From the point of view of rational transportation policy, passenger rail is really only the preferred mode for trips of 200 miles or less (maybe up to 500 miles, as different journey segments can be combined into one line, and if high speed rail is built.
However, the nature of our political system (where a bunch of lightly populated rural states have a disproportionate amount of power in our Federal system) requires that any support of passenger rail by the national government has to include support for service in those lightly populated rural states. This is the only reason why we still have any long-distance passenger rail. In other words, if you want the NEC, the Acela, the other corridor service that has the potential to take significant market share from automobiles and short-distance air shuttles, you need to fund the Empire Builder, Southwest Chief, Sunset Limited, etc., so that the Senators and Representatives from those states support funding for the corridors.
I sometimes wonder if the people in charge of Amtrak understand this basic political fact of life, which is kind of ridiculous, given that if you're going to be in charge of Amtrak you have to be, to some extent, a political creature. This political fact of life is that you're stuck with running long distance trains, so you might as well do what it takes to make them successful. Instead, you get the idea that they see this as a nuisance that's keeping them from operating all those cool corridor services that they really want.
Somebody needs to shake them upside the head and get them to be more enthusiastic about the entire mission of Amtrak and start thinking of ways to upgrade the long distance service. I'd bet that in doing so, their financial performance would improve, too.
The steps that need be betaken have been described here:
1) Accurate honest accounting to determine how much these services really cost.
2) Co-locating corridor services with some of the long distance routes. It';s been pointed out that this could be easily done with the Lake Shore Limited, as it's already co-located with the Empire Corridor, and corridor service could be established on that route connected Chicago and various cities in Ohio. There must be other places where this can be done, as well. This would allow costs to be shared, thus making better accounting of the long-distance trains.
3. Come down hard on host railroads who are causing unjustified delays.
4. Stop understaffing on-board service and in-station service. I suspect that if the trains were staffed properly, nearly all the complaints about unpleasant ind inconsistent service would stop.
Providing premium service is really an essential part of improving the financial performance of all of the trains. The RPA ridership and revenue statistics show this clearly. Perhaps we're never going back to the days of obsequious Pullman porters, starched white tablecloths, silver, and fine china with gourmet food cooked on board, but they should be able to provide a premium level service that makes it a good value proposition to pay extra to sit in a train for 48 hours when you could fly the distance in 4 hours.
The public service that justified the taxpayer support is the ability to serve relatively remote towns poorly served by anything else, as well as the slice of the population that can't fly or drive for medical reasons. The premium level service is necessary to boost the revenue to minimize the amount of taxpayer support. The political need to serve these remote towns is to get the votes from rural legislators for support for more necessary corridor service. Why the leadership at Amtrak can't see this and view it as a fun challenge instead of a nuisance is beyond me.