Amtrak's long-distance routes are in jeopardy, threatening loss of service to many rural areas

Interstates with speed limits that keep inching higher, and airplanes that keep getting faster, have made long-distance trains a novelty for most Americans, who don't have the time or interest to travel long distances at a slower pace. As a result, Amtrak, the federally sponsored corporation that has received more than $40 billion in taxpayer money over than 40 years, is struggling to stay afloat, with its long-distance routes losing a combined $600 million in 2012. That's a fact that has not gone unnoticed by House Republicans, who have repeatedly tried to stop giving the company subsidies, "which would basically pull the plug on the long-distance trains," Curtis Tate reports for McClatchy Newspapers. (Wikipedia photo)

But there's more at stake than long-distance routes. Stopping federal money could put an end to daily stops in rural towns that rely heavily on trains, Tate writes. "Passenger trains have been stopping in Hutchinson, Kan., since the early 1870s. But the agricultural center of 42,000 is in danger of losing the one that still stops there every day." One route at question is the Southwest Chief, "which clicks off 2,265 miles between Chicago and Los Angeles. With the exception of Kansas City, Mo., Topeka, Kan., and Albuquerque, N.M., the backdrop is mostly prairie, mountains and desert. But the train also serves dozens of small towns, including several in western Kansas."

To view all routes, number of riders, and costs and earnings of each route, click here or here. Travels and Trains and Other Things map (click it for larger version) shows long-distance routes; the most heavily subsidized are the Cardinal, which runs through Cincinnati, and the Sunset Limited, which runs through Houston)

"The train travels a historic route across western Kansas that needs millions of dollars in repairs," Tate writes. "BNSF Railway, one of North America’s largest freight rail companies, owns the line but uses it sparingly. If Kansas, Colorado and New Mexico can’t come up with roughly $100 million in the next few years, the train will have to find another track." Other state are also facing big costs to keep the lines running through their states.

Many towns have already lost Amtrak service, and many more are in danger or losing it, because states are being asked to take on costs, Tate writes. Earlier this month, "Indiana became the last of 18 states to agree to pick up most of the cost to operate trains on routes of 750 miles or fewer, as required by a law Congress passed in 2008. The states consider those routes essential transportation service, from heavily Democratic California to Republican-dominated North Carolina. But states are increasingly taking on infrastructure costs they once counted on Washington to cover, whether it’s funding for highway construction or port improvements. They might not have much more room in their budgets." (Read more)