BUSINESS

Riding the Rails

Will Americans, with their vast country and automobile lust, ever take to trains the way Europeans have? The CEO of the nation's publicly funded rail service is taking on the challenge one track tie at a time.

By Daniel Stone | Newsweek Web Exclusive

Jul 20, 2008 | Updated: 8:56 p.m. ET Jul 18, 2008

« Return to Article

Discuss

Posted By: bfredline @ 07/31/2008 10:15:27 AM

Comment: Being a huge fan of the railroads ever since I was 4, I can't tell you how much this new interest in the rials has me excited. I knew that if the price of oil ever really jumped (which it did), folks would be lined-up at the stations in hordes. I am just sad that it took a ecnomic kick in the pants to get Americans looking at rail again. People ask why we don't ride the rails like the Europeans? Several reasons, actually. FIrst, gas has always been hig in Europe. When we lied in Germany in the 70's, gas was already over a dollar. They didn't subsidize their highways like we did. So the incentie to ride was always stronger than in the states. Many people forget that it was actually the US that pioneered high-speed trains. The Limiteds were carreening across the landscape at speeds over 100! (Not bad for a steam engine). But as many people have pointed-out, we pulled-up the tracks, forced our passenger trains to wait for heay freights to lumber by. While in Europe, they run on dedicated welded rails, nice and smooth. The other thing is, Europe is a lot smaller than the US. Germany is about the size of Washington & Oregon together, France is a touch bigger. So flying in the US is and was a lot faster and attractive. And then there is the political landscape. Most European countries were quasi-socialist, so the government could do more in the name of the common good. And they didn't hae powerful lobying groups like GM, Standard Oil and Firestone driving the construction of the highways and steering money away from public transport and into the coffers of local highway departments (not to mention every road construction comapny, cement company, bus company, ect. across the country). So, this sudden surge in oil prices may have a silver lining after all. Not just because people will ride less or because I just love trains, but because America will remember that she has a forgotten asset lying in the backuard. Just waiting to be reborn. Railroads built this country, they can help build her back up.
Posted By: Skallywag @ 07/24/2008 10:36:35 AM

Comment: First, this country needs mass transit in the major population areas. I'd give up my drive to work in a hearbeat if we even had a transit system that didn't take 3 hours to get me to work. History shows us that auto manufacturers loved the idea of killing public transportation so they could sell more cars. They lobbied hard for more federal highway money, less rail money. Our inter-city trian system is so limited that passenger trains use the same tracks as freight. In europe, much of the system is designed to be seperate where ever possible, Thus they have a better rail system. The Europeans also never took the attitude of "it's my car, I'll drive it everywhere." They usually walk (overall they are more physically fit than Americans). take the bus or train for getting around. Cars are a luxury in Europe; not so much for economic reasons (but Europeans would rather spend part of a years worth of car payments on a really nice vacation) as for space limitations. Our public transportation system needs to take a real close look at how the Europeans did it - not just the engineering, but the economics and the psycology of getting people to ride. We need to change our attitude towards cars. No more, I have it, I'll use it,. We should take the attitude of "I'll walk or take the train instead.." It's better for us individually and as a society.
Posted By: ranchkid82 @ 07/23/2008 2:53:05 PM

Comment: Train service was once the main travel mechanism, but the rails have been torn up. I know in my Dad's hometown in rural Montana there are at least 3 houses within a mile of each other along the old line. The tressel is gone. It's amazing that the so called experts took us away from this mode of travel, and now want it back. I would go for more trains, but it does have to be more accommodating. The train out of Denver to Chicago is always at least 3 hours late because it's coming from LA and crossing the Rockies, plus Union Pacific freight trains have priority on the lines, and make Amtrak wait. The 3 hours is no big deal, except when I've got business in Chicago and I have to miss it because I'm at least 3 hours late. I also have heard about the European method, where the trains are on rails above ground, so farmers have minimal impact when the lines are set up. That would be a win-win, since we all know the history of railroaders from the past, who flexed their might and forced land out from under rightful owners. Much like today's CEOs!
Posted By: Ry Pie @ 07/23/2008 12:03:23 PM

Comment: I havent seen train travel first hand much in America. I live in Ohio but Ive been living and traveling through Europe for 3 months. I dont want to sound redundent, but train travel in Europe is outstanding! Cheap, comfortable and accessible. For example, I just traveled 400 miles for 30 USD. I had a large spacious cabin, I could walk around, use the bathroom, smoke, and even SLEEP! I believe that if its possible in Europe then its possible in America!!! Remember those stimulus checks? Waste. Pull the troops out of the middle east, concentrate our budget partly on efficient trains which would stimulate more vacation travel from financially exhausted middle class families and then spending on discretionary goods such as travel and merchandise will relax worried buyers.
Posted By: Chekie @ 07/23/2008 12:02:38 PM

Comment: Instead announcing 'pie in the sky' goals of putting men on Mars or colonizing the moon, I think we should have a Kennedy-esque goal of building a new high-speed Trans-continental railroad. It's time to get the cars off the road with a cheaper, more environmentally friendly passenger service that can compete with airlines. But also as important, or more so, is getting more freight moving by rail instead if trucks. Imagine the amount of reductions in emissions, wear and tear on the roadways, and traffic fatalities if we could reduce the amount of over the road freight by a third or more.
Posted By: Ry Pie @ 07/23/2008 11:55:41 AM

Comment: Im from Ohio. Ive spent the last 3 months living and traveling thru Europe. Now I dont want to sound redundent, but train travel in Europe is outstanding! Trust me, Ive seen first hand how many people and families take advantage of the low cost train system. I traveled 400 miles for only 30 USD with a large spacious seat, the ability to get up and walk around, use the bathroom, smoke and even SLEEP!
Posted By: avic @ 07/23/2008 11:55:11 AM

Comment: Why purchase routes when the fed gov We have the rail right away already between all our major cities why not start building the new high speed trains. Why purchase routes when the fed gov already owns the ideal right of way, our current interstate highway system, with its wide medians and set asides. Instead of using this valuable resource for high speed trains, and every one knows it???s there including our politicians, we have been slowly paving it over in our maddening expansion of an already obsolete transportation network. Medians can be reworked and lanes can be removed because our highway system will become redundant if not empty in the era of 300 $/bbl gas. In fact most of our current transportation infrastructure will become redundant including our prized airport network. As a nation we will have to return to rail as a primary transport system for not only freight but also people. Remember that cars and especially airplanes burn liquid carbon fuels and there is no current or foreseeable effective replacement for them. With no effective replacement for carbon based fuels (including natural gas) and the remaining quantity waning we need to re-examine going back to the previous transportation system before the age of the automobile. Batteries will only have a very limited range for cars and hydrogen requires huge amounts of energy to produce and both are not practical for airplanes. Folks its time to wake up and smell the coffee. If not for us then for our kids. Lets start a Manhattan style program to build a train network. Through out the research and studies and get to work. Or as they say here its time to shoot the engineers (and scientist and politicians etc) and get on with production.
Posted By: Laure Gale @ 07/23/2008 11:32:06 AM

Comment: I would love to see more rail travel. Recently when I went to the BEA I tried to travel by train. However the cost was much higher than by air. That is the only reason I did not travel by railroad. I hope they will get the costs down so we can all travel by rail and help our environment.
Gale Laure
Author
Posted By: evans0526 @ 07/23/2008 10:37:19 AM

Comment: We would like to use the rails as well. But in Texas with its vast expanse of open country, which would be conducive to passenger trains, there are few if any options in most areas. Major investments must be made in the rail system, and it would behoove the US to privatize the system and open it up to companies with proven experience in operating an efficient, effective system, i.e., European ones...
Posted By: Colorado Hoosier @ 07/23/2008 9:18:53 AM

Comment: My family would love to take rail more. However, it does not always go to where we want to go. For example, we want to go to a meeting in Chattanooga, TN from Denver, CO. Denver has good East-West service, but Chantanooga is not served at all (the home of the Chattanooga Choo-Choo and no rail service, shocking! We can either go through Chicago and wind up in Tennessee at 3:15 AM a day and a half after starting and then drive 320 miles to Chattanooga or we can take over three days and go through Chicago and Washington, DC, to Atlanta, GA. It would only be 120 mile trip to Chattanooga from Atlanta. The first would cost over $1,000 for 3 people and the second would cost about $1800. I would then need to find transportation from the train station to the Choo-Choo. I would love to travel by train, but it is hard. As a side note, try going from Denver to El Paso, TX, even though there is direct rail between the two cities, there is no easy route for passenger travel.
Posted By: myopinionhere @ 07/23/2008 9:17:09 AM

Comment: Had gas prices not risen like they have, no one would be complaining about our train system except to say that the government is giving them too much money. Their viable use is just now really going to be exploited, and that's really good. Not everyone likes to fly,and it will be very nice to see the train system get better and more like the European train systems. But I hope they start with their website...user-friendly it is not.
Posted By: scs247 @ 07/23/2008 9:06:18 AM

Comment: I agree w/ jetgraphics - go private! Note that the European success in rail is almost all contracted out to private companies - the largest of which is FirstGroup PLC. FirstGroup knows rail and bus service backwards and forwards. Why give $15 billion to a pubic funded disaster (never in the black since inception 30 yrs. ago) - contract it out to someone who's proven they know how to run it - and we'll start making serious pro
Posted By: scs247 @ 07/23/2008 9:05:15 AM

Comment: I agree w/ jetgraphics - go private! Note that the European success in rail is almost all contracted out to private companies - the largest of which is FirstGroup PLC. FirstGroup knows rail and bus service backwards and forwards. Why give $15 billion to a pubic funded disaster (never in the black since inception 30 yrs. ago) - contract it out to someone who's proven they know how to run it - and we'll start making progress!
Posted By: Papito58 @ 07/23/2008 8:58:47 AM

Comment: Having just heard on the news that the involvement in Iraq has already cost in excess of 600 Billion dollars, I???d suggest that the US should think of providing a heavily subsidized (free or almost free until the economy recovers) national public mass transportation system, inner city as well as suburban, a much more constructive use of taxpayer money.

Although such a plan would be several years in the making, I'd surmise that such a shocking idea would immediately cause the price of oil to drop, reduce our dependency on Mid East oil and stimulate the economy by freeing up disposable cash, cash that would otherwise be used for fuel purchases (this would be a long term benefit and not a one time government 'stimulus' handout, which 'sounds' good but has little real impact). The housing market may be stimulated as well, both by freeing up individual (gas money) cash and making suburban housing more attractive and affordable by reducing commuter expenses. The current huge trade deficit due to the increased cost of oil imports would certainly show a decline, the USD would rise, once again allowing the average American to enjoy quality vacations, plus the added bonus of cleaner air.

To encourage ridership and keep from regressing to prior habits, once the price of oil declines to a predetermined level, an artificially high fuel price can be maintained through taxes, which can then be used to subsidize Mass Transit, keeping fares low.

Lastly, a national mass transit system will ensure the viability of the American way of life, an assurance that should be at the top of the government???s list of priorities.
Posted By: lrh1942 @ 07/23/2008 8:33:26 AM

Comment: In the summer of 2006 my wife and I were traveling from Los Angeles to Little Rock Arkansas. We had made this trip on numerous occasions either driving or flying. Recalling very pleasant experiences from train trips in the 1950s, I recommended we travel by train, what a mistake. We were forced to stop on numerous occasions to allow freight trains to pass and on one occasion were stopped in the New Mexico desert for several hours because we were so far behind schedule, the crews allowed work hours had expired and we had to wait for a new crew to be driven from El Paso Texas. The rail stations had little to offer travelers except vending machines for food and drink and dirty toilet facilities. The meals served in the dining room onboard was good but overpriced as was the snackbar. It certainly was not representative of the trips I had taken in the '50s. I find it impossible to understand why Americas rail service has declined to the state it has.Travel by bus is quicker, much less expensive and offers stops where one can get a decent meal at a decent price. Shame on the CEO of AMTRAK, , he should be fired. This is a failure of leadership. Excuses are like, well you know what, everyone has one. No more miserable AMTRAK rides for me or mine.
Les Herring
Posted By: chrisusmc81 @ 07/23/2008 7:44:11 AM

Comment: The train in america couldnt be any more inefficient. Ticket prices are abhorrent and a car is still cheaper even with the gas prices. I have priced three buisiness trips in the last few months, hoping it would be cheaper on a train and not only was it 40% more expensive to ride the rails than my vehicle, my car would still arrive in town in almost half the time.
Posted By: jetgraphics @ 07/19/2008 10:18:45 PM

Comment: It's tragic that we only hear about "public funded mass transit". Why not private funded mass transit? If private mass transit was given a tax exemption instead of public funding, you can rest assured that every profitable corridor would be invested in - to the MAX. Tax exemption might also shake investment money from all those unnamed secret accounts.
- Posted By: KennyF @ 07/23/2008 3:33:03 PM
  
  Comment: I agree a mass transit system has to be expanded, but I don't see how we can avoid a big public investment. A tax exemption large enough to attract private companies would require so much revenue leaving the treasure (thru tax grants, rebates and the like) it would be the same as a tax increase to pay for a publicly developed system.
  
  I agree with lrh1942, you have to slant the system to make people keep riding the rails or, at the first temporary drop in energy cost will suck all the people out of the rail system. Conservative will b*tch about a subsidized ticket (paying $30 to go 400 miles destroys a $400 plane ticket) but I consider the alternative to be a national security issue, just the way the interstate highway system was pitched to the country in the 1950's.
  
  We need a rail system so badly, that it is worth the extra tax bite.