The only EAS cities here in the Northeast I can think of would be Augusta, Presque Isle, and Rockland, all in Maine.
You can't really compare Amtrak to US Airways. Each has their own niches. For example, in the midwest, there are several small towns that are no where no the cities that the Cartel's regional partners serve (a good 2-3 hour drive for them) that depend on Amtrak to get around convinently. In the Northeast, Amtrak is responsible for all the railroad operations. Commuters in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington all depend on Amtrak services to get them into the city. Also, Amtrak has a 50% market share on BOS-NYC-WAS, while Delta and U COMBINED have the other half.
However, there are things U has that Amtrak can't compete with. Want to go MHT-LAX? Here is what would happen:
U: Take PHL, PIT, or CLT flight, connect to LAX flight. Total time: 6-8 hours
Amtrak: Drive to Boston's South Station or Vermont's White River Junction (an hour either direction), and take a few trains (most likely through CHI from BOS, through Springfield, MA and CHI from WRJ) and go to Los Angeles. Total time: 3-4 days. Price: about the same. Which would people pick here? U or Amtrak. I'd certainly take U, as would most people (no train enthusiasts).
As for U to get back to profitability, there are several things that should be done besides getting concessions, which is inevitable for survival. They should really cut some routes, mainline and express, to achieve profitability. Close the PIT hub too. PHL and PIT are too close together, and PHL has a good yield. That would save money.