[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 32 (Thursday, March 13, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2274-S2275]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. ROTH (for himself, Mr. Moynihan, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. 
        Wyden, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Biden, Mr. Kerry, Mr. DeWine, Mr. 
        Leahy, and Mr. Specter):

  S. 436. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
for the establishment of an intercity passenger rail trust fund, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


                     AMTRAK TRUST FUND LEGISLATION

  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that would 
create a dedicated source of capital funding for Amtrak. Joining me as 
cosponsors are Senators Moynihan, Lautenberg, Wyden, Jeffords, Biden, 
Kerry, DeWine, Leahy, and Specter.
  Mr. President, all major modes of transportation have a dedicated 
source of capital funding, except for intercity passenger rail.
  My legislation would correct this inequity and create a secure and 
reliable capital trust fund for Amtrak, no different than what other 
major modes of transportation now have.
  My legislation would transfer one-half cent of the 4.3 cent per 
gallon motor fuels tax currently going to the general fund, to a new 
intercity passenger rail trust fund.
  This rail trust fund would total approximately $3.9 billion dollars 
over 5 years to be used for capital improvement projects. After the 
fifth year, the revenues from the half cent would revert back to the 
general fund. My bill would create contract authority to allow Amtrak 
to enter into contracts necessary for long-term capital projects. For 
States that do not have Amtrak service, it would provide funding for 
qualified transportation expenses.
  This capital funding proposal is critical to Amtrak's future.
  Amtrak needs capital funding to bring it's equipment, facilities, and 
tracks into a state of good repair. Much of Amtrak's equipment and 
infrastructure has exceeded its projected useful life. The costs of 
maintaining this aging fleet and the need to modernize and overhaul 
facilities through capital improvements to the system are serious 
financial challenges for Amtrak. My proposal would help reverse these 
problems and give Amtrak the resources necessary to meet its capital 
investment needs.
  Mr. President, Amtrak, and the National Commission on Intermodal 
Transportation have called for a secure source of capital funding for 
Amtrak. I believe that now is the time for this Congress to reverse our 
current policy that favors building more highways at the expense of 
alternative means of transportation such as intercity passenger rail. 
Despite rail's proven safety, efficiency, and reliability in Europe, 
Japan, and elsewhere, inter-city passenger rail remains severely 
underfunded in the United States. In fact, over half of the Department 
of Transportation's spending authority is devoted to highways and 
another quarter to aviation; rail still ranks last with roughly 3 
percent of total spending authority.
  Last year we spent $20 billion for highways while capital investment 
for Amtrak was less than $450 million.
  In relative terms, between fiscal year 1980 and fiscal year 1994, 
transportation outlays for highways increased 73 percent, aviation 
increased 170 percent, and transportation outlays for rail went down by 
62 percent. In terms of growth, between 1982 and 1992 highway spending 
grew by 5 percent, aviation by 10 percent, while rail decreased by 9 
percent.
  A problem that is going to increase is the congestion on our roads. 
Between 1983 and 1990, Vehicle Miles Traveled increased nationwide by 
41 percent. If current trends continue, delays due to congestion will 
increase by more than 400 percent on our highways and by more than 1000 
percent on urban roads. Highway congestion costs the United States $100 
billion annually, and this figure does not include the economic and 
societal costs of increased pollution and wasted energy resources.
  Air travel is equally congested. Commercial airlines in the U.S. 
presently

[[Page S2275]]

transport over 450 million passengers each year. A recent 
transportation safety board study revealed that 21 of the 26 major 
airports experienced serious delays and it is projected to get worse. 
Again, the costs are enormous. A 1990 DOT study estimated the financial 
cost of air congestion at $5 billion each year, and it expects this 
number to reach $8 billion by 2000.
  Congestion is a problem and it must be addressed. However, the 
current path we are on directs more money for highways and airports. 
For us in the Northeast, building more roads is simply not an option. 
We do not have the land nor the financial resources to build more 
highways or more airports. For these reasons, we must provide more than 
just good roads but a good passenger rail system as well.
  Adequately funded passenger rail can successfully address highway 
gridlock and ease airport congestion. Passenger rail ridership between 
New York and Washington is equal to 7,500 fully booked 757's or 10,000 
DC-9's. Between New York and Washington, Amtrak has over 40 percent of 
the air-rail market.
  Improved Northeast rail service will also have the same positive 
impact on road congestion--5.9 billion passenger miles were taken on 
Amtrak in 1994. These are trips that were not taken on crowded highways 
and airways. Improved rail service in the Northeast is projected to 
eliminate over 300,000 auto trips each year from highways as well as 
reduce auto congestion around the airports.
  Improved rail service will also have a positive affect on rural 
areas. Twenty-two of Amtrak's 55 million passengers depend on Amtrak 
for travel between urban centers and rural locations which have no 
alternative modes of transportation.
  Mr. President, now is the time to invest in our rail system.
  Opponents of my legislation have said that we should not use revenues 
from our motor fuels tax to pay for Amtrak. I disagree. States are 
currently using revenues collected from our motor fuels tax for many 
non-highway uses. For example, Virginia uses its motor fuels tax 
receipts on mass transit and ports; New Hampshire uses its motor fuels 
receipts to bolster their Fish and Game Department; Wyoming uses its 
portion of the motor fuels tax for snowmobile trails and boating 
facilities; Florida and Arkansas use the motor fuels tax for 
environmental protection. Like these States have already done, I 
believe Congress should spend the revenues raised by the motor fuels 
tax on those programs it feels best serve our transportation needs. I 
think passenger rail should be one of those programs.

  Another argument I often hear is that we should stop subsidizing 
Amtrak. Amtrak needs to be self-sufficient.
  I would like to see that happen, but to date, I am not aware of any 
transportation system that supports itself without Federal assistance. 
Further, I am not aware of any transportation system that supports 
itself through user fees. According to the Department of 
Transportation, in fiscal year 1994 nearly $6 billion more was spent on 
highways than was collected in user fees.
  In fiscal year 1995 nearly $8 billion more was spent on highways than 
was collected in user fees. Transit which is exempt from the motor 
fuels tax, received $3 billion in revenues in motor fuels revenues last 
year. I repeat, no mode is self-financed.
  In closing, our national passenger rail system is important.
  My legislation would provide capital funding to help improve and 
maintain the corporation's infrastructure. Amtrak will not be able to 
make it to zero operating subsidies by the year 2002 without it. If we 
are to adequately fund our passenger rail system like we fund our 
highways and other major modes of transportation, Amtrak will need this 
trust fund.
                                 ______