Amtrak
So there's this debate in the US Congress right now about whether Amtrak -- the nation's rail service -- should be privatized or turned into a public service.
Let me say at the outset that I love Amtrak. But I live in one of the few parts of the country where rail service actually makes sense -- the Northeast. I don't take rail service all the time, but I do use it from time to time, especially when I'm travelling between Providence, RI and New York City. Apparently enough other people do to make the Northeast Corridor, as its called, one of Amtrak's only profitable areas of operation.
Amtrak was founded in the early 1970s as an experiment in having the government create a private enterprise -- in itself an oxymoron of the highest caliber. The company was ostensibly supposed to be running profitably by the end of last year, which didn't happen.
My suspicion is that this is because despite its original intentions, the government hasn't ever let Amtrak be *run* like a private enterprise should be. The company is forced to make these hugely unprofitable runs where it loses hundreds of dollars per passenger -- the sort of thing that would have any second-rate accountant shut down the line in a second. The fact is, in most of the midwest and western states, it just doesn't make sense for Amtrak to function -- it's cheaper and considerably less time-consuming to buy a plane ticket and rent a car than it is to take a train, although the train is undoubtedly the more scenic and fun way to travel.
Amtrak's also hampered by an oversight process that requires it to make these incredibly stupid decisions about who builds its trains, how they're built, to what spec they're built and the tracks are laid. That quagmire -- largely, again, the government's direct fault -- is the reason why Amtrak's "Acela" high speed rail system had to go offline to correct defects in the vehicles themselves.
Having said all that negative crap about the feds, I have very little doubt that left to its own devices, Amtrak would disintegrate in a matter of a few years.
The problem isn't that the government, despite its own protestations to the contrary, keeps its fingers in Amtrak's pie. The problem is that the government thinks Amtrak should run privately to begin with.
In a country that's as physically vast as the United States is, I don't see how any company can build a profitable enterprise by offering coast-to-coast rail coverage -- not when privately-owned airlines are posting billion-dollar losses every quarter. Not when I can get to Florida in a couple of hours for less than $100 flying Southwest or AirTran.
I would prefer to see -- largely for selfish reasons, I admit -- Amtrak operated as a public service. Paid for with federal taxes. That's right, the libertarian thinks that this should be a government service.
Why?
Because rail travel is largely unlike any other way to get around. It lets you see parts of the country that you wouldn't see otherwise -- parts of the Northeast Corridor service through western Rhode Island and eastern Connecticut are breathtaking, every time I see them -- seashore routes that look straight out of a painting.
It's an elegant way to travel. It's a comfortable way to travel, compared to buses, cars or airplanes -- you can get up and move around. The seats are comfortable and roomy. And because rail travel is part of our nation's heritage, too.
I know those aren't concrete, dollars-and-cents reasons to want to see rail travel turned into a public service. I certainly don't have the fiduciary background to explain why it makes sense, just some gut reactions. But there it is.
Comments
They should dissolve Amtrak and create a NAtional Monorail system using the current railway space.
Posted by: tokey | June 18, 2003 10:38 PM