(rshsdepot) FW: Time for U.S. Commitment to Rail

["Kenyon F. Karl" <kenyon_@_getglobal.net>]

What follows must be an incredibly 'high-stakes' game of 'chicken'. Even
worse, I fully expect that Warrington will loose this game, just because
Congress has always been 'a day late and a dollar short' with its
appropriations. :-(

Kenyon F. Karl
Webmaster_@_new-england-public-transit.org
http://www.new-england-public-transit.org

- -----Original Message-----
From: NARP [mailto:narp_@_narprail.org]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 4:47 PM
To: NARP
Subject: Time for U.S. Commitment to Rail


To all NARP members, February 1, 2002--

The following is a news release from NARP.

- --Ross B. Capon, Executive Director

For Immediate Release
Friday, February 1, 2002 - #02-03

Today, Amtrak President & CEO George D. Warrington announced the layoff
of 1,000 employees (700 agreement; 300 non-agreement), reduced staffing
hours at 73 stations, and a number of other actions aimed at enabling
Amtrak to make it to September 30, the end of the fiscal year.

He said Amtrak needs a $1.2 billion appropriation for FY 2003 in order
to avoid "substantial route cuts" on October 1. He told a news
conference that a $521 million appropriation would mean only the
Northeast Corridor "would have an opportunity to run." He indicated
plans to post the legally required six months' advance notice of
discontinuance on March 28 for all long-distance trains, to prepare for
the possibility that Congress would not provide the needed funds.

The National Association of Railroad Passengers strongly believes that
the existing system is "skeletal," (to use Warrington's own words) and
should be continued in its entirety. We believe that the general public
- -- particularly since September 11 -- agrees with the importance of
maintaining and improving our national passenger rail network,
especially through cooperative federal/state investment in
short-distance corridors around the nation. In December, for example,
passenger-miles on Amtrak rose 3.8% while domestic aviation fell 13.2%.
(On Amtrak's sleeping cars, passenger-miles rose 7% and revenues rose
13%.)

The federal government this year will spend $33 billion on highways, $13
billion on aviation, but only $570 million on intercity passenger rail.
Moreover, the federal government offers 80% matches to encourage states
to focus their investments on highways and aviation. Federal matches to
support state investments for intercity passenger rail are virtually
non-existent.

This "anti-rail" funding bias has helped put Amtrak in its present
situation. At best, Amtrak's clear statement today may be a step toward
ending the anti-rail bias in federal funding policy. It is painful to
see valued employees laid off in a business that should be growing, but
we understand Amtrak's decision not to seek a supplemental
appropriation. Such an effort would be time-consuming, with no assurance
of success, and would be a distraction from the central issue before the
public: the long-term future of a connected, intercity passenger rail
network.

Two things should be clear regarding elimination of the long-distance
network:

* It would be a decision "for all time" and virtually impossible to
reverse in a later, more enlightened era, and

* The result would increase the cost of operating state-supported
short-distance trains, which no longer would share facility costs -- or
connecting passenger revenues -- with long-distance trains.

# # #

------------------------------