a whole let better as you said but the connection should be available on Monday in addition to Saturday. The LSL is also a guaranteed connection, but it runs on the exact same days as the CL so that connection is also only available twice weekly. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if the agent was just wrong; Amtrak has not made it easy to find out the days which the trains are running.


----------



## fredmcain (Oct 16, 2020)

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Yeah, it's not a whole let better as you said but the connection should be available on Monday in addition to Saturday. The LSL is also a guaranteed connection, but it runs on the exact same days as the CL so that connection is also only available twice weekly. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if the agent was just wrong; Amtrak has not made it easy to find out the days which the trains are running.



Brian,

Just for Kicks and Cheerios, here is a run down of the telephone conversation I had with the girl at Amtrak that I had previously posted on another group:

_I called Amtrak on Saturday (Oct 10th) and told them that I wanted to go from Elkhart, IN to Ottumwa, IA leaving Elkhart on Oct 22nd. The female voice on the other endd told me "Wait a minute". Then I was put on hold for about five minutes and when she came back she told me that, "It looks like the first train out is on Oct 24th".

I was confused 'cause a traveling companion had called Amtrak and was told that he could do this. But the female voice at the other end kept insisting "First train out, Oct 24th". Finally she told me that the Westbound Capital Ltd only departs Elkhart now on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.

HUH!? I told here that October 22nd _*IS*_ on a Thursday! Her response? "First train out is October 24th". I argued some more with her (and even contemplated hanging up and calling back to see if I'd get someone else).

"First train out, October 24th".

Finally, finally FINALLY, I got it out of her that the Zephyr will only be departing Chicago westbound on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays. SO ! ! ! these triweekly cuts are even WORSE than they appear at first glance! What this means is that the eastern LD trains will now only be connecting to the Western LD trains ONE DAY a week at Chicago! What a GREAT way to discourage passengers!

I'm sure that D. J. Russell and Ben Biaggini must be smiling in their graves.

When I went to hang up I told the girl, "Miss, thanks for your help but this is simply not gonna work".

Her response? "Well, O.K. that's fine but if you change your mind, please give us a call". Change my mind? How?

Potential passengers simply cannot bend all their plans around a screwed up schedule. I will STILL be going to Iowa on the 22nd. I just won't be taking the train, that's all._

Regards,
Fred M. Cain


----------



## MilwaukeeRoadLover (Oct 17, 2020)

fredmcain said:


> Lonestar,
> 
> I too have wondered about the host railroads dragging their feet on any restored daily service. Remember that a few years ago Amtrak "studied" converting trains 1 & 2 The _Sunset Limited_ to daily service. Union Pacific made such high demands that Amtrak quickly and quietly scuttled the whole idea.
> 
> ...


Also, it seems the notion of a "national railroad" only on the eastern seaboard is a bit of a dicotomy.


----------



## neroden (Oct 21, 2020)

fredmcain said:


> So, group, what is the latest news on this three times a week service? I was trying to scan through the posts on our forum and nothing jumped out at me.
> 
> Realistically, what are the chances that daily service _WILL_ return? Slim to none?
> 
> I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.



Essentially, daily service will return, in January or February, if Joe Biden is elected and Democrats take the Senate. If Republicans keep the Senate, daily service will not return.

We know Biden supports improved "coast to coast" rail -- it's in his campaign platform.

There's already a daily-service bill which passed the House.

That bill is currently being blocked not by Trump (who doesn't care), but by McConnell, who has the rest of the Republican Senators goose-stepping behind him like cult members, regardless of their personal views. If Republicans lose the Senate, they'll probably turn on McConnell and throw him out of leadership, so even the Republicans won't be backing him after that. So if Democrats win the Senate I expect we'll have *Republicans* signing on to the daily-service bill. But if Republican win the Senate they will give credit to McConnell and will keep slavishly following him like cult members, and McConnell opposes daily service (indeed, he seems to oppose any public services at all).

That's my analysis, and I analyze politics very intensively.


----------

