"Mainly because I was too tired to drive, and it was a very spontaneous -- actually impetuous -- move on my part," the retired nurse said.

The $60 round trip on Amtrak wasn't perfect because her coach lacked electricity on the way up. But Stoller, 59, had a nice weekend visiting her brother.

"I think the train is just underrated," she said on the way back through downstate Illinois, this time with power. "We depend on our cars too much."

Until a few weeks ago, it wasn't certain whether travelers like Stoller would continue to have the option of rail, or at least as many trains to choose from. Amtrak, which depends heavily on federal subsidies, was near bankruptcy and looking at the prospect of either liquidation or a severe restructuring.

Suddenly, it's a different story. Facing elections and bigger problems, Congress in coming months is expected to apply a $1 billion Band-Aid so that Amtrak can keep its trains running in 2003. For Illinois, that's generally good news.

What leaders in Washington, D.C., probably won't do is consider a larger issue: whether to set up a better financed, more efficient rail system, even after an unprecedented year of crises in the transportation industry.

For Illinois, which arguably has merely adequate train service, that's not very good news. What's more, the state's plans for speedier, more frequent trains probably won't advance without the guidance and funding of a comprehensive federal rail program.

"It's time, just like it was in 1969 and 1970, to come up with a new plan," says Rick Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High-Speed Rail Coalition, referring to the decline of the private passenger rail system that originally spawned Amtrak.

"There's a piece missing in the whole equation," he said. "You've got the operator, which is Amtrak. What you don't have is an organization that deals solely with developing the needed infrastructure and creating oversight."

The Illinois Department of Transportation contributes $10.3 million each year for trains that serve four rail "corridors" to Chicago; all of the short routes operate at a deficit for Amtrak.

On-time performance was particularly spotty last year on the Chicago-to-St. Louis corridor through Springfield, and in-state ridership inexplicably decreased from 2000 to 2001 after a few years of growth.

"Amtrak has had some trouble getting its trains out of the Chicago area," said Gary Williams, IDOT's recently retired bureau of railroads director.

Employee cutbacks caused by the system's financial problems "translates into a little bit longer time putting the trains together and getting them to depart the stations," he said.

Long-distance trains that pass through Illinois, such as the Texas Eagle that stops in Springfield, have an even worse on-time record. Amtrak says maintenance work along the routes is often to blame.

Former state lawmaker James Nowlan, a senior fellow with the University of Illinois Institute of Government and Public Affairs, gives Amtrak a mixed review. The Toulon resident travels about once a week to Chicago from Princeton to conduct business or research.

The inbound trip on the Illinois Zephyr from Quincy is "delightful," Nowlan said. "It's generally on time, and it's comfortable and you can get some things done, or you can visit with acquaintances."

But the California Zephyr he sometimes takes to get home is less enjoyable, Nowlan said. That train can sit in the Chicago rail yards for up to an hour so that money-starved Amtrak can attach long-distance freight loads.

"From the rider's perspective, Amtrak as an entity doesn't give a damn about the passengers," he said. "The passengers are not customers so much as commodities who sometimes get in the way."

Most would agree it's not easy to run the nation's only passenger railroad. The 31-year-old National Railroad Passenger Corp., which originally was envisioned as a self-sustaining entity, has had a particularly rough year in 2002.

Amtrak originally faced a year-end deadline to wean itself off federal subsidies, a provision that was part of a 1997 congressional reform plan. Amtrak didn't even come close, having lost a record $1.1 billion in 2001.

As a result, early this year, the Amtrak Reform Council called for the system to be dismantled and sold off. In February, the watchdog panel proposed a complex restructuring plan that would have included a government takeover of Amtrak's popular but expensive Northeastern Corridor and would have created the potential for private competition.

"(Amtrak) short-changed their whole system because they haven't been forthcoming about how much money they needed to run it," said Tom Till, executive director of the reform panel. "That has hurt the Midwest, and it has hurt the rest of the country outside of the Northeast."

Amtrak's outgoing president counter-attacked by threatening to discontinue long-distance trains as of Oct. 1 of this year unless Congress doubled the railroad's latest $520 million subsidy. Hundreds of Amtrak employees have been laid off, and damaged train stock languishes because there's no money for repairs.

Most lawmakers appear to be siding with the railroad and acknowledging that trains, like other forms of public transportation, will never break even. Congressional committees recently began considering Amtrak reauthorizations with only minor reforms attached.

"I think Congress has come to the realization that we have to have a good passenger transportation system in this country," said U.S. Rep. Ray LaHood, R-Peoria. "Amtrak is a good transportation system, and I believe Congress will support it with the dollars that are necessary."

A measure in the House proposes $1.9 billion for rail operations and infrastructure upgrades. In the Senate, a longer-shot authorization bill worth $24.5 billion proposes funding Amtrak for the next five years while earmarking money for track and tunnel upgrades and high-speed rail initiatives like the one Illinois is developing.

"I did not want passenger rail service to end in America, but I did want some reforms that might make it better serve the taxpayer," said U.S. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, R-Illinois, who conditionally supported the measure in the Senate Commerce Committee. "I do think it's necessary to have some public support for Amtrak, but we should not let it get out of hand. We need to do things like require Amtrak to competitively bid contracts. We need to constantly bird-dog Amtrak."

Meanwhile, a new Amtrak president, David Gunn, took the reins May 15.

The former New York transit director has impressed some skeptics with his frank comments about Amtrak's previous mistakes.

"I think there ought to be, however brief, a honeymoon period for Gunn to be able to get things lined up the right way," said James Coston, a Chicago attorney and rail buff who served on the Amtrak Reform Council. "The news is better than we thought it would have been six months ago.