Because of unprofitable long-haul routes through the middle of nowhere that no one in their right mind would use instead of flying but that are kept for political reasons.
The northeast corridor, which is basically the only Amtrak route that is actually focused on being a useful route for passengers, runs at a profit.
Amtrak is receiving $19.26B over the years of 2022 to 2026. $4.8B a year. That is an increase from the $1.7B/year it received from FY17 to FY19
The FHWA is handing out $52B in FY22. Now, you might say, oh, well, more people drive, so the FHWA is clearly a more sensible place to invest. But Americans spent $743B on their cars, including payments, interest, and insurance.
I wouldn't call it a scam. The subsidy per rider is, in fact, a relevant number. As others have pointed out, commuting by rail in America largely sucks, particularly in an age of COVID and rampant crime in many metro areas. In Portland a dude literally had his face and ear bitten off the other day at a light rail station. People will pay more for cars because everything about the experience is better.
Not in one day, and there's been a lot more violence than that on Metro, including shootings and stabbings. I'm much more comfortable with the risk on the highway, which is in many ways contingent on my own behaviors. Rational or not, I suspect many, many people agree with me. Likewise, buses were hilarious during the pandemic. Nobody wanted anything to do with them, and that's increasingly true every cold and flu season. How many people do communicable viruses contracted by mass transit kill every year? These are not flip comments. I'm just making the case that there's a reason people prefer cars, and it's not just because of some failure to build sufficient mass transit.
