Renaming Penn Station, LIRR ticket rules

Don't rename Penn Station, just repair it

Long Island commuters don’t need Penn Station renamed — they need it repaired [“Trump administration eyes Penn Station rename, Duffy says,” News, July 24].

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy appears to have decided that naming one of the nation’s busiest rail hubs after President Donald Trump deserves attention while millions of riders continue to endure delays, overcrowding, aging infrastructure, and an incomplete redevelopment.

Meanwhile, Trump should know that Penn Station wasn’t named after the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It was named for the Pennsylvania Railroad, the company that financed and built the original station as its New York terminal. Before trying to erase more than a century of history, he might take a few minutes to learn about it.

At a time when commuters are pleading for meaningful improvements to this century-old transportation hub, Duffy seems more interested in flattering Trump and advancing a political vanity project than in addressing the pressing transportation needs of all the people who rely on Penn Station every day.

Duffy should spend less time worrying about what Penn Station is called and more time making it a station worthy of its millions of paying customers.

— Beatrice Brennan Wall, Lloyd Harbor

I vote independently based on people and issues, not by political parties; I am not politically biased. However, I think that renaming Penn Station for a politician is a horrible idea. The Trump administration is talking about doing something that has little to gain and potentially a lot to lose.

This would make people even more politically divided. Why create an argument when the issue is so unimportant? How does the name of a building affect our daily lives?

Politicians are facing so many issues that are important. Let this one go.

— Fred Harber, Lake Success

Once again, Sean Duffy suggested that renaming Penn Station to Trump Station “has a nice ring to it.” I vehemently oppose the president’s name on yet another iconic landmark. No president should be demanding that his name be placed on buildings, memorials, or landmarks, especially this president whose administration I think is the most corrupt in our nation’s 250-year history. And Amtrak has $8 billion to lose in redevelopment plans if it doesn’t comply, which sounds like coercion at its finest.

I am also disappointed and angry that Gov. Kathy Hochul has not offered stronger opposition to the idea of renaming the station Trump Station. At what point do we say, “Enough is enough”?

— Linda Peyser, Lake Grove

He must be kidding. Renaming Penn Station for Donald Trump is an insult to everyone in New York and New Jersey. The busiest transit hub in the United States would be named after an individual who has consistently shown hostility toward both states and their rail systems? It’s like a bad dream.

Trump’s consistent opposition to rail transit improvements is well-documented. In October 2025, he declared the Gateway tunnel project “terminated” because he and Sen. Chuck Schumer disagreed over a funding bill. That undertaking, a $16 billion project, is constructing a new rail tunnel under the Hudson River to improve access to Penn Station. It took until June for a federal judge to permanently unfreeze these funds.

But that’s not all. In March, Newsday reported that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority sued the Trump administration to force the release of $60 million in withheld funds for Manhattan’s Second Avenue Subway extension. Those funds were finally released in April.

There is no doubt that Penn Station needs multiple billions of dollars to rebuild its current unappealing environment. Just don’t rename it for a president with a history of negative impacts on the New York region and mass transit.

— Andrew Sparberg, Oceanside

The writer, a retired LIRR manager and transportation historian, is an adjunct instructor at CUNY.

Require ticket scans before boarding train

The Long Island Rail Road should have a system where a rider scans a ticket before boarding the train [“Ticket policy drives discontent,” News, July 29].

This would greatly eliminate all the free rides. This is already in effect at Elmont-UBS Arena station. (When arriving there, one has to show a train ticket before leaving the station.)

I also notice that conductors rarely scan my activated ticket or do not even come through the car to check tickets.

— Diane Rieders, Freeport