Amtrak: Do We Need It?

So recently I was pondering the idea of taking a vacation somewhere. ‘Cause, you know, my life is so burdensome and overwhelming. Anyhow, I was looking at the possibility of visiting my mum in Kentucky. I could have flown, which I have done twice before when going there, or perhaps take the bus. Greyhound has new buses with wi-fi, power outlets and better seats. I thought driving across country while, saying, playing World of Warcraft would be fun.

Then I looked at the train. Yes, we still have passenger rail service in this country, though not so you’d notice. Now, I’d taken the train once before when going from Olympia, WA, to Oklahoma. There wasn’t any rail service in OK at the time, so I had to get off in Emporia, KS, and drive across from there. It was a pleasant enough trip, and I had a good time with it. So taking the train to Kentucky might’ve been quite lovely.

Then I actually looked at how much it would cost. And how slow it was.

It was very slightly cheaper than air travel, which would have gotten me to Louisville in a few hours. It was more expensive and slower than the bus, which would have gotten me there quite a bit sooner. Also, if I’d taken the train, I would have been on the bus twice anyhow, since there’s no passenger service in Louisville or Phoenix. Thus I would have had to take the bus from Phoenix to Flagstaff and then from Indianapolis to Louisville.

Now there are advantages to taking the train, I suppose. There is a certain romance involved and stuff. Plus I have to admit that being able to get up and walk around would be fun, and the dining car is nice, if very, very expensive. But on the other hand, it’s very slow and if you want a room, you’ll pay through the nose for it. I was looking at spending $1,000 for a round trip ticket with a room, and that’s just insane.

There’s been discussion lately, as there often is when the GOP is looking for something to cut, about cutting subsidies for Amtrak. Mind you, they only get about $2.6 billion a year, and while that’s a large amount to most of us, that’s not that big of a deal in a multi-trillion dollar budget. But for some reason it’s a popular thing for them to beat up on.

Anyhow, so given that Amtrak is more expensive and slower than the bus, and only very slightly cheaper and massively slower than the airlines, this begs the question: do we really need it? Do we need to continue to spend the money we spend to keep it going?

I say we do. It really isn’t that much money as a percentage of the budget, and it provides a much-needed mass transit option for people who can’t or won’t fly. It also serves areas that aren’t necessarily served by airplanes, and while many of those areas are also served by Greyhound, the simple fact is that not everyone can go Greyhound. If you’re disabled, you might need something larger than just a seat.

But not only do we need the existing Amtrak service, we also need to expand the hell out of it. There’s no reason at all that there shouldn’t be high-speed rail between the major east coast cities, as well as between Los Angeles and San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco and Los Angeles and Las Vegas. There should ideally be a high-speed line between Chicago and New York as well as one from Phoenix to LA, Tucson and Vegas. And by “high speed,” I mean 150+ mph. Something that’s genuinely faster than driving or riding the bus and that’s cheaper than flying.

I know this isn’t likely to happen, but if we aren’t willing to expand to what we need, we should at least keep what we have. It’s just good sense on many levels. That said, I really wish it were a more practical service.

Advertisement