Here is a Special Employee Advisory from Amtrak’s president.

special employee advisory

January 28, 2011

Message from Joe Boardman

Dear Co-workers,

During his State of the Union address this week, President Obama made specific reference to the critical role high-speed rail has in our country’s infrastructure and future.

Yesterday there was a congressional field hearing in New York City at Grand Central Station held by the new Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. John Mica. The subject of the hearing was about building “real” or “true” high-speed rail.

Al Engel, our new vice president for High-Speed Rail, and I joined a roundtable discussion of the issues after the official part of the hearing ended — we were not invited to testify before the committee. The addition of a discussion format in connection to a committee hearing was new for me. I guess it was Chairman Mica’s way of trying to get the members of the committee and others engaged in a discussion about high-speed rail.

While it’s not my intent to represent Chairman Mica’s position, his basic argument — as I understand it — comprises three parts: 1. While he appreciates the efforts that have been made to bring high-speed rail to the Northeast, those efforts do not measure up to a world-class standard based on what is available in Europe, Japan and China. 2. The assets of the Northeast Corridor should be privatized with perhaps multiple operators or franchised with the intent of introducing competition as the way to bring this level of service. 3. The distribution of federal high-speed rail funding is too widely dispersed and insufficient to accomplish the intended purpose of successfully constructing a world-class system, and further the only region of the United States that has the density to support that success is the Northeast.

You may have seen some of the stories in the media about the hearing, and we’ll be seeing more as the national debate about the future of passenger rail continues. I want to share with you our position.

In the context of these points of view — and I leave room for understanding them better as they develop — I believe:  1. Amtrak has proven to be a good steward of the Northeast Corridor since we were given that responsibility in 1976 for 363 miles of the 457 miles between Boston and Washington, D.C. Since 1976, we have electrified the entire route, we have nearly doubled the number of passenger trains per day, north-end speeds have gone up from a maximum of 90 mph to 150 mph, south-end speeds are up from 110 mph to 135 mph, travel time is down, ridership is up and continues to grow, Amtrak’s air/rail market share is up and rising, and the number of grade crossings are down nearly 80 percent. Given our challenges, we have made significant strides given the federal investment levels over the years. It is my position that Amtrak should continue as the primary steward of Northeast Corridor assets, in collaboration with states and commuter railroads, and in a collegial way with the Federal Railroad Administration.

2. In listening to other points of view, I think the core of their debate about high-speed rail is ultimately about who owns the property and/or operates it — a public entity like Amtrak or private sector entity. I think that’s at the heart of the debate. Its major focus is not “real high-speed rail,” it’s “real estate.” Amtrak was created by Congress precisely because the privately owned railroads could no longer sustain the vital public service of intercity passenger rail. No other company is prepared to take over the Northeast Corridor. No other entity is equipped to cover the long-term capital and operating costs of the NEC.

3. Places other than the Northeast need trip-time competitive rail service. The demand for it is so great that many states received funding for worthy investments to help meet their regional transportation needs. But more funding is needed to rebuild our passenger rail network, and to improve the ability for the freights to accommodate that growth. It is vitally important for passenger rail and high-speed rail systems to provide the connectivity that is needed to make passenger rail viable in the United States. It is not only about having rail as an option for millions of Americans, there are other reasons of national import — reducing our dependence on foreign oil, sound use of our energy and natural resources, economic recovery and stimulation, and congestion relief are among the others — for advancing passenger rail as a matter of strategic national priority.  Putting Amtrak on a list for zero federal funding is both inconsistent with that need, and ill-advised in the face of the issues we face domestically and globally.

As I told you last week, we are working hard to educate new members of Congress about the importance of Amtrak to our nation, and to our nation’s future. More and more of the public is demonstrating their knowledge of the importance of rail with our increasing ridership.

We always face uncertainty, and we will hear about cuts all around us; there are just some things we cannot control. But we can keep our faith that the right decisions will be made, and we can work hard for our customers.

Thank you for your support and for what you do every day.

Sincerely,

Joe Boardman

President and CEO