MONTPELIER, Vt. — Officials from Amtrak and Vermont Gov. Howard Dean’s administration are looking to have taxpayers contribute more to the financially troubled railroad over the next several years in exchange for less service in Vermont, a move that drew a cool reception from some legislative leaders, the Rutland Herald reported.
A draft plan being considered would reroute Vermont’s Amtrak trains and effectively end passenger rail service on the eastern side of the state in 2005.
In a briefing of the chairmen of the House and Senate transportation committees Tuesday, officials said they want to move toward having the state pay the full cost of subsidizing the two Amtrak trains that serve Vermont, the Ethan Allen Express and the Vermonter, which together carried just over 107,000 passengers last year.
That would help the perennially money-losing national passenger railroad move toward its goal of operating without massive federal subsidies, said Terrence Foley, senior director of business development for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor.
“What we’re trying to do here is put (Amtrak) on a glide path to self-sufficiency,” he told Sen. Richard Mazza, D-Grand Isle, and Rep. Richard Pembroke, D-Bennington.
Amtrak is under intense pressure to improve its bottom line. The Amtrak Reform Council created by Congress has recommended breaking up the company and letting private firms bid to take over individual routes.
In addition, Congress has ordered Amtrak to reach self-sufficiency by later this year, a goal the reform council has said Amtrak won’t meet.
Currently, Amtrak is slated to receive about $2 million in state subsidies, and the federal government will pick up $4.1 million of the cost of Vermont’s trains.
As part of a draft five-year business plan, officials wanted to boost the state share to $2.75 million in 2003, and possibly as high at $3.9 million if Vermont wants to add a train running to the tourist destination of Manchester.
Under the draft plan, the state’s subsidy would climb steadily in each of the successive two years, topping out at $4.1 million in 2005 for the two existing trains with an additional $1.3 million for a Manchester train.
At the same time, officials said, some services would be cut back. For example, ticket agents at some stations will be replaced with automated ticket vending machines.
And the current Vermonter route between Washington D.C., and St. Albans through the eastern part of the state would eventually be scrapped in 2005, replaced by a new Ethan Allen route that would run from New York City through Manchester, Rutland and Middlebury before terminating in Burlington.
The Vermonter would instead become a shuttle service between Springfield, Mass., and White River Junction. As a result ridership on the Vermont trains is expected to fall from about 120,000 passengers in 2002-03 to 98,000 in 2005-06.
That prompted critical questions from Mazza, who wondered how to sell lawmakers on a bigger subsidy for less service and lower ridership.
“It’s not going to be self-supporting,” Mazza said.
“It’s never going to be self-supporting,” replied Charles Miller, director of rail for the Vermont Agency of Transportation.
Foley said that the mileage involved in running the trains meant they would always need a subsidy.
“We could fill every train, every seat, 365 days a year, and still lose money,” he said.
“You’ve put us in a situation where we’ve got to say, ‘We’ve got to discontinue Amtrak … or put it out for public bid,’” Mazza said.
Language to explore doing just that was included in the transportation bill the Senate passed Tuesday, as well as a $2 million subsidy, the same as this year’s.
Officials from the state and Amtrak are currently negotiating a new contract for service. The existing contract expires June 30.
After the meeting, Amtrak officials stressed that the plan was only a draft and would almost certainly be changed in some fashion.
“We’re working on a plan that will assure continuation of service by Amtrak in Vermont for the next five years,” said James Weinstein, senior vice president of Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor.
“What this plan is really all about is preserving service for 100,000 riders and the economic benefits that they bring to Vermont,” Foley said.
He said virtually all passenger rail services in the world received government subsidies, and that Vermont’s trains were not unique in that respect.
“Because of the costs associated with running a long distance passenger train, you just can’t generate enough revenue to run them at a break-even point,” Foley said.
Mazza said the request for more money had even him — a strong supporter of passenger rail — questioning its cost and whether the state could afford it.
“There’s going to be a time when a decision has to be made about whether we can continue to support Amtrak,” he said. “… You can’t sell higher costs with less service.”
Mazza said he wanted to see what a private company might charge to run trains from Vermont to connect with the Amtrak system. He said the request for an additional $750,000 had come too late for it to be considered in the budget this year.
But John McClaughry, president of the free market think tank the Ethan Allen Institute and a critic of railroad subsidies, said any amount is too much.
“About 25 years ago I had an intern do a study for an article … on Amtrak,” he said. “His research showed that you could take the (Amtrak train) from Washington, D.C., to Montreal or, on the subsidy alone, you could take a limousine from downtown Washington to the airport, take a plane to Montreal and a limousine to downtown Montreal.”
McClaughry said with the exception of a high-density route between Washington and New York City virtually every Amtrak route was unprofitable.
“If people who prefer to travel by rail, they certainly should have that option, but they shouldn’t ask anyone else to pay for it,” he said. “Obviously, if the passengers on Amtrak had to pay the actual cost of their ride, there wouldn’t be any Amtrak.”
Miller said the draft plan and the $750,000 subsidy increase were the subject of ongoing talks.
“I don’t want to do negotiation in the press,” he said. “I think both Amtrak and the state are negotiating in good faith to try and come up with a number the state can handle. As soon as that’s done we’ll see where we are as far as budgetary constraints.”