Controversies:

Senator Proposes No-ride List Following bin Laden Revelation

Concerned over al Qaeda’s terrorist plans involving trains, a Democratic U.S. senator proposed in 2011 that the government create a “no ride” list for Amtrak, similar to what airlines use to prevent suspected individuals from flying on commercial jets. Senator Charles Schumer of New York suggested the idea after it was learned al Qaeda was considering an attack on American trains.

Amtrak officials said they were open to using a no-ride list to screen passengers. But, they added, the Transportation Security Administration would have to be involved, and the process would have to be “implemented in a way that respects civil rights and allows for the rapid flow of persons and trains, necessary for effective mass transit.”

Proposal For A 'No Ride List' For Train Travel Ignites Controversy (by Andrea McCarren, WUSA9.com)

Amtrak Backs Schumer Proposal For “No Ride List” (by Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com)

Amtrak IG Fired

Amtrak was roundly criticized by congressional Republicans in 2010 for firing its longtime inspector general.

Representative Darrell Issa (R-California) and Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) launched an investigation of Fred Weiderhold’s termination. Weiderhold was an Amtrak employee for 35 years, including 21 as its first inspector general.

What made the firing so disturbing in the eyes of Republicans was Weiderhold had been investigating excess payments by the agency’s law department for outside legal services. The IG also was looking into Amtrak’s decision to sell off railcars and then lease them back.

The following year news surfaced that Weiderhold may have violated the law himself, by lobbying Congress to adopt $450 million in spending for “capital security grants.” Federal statutes forbid inspectors general from lobbying lawmakers on legislation.

Amtrak Accused of Illegally Dismissing Its Inspector General (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)

Credibility Derailed: The Controversy over Amtrak Firing Inspector General Fred Weiderhold (by Kevin Latchford, Fairfax Libertarian Examiner)

Going Off The Rails With Amtrak (by John Hayward, Human Events)

Amtrak Top Cop Paid Hush Money? (Pennfedbmwe.org)

Former Amtrak Inspector General Accused of Inappropriate Lobbying (by Fawn Johnson, Government Executive)

Amtrak Board Stirs Trouble

Among the many problems that have plagued Amtrak, its board of presidential appointees has proved to be a source of plenty of bad publicity. Dominated by President George W. Bush’s selections, the board led an unsuccessful effort several years ago to force Amtrak to privatize its northeast train service. At the height of the push, the board fired Amtrak’s president and CEO, David Gunn, who had resisted the administration’s attempts to sell off the best revenue-generating line Amtrak owned.

Amtrak supporters in Congress were outraged by the dismissal. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-New York) called Gunn’s dismissal, “a crushing blow to Amtrak’s hopes for success and reform” and praised Gunn as “a brilliant manager who stood up for Amtrak.” He also said the decision to fire Gunn was a sign the Bush administration wanted to “decapitate Amtrak and end Amtrak as we know it.”

Amtrak’s then-Chairman David Laney praised Gunn’s tenure, but said that the railroad needed immediate changes and that Gunn resisted those changes. Shortly before the firing, the Government Accountability Office issued a report that said Amtrak needed fundamental improvement in many areas, including cost control, goods and services purchasing, and overall accountability.

In the wake of Gunn’s removal, some experts and members of Congress began to scrutinize the board, claiming it had been operating illegally. More than once, the board lacked a quorum, with only four of its seven seats filled. Also, according to Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio), chairman of the railroad subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, some directors had served without proper appointment as stated under a 1997 law meant to reform the railroad.

In addition, an Amtrak shareholder claimed the board was making changes in Amtrak’s structure without consultation with the holders of common stock.

Finally, those appointed to the board had come under attack as cronies of President Bush. Laney, a Texas attorney, raised more than $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney campaign before receiving his appointment, while Floyd Hall, former CEO of Kmart and the Museum Co., was responsible for $360,000 in “soft money” contributions to Bush-Cheney since 2000. Donna McLean, a former Department of Transportation official who started her own Washington D.C. consulting business, gave $2,000 directly to President Bush in 2004.

Amtrak's Own Board Sows Alarm About System's Future (by Matthew L. Wald, New York Times)

Cronyism Strikes Again (by Edward Wytkind, Baltimore Sun)

Amtrak firing draws critics (by Jennifer A. Dlouhy, Albany Times-Union)

Amtrak Fires President Days After Bad Report: Tenure Included Clashes With Bush Administration (by Keith L. Alexander, Washington Post)

House Explores Actions of Amtrak Board (by Matthew L. Wald, New York Times)

SourceWatch: Donna R. McLean

Amtrak’s Acela

In 1996, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation agreed to build high-speed locomotives and passenger cars as part of the Northeast High Speed Rail Improvement Project. Since that time, Amtrak has experienced multiple challenges related to this program and performance of the trains. Railroad officials became so frustrated with the trains’ manufacturers, Bombardier and Alstom, that they stopped paying the companies. Bombardier and Alstom sued Amtrak in 2001 for withholding payments. Amtrak countersued, and each party sought $200 million in damages. In March 2004, Amtrak and the two companies reached a negotiated settlement.

But troubles continued for Amtrak as it was forced to remove all Acela trains from service in April 2005 until faulty brakes were replaced. The brake problem produced more acrimony between Amtrak and Bombardier over whether the warranty on the parts would cover the costs of replacing them. Amtrak was losing money with the Acela trains, its best money-making operation, out of service, and didn’t want to absorb the cost of fixing the brakes, especially since future maintenance work (as of October 2006) would be Amtrak’s to handle, under the 2004 legal settlement.

Acela is back on the map for 2012, as Amtrak has included in its budget a request for funds to purchase 40 Acela Express coach cars to add capacity to the high-speed rail line from Washington to Boston. Target date for the cars to become operational is 2014.

Acela's Continued Problems Underscore the Importance of Meeting Broader Challenges (GAO Report) (pdf)

2 Equipment Makers Settle Dispute With Amtrak (by Don Phillips, New York Times)

Amtrak Mired in New York High-Speed Plan Debacle

Another effort to bring about high-speed rail also caused Amtrak considerable grief. In the late 1990s, the federal railroad decided to team up with New York to bring faster train service between New York City and Albany. Millions were spent to revamp existing trains with high-powered turbine engines instead of purchasing new locomotives. The engines didn’t burn diesel gasoline like ordinary locomotives but jet fuel—one of the many things that created problems for the project. After cost overruns and delays kept the trains from going into service, New York officials and Amtrak began pointing fingers at each other for the mess.

A Fast Train, Running Late (by Michael Luo, New York Times)

Pricey Food Costs Amtrak

An investigation by Amtrak’s inspector general in 2005 found that the railroad was spending $2 for every $1 it made from selling food to passengers. Expenses for labor and food were costing about $83 million more than the food service brought in. Even worse, when the costs of maintaining dining cars on long-distance trains and the cafe cars used on short-haul routes were factored in, the losses came to about $130 million.

Amtrak’s biggest problem was its labor cost, which is about three and a half times the average for restaurants. Amtrak’s work force is unionized and receives health and other benefits, which most restaurants employees don’t. Also, the study found Amtrak spends about two and a half times as much as restaurants to supply its trains, due to its need to store food and then move it on and off trains.

In 1999, in an effort to save money, Amtrak laid off its commissary workers and hired a private contractor to provide its food and put it on trains. That contract, auditors concluded, was flawed because it gives the contractor no incentive to reduce costs. The American Energy & Infrastructure Jobs Act, introduced by House Republicans in 2012, included the same type of privatization provision—with the same flaw.

Beyond Brakes, Amtrak's Woes Hit the Cafe Car (by Matthew L. Wald, New York Times)

Amtrak Food Would Be Privatized With House Proposal -- With Taxpayers Paying For Losses (Huffington Post)