Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Transportation United States

Senator Makes Amtrak Hire Ticket Agents Because 30 Percent of His State Lacks Internet (senate.gov) 240

Posted by BeauHD from the ignoring-the-root-causes dept.
McGruber writes: Joe Manchin, the senior Senator from West Virginia, has inserted language in the FY19 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies appropriations bill that will force Amtrak to employ at least one ticketing agent in every state that it serves.

His reasoning? "Amtrak has told me that most of their sales are now online, but West Virginians buy far more tickets at the Charleston station than most places around the country. That's not surprising, as nearly 30% of West Virginia is without internet access, and mobile broadband access is also difficult in my state's rugged, mountainous terrain, making online ticket sales difficult." Manchin continued: "Our population includes many working class families and elderly residents who are less likely to have a credit card or another means to purchase tickets remotely, but rely heavily on the train as an alternative to driving or flying. Although Matt Crouch's job was terminated today, once the bill is passed by the House and Senate and signed by the President, Amtrak will have to reinstate a position in the state and I will do everything over the next few months to make sure that happens."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Senator Makes Amtrak Hire Ticket Agents Because 30 Percent of His State Lacks Internet More

Senator Makes Amtrak Hire Ticket Agents Because 30 Percent of His State Lacks Internet

Comments Filter:

  • Why blame Amtrak? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 08, 2018 @05:24PM (#56752444)
    Yes, having no Internet access is a bad deal for Virginians, but maybe the state representative should be doing something about that instead of bitching to Amtrak.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Etcetera ( 14711 )

      Yes, having no Internet access is a bad deal for Virginians, but maybe the state representative should be doing something about that instead of bitching to Amtrak.

      That's great, and I encourage local co-ops to help build (probably wireless) infrastructure to help those residents get online.

      In the meantime, people need to get on trains. I realize Amtrak service sucks sometimes, but I'd hope we don't have trains more than 3-4 years late.

      • ... but I'd hope we don't have trains more than 3-4 years late.

        That would be one hell of a trip, and probably a little worrisome. Will my trip insurance cover lost wages during that time?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by q_e_t ( 5104099 )

        In the meantime, people need to get on trains. I realize Amtrak service sucks sometimes, but I'd hope we don't have trains more than 3-4 years late.

        That's the average delay in the UK at the moment, I think.

    • Re:Why blame Amtrak? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Daltorak ( 122403 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @05:43PM (#56752558)

      Yes, having no Internet access is a bad deal for Virginians, but maybe the state representative should be doing something about that instead of bitching to Amtrak.

      Have you even been to West Virginia? High-speed internet service is a major technical challenge there because of the geography. It's really mountainous and sparsely-populated. You can barely even get 3G service outside the cities unless you're near an Interstate or state highway. Good places to put towers that effectively cover a large area few and far between.

      On top of that, there is a complete lack of cell service, Wi-fi or even microwaves on the central-eastern side of the state because of the Green Bank Observatory. (If you don't know about this, read up on it because it's actually really interesting [cnn.com].)

      • Re:Why blame Amtrak? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Daneel Olivaw R. ( 5113539 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @05:47PM (#56752578)
        can't this be solved by putting booking kiosk (machines) instead of forcing a person to do boring ticketing work?
        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • If they have telephones and electricity, and they do, then broadband can be deployed there as well, and it will be easier than the original installation of either of those earlier services since service corridors, conduits, etc. already exist. In 2000 95.3% of all housing units in West Virginia had landline telephones. [census.gov]

        It may take something like the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 to make it happen, but that is the point. Representatives of rural areas should be pushing for this hard.

        • Not _just_like_ the Rural electrification act...that pig fuck is still sinking a billion/year for nothing but rent seeking from utilities of rich suburbs and industrial farms. Worst example you could come up with.

        • I agree. Phones and Electricity made no sense as a private investment when the "last mile" was in places like West Virginia. Amtrak, too, only goes there because of government mandate. It's important to include with that mandate with enough money to pay for the cost.

      • Have you even been to West Virginia? High-speed internet service is a major technical challenge there because of the geography. It's really mountainous and sparsely-populated.

        Colorado has much worse terrain -- higher mountains, more snow, etc. -- and yet Colorado finished wiring all of its county seats wth high-speed, fiber-optic broadband Internet back in 2014: Wired Internet arrives in Silverton, finally [denverpost.com]

        • Do they have cable? Probably in most places, because the lure of profit was enough for them to put down the wires a few decades ago.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by hey! ( 33014 )

      Can you get that Internet access to his constituents instantaneously? Because if you can't, folks in places like Cumberland still have to find a way to book travel.

      I don't know if you've traveled through Appalachia, but a lot of it's incredibly remote. I don't see this as punitive at all.

    • I actually disagree. Amtrak is funded at least partially by the government. It's supposed to be there as the alternative to expensive flying, a cheaper way for everyone to get around, not just those with internet access.

      Internet elitists should not be the lowest common denominator to take a train unless they want to stop taking tax money.

    • Yes, having no Internet access is a bad deal for Virginians, but maybe the state representative should be doing something about that instead of bitching to Amtrak.

      West Virginians. Don't lump us in with those hillbillies. :-)

    • Who says he isn't?

      And in the meantime, he's making things better in small ways as quickly as he can.

    • Or just buy your ticket from the conductor like you can in many places around the world. You still need someone at the station though to at least sweep up and clean the restroom and chase the skateboarders away.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by kriston ( 7886 )

      We have cooperatives that already do this and already serve vast areas in West Virginia.

      It's not access that's the problem. It's the cost. There are two satellite internet companies and one of them can be resold through cooperatives. DSL can be universally available now that we have g.Fast and ADSL loop extenders at very low cost, again through cooperatives.

      Even more seriously, though, Amtrak station agents need to remain.

  • Why not install POS terminals instead? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JoeyRox ( 2711699 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @05:27PM (#56752464)
    If people can order burgers at a McDonalds POS terminal they can certainly buy train tickets from them as well.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Or they could just buy the tickets on the train. Train rides aren't like air travel. You can show up, get on, and pay when the guy comes by to see your ticket. A much saner law would have been Amtrak isn't allowed to charge an on-board surcharge when the station has no in-person ticketing available.

      • Maybe they could even do this under the new law- "we DO have ticket agents in every state- in fact, there is at least one on every train!"

        The only problem I see with that is that a ticket agent / desk helps with scheduling and whatnot- maybe that could be replaced by pamphlets or posted schedules at the train station?

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by q_e_t ( 5104099 )

        Or they could just buy the tickets on the train. Train rides aren't like air travel. You can show up, get on, and pay when the guy comes by to see your ticket. A much saner law would have been Amtrak isn't allowed to charge an on-board surcharge when the station has no in-person ticketing available.

        As I noted earlier, many people like to know how much travel will cost before making it. Without a ticket agent they can't. Or know if they are getting the correct, cheapest fare in some instances.

    • and not just because they're not 'tech savvy'. Age Related Cognitive Decline is a thing.

      I don't like Joe Manchin one bit. He just sold us all out to Wall Street (along with a bunch of other Dems ) by repealing Dodd-Frank (in pieces so nobody would notice). Thanks to him and his right wing / pro corp ilk we're gonna have a major crash in about 4-6 years (just in time for a Democrat to take the Whitehouse and the blame). I hate the guy, but this seems reasonable.
  • I'd argue that the ability to buy tickets for cash is a good enough reason to have ticket agents. And also the ability to make certain changes to trips in progress that aren't always possible online.

    • I'd argue that the ability to buy tickets for cash is a good enough reason to have ticket agents.

      Oh, I guess we'll see, really soon, that train ticket agents get a DHS agent setup at their booths. If you buy a ticket with cash, you'll have your face photographed, your thumb fingerprinted, and your mouth swabbed for a DNA sample.

    • Don't need a ticket agent for that, just better kiosks. Looked it up just now and it appears their kiosks for some reason don't accept cash. NJ Transit figured this out a while ago, all the stations have kiosks that accept cash, and even give change in bills.
      They should still have agents for other reasons, primarily because there's always people who can't use the kiosks, because of disability or just not understanding it. Or at least don't have a cash surcharge for on train purchase.

      • NJ Transit figured this out a while ago, all the stations have kiosks that accept cash, and even give change in bills.

        Portland does this too -- at least when I visited there way back when -- but their kiosks gave change in dollar coins. Their transit system used (uses?) the honor system in that no ticket check is done to ride, but you'll get a fine if caught w/o a ticket in a random check by a patrol person.

  • Make up your mind (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mcmonkey ( 96054 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @05:30PM (#56752484) Homepage

    If Amtrak is expected to make a profit, or at least survive on its own, then it must have the ability to allocate resources as needed, including not devoting resources to markets that aren't profitable.

    However if Amtrak is expected to serve markets that aren't going to be sustainable, make it a public utility supported by public (ie, tax) money.

    • Re:Make up your mind (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @06:43PM (#56752856)
      The problem is Amtrak competes against a service which is heavily subsidized by the government - cars and trucks run on freeways constructed with tax dollars (fuel taxes only pay for maintenance). If the roads weren't so heavily subsidized, the U.S. would be more like Europe and would make greater use of rail transport for both cargo and people.*

      So expecting Amtrak to be profitable on its own is unrealistic. You need to subsidize it to the same degree you're subsidizing freeways just to level the playing field. And when you subsidize a small service to that degree, politicians start to play around with how the money should be spent.

      * The idea back when freeways were first made was that trucks could transport goods from endpoint to endpoint, eliminating the need for expensive labor-intensive loading and unloading stages, where people at the railyard have to move cargo from the train onto a truck to make it to its final destination, or vice versa. The labor of the loading/unloading stages was the predominant cost to cargo transport at the time, so eliminating it was an economically sound idea. But since then, fuel costs have increased substantially, and the advent of container transport has reduced loading/unloading costs. But we're still stuck with a cargo transport system built based on the old cost structure, which is artificially keeping trucks competitive with trains for long-distance transport.

      • Amtrak has always been insanely subsidized. Passenger rail _sucks_ for areas with low population density, it just can't compete.

        American freight rail is better than Europe's, by any metric you care to pick. Because our rail system is optimized for freight, not passengers.

      • If the roads weren't so heavily subsidized, the U.S. would be more like Europe and would make greater use of rail transport for both cargo and people

        The biggest problem is population density. In areas where population is dense, we already have pretty good transit systems in the US. Even in smaller towns like Modesto, CA you can get around without a car.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by djinn6 ( 1868030 )

          Even in smaller towns like Modesto, CA you can get around without a car.

          You certainly can. I mean, if you have 2 feet you can travel the entire continental US. Whether you want to depends on how much your time is worth. A 7 minute drive from the Modesto Airport to downtown is a 36 minute journey by public transport.

      • The containers are still being loaded and unloaded using gantry cranes. The railroads should design very low floor flat bed cars. Containers should have a small batter and wheels to "self" drive and get off the road tractor trailer frames and get on to railroad cars and vice versa. The battery should have some small range, like 1 mile at 10 mph.

        The long distance freight trains should pull into a yard close to a major highway intersection like I-75 on I-80. A whole bunch of containers get off on one side, a

        • Containers should have a small batter and wheels to "self" drive and get off the road tractor trailer frames and get on to railroad cars and vice versa. The battery should have some small range, like 1 mile at 10 mph.

          These vehicles would still have to use the road network, so they need to be able to operate at traffic speeds. It makes much more sense to make delivery vehicles capable of picking up full containers — something similar to the PODS self-storage trucks, only more serious, for larger containers. They only need to make local trips, so they don't need much range (as you say.)

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by djinn6 ( 1868030 )

          envisaged... expected to be... can be designed...

          Elon has a lot of great ideas and makes a lot of promises. But until an electric truck is sold by the thousands to shipping companies, there's no point bringing it up. Where's the $35,000 electric car that he promised back in 2016? Oh, right, it's actually $50,000 [autotrader.com].

          The railroads should design very low floor flat bed cars. Containers should have a small batter and wheels to "self" drive and get off the road tractor trailer frames and get on to railroad cars and vice versa. The battery should have some small range, like 1 mile at 10 mph.

          I don't see how this would be faster than using cranes. Or cheaper for that matter.

  • National Radio Quiet Zone. (Score:3)

    by b0s0z0ku ( 752509 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @05:30PM (#56752492)

    The National Radio Quiet Zone covers a large part of West Virginia. The "lack of Internet" is by design, though I guess wired Internet is still possible. No WiFi, satellite Internet, or cell service allowed to protect radio telescopes from interference.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by DewDude ( 537374 )
      It's a bit more complicated than that. Satellite internet would probably be allowed since those are technically licensed radiators..or at the very least, are type-accepted by the FCC and have passed a stricter set of tests for spurious emissions/leakage. Most of your radiation is going to be focused in a beam upwards. I mean..it can cause problems, but most of those could be mitigated. Most of the tightest restrictions are in a pretty small radius around the facilities. It mostly means a broadcaster can't f

  • commuter rail still has the hole punch

    • We're not talking about the ticket stampers on trains, but the people at the station selling tickets BEFORE boarding. Amtrak has people stamping (or scanning) tickets as well.

  • ... provide internet to 30% of the goddam state?

    • To make this cost-effective, they'd have to get rid of the National Radio Quiet Zone.

      • Never heard of that, so thank you for the education. (Seriously)

        From Wikipedia:

        This makes cable and satellite all but essential for acceptable television in much of the region.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by sims 2 ( 994794 )

        Wouldn't it make it more cost effective to leave it?
        FTTP/cable/ADSL would have a much more exclusive control of the area due to other options not being allowed ensuring a higher take rate.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by djinn6 ( 1868030 )
        Wouldn't be a bad idea. It might be cheaper to move the telescope elsewhere. Or even write some software to deal with the interference.
  • The commuter and light rail trains that I've been on had vending machines at the stations.

  • Have Amtrak tickes sold at post offices (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Streetlight ( 1102081 ) on Friday June 08, 2018 @06:10PM (#56752678) Journal
    It might be easier for people to get tickets if they were available at at United States Post offices and postal stations. Folks would need to plan their travel plans in advance because post offices aren't open 24/7, but even most small tows have postal service outlets.
  • Once SpaceX gets its Starlink internet service up and running, everywhere in the US should have access to good internet. The FCC approved them launching a constellation of over 4,000 LEO satellites by 2024, which then will be followed by about 7,000 satellites in even lower orbits. SpaceX has already put the first test satellites into orbit. Though as others have mentioned, dealing with the Radio Quiet Zone regulations might be a problem. The nice thing about LEO satellites is that it fixes the latency i

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sims 2 ( 994794 )

      There are at least 3 different companies working on launching their own LEO constellations right now with targets of 50Mbps, 1Gbps and 10Gbps.
      Hopefully at least one of them makes it to market but until one does it's just vaporware.

  • Since when was the internet the only means of long-distance communication ? For the purpose of purchasing a ticket, a phone is a perfectly reasonable thing to use.

    What makes the senator think that availability of the internet will suddenly address W. Virginians' apparent aversity to using credit cards ?

    • Unless you are buying far enough in advance to have a ticket mailed to you, the phone is not a solution. The internet solves the problem because you can print the ticket at home, or if you have a smartphone you can get an e-ticket that you display on the phone.

      • There are any number of solutions to that. For example:

        • your credit card could act as your ticket, or for that matter any other kind of ID or even facial recognition.
        • As someone else said the ticket can be printed at the station.
        • They could give you a reference number over the phone that you could write down (it only need a few characters to be valid on a given route and date for a given name, airline booking references are not very long.).
        • Not all rail purchases are spur of the moment, pick up a rail trav

  • Invest in it. Hard to do so under libertarian economy? The vector of progress is from libertarianism of Somalia towards 90% tax brackets "which US never ever ever had" (oh, wait).

    The senator should go back to his sister-wife and shut his imbecile Republican (? no, actually, believe or not, this imbecile is a Democrat) yapper.

  • Having some way to buy tickets from an agent is important - not only for people with no internet access, but also for the unbanked population. But there is no reason to require that Amtrak employ those agents. In some states, an agency agreement for somebody else to sell the tickets might be a suitable solution, rather than requiring an Amtrak employee who will be idle most of the time. (Some Amtrak locations are served by only two trains per day, one in each direction.) The agent could be a local transit a

  • Overlooking So Many Obvious Other Solutions (Score:3)

    by DewDude ( 537374 ) on Saturday June 09, 2018 @04:50PM (#56756818) Homepage
    Yes, let's make our government-subsizied and owned monopoly add on additional costs when they don't want to subsidize it in the first place.

    Let's not even talk about the fact Amtrak is one of the more expensive options for long distance travel. Using my upcoming vacation as an example; Amtrak doesn't offer actual train service to Las Vegas...so you have to take the train to L.A. and then spend almost 7 hours on a bus. This is $280 each way and a travel time of 72 hours each way! Meanwhile, $180 gets me on a flight to Las Vegas that has a total travel time (including short layover/plane switch) of just the Amtrak bus segment! Mind you, this is also for just a coach seat on Amtrak; so have fun spending 18 hours riding to Chicago and then 42 hours to LA...in a coach seat.

    Amtrak isn't attracting new customers because no one wants to pay that much more for a "lower" level of service; it has nothing to do with the availability of ticket agents. I really have to question doing something for "disadvantaged populations" that's typically a more expensive option too. If someone is that bad off, they're likely to want to really save the pennies and won't consider Amtrak at $300 if they can ride a bus for less money. Greyhound directly to Vegas is about $208 and takes about 60 hours. If I'm "disadvantaged", I'm probably saving the $78 and taking Greyhound and actually get there faster.

    The lack of a credit card or other banking isn't what it used to be either. You can get reloadable cards now...they've been a thing for years. There's also the thing of you can still pay cash at the ticket counters of most airlines. You can even usually call ahead to reserve and they'll give you 24 hours to show up and pay. It might cost a little bit more...and you might have some extra screening. But if you don't want that, you can just go back and pay more for the slower, less comfortable option.

    There are a few legitimate reasons...but these can be overcome other ways. Why not let a third-party sell the tickets? Go to your local Western Union outlet and purchase them; sell them at the post office; visit a local travel agent and pay them cash to get your tickets.

    This just seems like a very shallow act by a politician trying to make it seem like he's "helped" people. He's done something for a few people that we'll all have to pay for. It also seems like a very lazy solution for people who can't be bothered to actually think.

Slashdot Top Deals

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin

Close