(The following article by Alan Wirzbicki was posted on the Boston Globe website on September 9.)
WASHINGTON — The National Association of Railroad Passengers, an advocacy group that lobbies for more federal spending on Amtrak and is frequently quoted in newspaper articles about the railroad, received more than $30,000 from Amtrak last year under a contract to provide customer feedback.
The Washington-based nonprofit group and its executive director, Ross Capon , testify regularly before Congress, arguing for more Amtrak subsidies. And while the group said it disclosed its Amtrak connection to congressional staff members, the financial relationship has not been widely known.
Amtrak critics, including several former NARP executives , called attention to the contract in a letter sent to the nonprofit’s board this week, saying it had weakened the group’s ability to criticize what they said was poor train service on Amtrak’s national network, which includes almost 1 million passengers served in Boston.
“NARP has allowed itself to be compromised in its role as a passenger advocate by financial dependence on Amtrak,” said the letter, which was signed by the group’s founder, Anthony Haswell, and Joe Vranich, a former Amtrak spokesman and onetime executive for the group who has become one of Amtrak’s most vociferous critics.
Capon, in an interview, said that the payments were part of a 10-year-old contract to provide Amtrak with customer opinions, that they had been disclosed to congressional staff members and the Internal Revenue Service, and that they did not influence any of the group’s public positions.
“We have not kept this secret,” he said. “If the contract went away tomorrow, it would not have a material effect on our finances, so there’s no reason that the existence of this contract would influence our willingness to criticize Amtrak.”
According to Capon and an Amtrak spokesman, Cliff Black, Amtrak has reimbursed the group since 1996 for a part-time employee who manages a customer advisory board to process suggestions and complaints about Amtrak service.
“It’s basically a break-even deal; we do not make a profit on it,” Capon said.
“When we’ve had discussions on the board about if we should criticize Amtrak on x or y, the existence of this contract has never come up in those discussions.”
Nonetheless, hundreds of newspaper articles have quoted Capon without noting the business relationship between the association and Amtrak.
Amtrak’s critics, in their letter complaining about the deal, said “NARP has become little more than a cheering section for Amtrak. It excuses Amtrak’s shortcomings, covers for Amtrak in the news media, and exhorts the Congress to continue appropriating subsidies for obsolete and substandard train service.”
As an example, Vranich cited the association’s continued support for Amtrak before the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority ended its contact for commuter rail in 2003 because of poor on-time performance and other service complaints.
“They’re not standing up for the number one rail passenger market in the country, which are the commuters,” he said in a telephone interview. Nationwide, commuter rail systems carry far more passengers than Amtrak.
Black said the railroad did not exercise any control over the group, citing numerous instances where the group has complained to Amtrak about fare hikes and schedule changes.
Indeed, the group recently offered stinging criticisms of Amtrak.
Last year, during a budget dispute, Capon told The New York Times that the company’s board of directors was “committing corporate suicide, and they ought to be sued for it.”