Public ownership of railroads

[Kimwhit]

I'm not sure where this belongs, but this white paper was just released today by publicrailnow.org and I thought others might be interested.

Today, on July 1, one week after the National Transportation Safety Board's damning hearing on Norfolk Southern's disastrous handling of the derailment in East Palestine, the 102nd anniversary of the Railway Shopmen's Strike, and 68 years after the Act creating the Interstate Highway System went into effect--

My report, "Putting America Back on Track: The Case for a 21st Century Public Rail System," offers a vision of the public alternative to the failures of the private short-term-profit-focused rail system dominated by four duopolistic Class I railroads.

The failures of the private rail system are plain to see:
-Layoffs and understaffing are rampant, impacting workers' quality of life
-Disrespect and retaliation against employees, especially those raising safety concerns
-An accident rate that has risen 30% in the past 10 years
-A failure to grow traffic, and "the worst service ever" that has driven customers away from rail
-And many other issues, impacting every part of our society (I don't want to drone on in this post on the manifold issues, so if you are the least bit interested, please give the executive summary a glance for a fuller introduction)

These issues are outlined in the report below, as well as how the system of private ownership and management has led us here.

Public ownership—as with our highway system, inland waterways, and most rail systems around the world—offers an alternative vision. That of a sustainable, publicly accountable, worker-friendly, service-focused rail system capable of triggering a modal shift to rail.

In the report, I discuss:
-the "Why" of public ownership/the problem with the private Class Is
-the history of public rail in the United States
-present-day public rail in the United States
-international rail systems, both public and private
-and various models for public ownership

I am incredibly proud of this work, and thankful to all the folks who have helped me get it done. Now the hard work begins of restarting the long-dormant discussion about public rail ownership and building the coalition for Public Rail Now (publicrailnow.org). If you would like to get involved with, or organizationally endorse, the campaign please visit our website and fill out one of the linked forms:
https://lnkd.in/e3TPpueF

If you have questions about the report or would like to have me present to your organization about public rail, feel free to reach out to me personally at [email protected]

America deserves a rail system that works for all of us.

hashtag#rail hashtag#railroad hashtag#raillabor hashtag#labor hashtag#climate hashtag#publicrailnow hashtag#supplychain

 

[BlackDiamond]

Very interesting. I just skimmed it but intend to go back and read it later.
One question I had is what would be the mechanism for public control of the railroads, could the nation afford to buy them outright as that would be quite expensive. Also how would that affect Canada as both CN and CPKC operate in both countries (also Mexico).

 

[JWM]

Having used various publicly owned railroads in Europe, the service and safety are better, but at a price. Not one of them comes close to breakeven, I think. If you treat them as a public service then I guess it makes sense.

 

[BlackDiamond]

Having used various publicly owned railroads in Europe, the service and safety are better, but at a price. Not one of them comes close to breakeven, I think. If you treat them as a public service then I guess it makes sense.

Actually, I believe the Swiss Federal Railways break even and perhaps show a small profit due to the quality of their service and the high level of patronage by people there. Between the trains and the buses that are well organized to connect with each other, you can get just about anywhere in the country without a car.

Also I believe some of the high speed trains in Europe do break even although of course we are not counting the high cost of capital to build them in the first place. I think this is why you see many open access operators vying to run their own high speed services in competition. In many countries there is still a large network of conventional trains that do lose money. I do worry that the cherry picking of high speed service and subsequent neglect of the local trains is detrimental in the long run to a comprehensive network. I hear this is happening in France for example.

 

[caravanman]

I can never understand how if it costs 100 units to provide a correct service of anything, cover wages, repairs, etc, that pretending to provide the same level of service for less cost, and provide a profit for private owners, makes any realistic sense?

 

[slasher-fun]

Also I believe some of the high speed trains in Europe do break even although of course we are not counting the high cost of capital to build them in the first place. I think this is why you see many open access operators vying to run their own high speed services in competition. In many countries there is still a large network of conventional trains that do lose money. I do worry that the cherry picking of high speed service and subsequent neglect of the local trains is detrimental in the long run to a comprehensive network. I hear this is happening in France for example.

France has among the highest track access charges in Europe, and a rather poor network outside of their high-speed lines. Flix wanted to operate several conventional speed trains, and gave up because of the excessive track charges. The first competitor on these lines is SNCB for a couple of months, that operates trains between Bruxelles and Paris, but without any stop between the Belgian border and Paris. https://www.b-europe.com/EN/Trains/Eurocity-Brussels-Paris

In Germany for example, where the network is much cheaper to use, and where the conventional lines are in a mostly good shape, the competitors only operate conventional speed trains.

Spain is a different story, as their conventional speed network has a different track gauge than the rest of Europe.

 

[Metra Electric Rider]

The big difference between Europe and the US is one word: Freight! That said, it sounds like some of the freight railroads here aren't doing a great job pleasing their customers with freight (whether that is planned money losing for value-out or planned sale or just plain sheer incompetence I can't answer) but that makes a big difference in the networks and whether/how they could be nationalized. At the moment, I suspect it's a pretty big non-starter with the potential, uh, changes facing the nation and whether we will be a nation in a few years.

 

[cirdan]

Actually, I believe the Swiss Federal Railways break even and perhaps show a small profit due to the quality of their service and the high level of patronage by people there. Between the trains and the buses that are well organized to connect with each other, you can get just about anywhere in the country without a car.

They break even after counting subsidies received as income.
Inter City trains are supposed to operate without subsidy (at least on paper), but all commuter and regional services are subsidized by local and / or federal government. SBB declares a profit if they end up with money in hand after taking the subsidy and running the service. Amtrak could do that too.

Major infrastructure and construction projects are also for the most part generously supported by government money.

Overall Swiss Federal Railways consume quite a lot of taxpayer money.

So they only really break even for a special way of counting.