Do you think Amtrak should be privatized?

Question

If so, explain why. If you think there is a better way other than complete gov't ownership or complete privatization, then please tell.

Answer 1

Amtrack is owned by private but gov. gives them a money into them so they keep off from runnin out of business

In my opinion, it is hard for goverment to keep on eye on them so thats why they are not fully controlled by the government

Answer 2

Passenger rail loses money in every civilized country, fact of life.  

Europe has a ~50% farebox ratio, Amtrak over 80%.  Put another way, the European governments subsidize $1 and European citizens match with another $1.  When the USA spends $1 on Amtrak subsidy, riders match it with over $4!

So subsidy-wise, Amtrak is already a GREAT bargain.  

What do you hope to fix with privatization of Amtrak?   You won't erase the universal rule that passenger rail in every civilized country needs subsidy.  Do you expect Amtrak will be run better as a private company?  Maybe, but if you get familiar with how they operate now, they're pretty tight now.  The best you could hope for is lift some pension burdens off of them but that has nothing to do with privatization.

Answer 3

The government would love to return US passenger train service to the private sector, but the private sector is very unwilling to take it back.  

Intercity passenger trains were exclusively run by the private sector in the first part of the 20th century.  With the growth of the automobile and air transportation, the companies started to lose money on the service.  They began to abandon passenger trains, turning their focus to the more profitable freight service.  

Amtrak was established when it became clear that if government didn't step in, we would be left with no intercity passenger trains.  Amtrak, with federal and some state funding, has kept a skeletal passenger train service going.  

It's hated by fiscal conservatives, who continually talk about privatizing trains, without understanding why Amtrak was established in the first place.

Several administrations, including the current, have established panels of "experts" to figure out how to privatize passenger rail, but their recommendations are typically unworkable, and would only lead to what we don't want--the death of passenger train service in the US.

Answer 4

It needs to be subsidized in order to continue running.  I believe that the government should increase subsidies and encourage people to ride it.  If they want to privatize it and continue to pay subsidies, that's fine.

But the problem is that many small-town politicians are against Amtrak in the first place, and are trying to use privatization as an excuse to shut it down.  If they privatize it and it fails, it gets liquidated.  

So I would be against privatization unless there is a federal funding guarantee with it.

Answer 5

Amtrak is private.

The government SUBSIDIZES the rail roads.  But they don't own it.

Good Luck...

P.S.  I stand corrected:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak

Answer 6

Railroads get a better price per ton of coal than ton of people.  Coal doesn't complain or sue railroads either.  That's why they got out of the business of hauling people.  It's not profitable.

Answer 7

oh, there could be lots of debate about all this, i dont think Y!A has enough space for the volumes of opinions on this, let alone all of the other transportation matters involved.

but briefly, government subsidizes many many types of industry, including railroads, highways, the post office, broadcasting, oil, and many other things.  sometimes the subsidy is direct, such as outright ownership (such as amtrak or the post office), sometimes it is indirect (for airlines, govt owns and pays for FAA traffic control, removes airport property from tax rolls, etc), and sometimes it is hidden (highways get police protection and support from local property taxes, not from gas tax).

there are different ways that government can be involved too.  they can own the infrastructure outright (like the highways, which also removes them from the property tax rolls) while letting any carrier or individual operate over them for a toll or, in america, for free.  Or, they can own the company and rent the infrastructure, like they do with amtrak.  Or they can own both the company and the infrastructure, such as the postal service.

if we talk about privatising amtrak, then i think it only fair that we talk about privatising ALL transportation, which includes roads.  Can this work?  It could.  Will it work?  probably not, people hate toll roads with a passion bcs they feel they should be able to drive per-use for free.  But we think nothing of paying for a plane ticket, train ticket, or bus ticket, before getting to use any of the other transport modes.  So why is the auto being treated differently?

The gas tax is a joke.  Federally, it is still 18 cents per gallon, which is the exact same as in the 1970's and before.  Even tho' the cost of road construction material and labour, police labour, etc have all risen over the last 30 years, the gas tax has not raised even 1 iota of a cent.  

Also, think of this - a car that gets 20 miles per gallon will pay more gas tax than a car that gets 40 miles per gallon, right?  so, the gas tax has ignored auto technology and CAFE standards that has increased the fuel efficiency of autos by increasing their mpg.  so what happens?  if/when you get a more fuel efficient car, you either drive the same, thus paying less fuel tax; or you start driving twice more miles (bcs you perceive it as sooo efficient) to only pay the same amount of tax.  Thus, in any case, there is less money coming in and people are driving more, thus creating demand for more construction, repairs, calls for new roads and lanes, and congestion for which there is no funding to mitigate.

another point - property.  private railroad companies have to own/rent the land their tracks are on, and they also have to pay for installing and maintaining their signal system, and they pay half of installation and full of maintenance of every road/rail grade crossing pavement and signals.  And, to boot, the railroads have to pay property taxes on every parcel of land to each county and state that they run through.  In addition, if the corporation makes a profit, they have to pay income taxes just like other corporations.

all roads and airports are on government-owned land.  there is no annual rent paid.  there is no property taxes paid on any of the millions and millions of acres of property that are paved over.  the government pays for FAA and runway lights, and for installing, maintaining, and electricity for every traffic intersection signal, and even all the street lights.  there is no charges made to the auto user nor the pedestrian for all the poles, light bulbs, electricity, etc, that go with every road.

here is a sobering statistic for you, to show how screwed transportation funding is.  autos (and buses and trucks) get over 33 BBBillion $/yr in various subsidies, most indirect.  airlines get around 15 BBB $/yr, while amtrak gets 1.2 BBBillion per year for operations and capitalization combined, and the private rail freight carriers get zippo for operations, zippo for signaling/maintenance, and the minimal capital investments tend to be for grade elimination, which is arguably helping the road/auto as much or more than the railroad (altho' yes, it does improve the safety of the railroad too).

here is an example for you:  in chicago, the state of illinois (not the city) paid 980 Million $ for repairing the 8 mile stretch of Dan Ryan Expressway.  In the past 2 years, they were paying only 12 Million $/yr for helping to subsidize 3 amtrak routes (total 852 miles, 12 separate daily train runs on 3 routes), upped it to 24 Million $ last year for the first time.  ridership on trains shot up between 40 and 90 % in first year on the 3 routes, and yet, Illinois is proposing to cut back the amtrak funding this year due to budget problems, in spite of impressive ridership and a successful rail program.

compare:  Dan Ryan - 980 M $ / 8 miles = 122,500,000 PER MILE (122.5 Million $).   Amtrak - 24 M $ /  852 miles = 28,169 PER MILE (28.17 Thousand $).

and, do i even have to say about repayment of this money to the state?  for dan ryan, it is still a freeway, there is not one single toll gantry or booth nor any other taxing mechanism to get ANY money back.  whereas on amtrak, the state gets some cost reduction for every fare that is purchased, bcs each train passenger (and remember we had an avg 60% increase in the number of riders) MUST PAY a fare before they can board.

or you could look at it politically -- Dan Ryan 8 miles lies only in 1 county, altho' people and businesses do come from other counties and states to use it too, which is not necessarily a benefit anyway to illinois politicians).  The 3 amtrak routes have stations in 28 counties, run thru additional counties without stopping, and serve a larger cachement area of over 80 counties.

so, as far as votes in the General Assembly or federal Congress, now, just WHICH do you think most of the small-town voters will vote for?  of course, the one that serves them -- hence the continued popularity of the Postal Service or Amtrak.  I mean, if privatisation is soooo wonderful, then why havent FedEx and UPS taken over ALL mail deliveries and let the govt close down the expensive federal Postal Service.....see, just 1 of many many examples.

is the car absolutely needed everywhere?  perhaps, but only because of land use and zoning decisions, government subsidies for extending sewers/roads for new development while neglecting their existing infrastructure, shopping malls/big box stores built on the outskirts instead of in downtowns, and so on.  so, perhaps, instead of just looking at amtrak or roads, we need to look at the bigger picture of urbanism, land use, choice of locations for residence vs employment, post-Euclidean zoning issues, etc.

well, this is just a start.  I hope everyone will think of these points, and when it is time to debate the TEA 2009 bill, to accept that either gas taxes or tolls need to be augmented for roads, or that rail/bus/air needs to be subsidized more, in order to compete with the almighty automobile.