# New DOT Secretary?



## AmtrakFlyer (Nov 6, 2020)

Anyone want to start throwing out guesses on who’s on the short list?

I hope this isn’t one area Biden tries to reach across the aisle and appoint a Republican. I’ve heard rumblings we can expect a couple GOP appointments as he tries to reach across the aisle.

Infrastructure today is too important to play around with but stranger things have happened. George W Bush reached across and appointed (D) Norman Mineta who in turn was about as anti Amtrak as any DOT Sec in Amtrak’s history and advanced Bush’s anti rail agenda.

I do get Amtrak is bi partisan though and maybe a Sen Moran type might be what the dr ordered. Who’s knows. 

On a related note heres a list of DOT secretaries to date.






1967 – 2017: Meet the Secretaries of Transportation







www.transportation.gov


----------



## NSC1109 (Nov 6, 2020)

I think it’s a little early to be asking about who Biden may or may not appoint. No one has been declared the winner yet.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie (Nov 6, 2020)

I would tend to agree with you, but the Secret Service on Friday morning upgraded Biden's level of security to that of President Elect.


----------



## Palmetto (Nov 7, 2020)

NSC1109 said:


> I think it’s a little early to be asking about who Biden may or may not appoint. No one has been declared the winner yet.
> 
> True, but there's already a transition team website that's been set up as of yesterday [Friday]. As to a name, I like De Fazio.


----------



## CTANut (Nov 7, 2020)

If Biden wins, Amtrak service probably will increase, however, Trump's political party made it clear that they want to dissolve Amtrak and let a private party handle the Northeast Corridor.
It all depends on what happens in Congress as well.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Nov 7, 2020)

How the Senate races finish will make a big difference. Some of those races are very close and will take time to resolve.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Nov 7, 2020)

Congressman Bill Lupinski of Illinois is a possible choice. He was defeated in the primary, so he's available. He has served on many transportation committees in the House. His father, whom he succeeded, was also big on transportation and got the CTA's Orange Line built during the Reagan administration.


----------



## Saddleshoes (Nov 7, 2020)

How about bringing back Ray LaHood?
He is also a former (Republican) Illinois congressman and was DOT secretary for Obama's 2nd term. He knows the turf. He was one of the main supporters of High Speed Rail.


----------



## Palmetto (Nov 7, 2020)

MikefromCrete said:


> Congressman Bill Lupinski of Illinois is a possible choice. He was defeated in the primary, so he's available. He has served on many transportation committees in the House. His father, whom he succeeded, was also big on transportation and got the CTA's Orange Line built during the Reagan administration.


Very good choice, IMO.


----------



## jis (Nov 7, 2020)

Saddleshoes said:


> How about bringing back Ray LaHood?
> He is also a former (Republican) Illinois congressman and was DOT secretary for Obama's 2nd term. He knows the turf. He was one of the main supporters of High Speed Rail.


Man! The execution of the HSR program in the Obama administration was quite atrocious IMHO. Trying to distribute crumbs to try to win over red constituents did not prove to be a winning strategy, and all that happened was everything got delayed by many years and the final result was less than spectacular. I hope the same mistake that the likes of Ray presided over are not repeated.


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Nov 7, 2020)

Favorite candidate right now is LA mayor, Eric Garcetti.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Nov 7, 2020)

Shawn Ryu said:


> Favorite candidate right now is LA mayor, Eric Garcetti.



Why? Why would he be a good choice?


----------



## me_little_me (Nov 7, 2020)

jis said:


> Man! The execution of the HSR program in the Obama administration was quite atrocious IMHO. Trying to distribute crumbs to try to win over red constituents did not prove to be a winning strategy, and all that happened was everything got delayed by many years and the final result was less than spectacular. I hope the same mistake that the likes of Ray presided over are not repeated.


I agree. I had hoped to see, that once Florida rejected the money, that it would be used where it would best work on a distance long enough to mean something, yet short enough to not take a lifetime fighting NIMBYs so the concept would become real to Americans.
My vote would have been for Charlotte to Richmond/DC because both states support rail. Eventually, if Georgia saw the light, Atlanta could have been the first extension.


----------



## Seaboard92 (Nov 7, 2020)

I have a really odd ball pick..... myself. 

Qualifications
1. I understand fleet utilization 
2. I understand most of the operating jobs in both the airline and railroad industries 
3. I have a 4.0 GPA in Political Science 
4. I know how to delegate a job. 
5. I understand transit oriented development. 
6. I understand why a multi-modal transportation system is important and have ideas on how to aid in that multi-modal future. 
7. I know how to research and write academic level plans to solve solutions. 
8. A belief in the solving the stem of the problem and not the problem itself. Knowing that if you cure the stem the problem goes away. 
9. I have a vested interest in the success of the transportation industry. 
10. I'm relatively young so there are no skeletons in my closet at a confirmation hearing. 


And the next great reason. I will work for food, lodging, and a low hourly wage. 

In all seriousness though maybe someone like Wick Moorman, or another railroad CEO.


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Nov 7, 2020)

Dakota 400 said:


> Why? Why would he be a good choice?


LA public transit got a big boost under his tenure.


----------



## Asher (Nov 7, 2020)

Shawn Ryu said:


> LA public transit got a big boost under his tenure.


With Snoop Dogg at the grand opening of the new A line


----------



## Shawn Ryu (Nov 7, 2020)

anumberone said:


> With Snoop Dogg at the grand opening of the new A lineView attachment 19598


You might be in better position to let us know if its a good pick or not.

Anyways its not confirmed. Just a rumor.


----------



## bms (Nov 7, 2020)

I'm fine with a politician as the Secretary of Transportation, but I would really like to see Biden fill Amtrak's Board of Directors with people with experience in the railroad industry. Amtrak's Board should no longer be used as a consolation prize for members of Congress who got voted out of office.


----------



## jiml (Nov 7, 2020)

Seaboard92 said:


> I have a really odd ball pick..... myself.
> 
> Qualifications
> 1. I understand fleet utilization
> ...


Send him your resume.


----------



## MARC Rider (Nov 7, 2020)

Seaboard92 said:


> I have a really odd ball pick..... myself.
> 
> Qualifications
> 1. I understand fleet utilization
> ...


You don't have to offer to work for cheap, I believe that the salary for cabinet officers is set by law.

But seriously,

In addition to airlines. railroads and truckers, DOT also has responsibility for highways and marine/barge traffic. They also do stuff like regulate auto fuel economy (in cooperation with EPA) and auto safety standards.

You might not want to be Secretary of DOT, but I could see that there would be a place for you in a professional position. Keep your eyes peeled on USAJOBS.gov:




__





USAJOBS - The Federal Government's official employment site


Search and apply for federal jobs. Learn about unique hiring paths for veterans, students and graduates, individuals with a disability, and more.



www.usajobs.gov


----------



## Bob Dylan (Nov 8, 2020)

MARC Rider said:


> You don't have to offer to work for cheap, I believe that the salary for cabinet officers is set by law.
> 
> But seriously,
> 
> ...


Veep of Operations would probably be a great spot for you( if a good person was named CEO and let you do your job!)


----------



## Asher (Nov 8, 2020)

Shawn Ryu said:


> You might be in better position to let us know if its a good pick or not.
> 
> Anyways its not confirmed. Just a rumor.


I don't know who to praise or blame. LA Has a terrible transit system. Although, it is improving.


----------



## Andrew (Nov 8, 2020)

I think that John D. Porcari would be an excellent choice.


----------



## Seaboard92 (Nov 8, 2020)

Bob Dylan said:


> Veep of Operations would probably be a great spot for you( if a good person was named CEO and let you do your job!)



I agree I would love that job. The amount of tweaking in the network that would be happening would be unprecedented in the last few years. First things I would change. 

Interlining the Silver Meteor and Lakeshore Limited to share equipment. If you push the LSL EB from Chicago to the Capitol's slot, and push the SM SB three or four hours later you can save two sets of equipment. Shut down the NYC OBS base for the LSL move it to MIA where the cost of living is lower and save on two OBS crews too. 

The Ohio State Limited, and a NY-Detroit night train are high on my list. Using the equipment saved from the LSL/SM changes.


----------



## jis (Nov 8, 2020)

Wouldn't you use at least one saved set to make the Cardinal daily, CSX willing of course? You could possibly go for the gold with the splitting of it at Indy to send a section to St Louis too, but that would probably eat up the other saved set too.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Nov 8, 2020)

Seaboard92 said:


> The Ohio State Limited



Restoring The Ohio State Limited: you're my man! (Just don't expect the current Ohio General Assembly to supply any funds needed to do so.)


----------



## Bob Dylan (Nov 8, 2020)

How bout adding the Lone Star, Coast Daylight,Daily Texas Eagle, The International and the National Ltd. to your Schedule!


----------



## Seaboard92 (Nov 8, 2020)

Dakota 400 said:


> Restoring The Ohio State Limited: you're my man! (Just don't expect the current Ohio General Assembly to supply any funds needed to do so.)



Actually it doesn't require the Ohio General Assembly at all. The route is 878 Miles from New York-Pennsylvania Station to Cincinnati Union Terminal. My reason for reinstating the Ohio State Limited is simple. It is long enough that it doesn't fall under that 750 mile rule so it can be started fairly easily. Secondly if you time the departure from Cleveland to the morning, and from Cincinnati in the evening you have the beginning of a decent corridor. Then to get a decent level of service the State of Ohio only has to fork up the money for one Piedmont style trainset to get morning, and evening service in both directions. The best way to get people on board with new trains is to demonstrate how well they work. 

Personally I'm in favor of reinstating the Southwestern Limited to St. Louis via the Water Level Route, Big Four, and Pennsylvania (across IL) as well.


----------



## Anderson (Nov 9, 2020)

Seaboard92 said:


> Actually it doesn't require the Ohio General Assembly at all. The route is 878 Miles from New York-Pennsylvania Station to Cincinnati Union Terminal. My reason for reinstating the Ohio State Limited is simple. It is long enough that it doesn't fall under that 750 mile rule so it can be started fairly easily. Secondly if you time the departure from Cleveland to the morning, and from Cincinnati in the evening you have the beginning of a decent corridor. Then to get a decent level of service the State of Ohio only has to fork up the money for one Piedmont style trainset to get morning, and evening service in both directions. The best way to get people on board with new trains is to demonstrate how well they work.
> 
> Personally I'm in favor of reinstating the Southwestern Limited to St. Louis via the Water Level Route, Big Four, and Pennsylvania (across IL) as well.


Also, if you _have_ to make it a NYC-Chicago train for some reason (it depends on how you read the clauses in question in PRIIA), the resulting CHI-CIN run would be a daytime service (albeit at the cost of at _least_ one equipment set).


----------



## neroden (Nov 9, 2020)

McConnell has already declared his intention to start blockading all Biden cabinet nominees, including Secretary of Transportation, so we may have to look into what Biden will do to manage DOT if that happens. :-(

The Republicans in the Senate need to stop enabling McConnell.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Nov 9, 2020)

Seaboard92 said:


> Then to get a decent level of service the State of Ohio only has to fork up the money for one Piedmont style trainset to get morning, and evening service in both directions.



Before November 3rd, our General Assembly would have not been interested in providing money for this service. After November 3rd, it will be even more uninterested. The GOP majorities in both Houses increased in this election.


----------



## Amtrakfflyer (Dec 15, 2020)

This came out of left field to me. He’s progressive and forward thinking. Since policy will be set by the Administration I don’t think his lack of experience is a huge factor. He‘s smart and has shown he can hold his own in dealing from people from opposing view points. Plus with a background from small town America, the odds are he would be a better advocate for maintaining/and or expanding the network then say the mayor of Los Angeles or a city in the Northeast.









Pete Buttigieg has emerged as the frontrunner to become Biden's secretary of transportation, new report says


Buttigieg is expected to run for president again in the future. An opportunity in the federal government would catapult any such political plans.




www.yahoo.com


----------



## Palmetto (Dec 15, 2020)

Sarah Feinstein and another woman [names escapes me now] in New York City are also under consideration.


----------



## IndyLions (Dec 15, 2020)

Amtrakfflyer said:


> This came out of left field to me. He’s progressive and forward thinking.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think this would be good - but I don’t know his position on transportation issues in particular.

Of all the candidates - Mayor Pete was by far my favorite. Smart, articulate, practical, progressive but moderate. His biggest issue is inexperience.

His interviews with FOX News during the latter stages of the campaign were great. He wasn’t afraid to defend Biden and debunk Trump on any network. He was polite, never snarky, and used his intelligence to make his points. I never saw them get the better of him.

Now how that would relate to transportation policy, I have no idea.


----------



## John Bredin (Dec 15, 2020)

jis said:


> Man! The execution of the HSR program in the Obama administration was quite atrocious IMHO. Trying to distribute crumbs to try to win over red constituents did not prove to be a winning strategy, and all that happened was everything got delayed by many years and the final result was less than spectacular. I hope the same mistake that the likes of Ray presided over are not repeated.


Wisconsin and Ohio, two of the most prominent examples of the dynamic you're referring to, were IMHO not efforts "to distribute crumbs to win over red constituents." Both states had viable passenger rail projects already planned, and in the case of Wisconsin beyond planning to equipment procurement. Both plans would've open up passenger service to significant unserved markets. Service connecting Chicago, Milwaukee and Madison (state capital and university) multiple times a day wasn't crumbs. Neither was service connecting Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus (also state capital and university), and Cleveland multiple times daily.

Also, both plans were made under Democratic administrations. The feds pressed on because they were still thinking like transportation planners & managers of decades past: politics have a role in which projects get green-lighted but an approved project proceeds regardless of who's in the White House or the governor's mansion. Politics sets policy, but policy is implemented apolitically. Before Walker and his ilk, "there's no Democratic or Republican way to build a sewer" was common wisdom.

Before Walker came onto the political scene riding to office on a train-bashing platform, it was almost literally unprecedented for a state government to reject federal capital funding. If a preceding governor had applied for money for a project the present governor was unenthusiastic about, he still would take the federal money because (pre-Walker) who passes up federal money? Not everyone believed Walker would actually follow through on his campaign rhetoric. Even after that, it wasn't obvious that Ohio with "moderate" governor Kasich would follow along, nor Florida's governor reject the money for that state's pre-existing plans.

How should LaHood have run the thing differently? The money was for stimulus, fiscal relief for the economy. Waiting for states to devise sufficiently grand plans (true HSR, electrification, or the like) instead of grabbing an already-vetted plan off their shelves would've delayed the effect of rapid stimulus, and giving the money to one or two grand projects only would've defeated the effect of stimulating the economy in various places. That said, and to tie back to my first point, the Wisconsin and Ohio projects (and even the Florida plans) were IMHO simultaneously good stimulus projects and good passenger rail projects. Had those plans proceeded, the HSR program would have a concrete legacy of an Amtrak system measurably bigger for the last decade or so on its map, station list, and schedules.


----------



## jis (Dec 15, 2020)

Well, so how did it work out at the end is what finally matters. It was a disaster for HSR and passenger rail expansion plans for a decade or more. It was a huge mistake to not allocate some money to places with friendlier governments. It is not like a Governor whose primary electoral platform was against passenger rail was going to be bought off by some money to get to abandon the platform on which he was elected. It was a fools errand to send money in those directions, as was proved by how the events unfolded. Some of us had pretty much predicted that at the time. Others were being starry eyed idealist. Anyway, that is my humble opinion, and like veryone else I am llowed to have one, and it supported by the flow of events.


----------



## Trogdor (Dec 15, 2020)

jis said:


> Well, so how did it work out at the end is what finally matters. It was a disaster for HSR and passenger rail expansion plans for a decade or more. It was a huge mistake to not allocate some money to places with friendlier governments. It is not like a Governor whose primary electoral platform was against passenger rail was going to be bought off by some money to get to abandon the platform on which he was elected. It was a fools errand to send money in those directions, as was proved by how the events unfolded. Some of us had pretty much predicted that at the time. Others were being starry eyed idealist. Anyway, that is my humble opinion, and like veryone else I am llowed to have one, and it supported by the flow of events.



While I agree that things didn’t end well, but you might be misremembering some of the facts in your hindsight criticism. It was Wisconsin DOT secretary Frank Busalacchi that lobbied personally to Joe Biden during the campaign and early stimulus days to get funding for rail, because WisDOT already had a project more-or-less ready to go.

The money was awarded to the state long before the election took place. The money was awarded in January 2010, and the gubernatorial campaign didn’t really heat up (and killing HSR didn’t really become a campaign platform) until months later, with the election occurring in November 2010. If you are suggesting that the Obama administration should have predicted this electoral outcome 11 months into the future, fair enough, but allow me to politely disagree with that view.


----------



## pennyk (Dec 15, 2020)

Pete Buttigieg was just named as Biden's choice for Transportation Secretary.


----------



## jis (Dec 15, 2020)

Trogdor said:


> While I agree that things didn’t end well, but you might be misremembering some of the facts in your hindsight criticism. It was Wisconsin DOT secretary Frank Busalacchi that lobbied personally to Joe Biden during the campaign and early stimulus days to get funding for rail, because WisDOT already had a project more-or-less ready to go.
> 
> The money was awarded to the state long before the election took place. The money was awarded in January 2010, and the gubernatorial campaign didn’t really heat up (and killing HSR didn’t really become a campaign platform) until months later, with the election occurring in November 2010. If you are suggesting that the Obama administration should have predicted this electoral outcome 11 months into the future, fair enough, but allow me to politely disagree with that view.


Good point. Thanks for jogging my memory. But as you agree, the eventual result was disastrous for passenger rail. California and Northeast got less funding than they could have effectively used pretty immediately, leading to later scrambles.

Interestingly, the argument that Scott used in Florida for rejecting the funding was that they were unwilling to take on the risk of having to fund operations down the line, and even today it appears that a majority in Florida agree with that position. The same Scott pretty enthusiastically pushed for federal funds for SunRail, for which of course the State DOT has no responsibility to fund operations beyond fiver years. The Counties have to pick up the tab through Sales Tax or other tax and fees adjustments. Maybe if the concerned Counties were on board, things might have gone differently, though later developments suggest that the plan was probably still too ambitious.

One thing that comes to mind is that misreading how things might go in Wisconsin dates back to 2010. It is not something that just happened suddenly in 2016. But that is a discussion for another place another day.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Dec 15, 2020)

How ironic is it that a millennial is now going to oversee Amtrak? (He’s 38 right at the upper cusp)


----------



## jis (Dec 15, 2020)

On Infrastructure: Buttigieg Casts Doubt on Gas Taxes, Touts Rail


RICHMOND, Va. -- Presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg is critical of the federal government's use of gas taxes and its failures to improve rail service -- issues that both are hot topics in Virginia. The United for Infrastructure conference in Las Vegas, billed as the first 2020 campaign event...




www.publicnewsservice.org


----------



## Eric S (Dec 15, 2020)

Trogdor said:


> While I agree that things didn’t end well, but you might be misremembering some of the facts in your hindsight criticism. It was Wisconsin DOT secretary Frank Busalacchi that lobbied personally to Joe Biden during the campaign and early stimulus days to get funding for rail, because WisDOT already had a project more-or-less ready to go.
> 
> The money was awarded to the state long before the election took place. The money was awarded in January 2010, and the gubernatorial campaign didn’t really heat up (and killing HSR didn’t really become a campaign platform) until months later, with the election occurring in November 2010. If you are suggesting that the Obama administration should have predicted this electoral outcome 11 months into the future, fair enough, but allow me to politely disagree with that view.


I'd also add that intercity rail had enjoyed bipartisan support at the gubernatorial level in Wisconsin in the decades leading up to the 2010-2011 debacle. (I don't know enough about the situation in Ohio to suggest whether that was the case there as well.)


----------



## Dakota 400 (Dec 15, 2020)

Eric S said:


> I'd also add that intercity rail had enjoyed bipartisan support at the gubernatorial level in Wisconsin in the decades leading up to the 2010-2011 debacle. (I don't know enough about the situation in Ohio to suggest whether that was the case there as well.)



The in-state rail proposals were developed when Governor Ted Strickland (a D) occupied the Office. Yet, even then, our General Assembly was a R in both Houses. Had he been re-elected, he would have had a devil of a time getting the General Assembly to cough up much, if any money. Each General Election keeps seeing the General Assembly becoming more R and less D. Even if Governor DeWine, our Governor currently, supported a rail proposal, he would have no success with a General Assembly that seems to be in opposition to a Governor of their own Party more often than they support his proposals.


----------



## Lonestar648 (Dec 16, 2020)

I would expect with Biden’s horrendous schedule once sworn in, he would want someone who would be pro rail like him to be DOT Secretary. We can’t expect Biden to have much more than a minute here and there at best, but next best thing is someone who also has an interest in passenger rail. Amtrak management will be doing a quick shuffle based on where Amtrak falls on the DOT food chain.


----------



## Palmetto (Dec 16, 2020)

New yesterday afternoon is that it will be Pete Buttigieg.


----------



## Maverickstation (Dec 16, 2020)

Palmetto said:


> New yesterday afternoon is that it will be Pete Buttigieg.



A great thing about Pete is that he was the Mayor of a city (South Bend) served by (2) Amtrak trains ( Capitol Limited and Lake Shore Limited), as well as NICTD-South Shore Line service to and from Chicago. If anyone understands the value of Amtrak Inter-City Service, as well as local rail service it would be him.


----------



## Steve4031 (Dec 16, 2020)

Maverickstation said:


> A great thing about Pete is that he was the Mayor of a city (South Bend) served by (2) Amtrak trains ( Capitol Limited and Lake Shore Limited), as well as NICTD-South Shore Line service to and from Chicago. If anyone understands the value of Amtrak Inter-City Service, as well as local rail service it would be him.



Hopefully he had a few leisurely rides into Chicago doing the Norfolk Southern shuffle as Amtrak is switched from track to track to overtake a freight and then get out of the way of oncoming freights only to then follow a freight into the Englewood yards.


----------



## Eric S (Dec 16, 2020)

Maverickstation said:


> A great thing about Pete is that he was the Mayor of a city (South Bend) served by (2) Amtrak trains ( Capitol Limited and Lake Shore Limited), as well as NICTD-South Shore Line service to and from Chicago. If anyone understands the value of Amtrak Inter-City Service, as well as local rail service it would be him.


It's also been reported that, as Mayor, he was supportive of the (thus far unsuccessful but ongoing) effort to re-extend South Shore service back to downtown South Bend, perhaps in conjunction with an intermodal station near the old Union Station serving Amtrak as well as local and intercity buses.


----------



## dlagrua (Dec 16, 2020)

I do not believe that any one politician can make any drastic changes to Amtrak policy. Being a government owned corporation there is no lobbyist money available to feed the politicians.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Dec 16, 2020)

The new Administration, Biden, Mayor Pete, House/Senate members, new board members, RPA and advocates like us are more than 1 person and politician. Gardner, Flynn and Anderson (who apparently is still around behind the scenes) picked this battle. Game on!


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 16, 2020)

The question in my mind is how well South Bend politics will translate to Washington, DC politics.


----------



## mlanoue (Dec 16, 2020)

Well, Mayor Pete delivered a speech today after his nomination. The first thing he mentioned was Amtrak. Said he was only going to be the second biggest Amtrak fan in the administration.

Pete Buttigieg Delivers Remarks As Biden's Transportation Secretary Nominee


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie (Dec 16, 2020)

I am unsure what this will all mean. While Buttigieg is a competent person, and stood up quite well on the National political stage, I would have never thought of him as the best expert we have on transportation.

President (Elect) Biden has more pressing issues, like Covid-19 and the economy, that needs 110% of this attention. Transforming Amtrak into a fleet of gleaming-white HS bullet trains zooming between US cities, while nice, really isn't even near the top of the pressing American agenda. No Treasury Secretary can change that.


----------



## mlanoue (Dec 16, 2020)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> I am unsure what this will all mean. While Buttigieg is a competent person, and stood up quite well on the National political stage, I would have never thought of him as the best expert we have on transportation.
> 
> President (Elect) Biden has more pressing issues, like Covid-19 and the economy, that needs 110% of this attention. Transforming Amtrak into a fleet of gleaming-white HS bullet trains zooming between US cities, while nice, really isn't even near the top of the pressing American agenda. No Treasury Secretary can change that.



Definitely true. Although I think since he is competent and stands up well in the national spotlight, he might be in a better position to sell transportation needs to the nation than someone who is may have more direct knowledge, but isn't as well-spoken. He has a following so people will listen. Usually the Transportation Secretary is somebody nobody has ever heard of. This time he's fairly well-liked. It may or may not make a big difference, but it can't hurt much.


----------



## Dakota 400 (Dec 16, 2020)

Considering that the current Secretary of Transportation is the wife of the Senior Senator of Kentucky and their home is Louisville, how much Amtrak experience did she have? How much of Kentucky is served by Amtrak? Louisville certainly isn't. The new potential Secretary has been Mayor of a city that has Amtrak service. Surely, he is better acquainted with Amtrak than Secretary Chao was when she joined the President's Cabinet


----------



## Asher (Dec 16, 2020)

I think Pete is a stand up guy, a backer of Amtrak. He’s ambitious and a good choice. And in the end a person who will get confirmed.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 16, 2020)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> I am unsure what this will all mean. While Buttigieg is a competent person, and stood up quite well on the National political stage, I would have never thought of him as the best expert we have on transportation.
> 
> President (Elect) Biden has more pressing issues, like Covid-19 and the economy, that needs 110% of this attention. Transforming Amtrak into a fleet of gleaming-white HS bullet trains zooming between US cities, while nice, really isn't even near the top of the pressing American agenda. No Treasury Secretary can change that.


But passenger rail is part of what's needed to deal with climate change, which apparently the new administration is planning a big push. Even though most of the talk in transportation and climate change is having to do with technology-forcing to get more battery electric cars on the road, such cars don't do anything about containing suburban sprawl, which is, in itself, a major driver of greenhouse gas emissions. Passenger rail is essential to allow for more cities and towns to develop in a denser, more walkable manner. Of course, most of this would be corridor/regional service. No need to start with 200 mph bullet trains, if we could even replicate the Piedmont Service, or the Wolverines, or the Lincoln Service, etc. in more places across the country, that would be a big start. Even better would be to upgrade to something more on the lines of the Capitol Corridor, or Pacific Surfliner, or Empire Service, not to mention, in corridors with numerous large cities along the route, to upgrade to a transit ecology similar to the NEC, and to upgrade the NEC to a transit ecology of something similar to Europe or Asia.

This should me folded into climate change policy, and also some national security policy, in the sense that the country should diminish its reliance on petroleum, which might reduce the strategic significance of a lot of very unstable regions in the world. If oil is less important for us, there's less of a chance that we'll stumble into an ill-advised war over securing our oil supply.


----------



## IndyLions (Dec 16, 2020)

MARC Rider said:


> This should me folded into climate change policy, and also some national security policy, in the sense that the country should diminish its reliance on petroleum, which might reduce the strategic significance of a lot of very unstable regions in the world. If oil is less important for us, there's less of a chance that we'll stumble into an ill-advised war over securing our oil supply.



I agree with a whole bunch of what you said - probably all of it. But you and I aren’t the ones that need convincing. If we don’t get conservatives to go along willingly - nothing truly good will happen with rail and Amtrak.

What scares me is if Amtrak somehow gets tied to a hot button political issue. What hot button political issue could that be, you ask? I have two in mind (I say). One, the Green New Deal, and two, climate change. Experience tells me that conservatives will fight tooth and nail to keep anything closely resembling the Green New Deal or sweeping climate change legislation from passing. I don’t want Amtrak anywhere near those two issues.

Ten to twenty years from now it won’t matter - our kids will be in charge and they recognize and support those issues. But for the next 10 years we will have to tread carefully and cajole our way along if we want meaningful, short-term change that accomplishes what we want without rubbing anyone’s nose in it.

Sensible, future minded infrastructure and transportation improvements are something that (nearly) everyone can get behind if it is couched properly. We just have to see that it IS couched properly!

I know from observing him that Mayor Pete is intelligent and articulate enough to make that argument effectively. Whether or not he has the political skill is yet to be determined.


----------



## Ziv (Dec 16, 2020)

I don't think Amtrak needs to be getting 110% of Biden's attention. It isn't even in the top 5 of issues the US has to deal with in the next 4 years. But the fact is that having someone who wants Amtrak to succeed as the head of the DOT will be a good thing. Most of the time the DOT is putting Amtrak near the back of the pack when it comes to which chick the momma bird is going to give the worm to. At least now, Amtrak has a chance to get a worm a bit more often. 
Get back to daily LD service immediately. Give Amtrak a little more money every year on a steadier basis. It doesn't need to be a billion more, even $300Mn more would make a huge difference. Keep buying more cars every year and then buy some new LD loco's too. Get rid of the Mica rule on dining cars and then bring back the dining cars ASAP. Find a way to incentivize the freight companies to not bury Amtrak trains if they fall out of their time slot. Get at least one or two of the western LD trains to twice a day as soon as the equipment is there. Ok, that last one may be crazy talk, but the first few items are eminently doable and they wouldn't take a huge amount of money.

[/QUOTE]
...
President (Elect) Biden has more pressing issues, like Covid-19 and the economy, that needs 110% of this attention. Transforming Amtrak into a fleet of gleaming-white HS bullet trains zooming between US cities, while nice, really isn't even near the top of the pressing American agenda. No Treasury Secretary can change that.
[/QUOTE]


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 16, 2020)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> President (Elect) Biden has more pressing issues, like Covid-19 and the economy, that needs 110% of this attention. Transforming Amtrak into a fleet of gleaming-white HS bullet trains zooming between US cities, while nice, really isn't even near the top of the pressing American agenda.



Expanding rail service helps the economy by creating immediate jobs in construction, engineering, logistics, etc. and then continue to help the economy by transporting passengers to towns for work, vacation, etc which of course means they are spending money. 



Dakota 400 said:


> The new potential Secretary has been Mayor of a city that has Amtrak service.



Also a city that has the last of the real electic interurban lines in operation.


----------



## jiml (Dec 16, 2020)

What's interesting to an outside observer is that if your new Transportation Secretary is indeed an Amtrak supporter, he will be speaking as a younger person as opposed to someone who remembers "the good old days" of passenger rail. This may actually augment his credibility with those that matter.


----------



## keelhauled (Dec 16, 2020)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> I am unsure what this will all mean. While Buttigieg is a competent person, and stood up quite well on the National political stage, I would have never thought of him as the best expert we have on transportation.


I am not sure that it matters very much whether he is an expert. Cabinet member is an executive position, not a technical one; much like being CEO, it is less important that someone knows the nuts and bolts than it is that they can manage the people who do know the nuts and bolts in order to achieve goals. It's not the job of a secretary of whatever to personally carry out the department's mission.


----------



## Willbridge (Dec 16, 2020)

keelhauled said:


> I am not sure that it matters very much whether he is an expert. Cabinet member is an executive position, not a technical one; much like being CEO, it is less important that someone knows the nuts and bolts than it is that they can manage the people who do know the nuts and bolts in order to achieve goals. It's not the job of a secretary of whatever to personally carry out the department's mission.


Having been recruited for the Oregon DOT out of the Army by then Gov. McCall I can tell you that you are right. However, having an executive who leans one way or another can motivate the mid-level bureaucrats who want to keep their jobs and promotions going. There are usually things in the in-basket that can be pulled out for some work. 

When the highway guys tried to tie things up I could pull out letters signed by the governor to citizens indicating his support for rail passenger service. When the next governor came in we were directly ordered to stop several projects. The governor after that at least allowed them to resume. None of this had to do with partisan politics, but rather personal relationships or the desire to be different from the predecessor. I went on to other jobs where results were demanded.


----------



## Willbridge (Dec 16, 2020)

jiml said:


> What's interesting to an outside observer is that if your new Transportation Secretary is indeed an Amtrak supporter, he will be speaking as a younger person as opposed to someone who remembers "the good old days" of passenger rail. This may actually augment his credibility with those that matter.


I can get pretty cynical after 50 years of this but at least it’s a different approach. And, I should admit, it’s been 50 more years than the Stanford Research Institute predicted for the future of rail passenger service. They estimated that the 1970’s would see the end of intercity rail service in a study commissioned by... the SP!

-- rwr


----------



## Bob Dylan (Dec 16, 2020)

Mayor Pete mentioned Amtrak in his Introduction remarks today, and said that just like "Amtrak Joe", the President elect, he feels strongly that Rail of all types is important to updating our Transportation Networks and Improving the Enviroment thru New Technolgies.

This seems like a sure Win for the Country!!!


----------



## Lana J C (Dec 17, 2020)

Rail Passengers Association helps a lot with lobbying politicians. If you arent yet a member, please consider joining!


----------



## Matthew H Fish (Dec 17, 2020)

I don't want to prejudge Pete Buttigieg, but I am a little bit disappointed.

Here in the Pacific Northwest, we have been working to make transit and rail more accessible and more of a normal option for years. And even though we have a way to go, we have had some success. Portland helped usher in the new era of light rail, and Portland-Seattle has useful corridor service. 

I know there is politics of choosing a "small town mayor", but I feel that if there was a real commitment to changing US transit and energy-using policies, it would make more sense to choose someone from a state or city that had shown it could implement real change with transit.


----------



## bms (Dec 17, 2020)

Bob Dylan said:


> Mayor Pete mentioned Amtrak in his Introduction remarks today, and said that just like "Amtrak Joe", the President elect, he feels strongly that Rail of all types is important to updating our Transportation Networks and Improving the Enviroment thru New Technolgies.
> 
> This seems like a sure Win for the Country!!!



I agree with you Jim, I think Mayor Pete is a great choice. Don't understand all the negativity. It is a political position so of course a politician would be appointed. We got someone who supports Amtrak service and I am happy about that.


----------



## Manny T (Dec 18, 2020)

When writing about Pete Buttigieg some describe him as a "small town mayor." 

Why? He is or was:

a graduate of Harvard College and Oxford University and a Rhodes Scholar. 
a consultant at the management consulting firm McKinsey.
an intelligence officer in the United States Navy Reserve, attaining the rank of lieutenant.
a candidate for president in the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries
the winner of the 2020 Iowa caucuses, he placed second in the New Hampshire primary.
He dropped out of the race on March 1, 2020 and endorsed Joe Biden the next day -- so his political instincts are good and he knows a winner when he sees one (not a loser, like some).
I think the articulate, educated and experienced Pete Buttigieg brings a lot to the cabinet (political) post of Secretary of Transportation, way way beyond his experience as "a small town mayor."


----------



## jis (Dec 18, 2020)

Manny T said:


> When writing about Pete Buttigieg some describe him as a "small town mayor."


I had just chalked it up as a willful or otherwise display of ignorance on part of the ones describing him as such without any additional notes.

Thanks you for elaborating what items were ignored by them.


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 18, 2020)

Manny T said:


> When writing about Pete Buttigieg some describe him as a "small town mayor."
> 
> Why?


Because it is a fair commentary on the fact that he does not have "inside the beltway" political experience. No doubt this will be an adjustment for him.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 18, 2020)

Matthew H Fish said:


> I don't want to prejudge Pete Buttigieg, but I am a little bit disappointed.
> 
> Here in the Pacific Northwest, we have been working to make transit and rail more accessible and more of a normal option for years. And even though we have a way to go, we have had some success. Portland helped usher in the new era of light rail, and Portland-Seattle has useful corridor service.
> 
> I know there is politics of choosing a "small town mayor", but I feel that if there was a real commitment to changing US transit and energy-using policies, it would make more sense to choose someone from a state or city that had shown it could implement real change with transit.



I love Portland but “keep Portland weird” isn’t just a bumper sticker. If Biden brings in someone from the West Coast the conservatives would start gathering their pitch forks!


----------



## trainman74 (Dec 18, 2020)

Manny T said:


> a consultant at the management consulting firm McKinsey.



I don't necessarily consider this one a positive, speaking as someone who was laid off from a company that was consulting with McKinsey.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 18, 2020)

Manny T said:


> When writing about Pete Buttigieg some describe him as a "small town mayor."


South Bend, Indiana, while not a New York or Chicago, is not a "small town."


----------



## toddinde (Dec 19, 2020)

trainman74 said:


> I don't necessarily consider this one a positive, speaking as someone who was laid off from a company that was consulting with McKinsey.


McKinsey also did a study for Amtrak, which was rejected, but called for elimination of the long distance trains.


----------



## jis (Dec 19, 2020)

Actually a pretty good article...









Mayor Pete had a fleet of 47 buses. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg will have a budget of $87 billion


South Bend, Indiana has a transit budget of about $10 million, covering 47 buses and fewer than 100 full-time employees.




www.cnn.com





Another thing I realized in stark numbers from this article - DOT budget is $87 Billion. Of that the direct Amtrak portion is a shade under $2 Billion, all of FRA is a shade under #3 Billion. FTA is around $13.5 Billion give or take, of which the rail portion is probably considerably less than half. The rest of the $87 Billion is something else. For reference see the *2019 enacted* column in the table on _pages 18-20_ of US DOT Budget Highlights


----------



## IndyLions (Dec 19, 2020)

Before I had any idea who Mayor Pete was, I had an opportunity to explore South Bend by bicycle in 2018 and I was really impressed.

My youngest daughter attended college in Boston, and I drove her to South Bend to put her on the LSL for her trip back to college after Thanksgiving. As many of you know, the LSL leaves South Bend at a pretty late hour. Instead of a late night drive back to Indy, I decided to spend the night in a South Bend hotel. It was unseasonably warm, and I decided to get up the next morning and explore South Bend by bike. Because of that, I decided to stay In a downtown hotel to make things more convenient.

I was shocked at the difference in South Bend from my previous visits many years before. Instead of a shuttered downtown, and an industrial wasteland with no real redeeming value, the downtown was really thriving. There were restaurants, the streets were well organized, there were plenty of well maintained parks and bike paths - it was really a transformed place.

One thing mayor Pete did not fix, however, was the Amtrak train station. It’s functional but all in all pretty bleak. He may have been trying to move it to a better location and didn’t get that done - but I’ll have to give him a negative mark on that one score.


----------



## jis (Dec 19, 2020)

I have heard from some transport oriented friends of mine who live in South Bend (one is a Professor at Notre Dame) that there was a proposal to move the Amtrak stop adjacent to the old Union Station building (which has been restored) downtown. A bus station got built adjacent to it, but NS kiboshed the Amtrak move.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Dec 19, 2020)

Jis is right. There were plans to move Amtrak to the former Union Station, but NS killed the plan because the 5-10 minutes four times a day Amtrak would stop at the station would somehow terribly disrupt their switching at the South Bend yard.


----------



## IndyLions (Dec 19, 2020)

MikefromCrete said:


> Jis is right. There were plans to move Amtrak to the former Union Station, but NS killed the plan because the 5-10 minutes four times a day Amtrak would stop at the station would somehow terribly disrupt their switching at the South Bend yard.



From what little I can tell from research online - that's a pretty puny yard. I'm guessing that if they successfully move the South Shore terminus from the airport to downtown - Amtrak could follow despite NS objections.


----------



## jis (Dec 19, 2020)

IndyLions said:


> From what little I can tell from research online - that's a pretty puny yard. I'm guessing that if they successfully move the South Shore terminus from the airport to downtown - Amtrak could follow despite NS objections.


But the proposed South Shore move to Downtown may not involve NS at all. Here are the various locations being considered. 







Only if they figure out how to fund the Union Station alternative would NS possibly be involved, though even then, possibly not, beyond some adjustment of easements that do not involve any obstruction to NS's railroad tracks. There is ROW space between NS tracks and edge of the ROW for laying one, and possibly two additional tracks from SB Amtrak station to Union Station without interfering with NS. There is also space to build a platforms for the shorter South Shore trains by the Union Station Building towards the west end of it. That is all that is needed to bring the South Shore Line to Union Station.

The NS issue that will remain for Amtrak is how it can approach from the East to join the South Shore Line without allegedly destroying NS's complete operations in the area. 

Here is an Blog discussing the various alternatives for the South Shore station in South Bend and various opinions about it:









The South Shore Belongs Downtown in South Bend


I’ve written before about how the country’s last interurban, the South Shore Line, could play a larger role in the transportation network for Northwest Indiana and beyond. The City of South Bend ap…




itineranturbanist.wordpress.com





Here is an Editorial in the South Bend Tribune on this subject from back in 2018...









Editorial: Confused about the South Shore plan in South Bend? So are we.


There’s not a clear vision for the South Shore and where a new station should go.




www.southbendtribune.com


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 19, 2020)

Why would the other options be considered? Is there a reason they don’t want to stay at the airport?


----------



## jis (Dec 19, 2020)

crescent-zephyr said:


> Why would the other options be considered? Is there a reason they don’t want to stay at the airport?


Money, or lack thereof. The downtown alternative is apparently the most expensive by quite a lot.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 19, 2020)

jis said:


> Money, or lack thereof. The downtown alternative is apparently the most expensive by quite a lot.



I meant why are the other non-airport / non-downtown stations being considered?


----------



## jis (Dec 19, 2020)

crescent-zephyr said:


> I meant why are the other non-airport / non-downtown stations being considered?


Did you read the Editorial I linked to above?


----------



## Trogdor (Dec 20, 2020)

Honestly, the airport doesn’t really make sense as a route terminal for the South Shore passenger trains (as one of the links alludes to). In a transportation context, connecting to a small, little-served airport that barely sustains service to hub airports (including O’Hare, incidentally) doesn’t really add much value. It’s not like people are going to fly to South Bend just to take the train to Chicago (well, “normal” people; I’m sure some railfans will take that as a challenge).

Upgrading the route into Downtown South Bend and having an integrated stop with Amtrak has numerous possible benefits. Maybe even hang a carrot in front of NS’s face as well. If you can get a forward connection (i.e. one that doesn’t require backing out of CUS) to the St. Charles Air Line, Amtrak would love to move off the NS between Chicago and Porter, IN, on the Michigan Line trains. Add double-tracking the South Shore and a connection in South Bend, and you could possibly move the Capitol Limited and Lake Shore Limited over as well, all the way to South Bend.

The problem is, as with everything, our transportation networks are so disjointed and parochial that it takes a “small town mayor” budgeting a few million dollars to even possibly get something done in the South Bend area, when in reality, a large-scale view is needed to see that there are regional (and even national) transportation benefits to connecting the South Shore to downtown, combined with double-tracking, removing the street running in Michigan City (already under way), an improved connection to the St. Charles Air Line, and even improved rail capacity from Chicago Union Station to O’Hare Airport.

There shouldn’t be flights from South Bend to O’Hare, and there doesn’t need to be a passenger train that ends at South Bend Airport. Instead, fast, direct train service from South Bend to O’Hare ought to be possible, using just a few infrastructure upgrades, some of which are already planned, a few others being on advocates’ wish lists.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 20, 2020)

I get wanting to route the train downtown, I don’t understand wanting to route the train somewhere other than the airport and other than downtown just to save 10 minutes.

The South Shore operating to the airport has worked well for me when meeting family in South Bend. I wonder how many who have criticized it have actually ridden it?


----------



## Matthew H Fish (Dec 20, 2020)

I agree: "Small Town Mayor" is not really descriptive. "Mid sized city" "Large exurb"...

But as far as train and transit purposes go, South Bend has...an Amtrak stop with daily service and 17 local bus lines. It is a low-density, suburban style city, built around an airport and a freeway. And that is the relevant issue as far as his experience goes.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 20, 2020)

Matthew H Fish said:


> I agree: "Small Town Mayor" is not really descriptive. "Mid sized city" "Large exurb"...
> 
> But as far as train and transit purposes go, South Bend has...an Amtrak stop with daily service and 17 local bus lines. It is a low-density, suburban style city, built around an airport and a freeway. And that is the relevant issue as far as his experience goes.



Also the terminal city for the only remaining electric interurban service in the country. It may be more convenient to your agenda to leave that part out so my apologies for the correction


----------



## Matthew H Fish (Dec 20, 2020)

That is interesting, I didn't know that. 

My main point was that there were many US cities that had mass transit systems, or at least very active bus systems, and that South Bend, Indiana, was not one of them. 

That doesn't mean that he can't be an effective/enthusiastic advocate for non-private vehicle and non-fossil fuel based transportation. Just that he doesn't seem to have any particular experience with that. I don't know what is controversial about that statement.


----------



## flitcraft (Dec 20, 2020)

In my opinion, the Secretary of Transportation doesn't have to have concrete transportation experience; what they need is to be attuned to transportation policy in the greater framework of national priorities, and the vision to see that policy come to fruition. With that, you hire people with the right experience to implement policy. 

Here's an example: Dorm Braman had been mayor of Seattle--which at that time was not the metropolis that it is today--when Richard Nixon tapped him to be Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Urban Transportation and the Environment. He had no background in transportation per se, and Seattle's public transit system was (and still is) quite primitive, but Braman threw himself into the job. He pushed hard for urban mass transit and for Amtrak as well. I think that Buttigieg could be this generation's Braman.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 20, 2020)

Matthew H Fish said:


> My main point was that there were many US cities that had mass transit systems, or at least very active bus systems, and that South Bend, Indiana, was not one of them.



Your main point seems to be saying that he’s not qualified for the job. Who would you suggest for the job?


----------



## Qapla (Dec 20, 2020)

One of the main criteria for a good Secretary should be the desire to improve transportation ... that would include not having a predisposed position that any one type of transportation is "the" answer. He should be open to any/all solutions that will move people in, around and through the country in a way that serves the best interest of people and the environment - NOT on making a profit for any one type of transportation or giving in to lobbyists groups or industry.

If a person takes the job with a preconceived idea they will not be open to alternate solutions.


----------



## Deni (Dec 21, 2020)

crescent-zephyr said:


> Your main point seems to be saying that he’s not qualified for the job. Who would you suggest for the job?



Gabe Klein.


----------



## Lonestar648 (Dec 21, 2020)

Depending on how the Senate goes in GA will depend on who gets confirmed and how long the process takes. This nomination may still get through the political process without much negotiation if the Republicans win in GA.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Dec 21, 2020)

Deni said:


> Gabe Klein.


Who?


----------



## jis (Dec 21, 2020)

MikefromCrete said:


> Who?











Gabe Klein - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 21, 2020)

Deni said:


> Gabe Klein.



He is a part of the Biden transition team related to the DOT so he’s in the mix at least. He would be an excellent choice as well. If Gabe and Pete team up we could have a really incredible future!


----------



## Abe26 (Dec 27, 2020)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> I am unsure what this will all mean. While Buttigieg is a competent person, and stood up quite well on the National political stage, I would have never thought of him as the best expert we have on transportation.
> 
> President (Elect) Biden has more pressing issues, like Covid-19 and the economy, that needs 110% of this attention. Transforming Amtrak into a fleet of gleaming-white HS bullet trains zooming between US cities, while nice, really isn't even near the top of the pressing American agenda. No Treasury Secretary can change that.



I disagree, 
why can every modren country the world have fast, efficient, nice trains but the good old USA can’t
we can spent almost a trillion defense every year! But on a fast rail system we are doomed.

I think now is the best time to upgrade out train system infrastructure, with the unemployment high, and and the economy down, we should spent on upgrading the train lines, improve everything and we should aim for 200 MPH trains


----------



## Palmetto (Dec 27, 2020)

Abe26 said:


> I disagree,
> why can every modren country the world have fast, efficient, nice trains but the good old USA can’t
> we can spent almost a trillion defense every year! But on a fast rail system we are doomed.
> 
> I think now is the best time to upgrade out train system infrastructure, with the unemployment high, and and the economy down, we should spent on upgrading the train lines, improve everything and we should aim for 200 MPH trains



Here's my brief answer to the question: entitlement and lawyers. Probably an over-simplification, but I think those two are a big part of progress in this country. Just take a look at the Texas High Speed Rail project as one, recent example.


----------



## tricia (Dec 27, 2020)

Abe26 said:


> I disagree,
> why can every modren country the world have fast, efficient, nice trains but the good old USA can’t
> we can spent almost a trillion defense every year! But on a fast rail system we are doomed.
> 
> I think now is the best time to upgrade out train system infrastructure, with the unemployment high, and and the economy down, we should spent on upgrading the train lines, improve everything and we should aim for 200 MPH trains



Personally, I'd favor a much more extensive, reliable, and frequently run network of 70MPH trains before HSR--but I think we're in agreement that upgrading train infrastructure would be a very effective part of any pandemic-recovery economic plan that seeks both short-term stimulus and long-term benefits.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 27, 2020)

I agree. Speed isn't Amtrak's advantage, reliability, safety, and the potential options for those that can't travel by air. Medical equipment,, etc. 
And of course your personal automobile on the AutoTrain. 

A consistent and reliable 70 mph isn't that slow, but trains that have to wait on freight trains will probably average more like 30mph.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 27, 2020)

I would imagine more people travel by car than they do by plane ... and cars on the Interstate do not travel anywhere near 200mph (not legally, anyway). So, if trains could travel at an average speed faster than the Interstate average speeds, the fact that they run 24/7 while the passenger can rest/ride/sleep could attract people back to the rail for long trips.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 27, 2020)

Qapla said:


> I would imagine more people travel by car than they do by plane ... and cars on the Interstate do not travel anywhere near 200mph (not legally, anyway). So, if trains could travel at an average speed faster than the Interstate average speeds, the fact that they run 24/7 while the passenger can rest/ride/sleep could attract people back to the rail for long trips.


When I take road trips, even on routes where, traffic permitting, I can drive 70-80 mph, my point to point average speed never seems to exceed 50 mph. It's all those restroom stops, fuel stops, lunch stops, etc. And if it's longer than a day trip, my max is 8-10 hours driving (400-500 miles), and then I need to stop for the night. Thus, if a train can consistently perform at a 50 mph point-to-point average speed, it's speed competitive with driving. If it can do 60 mph point to point average speed, it's actually faster than driving. Of course, in order to account for parts of the route with curves and grades, and intermediate stops, etc., the train's top speed on suitable parts of the route will need to be 80-90 mph.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Dec 27, 2020)

MARC Rider said:


> When I take road trips, even on routes where, traffic permitting, I can drive 70-80 mph, my point to point average speed never seems to exceed 50 mph. It's all those restroom stops, fuel stops, lunch stops, etc. And if it's longer than a day trip, my max is 8-10 hours driving (400-500 miles), and then I need to stop for the night. Thus, if a train can consistently perform at a 50 mph point-to-point average speed, it's speed competitive with driving. If it can do 60 mph point to point average speed, it's actually faster than driving. Of course, in order to account for parts of the route with curves and grades, and intermediate stops, etc., the train's top speed on suitable parts of the route will need to be 80-90 mph.


If you're going to factor in stops for the car trip, you should also include travel time to and from the stations for the train trip. While train stations tend to be more centrally located than airports, not everyone is going downtown and there will be some additional travel time regardless. There is also some time after arriving at the station but prior to the departure time. However, these factors are less relevant on longer trips. For example, I live in Chicago and it takes me about 45 minutes to get to Union Station; I also tend to get there at least 30 minutes early. That nearly doubles the travel time if I am going to Milwaukee, a route which has a travel time that is theoretically highly competitive with driving. It could take even longer than that depending on where my specific destination is. However, if I were to take the SWC to Los Angeles, the 1-2 hours of travel time on the ends don't make as much of a difference.


----------



## Abe26 (Dec 27, 2020)

MARC Rider said:


> When I take road trips, even on routes where, traffic permitting, I can drive 70-80 mph, my point to point average speed never seems to exceed 50 mph. It's all those restroom stops, fuel stops, lunch stops, etc. And if it's longer than a day trip, my max is 8-10 hours driving (400-500 miles), and then I need to stop for the night. Thus, if a train can consistently perform at a 50 mph point-to-point average speed, it's speed competitive with driving. If it can do 60 mph point to point average speed, it's actually faster than driving. Of course, in order to account for parts of the route with curves and grades, and intermediate stops, etc., the train's top speed on suitable parts of the route will need to be 80-90 mph.


NYC to Buffalo with a car takes 7 hours, 375 miles, if you can have a train going 150-200 MPH just 50% of the time and make it in 3 1/2 hours , most people will take it versus flying. This route alone has more then 10 flights a day, and if it can go till Toronto, its a game changer with 30 flights a day.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 27, 2020)

Abe26 said:


> NYC to Buffalo with a car takes 7 hours, 375 miles, if you can have a train going 150-200 MPH just 50% of the time and make it in 3 1/2 hours , most people will take it versus flying. This route alone has more then 10 flights a day, and if it can go till Toronto, its a game changer with 30 flights a day.



The 10 New York-Buffalo flights, if they're using 737s with a capacity of 150, have 1500 seats per day.
A regional consist of 6 Amfleet 1 coaches, a cafe car and an Amfleet 1 business class car has a capacity of about 500, or almost 2 widebody jetliners. If the 4 trains now running between New York and Buffalo had that consist or the equivalent, that would be 2000 seats per day. More seats available without adding a single train on the route. But, of course, successful train routes aren't about the end-to-end traffic. Just look at the Northeast Corridor. Nearly everyone gets off or boards at New York, very few people ride all the way from Washington to Boston. It's people riding between all those intermediate city pairs that fill the trains, and most of them would otherwise drive. A 60-70 mph point-to-point average speed makes those trains very time-competitive with driving, especially if any of the driving route has a potential for traffic congestion.


----------



## west point (Dec 27, 2020)

Until all the potential trains can operate in the USA with enough equipment I do not want to see any equipment be assigned to a train going thru Canada. I like Canada but if a 12 car train does a RT thru Canada the you have the equivalent of 3 -4 cars essentially assigned in Canada.


----------



## Palmetto (Dec 28, 2020)

Those 10 flights to Buffalo, though, don't stop in Amsterdam [NY] or Utica. I am a firm opponent of endpoint mentality.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Dec 28, 2020)

Endpoint mentality is idiotic and one of many reasons Anderson failed as CEO. I hope the new management including Gardner get that now.


----------



## railiner (Dec 28, 2020)

MARC Rider said:


> When I take road trips, even on routes where, traffic permitting, I can drive 70-80 mph, my point to point average speed never seems to exceed 50 mph. It's all those restroom stops, fuel stops, lunch stops, etc. And if it's longer than a day trip, my max is 8-10 hours driving (400-500 miles), and then I need to stop for the night. Thus, if a train can consistently perform at a 50 mph point-to-point average speed, it's speed competitive with driving. If it can do 60 mph point to point average speed, it's actually faster than driving. Of course, in order to account for parts of the route with curves and grades, and intermediate stops, etc., the train's top speed on suitable parts of the route will need to be 80-90 mph.



Not all of us are the same...
I have made three round trips in the past year between my former Queens apartment, and my new homes in Florida, driving. I am a 'marathon' driver, and easily beat the time by several hours, it would have taken me by using the Auto-Train instead. Not to mention the money saved, even though my car only carried one out of five available seats.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 28, 2020)

railiner said:


> Not all of us are the same...
> I have made three round trips in the past year between my former Queens apartment, and my new homes in Florida, driving. I am a 'marathon' driver, and easily beat the time by several hours, it would have taken me by using the Auto-Train instead. Not to mention the money saved, even though my car only carried one out of five available seats.


My grandfather used to do a 24-hour marathon drive from Florida when he came up to visit us. And that was in the early 1960s before I-95 was 100% completed. I guess I didn't inherit the genes for marathon. The best I've done was 600 miles in 14 hours, but the last time we did that my family rebelled and told me never to do that again.

I would think that marathon drivers are a minority of the people who make road trips, anyway.


----------



## jiml (Dec 28, 2020)

MARC Rider said:


> The 10 New York-Buffalo flights, if they're using 737s with a capacity of 150, have 1500 seats per day.


With the exception of JetBlue, most of those are regional jets.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 28, 2020)

Back in the late 1940's my Mother made several trips from Jacksonville to Philly - the straight through trip took 17-18 hours ... there were no Interstates in those days and she had two young children in the car.

My Dad drove straight through from Gainesville, Fl to Alamosa during the 1960's ... a 33 hour trek on the roads that existed at the time.

I have driven several of these marathon drives myself ...

However, I have also rode both Silvers from Jacksonville to NYC (and back). Could I have driven it? Sure - but, why  Even though I rode coach it was calming, enjoyable, relaxing and, I wasn't tired or stiff from driving when I got there.

I think that, if trains were more frequent, on time and just as fast as driving - more people would be inclined to think, "sure, I can drive there ... but, why should I when I can take the train".


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 28, 2020)

The problem when you compare the train to driving is that you are without a vehicle once you get to your destination. That’s a turn off to a lot of people.


----------



## Qapla (Dec 28, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> you are without a vehicle once you get to your destination






Just like when you take a plane 


This is what we planned on doing


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 28, 2020)

Qapla said:


> View attachment 19896
> 
> 
> Just like when you take a plane
> ...


That's what we did when we took our trip to Miami on the _Silver Meteor_ back in 2015. And if Amtrak ever gets it's act together and makes the new Miami station usable (for Amtrak trains), it will be co-located with the rental car center at the Miami airport.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 28, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> The problem when you compare the train to driving is that you are without a vehicle once you get to your destination. That’s a turn off to a lot of people.



Must be why nobody ever goes anywhere without a car...


----------



## Willbridge (Dec 29, 2020)

crescent-zephyr said:


> Must be why nobody ever goes anywhere without a car...


In 2018 I made a trip from Denver to Berlin entirely by public transport (walk/roll>bus>train>LH plane>bus>S-Bahn>S-Bahn>walk/roll from my home to our veterans' reunion hotel. However, I lived then in the Capitol Hill area of Denver with all the parking spaces full and the Berlin hotel is a block from an S-Bahn station. "Needing" a car is a common phrase -- I have a German tourist guide to the U.S. that states clearly that renting a car is required -- but it really depends on the journalistic Who, Why, Where, What, When and How to get the best answer.

When I was in training at Fort Ord I went along as tour guide into SF with three New Mexico National Guardsmen and a guy from Joplin, Missouri. They insisted on renting a car, even though I had already found the SP _Del Monte_ to be a fine way to get into the City. I chipped in and went along with it as research. We spent much of the weekend looking for parking spaces. Next time I took the train. I don't think they went back to SF again.


----------



## jis (Dec 29, 2020)

In my umpteen bazillion trips to various countries in Europe I have never ever rented a car. Worst case I had to take a cab a couple of times, but mostly it has been public transit. Admittedly most American cities are yet to evolve to such a state of public transit.


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 29, 2020)

Qapla said:


> View attachment 19896
> 
> 
> Just like when you take a plane
> ...


You missed what I wrote. Here it is again with the relevant part highlighted:
_The problem *when you compare the train to driving* is that you are without a vehicle once you get to your destination. That’s a turn off to a lot of people. _

Yes, you can rent a car when you get to your destination. At many Amtrak stations that is easier said than done. You better hope that Enterprise is open and that they can send someone to pick you up. And of course there is the cost of renting a car that needs to be factored in as well as the liability headaches.

Don't shoot the messenger. I am just saying that a lot of people find that to be a turn off.


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 29, 2020)

jis said:


> In my umpteen bazillion trips to various countries in Europe I have never ever rented a car. Worst case I had to take a cab a couple of times, but mostly it has been public transit. Admittedly most American cities are yet to evolve to such a state of public transit.


I have rented a car a couple of times in Europe, but now that there are traffic cameras all over the place I have stopped renting. I find that it's easier to slip up when you are out of your element - especially in Italy where they have cameras that issue fines if you enter the wrong zone in urban areas.

But, as you say, the state of public transportation in Europe is much better than in the United States.


----------



## jiml (Dec 29, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> The problem when you compare the train to driving is that you are without a vehicle once you get to your destination. That’s a turn off to a lot of people.



It's more than a "turn off", it's downright impractical.



Qapla said:


> View attachment 19896
> 
> 
> Just like when you take a plane



Once-affordable car rentals are now priced out of most budgets, except for shorter trips. Renting a car for a week is a lot different than renting one for a month or longer - hence the value of the Auto Train. Once the fare and vehicle charge become less than a car rental you have a successful product, without even considering the ancillary benefits such as traffic, stress, etc.


----------



## jis (Dec 29, 2020)

Unfortunately the level of window tint in my car in Florida is illegal in NJ/NY. So no more Auto Train ride to the Northeast for me  I had no idea that NY/NJ had such requirements, and that people actually get ticketed for it. Oh well....


----------



## IndyLions (Dec 29, 2020)

Some people just want to drive everywhere - that’s their prerogative, but for me “having to drive” is a big turn off.

It’s getting much easier in a lot of cities to get by without driving/renting a car. By and large I stay at a downtown hotel, walk, take subways/light rail, and Uber/Lyft. I find buses huge time wasters - they are important for locals but not great for tourists, in my opinion.

The cities I’ve explored in the last couple of years without a car include NY, CHI, DC, LA, SEA, OAK, SAC, Austin. We rented a car in Vegas one day only because we wanted to see an attraction an hour out of town.


----------



## tgstubbs1 (Dec 29, 2020)

I used to live only a mile and a half from Amtrak so all of my LD trips were 'hikes'.

They used to have Rent a Wreck car rental in a lot of cities. Probably illegal by now, or out if business from insurance costs. 

A lot of the appeal if Auto Train for me would be having MY car with MY luggage plus food, etc. AND not racking up thousands of miles on the odometer. 
I enjoy driving long distances for the scenery but I'd rather just look out the window of a train.


----------



## MARC Rider (Dec 29, 2020)

Nobody should think that rail is the best way to go for every single traveler. Yes, some people may need a car when they get to their destination, but many others don't. And the additional expense of renting the car and the Uber/taxi to the car rental place may be worth it to avoid the long road trip required to bring your own car along. Plus, nearly all of Amtrak's trains serve the relatively few cities in the US where you really don't need a car when you get there. People traveling into New York, Boston, Philly, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. would most likely not need a car. On our trip to the Gathering last year, I was pleasantly surprised that even in Dallas, of all places, I managed pretty well without a car, though I did use Uber one evening to get to a restaurant that was not conveniently located near a DART light rail station and for which the bus service was a bit indirect.


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 29, 2020)

jiml said:


> Once-affordable car rentals are now priced out of most budgets, except for shorter trips.


If you are traveling with four people, the cost of a rental vehicle that can actually fit four people and their suitcases is quite high. Those sub-compacts just don't work.


----------



## west point (Dec 29, 2020)

Bet I know the attraction 1 hour out of Lost wages ?


----------



## Ziv (Dec 29, 2020)

I rented a car on my first trip to Europe in 1993. I went with my girlfriend and given how much luggage she had, I am glad we got that little Polo. She filled it with luggage! I asked her if she could travel with just one smaller suitcase when we started the trip and she asked me, "Do you like the way I look?" I said I did and never brought up the luggage reduction idea again.
We broke up a year later and though I rent cars when I go home to Montana or when I travel to Cabo, I have never rented a car in Europe or Asia since.


jis said:


> In my umpteen bazillion trips to various countries in Europe I have never ever rented a car. Worst case I had to take a cab a couple of times, but mostly it has been public transit. Admittedly most American cities are yet to evolve to such a state of public transit.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Dec 29, 2020)

The be politically incorrect. The majority of Americans still think we are the best country in the world bar none. I can only assume the majority of Americans have not traveled the world. The facts are minus our military we debately aren’t even a first world country anymore. Our lifespans are approaching 3rd world levels at 47th worldwide tied with Cuba. Education, infrastructure, retirement are a joke here unfortunately. People need to realize we are only 4.4 percent of the worlds population.
We have an amazing country with unlimited potential but until people stop getting the wool pulled over their eyes things will continue to crumble.

Amtrak is a great analogy to the United States in general. Great potential but at the same time circling the drain.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 29, 2020)

west point said:


> Bet I know the attraction 1 hour out of Lost wages ?



Hopefully it was the Nevada Northern Railroad in Ely!


----------



## Exvalley (Dec 29, 2020)

AmtrakFlyer said:


> Our lifespans are approaching 3rd world levels at 47th worldwide tied with Cuba.


This is generally because of the obesity epidemic - which is indeed a first world problem.


----------



## crescent-zephyr (Dec 29, 2020)

AmtrakFlyer said:


> Via rail can keep 60 year old coaches and 35 year old locomotives running. Why can’t we.



We can. Were the heritage diners and PPC’s dangerous to ride in? Are the North Carolina owned heritage coaches dangerous to ride in? 

With proper maintenance these cars can go on for a long time.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Dec 29, 2020)

I don’t think anyone here hates or hates on the United States. We all want to see it improve and prosper. Just like Amtrak. Whether it’s negotiating with freight railroads for on time trains or drug companies for the prices other countries pay, changes need to take place. I’ll leave it at that.


----------



## toddinde (Dec 30, 2020)

Exvalley said:


> The problem when you compare the train to driving is that you are without a vehicle once you get to your destination. That’s a turn off to a lot of people.


I never understand that. Rental cars are pretty cheap and plentiful most places. It certainly doesn’t discourage air travel where nobody has their own car at the destination. There are plenty of options now including Uber and Lyft. I don’t think this is a major issue for the passenger train in general.


----------



## lyke99 (Dec 30, 2020)

jis said:


> Unfortunately the level of window tint in my car in Florida is illegal in NJ/NY. So no more Auto Train ride to the Northeast for me  I had no idea that NY/NJ had such requirements, and that people actually get ticketed for it. Oh well....


I have friends who transferred to Las Vegas for work, then a couple of years later when the company went through some consolidation they were moved back to Minnesota. They've been pulled over, but not cited for the same "offense" in the car they purchased while living there. They tell me every car on that dealer's lot had the same level of window tint...

To get back to the original topic of the post, I think Pete Buttigieg will approach the job with a level of enthusiasm/passion we haven't seen from a Secretary of Transportation in a while, if ever.


----------



## Ziv (Dec 30, 2020)

True, but then you have added $25 to $50 per day to the cost of your trip. Not crippling, but it does limit your spending on other items.


toddinde said:


> I never understand that. Rental cars are pretty cheap and plentiful most places. It certainly doesn’t discourage air travel where nobody has their own car at the destination. There are plenty of options now including Uber and Lyft. I don’t think this is a major issue for the passenger train in general.


----------



## IndyLions (Dec 30, 2020)

lyke99 said:


> To get back to the original topic of the post, I think Pete Buttigieg will approach the job with a level of enthusiasm/passion we haven't seen from a Secretary of Transportation in a while, if ever.



That’s what I feel as well. And not only his enthusiasm but his progressive yet moderate approach.

There’s no question he lacks experience – but that also means he is likely less jaded. Another good thing!


----------



## IndyLions (Dec 30, 2020)

crescent-zephyr said:


> Hopefully it was the Nevada Northern Railroad in Ely!



This trip it was Red Rock Canyon. Over the years it’s been Hoover Dam, Death Valley and Lake Las Vegas.

Next trip Nevada Northern Railroad!


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie (Jan 7, 2021)

Pete Buttigieg, the pick to lead the U.S. Department of Transportation, reached out at Biden's request, to our local government, asking what our needs would be.

I have no idea if rail service was brought up. A while back, Amtrak ran a demonstration excursion, from NYC, to show that passenger rail service was indeed possible (a lot of nay-sayers claimed that the tracks have all been, long ago, torn all up).

"Buttigieg made improving rail service a key part of his tenure as mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and has a good understanding of the problems facing local governments..."


----------



## OBS (Jan 7, 2021)

Maybe Pete could start tomorrow?.....


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jan 7, 2021)

Amtrak is by no means out of the woods but things are looking up. Assuming tradition holds (big assumption) after the new VP's Senate seat is vacated, nominated, and reseated the President, House, and Senate should all be in moderate favor of Amtrak with swing Senators holding much of the power over spending. This should mean Amtrak funding will be relatively stable if not substantially improved but that big regulatory changes will probably be reversed by a Supreme Court that is likely to put private business interests above the government's power to regulate commerce.


----------



## AFS1970 (Jan 8, 2021)

Gaps are not unusual at all, that is why the #2 in most departments is a career civil servant who can cover while the confirmation process goes through. I agree that she has really done nothing special as secretary but leaving in the last days of an administration is still no big thing. 
I am not a fan of Mayor Pete as I think he trades on his personal life more than any actual accomplishments, but I am hopeful that he is at least somewhat interested in transportation. I can't see Biden, who is an Amtrak passenger, putting someone in that position who is anti-train.


----------



## AmtrakFlyer (Jan 8, 2021)

He’s more accomplished than most 30 somethings and quite frankly people twice is age.

Even if his campaign for POTUS had been successful he would have brought more to the table with his military and political experience than a movie star, someone born into a political family following his fathers footsteps or a reality tv personality.
We are on the same page bottom line he should be good for Amtrak and the DOT.



AFS1970 said:


> Gaps are not unusual at all, that is why the #2 in most departments is a career civil servant who can cover while the confirmation process goes through. I agree that she has really done nothing special as secretary but leaving in the last days of an administration is still no big thing.
> I am not a fan of Mayor Pete as I think he trades on his personal life more than any actual accomplishments, but I am hopeful that he is at least somewhat interested in transportation. I can't see Biden, who is an Amtrak passenger, putting someone in that position who is anti-train.


----------



## pennyk (Jan 8, 2021)

Many posts in this thread veered way off topic and became way too political. An attempt was made to remove most of those posts.

This thread has been locked. When posting in other threads, please refrain from political comments unrelated to Amtrak and try to stay on topic. Thank you for your continued cooperation.


----------

