The Virginian-Pilot
©
A new federal budget proposal threatens to end funding for regional Amtrak service at a time when Virginia is expanding passenger rail in the state and has no source of operating money for the trains.
State officials say it's not clear yet how the measure would affect Virginia's six regional Amtrak trains, including Newport News service and the anticipated Norfolk service that's slated to start in two years.
But rail advocates interpret the proposal as ominous.
"If this legislation is enacted, Virginia will lose 64 percent of its Amtrak trains, including all of the services that start in Virginia," Danny Plaugher, executive director of Virginians for High Speed Rail, said in an email blast to its members.
The Piedmont Rail Coalition issued an "emergency alert" that the proposal "WILL kill" the Lynchburg-to-Washington train, which has exceeded ridership goals by 2-1/2 times since it started in October 2009.
The House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee wants to cut Amtrak's budget by 60 percent, including all state-supported routes in 15 states, beginning with the new federal fiscal year on Oct. 1.
These "short corridors" provide service to about 9 million passengers a year. The budget proposal would not cut long-distance trains that run through Virginia between Massachusetts and Florida.
"The state routes have the best ridership over the last few years and also provide the best connectivity options for the different areas of the state," Plaugher said. "If these trains get eliminated, Hampton Roads loses all their trains, and Virginia's left with a handful of long-distance trains."
Amtrak runs two trains a day connecting Newport News and Richmond and beyond. The state is spending $101 million to upgrade freight tracks between Norfolk and Richmond in preparation for service beginning October 2013.
Thelma Drake, director of the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, said Thursday that it's too soon to know what will happen with service in Virginia, and that Congress is unlikely to act on a new budget for several months.
Even so, Drake noted, a law passed in 2008 would end federal support of regional passenger rail in 2013 anyway, and Virginia has been working with Amtrak on a payment structure and with state legislators to identify funding.
She estimated that the state will need to pay an average of $30 million a year starting in 2013; that would include the new service to Norfolk.
"We need to be prepared because, either way, it's coming," Drake said. "Right now, there's a lot of moving parts and balls in the air."
The new budget proposal might force the issue sooner than expected.
Drake said some of the questions that need to be answered include whether Virginia can keep all the service it currently has; and whether it make sense to shut down the best-performing routes such as the Lynchburg train - which is doing so well it requires no operating subsidy - just because it's a state-supported train.
"As of today, we don't have the money, so, potentially yes, some service would have to be cut if this goes through now," said Courtney Moyer, a spokeswoman for the state rail department. "While this would be a challenge for us if it's implemented, Virginia is ahead of the game compared to other states."
The General Assembly this year created a vehicle to pay for passenger rail, the Intercity Passenger Rail Operating and Capital Fund, but did not fund it.
Debbie Messina, (757) 446-2588, debbie.messina@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Amtrak "subsidy"
Funny how Amtrak is "subsidized" but highway and air routes are "investments" with dedicated tax bases. Semantics aside, the long underfunded Amtrak continues to improve whatever and wherever it can and continues to survive. A look at foreign aid would disclose savings far greater than defunding Amtrak. While the monies aren't yet paid out, Egypt alone is on the request (By whom I don't know, but guess the State Dept.) list for $1,500,000,000 [read billion], a little more than Amtrak's request FOR OUR OWN COUNTRY'S transportation needs.
Regional passenger rail is needed in the 21st Century Economy
55 years ago, when the USA was awash in domestic oil, Congress heavily subsidized development of our Airline and Interstate Highway infrastructure, to the direct detriment of profitable passenger rail operation.
Today, we are no longer awash in oil. Global consumption is rapidly depleting easily extractable global supplies, and the cost of fuel will continue to rise accordingly.
To meet the challenges of the 21st Global Economy, we must refurbish and upgrade our regional passenger rail system wherever it is a more fuel efficient alternative to congested highway or short-hop airline travel.
The Oil, Airline and Highway Lobbies naturally oppose competition in these regional markets. Their profit motive is out of step our national needs.
Pure selfishness
Of course the voices of those who gladly accept a subsidy for roads, bridges, tunnel, and highways always rises if they see a threat to their chosen form of mobility. If it we left to Greenmun and Tabor, roads would continue to be subsidized by general taxes and they would continue to use roads to make long commutes, much of which is paid for by us, the general tax payer. So it is not surprising they would applaud the cuts to train service; they don't use it. This kind of selfishness is endemic in the libertarian and right wing sectors, but simply hides what is in their self interest. Passenger rail and light rail have become essential means of mobility to millions of our citizens and they need to be served as well.
Amtrak should go
Inter-city passenger rail is subsidized at the rate of 40cents per passenger mile.
The cost to own and operate a compact car is only 30cents per passenger mile.
It would be cheaper to give Amtrak riders the use of a car than to continue Amtrak.
Its time to stop subsidizing uneconomic services like passenger rail. If fares can't cover the cost, that's the marketplace telling you there are better alternatives, like driving for trips under 400 miles and flying for longer trips.
You can pay for your own
You can pay for your own highways. With European gas taxes fully covering highway expenses, drivers there are paying $8 to $10/gallon. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/05/gas-prices-around-the-world-cheaper-than-water-i-and-i-10-a-gallon/238226/. That will be payable by every driver across the country. And, if you want to compare current subsidies, be sure to include the cost not only of buying a car for all inner city travelers but of their insurance and 365-day a year parking expenses since they do not own cars (speaking from personal experience) - and take into account the loss of productivity of those who regularly work while travelling on trains.
Sad
We are essentially the only "civilized" country on the planet to not have a strong rail transportation system. Of course, with out affection for guns and lack of comprehensive health care, it may be a stretch to call us civilized.
We can't afford these endless subsidies
These cuts are long overdue.
Either charge the people using these trains what the passenger trains cost to operate, or scrap them.
The "force people NOT riding the train to pay for the train" so called "budgeting" has to end.
We, the taxpayers, can't afford this lame "redistribute-the-wealth" mentality.
All that "Light Rail Now"/Mike Barrett baloney spewed about Nawfork's overpriced tiny 7.4 mile light rail being a connection to "high speed rail" is being exposed for the B.S. it always was.
It wasn't actually "high speed rail", it was slower passenger rail sharing freight rails. I discussed the new AMTRAK service with the VDRPT. They finally admitted there wasn't any way to pay for the new passenger rail to Tidewater from Richmond.
Don't gore his ox
Of course so long as Greenmun's commute from the Beach to Portsmouth is subsidized, he is fine with that. The point is, the Commonwealth is unable to maintain the roads, tunnels, and bridges we now have much less maintain and repair any new ones. We will need light rail and passenger rail to provide alternate means of mobility in congested corridors. That is exactly what light rail does in the I-264 corridor, and the passenger rail to Richmond will do in the I-64 corridor. These projects do not replace interstates, they supplement them so they will serve those who must continue to use them better. This nation rose to greatness based upon mobility and transportation, and we are now at risk because we have turned our back on funding it.
Fine... But those of us who
Fine... But those of us who do not have children should no longer have to pay taxes toward schools. Charge people who have kids the REAL cost of sending a kid to school.
I don't collect welfare, so I should no longer have to pay for that.
I can create a whole list of "wealth distribution" projects that do not directly benefit me that I should no longer have to pay for.
Amtrak is Needed for a Balanced Transportation Network
Isn't it interesting that LAST YEAR over 40 billion dollars was allocated to highways but over the past 40 YEARS only 36 billion was allocated to Amtrak to operate a nationwide rail passenger system - and don't forget the additional annual cost of lost real estate taxes on land and structures to local communities when highways are built and expanded. Amtrak should be praised for accomplishing what they have done with the minute percentage of the transportation budget that they have received through the years. Yes, highways need funding, but overlooking the need for Amtrak and a national rail passenger system for our future is a gross mistake.