Discovery Blog

Amtrak’s annual report on the ridership of its intercity passenger rail services that was ballyhooed on the front page of USA Today revealed more than maybe the paper realized. On November 29th USA Today reported, “Tighter airport security and higher gas prices appear to be boosting Amtrak ridership in the Northeast, the South, and the Midwest.”

The article notes, “The greatest growth rates occurred among the 23 short-distance routes where states contribute money to Amtrak and dictate routes.” It might also have indicated that where the states have money invested, they do their best to make sure the service is worthwhile, which the ridership increases demonstrate. In unconscious illustration of that theme, the story cites the percentage increases in ridership on eleven specific Amtrak train services, all but two of which are state-supported routes. In contrast to the significant percentage ridership increases cited for specific trains or services, the story’s mention of Amtrak’s overall ridership increase of only 1.1 percent seemed weak at best. This hardly justifies the “Amtrak ridership up in USA” headline for the story.

USA Today also notes the 1.3 percent drop in ridership on long-distance routes, which Amtrak attributes mostly to “less than acceptable on-time performance.” That is a decline of about 50,000 riders, to 3,731,256 for the year, all attributable to two long-distance trains.

The story mentions only one actual ridership number, the total of 2,668,174 riders carried by Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor Acela/Metroliner service between Washington, D.C. and Boston, MA. That number masks the fact that, overall, Northeast Corridor ridership fell by 1.6 percent in 2006. The additional 215,272 Acela/Metroliner riders were more than offset by the decline of 360,613 in Amtrak’s ridership on its “Regional” Northeast Corridor services (and a ridership decline of 9,500 “special train” passengers). The net ridership loss for the NEC in 2006 was 154,901 riders in what is acknowledged to be Amtrak’s premium market.

The story cites an airline analyst, who explains why this happened. One Robert Mann says airlines drove passengers from air to rail in short-haul markets “by reducing the number of seats available for shorter trips and raising the ‘walk-up price’ of tickets on their shuttles.” Translation: NEC air shuttle fares were much higher than Acela/Metroliner fares.

This drove air passengers to Amtrak’s premium services, accounting for the 8.8 percent increase in Acela/Metroliner passengers, and permitting fare increases that bore a whopping 18.8 percent revenue increase for the year. Even more interestingly, Amtrak succeeded in boosting NEC revenues for Regional Services by 7.5 percent, despite the 5 percent decline in Regional Service riders. The article missed all of this.

By the way, NEC Regional Service, even with its 2006 decline, still carries more than two and a half times the number of annual riders that Acela/Metroliner service carries. Altogether, Amtrak lost 155,000 NEC riders in 2006, but raised its NEC revenues by more than $80 million. This is a hopeful sign that Amtrak is beginning to understand that it is indeed a commercial business.

In all of these instances, however, the article completely fails to provide any sense of perspective on the role that Amtrak, or its various regional and national services, play in the transportation system, or how many passengers they carry, or how much they lose or make. A review of Amtrak’s press release on 2006 ridership and its 2007 legislative request (PDF) will provide a wealth of insight.

A look at the airlines also lends perspective to Amtrak’s performance. In 2005, the most recent year for which the Department of Transportation has complete figures, the airlines carried 745.7 million passengers, 33.1 million, or 4.6 percent, more than they did in 2004. Note that the 2005 increase in airline traffic was about one-third larger than Amtrak’s entire 2006 patronage.

In this context, and over the long term, Amtrak’s series of annual ridership “improvements” amount to a lump of coal in an old-fashioned boiler. Amtrak’s fewer than 25 million passengers in 2006 are only a handful more than the 21 million it carried in 1979. In the meantime, the airlines have grown from about 170 million riders in 1979 to more than 745 million in 2005. U.S. population has increased during that period by the better part of a 100 million people, or 50 percent.

These results support the February 2003 recommendations of the Amtrak Reform Council, a bipartisan independent federal commission. ARC recommended that states be required to fund the operating losses of the Northeast Corridor and other short-distance corridor trains in exchange for a federal-state funding program for capital investments in track and equipment. For the long-distance trains, the federal government would continue to cover the operating losses, but would apply economic criteria to allocate funds to the trains with the best performance. With long-distance trains accounting for 15 percent of Amtrak’s total ridership, 27 percent of the revenues from train operations, and 43 percent of the train operating costs, it is clear that finding sound economic investments among the long-distance trains is a task that grows more difficult.

Tom Till is a Senior Fellow with Discovery Institute's Cascadia Center for Regional Development.

Discovery Institute fights against the conceit that only a secularized culture can have a legitimate public life. Indeed, we would argue that people of serious religious perspectives not only have a full, long-recognized right to contribute to the leadership of political culture (broadly defined), but also that they often provide intellectual insights beyond the reach of the culturally deracinated secularist. In consequence of this stand we find ourselves described by foes on the Darwinist evolution debate as a "Christian" or "religious" think tank. That is really an ignorant, philistine description, though one that always amuses those Discovery fellows who are Jewish or non-religious.

We do weigh many issues in the scales of ethics that have been employed for centuries in the Judeo-Christian world. We do so without apology. The standards are sound even without reference to religion. In staking out this ground, we are constantly intrigued by a number of brilliantly edited magazines that look at politics and culture through a religious lens. The wonderful thing about such magazines as Touchstone, First Things, Crisis, World, Christianity Today and Commentary is that within their respective circles of writers, one actually finds more diversity of religious backgrounds—and more true tolerance--than, say, at The Nation or The New York Times magazine, and more relevance to lasting consequences of public policy than one encounters at certain increasingly rudderless conservative journals.

Commentary is an example that stands out in this group of magazines because its Jewishness is ethnic as much as religious, and because it has an utterly unique history and record of achievements. (One of our own senior fellows, David Berlinski, has been responsible for some of those achievements.) A new account of Commentary's history by Nathan Abrams obviously doesn't do the subject justice, if Benjamin Balint is to be believed. And my own familiarity with the magazine over the decades suggests that Balint is to be believed, indeed. His review of Abrams' book, running in the new issue of The Weekly Standard, has real authority.

Balint explicitly asserts that "Commentary showed that there is no contradiction between ethnic particularities and participation in the larger culture," and that the path to full participation need not fall into the trap of cultural relativism or "multiculturalism". Abrams apparently doesn't come close to grasping that point.

Overall, Balint's fine review suggests that the full story of one of America's most under-recognized cultural resources—Commentary magazine—has still to be written.

The political cartoons and editorials that celebrate the Democrats' success in forcing the resignation of John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations suggest to me a short term triumph of partisanship--with no lasting partisan advantages to go with it--and likely long term damage to the international interests of the United States.

Foreigners are not adept at reading subtle refinements in American politics. They don't see this as just a Democratic "gotcha" that wins a day's embarrassment for the President. Rather, they see in it a sign of weakening American resolve on several key subjects that one thought were endorsed by both U.S. political parties, including the war against terrorists, containment of North Korea's nuclear ambitions and the cause of internal reform at the United Nations itself.

Bolton was punished because Democrats wanted to deny him appointment two years ago, based on previous disagreements, and they were frustrated by the president's subsequent recess appointment of him. Bolton cannot be faulted for his actual service at the U.N., which was exemplary of firm, but supple diplomacy. He didn't win a string of victories for the Bush Administration; he won them for America. Are there Democrats who would like to chastise him, for example, for exposing the new U.N. "Human Rights Council," whose members consist of many of the world's worst human rights violators?

Not likely.

Don't worry about John Bolton, he is a survivor and has a following of admirers. Worry instead about America's position at the U.N. The only way to salvage that position now is to appoint--as a bi-partisan choice--a new ambassador with the same policies and resolve as Bolton.

U.S. Senator (for a couple of more weeks) Bill Frist of Tennessee, Majority Leader (for the same remaining couple of weeks) has come out with a stirring defense of the Republican Congress since 1994. It is impressive (see below). It also is a tad late for the election campaign of 2006.

The Republican Congressional Index: A Dozen Years Of Success

From The Economy To Crime To Education, A Look At The Numbers Shows Great National Progress Since Republicans Assumed Control Of Congress In 1994

ECONOMIC GROWTH

Size Of U.S. Economy: Up 42.1%
Per Capita Personal Income: Up 59%
Federal Tax Liability, Married Couple, Two Kids, Average Income: Down 79.4%
Chapter 11 Bankruptcies: Down 47%

Gross domestic product, constant 2000$: $7,835.5 trillion (1994); $11,134.8 trill (2005)

GDP percent change based on real 2000$: 2.5% (1995); 3.5% (2005)

Per capita GDP, constant 2000$: $30,958 (1994); $38,392 (2004)

Number of employed in civilian labor force: 123,060,000 (1994); 139,252,000 (2004)

Per capita personal income, constant 2000$: $24,731 (1994); $30,524 (2004)

Unemployment rate: 5.6% (Nov. 1994); 4.4% (Oct. 2006)

Chapter 11 bankruptcies: 1,755 (1995); 935 (2004)

Homeownership rate: 64.0% (1994); 68.9% (2005)

U.S. foreign export in goods and services: $703.3 billion (1994); $1.272 trillion (2004)

Average net compensation (constant 2004$): $29,037 (1994); $34,198 (2004)

Interest rate, 30-year, fixed-rate conventional mortgage: 8.35% (1994); 5.58% (2006)

Jobs created since January, 1995: 19,548,000 (October, 2006)
# of countries with populations of less than 19.5 million: 148 (2005)

Number of days lost by labor work stoppages: 5,020,000 (1994); 3,344,000 (2004)

Patents issued to U.S. Residents: 64,400 (1995); 94,100 (2004)

Federal tax liability: married couple, two dependents, with adjusted gross income of $35,000: $2,768 (1995); $570 (2001)

Effective federal income tax rate: married couple, two dependents, with adjusted gross income of $35,000: 7.9% (1995); 1.6% (2001)

Net farm income: $46.7 billion (1994); $82.5 billion (2005)

CREATION OF WEALTH

Dow Jones Industrial Average: Up 322%
S&P 500 Index: Up 304%
NASDAQ: Up 318%

Dow Jones Industrial Average: 3,808.87 (11/08/94); 12,278.41 (12/7/06)

S&P 500 Index: 463.06 (11/8/94); 1,407.29 (12/7/06)

NASDAQ Composite Index: 762.31 (11/8/94); 2,427.69 (12/7/06)

Number of households owning mutual funds: 30.2 million (1994); 54 million (2005)

Percent of households owning mutual funds: 30.7% (1994); 47.5% (2005)

Total assets in the IRA market: $1.056 trillion (1994); $3.667 trillion (2005)

Assets in 401(k) plans: $675 billion (1994); $2.443 trillion (2005)

CRIME AND LAW ENFORCEMENT


Violent Crime: Down 34%
Murder Rate: Down 38%
Robberies: Down 40%
Aggravated Assaults: Down 32%
Property Crimes: Down 26%
Burglaries: Down 30%
Larceny Theft: Down 24%
Auto Theft: Down 30%


All crimes: 39,926,000 (1995); 24,312,000 (2003)
Number of crimes declined: 39.1%

Violent crime rate per 100,000: 714 (1994); 469 (2005)

Murder rate per 100,000: 9.0 (1994); 5.6 (2005)

Personal crimes (pickpockets, etc.): 10.4 million (1995); 5.6 million (2003)
Number of personal crimes declined: 46.47%

Personal crime rate, per 1,000 persons age 12 or older: 46.2 (1995); 23.3 (2003)
Personal crime rate declined: 49.6%

Violent crimes: 1,857,670 (1994); 1,390,695 (2005)
Number of violent crimes declined: 33.5%


EDUCATION

More Funding, More Graduates, Fewer Dropouts, More Technology In Classrooms

Total expenditures of educational institutions (constant 2003-2004$): $623,481 million (1994-95); $865,500 million (2003-04)

Total expenditures of elementary & secondary schools (constant 2003-2004$): $365,913 million (1994-95); $514,300 million (2003-04)

Percent of persons 25 or older completing high school or higher: 81.7% (1995); 85.2% (2004)
Percent of African-Americans 25 or older completing high school or higher: 73.8% (1995); 81.1% (2004)

Percent of persons 25 or older with bachelor’s degree or higher: 23.0% (1995); 27.7% (2004)
Percent of African-Americans 25 or older with bachelor’s degree or higher: 13.3% (1995); 17.7% (2004)

Expenditure per pupil in public elementary and secondary schools (constant 2003$): $6,706 (1995-96); $8,044 (2002-03)

Public elementary and secondary pupil/teacher ratio: 17.3 (1995); 15.5 (2005)

Public school dropout rate: 12.0% (1995); 9.9% (2003)
Public school dropout rate, Hispanic students: 30.0% (1995); 23.5% (2003)

Federal revenues for public elementary and secondary schools: $18.34 billion (1993-94); $33.14 billion (2001-02)
Increase in federal revenues for public schools: 80.7%

Federal revenues for public elementary and secondary schools per student: $422 (1993-94); $695 (2001-02)

Students reporting carrying a weapon on school property: 11.3 (1993); 6.1 (2003)

Percent of public school classrooms with Internet access: 8% (1995); 93% (2003)

Higher Average Test Scores, Lower Achievement Gaps:

Average NAEP math scores for students, age 9: 231 (1994); 241 (2004)
Average NAEP math scores for students, age 13: 274 (1994); 281 (2004)
Average NAEP math scores for African-American students, age 9: 212 (1994); 224 (2004)
Average NAEP math scores for Hispanic students, age 9: 210 (1994); 230 (2004)
Average NAEP math score gap between white students and Hispanic students, age 9: 27 (1994); 18 (2004)
Average NAEP reading scores for African-American students, age 9: 185 (1994); 200 (2004)
Average NAEP reading score gap between white students and African-American students, age 13: 33 (1994); 26 (2004)
Average NAEP reading scores for Hispanic students, age 9: 186 (1994); 205 (2004)

FAMILY ISSUES

Poverty Rate Down, Welfare Recipients Down, Abortions Down, Divorce Rate Down

Number of legal abortions: 1,267,000 (1994); 854,000 (2002)
Decline in number of legal abortions: 32.6%

Legal abortions per 1,000 women: 23.7 (1994); 20.8 (2002)

Divorce rate: 4.6 (1994); 3.7 (2004)
Decline in divorce rate, 1994-2004: 17.4%

Poverty rate: 14.5% (1994); 12.7% (2004)
Decline in poverty rate, 1994-2004: 12.4%

Percent of children (under 18) living in poverty: 21.8 (1994); 17.8 (2004)
Decline of children (under 18) living in poverty, 1994-2004: 18.4%

Use of alcohol in last month by eighth graders: 24.6% (1994); 18.6% (2004)
Decline of alcohol use by eighth graders, 1994-2004: 24.4%

Use of tobacco in last month by high school seniors: 33.5% (1994); 25.0% (2004)
Decline of smoking by high school seniors: 25.4%

Use of tobacco in last month by eighth graders: 19.1% (1994); 9.2% (2004)
Decline of smoking by eighth graders, 1994-2003: 51.8%

Recipients of AFDC/TANF payments: 14,160,920 (1994); 4,449,811 (2005)
Decline of welfare recipients, 1994-2005: 68.6%

HEALTH AND SCIENCE

Infant Mortality Down, AIDS Deaths Down, More Spending On Research & Development

Infant mortality rate (infant deaths per 1,000 live births): 8.0 (1994); 6.9 (2003)
Decline in infant mortality rate: 13.8%

Births to teenage mothers (per 1,000 live births): 58.2 (1994); 41.7 (2003)

AIDS deaths rate per 100,000 (age adjusted): 16.0 (1994); 4.7 (2003)

Death rate for all cancers per 100,000 people per year: 212 (1994); 194 (2002)

Death rate for breast cancer per 100,000 people per year: 31 (1994); 26 (2002)

Death rate for prostate cancer per 100,000 people per year: 38 (1994); 28 (2002)

U.S. research and development expenditures (constant 1996$): $176.2 billion (1994); $253.2 billion (2003)

National Institute of Health appropriations: $11 billion (1994); $28.5 billion (2005)
Increase in NIH appropriations: 260%

National Cancer Institute appropriations: $2.1 billion (1994); $4.8 billion (2005)
Increase in National Cancer Institute appropriations: 232.2%

Private pharmaceutical research & development spending: $13.4 billion (1994); $39.4 billion (2005)
Increase in pharmaceutical research & development spending: 294%

SIZE OF GOVERNMENT

Federal civilian employees: 2.993 million (1994); 2.701 million (Nov. 2005)

Number of legislative branch employees: 33,367 (1995); 30,493 (Nov. 2005)
Decline in number of legislative branch employees, 1995-2005: 8.6%

The Seattle Times today runs a column by David Klinghoffer and me that spells out some ideas for dealing with storms like the one that slowed Seattle down recently and left a million and a half people—including colleagues of ours—without power, some for more than a week. Even today I am hearing of needless financial losses by businesses that had no generators to back-up the regular power supply. Vast supermarkets on the East Side of Lake Washington (Seattle suburbs) closed for want of electricity and not only suffered the lack of normal income, but had to destroy perishable goods. Filling stations, restaurants, even doctors’ offices closed. For such businesses the financial loss alone was probably more than what it would have cost to have a couple of big generators available. We will have such storms and other disasters in the future, so will the private and public sectors use the recent event as a wake up call?

Mind you, when we talk about decentralization we are not suggesting that the power grid should be taken apart; far from it. The central grid is a wonder of engineering, capable of supplying power from strong areas to weakened ones as needed. Rather, by decentralization we mean that local, neighborhood and even private back-up systems—redundancy—should be available for those rare but traumatic times when a regional system breaks down. Let’s see some imaginative innovation from private and public sources now.

For a new example, on this blog we have urged the adoption of plug-in hybrid cars as a way to conserve fossil fuels. My colleagues in the Cascadia project of Discovery Institute suggest that the plug-in hybrid car batteries could, in a pinch, be used to supplement a home’s electric supply after a power outage. I don’t know for how long, or how successfully, but it is worth investigating.

Indeed, I hope that one outcome of the Seattle storm will be to wake up state legislatures and city councils in Washington State and around the country this winter and spring. New laws and regulations should be considered, not to add further to the paperwork load already required of builders and businesses, but to substitute for it. For example, a colleague in Woodinville, WA, north of Seattle, was without power for eight days but kept warm because he had “old fashioned” gas heat appliances that worked—with a struck match applied to the pilot light—when the electricity failed. Newer systems operate under a code “reform” that is designed to prevent home accidents by preventing such over-rides. Thousands of people with the new “reformed” systems therefore sat in the cold and dark in my colleague’s neighborhood! Surely, as our article says, it should be possible to come up with safe, alternative ways to over-ride gas and oil systems that rely on periodic electric stimulus.

Talk about a need for “intelligent design”! Our forefathers in the bad old days a hundred years ago suffered with wood stoves and clunky coal furnaces that required the periodic cleaning of heavy cinders and polluted the atmosphere. But at least they survived any winter storm sent their way!

There is no “War on Christmas” in Russia, apparently. That would be so “Communist era”--and Western secular! To get a whiff of old fashioned antagonism toward Christian social customs you have come to the U.S. and visit the offices of the ACLU, Citizens United for Separation of Church and State and various purblind government offices. Our Discovery colleague from Russia, Yuri Mamchur, who heads the Real Russia Project, is in Moscow this week and says that his old public high school now sports a “huge Christmas crèche” in front of the building. No problem. No complaints.

Life size crèche outside Moscow public school

Since Russia is predominantly and increasingly Orthodox, of course, the celebration of the birth of Jesus isn’t emphasized there for another week and a half. Charles Ganske of Discovery Institute’s Real Russia Project, meanwhile, has this fascinating look at the reported rise of Christian sentiment in Russia since the fall of Communism. It is interesting on several counts, one being that an Orthodox revival has not generated discernible antagonism toward other faiths, even though the governmental bureaucracy is suspicious of new, proselytizing faiths to the point of harassment in some cases.

Overall, Americans will see the new surveys on religion as hopeful signs of the revival of mediating institutions in Russia. Many also will add Russia to the list of nations—notably China and sub-saharan Africa—where Christianity is gaining active believers in large numbers. Everyone is free to speculate on the possible implications for the world’s culture, politics and economy.

The transitional government of Somalia, whose forces, bolstered (as is not widely known) by U.S. arms and (which is well known) Ethiopian air and ground troops, seems to have regained control over the country from the radical Islamic Court that took over most of the land six months ago. The Islamic Court forces were beaten in several skirmishes and have retreated to
a port city on the seacoast to regroup. Civilians there are being held as human shields, so air attacks presumably will not be undertaken by the Somalian transitional government and its forces. Ground troops will have to do it all.

I say "transitional government" because the United States has yet to recognize the Administration of President Abdullahi Yusuf, even though the Yusuf regime has enjoyed recognition from the U.N., the African Union and even the Arab League. The difference between the United States and the others, matters, since only the U.S. seems ready to do much actively in situations like this.

For some reason, perhaps because the Bush Administration feared a fiasco that would damage our reputation in Iraq and elsewhere, our government has held back diplomatic recognition for President Abdullahi Yusuf and his government until success is assured. That didn't stop us from providing practical support, however, as well as sanction for the Ethiopian involvement.

The Somalians did not want our troops, only our supplies, as their Ambassador designate, Koshin Mohamed, made clear in a lecture at Discovery Institute in Seattle this past fall. Mr. Mohamed, who obviously is well-connected in Somalia, even though he is only 28, and operates an accountancy office in Seattle, has some other opinions worth noting. For example, he believes that aid for Somalia that has been administered by the United Nations has been showing up in the hands of war lords, not the Yusuf Administration. He suggests that bi-lateral aid is the way to go henceforward and he indicates that the recent U.S. military aid, indeed, has
been handled effectively.

Many people in the media and elsewhere disputed the popularity of the Yusuf Administration a few weeks ago and doubted its military prowess. But Koshin Mohamed notes that once they were armed the government troops fought well and that they were welcomed by crowds described as "jubilant" by the Associated Press.

We were pleased to help Mr. Mohamed as he set up his operation in Washington, D.C. last summer and are happy that he will be able to give another talk at our Washington, D.C. office (1015 15th St., NW) on January 11. It was planned originally to warn Americans that al-Qaeda was beginning to make a new base in Somalia, but now it will have a more upbeat theme,
clearly.

Somalia is a Muslim country, but it does not have much taste for Taliban style cultural constraints. Somalians don't want support from radicals in Saudi Arabia or anywhere else, Mohamed says. They want American help and investment. There are large oil and gas reserves in the country--un-utilized--that could well finance a sizable development program. Perhaps the happiest way the Yusuf government could assure long-term popular support would be to allow U.S. companies to drill, but to be sure that local profits go in large part directly to individual Somalian families--perhaps 50 percent--as well as to run government operations.

Meanwhile, nothing should be taken for granted here in the U.S. We are hoping that the Bush Administration will recognize the authority of the Yusuf government as soon as possible and give it full support. Part of that support will mean un-freezing the accounts of the old Somalian government that are still under State Department control. It is only about $1.5 million, but it should be enough to allow the new ambassador--Koshin Mohamed--to take up his job properly. it will be a pleasure to see the young University of Washington graduate, who holds U.S. as well as Somalian citizenship, in the ambassador's office at last.

Discovery’s Cascadia project has promoted plug in hybrid cars for the past year and we hope we are making some headway with the Bush Administration. We know that there is interest in Congress, especially from Senators Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, now co-chairman of the Committee on the Present Danger, has been an ally through this whole effort and spoke at last spring’s Discovery conference on the subject (as did Sen. Brownback). His article, “Gentlemen, Start Your Plug-Ins,” is found in the Weekend issue of The Wall Street Journal.

What is the connection between this subject and “the present danger” in world affairs? Simple: our current thralldom to unreliable or dictatorial or even malevolent oil-rich regimes overseas. As Woolsey points out, plug-ins could cut our gasoline consumption by half in the coming decade, especially when linked to new biofuel production. I will be very disappointed if the President fails to move on this priority in coming days. The best way to drain the swamp of terrorism is to take away their funding sources. As Woolsey has pointed out elsewhere, Americans now wind up financing both sides of the war on terrorism, one directly (ours), the other indirectly (theirs).