RPA Blasts Faulty Amtrak Accounting in Report

[IndyLions]

While the idea of a government-owned track system with open access is very interesting, the amount of money required to purchase all of the privately owned tracks in the U.S. would be staggering.

They’re the government - they can print more...

You know it doesn’t quite work like that, right?

I was being facetious. However, the bottom line is that if something occurred that convinced the US government that owning all rail infrastructure was an issue of “national security” - it wouldn’t matter what it cost - it would get done somehow.

 

[MikefromCrete]

During World War I, the government did take over the railroads, but the lines were turned back to their owners right after the war. So the government didn't actually buy the railroads, it was more of a temporary seizure in the name of "national security."

 

[neroden]

Finally! This is the broadside which was needed. Amtrak's current accounting is flatly illegal, a clear and ongoing violation of the PRIAA 2008 legal requirement to provide avoidable cost -- a provision which is still active and in force. It's time for Congress and the Amtrak Board and Mr. Anderson to know that they are being lied to by Amtrak accountants.

I have been really busy and still haven't sent my letter off. It's pithier so I will probably still try to finish it and send it off.

 

[neroden]

Amtrak's accounting system has always been a source of irritation for passenger rail supporters. RPN's "white paper" certainly points up the problems with assigning fixed costs to various trains. I'm not sure how Amtrak can be forced to adjust its procedures to give a clearer picture of what actual operating costs are. Perhaps, congress could put stipulations in the next Amtrak legislation

Already done in 2008. Amtrak is required to report avoidable costs, has been explicitly required by law to report them since 2008, and has not been doing so.
The main question is who has standing to file suit and what form the lawsuit would take. But basically Amtrak can be forced to, and we don't even need a new law.

 

[cpotisch]

Amtrak's accounting system has always been a source of irritation for passenger rail supporters. RPN's "white paper" certainly points up the problems with assigning fixed costs to various trains. I'm not sure how Amtrak can be forced to adjust its procedures to give a clearer picture of what actual operating costs are. Perhaps, congress could put stipulations in the next Amtrak legislation

Already done in 2008. Amtrak is required to report avoidable costs, has been explicitly required by law to report them since 2008, and has not been doing so.
The main question is who has standing to file suit and what form the lawsuit would take. But basically Amtrak can be forced to, and we don't even need a new law.

As I understand it, AG Sessions and SecDOT are the ones that have standing to sue Amtrak for that kind of stuff.

 

[jis]

Amtrak's accounting system has always been a source of irritation for passenger rail supporters. RPN's "white paper" certainly points up the problems with assigning fixed costs to various trains. I'm not sure how Amtrak can be forced to adjust its procedures to give a clearer picture of what actual operating costs are. Perhaps, congress could put stipulations in the next Amtrak legislation

Already done in 2008. Amtrak is required to report avoidable costs, has been explicitly required by law to report them since 2008, and has not been doing so.
The main question is who has standing to file suit and what form the lawsuit would take. But basically Amtrak can be forced to, and we don't even need a new law.

As I understand it, AG Sessions and SecDOT are the ones that have standing to sue Amtrak for that kind of stuff.

I am not so sure about SecDOT. Only the AG is mentioned in the law. Besides in a suite filed against Amtrak SecDOT (being an ex-officio member of the Board of Directors) will probably have his/her rear end on the defensive line more likely than not, willingly or unwillingly, anyway, since half the problems at Amtrak really originate in the muddle headed FRA.

 

[cpotisch]

Amtrak's accounting system has always been a source of irritation for passenger rail supporters. RPN's "white paper" certainly points up the problems with assigning fixed costs to various trains. I'm not sure how Amtrak can be forced to adjust its procedures to give a clearer picture of what actual operating costs are. Perhaps, congress could put stipulations in the next Amtrak legislation

Already done in 2008. Amtrak is required to report avoidable costs, has been explicitly required by law to report them since 2008, and has not been doing so.
The main question is who has standing to file suit and what form the lawsuit would take. But basically Amtrak can be forced to, and we don't even need a new law.

As I understand it, AG Sessions and SecDOT are the ones that have standing to sue Amtrak for that kind of stuff.

I am not so sure about SecDOT. Only the AG is mentioned in the law. Besides in a suite filed against Amtrak SecDOT (being an ex-officio member of the Board of Directors) will probably have his/her rear end on the defensive line more likely than not, willingly or unwillingly, anyway, since half the problems at Amtrak really originate in the muddle headed FRA.

Thanks. Thought I had read here that both AG and SecDOT had the ability to do so, but I'm just going to chalk that up to my wonky memory.

 

[tricia]

The reason we don’t discuss changing anything with private railroads too much is because any attempt to acquire their property into public domain will almost certainly get thrown out by the SCOTUS due to it running afoul of the taking clause, unless of course extremely large pots of money can be found to compensate them adequately, which seems unlikely.

Might the purchase price be offset by credit for the staggeringly large subsidies the US gov't originally provided to railroads when they were first built, especially in the West?

 

[jis]

The reason we don’t discuss changing anything with private railroads too much is because any attempt to acquire their property into public domain will almost certainly get thrown out by the SCOTUS due to it running afoul of the taking clause, unless of course extremely large pots of money can be found to compensate them adequately, which seems unlikely.

Might the purchase price be offset by credit for the staggeringly large subsidies the US gov't originally provided to railroads when they were first built, especially in the West?

That would be real voodoo accounting. I am not sure the financial markets will think very highly of it. Also, the government and the nation has reaped huge harvests from those subsidies already and used it for myriads of things. How long can you keep milking the same 150 years old cow?

 

[west point]

Could it be that this RPA report has caused a knee jerk reaction from Amtrak ? Maybe the cancellations of non PTC routes ?

 

[jis]

Could it be that this RPA report has caused a knee jerk reaction from Amtrak ? Maybe the cancellations of non PTC routes ?

No. The two have nothing to do with each other. The PTC stuff started much before anything was published by RPA.