The Joys of AMTRAK

[Epigonos]

It may very well be a problem in both the Midwest and Eastern parts of the U.S , in the not too distant future. Much of the food sold in Midwestern and in Eastern markets arrives by rail, including vegetables, fruits, beef, pork, and chicken. The majority of automobiles arriving from Japan and Korea are off loaded at west coast ports and are then shipped to the rest of the country by rail. An added problem east of the Mississippi River is that most of the tunnels were built in the nineteenth century and are too low to accommodate double-decker fright cars.

[Guest]

In the US, we call funding passenger trains a "subsidy" but funding roads an "investment."

 

Well, it's not exactly comparable. I think that the funding of the roads is mostly from fuel taxes, so the more you drive (and the bigger a gas guzzler you drive) the more you pay, which seems eminently fair and reasonable. When rails are funded, it means that both rail passengers and those who don't use the rails have to pay. Not quite as fair. Of course, here in the SF Bay Area, I don't mind paying taxes for BART trains even though I rarely take BART myself, because I do benefit from BART even when I don't take it--due to less crowded highways. I don't think I can make quite the same argument for AMTRAK. I'm not against subsidizing the rails, but this is different from highway tax dollars which comes from a user tax.

[Guest]

FYI, rail shutdowns are scheduled 2 years in advance. We're been planning our work for this shutdown since 2015. And, just last month I got the specific shutdown dates thru 2019. The problem is not that these aren't scheduled in advance - they ARE. The problem is that Amtrak is playing "I've got a secret" with their customers.

 

In other words, it sounds as if AMTRAK is selling a service they know for a fact they won't be able to provide. This sounds fraudulent to me, as a matter of fact, if not a matter of law.

[OneFinger]

In other words, it sounds as if AMTRAK is selling a service they know for a fact they won't be able to provide. This sounds fraudulent to me, as a matter of fact, if not a matter of law.

 

You've hit the nail on the head. But, I can see Amtrak justifying their actions by claiming that service is being provided (via bus) so there is no disruption of service. But, I fully feel there should be full disclosure by Amtrak at least 3 months in advance so riders can determine if they want that lesser level of service.

[handiacefailure]

I hope you contested the charges with your credit card company. If you reserved a business class seat and had no seat you shouldn't have an issue.

 

I have used the acella train from Philly to DC with good luck but outside of that Amtrak sucks for me.

 

They don't own the tracks so they have to yield if Conrail is doing work on the tracks and give their trains priority. Everytime I have taken the train to and from Chicago it's been delayed at least two hours. Usually it leaves here after it is due to arrive in Chicago. One time I took Amtrak from Chicago and the train was stopped for almost 5 hours and they didn't keep the snack car open. The trip should have been four hours and was a little over 200 miles and I could have driven the 50 minutes to Detroit airport, parked off site and gone through security and flown to London and cleared passport control and taken the underground and been to my hotel in less time than it took to go from Chicago to Toledo on Amtrak that night.

 

Now trains in other countries are another story. Never a problem with all the trips I've taken on Eurorail between London and Paris, biggest delay I had was 30 minutes and the staff was really apologizing for that. I take Viarail between Windsor and Toronto and it's never more than a few minutes late. I have to laugh when people on the train bitch they are 20 minutes late:) Their policy is if the train is over an hour late you get a voucher for 50% of your fare and if it's over four hours late you get a voucher for the full fare. If Amtrak did that they would be out of business in a week

[+ WilliamM]

I hope you contested the charges with your credit card company. If you reserved a business class seat and had no seat you shouldn't have an issue.

 

Here is what Amtrak will do:

 

If you have a round-trip ticket for the Northeast corridor service and do not board the train for the first half of the trip. Amtrak sends an email, asking you to call. Upon making the call, you have to pay for the ride you missed, but your fare is refunded for the return trip.

 

Also, Amtrak only makes a few stops in each state. When I was in the Army I learned not to make unscheduled night trips to Massachusetts without scheduling a ride from the nearest train station. Several times, my only choice was to hitch hike at night from Riverside Station to Natick/Framingham, MA.

 

However, it is extremely unfair that Amtrak seems to work well only between Washington and Boston.

[+ Charlie]

Well, it's not exactly comparable. I think that the funding of the roads is mostly from fuel taxes, so the more you drive (and the bigger a gas guzzler you drive) the more you pay, which seems eminently fair and reasonable.

Except that electric cars, which don't pay the gas tax, use the roads which they don't help to pay for.

[+ WilliamM]

In other words, it sounds as if AMTRAK is selling a service they know for a fact they won't be able to provide. This sounds fraudulent to me, as a matter of fact, if not a matter of law.

 

There is apparently a huge difference between Amtrak service (including customer service) in different parts of the country.

 

Remember members of the House and Senate in states/districts relatively near Washington use Amtrak frequently.

[rvwnsd]

Well, it's not exactly comparable. I think that the funding of the roads is mostly from fuel taxes, so the more you drive (and the bigger a gas guzzler you drive) the more you pay, which seems eminently fair and reasonable. When rails are funded, it means that both rail passengers and those who don't use the rails have to pay. Not quite as fair. Of course, here in the SF Bay Area, I don't mind paying taxes for BART trains even though I rarely take BART myself, because I do benefit from BART even when I don't take it--due to less crowded highways. I don't think I can make quite the same argument for AMTRAK. I'm not against subsidizing the rails, but this is different from highway tax dollars which comes from a user tax.

Actually, it is very comparable. According to the US Department of Transportation website the Federal Motor Fule Tax is handled as follows:

 

"...The revenue from the collected Federal fuel taxes are deposited into the Highway Trust Fund, which has several accounts. Though the percentages vary depending on the fuel type, the majority (approximately 83 to 87%) is deposited into the Highway Account, to be used on road construction and maintenance. An additional amount (approximately 11 to 15%) goes to the Mass Transit Account, and for many fuels, 0.1 cents per gallon goes to the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund."

 

However, mass transit projects have an awfully hard time getting funded, despite a portion of the motor fuel tax being deposited into a trust fund that is supposedly earmarked for transit projects.

[rvwnsd]

There is apparently a huge difference between Amtrak service (including customer service) in different parts of the country.

 

Remember members of the House and Senate in states/districts relatively near Washington use Amtrak frequently.

 

California, Illinois, and a handful of other states fund and own "corridors" that are branded as Amtrak and are either operated by Amtrak or a local joint powers authority. The Northeast Corridor is owned and operated by Amtrak.

 

In other words, it sounds as if AMTRAK is selling a service they know for a fact they won't be able to provide. This sounds fraudulent to me, as a matter of fact, if not a matter of law.

Amtrak California consists of a combination of train and so-called "thruway bus" service. Thruway bus service is used to transport passengers to the train and to bridge the gap between disconnected train services. When train service is interrupted, they substitute the Amtrak California bus. Essentially, Amtrak California is an inter-city mass transit system not unlike the LA County Metro, New York City MTA, or Chicago Transit Authority/Metra Commuter Rail. It is a commuter train.

 

See the "About Us" page for more details.

[Guest]

"...The revenue from the collected Federal fuel taxes are deposited into the Highway Trust Fund, which has several accounts. Though the percentages vary depending on the fuel type, the majority (approximately 83 to 87%) is deposited into the Highway Account, to be used on road construction and maintenance. An additional amount (approximately 11 to 15%) goes to the Mass Transit Account....

 

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think AMTRAK is considered mass transit. Mass transit projects such as BART, the NYC Subway, LIRR, CTA, etc., help the roads by taking very large numbers of cars off of the roads. This is not really the case for AMTRAK. I also don't buy that taking a passenger who paid for a rail ticket by bus isn't fraudulent because "they only contracted you to take you from point A to point B." By that logic, you could go to a fine dining restaurant and pay for a gourmet meal and be served with KFC. Of course, the restaurant would quickly go out of business, whereas AMTRAK has a monopoly. I don't think that monopolies should be allowed to get away with what's clearly fraud on the face of it.

[MikeBiDude]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think AMTRAK is considered mass transit. Mass transit projects such as BART, the NYC Subway, LIRR, CTA, etc., help the roads by taking very large numbers of cars off of the roads. This is not really the case for AMTRAK. I also don't buy that taking a passenger who paid for a rail ticket by bus isn't fraudulent because "they only contracted you to take you from point A to point B." By that logic, you could go to a fine dining restaurant and pay for a gourmet meal and be served with KFC. Of course, the restaurant would quickly go out of business, whereas AMTRAK has a monopoly. I don't think that monopolies should be allowed to get away with what's clearly fraud on the face of it.

 

In SoCal, Take the Surfliner one day when the Metrolink system goes down and your Amtrak train has to make all its own stops AND Metrolink stops. I think it's different here in SoCal where Amtrak does in fact take cars off the road (I-5, CA101) and is a commute vehicle for many people.

[+ Charlie]

In order to take AMTRAK California from Palm Springs to San Francisco, one takes the AMTRAK bus from PS to Bakersfield (5 hrs.), the train from Bakersfield to Emeryville, and another AMTRAK bus into SF. It is an all day trip, but my spouse has done it a number of times, and it has always been dependable for him.

[+ WilliamM]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think AMTRAK is considered mass transit. Mass transit projects such as BART, the NYC Subway, LIRR, CTA, etc., help the roads by taking very large numbers of cars off of the roads. This is not really the case for AMTRAK.

 

Before Amtrak I drove from Philadelphia to Boston or New York or Washington,

 

Many people commute daily by train from Philadelphia to New York & back for their jobs. Members of Congress also commute by Amtrak from Washington to Wilmington and Philadelphia. Amtrak also has many trains that run from Philadelphia to Harrisburg, PA and back.

 

So I am totally lost by your comments since Amtrak clearly also takes cars off the roads as well.

[+ Eric Hassan]

Unfortunately Amtrak does not own the tracks, they are owned by the railroads that abandoned passenger service in the U.S. in the late 60's. I believe that the rails running between Los Angeles and San Diego are owned by Southern Pacific. They decide if and when the rails are repaired. The freight trains of the line that owns the rails also take precedence in the right of way. Years ago taking the Empire Builder from Chicago to Seattle, we were on several occasions forced onto a siding to allow freight trains to pass, sometimes paused for an hour or more. You won't have to worry about Amtrak much longer, the President's proposed budget eliminates all funding for it.

 

@Epigonos - sorry you've had that experience.

 

The first sentence is only partially true - Amtrak does own some of the tracks, though mostly in the NEC and the east coast in general - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak#Lines

 

I travel frequently between NYC and Boston, DC, and Philadelphia and generally have a satisfactory experience. Occasionally, the other patrons make it a challenging ride. Other times, some of the conductors make it a more pleasant ride (read - they're sexy with good arms).

 

@ArVaGuy has a good idea with the RedCap service. I've also found complaining on Twitter manages to get a fast response from many companies, including Amtrak (I sorta hate being the douche who tweets complaints, but I'm not above looking like a douche if it gets me what I want).

[gregkidman]

I just used the Amtrak from DC to New York last Friday. It was delayed by 2 hours but the trip was pleasant enough.

[+ Gar1eth]

Well, it's not exactly comparable. I think that the funding of the roads is mostly from fuel taxes, so the more you drive (and the bigger a gas guzzler you drive) the more you pay, which seems eminently fair and reasonable. When rails are funded, it means that both rail passengers and those who don't use the rails have to pay. Not quite as fair. Of course, here in the SF Bay Area, I don't mind paying taxes for BART trains even though I rarely take BART myself, because I do benefit from BART even when I don't take it--due to less crowded highways. I don't think I can make quite the same argument for AMTRAK. I'm not against subsidizing the rails, but this is different from highway tax dollars which comes from a user tax.

 

So that would be the same argument for/against funding airports-after all not everyone flies. But don't governments whether national/state/local fund provide a major source of funding for airports?

 

Gman

[+ friendofsheila]

Bay Area to Portland, OR, in 2nd class on Amtrak was HELL.

 

Only available as an overnight. Trying to sleep in one of those damned seats, person next to me took off his shoes and had THE STINKIEST FEET IN THE UNIVERSE.

 

Sleeper cars cost an arm and a leg. Never again.

[Epigonos]

Well I have, at last, found out how to use Amtrak between Fullerton and San Diego. 1.) DO NOT go on the weekend. 2.) Going south, from Fullerton, during the week, in the summer, take a train after 11:00 am to miss the day beach goers. 3.) Going north, from San Diego, during the week, take the train after 11:00 am to miss the commuters. I had major reservations about being off loaded in Oceanside and being bused the rest of the way. It worked like a charm. The buses were waiting and ready to go and we were out of the station within ten minutes. Traffic to San Diego wasn't all that bad and the trip took about the same amount of time as the train would have. This morning the Amtrak ticket agent was more than accommodating and was able to put me on an earlier train hassle free. My attitude toward Amtrak has mellowed considerably.

[+ MostlyLurking]

Amtrak travel outside of the corridors can be wonderful if you approach it with an adventurous attitude. Don't make plans assuming a timely arrival. Stash some snacks. Bring something to read.

 

That said, overnight without getting a sleeper requires an even higher level of acceptance. It's better than overnight in economy on a plane, but few of us want to sleep in a chair.

[+ Gar1eth]

 

That said, overnight without getting a sleeper requires an even higher level of acceptance. It's better than overnight in economy on a plane, but few of us want to sleep in a chair.

 

I did as an 18 year old. We were going to a high school convention in Michigan. We rode from Ft. Worth to Lansing-or was it East Lansing. Of course I didn't, as far as I know, have sleep apnea back then. And it was fun being with my best friend and a few other friends on an adventure.

 

Gman

[gregkidman]

I just used the Amtrak from DC to New York last Friday. It was delayed by 2 hours but the trip was pleasant enough.

On the return trip, the train was on time. I still hold Amtrak in high regard.

[Guest]

So that would be the same argument for/against funding airports-after all not everyone flies. But don't governments whether national/state/local fund provide a major source of funding for airports?

 

Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought that most of the government funding for airports came from fees and taxes that passengers and airlines paid. Am I wrong about this?

[bobchitown]

Just did NYC-BOS. Age old problem with government employees none of whom gave a rats ass. One kept screaming at the other workers that the lane ropes weren't out. She sort of shoved them out in no rational position and walked away leaving the same clump of pax to deal with boarding themselves.