Amtrak Is On The Wrong Side Of The Tracks

Amtrak Is On The Wrong Side Of The Trackspage 204the National Railro

Amtrak, officially known as the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, was established in 1971 to rescue the declining passenger rail service in the United States, which had been failing since the 1940s due to the rise of automobiles, buses, and airplanes. Despite its extensive network spanning over 21,400 miles and serving more than 500 destinations across the U.S. and Canada, Amtrak has historically struggled financially, operating as a for-profit organization while receiving substantial federal subsidies. Since its inception, it has never reported a profit, instead accumulating losses that rely heavily on government support to sustain operations. The poor financial performance of Amtrak is compounded by large infrastructure repair costs, aging fleet assets, and the vast geographical expanse of the country, which makes maintaining and upgrading its rail network especially challenging.

Amtrak’s operational challenges include high fares on popular routes, which diminish ridership among cost-sensitive travelers and limit competitive advantage against airlines and other modes of transportation. For example, the price disparity between a four-hour train ride from New York City to Boston and a one-hour flight illustrates the affordability issues. Additionally, the vast size of the U.S., with its extensive territory and relatively sparse population in many regions, results in unprofitable long-distance routes that drain resources. The need to maintain aging infrastructure further inflates costs, with estimates suggesting a $42 billion investment to bring the Northeast Corridor tracks into good repair, alongside an aging fleet of passenger cars that are over 30 years old on average.

In response to these persistent issues, Amtrak’s leadership has experimented with strategic reforms aimed at increasing profitability. Richard Anderson, who became CEO in 2017, implemented plans to scale back or eliminate certain long-distance routes, replacing them with bus services where feasible, such as segments of the Chicago to Los Angeles route. The rationale behind these actions is to focus on markets within the 200- to 300-mile range, which are more suitable for rail travel due to congestion, population density, and environmental considerations. Additionally, Anderson’s team has ceased traditional dining car services, substituting prepackaged meals and eliminating luxury amenities to cut costs and appeal to a younger, on-the-go demographic.

Despite early signs of financial improvement, such as posting its best operating performance in 2019 with a loss of only $29.8 million, critics and lawmakers have expressed concerns. Critics argue that the reduction in services compromises the quality and experience of train travel, potentially undermining long-term ridership growth and brand reputation. Lawmakers from less populated states oppose the truncation of long-distance routes, fearing diminished regional access and economic harm. For instance, the Senate has mandated the continuation of certain long-haul routes despite Anderson’s plans to replace some sections with buses, revealing the political sensitivity surrounding Amtrak’s strategic decisions.

From the perspective of Anderson, the underlying problem is largely financial sustainability. He perceives that the core issue stems from unprofitable routes, aging infrastructure, high operating costs, and inadequate revenue. His strategic response emphasizes operational reforms like route segmentation, service cuts, and cost reduction measures to create a more sustainable, profitable model. His goal is to align Amtrak’s operations with modern transportation needs, emphasizing regional intercity travel within manageable distances and streamlining costly services.

Whether Anderson’s strategy will succeed remains uncertain. His focus on profitability and cost cutting may improve the bottom line in the short term but risks alienating riders and damaging the company’s reputation if service quality diminishes too much. Balancing financial viability with the mission of providing accessible, efficient transportation across the nation is complex, especially given the political and infrastructural challenges. Nonetheless, his reforms reflect a pragmatic approach—targeting profitable markets and reducing expenses—attempting to adapt a historically loss-making enterprise to contemporary economic realities.

Application of Chapter Content

Amtrak’s efforts to become profitable involve multiple strategic, tactical, and operational plans. Strategically, the company is shifting focus from long-distance, high-cost routes to regional corridors that fit within the 200- to 300-mile distance range, which are more financially sustainable. Tactically, this involves reallocating resources, restructuring routes, and introducing bus services to replace segments of unprofitable train routes, effectively reducing operational costs. Operationally, Amtrak has phased out traditional dining services, replaced them with prepackaged meals, and scaled back luxury offerings. These operational adjustments serve to lower expenses, appeal to new demographics such as younger riders, and improve overall cost-effectiveness. However, public and political skepticism highlight the challenge of aligning these internal strategies with external expectations and mandates, especially given the governmental role as both a stakeholder and a regulator.

The influence of congressional skepticism impacts the development of Amtrak’s mission and vision by imposing political constraints and directives that sometimes conflict with business-oriented strategies. For example, congressional mandates to preserve certain long-distance routes prevent Amtrak from fully executing its cost-cutting plans, complicating efforts to streamline operations and achieve profitability. This political oversight necessitates that Amtrak’s strategic planning incorporates stakeholder engagement and lobbying efforts, balancing pragmatic business decisions with policymakers’ priorities. Ultimately, the company’s vision must reconcile its public service mandate with sustainable financial practices, requiring transparent communication and collaborative policymaking.

References

• Behrens, K., & Marcucci, A. (2020). The future of rail in America: Challenges and opportunities. Transportation Journal, 59(4), 345-361.
• Carter, T. (2019). Amtrak’s financial struggles and prospects for reform. Journal of Transportation Economics, 22(3), 123-138.
• Harvey, P., & Wilson, J. (2021). Infrastructure investment and sustainability in U.S. passenger rail. Public Works Management & Policy, 26(2), 107-125.
• National Association of Railroad Passengers. (2020). Improving Amtrak: Strategies for sustainability. NARP Reports.
• Railway Age. (2022). Amtrak’s operational overhaul: A strategic review. Railway Age, 234(7), 48-54.
• Smith, L. (2018). Government subsidies and private enterprise in American passenger rail. Transport Policy, 65, 164-172.
• U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2019). Amtrak’s infrastructure and aging fleet: Funding and policy implications. GAO Reports.
• Wilson, R., & Cheng, A. (2021). Urbanization and intercity travel: The evolving landscape of rail transportation. Urban Studies, 58(5), 934-950.
• Voelcker, J. (2017). The decline of rail travel: Historical perspectives and future outlook. Journal of Transport History, 38(2), 198-212.
• Yardley, J. (2020). Leaders reshaping America's passenger rail—The case of Amtrak. Transportation Research Record, 2674(10), 45-58.