andrewjw wrote:Philly Amtrak Fan wrote:Noel Weaver wrote:
I would like to see some state support for more service to Pittsburgh but no way more overnigh trains. Philadelphia has three choices to get to Chicago by connecting at New York or Washington or the Cardinal. I think this is adequate.
Noel Weaver
You don't live in Philly. You don't have a right to speak as to what's adequate to Philly.
Your comment about wasting tax dollars for trains that aren't used is reasonable but what about all of the other current trains that aren't used then? You are assuming the Broadway is going to be any worse than the Cardinal or Empire Builder. I don't think it will be. If you think spending federal tax money on a new Broadway is a waste of federal tax money why is Byrd Crap not a waste of tax payer money then? That's a double standard to me. The BL serves (or would serve) a larger population base.
Who should get trains and who shouldn't get trains in my opinion? Where do people live and where do people want to go to? If a lot of people live in Philly and a lot of people want to go to Philly, we need a lot of trains to/from Philly. If nobody lives in Thurmond, West Virginia and nobody wants to go to Thurmond, West Virginia, we don't need no damn trains to/from there just because Byrd demanded there be trains go through there 30 years ago.
I grew up in Philadelphia, and yes, three trips to Chicago per day is quite enough for anyone without an unhealthy obsession with history.
Well the Cardinal isn't daily so that doesn't count and even if it is daily that's longer than 24 hours when the Broadway took about 18 hours. You talk about the Broadway being "history". I took the BL in 1994-95 and I took the Three Rivers in 1997 and 2001-02. You act like the BL is the old PRR/PC train, the BL ran on Amtrak for over 20 years and the TR for over a decade between Philly and Chicago after that. And even if Philly and New Jersey have the option of a 26 hour one seat ride, what about Lancaster and Harrisburg, what do they have? A four hour layover in the Pittsburgh Amshack westbound and getting kicked out of the CL at 5:05am in the morning (assuming the CL makes it into PGH on time, otherwise they miss the connection into PGH and they have to bustitute to make it back to eastern PA, which is what happened on my last trip back from California), that's what.
I think many of you do support a revival of the BL. I don't want it to be a fight between the BL and the Cardinal. I only say the Cardinal is worthless and not necessary and a waste of money when someone wants to say the BL is worthless or not necessary. When people ask "why not both"? I never have a problem with saying sure. The only reason I don't say why not both is because I know Congress isn't spending the money.
Getting back to new service, Noel's argument seems to be expansion of service should be the state's responsibility and not the federal responsibility. If that's the case, then chances are good the biggest expansion we'll see in the next 20 years will be ... Roanoke! Whoopie doo! I can't wait to take a train all the way down from Philly to Roanoke! I'm sure Noel is coming all the way from Pompano Beach to Roanoke! And those millions of people from Roanoke are really going to add millions of dollars in revenue and Amtrak's going to be swimming in money! Someone find me Leonard Hofstadter's sarcasm sign.
If you want meaningful expansion, you need to expand to routes/states/cities where people live and where people want to go to. There really is poor service in Ohio. If Ohio isn't willing to fund, maybe the federal government does need to step in, Maybe Cleveland does need service outside the graveyard shift. Maybe Cincinnati does too. Maybe Columbus needs a train at all. Just because they won't elect pro-rail officials doesn't they don't want or deserve trains. You think trains/transportation is the #1 issue on most voters' minds? It isn't on mine I can tell you that. The economy, taxes, education, health care, a lot of other issues come first. I won't get into that. But certainly if a train serves Columbus it can add a lot of people to Amtrak's base (and remember Columbus is home to Ohio State University and college kids often ride trains proportionally more frequently than the general public).
Where else? How about Noel's home state of Florida? You right now can only travel on Amtrak from Florida one direction, northward via the Silver routes. You can't head towards Texas (unless/until they restored the Gulf Coast service). Think about this. Try taking going from Florida to Atlanta. That should be taking I-75 from Tampa or from Orlando via Florida's Turnpike up to Atlanta. Any trains along that route? No. Why not? You would think that would be a popular route. Imagine if you could take a train overnight from Atlanta to Orlando, spend all day in Disneyworld and then take the train back to Atlanta. You wouldn't have to pay ridiculous hotel fees in Orlando. Couldn't you drive there? You have to pay for gas, you put miles on your car, and you have to deal with traffic. Plus overnight you can sleep the time away. I wish there was an overnight train to Pittsburgh. I'd visit there more often if there was. Now I have to give up two whole days traveling back and forth if I want to travel there (or take Greyhound). Or how about Las Vegas? No Amtrak service at all. Not everyone wants to fly and a lot of people are afraid to.
If we bring trains where people are and where they want to go, Amtrak can be more successful. If it's going to cost more money and the government isn't willing to spend more money then IMO we may have to start think about cutting some "under-performing" routes to start some more promising routes. If we lose 100,000 riders but gain 200,000 I will take that any day of the week. Would I rather gain the 200,000 and keep the 100,000? You bet. But we don't have the money to do so. So give me the chance to add the 200,000. It will cost the 100,000 but the net is still 100,000. What's the alternative? We do nothing and the net is nothing.
