Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
ExCon90 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:22 pm Glad to see that point being made publicly. People need to realize that freight is the only reason the tracks are there in the first place; it the freight goes away, the tracks will eventually go also. A number of former passenger routes could not be restored today because when the freight was rerouted the tracks disappeared.I'd have to disagree with that. Railroads would have never been built across the U.S. at such as scale if it weren't for governmental subsidies in the form of massive land grants, eminent domain assistance, and significant investments in track and safety infrastructure. Governments agreed to this because of the benefits for both passengers and freight, and Amtrak was created when railroads were no longer interested in upholding the passenger side of the bargain. Part of that agreement is that Amtrak gets priority and now the freight railroads have decided they don't want to abide by the agreement and they want to make the service so bad it gets cut entirely or that the government writes more big checks to build more track.
prokowave wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 7:04 pmRailroads paid back ever cent of subsidy that they received to build transcontinental routes--and more. They paid in part through giving discounted mail contracts to the government. And not every transcon received government aid (in free land)--at least one did not.ExCon90 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:22 pm Glad to see that point being made publicly. People need to realize that freight is the only reason the tracks are there in the first place; it the freight goes away, the tracks will eventually go also. A number of former passenger routes could not be restored today because when the freight was rerouted the tracks disappeared.I'd have to disagree with that. Railroads would have never been built across the U.S. at such as scale if it weren't for governmental subsidies in the form of massive land grants, eminent domain assistance, and significant investments in track and safety infrastructure. Governments agreed to this because of the benefits for both passengers and freight, and Amtrak was created when railroads were no longer interested in upholding the passenger side of the bargain. Part of that agreement is that Amtrak gets priority and now the freight railroads have decided they don't want to abide by the agreement and they want to make the service so bad it gets cut entirely or that the government writes more big checks to build more track.
When railroads are seeing record operating ratios and earnings, I don't think it's too much to ask them to maintain their tracks and build enough sidings so give Amtrak the priority to which it is entitled by law.
ExCon90 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:22 pm Glad to see that point being made publicly. People need to realize that freight is the only reason the tracks are there in the first place; it the freight goes away, the tracks will eventually go also.Yes, the North Jersey Coast Line, The former Erie Lackawanna mains, the Northeast Corridor, The Atlantic City line, The Reading Lines,The Shore Line, The Springfield Line and The Harrisburg Line all withered and died without the freight trains.
ExCon90 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:22 pm A number of former passenger routes could not be restored today because when the freight was rerouted the tracks disappeared.That depends on the vision. NYS gobbled up the former CSX line and turned it over to Amtrak. Michigan and Massachusetts have done the same. Virginia threatened to go rogue years ago and put pressure on CSX to straighten up. They also put a LOT of money behind their words, heavily investing in the infrastructure that CSX undermaintained by adding crossovers, additional tracks, switch heaters, and even paid for another bridge across Quantico Creek, since CSX decided it was cheaper to rebuild it with one track.
SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:52 pm Agreed.
If the government wants Amtrak to always be on time...pay the freight railroads, via contracts negotiated at arms' length and not under duress, for track improvements.
If the government can force freight railroads to do its bidding, by fiat, then any of us can be crushed by government as well.
I have yet to see a major carrier file such a claim, not even during the BNSF meltdown in North Dakota. Prior to that, BNSF wanted to abandon the Devils Lake Subdivision since they said they don't use it. The FRA, Amtrak and BNSF made a deal to keep it and upgrade it, with each making equal contributions.
(c) Preference over freight transportation. --Except in an emergency, intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation provided by or for Amtrak has preference over freight transportation in using a rail line, junction, or crossing unless the Board orders otherwise under this subsection. A rail carrier affected by this subsection may apply to the Board for relief. If the Board, after an opportunity for a hearing under section 553 of title 5 , decides that preference for intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation materially will lessen the quality of freight transportation provided to shippers, the Board shall establish the rights of the carrier and Amtrak on reasonable terms.
SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:52 pm Agreed.Its a rather sad state of affairs that anyone could see the government would be out to crush them.
If the government wants Amtrak to always be on time...pay the freight railroads, via contracts negotiated at arms' length and not under duress, for track improvements.
If the government can force freight railroads to do its bidding, by fiat, then any of us can be crushed by government as well.
David Benton wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 8:43 pmWell, try living in the US instead of New Zealand. The US is full of people at each other’s throats, who use government as a weapon.SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Wed Nov 27, 2019 4:52 pm Agreed.Its a rather sad state of affairs that anyone could see the government would be out to crush them.
If the government wants Amtrak to always be on time...pay the freight railroads, via contracts negotiated at arms' length and not under duress, for track improvements.
If the government can force freight railroads to do its bidding, by fiat, then any of us can be crushed by government as well.
In other democracies, it would seem the government is more focused on protecting and providing for its citizens , perhaps shown in a higher provision of passenger trains and other public transport. .
SouthernRailway wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:14 am Brightline has been able to use tax-advantaged bonds and I think governments have paid for some crossings and maybe are offering funds for more stations that governments want. That’s it.Has Brightline been charged fair market value for the use of government land? If not, that’s another subsidy.