Report: Amtrak loss comes to $32 per passenger
Published: October 27, 2009
WASHINGTON -- U.S. taxpayers spent about $32 subsidizing the cost of the typical Amtrak passenger in 2008, about four times the rail operator's estimate, according to a private study.
Amtrak operates a nationwide rail network, serving more than 500 destinations in 46 states. Forty-one of Amtrak's 44 routes lost money in 2008, said the study by Subsidyscope, an arm of the Pew Charitable Trusts.
Stephen Van Beek, president of the Eno Transportation Foundation, a think tank, said the analysis could help guide decisions on how to spend $8 billion set aside for high-speed and intercity rail in a $787 billion economic stimulus bill. Rail planners may decide that spending the funds on high-speed rail makes more sense than slower intercity rail, which the Amtrak numbers show need higher subsidies.
Subsidyscope says its review counted certain capital expenses that Amtrak doesn't consider when calculating the financial performance of its routes, namely wear and tear on equipment, or depreciation.
Leading the list was the train traveling between San Antonio and Los Angeles -- the Sunset Limited -- which lost $462 per passenger. Taxpayers subsidize the losses to keep the passenger train service running.
The Northeast corridor has the highest passenger volume of any Amtrak route, greatly enhancing efficiency. The corridor's high-speed Acela Express made a profit of about $41 per passenger. The more heavily utilized Northeast Regional lost almost $5 per passenger.
Passenger rail systems throughout the world lose money and require government subsidies to cover operating expenses.
Marcus Peacock, project director for Subsidyscope, said his group's analysis should lead to more scrutiny for the Amtrak routes that are losing the most money.
Van Beek cautioned against holding passenger rail service to a higher standard than other forms of transportation.
"Let's not hold rail up and say it needs to make money when highways don't make money, transit doesn't make money and a lot of small airports don't make money and they all get subsidies," Van Beek said.
The Government Accountability Office had previously said the omission of depreciation substantially understates the capital expenses associated with Amtrak's routes.
Amtrak officials said they're working with the Transportation Department to come up with a fair way to determine capital expenses but the method used in the report unfairly burden routes whose equipment was sold and then leased back.
-- The Associated Press
Reader Reactions
Squire’s point is exactly correct. Amtrak is a drop in the bucket compared to the budgets for roads. Plus trains have the potential to get more people off the road and thereby save money with less of an environmental impact than anything else.
Also, if you read the article carefully, it shows the “high speed” Acela actually made a profit. This is probably a partial result of Amtrak owning those rails, but it just goes to show what can be done. Owning their own tracks there also allows for trains to be more consistently on time, which helps to attract more riders and bring down needed subsidies.
Instead of using this report as a way to bash the whole passenger rail industry it should be used for its true intent, which is to take a good look at the less efficient routes and determine whether they are truly needed. Focus energies where they are truly needed and Amtrak will be the least subsidized mode of transportation before long.
In the last 30 years the USA has spent about $30 billion on Amtrak. In the same period we have spent $1.9 trillion on roads. Very few roads turn a profit (perhaps the NJ Turnpike) and when they do people get mad about having to pay for it. So why should Amtrak be held to this arbitrary profit standard when no other gov’t services are? How much profit did the police turn this year, or the fire department? Why would we want any government service bringing a profit?
Roadways… the perfect example of government in action. Never made the first dime of profit. Shut them all down!
And to dkb123 - it may surprise you to know we already have a “public option” - it’s called “indigent care”. It’s the worst possible kind of public option and one of the main reasons we need healthcare reform.
Anyone who is in favor of government-run health care should pay attention to this article. A public option health care program will serve a much larger audience than this failed government-run rail system. The losses will be exponetially larger and the people served will be sadly disappointed. It’s time to wake up America. Call your elected officials and demand they vote no to Obama-care.
Amtrak….the perfect example of government in action. Never made the first dime of profit. Shut it down!
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.


Advertisement