Arlington wrote:It is fair to say you're disappointed and that a lack of a diner is a reason that you (personally) won't ride, but directing these emotions against Amtrak management--as if they had somehow earned your disapproval--is fundamentally unjust. They are running a transportation company on behalf of the American People. Not a museum, not a National Park, not a seasonal ferry, not an excursion train. Amtrak's mandate is to provide maximum mobility for minimum losses, and they may have made some wrong calls (I'd say it was ordering the diner before a Starvation test) but calling them a "sorry excuse" is not supported by the evidence.
I think there is a wealth of evidence to support my “sorry excuse” claim. I don’t think you need a list of their many, many failures over the years to know that they exist but I will do my best to provide one if you want. It’s way bigger than the diner fiasco, and it casts a huge shadow over the few things they might manage to get right in a “stopped clock is right twice a day” fashion. The argument that the current presidential administration has somehow influenced things at Amtrak is false, however. It would make sense if that were the case, but unfortunately the impetus for many of the recent changes is a lot less clear cut than that.
As for their “mandate,” that is provided by a complicated arrangement of legislation that has evolved over the years. If we are to look at PRIIA and PRRIA, for example, Amtrak seeems to selectively choose what parts of the law to follow. They have gotten serious about the food and beverage losses, but at the same time are ignoring the inconvenient service and growth related portions of the law, like the specific language about expanding PV and charter business opportunities.