(The following editorial appeared on the Portland Oregonian website on February 24.)
PORTLAND, Ore. — The Bush administration keeps saying that it really, really likes passenger rail but that the only way to save it is to steer Amtrak into bankruptcy.
That’s no way to run a railroad. Bush’s new budget plan to eliminate the Amtrak subsidy will send passenger rail hurtling off the tracks, derailing a system that serves 25 million passengers a year.
The White House claimed in its written budget message that if Congress zeroes out Amtrak it would quickly plunge into bankruptcy, and “ultimately a more rational passenger rail system would emerge, with service on routes where there is real ridership demand and support from local governments.”
In fact, an Amtrak bankruptcy would be the end of the line for scores of trains serving hundreds of communities throughout the nation. It would be a train wreck with few survivors: Only the popular trains in the crowded Northeast corridor, and perhaps a few others around the country, would live to run another day.
National passenger rail in this country faces serious problems, but killing Amtrak won’t solve them. The fundamental issue is that too many people insist that Amtrak, alone among major passenger railroads in the world, be financially self-sufficient. In fact, every one of the thriving rail systems in Europe and Asia requires some level of government financing.
Amtrak’s subsidy this year is $1.2 billion. The government has given the railroad $29 billion since its creation in 1971. That’s real money, but it’s far less than the government has lavished on airlines during the same time period.
Congress may find it necessary to cut more money-losing, long-haul routes, such as the Pioneer that once chugged up the Columbia Gorge from Portland to Denver. Yet the best way for Congress to drive down Amtrak’s long-term subsidy is to invest more in the railroad in the short term and allow it to replace its 1930s infrastructure.
The Bush administration is right to demand that states provide more support for passenger rail. Last year only 13 of 46 states that Amtrak serves put up any money for the passenger rail system; they kicked in about $130 million. Oregon supplied $4 million and Washington $11 million.
Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta says that if a state on a long train route refuses to contribute, Amtrak should “run through that state without opening the door or stopping.” We support that policy. States should provide more support for passenger rail, especially as they push Amtrak to improve and expand service.
Yet interstate passenger rail is in the national interest, and ultimately it remains a federal responsibility. Amtrak was created 34 years ago because the economics of private ownership clearly didn’t work, and the states alone could not fully support passenger rail. Those hard facts haven’t changed.
If Bush succeeds in driving Amtrak into bankruptcy, many areas of this nation will be left without passenger rail. The uncertainty and confusion will set back efforts in the Northwest to develop fast, efficient service linking Eugene, Portland, Seattle and Vancouver, B.C. If Amtrak left, it would be a long wait for the next train.