WASHINGTON -- According to the New York Times, Amtrak, the
money-losing national railroad, should be broken up, with the
government taking ownership of the tracks and competing companies
taking over some or all of the most popular train routes, a plan to
be unveiled today says.
Competition would be encouraged,
long-haul lines could be put out to bid, and Amtrak itself would
have to become more accountable under proposals by the Amtrak Reform
Council, which was created by Congress to come up with a
restructuring plan if Amtrak failed to become
self-sufficient.
The council, made up of 11 political
appointees representing labor and railroad interests, determined in
November that Amtrak, a for-profit government corporation that lost
$340 million last year, had no chance of weaning itself from
operating subsidies by the Dec. 2, 2002, deadline set by
Congress.
The council has until Feb. 7 to prepare a plan for
rebuilding Amtrak. Congress, which is divided over the value of rail
subsidies, will make final decisions about Amtrak's fate.
But
with the restructuring proposals still being developed, a dispute
has already broken out in Washington over Amtrak and the council
itself. Railroad unions have accused the council of being
anti-Amtrak and have demanded that it be shut down. After the
November finding, the council's federal budget was cut in half, and
it will probably run out of money and have to close in the
spring.
Several senators have sharply criticized the timing
of the council's report, coming so soon after the Sept. 11 attacks
exposed the vulnerability of the nation's transportation system.
Amtrak initially reported a sharp upsurge in ridership after the
attacks, but when the final figures came out, ridership was shown to
have declined 6 percent in September, and about 1 percent in October
and November.
Regardless, the senators, in particular Joseph
R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, argued that even discussing
Amtrak's demise could hurt the railroad's standing with its
creditors and the public. The senators passed a bill that prohibits
Amtrak from drawing up a plan for its own liquidation, as called for
by Amtrak's last five-year reauthorization in 1997.
But the
council insists that it is not trying to shut down Amtrak or even
end all subsidies, acknowledging that some government support for
mass transit is necessary.
"This committee is pro-rail," said
Mayor John O. Norquist of Milwaukee, who is a council member. "What
we want to do is set up a system where what the customers want is
what the railroad delivers."
As the Feb. 7 deadline
approaches, the debate over what a national passenger railroad
system should look like is expected to intensify.
"It isn't a
matter of reforming Amtrak, it's a matter of replacing Amtrak," said
Joseph Vranich, a former member of the council who was manager of
Amtrak's news bureau for most of the 1970's. "The major flaw in
setting up Amtrak was to meet the political requirement of making it
a national system."
In effect, said Mr. Vranich, there are
two Amtraks. One comprises busy routes, like the Northeast corridor
from Boston to Washington, that need little or no government
subsidies. And then there are long distance trains that run through
less populated areas, losing money with every
passenger.
Amtrak began operating in 1971 after the
government took over passenger service from bankrupt railroads.
Formally the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Amtrak now
serves more than 500 communities in 45 states and employs about
21,000 union workers.
Amtrak has never run in the black. By
1997, it had gone through $22 billion in government money. As
Congress reauthorized funding that year, it set up the Amtrak Reform
Council to monitor the railroad's finances, and Amtrak made a
commitment to become self-sufficient before its reauthorization
expired in December.
After the council determined in November
that Amtrak would not meet that deadline, it released nine
recommendations for restructuring the railroad. At a meeting today,
it will narrow those proposals to three, all of them based on the
business model of spinning off ownership of the tracks, stations and
bridges in the Northeast corridor to take possession away from
Amtrak and giving it to the government, leaving Amtrak to run
trains, not maintain tracks.
The three proposals
are:
--Creating national or regional
monopolies.
--Having Amtrak continue to operate Northeast
Corridor trains, but opening up competition for long-haul
trains.
--After a two- to five-year transition, opening all
intercity rail markets to competition, with Amtrak eventually being
completely privatized.
"Congress can accept or throw away our
recommendations," said Gilbert E. Carmichael, chairman of the
council. "But this is the time to decide if we want to continue with
the old Amtrak and all its old problems or have a new Amtrak and a
new national rail policy."