To get a clear picture, let me overstate the situation. The Democrats want the government to do everything, including building HSR. The Republicans don't want the government to do anything (except defense). They want the private sector to do everything for profits. Oversimplified but useful to think about.
Republican Rep. Mica wants to privatize Amtrak on the Northeast Corridor, because that's the only route that isn't operationally subsidized (we are told), therefore private investors might be interested. The rest of Amtrak's inter-city passenger service continues to be a financial sink-hole.
You understand that the Democrats don't mind public investment. They just don't think that the profit-motive is the most parsimonious or effective way to manage large public services like our utilities and our transportation.
Another point. All US inter-city passenger rail was once privatized. (Now almost none are,) The major train operators, those that are still in business hauling freight, also used to provide passenger service, more as a service than as a revenue producer. (More like a loss leader.) They were glad to get rid of that financial burden, turning it over to Congress which created Amtrak, which it now has to subsidize annually for over a billion dollars.
The HSR promoters will argue that HSR is unlike any other passenger rail and will be a big cash cow. That's nonsense. HSR in this country will be like all other passenger rail service, only faster, more expensive, and cost more to ride.
That formula guarantees the need for subsidies, even with the most expensive train tickets in the schedule. In other words, it will be the same as in every other country. China, our HSR role model, has had to cut fares, slow down the trains and strip them of fancy fittings inside. And that's one of the most autocratic countries in the world.
The bottom line in this article is that the Democrats want government funding for Amtrak and HSR and the Republicans don't.
Let's state the fundamental HSR issues yet once more.
1. It costs too much.
2. It won't do what is promised; that is, carry all those passengers, 39 million annually at last count.
3. If build, it will do irreparable harm wherever the route finally goes.
4. It's not really about trains at all.
5. It's really about the distribution of government political pork, geared toward the 2012 election cycle.
6. If HSR is such a great idea, why hasn't Amtrak built one, since Acela doesn't really count?
7. Who decided that building expensive fast trains for rich people, and with our tax dollars, was such a great idea?
7. Who decided that building expensive fast trains for rich people, and with our tax dollars, was such a great idea?
===================================
House GOP proposal would privatize high-speed rail along Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor
By Ashley Halsey III, Published: May 26
House Republicans want to dismantle Amtrak, giving private investors the task of building and operating high-speed rail service between Washington and Boston.
They believe that an infusion of private capital would enable the system to be built in 10 years, a third of the time that Amtrak projects for completion of the $117 billion project, and that service would improve if operations were put in the hands of a for-profit company.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/commuting/amtrak-faces-congestion-and-criticism-as-it-celebrates-40-years-of-service/2011/04/28/AFOeNMqG_story.html
At a hearing Thursday, House Transportation Committee Chairman<http://mica.house.gov/> John L. Mica (R-Fla.) condemned Amtrak as having “one of the most dismal records on earth for any rail service, particularly in the Northeast Corridor.”
His plan to privatize the operations in the densely populated region from Washington to Boston was pounced on by Democrats and unions who represent Amtrak employees.
“The railroads didn’t want to run a railroad,” said Del. <http://www.norton.house.gov/>Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), pointing to the demise of private passenger rail service more than 40 years ago. “They went bankrupt on passenger service. They begged the government to take it.”
The Republican proposal would strip Amtrak of the most heavily used portion of its system, with almost 250,000 weekday passengers, and the only rail real estate it owns. It holds title to all but 93 of the 456 miles of track between Union Station and Boston. Elsewhere, its trains travel on track owned by freight rail lines.
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=Page&pagename=am%2FLayout&cid=1246041980246
Mica believes that private investors will step forward to build and operate high-speed rail in the Northeast Corridor, significantly reducing the annual subsidy required to pay Amtrak to run the rest of the country’s passenger rail service.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dollars-from-floridas-high-speed-rail-project-up-for-grabs/2011/03/11/ABVcCXR_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/feds_redistribute_2_billion_for_rail_projects/2011/05/09/AFXU6YcG_story.html
“Amtrak receives, $1.5 billion in their annual subsidy,” he said. “If you look at their figures, about $500 million goes to operations. So the other billion is pretty much being poured into the Northeast Corridor because they don’t own any other track.”
<http://www.corsair-capital.com/team_partners.aspx?member=D.T.%20Ignacio%20Jayanti>
Ignacio Jayanti, president of the private equity firm <http://www.corsair-capital.com/about.aspx>Corsair Capital, told the committee that it would be possible to raise $50 billion to $60 billion from investors over the 10-year period he said it would take to build high-speed rail in the corridor.
“There are significant private-sector dollars that are available,” Jayanti said.
Mica cited as a success story the privatization of two British rail lines by <http://www.virgintrains.co.uk/>Virgin Trains, saying ridership doubled on lines from London to Manchester, England, and Glasgow, Scotland, and that the service turned a profit while eliminating government subsidies and sustaining rail employees’ wages.
Legislation Mica says he plans to introduce within two weeks will face a partisan split, as was evident at the hearing, where Sen. <http://lautenberg.senate.gov/>Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) showed up to give a hint of what the proposal might face in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
“Privatizing the Northeast Corridor is not a smart or viable prospect,” said Lautenberg, who sits on the Senate Transportation Committee.
Rep. <http://corrinebrown.house.gov/>Corrine Brown (D-Fla.) was among those who argued that public transportation systems, whether highways, air travel or railways, all required federal financial support.
“There is no form of transportation that supports itself,” Brown said. “I don’t support cherry-picking the best routes in our system and turning them over to the private sector.”
Amtrak’s defenders said the system has been underfunded since its founding 40 years ago. [What does that mean?]
“It’s a classic starve-the-beast philosophy,” said Edward Wytkind, who heads the transportation division of the AFL-CIO. “You chronically underfund the company and then you expect it to do great things.”
While Wytkind said he supported private investment in rail service, he said “now is the time to boost investment in Amtrak.”
© The Washington Post Company
