Pardon me, but is this the way to run a choo-choo? That was, in essence, the question members of Amtrak’s board asked themselves in respect of the leadership of the railroad’s now-former chief executive, David Gunn, before handing Mr. Gunn his pink slip yesterday. The move by a board consisting almost entirely of Bush appointees prompted howls of outrage from many quarters of New York’s delegation in Washington, but it could actually prove to be a blessing for the passenger railroad. Mr. Gunn’s departure clears the way for an executive who will work for rail reform that would benefit taxpayers and passengers alike.

Mr. Gunn leaves behind a dysfunctional railroad. Amtrak has gobbled up $29 billion in federal taxpayer money since it was formed in 1971 out of the struggling passenger operations of the freight railroads, and that number doesn’t include subsidies Amtrak receives from individual states for some of the lines it operates. Amtrak’s greatest operational liability is also its greatest political asset: Its extensive route network means that most of its trains hemorrhage cash, but the fact that most states enjoy some form of Amtrak service makes Congress willing to pump in more money. Just last week the Senate authorized a new $11.6 billion, six-year aid package, although lawmakers haven’t actually appropriated the money yet.

President Bush has attempted to shut the tap with help from his appointees on Amtrak’s board, but Mr. Gunn dedicated himself to fighting reform. Most recently he opposed a plan to spin off the railroad’s only profitable stretch, between Boston and Washington, D.C., to a consortium of northeastern states that would operate it with the help of block grants from the federal government.

This stubborn antipathy to change helps explain the plaudits Mr. Gunn garnered yesterday from such luminaries as Senators Clinton and Schumer; Mr. Schumer has derided the spin-off proposal as a way to saddle New Yorkers with expensive intercity passenger rail obligations while, in a statement yesterday, Mrs. Clinton seemed to imply that Penn Station would shut down if Amtrak were to disappear. But, as a passenger rail expert, Joseph Vranich, argues nearby, a spin-off would benefit New Yorkers since such federal block grants would channel money into infrastructure that needs it. Mr. Vranich’s book, “End of the Line,” details some of these needed improvements, including upgrades in firefighting equipment and emergency exits for the six tunnels in and out of Manhattan. Amtrak has for years stubbornly resisted the MTA’s efforts to upgrade the tunnels; meantime, those billion of federal dollars the Senate wants to spend are just as likely to go to sleeper cars or money-losing long-distance operations through Texas or Montana.

Whatever Senators Clinton and Schumer say about him, Mr. Gunn didn’t do any favors for New York rail passengers during his tenure at Amtrak. He failed to make necessary safety upgrades in the New York area and threatened periodically to shut down all commuter service in and out of the city. Maybe now New Yorkers will be able to benefit from a new Amtrak executive who understands how to make the system work for travelers in the region.