NY Times: Anderson out, William Flynn in

[jis]

It's true that we each have our own views and agendas, but one major difference I've noticed is that corridor focused members don't seem to have a problem supporting the loss of long distance amenities or offering up entire long distance routes for abandonment unsolicited. Even in cases where they live a thousand miles away from a route they've ridden maybe once or not at all they'll offer to give our trains away for nothing. Which is odd because I don't see folks who live out on the long distance network suggesting we discontinue commuter trains just because we don't like the schedule or they carry fewer passengers than some other train. It's unfortunate but also unsurprising that people who live along commuter rail areas are willing to give Anderson a pass for moves that actively undermined and devalued the long distance network.

You and most reasonable people don't. But there have been non-corridor advocates who have seriously suggested that certain corridors should be cut back. Similarly, many reasonable corridor people work quite diligently to advocate for LD trains. I would point to - for example - NJ-ARP Unquestionably, primarily "corridor people"), which has a long running record of fighting for LD trains. But then there are also unreasonable people in Corridor land who are not as supportive of and sometimes destructive of LD trains.

That is where my comment about being ignorant (either willingly or by omission or acting as such as a convenient political posture) playing a significant role comes in. Corridor people who are ignorant (willingly or otherwise) about the importance of LD trains to their users (we have even seen a few examples on AU) are willing to forego them and LD people who are ignorant of the importance of Corridors to the economy of where they run are willing to trash them at every opportunity. All that one can do is educate both negative groups, but sometimes you can just bring the horse to the water, but can't make them drink. That unfortunately is life.

 

[toddinde]

I am not sure we all agree that Anderson was universally not positive. He did a few really bad things, but he also did a bunch of good, like refreshing rolling stock, ordering new rolling stock, including for LD service, and such. His stance on LD trains was indeed negative, but that was not everything that he did. His stance on food service should have forced Congress to legislatively put an end to it, which they chose not to, which says quite a bit about how Congress overall feels about that matter I suppose - not something that I like. And oddly enough, because of his negative stance, as a reaction to it, the LD network is probably on firmer financial footing with more subsidy than ever budgeted for it. So there are pluses and minuses to consider.

I concur that Anderson was not all bad.

 

[toddinde]

I live at the junction of the Eagle and Sunset and mainly ride Western trains. I've seen zero refreshed anything. The only new rolling stock came in the form of barely used baggage cars that weren't ordered or deployed by Anderson. I've seen no meaningful improvements to dining, on time performance, service standards, interruption recovery, timely communication, fare restrictions, ticket prices, etc. Anderson seemed to go out of his way to antagonize people like me, and I will not be thanking him for inadvertently helping the long distance network by repeatedly attacking and undermining those who support it while trying to promote a replacement network of stub trains and bus bridges.

 

[toddinde]

We live in a similar part of the world which is interestingly where the population growth and economic dynamism is. The Sunset Limited route serves faster growing, more population centers, and a greater population than the Northeast Corridor. Phoenix is the largest American city without rail service. It definitely justifies two daily trains.

 

[toddinde]

Since all NEC states are net donor states as far as federal taxes and expenses go, it can be argued that the paltry subsidy that NEC is getting is not using a single penny of Texas money. Grow up!

I’m grown up, and it’s national or nothing. Period.

 

[railiner]

it’s national or nothing. Period.

You are in denial...
If “nothing” (the demise of Amtrak as a national entity), ever came to pass,
you can be assured, the Northeast Corridor would survive in one form or another, as would some other corridors around the country...

 

[crescent-zephyr]

The customers generally like the new fresh feel instead of the admittedly tired feel that was replaced.

I thought the refreshed cars were nice enough on my last amtrak ride... I just don't see the point of praising Anderson for a lite refresh of 30+ year old cars. (actually going on 40 aren't they!? wow.)

When did the new cafe menu start? I last rode regional and acela in October and the cafe menu was more limited than I remembered.

 

[jis]

I thought the refreshed cars were nice enough on my last amtrak ride... I just don't see the point of praising Anderson for a lite refresh of 30+ year old cars. (actually going on 40 aren't they!? wow.)

When did the new cafe menu start? I last rode regional and acela in October and the cafe menu was more limited than I remembered.

I was just giving a balanced scorecard in my opinion. I have no problem if others have other opinion. C’est la vie.

Anderson also did issue the RFP for replacing Amfleet Is. But those who cannot see any positive in someone they are trying to demonize I suppose will find some ulterior motive or something like that there too [emoji849]

 

[zephyr17]

So is Amtrak safe in William J Flynn's hands as its next President & Chief Executive?

Amtrak is never safe.

 

[jis]

You are in denial...
If “nothing” (the demise of Amtrak as a national entity), ever came to pass,
you can be assured, the Northeast Corridor would survive in one form or another, as would some other corridors around the country...

To be fair though I think “National or nothing” is a good political slogan. Reality is a different animal, as you point out.

 

[zephyr17]

To be fair though I think “National or nothing” is a good political slogan. Reality is a different animal, as you point out.

It would survive, but hopefully with much less federal support, such as competitive DOT grants available to any state, and owned and operated by a consortium of states that benefit.

Amtrak restricted to the NE Corridor would lose political support in Congress necessary for its survival. I know i would hope my Washington State Congressional delegation would swing from its current strong Amtrak support to opposition in such a scheme.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

But those who cannot see any positive in someone they are trying to demonize I suppose will find some ulterior motive or something like that there too

I’m not trying to demonize the guy but I don’t see much to praise him for.

I thought the new amfleet I’s look nice enough and the Chargers are a good investment.

 

[Rasputin]

I’m not trying to demonize the guy but I don’t see much to praise him for.

I think he kind of demonized himself without needing any help in doing so.

 

[jis]

It would survive, but hopefully with much less federal support, such as competitive DOT grants available to any state, and owned and operated by a consortium of states that benefit.

Amtrak restricted to the NE Corridor would lose political support in Congress necessary for its survival. I know i would hope my Washington State Congressional delegation would swing from its current strong Amtrak support to opposition in such a scheme.

If the dismantling of Amtrak were to come to pass, I very much doubt that the NEC operations would be called Amtrak. It would be funded by a mix of state and federal funds like most other things. Emphasis on the high speed aspect may be reduced unless there is some kind of a public-private partnership with market investment involved. But the majority used services will continue quite unabated including some sort of equivalent of Regional service, and maybe the artificial partitioning of service that causes absurdities like requiring to change trains at Trenton to get a reasonable fare service between NY and Philly will possibly become a thing of the past.

Basically it will be something equivalent to what is growing in California, but starting from a very large existing system. The infrastructure will get fixed irrespective of whether it is Amtrak or something else, just like eventually California HSR will get significant support from the Feds after the present crop of obstructionist Republicans have been duly neutered. NEC infrastructure is not an Amtrak issue. It is more like Highways in the northeast issue. Horsetrading on that will be about infrastructure, not about Amtrak.

Actually there is considerable support in the northeast among advocates to separate out the infrastructure from Amtrak and return Amtrak to its original role of being a TOC. Of course Amtrak does not like that idea at all. Who likes to lose part of a fiefdom? So what happens to NEC is not exactly tied at the hips with Amtrak, and in regular Amtrak budget the National Network gets more money than NEC anyway.

 

[John Bredin]

in regular Amtrak budget the National Network gets more money than NEC anyway.

Don't confuse people with facts, Amtrak is anti-LD and everyone knows it.

 

[zephyr17]

Don't confuse people with facts, Amtrak is anti-LD and everyone knows it.

From an Amtrak management perspective under Anderson it is. From a Congressional perspective, the source and assigner of those funds, it isn't, or shouldn't be.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I’m not trying to demonize the guy but I don’t see much to praise him for.

I think he kind of demonized himself without needing any help in doing so.

You don't remember all those customer outreach events where Anderson asked us what we needed from Amtrak? Or the endless clamoring for DMU's and bus bridges with vending machines and TV dinners? Give the man a break already.

 

[John Bredin]

From an Amtrak management perspective under Anderson it is. From a Congressional perspective, the source and assigner of those funds, it isn't, or shouldn't be.

If that was true, then Amtrak, like the Trump administration, would be submitting a draft budget with little or no money for LD trains and Congress would have to restore LD funding a la Reagan's zero budgets. Amtrak's proposed budget is linked above, and it isn't a screw-LD-trains budget.

Here are some of Amtrak's requested Federal grant amounts:

Infrastructure $774,596,210: Northeast Corridor $419,899,890; National Network $354,696,320.
Equipment $792,038,240: Northeast Corridor $214,949,633; National Network $577,088,607.
Stations $275,077,721: Northeast Corridor $70,580,477; National Network $204,497,244.

46% of requested infrastructure grants for the National Network even though Amtrak doesn't own much of the infrastructure it uses for National Network trains. 73% of requested equipment grants for National Network equipment, and 74% of requested station grants for National Network stations.

 

[zephyr17]

If that was true, then Amtrak, like the Trump administration, would be submitting a draft budget with little or no money for LD trains and Congress would have to restore LD funding a la Reagan's zero budgets. Amtrak's proposed budget is linked above, and it isn't a screw-LD-trains budget.

Here are some of Amtrak's requested Federal grant amounts:

Infrastructure $774,596,210: Northeast Corridor $419,899,890; National Network $354,696,320.
Equipment $792,038,240: Northeast Corridor $214,949,633; National Network $577,088,607.
Stations $275,077,721: Northeast Corridor $70,580,477; National Network $204,497,244.

46% of requested infrastructure grants for the National Network even though Amtrak doesn't own much of the infrastructure it uses for National Network trains. 73% of requested equipment grants for National Network equipment, and 74% of requested station grants for National Network stations.

Amtrak management is not entirely stupid and knows they are under MANDATE to operate the national network

Zeroing it out on their own budget request would be a stupid meat axe approach that Congress would override and they know it.

It doesn't mean they want to, as both Anderson's attempted actions and comments make clear.

 

[west point]

Maybe you should send a copy of tour letter to Amtrak to Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee. He Questioned Gardner today about how passengers were accepting the new food service. Gardner could not give an answer. See trains newswire.

https://trn.trains.com/news/news-wi...break-even-claims-questioned-in-house-hearing

 

[Devil's Advocate]

If that was true, then Amtrak, like the Trump administration, would be submitting a draft budget with little or no money for LD trains and Congress would have to restore LD funding a la Reagan's zero budgets.

Just because I disagree with Anderson doesn't mean I think he's an *****. Attacking every long haul route at the same time would be a fool's errand. So he picked a single route to test the waters. Anderson's plan to replace the Southwest Chief with shortened stub trains and permanent bus bridges would have made the Southern Pacific envious. Fortunately for us he picked the wrong route to attack first and was met with substantial resistance that quickly roused political allies. If Anderson had picked a weaker route that was less accustomed to defending itself he might have succeeded and could have used a similar premise to attack other routes as well. Does a long haul route traverse old tracks in need of repair? Bus bridge. Does a long haul route need to cross an adversarial host? Bus bridge. Does a long haul route include a segment with limited patronage? Bus bridge. Does anyone forced to travel across the bridge really want to pay Amtrak prices for lowest bidder bus service? Doubtful.

 

[John Bredin]

Can anyone point to Amtrak under Anderson talking about a bus bridge for any LD service other than the Southwest Chief?

And does anyone remember what was happening with the Chief at the time: BNSF talking about mothballing a stretch of the line, so that Amtrak would bear the maintenance costs including installing PTC? Is it possible, just possible, that the bus bridge proposal had something to do with that?

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Can anyone point to Amtrak under Anderson talking about a bus bridge for any LD service other than the Southwest Chief? And does anyone remember what was happening with the Chief at the time: BNSF talking about mothballing a stretch of the line, so that Amtrak would bear the maintenance costs including installing PTC? Is it possible, just possible, that the bus bridge proposal had something to do with that?

If Anderson was convinced the prior arrangement had somehow become untenable you could make a case for good faith efforts if he first tried to save the route as-is by promoting service retention to the relevant stakeholders. If he encountered budgetary resistance and was forced to move the route to the BNSF mainline I think supporters would be disappointed but would still understand. There would also be a mix of negative and positive outcomes that would help moderate the result. Instead of doing that Anderson rebuffed calls to keep the route intact and kept trying to sell bus and corridor service to long haul train supporters.

 

[Trogdor]

Can anyone point to Amtrak under Anderson talking about a bus bridge for any LD service other than the Southwest Chief?

And does anyone remember what was happening with the Chief at the time: BNSF talking about mothballing a stretch of the line, so that Amtrak would bear the maintenance costs including installing PTC? Is it possible, just possible, that the bus bridge proposal had something to do with that?

Not quite. The whole deal with BNSF wanting nothing to do with maintaining the line was resolved long before Anderson took over. IIRC, a three-way agreement was reached between Amtrak, BNSF, and the State of Colorado that dealt with the line. At the time, Amtrak basically had a deadline to either come to an agreement to maintain the track or reroute the Chief over the transcon, which would have run the train through north Texas instead. I want to say it was around 2015/16 or so that the issue got resolved, and Amtrak agreed to pitch in some money to maintain the track.

 

[John Bredin]

You know, I thought the people saying Anderson was anti-LD meant he had no enthusiasm for LD trains and was mismanaging LD service because he didn't care. Not-so-benign neglect, in short.

But it seems the theory/belief is that he actively hated the LD trains, that he knew the right noises to make to Congress -- carrying the charade to the extent of asking Congress for more money for the national network than the NEC -- but then after getting that funding actively sabotaged the LD trains.

Does anyone realize how bonkers that sounds? Where would such active malice come from? Neglect or lack of enthusiasm makes some sense given that Anderson came to Amtrak from another industry altogether, but that same lack of experience leans against him knowing enough about LD trains to either hate or love them.

It's particularly odd in light of the national-network-heavy budget request. Half the infrastructure money and three-quarters of the equipment and station money is IMHO a hell of a lot more than you'd ask for if you hated LD trains but needed to ask for enough funding to hide it. Plus once Congress expects you to run the LD trains, what's to be gained from deliberately sabotaging them? Some of the old railroads sabotaged passenger service because they were fishing for ICC train-off authorizations, but Amtrak is more like a government bureaucracy where you connive to add to your bailiwick, not to be rid of a good chunk of it.

A lot of weight for the malice theory is placed on contemporary dining and other amenity cutbacks. But I was taught to not attribute to malice that which can be as easily explained by stupidity. And for all the times Congress has pulled Amtrak's fat out of the fire, it was also Congress that passed into law the goal of breaking even on food service. Anderson may well have picked a lousy way to reach that goal, but the goal itself was imposed on him from above, he didn't pull it out of his hat.