Amtrak's access rights to freight lines in danger

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by pfox

FYI, in the case of the OKC to Tulsa connection, the rail line is owned by the State of Oklahoma.

Sgrizzle, the text of the legislation that created Amtrak, including the text that allows Amtrak to use existing freight routes, is inclulded in the original post (at the bottom). It is not long.  An executive summary would be longer...

It is very popular to complain about Amtrak, but I think CL captures the gist of the argument.  Complaining about a subsidy that encompasses 1% of the total federal transportation budget seems absurd.

The other day I saw a woman, a single driver, in the biggest SUV possible, on US 75 with a bumper sticker that said something to the effect of "Government should stop wasting my money..." CL is exactly right. We are subsidizing that womans right to drive the biggest, most inefficient vehicle possible on our public roads.  I think SHE is the one who should stop wasting our money.

The State of Oklahoma has committed to passenger rail service, yet it only serves OKC. Shocker, I know.  If we are going to subsidize rail for the State, I want Tulsa to benefit from it.  Can we agree on that?

Still goes back to my issue- why subsidize something which is or would be under-utilized in the first place?

Annual average ticket sales is around 60,000 for Heartland Flyer, or 164 passengers per day or 82 passengers each way.  No indication of how many are repeat or frequent travelers on the line.

[Transport_Oklahoma]

Congressman Boozeman, whose district has no Amtrak service, has withdrawn the amendment.

When the first train rolls into Tulsa, I'll see you all at the station.  

[Conan71]

Here's the point missed CL:

Heartland Flyer gets $2mm from the State of Oklahoma.  The Federal Gov't. charges us $4mm.  I can't seem to find anywhere what the net cost is to run the line for one year.

The Heartland Flyer transports 60,000 pax a year between OKC and Ft. Worth.

I-35 between OKC and Ft. Worth probably moves that many vehicles, with who knows how many people and how many tons of cargo, in one day.  

Comparing subsidies per passenger mile traveled, $30 bln. on highways is proportionately less than $1.4 bln on rail.  Comparing subsidies per U.S. citizen creates an inaccurate picture because it does not reflect utiliztion of the transportation mode.  By far, roads are cheaper than rail.

Same thing with the Turner Turnpike vs. a passenger rail system.  FAIK, the TT is self-sustaining.  The tolls pay for the maintenance and it is a pay-as-you-go system.

Not to mention, if my business is down in Moore, I have to figure out a way to get from the train station to my final destination, which would involve either thumbing a ride or waiting around to get a rental car.  Then I've got to make sure I've finished my business in time to catch the return train, or I wind up staying overnight.

If someone works or lives in DT Tulsa and they have business within walking distance of the terminal in OKC, then all fine and good, but we are talking about a very small number of people this is practical for.