WASHINGTON, D.C. — Amtrak President David Gunn was probably not issuing an idle threat when he vowed to start closing down the nation’s passenger rail system by midweek if a federal bailout is not received, according to an editorial in the Washington Post. Without a substantial transfusion of cash, trains can be expected to come to a screeching halt one day soon. The expectation, however, is that leaders in Washington will find a way to keep the wheels rolling. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said as much yesterday. The prospect of disrupting the lives of more than 100,000 rail commuters in the Northeast Corridor and on the West Coast concentrates the minds of vote-conscious Washington politicians like nothing else. But if, as a result of stop-gap action, all that happens is Amtrak gets an infusion of emergency funds to keep the trains in service until the next funding crisis, then the federal response will have resolved little.
Amtrak has an unbroken 31-year history of losing money. That dismal financial record has been matched by congressional and White House failures to realistically define Amtrak’s role. Thanks to congressional mandates, for instance, Amtrak has opted to maintain long, unprofitable routes along slimly populated corridors. No business could hope to survive managing its affairs that way. Neither can Amtrak. Capital and operating costs continue to far outstrip ticket sales. Without continued and increasing federal subsidies, Amtrak would have gone belly up years ago. Enter Congress again. Five years ago, federal lawmakers, seeking as always to have it both ways, ordered Amtrak to become operationally self-sufficient by 2003. Now, did Congress come through with all of the capital investment it promised? No. Did Congress relieve Amtrak of having to keep in place a money-losing national route system? No. Ah, but does Congress want “reform”? Goodness yes; just don’t ask what and how.
Congress, in fact, wants it all: a profitable Amtrak — incidentally, a blessed fiscal state that has thus far eluded national rail services everywhere; and public service, with passenger cars servicing routes that make political but not business sense. Of course, therein lies the problem. Amtrak cannot be an “all routes for all politicians” public service and a profit-making operation. Secretary Mineta has tabled proposals to reduce the subsidies and share the costs of rail service with the states. They’re groaning in Congress, but if not the administration’s plans, then what? If Amtrak is to become a true national rail system that places community needs above a profit and loss statement, then, even with slashing a few routes and staff and tighter fiscal controls, federal subsidies will have to be directed to rail travel, as they have been devoted to roads and air transportation. That’s the bottom line. And don’t think Congress doesn’t know that, too.