National Journal, 4/22:
The Long-Running Battle Over Long-Distance Trains
Congress is battling once again over what to do with the Amtrak routes that don't make money.
April 22, 2015 Amtrak has 15 long-distance routes that crisscross the United States over some 18,000 miles. They lose money. They likely will always lose money.
Yet time and again, Congress has found just enough money to keep all the trains running. And time and again, a cadre of conservatives has gotten irritated about it, pointing out that the rail network was originally envisioned as a for-profit corporation.
Now, Congress is coming to terms with the uncomfortable truth: If elected officials want passenger trains to go long distances (say, through their states), the federal government will probably have to pay for them. This is the underlying theme of legislation to authorize funding for Amtrak that sailed through the House in March. If the bill is enacted, Amtrak could no longer automatically use revenues from its profitable Northeastern Corridor—which functions mainly as a commuter network—to bolster its long-distance lines.
"We really need to see in different business units. How much are we spending? How much are we losing? And figure out if there's a way to at least get them up to breaking even," House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bill Shuster said in an interview.
The House-passed measure deliberately puts Amtrak's "national network" of long-distance routes in dire straits. . . .
Continue here.