(The Boston Globe published the following article by Jim Geraghty of the States News Service on June 5.)
WASHINGTON — As Congress prepares to debate the future of Amtrak, a study released yesterday says the federal government must start viewing intercity rail travel as a public service, not a failing business.
Elliott Sclar, a Columbia University professor of urban planning and author of the report published by the Economic Policy Institute, said yesterday that a national plan to make passenger trains a key part of the nation’s transportation strategy would pay important economic, environmental, and homeland security dividends.
Congress is likely, in the coming months, to make key decisions about the fate of Amtrak, the troubled national passenger rail system. The sluggish economy has hit the travel sector hard, and there are 100,000 fewer Amtrak riders for the first half of the system’s current fiscal year than for the same period last year.
The Bush administration is considering a proposal that would allow private companies to operate trains and is expected to unveil a detailed proposal in the coming weeks. A Senate transportation panel will hold a hearing today on options for paying for rail equipment and infrastructure and proposals for passenger rail service.
”Imposing a business model on what is essentially a public service leads to confusing, wrong outcomes,” said Sclar. ”Private companies have the right to fail, go bankrupt, merge, or sell divisions. A public entity has an obligation to maintain public services.”
His study concluded that privatization plans for Amtrak would be ”the route to failure,” with no guarantees on quality of service, routes, or consideration of the public’s interest.
Vukan Vuchic, a University of Pennsylvania professor who studies transportation systems, argued that the cost constraints Congress has put on Amtrak have forced the rail system to focus on ”maximum revenue instead of maximum riders” — resulting in overpriced tickets.
He pointed to the experience of the New York City mass transit system, which he said experienced a 33 percent increase in ridership after offering free subway-bus transfers.
”In addition to making more money overall, the increased ridership had other benefits like less congestion and more mobility,” Vuchic said. ”Maximum ridership should be the main goal.”
Vuchic endorses increasing taxes on gasoline by a nickel to fund rail upgrades.
”I can say that. I’m an academic — I’m not running for any office,” he said. ”But families will not starve if gasoline taxes go up.”
Amtrak critics like Peter Sepp of the National Taxpayers Union said the ”public good” justification for national rail service ”gets around the tap dance that Amtrak officials have often engaged in — `If we get a little more money, we can be profitable.’ ”
Amtrak was established in 1970 when Congress decided to guarantee passenger rail service over a route system chosen by the Department of Transportation. Amtrak has never turned a profit, requiring the federal assistance to make up for the losses. In 1997, Congress set the goal that Amtrak should break even by the end of 2002 — a goal that the rail service could not meet.
Part of Amtrak’s problems are expensive, less popular cross-country routes. Representative Mark Kennedy, Republican of Minnesota, pointed out that Amtrak’s Sunset Limited, which runs from Los Angeles to Orlando, loses more than $347 per passenger, according to the rail service’s 2001 numbers.
Kennedy calculated that the federal government could save $132 per passenger if it bought every passenger on the route a plane ticket.
Sepp contended that the public service argument does not recognize that most modes of transportation are now being opened to more private sector participation, such as privately built toll roads.
Vuchic and Sclar fear that Amtrak’s fate will be sealed later this year when the terms of Michael S. Dukakis, vice chairman of Amtrak’s board of directors, and three other board members expire. They say that when the Bush administration names new board members, the panel will be dominated by privatization enthusiasts who wish to see Amtrak either changed dramatically or eliminated.