[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 145 (Friday, October 24, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H9515-H9528]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AMTRAK REFORM AND PRIVATIZATION ACT OF 1997
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Miller of Florida). Pursuant to House
Resolution 270 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further
consideration of the bill, H.R. 2247.
{time} 1108
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the
bill (H.R. 2247) to reform the statutes relating to Amtrak, to
authorize appropriations for Amtrak, and for other purposes, with Mr.
Thornberry, Chairman pro tempore, in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. When the Committee of the Whole rose on
Wednesday, October 22, 1997, all time for general debate had expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the Committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill
for the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be
considered as read.
The text of the Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is
as follows:
H.R. 2247
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Amtrak Reform and
Privatization Act of 1997''.
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT REFORMS
SEC. 101. CONTRACTING OUT.
(a) Amendment.--Section 24312(b) of title 49, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Contracting Out.--(1) When Amtrak contracts out work
normally performed by an employee in a bargaining unit
covered by a contract between a labor organization and
Amtrak, Amtrak is encouraged to use other rail carriers for
performing such work.
``(2)(A) Amtrak may not enter into a contract for the
operation of trains with any entity other than a State or
State authority.
``(B) If Amtrak enters into a contract as described in
subparagraph (A)--
``(i) such contract shall not relieve Amtrak of any
obligation in connection with the use of facilities of
another entity for the operation covered by such contract;
and
``(ii) such operation shall be subject to any operating or
safety restrictions and conditions required by the agreement
providing for the use of such facilities.
``(C) This paragraph shall not restrict Amtrak's authority
to enter into contracts for access to or use of tracks or
facilities for the operation of trains.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) shall take effect 254
days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 102. CONTRACTING PRACTICES.
(a) Below-Cost Competition.--Section 24305(b) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Below-Cost Competition.--(1) Amtrak shall not submit
any bid for the performance of services under a contract for
an amount less than the cost to Amtrak of performing such
services, with respect to any activity other than the
provision of intercity rail passenger transportation,
commuter rail passenger transportation, or mail or express
transportation. For purposes of this subsection, the cost to
Amtrak of performing services shall be determined using
generally accepted accounting principles for contracting.
``(2) Any aggrieved individual may commence a civil action
for violation of paragraph (1). The United States district
courts shall have jurisdiction, without regard to the amount
in controversy or the citizenship of the parties, to enforce
paragraph (1). The court, in issuing any final order in any
action brought pursuant to this paragraph, may award bid
preparation costs, anticipated profits, and litigation costs,
including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees, to any
prevailing or substantially prevailing party. The court may,
if a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction is
sought, require the filing of a bond or equivalent security
in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
``(3) This subsection shall cease to be effective on the
expiration of a fiscal year during which no Federal operating
assistance is provided to Amtrak.''.
(b) Through Service in Conjunction With Intercity Bus
Operations.--(1) Section 24305(a) of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(3)(A) Except as provided in subsection (d)(2), Amtrak
may enter into a contract with a motor carrier of passengers
for the intercity transportation of passengers by motor
carrier over regular routes only--
``(i) if the motor carrier is not a public recipient of
governmental assistance, as such term is defined in section
13902(b)(8)(A) of this title, other than a recipient of funds
under section 5311 of this title;
``(ii) for passengers who have had prior movement by rail
or will have subsequent movement by rail; and
``(iii) if the buses, when used in the provision of such
transportation, are used exclusively for the transportation
of passengers described in clause (ii).
``(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to transportation
funded predominantly by a State or local government, or to
ticket selling agreements.''.
(2) Section 24305(d) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(3) Congress encourages Amtrak and motor common carriers
of passengers to use the authority conferred in sections
11322 and 14302 of this title for the purpose of providing
improved service to the public and economy of operation.''.
SEC. 103. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.
Section 24301(e) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``Section 552 of title 5, this part,''
and inserting in lieu thereof ``This part''.
SEC. 104. TRACK WORK.
(a) Outreach Program.--Amtrak shall, within one year after
the date of the enactment of this Act, establish an outreach
program through which it will work with track work
manufacturers in the United States to increase the likelihood
that such manufacturers will be able to meet Amtrak's
specifications for track work. The program shall include
engineering assistance for the manufacturers and dialogue
between Amtrak and the manufacturers to identify how Amtrak's
specifications can be met by the capabilities of the
manufacturers.
(b) Annual Report.--Amtrak shall report to the Congress
within 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act on
progress made under subsection (a), including a statement of
the percentage of Amtrak's track work contracts that are
awarded to manufacturers in the United States.
TITLE II--OPERATIONAL REFORMS
SEC. 201. BASIC SYSTEM.
(a) Operation of Basic System.--Section 24701 of title 49,
United States Code, and the item relating thereto in the
table of sections of chapter 247 of such title, are repealed.
(b) Improving Rail Passenger Transportation.--Section 24702
of title 49, United States Code, and the item relating
thereto in the table of sections of chapter 247 of such
title, are repealed.
(c) Discontinuance.--Section 24706 of title 49, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (b);
(2) by striking ``Notice of Discontinuance.--(1) Except as
provided in subsection (b) of this section, at'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Time of Notice.--At'';
(3) by striking ``90 days'' and inserting in lieu thereof
``180 days'';
(4) by striking ``a discontinuance under section 24704 or
24707(a) or (b) of this title'' and inserting in lieu thereof
``discontinuing service over a route'';
(5) by inserting ``or assume'' after ``agree to share'';
(6) by striking ``(2) Notice'' and inserting in lieu
thereof ``(b) Place of Notice.--Notice''; and
(7) by striking ``section 24704 or 24707(a) or (b) of this
title'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection (a)''.
(d) Cost and Performance Review.--Section 24707 of title
49, United States Code, and the item relating thereto in the
table of sections of chapter 247 of such title, are repealed.
(e) Special Commuter Transportation.--Section 24708 of
title 49, United States Code, and the item relating thereto
in the table of sections of chapter 247 of such title, are
repealed.
(f) Conforming Amendment.--Section 24312(a)(1) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``, 24701(a),''.
SEC. 202. MAIL, EXPRESS, AND AUTO-FERRY TRANSPORTATION.
(a) Repeal.--Section 24306 of title 49, United States Code,
and the item relating thereto in the table of sections of
chapter 243 of such title, are repealed.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 24301 of title 49,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(o) Nonapplication of Certain Other Laws.--State and
local laws and regulations that impair the provision of mail,
express, and auto-ferry transportation do not apply to Amtrak
or a rail carrier providing mail, express, or auto-ferry
transportation.''.
SEC. 203. ROUTE AND SERVICE CRITERIA.
Section 24703 of title 49, United States Code, and the item
relating thereto in the table of sections of chapter 247 of
such title, are repealed.
[[Page H9516]]
SEC. 204. ADDITIONAL QUALIFYING ROUTES.
Section 24705 of title 49, United States Code, and the item
relating thereto in the table of sections of chapter 247 of
such title, are repealed.
SEC. 205. TRANSPORTATION REQUESTED BY STATES, AUTHORITIES,
AND OTHER PERSONS.
(a) Repeal.--Section 24704 of title 49, United States Code,
and the item relating thereto in the table of sections of
chapter 247 of such title, are repealed.
(b) Existing Agreements.--Amtrak shall not, after the date
of the enactment of this Act, be required to provide
transportation services pursuant to an agreement entered into
before such date of enactment under the section repealed by
subsection (a) of this section.
(c) State, Regional, and Local Cooperation.--Section
24101(c)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
inserting ``, separately or in combination,'' after ``and the
private sector''.
(d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 24312(a)(1) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``or
24704(b)(2)''.
SEC. 206. AMTRAK COMMUTER.
(a) Repeal of Chapter 245.--Chapter 245 of title 49, United
States Code, and the item relating thereto in the table of
chapters of subtitle V of such title, are repealed.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 24301(f) of title
49, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(f) Tax Exemption for Certain Commuter Authorities.--A
commuter authority that was eligible to make a contract with
Amtrak Commuter to provide commuter rail passenger
transportation but which decided to provide its own rail
passenger transportation beginning January 1, 1983, is
exempt, effective October 1, 1981, from paying a tax or fee
to the same extent Amtrak is exempt.''.
(2) Subsection (a) of this section shall not affect any
trackage rights held by Amtrak or the Consolidated Rail
Corporation.
SEC. 207. COMMUTER COST SHARING ON THE NORTHEAST CORRIDOR.
(a) Determination of Compensation.--Section 24904 of title
49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (b);
(2) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (b);
(3) in subsection (b), as so redesignated by paragraph (2)
of this subsection--
(A) by striking ``Transportation Over Certain Rights of Way
and Facilities'' in the subsection head and inserting in lieu
thereof ``Freight Transportation'';
(B) by inserting ``relating to rail freight
transportation'' after ``subsection (a)(6) of this section''
in paragraph (1); and
(C) by inserting ``to an agreement described in paragraph
(1)'' after ``If the parties'' in paragraph (2); and
(4) by inserting after subsection (b), as so redesignated
by paragraph (2) of this subsection, the following new
subsection:
``(c) Binding Arbitration for Commuter Disputes.--(1) If
the parties to an agreement described in subsection (a)(6)
relating to commuter rail passenger transportation cannot
agree to the terms of such agreement, such parties shall
submit the issues in dispute to binding arbitration.
``(2) The parties to a dispute described in paragraph (1)
may agree to use the Surface Transportation Board to
arbitrate such dispute, and if requested the Surface
Transportation Board shall perform such function.''.
(b) Privatization.--Section 24101(d) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Minimizing Government Subsidies.--To carry out this
part, Amtrak is encouraged to make agreements with the
private sector and undertake initiatives that are consistent
with good business judgment, that produce income to minimize
Government subsidies, and that promote the potential
privatization of Amtrak's operations.''.
SEC. 208. ACCESS TO RECORDS AND ACCOUNTS.
Section 24315 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (e), by inserting ``financial or'' after
``Comptroller General may conduct''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(h) Access to Records and Accounts.--A State shall have
access to Amtrak's records, accounts, and other necessary
documents used to determine the amount of any payment to
Amtrak required of the State.''.
TITLE III--COLLECTIVE BARGAINING REFORMS
SEC. 301. RAILWAY LABOR ACT PROCEDURES.
(a) Notices.--(1) Notwithstanding any arrangement in effect
before the date of the enactment of this Act, notices under
section 6 of the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 156) with
respect to all issues relating to--
(A) employee protective arrangements and severance
benefits, including all provisions of Appendix C-2 to the
National Railroad Passenger Corporation Agreement, signed
July 5, 1973; and
(B) contracting out by Amtrak of work normally performed by
an employee in a bargaining unit covered by a contract
between Amtrak and a labor organization representing Amtrak
employees,
applicable to employees of Amtrak shall be deemed served and
effective on the date which is 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act. Amtrak, and each affected labor
organization representing Amtrak employees, shall promptly
supply specific information and proposals with respect to
each such notice. This subsection shall not apply to
issues relating to provisions defining the scope or
classification of work performed by an Amtrak employee.
(2) In the case of provisions of a collective bargaining
agreement with respect to which a moratorium is in effect 90
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, paragraph
(1) shall take effect on the expiration of such moratorium.
For purposes of the application of paragraph (1) to such
provisions, notices shall be deemed served and effective on
the date of such expiration.
(b) National Mediation Board Efforts.--Except as provided
in subsection (c), the National Mediation Board shall
complete all efforts, with respect to each dispute described
in subsection (a), under section 5 of the Railway Labor Act
(45 U.S.C. 155) not later than 180 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(c) Railway Labor Act Arbitration.--The parties to any
dispute described in subsection (a) may agree to submit the
dispute to arbitration under section 7 of the Railway Labor
Act (45 U.S.C. 157), and any award resulting therefrom shall
be retroactive to the date which is 180 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act.
(d) Dispute Resolution.--(1) With respect to any dispute
described in subsection (a) which--
(A) is unresolved as of the date which is 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act; and
(B) is not submitted to arbitration as described in
subsection (c),
Amtrak and the labor organization parties to such dispute
shall, within 187 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act, each select an individual from the entire roster of
arbitrators maintained by the National Mediation Board.
Within 194 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the individuals selected under the preceding sentence shall
jointly select an individual from such roster to make
recommendations with respect to such dispute under this
subsection.
(2) No individual shall be selected under paragraph (1) who
is pecuniarily or otherwise interested in any organization of
employees or any railroad. Nothing in this subsection shall
preclude an individual from being selected for more than 1
dispute described in subsection (a).
(3) The compensation of individuals selected under
paragraph (1) shall be fixed by the National Mediation Board.
The second paragraph of section 10 of the Railway Labor Act
shall apply to the expenses of such individuals as if such
individuals were members of a board created under such
section 10.
(4) If the parties to a dispute described in subsection (a)
fail to reach agreement within 224 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the individual selected under
paragraph (1) with respect to such dispute shall make
recommendations to the parties proposing contract terms to
resolve the dispute.
(5) If the parties to a dispute described in subsection (a)
fail to reach agreement, no change shall be made by either of
the parties in the conditions out of which the dispute arose
for 30 days after recommendations are made under paragraph
(4).
(6) Section 10 of the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 160)
shall not apply to a dispute described in subsection (a).
SEC. 302. SERVICE DISCONTINUANCE.
(a) Repeal.--(1) Section 24706(c) of title 49, United
States Code, is repealed.
(2) Any provision of a contract, entered into before the
date of the enactment of this Act between Amtrak and a labor
organization representing Amtrak employees, relating to--
(A) employee protective arrangements and severance
benefits, including all provisions of Appendix C-2 to the
National Railroad Passenger Corporation Agreement, signed
July 5, 1973; or
(B) contracting out by Amtrak of work normally performed by
an employee in a bargaining unit covered by a contract
between Amtrak and a labor organization representing Amtrak
employees,
applicable to employees of Amtrak is extinguished. This
paragraph shall not apply to provisions defining the scope or
classification of work performed by an Amtrak employee.
(3) Section 1172(c) of title 11, United States Code, shall
not apply to Amtrak and its employees.
(4) Paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection shall take
effect 254 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Intercity Passenger Service Employees.--Section 1165(a)
of the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981 (45 U.S.C. 1113(a))
is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``After January 1, 1983'';
(2) by striking ``Amtrak, Amtrak Commuter, and Conrail''
and inserting in lieu thereof ``Amtrak and Conrail'';
(3) by striking ``Such agreement shall ensure'' and all
that follows through ``submitted to binding arbitration.'';
and
(4) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
agreement, or arrangement, with respect to employees in any
class or craft in train or engine service, Conrail shall have
the right to furlough one such employee for each employee in
train or engine service who moves from Amtrak to Conrail in
excess of the cumulative number of such employees who move
from Conrail to Amtrak. Conrail shall not be obligated to
fill any position governed by an agreement concerning crew
consist, attrition arrangements, reserve boards, or reserve
engine service positions, where an increase in positions is
the result of the return of an Amtrak employee pursuant to an
agreement entered into under paragraph (1). Conrail's
collective bargaining agreements with organizations
representing its train and engine service employees shall be
deemed to have been amended to conform to this paragraph. Any
dispute or controversy with respect to the interpretation,
application, or enforcement of this paragraph which has not
been resolved within 90
[[Page H9517]]
days after the date of the enactment of this paragraph may be
submitted by either party to an adjustment board for a final
and binding decision under section 3 of the Railway Labor
Act.''.
TITLE IV--USE OF RAILROAD FACILITIES
SEC. 401. LIABILITY LIMITATION.
(a) Amendment.--Chapter 281 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 28103. Limitations on rail passenger transportation
liability
``(a) Limitations.--(1) Notwithstanding any other statutory
or common law or public policy, or the nature of the conduct
giving rise to damages or liability, in a claim for personal
injury, death, or damage to property arising from or in
connection with the provision of rail passenger
transportation, or from or in connection with any rail
passenger transportation operations over or rail passenger
transportation use of right-of-way or facilities owned,
leased, or maintained by any high-speed railroad authority or
operator, any commuter authority or operator, any rail
carrier, or any State--
``(A) punitive damages shall not exceed the greater of--
``(i) $250,000; or
``(ii) three times the amount of economic loss; and
``(B) noneconomic damages awarded to any claimant for each
accident or incident shall not exceed the claimant's economic
loss, if any, by more than $250,000.
``(2) If, in any case wherein death was caused, the law of
the place where the act or omission complained of occurred
provides, or has been construed to provide, for damages only
punitive in nature, the claimant may recover in a claim
limited by this subsection for economic and noneconomic
damages and punitive damages, subject to paragraph (1)(A) and
(B).
``(3) For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) the term `actual damages' means damages awarded to
pay for economic loss;
``(B) the term `claim' means a claim made, directly or
indirectly--
``(i) against Amtrak, any high-speed railroad authority or
operator, any commuter authority or operator, any rail
carrier, or any State; or
``(ii) against an officer, employee, affiliate engaged in
railroad operations, or agent, of Amtrak, any high-speed
railroad authority or operator, any commuter authority or
operator, any rail carrier, or any State;
``(C) the term `economic loss' means any pecuniary loss
resulting from harm, including the loss of earnings, medical
expense loss, replacement services loss, loss due to death,
burial costs, loss of business or employment opportunities,
and any other form of pecuniary loss allowed under applicable
State law or under paragraph (2) of this subsection;
``(D) the term `noneconomic damages' means damages other
than punitive damages or actual damages; and
``(E) the term `punitive damages' means damages awarded
against any person or entity to punish or deter such person
or entity, or others, from engaging in similar behavior in
the future.
``(b) Indemnification Obligations.--Obligations of any
party, however arising, including obligations arising under
leases or contracts or pursuant to orders of an
administrative agency, to indemnify against damages or
liability for personal injury, death, or damage to property
described in subsection (a), incurred after the date of the
enactment of the Amtrak Reform and Privatization Act of 1997,
shall be enforceable, notwithstanding any other statutory or
common law or public policy, or the nature of the conduct
giving rise to the damages or liability.
``(c) Effect on Other Laws.--This section shall not affect
the damages that may be recovered under the Act of April 27,
1908 (45 U.S.C. 51 et seq.; popularly known as the `Federal
Employers' Liability Act') or under any workers compensation
Act.
``(d) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
`rail carrier' includes a person providing excursion, scenic,
or museum train service, and an owner or operator of a
privately owned rail passenger car.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections of chapter
281 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following new item:
``28103. Limitations on rail passenger transportation liability.''.
TITLE V--FINANCIAL REFORMS
SEC. 501. FINANCIAL POWERS.
(a) Capitalization.--(1) Section 24304 of title 49, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 24304. Employee stock ownership plans
``In issuing stock pursuant to applicable corporate law,
Amtrak is encouraged to include employee stock ownership
plans.''.
(2) The item relating to section 24304 of title 49, United
States Code, in the table of sections of chapter 243 of such
title is amended to read as follows:
``24304. Employee stock ownership plans.''.
(b) Redemption of Common Stock.--(1) Amtrak shall, within 2
months after the date of the enactment of this Act, redeem
all common stock previously issued, for the fair market value
of such stock.
(2) Section 28103 of title 49, United States Code, shall
not apply to any rail carrier holding common stock of Amtrak
after the expiration of 2 months after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(3) Amtrak shall redeem any such common stock held after
the expiration of the 2-month period described in paragraph
(1), using procedures set forth in section 24311(a) and (b).
(c) Elimination of Liquidation Preference and Voting Rights
of Preferred Stock.--(1)(A) Preferred stock of Amtrak held by
the Secretary of Transportation shall confer no liquidation
preference.
(B) Subparagraph (A) shall take effect 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(2)(A) Preferred stock of Amtrak held by the Secretary of
Transportation shall confer no voting rights.
(B) Subparagraph (A) shall take effect 60 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(d) Note and Mortgage.--(1) Section 24907 of title 49,
United States Code, and the item relating thereto in the
table of sections of chapter 249 of such title, are repealed.
(2) The United States hereby relinquishes all rights held
in connection with any note obtained or mortgage made under
such section 24907, or in connection with the note, security
agreement, and terms and conditions related thereto entered
into with Amtrak dated October 5, 1983.
(e) Status and Applicable Laws.--(1) Section 24301(a)(3) of
title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``, and
shall not be subject to title 31'' after ``United States
Government''.
(2) Section 9101(2) of title 31, United States Code,
relating to Government corporations, is amended by striking
subparagraph (A) and redesignating subparagraphs (B) through
(L) as subparagraphs (A) through (K), respectively.
SEC. 502. DISBURSEMENT OF FEDERAL FUNDS.
Section 24104(d) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended to read as follows:
``(d) Administration of Appropriations.--Federal operating
assistance funds appropriated to Amtrak shall be provided to
Amtrak upon appropriation when requested by Amtrak.''.
SEC. 503. BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
(a) Amendment.--Section 24302 of title 49, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 24302. Board of Directors
``(a) Emergency Reform Board.--
``(1) Establishment and duties.--The Emergency Reform Board
described in paragraph (2) shall assume the responsibilities
of the Board of Directors of Amtrak 60 days after the date of
the enactment of the Amtrak Reform and Privatization Act of
1997, or as soon thereafter as such Board is sufficiently
constituted to function as a board of directors under
applicable corporate law. Such Board shall adopt new bylaws,
including procedures for the selection of members of the
Board of Directors under subsection (c) which provide for
employee representation.
``(2) Membership.--(A) The Emergency Reform Board shall
consist of 7 members appointed by the President, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate.
``(B) In selecting individuals for nominations for
appointments to the Emergency Reform Board, the President
should consult with--
``(i) the Speaker of the House of Representatives
concerning the appointment of two members;
``(ii) the minority leader of the House of Representatives
concerning the appointment of one member;
``(iii) the majority leader of the Senate concerning the
appointment of two members; and
``(iv) the minority leader of the Senate concerning the
appointment of one member.
``(C) Appointments under subparagraph (A) shall be made
from among individuals who--
``(i) have technical qualification, professional standing,
and demonstrated expertise in the fields of intercity common
carrier transportation and corporate management; and
``(ii) are not employees of Amtrak, employees of the United
States, or representatives of rail labor or rail management.
``(b) Director General.--If the Emergency Reform Board
described in subsection (a)(2) is not sufficiently
constituted to function as a board of directors under
applicable corporate law before the expiration of 60 days
after the date of the enactment of the Amtrak Reform and
Privatization Act of 1997, the Chief Justice of the United
States shall appoint a Director General, who shall exercise
all powers of the Board of Directors of Amtrak until the
Emergency Reform Board assumes such powers.
``(c) Board of Directors.--Four years after the
establishment of the Emergency Reform Board under subsection
(a), a Board of Directors shall be selected pursuant to
bylaws adopted by the Emergency Reform Board, and the
Emergency Reform Board shall be dissolved.
``(d) Authority to Recommend Plan.--The Emergency Reform
Board shall have the authority to recommend to the Congress a
plan to implement the recommendations of the 1997 Working
Group on Inter-City Rail regarding the transfer of Amtrak's
infrastructure assets and responsibilities to a new
separately governed corporation.''.
(b) Effect on Authorizations.--If the Emergency Reform
Board has not assumed the responsibilities of the Board of
Directors of Amtrak before March 15, 1998, all provisions
authorizing appropriations under the amendments made by
section 701 of this Act for a fiscal year after fiscal year
1998 shall cease to be effective.
SEC. 504. REPORTS AND AUDITS.
Section 24315 of title 49, United States Code, as amended
by section 208 of this Act, is further amended--
(1) by striking subsections (a) and (c);
(2) by redesignating subsections (b), (d), (e), (f), (g),
and (h) as subsections (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f),
respectively; and
(3) in subsection (d), as so redesignated by paragraph (2)
of this section, by striking ``(d) or (e)'' and inserting in
lieu thereof ``(b) or (c)''.
SEC. 505. OFFICERS' PAY.
Section 24303(b) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by inserting ``The preceding sentence shall cease to
be effective on the expiration of a fiscal year during which
no Federal operating assistance is provided to Amtrak.''
after ``with comparable responsibility.''.
SEC. 506. EXEMPTION FROM TAXES.
Section 24301(l)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
[[Page H9518]]
(1) by inserting ``, and any passenger or other customer of
Amtrak or such subsidiary,'' after ``subsidiary of Amtrak'';
(2) by striking ``or fee imposed'' and all that follows
through ``levied on it'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``,
fee, head charge, or other charge, imposed or levied by a
State, political subdivision, or local taxing authority,
directly or indirectly on Amtrak or on persons traveling in
intercity rail passenger transportation or on mail or express
transportation provided by Amtrak or a rail carrier
subsidiary of Amtrak, or on the carriage of such persons,
mail, or express, or on the sale of any such transportation,
or on the gross receipts derived therefrom''; and
(3) by amending the last sentence thereof to read as
follows: ``In the case of a tax or fee that Amtrak was
required to pay as of September 10, 1982, Amtrak is not
exempt from such tax or fee if it was assessed before April
1, 1997.''.
TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 601. TEMPORARY RAIL ADVISORY COUNCIL.
(a) Appointment.--Within 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, a Temporary Rail Advisory Council (in
this section referred to as the ``Council'') shall be
appointed under this section.
(b) Duties.--The Council shall--
(1) evaluate Amtrak's performance;
(2) prepare an analysis and critique of Amtrak's business
plan;
(3) suggest strategies for further cost containment and
productivity improvements, including strategies with the
potential for further reduction in Federal operating
subsidies and the eventual partial or complete privatization
of Amtrak's operations; and
(4) recommend appropriate methods for adoption of uniform
cost and accounting procedures throughout the Amtrak system,
based on generally accepted accounting principles.
(c) Membership.--(1) The Council shall consist of 7 members
appointed as follows:
(A) Two individuals to be appointed by the Speaker of the
House of Representatives.
(B) One individual to be appointed by the minority leader
of the House of Representatives.
(C) Two individuals to be appointed by the majority leader
of the Senate.
(D) One individual to be appointed by the minority leader
of the Senate.
(E) One individual to be appointed by the President.
(2) Appointments under paragraph (1) shall be made from
among individuals who--
(A) have technical qualification, professional standing,
and demonstrated expertise in the fields of transportation
and corporate management; and
(B) are not employees of Amtrak, employees of the United
States, or representatives of rail labor or rail management.
(3) Within 40 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, a majority of the members of the Council shall elect a
chairman from among such members.
(d) Travel Expenses.--Each member of the Council shall
serve without pay, but shall receive travel expenses,
including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with
sections 5702 and 5703 of title 5, United States Code.
(e) Administrative Support.--The Secretary of
Transportation shall provide to the Council such
administrative support as the Council requires to carry out
this section.
(f) Access to Information.--Amtrak shall make available to
the Council all information the Council requires to carry out
this section. The Council shall establish appropriate
procedures to ensure against the public disclosure of any
information obtained under this subsection which is a trade
secret or commercial or financial information that is
privileged or confidential.
(g) Reports.--(1) Within 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Council shall transmit to the
Amtrak board of directors and the Congress an interim report
on its findings and recommendations.
(2) Within 270 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Council shall transmit to the Amtrak board of
directors and the Congress a final report on its findings and
recommendations.
(h) Status.--The Council shall not be subject to the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) or section 552
of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the
Freedom of Information Act).
SEC. 602. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS.
Section 24301(b) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking the first sentence;
(2) by striking ``of the District of Columbia'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``of the State in which its
principal place of business is located''; and
(3) by inserting ``For purposes of this subsection, the
term `State' includes the District of Columbia.
Notwithstanding section 3 of the District of Columbia
Business Corporation Act, Amtrak, if its principal place of
business is located in the District of Columbia, shall be
considered organized under the provisions of such Act.''
after ``in a civil action.''.
SEC. 603. STATUS AND APPLICABLE LAWS.
Section 24301 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``rail carrier under
section 10102'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``railroad
carrier under section 20102(2) and chapters 261 and 281'';
and
(2) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
``(c) Application of Subtitle IV.--Subtitle IV of this
title shall not apply to Amtrak, except for sections 11301,
11322(a), 11502, and 11706. Notwithstanding the preceding
sentence, Amtrak shall continue to be considered an employer
under the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974, the Railroad
Unemployment Insurance Act, and the Railroad Retirement Tax
Act.''.
SEC. 604. WASTE DISPOSAL.
Section 24301(m)(1)(A) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``1996'' and inserting in lieu thereof
``2000''.
SEC. 605. ASSISTANCE FOR UPGRADING FACILITIES.
Section 24310 of title 49, United States Code, and the item
relating thereto in the table of sections of chapter 243 of
such title, are repealed.
SEC. 606. RAIL SAFETY SYSTEM PROGRAM.
Section 24313 of title 49, United States Code, and the item
relating thereto in the table of sections of chapter 243 of
such title, are repealed.
SEC. 607. DEMONSTRATION OF NEW TECHNOLOGY.
Section 24314 of title 49, United States Code, and the item
relating thereto in the table of sections of chapter 243 of
such title, are repealed.
SEC. 608. PROGRAM MASTER PLAN FOR BOSTON-NEW YORK MAIN LINE.
(a) Repeal.--Section 24903 of title 49, United States Code,
and the item relating thereto in the table of sections of
chapter 249 of such title, are repealed.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 24902(a)(1)(A) of title
49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``and 40
minutes''.
SEC. 609. BOSTON-NEW HAVEN ELECTRIFICATION PROJECT.
Section 24902(f) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``Improvements under''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Amtrak shall design and construct the electrification
system between Boston, Massachusetts, and New Haven,
Connecticut, to accommodate the installation of a third
mainline track between Davisville and Central Falls, Rhode
Island, to be used for double-stack freight service to and
from the Port of Davisville. Amtrak shall also make clearance
improvements on the existing main line tracks to permit
double stack service on this line, if funds to defray the
costs of clearance improvements beyond Amtrak's own
requirements for electrified passenger service are provided
by public or private entities other than Amtrak. Wherever
practicable, Amtrak shall use portal structures and realign
existing tracks on undergrade and overgrade bridges to
minimize the width of the right-of-way required to add the
third track. Amtrak shall take such other steps as may be
required to coordinate and facilitate design and construction
work. The Secretary of Transportation may provide appropriate
support to Amtrak for carrying out this paragraph.''.
SEC. 610. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990.
(a) Application to Amtrak.--Amtrak, and with respect only
to the facilities it jointly uses with Amtrak, a commuter
authority, shall not be subject to any requirement under
section 242(a)(1) and (3) and (e)(2) of the Americans With
Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12162(a)(1) and (3) and
(e)(2)) until January 1, 1998. For stations jointly used by
Amtrak and a commuter authority, this subsection shall not
affect the allocation of costs between Amtrak and the
commuter authority relating to accessibility improvements.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 24307 of title 49,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (b); and
(2) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (b).
SEC. 611. DEFINITIONS.
Section 24102 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking paragraphs (2), (3), and (11);
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (8) as
paragraphs (2) through (6), respectively;
(3) by inserting after paragraph (6), as so redesignated by
paragraph (2) of this section, the following new paragraph:
``(7) `rail passenger transportation' means the interstate,
intrastate, or international transportation of passengers by
rail;'';
(4) in paragraph (6), as so redesignated by paragraph (2)
of this section, by inserting ``, including a unit of State
or local government,'' after ``means a person''; and
(5) by redesignating paragraphs (9) and (10) as paragraphs
(8) and (9), respectively.
SEC. 612. NORTHEAST CORRIDOR COST DISPUTE.
Section 1163 of the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981 (45
U.S.C. 1111) is repealed.
SEC. 613. INSPECTOR GENERAL ACT OF 1978 AMENDMENT.
(a) Amendment.--Section 8G(a)(2) of the Inspector General
Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) is amended by striking
``Amtrak,''.
(b) Amtrak Not Federal Entity.--Amtrak shall not be
considered a Federal entity for purposes of the Inspector
General Act of 1978.
SEC. 614. CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION.
Section 4023 of the Conrail Privatization Act (45 U.S.C.
1323), and the item relating thereto in the table of contents
of such Act, are repealed.
SEC. 615. INTERSTATE RAIL COMPACTS.
(a) Consent to Compacts.--Congress grants consent to States
with an interest in a specific form, route, or corridor of
intercity passenger rail service (including high speed rail
service) to enter into interstate compacts to promote the
provision of the service, including--
(1) retaining an existing service or commencing a new
service;
(2) assembling rights-of-way; and
(3) performing capital improvements, including--
(A) the construction and rehabilitation of maintenance
facilities and intermodal passenger facilities;
(B) the purchase of locomotives; and
(C) operational improvements, including communications,
signals, and other systems.
[[Page H9519]]
(b) Financing.--An interstate compact established by States
under subsection (a) may provide that, in order to carry out
the compact, the States may--
(1) accept contributions from a unit of State or local
government or a person;
(2) use any Federal or State funds made available for
intercity passenger rail service (except funds made available
for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation);
(3) on such terms and conditions as the States consider
advisable--
(A) borrow money on a short-term basis and issue notes for
the borrowing; and
(B) issue bonds; and
(4) obtain financing by other means permitted under Federal
or State law.
SEC. 616. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
Part C of subtitle V of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in section 24307(b)(3), as so redesignated by section
610(b)(2) of this Act, by striking ``Interstate Commerce
Commission'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Surface
Transportation Board'';
(2) in section 24308--
(A) by striking ``Interstate Commerce Commission'' in
subsection (a)(2)(A) and inserting in lieu thereof ``Surface
Transportation Board''; and
(B) by striking ``Commission'' each place it appears and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Board'';
(3) in section 24311(c)--
(A) by striking ``Interstate Commerce Commission'' in
paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu thereof ``Surface
Transportation Board'';
(B) by striking ``Commission'' each place it appears and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Board''; and
(C) by striking ``Commission's'' in paragraph (2) and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Board's'';
(4) in section 24902(j)--
(A) by striking ``Interstate Commerce Commission'' each
place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof ``Surface
Transportation Board''; and
(B) by striking ``Commission'' each place it appears and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Board''; and
(5) in section 24904(b), as so redesignated by section
207(a)(2) of this Act--
(A) by striking ``Interstate Commerce Commission'' in
paragraph (2) and inserting in lieu thereof ``Surface
Transportation Board''; and
(B) by striking ``Commission'' each place it appears and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Board''.
SEC. 617. MAGNETIC LEVITATION TRACK MATERIALS.
The Secretary of Transportation shall transfer to the State
of Florida, pursuant to a grant or cooperative agreement,
title to aluminum reaction rail, power rail base, and other
related materials (originally used in connection with the
Prototype Air Cushion Vehicle Program between 1973 and 1976)
located at the Transportation Technology Center near Pueblo,
Colorado, for use by the State of Florida to construct a
magnetic levitation track in connection with a project or
projects being undertaken by American Maglev Technology,
Inc., to demonstrate magnetic levitation technology in the
United States. If the materials are not used for such
construction within 3 years after the date of the enactment
of this Act, title to such materials shall revert to the
United States.
SEC. 618. RAILROAD LOAN GUARANTEES.
(a) Declaration of Policy.--Section 101(a)(4) of the
Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (45
U.S.C. 801(a)(4)) is amended to read as follows:
``(4) Continuation of service on, or preservation of, light
density lines that are necessary to continued employment and
community well-being throughout the United States.''.
(b) Maximum Rate of Interest.--Section 511(f) of the
Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (45
U.S.C. 831(f)) is amended by striking ``shall not exceed an
annual percentage rate which the Secretary determines to be
reasonable, taking into consideration the prevailing interest
rates for similar obligations in the private market.'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``shall not exceed the annual
percentage rate which is equivalent to the cost of money to
the United States.''.
(c) Minimum Repayment Period and Prepayment Penalties.--
Section 511(g)(2) of the Railroad Revitalization and
Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (45 U.S.C. 831(g)(2)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(2) payment of the obligation is required by its terms to
be made not less than 15 years but not more than 25 years
from the date of its execution, with no penalty imposed for
prepayment after 5 years;''.
(d) Determination of Repayability.--Section 511(g)(5) of
the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976
(45 U.S.C. 831(g)(5)) is amended to read as follows:
``(5) either the loan can reasonably be repaid by the
applicant or the loan is collateralized at no more than the
current value of assets being financed under this section to
provide protection to the United States;''.
TITLE VII--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
SEC. 701. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Capital Expenditures.--Section 24104(a) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(a) Capital Expenditures.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation--
``(1) $230,000,000 for fiscal year 1995;
``(2) $230,000,000 for fiscal year 1996;
``(3) $224,000,000 for fiscal year 1997;
``(4) $501,000,000 for fiscal year 1998;
``(5) $516,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
``(6) $531,000,000 for fiscal year 2000,
for the benefit of Amtrak for capital expenditures under
chapters 243 and 247 of this title.''.
(b) Operating Expenses.--Section 24104(b) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Operating Expenses.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation--
``(1) $542,000,000 for fiscal year 1995;
``(2) $405,000,000 for fiscal year 1996;
``(3) $365,000,000 for fiscal year 1997;
``(4) $387,000,000 for fiscal year 1998;
``(5) $292,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
``(6) $242,000,000 for fiscal year 2000,
for the benefit of Amtrak for operating expenses.''.
(c) Additional Authorizations.--Section 24104(c) of title
49, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Additional Authorizations.--In addition to amounts
appropriated under subsection (a), there are authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation--
``(1) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 1995;
``(2) $115,000,000 for fiscal year 1996;
``(3) $255,000,000 for fiscal year 1997;
``(4) $250,000,000 for fiscal year 1998;
``(5) $250,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
``(6) $250,000,000 for fiscal year 2000,
for the benefit of Amtrak to make capital expenditures under
chapter 249 of this title.''.
(d) Reduction of Amounts.--Section 24104 of title 49,
United States Code, is further amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(g) Reduction of Amounts.--For each fiscal year, the
total amount authorized to be appropriated under subsections
(a) and (c) combined shall be reduced by any amount made
available to Amtrak pursuant to the Taxpayer Relief Act of
1997 for that fiscal year.''.
(e) Conforming Amendments.--Section 24909 of title 49,
United States Code, and the item relating thereto in the
table of sections of chapter 249 of such title, are repealed.
(f) Guarantee of Obligations.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation--
(1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 1998;
(2) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
(3) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2000,
for guaranteeing obligations of Amtrak under section 511 of
the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976
(45 U.S.C. 831).
(g) Conditions for Guarantee of Obligations.--Section
511(i) of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform
Act of 1976 (45 U.S.C. 831(i)) is amended by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(4) The Secretary shall not require, as a condition for
guarantee of an obligation under this section, that all
preexisting secured obligations of an obligor be subordinated
to the rights of the Secretary in the event of a default.''.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. No amendment to the committee amendment in
the nature of a substitute is in order except those printed in House
Report 105-334 and an amendment in the nature of a substitute by the
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar]. That amendment may be offered
only after the disposition of the amendments printed in the report,
shall be considered read, shall be debatable for 30 minutes, equally
divided and controlled by an opponent and a proponent, and shall not be
subject to an amendment.
The amendments printed in the report may be offered only by a Member
designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable
for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by
the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment,
except as specified in the report. And shall not be subject to a demand
for division of the question.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
Preferential Motion Offered by Mr. Bonior
Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior].
The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195,
noes 214, not voting 24, as follows:
[Roll No. 528]
AYES--195
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Baesler
Baldacci
Barcia
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Bentsen
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Cardin
Carson
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
[[Page H9520]]
Cummings
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dellums
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
Ensign
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Fazio
Filner
Flake
Foglietta
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Furse
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Gibbons
Goode
Gordon
Green
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hefner
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holden
Hooley
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kleczka
LaFalce
Lampson
Lantos
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pickett
Pomeroy
Poshard
Price (NC)
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schumer
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Skaggs
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith, Adam
Snyder
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stenholm
Stokes
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson
Thurman
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Turner
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Wexler
Weygand
Wise
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
NOES--214
Aderholt
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bilbray
Bliley
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Brady
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Christensen
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Cook
Cooksey
Cox
Crane
Crapo
Cunningham
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeLay
Diaz-Balart
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Everett
Ewing
Foley
Fowler
Fox
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goodlatte
Goss
Graham
Granger
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Horn
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kasich
Kelly
Kim
Kingston
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lucas
Manzullo
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Metcalf
Mica
Miller (FL)
Moran (KS)
Morella
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oxley
Packard
Pappas
Parker
Paul
Paxon
Pease
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Redmond
Regula
Riggs
Riley
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Royce
Salmon
Sanford
Saxton
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Solomon
Spence
Stearns
Stump
Sununu
Talent
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Traficant
Upton
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--24
Andrews
Bereuter
Bilirakis
Bono
Brown (CA)
Chenoweth
Cubin
Dickey
Fawell
Forbes
Gonzalez
Goodling
Houghton
McCarthy (NY)
McIntosh
Mollohan
Payne
Rangel
Ryun
Scarborough
Schiff
Smith (OR)
Souder
Weldon (PA)
{time} 1128
Mr. WALSH and Mr. OXLEY changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the motion was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
(Mr. ARMEY asked and was given permission to speak out of order for 1
minute.)
Legislative Program
Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Chairman, I take this time for the purpose of advising
the Members about the day's schedule.
Mr. Chairman, of course, as we all know, we are approaching the end
of the legislative year. This is always a hectic time in our lives.
There are always important matters that must be resolved before we
finish.
We come to the point of time in the year's schedule when it becomes
difficult, and, many times impossible, to postpone legislation, and
while, during the course of the year and at all times I do my very best
to in fact honor the commitment for Members with respect to their
ability to get away from the week's work at the appointed time, I feel
like it is only fair for all the Members to get an early warning, as
early as I can realize it, when it might be that we may not be able to
meet the departure time for the day.
Today we were, of course, promised, as is our usual custom on
Fridays, a 2 o'clock departure time. But we do have two very important
pieces of legislation that must be completed today, Amtrak and the
Interior conference report. Already today we have had some votes that
perhaps we might not have had to have that indicate to me that the 2
o'clock departure time is not likely to be something we can meet.
I would like to, of course, retain the completion of our work to some
period of time as soon after 2 o'clock as possible, and I would
encourage all our Members to be circumspect and respectful of one
another in the use of our time so that we can complete these two
important legislative pieces today and finish our work. But it is only
fair that I encourage everybody to understand that under any
circumstances, we simply do not have time in the legislative calendar
into which we can postpone these two pieces of work, if we are then to
complete the other work that is still before us.
Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ARMEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. FAZIO of California. I think everyone here, Mr. Leader, would
like to proceed on the agenda to complete this Congress, and certainly
I think most of us would have hoped we could have taken up the Amtrak
matter yesterday, as we had scheduled to.
But it seems to me the one key component to getting agreement from
both sides of the aisle to proceed on all these important matters is an
overridingly important issue that relates to the gentlewoman from
Orange County, CA [Ms. Sanchez].
She will be having an anniversary, as we all will, of our election
here before we leave this town the first Tuesday of November, and yet
she has not been accorded the same ability to take and hold her seat
that the rest of us have.
I think it is fair to say the people on this side of the aisle, who
showed the power of their support for her last night, retain that
interest, and implore the majority to bring that issue to close before
we leave. If that assurance can be given, I think the process here can
be eased greatly.
Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman
for his remarks, and it is my understanding that the gentlewoman from
California [Mrs. Sanchez] is in fact seated in the body, is voting,
does have her committee assignments, and is working on the same basis
as any other Member. The House did, of course, spend some time
yesterday addressing this issue. It is an important issue, as the
gentleman from California says, and it is in fact so important that it
will be done fully, completely, professionally, objectively and fairly.
Finally, before I yield back my time, I should say that another very
important component to the effect of successful completion of work is
civility.
Amendment Offered by Mr. LaTourette
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, made in order
under the rule.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. LaTourette:
Page 2, strike lines 4 through 6, and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
(a) Agreement by Parties.--Section 24312(b)(1) of title 49,
United States Code, is
[[Page H9521]]
amended by inserting ``, unless the parties otherwise agree''
after ``in the bargaining unit''.
(b) Use of Other Rail Carriers.--Section 24312 of title 49,
United States Code, is further amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
(c) Use of Other Rail Carriers.--(1) When Amtrak contracts
* * *
Page 3, line 1, strike ``(b) Effective Date.--Subsection
(a)'' and insert in lieu thereof ``(c) Effective Date.--
Subsection (b)''.
Page 12, line 11, through page 15, line 16, amend section
301 to read as follows:
SEC. 301. RESOLUTION OF LABOR PROTECTION AND CONTRACTING OUT
ISSUES.
Amtrak and a labor organization representing Amtrak
employees may present proposals, to a Presidential Emergency
Board appointed under section 10 of the Railway Labor Act (45
U.S.C. 160) with respect to a dispute to which Amtrak and the
labor organization are parties, concerning all issues
relating to--
(1) the provisions of Appendix C-2 to the National Railroad
Passenger Corporation Agreement, signed July 5, 1973; and
(2) the limitations imposed under section 24312(b) of title
49, United States Code.
If no contract has been agreed to after the expiration of the
30-day period following the report of the Presidential
Emergency Board, then, consistent with the Railway Labor Act,
the employees may strike and Amtrak may lock out the
employees or impose terms of employment containing changes
with respect to issues described in paragraph (1) or (2),
notwithstanding sections 24706(c) and 24312(b) of title 49,
United States Code. This section shall not apply to any
dispute concerning which a Presidential Emergency Board has
reported before the date of the enactment of this Act. This
section shall not apply to any issue that has been resolved
by an agreement between Amtrak and a labor organization. This
section shall not apply to issues relating to provisions
defining the scope or classification of work performed by an
Amtrak employee. Nothing in this Act shall affect the level
of protection provided to employees of freight railroads or
of transit systems.
Page 15, line 18, through page 16, line 13, amend
subsection (a) to read as follows:
(a) Employee Protective Arrangements.--
(1) Amendment.--Section 24706(c)(3) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended by inserting ``, unless the parties
otherwise agree'' after ``of this title''.
(2) Application of other law.--Section 1172(c) of title 11,
United States Code, shall not apply to Amtrak and its
employees if an agreement described in the amendment made by
paragraph (1) of this subsection is in effect.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 270, the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. LaTourette] and a Member opposed each will control 10
minutes. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster] seek the
time in opposition?
Mr. SHUSTER. I do, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
LaTourette].
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that half of my
10 minutes in support of the amendment be given to the coauthor of the
amendment, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant], and that he be
permitted to yield time.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Ohio?
There was no objection.
(Mr. LaTOURETTE asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.]
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, initially I want to thank the cosponsor of this
amendment, my fine colleague, the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Traficant].
I also want to commend the chairman of our full committee, the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Bud Shuster], for not only his work on
this bill, but also in the way that he has been willing to work with
us, and even appear at the Committee on Rules and suggest that this
amendment be made in order.
This bill is sound in many respects, as it serves to reform Amtrak
and many important areas. There is no doubt that one reason that Amtrak
continues to run deficits is due to the lack of reform. Where I must
respectfully part company, however, with our chairman, is whether the
C-2 labor protections for Amtrak are part of that problem.
I supported this bill in the last Congress and in committee this year
out of respect for our chairman and the arguments that he made. But
that support was based upon the argument that C-2 protections were
adversely impacting the financial health of Amtrak.
Based upon information received during the committee hearing, I have
doubts, serious doubts, about those claims. Amtrak's current net loss
is in the neighborhood of $322 million. In 1995 and 1996 Amtrak paid
out only $2 million in labor protection to approximately 2,000
employees. This works out to approximately $1,000 per employee.
The cost of labor protection and contracting out is open to debate,
and in regard to C-2 labor protections, which we heard so much about
during the course of the rule debated, Amtrak has been unable to
produce a single individual who has ever received the C-2 labor
protection.
In a July letter written by Tom Downs, the CEO of Amtrak, which I
will include for the Record, he stated Amtrak does not experience a
significant cost in C-2 expenses, so that the impact of the repeal of
C-2 would not save us any significant funds except ultimately in the
bankruptcy of Amtrak. I also state that I would prefer to be able to
negotiate C-2 provisions with labor than to have Congressman date
changes.
I mention the Downs letter simply to stress there is an honest
difference of opinion regarding the issue of existing labor protection
and the prohibition of contracting out. Given this fact, it is only
fair that these issues be subject to collective bargaining. The
amendment will provide for these issues to be bargained between Amtrak
and its union organizations and ensure that neither party negotiates
from a disadvantaged position.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the LaTourette-
Traficant amendment and reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I must rise in opposition to this amendment. This
amendment will destroy the labor reforms in the legislation, leaving in
place the status quo that has helped bring us to the brink of
bankruptcy with Amtrak. Indeed, this amendment will destroy the labor
reform in this legislation, which is, and I emphasize this, which is
precisely, exactly, the same labor reform which passed this House in
the last Congress by a vote of 406 to 4.
Indeed, the labor reform which passed this House overwhelmingly in
the last Congress and which is in this legislation before us today was
drafted by Congressman Quinn back in 1995 with Labor's full
participation, and, indeed, is exactly word for word the same labor
reforms that Labor supported in the last Congress.
So if we are going to save Amtrak, if we are going to unlock the $2.3
billion needed to help save Amtrak, it is necessary, it is vital, that
we keep in place the labor reforms, which this House previously
overwhelmingly agreed to.
For that reason, I must oppose the amendment of my friend.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
West Virginia [Mr. Wise].
Mr. WISE. Mr. Chairman, those concerned about the cost of labor
protection need to understand what the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
LaTourette], has said. Two thousand people were laid off by Amtrak at
an average cost of slightly over $1,000, far less than the plans of
most major corporations.
In terms of undoing labor reforms, what you do with the LaTourette-
Traficant amendment is you say there will be no more automatic labor
protection clauses, no more automatic C-2. Instead, it becomes a
subject of collective bargaining, and, indeed, if they do not reach
agreement, Amtrak can unilaterally do away with those labor protection
clauses.
All we are asking is you treat now these railroad workers with the
same ability that you treat those in the private sector. Permit them to
go to collective bargaining where labor protection comes in the mix
with wages and working conditions and grievance procedures. So one can
be bargained away for the other, but at least the workers have
something to say about that. That is why it is so important to support
the LaTourette-Traficant amendment.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I want to deal with this issue of how much
it costs Amtrak to lay off workers and the argument that it hasn't
really cost them anything.
[[Page H9522]]
It begs the question. In fact, it is a red herring. The very fact
that 6 years of labor protection and pay must be paid is the reason why
Amtrak could not adjust their labor force and layoff anybody, because
it was too costly to do so. So it is true they have not spent much
money in these layoffs. The reason is they could not afford to do it
because of the 6-year guarantee.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin, [Mr.
Petri], the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Surface
Transportation.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
I rise in opposition to the LaTourette-Traficant amendment. The
amendment would gut the labor reforms in the Amtrak bill, leaving
Amtrak with the onerous labor provisions that it has been saddled with
for the last 26 years.
Let me be clear about what current labor requirements entail. Amtrak
must pay up to 6 years of full wages and benefits to any worker who is
laid off due to a route elimination or frequency reduction to below
three times per week. That is right, 6 years of severance pay.
Even worse, any worker who is asked to move his or her job location
more than 30 miles is eligible for the 6 years of benefits. So workers
do not even have to be laid off in order to claim the 6 years of pay.
In addition, there is currently a Federal law that prevents Amtrak
from contracting out any work other than foods or beverage service if
it will result in the layoff of a single employee in a bargaining unit.
This prohibits Amtrak from gaining any of the savings that are possible
through contracting out work.
Mr. Chairman, the bill before us contains a compromise reform
proposal on these two issues that was worked out in the last Congress
with the full participation and support of organized labor. It is a
fair compromise that allows labor and management to negotiate through
the collective bargaining process the issues of labor protection and
contracting out. Amtrak could agree to any terms on these issues.
Federal law would not predetermine the outcome in any way. It is
important to note that at the end of the bargaining process, if there
were no agreement, labor would have the right to strike just as it
would under any other railroad labor collective bargaining agreement.
{time} 1145
Mr. Chairman, we do not require airlines to pay laid-off employees
for 6 years. We do not prevent the airlines from contracting out work.
Why should we do that for Amtrak?
I urge my colleagues to defeat the LaTourette amendment, pass the
bill, and secure Amtrak's future.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, like the chairman of the full committee, I have great
respect for the chairman of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation,
but I would again point out that Amtrak has yet to point out one single
employee who has successfully accessed the horrible 6-year severance
package they are talking about.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
Traficant], the distinguished ranking member of the full committee,
Mr. TRAFICANT. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me, Mr.
Chairman, and I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pascrell].
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the
LaTourette amendment. We have seen a pattern of trying to undermine and
trying to impose incremental changes in labor agreements on this floor.
Parties signed agreements. They should change the agreements in
collective bargaining. It is not up to the Congress of the United
States to take away labor protections. When we have the head of
management saying that if these protections are removed, they are going
to have very little effect upon the total package, what more do we
wish? Labor and management are on the same page. Why should we rip out
that page?
If we do not have this amendment, we will eliminate wage protections
for displaced passenger rail employees which have been in place since
1930. Many of these workers gave up their seniority on freight
railroads to come over to Amtrak when it was created. They would lose
severance benefits they deserve under this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Collins].
(Mr. COLLINS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the LaTourette
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I regret having to oppose my good friends from Ohio. I
know we share the strong belief that the men and women who work in the
trenches every day are the backbone of each and every business. It is
the working men and women who are responsible for the success or
failure of a company, and they should be treated fairly and allowed to
reap the benefits of their successes.
At the same time, I believe working men and women must share in the
responsibilities of maintaining the profitability of the companies from
which they derive their livelihood. Unfortunately, I believe the
LaTourette amendment would gut some of the most important provisions in
the Amtrak reform legislation which Amtrak must have to survive. These
are the labor provisions.
As mandated by law today, Amtrak must pay any worker up to 6 years of
full wages and benefits if that worker is laid off due to route
elimination, or even a reduction in frequency of service below three
times a week. Even more costly for Amtrak is the provision that in the
case of realignment, an employee can be paid up to 6 years of full
wages and benefits if he is asked to move his job location by more than
30 miles and does not wish to do so.
Some have argued that these provisions are not important since
payments for labor protection have been relatively low. However, that
argument ignores the fundamental need for this legislation. The
legislation will allow Amtrak for the first time to act like a business
and realign routes and services to be profitable. Today this cannot be
done. Why? Because Congress has required Amtrak to provide certain
routes and services, whether or not they are profitable. Therefore,
labor has been protected from operational changes and costs have been
minimal.
However, the GAO has estimated that the total labor protection
obligation of Amtrak would cost between $2 and $5 billion, up to more
than five times the total annual Federal funding for Amtrak. The
taxpayers simply cannot afford this. The LaTourette amendment would
leave the current law on labor protection in place. If negotiations set
forth under legislation fail, the current labor provisions would
remain. Therefore, there would be little or no incentive to negotiate
in good faith and the status quo would be maintained.
In this legislation, Congress will determine the future of passenger
rail service in this country. With roads and highways becoming
increasingly jammed and with regulations on air quality becoming
increasingly stringent, many States are having a reviewed and renewed
interest in the use of rail.
We are at a point where we have three basic choices. We may choose,
first, to raise the amount of subsidy; second, to give Amtrak the
opportunity to survive with the reforms provided in this legislation;
or third, we can decide that passenger rail service to any great extent
is not necessary or desirable in this country.
I urge my colleagues to vote against the LaTourette amendment, and
vote in support of passenger rail service in the United States.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar], the ranking member, and a man
who was born to be chairman of this committee, like the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster].
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time
to me.
Mr. Chairman, I want to come back to the fundamental issue here, what
is driving this issue; what are the costs that are driving the Amtrak
problem.
Last year, Amtrak had a $322 million deficit, in 1996. How much of
that was
[[Page H9523]]
caused by labor protection? About $1 million. We cannot lay all of
Amtrak's problems at the feet of the working people who run the trains.
Amtrak over 2 years laid off 2,000 people. It cost $2 million in labor
protective costs. That does not break the back of Amtrak.
Does labor protection provisions, a requirement to pay severance
costs to the laid-off workers, prevent Amtrak from shutting off rail
service? No, it does not. Ask the people in Idaho, Utah, Alabama,
Massachusetts, Florida. Amtrak canceled routes in all those States last
year because they knew that the labor protection cost was so small,
there were so few employees involved, that the effect would be
negligible on savings, so they shut the routes down. We cannot lay the
problems of Amtrak at the feet of working men and women.
Mr. Chairman, what does this amendment that Mr. LaTourette and Mr.
Traficant are offering do? It sets up a process by which the Railway
Labor Act can function to resolve these problems. Amtrak and its labor
workers can negotiate changes in labor protection and contracting out.
If they fail to agree, they can go to a Presidential emergency board to
ask it to make recommendations. If they still fail to agree, they can
resort to usual self-help remedies. Amtrak management can lock out or
impose contract terms. Labor can strike. That is all this does. We
ought to support the LaTourette-Traficant amendment.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, the issue today is the collective bargaining process.
By voting for Quinn, we treat Amtrak workers differently, and take away
a fundamental right under American law that Congress has steadfastly
supported, the right for workers with management to negotiate the
salient points of the terms of their employment.
This is not about Amtrak today; this vote is about the collective
bargaining process, the sanctity of that process, and the terms
guaranteed within the rights to negotiate. If Members vote for the
Quinn measure, they take away the right of Amtrak workers to negotiate.
The gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Collins] is exactly right. I do not
have any more respect any greater for anybody else than for the
gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Collins], but not once, I would say to the
gentleman, has there been a severance pay by Amtrak. They negotiated
it.
We cannot, Congress, save Amtrak by destroying and killing Amtrak
workers. But by god, if Congress goes forward and sets the precedent
today to throw out the window the gains of the collective bargaining
process, Congress will have failed itself. Congress would have set a
new law, a tragic law.
Let me say this, Republicans are mad, and rightfully so. Labor tried
to screw them, but striking back at labor today is not what they are
doing. What they are doing is turning back the clock on the rights of
workers, duly assembled under our constitutional freedoms, to bargain
in good faith, to negotiate and bargain in good faith.
God almighty, how can we be having this debate? There was a blue
ribbon panel since the last vote, Mr. Chairman, and that blue ribbon
panel says none of these labor provisions is costly or consequential to
Amtrak. They do not care what we do. I say the people of America and
the workers of America know what we do.
I do not think the Republicans are as unfriendly to working people as
to take away a precedent of collective bargaining in this country. This
is a sad day. I voted with them many times. The gentleman from New York
[Mr. Quinn] has been a friend of labor. He should be very careful,
because by treating Amtrak workers differently today, he negotiates a
new labor type of system in America where collective bargaining and
negotiation in good faith is not important to the Congress of the
United States.
Shame, Congress. Shame, Congress. I ask Members to vote ``no'' on
Quinn.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the enthusiasm of my good friend, the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant]. But facts are stubborn things. The
facts are that the legislation before us does not take away the
collective bargaining rights of Amtrak employees. In fact, it puts in
place the ability of the Amtrak employees and management to engage in
collective bargaining. That is a fact. It is in the legislation. All
the steamy rhetoric in Washington is not going to change that fact.
Beyond that, it is also significant to note that the 6-year labor
protection was not something that was negotiated through collective
bargaining. Ironically, the 6-year imposed labor protection was imposed
by the Department of Labor, not through collective bargaining. I
appreciate all the enthusiastic, steamy rhetoric about taking away
collective bargaining and protecting collective bargaining, but facts
are facts. The facts are just as I recited them.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SHUSTER. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out for the Record in
the few minutes we have remaining, when we talk about collective
bargaining, there is nobody in this House, I do not believe, who has
fought for collective bargaining longer and harder than me. What is
ironic to me is that this same bill, the identical bill of 2 years ago,
which talked about collective bargaining and had the support of labor
for collective bargaining, is back here again, identical as the first
time.
I cannot understand for the life of me, Mr. Chairman, why we had the
support and belief that it did not break contracts back then, but
somehow it breaks contracts today, the exact same language. We will
talk more about it in the amendment.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, it is interesting that the very Members
who are speaking so forcefully about the lack of collective bargaining
in this voted in favor of this very legislation just in the last
Congress.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise just briefly, not to rebut but to make a
response.
{time} 1200
This bill, 254 days from the date that it is going into enactment,
repeals all of the labor protection statutes that are available to
Amtrak workers. It creates no incentive. There was an observation made
that there is no incentive there for the workers to negotiate. It
creates no incentive for the Amtrak workers to negotiate, because they
are all gone.
After 16 years of deferrals, wage freezes, entry level wage
decreases, the Amtrak worker who just as late as 1980 made a buck-
seven, less than a BART worker in San Francisco, now makes $7.39 an
hour less. That is not right.
Mr. Chairman, this is the right amendment, and just because of the
confusion I want to stress one thing. We need people to vote ``no'' on
Quinn so we have a vote on LaTourette-Traficant.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of
the LaTourette-Traficant amendment to H.R. 2247, the Amtrak
Reauthorization Act of 1997. My colleagues, in today's highly
competitive marketplace we need to preserve labor protections and
collective bargaining rights of employees and to level the playing
field between the employers and employees in negotiating wages,
benefits and severance payments.
The LaTourette-Traficant amendment to H.R. 2247 will level the
playing field in negotiations between Amtrak and it's employees. H.R.
2247, as drafted fails to do this, it removes labor protections from
workers and eliminates statutory wage protection for Amtrak employees,
while claiming that it simply subjects these issues to collective
bargaining. This is not good for Amtrak workers and that is not good
for America in trying to preserve a national railway system for this
country.
The LaTourette-Traficant amendment requires Amtrak employees to enter
into collective bargaining on two provisions which are currently
nonnegotiable under current law. These two provisions prohibit Amtrak
from taking Federal funds, firing an employee, and contracting out work
and providing protection to Amtrak employees who lost their jobs when a
route is eliminated.
The LaTourette amendment requires employees to engage in bargaining
with Amtrak on these two issues, just as they must bargain with Amtrak
on all collective bargaining issues.
The key issue with these amendments is that these two provisions
remain in place while
[[Page H9524]]
the bargaining continues. If Amtrak is not satisfied with the outcome
of the bargaining, Amtrak may refuse to sign a contract with the
employees, and the only recourse of the employees is to strike.
Amtrak has also publicly stated that all it wants is to bargain with
its employees about these two issues. Privately, Amtrak President Tom
Downs has said the LaTourette amendment is acceptable to him.
Porponents of the H.R. 2247 say that this amendment will hurt the
financial security of Amtrak. This argument is ridiculous. The two
provisions being currently debated have no bearing on Amtrak's
financial future. The current bill as written eliminates labor
protections and abrogates collective bargaining agreements negotiated
between Amtrak and its employees, and repeals existing prohibitions on
contracting out Amtrak's operation.
The contracting out provisions in the law bars Amtrak from firing a
current employee and contracting out his or her job. But this provision
does not really prohibit contracting out--in fact, Amtrak contracts out
$10 million worth of work. The labor protections provide severance for
workers who lose their jobs when a route is eliminated entirely. Since
the layoff of 4,000 employees in the last 2 years, Amtrak has paid out
thousands of dollars in protective benefits. Amtrak has said repeatedly
that these provisions have nothing to do with its future economic
security.
The LaTourette amendment is a fair, sensible compromise. I believe
that this amendment reasonably protects the rights of Amtrak employees
while satisfying the concerns of Amtrak. My colleagues, all the
evidence highlights the continued need for labor protections and
statutory wage protections between Amtrak and its employees and to
secure Amtrak's future. I urge my colleagues to support the LaTourette
amendment which will ensure a strong and secure future of Amtrak and
its 20,000 workers.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the amendment by
Mr. LaTourette and Mr. Traficant, my colleagues from northern Ohio, and
to honor the men and women who have built and operate the Amtrak
railway system.
More than 100 years ago, it was the railroads that formed the basic
infrastructure of our country--the infrastructure that enabled our
economy to expand and prosper. Hundreds of thousands of dedicated
workers--many of them immigrants working for low wages--gave their
lives to build America's railroads. Today, railroads employees use
their skills to keep the railroads safe--to move freight and passengers
quickly and efficiently.
When Amtrak was founded in 1971, the Federal Government made a
compact with its workers. We made a pact to treat Amtrak workers
fairly, to protect the incomes of Amtrak workers who gave up jobs in
higher-paying freight railroad companies. The Government promised to
compensate Amtrak employees who are displaced because of the process of
restructuring. This Amtrak Reform Act abandons those commitments. It
eliminates essential worker protections and places arbitrary time
limits on the collective bargaining process. It would lead to greater
labor strife in the Amtrak system because workers would have their
contract rights canceled. It would demoralize Amtrak workers, forcing
them to sacrifice so the system can obtain the Federal financing that
was set aside in the Balanced Budget Act. This is blatantly unfair to
the people who keep Amtrak running. And it violates the public interest
of our Nation.
The amendment by Mr. LaTourette and Mr. Traficant is a fair and
reasonable compromise. It balances the financial needs of Amtrak with
the respect that we owe to Amtrak's dedicated employees. I commend my
Ohio colleagues for proposing this measure and I urge my colleagues to
support it.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the Amtrak
Reform and Privatization Act because I believe it violates both worker
and passenger rights and safety. The bill as it is currently written
would violate the rights of Amtrak workers by eliminating wage
protections and allowing the company to hire outside contractors. It
has been proven that eliminating wage protection or contracting out
will do little to improve the financial stability of the company. By
eliminating this protection it will only prove to be helpful to Amtrak
if the company is forced to lay off a large number of employees. This
would be a cruel send off to many dedicated railway workers who have
given the best years of their lives to help keep Amtrak going. The bill
also threatens the safety of both employees and passengers from
receiving the damages due to them and their families as a result of a
rail accident. I represent an area of New Jersey that relies heavily on
Amtrak service and Amtrak rails to provide needed public transportation
to millions of people in one of the most congested areas of the
country. Therefore, I cannot support this piece of legislation unless
these negative provisions are taken out. I believe Representative La
Tourette and Representative Traficant's amendment will allow employees
of the rail company to have the proper and safe standards they
currently rely on while still ensuring that this bill will reform
Amtrak to become a stable and one day profitable company. I urge my
colleagues to vote for this amendment and against the bill if the
LaTourette-Traficant amendment or the Oberstar substitute is not agreed
to.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Quinn as a Substitute for the Amendment
Offered by Mr. LaTourette
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment as a substitute for the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment offered as a substitute for the amendment
is as follows:
Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Quinn as a substitute for
the amendment offered by Mr. LaTourette:
Page 15, after line 16, insert the following new paragraph:
(7) Nothing in this Act shall affect the level of
protection provided to employees of freight railroads or of
transit systems.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). Pursuant to House
Resolution 270, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Quinn] and the
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Quinn].
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am glad I was here on the floor this past Wednesday
to witness the open debate that we held on H.R. 2247, which of course
was the ``Amtrak Reform and Privatization Act of 1997,'' because if I
had been in my office, Mr. Chairman, and watched the debate on our TV
sets I would have thought that I was watching a videotape of our
discussion 2 years ago in the full committee markup of this Amtrak
bill.
Mr. Chairman, I heard people on the floor just a day or two ago
arguing how this bill would break contracts. I heard people argue how
thousands of jobs would be lost and how Amtrak would contract out all
of its work and how the job loss would wreak havoc with the Railroad
Retirement System.
Ironically, Mr. Chairman, those are exactly the same arguments that I
used to gain support for amendments that we offered that day. Those
were arguments that Members in the House used, both Democrats and
Republicans, to get the compromise that we had then and the same
compromise that we have this morning.
Has the House forgotten that we amended the bill that day? Have we
forgotten that we won a major victory for the working men and women of
the railroad that day?
Mr. Chairman, we came up with a fair compromise that would help
Amtrak gain the necessary reforms it needed to survive.
I thought about that word ``Congress,'' and thought about the word
``compromise'' a little bit at the same time. I went back to the office
and I got the Webster's Dictionary and looked up ``compromise.'' It
said, ``A settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent
reached by mutual concessions.'' Consent reached by mutual concession.
Is that not what we had on this legislation the last time, consent
reached by mutual concession?
Mr. Chairman, the original committee bill that I objected to would
have dropped Amtrak labor protections from 6 years to 6 months, no
questions asked. It would have happened. The original committee bill
would have allowed Amtrak to contract out almost all of its work, no
questions asked.
We put together a compromise which we offered on behalf of everybody
so that we would have mutual concessions from both sides. That is the
definition of a compromise, Mr. Chairman. Unfortunately, I have to rise
today with this substitute to the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. LaTourette], my good friend and colleague. I would have hoped that
we would have been able to keep the amendment separate; however, with
the rule before us, that is not going to be possible.
While I respect and admire my good friend from Ohio, his amendment
would strike from the bill the compromise language that we all worked
on, with
[[Page H9525]]
the support of labor, to protect the rights of working men and women at
Amtrak.
I am a little disappointed, Mr. Chairman, with the level of some of
that discussion here on the floor. We have been fighting for the
survival of Amtrak for over 2 years now, and it makes everything sound
that this amendment, this Quinn amendment, is all of the sudden
antilabor. I respectfully disagree that I am offering an antilabor
amendment today. It is a prolabor amendment that simply does this: It
walls off the Amtrak employees so that we are not having any effect
today on freight labor or transit labor workers in this act. Plain and
simple. Otherwise, it is exactly the same.
Today's amendment would, in addition to walling off those provisions,
say to our workers across the country and in our individual districts
that we are going to keep Amtrak alive and well and working so that all
the jobs can be retained. I am very concerned, Mr. Chairman, if we are
not successful here this afternoon, where this funding for Amtrak will
end up.
Mr. Chairman, we have a golden opportunity to do the right thing and
to save our country's national rail passenger system today while
preserving the dignity of its workers. The LaTourette amendment, by
stripping out the Quinn compromise, will jeopardize that funding. The
release of that money is contingent upon real Amtrak reform. What
better reform is there than the compromise reform that we agreed upon
in this House 406 to 4? Which Republicans, Democrats and organized
labor all agreed to?
I suggest that we keep the necessary compromise reforms in this bill,
strip out the unintentional effect that it could have had on freight
and transit labor workers, and I ask my colleagues to support the Quinn
substitute.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. Chairman, to first debunk a few myths, one is the myth of the
vote of the last Congress. We had an election since then. Seventy-six
new Members of Congress. We do not expect them to be retained to
whatever was done by their predecessor in Congress.
Second, in the aftermath of that legislation to which senior members
of rail labor signed on, there has been an election as well and those
two labor leaders were defeated and replaced by new leadership who has
charted a new direction for their members and said that it is not a
good deal.
Third, the Quinn amendment is opposed by the AFL-CIO, the
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO, the United Transportation
Union, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, the Transportation
Communications Union, the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees,
the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen, and the Transport Workers Union,
and all other rail unions. That was set forth in a statement from the
Transportation Trades Department this morning.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
LaTourette].
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I want to say in response to the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Quinn], my good friend, I am certainly not
saying that his amendment is an anti-labor amendment. I think everybody
on our side recognized the gentleman as a friend of labor. My problem
with the Quinn amendment is this: It walls off freight labor, but it
does nothing for the men and women who work for Amtrak.
The fact of the matter is if the Quinn amendment passes we will not
have a vote on the LaTourette amendment. What that means is that all of
the labor provisions that are in place 254 days after the enactment of
the bill, that are in place for all the men and women who work so hard
for Amtrak, will blow up. That clearly will put the management at
Amtrak, which issued a memorandum to itself saying that they should be
careful not to give themselves no more than a 15 percent increase,
while the wages of the Amtrak employees have continued to decline.
The observation that I made in the Committee on Rules and that the
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] made on the floor the other day
is exactly right. The Quinn amendment is a good amendment, but it is
half a loaf. We need the whole loaf to protect the good men and women
that work for Amtrak.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster], the chairman of the full
committee.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Quinn
amendment. I certainly would concur that new Members who were not here
in the past Congress are totally free to vote however they choose. But
I do believe that Members who were here and with whom we negotiated in
good faith, I am quite surprised that they now would flip-flop even
though we did work out a compromise.
In fact, the distinguished ranking member of the Subcommittee on
Railroads said about virtually this same legislation the last time we
had it before us that,
I was initially concerned that the Amtrak employees might
not be treated equitably in the bill. However, after some of
the changes were made in the bill, a reasonable compromise
was reached. The bill will enable Amtrak to downsize and
control its costs while ensuring the fair treatment of Amtrak
employees if there is a loss of jobs.
Mr. Chairman, that was their position then. The Secretary of
Transportation at the time said,
I am pleased that the labor provisions of the bill have
been altered so the change will be achieved through labor-
management dialog. The committee's proposed legislation is a
positive contribution to the debate on how to ensure the
long-term vitality of inner city transportation.
And Mr. Greg Lawler representing rail labor said at the time,
We think this is a good compromise on Amtrak. We hope it
goes forward. We like it.
This is the biggest flip-flop since Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall.
This is not antilabor. This is pro-Amtrak. We are trying to save
Amtrak. And at the time, talk about good faith negotiation, at the time
we sat down with the Senate and tried to work out funding for Amtrak
the agreement was that the $2.3 billion would be put in the
reconciliation tax package for Amtrak subject to, contingent upon, real
regulatory reforms, meaningful reforms taking place.
So, Mr. Chairman, if the Quinn amendment fails, then I do not believe
there is going to be any bill. There is not going to be any bill
because we will be in the position of not being able to fulfill our
commitment that we made back at the time the $2.3 billion was made
contingent upon real reform. If there is no real reform, there is not
going to be any bill and there is not going to be any $2.3 billion for
Amtrak, and I deeply regret that because I want to save Amtrak.
Mr. Chairman, it is crucial that we pass the Quinn amendment so we
can then proceed to pass this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Florida [Ms. Brown].
Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, in this discussion we need to
talk about the important role passenger rail plays in the lives of our
citizens and our economy. What this Amtrak authorization bill really is
about is keeping the vital links open.
There are provisions in the authorizing bill that disregard labor
agreements already agreed to by labor and management. If we are really
serious about keeping Amtrak running, if we are really serious about
supporting the working people of Amtrak and getting people to work, we
must vote ``no'' on this Quinn amendment.
Mr. Chairman, when I served in the Florida House of Representatives
we had a saying: ``Loving a bill to death.'' That is what is happening
here. We are talking about how we support Amtrak and we support Amtrak
workers, but we are putting provisions in here that we know are a
killer to the working people of Amtrak and the men and women of this
country.
Mr. Chairman, in this discussion, we need to talk about the important
role passenger railroads play in the lives of our citizens and to our
economy.
What this Amtrak authorization bill really is about is keeping this
vital link open. There are provisions in this authorization bill that
disregard labor agreements already agreed to by labor and management.
This will kill the chance for a smooth labor negotiation and create a
transportation nightmare.
[[Page H9526]]
The LaTourette-Traficant bill adds reason and fairness to this bill.
It leaves the issues of wage and contracting to the labor and
management negotiators.
This amendment must be part of the bill.
The negotiators must have the ability to work out the best deal.
If we are really serious about keeping Amtrak running and getting
people to work, we must vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
West Virginia [Mr. Wise].
Mr. WISE. Mr. Chairman, the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Shuster] recalled my words on the floor 2 years ago, so I want to
rise to that challenge. The fact is, as the chairman points out, this
bill passed 406 to 4, left the House 406 to 4.
But, Mr. Chairman, I would say to my colleagues, please note, walk
100 yards down the hall to the other body. It went nowhere. One of the
reasons it went nowhere is because of the provisions in this bill as
well as the provisions dealing with liability restrictions.
Do we want an Amtrak bill? Do we want the trains to continue running
in the Northeast corridor? Do we want to see some legislation this
year? Then we have to vote against the Quinn amendment and for the
LaTourette amendment.
Also, because the predictions that were made 2 years ago so
eloquently in the debate about what would happen if these provisions
were not included in the bill have proven not to come forth. Indeed,
the so-called labor protections have resulted in less than slightly
more than $1,000 per severed employee, not a great sum to Amtrak.
So for those reasons, 406 to 4, yes, out of this House and the bill
then went absolutely nowhere. Stalled on a siding.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Indiana [Ms. Carson].
(Ms. CARSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. CARSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express strong opposition to the
Quinn amendment. While the Amtrak reform and privatization bill makes
some vital improvements to the Nation's passenger rail system, it also
includes very dangerous provisions that will hurt Amtrak's employees
and passengers.
It throws Amtrak employees into the same uncertainty that faces so
many other American workers today. The bill ends race protections for
displaced and downgraded Amtrak workers that have been in place since
the 1980's. It does away with the law protecting Amtrak employees
against being replaced by contract workers without the same guarantees
of wages and benefits like health care.
In my district, this provision in the bill would allow Amtrak to
replace 706 workers at the Amtrak maintenance shop in Beech Grove, IN,
with contract workers in other States. Taking away people's jobs is not
reform. Let us not balance Amtrak's books by depriving people like the
Beech Grove shop workers of their jobs.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the LaTourette-
Traficant amendment and to reject the Quinn amendment.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Florida [Mr. Mica], a member of the full committee and a member of the
Subcommittee on Railroads.
{time} 1215
Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.
Mr. Chairman, why can we not pass the same bill that this House
passed last year by a vote of almost every Member of the House? I
submit it is because special interests weighed in.
Here are the folks that supported the legislation last time that have
now reversed their position. Special interests have weighed in.
I have a unique approach today. Let us not represent special
interests. Let us represent the American taxpayer.
We heard it is not costing us anything. Let me put this in
perspective. For every time someone got on an Amtrak passenger train
last year, the taxpayer paid $25, $25. There were 20 million boardings.
That is hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. So it does cost the
taxpayer money. In fact, it has cost the taxpayer, since 1971, $19
billion to subsidize Amtrak.
Testimony to our committee said that we could transport people by
chauffeured limousine along some of these routes at a lower cost. Why
can we not make these changes? Because special interests say that if we
eliminate a route, we must pay 6 years full wages and benefits.
We have tried Band-Aids. We have tried bailing wire. We have tried
masking tape. I submit that the taxpayer demands that we make real
reforms that fix Amtrak.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
New Jersey [Mr. Pascrell].
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, thank God we are in the 105th Congress.
That was a chart from the 104th Congress.
Specifically speaking, in subtitle 5 of title 49, section 24706, it
is very clear what the language is that they are going to take out with
the Quinn amendment. It says the following: Employee protective
arrangements, Amtrak or a rail carrier shall provide fair and equitable
arrangements to protect the interests of employees of Amtrak or a rail
carrier, as the case may be, affected by the discontinuance of
intercity rail passenger service.
We are talking about the preservation of rights, privileges and
benefits of the employees to continuation of collective-bargaining
rights, the protection of individual employees against a worsening of
their positions related to employment, assurances of priority of
employment, reemployment, et cetera, et cetera. All that we are talking
about in the LaTourette amendment is to place the words at the end of
that section saying, ``unless the parties agree.''
They cannot even accept that. This is antilabor. I will say it here
on the floor.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, if we take away the incentive to bargain
in good faith, we kill collective-bargaining, period. Every word of the
Quinn amendment is in LaTourette and Traficant. If Members vote for
LaTourette-Traficant, they vote for Quinn. But what is not in Quinn are
basic labor protections.
I am tired of hearing about 2 years ago. Workers were willing to hurt
themselves to save Amtrak. But since then there has been a blue ribbon
panel that said we do not have to kill the workers. That is not the big
cost factor.
Let us allow our workers to negotiate with management. Let us not set
a precedent today that does kill collective-bargaining. If we do not
incentivize collective-bargaining and we provide a disincentive, we
kill collective-bargaining.
That is the issue today. That is the issue today. If Members are
supporting Quinn, everything that Quinn says is in LaTourette and
Traficant. I want Members to know that. But when they vote for Quinn,
they are killing the incentive to negotiate in good faith. Let there be
no mistake. That is a sad day.
H.R. 2247, the Amtrak Reform and Privatization Act of 1997, makes
some much needed changes to Amtrak that will allow it to streamline its
operations and cut costs.
However, as drafted the bill makes changes in current law that are
unnecessary and will have a negative impact on Amtrak's employees.
The LaTourette-Traficant amendment does exactly what the Quinn
substitute does: it says that freight and transit workers will not be
affected by any changes made in the bill.
But the amendment goes further than Quinn: It also says that
statutory provisions on labor protection and contracting out will
remain in place.
Under the Quinn amendment, Amtrak workers are treated differently
than freight or transit workers. Under the Quinn amendment, freight and
transit workers retain the protections afforded under the current law.
Amtrak workers lose that protection under the Quinn amendment.
The LaTourette-Traficant amendment affords Amtrak management and
labor the opportunity to collectively bargain over these issues. The
amendment allows these provisions to be altered or eliminated through
the collective bargaining process.
Let's tell it like it is. Amtrak seldom, if ever, pays labor
protection severance when a route is terminated. When there are job
cutbacks, senior employees have rights under collective bargaining
agreements to bump more junior employees holding other jobs. These
junior employees are eligible for very limited protection.
[[Page H9527]]
Over the past 5 years, Amtrak was able to lay off more than 2,000
employees out of a work force of 23,000. The labor protection costs
amounted to about $500 per employee.
Let's take a look at contracting out. H.R. 2247, also repeals the
statutory prohibition on Amtrak contracting out work if it results in
any Amtrak employees losing their jobs.
The fact is, current law allows Amtrak to contract out work, and
every year Amtrak contracts out tens of millions of dollars of work.
Yes, in the last Congress almost an identical bill passed with over
400 votes. I supported that bill.
But a lot has changed in 2 years. A blue ribbon panel was established
to review Amtrak. The panel did not find that statutory labor
protection and contracting out provisions are a major factor in
hindering Amtrak's performance.
Since the last Congress, we have also had more time to examine the
exact costs Amtrak has incurred because of statutory labor protection
and contracting out provisions. Those costs are minimal.
Passing this amendment will not, in any way, compromise the major
thrust of the bill, which is to make much needed reforms to Amtrak's
operations.
The LaTourette-Traficant amendment ensures that any changes to the
current relationship between management and labor are mode through the
collective bargaining process--not through the dictates of Congress.
That's the way it should be.
Vote ``no'' on the Quinn amendment and ``yes'' on the LaTourette-
Traficant amendment.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. LaTourette], cosponsor with the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
Traficant] of the underlying amendment.
Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
the time.
To amplify on what our good friend from Youngstown, OH, had to say,
in 1981 Amtrak unions negotiated an agreement calling for a package of
wage increases. Soon after the passage of that agreement, that
contract, the unions were told by Amtrak and Members of Congress that
Amtrak could not afford what the company just agreed to. The workers
were told that they had to defer two-thirds of those increases.
It is now 1997, 16 years later, and that wage increase remains
deferred. Amtrak workers have sacrificed for the good of Amtrak.
Again, to reiterate, the Quinn amendment, if we think of a train ride
from New York City to Los Angeles, the train stops in Buffalo sadly. It
does not get all the way to Los Angeles. In order to get all the way to
Los Angeles, we need to reject the Quinn amendment and support
LaTourette-Traficant.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore [Mr. Thornberry]. The gentleman from
Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] has the right to close debate as he is
defending the committee position on a substitute amendment.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. LoBiondo].
Mr. LoBIONDO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that my good
friend, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant] pointed out what is
needed in this bill and referred to the comments of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster].
If we do not enact these reforms, we are not going to have Amtrak.
Maybe some Members in this House do not care about Amtrak. Maybe some
Members say it does not affect them. But it does. It is an important
component of our rail system that we need to pass the Quinn amendment
to be able to keep this alive.
The gentleman from New York [Mr. Quinn] has worked tirelessly on
these issues to help promote the common good, to try to draw Members
together, to try to draw consensus. If we are to move forward with
Amtrak, we need these reforms to be able to put in place the funding.
So if Members care about Amtrak, if they want to see Amtrak continue
to operate, this is essential. That is the bottom line. We can talk all
we want about everything else. There will not be any jobs. It will be
bankrupt. It will be belly up. Those jobs will be gone. So we want
these reforms enacted so we can protect it.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Just
to close the last 30 seconds that we have, I think the point that the
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. LoBiondo] and other speakers have made
is critically important to all Members before they come over here to
vote this afternoon.
We can talk about blue ribbon panels. We can talk about charges back
and forth and who is for labor and who is against labor. But at the end
of the day, in the next half hour, the important concept is whether or
not Amtrak is able to survive.
I will submit that a vote against Quinn is a vote to contribute to
the collapse of Amtrak. Support the Quinn substitute.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I want to thank the distinguished gentleman from Ohio for his
principled stand and the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant] for his
stand on this issue of fundamental importance to rail labor.
I have heard some very disturbing comments in the course of the
debate yesterday or the day before in reference to labor bosses. Today
reference to special interests. Since when are working men and women
special interests? It is just a way of blurring their name, smudging
their name. I resent it.
Who do you call captains of industry? Management. Fancy term. Why
cannot labor be referred to in the same terms of respect?
Make no mistake about it, we support what the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Quinn] is attempting to do. His concepts are incorporated into the
LaTourette amendment, but we never get to the LaTourette amendment, the
LaTourette-Traficant amendment, if we support Quinn. To get to the real
reforms in Amtrak we need to defeat the pending amendment of the
gentleman from New York in order to vote on what working men and women
have said in their elections that they support as the right way to deal
with labor conditions in America's passenger rail.
Let us make no mistake about it. The committee bill does this year,
as it did in the last Congress, set up a process for wiping out
contractual agreements freely entered into between labor and
management. I would say, and in the last Congress I did support this
bill because it was something I inherited, I kept the word of my
predecessor.
I would not have negotiated this bill. But my father told me, what is
sacred is what labor negotiates with management. You can never wipe it
out. The Congress will wipe out the sacred trust between labor and
management in the contract freely negotiated. Defeat the Quinn
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from New York [Mr. Quinn] as a substitute for the
amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. LaTourette].
The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that
the ayes have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(c) of rule XXIII, the
Chair may reduce to not less than 5 minutes the time for any electronic
vote, if ordered, on the LaTourette amendment without intervening
business or debate.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195,
noes 223, not voting 16, as follows:
[Roll No. 529]
AYES--195
Aderholt
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bilbray
Bliley
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Brady
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Cardin
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Christensen
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Cook
Cooksey
Cox
Crane
Cunningham
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeLay
Dooley
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Ensign
Everett
Ewing
Fawell
Foley
Forbes
Fowler
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gingrich
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Granger
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
[[Page H9528]]
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kasich
Kim
Kingston
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Largent
Latham
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lucas
Manzullo
McCollum
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Moran (KS)
Morella
Myrick
Nethercutt
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oxley
Packard
Pappas
Parker
Paxon
Pease
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Redmond
Regula
Riggs
Riley
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Roukema
Royce
Salmon
Sanford
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (TX)
Snowbarger
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stenholm
Stump
Sununu
Talent
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Upton
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wolf
NOES--223
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baesler
Baldacci
Barcia
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Bentsen
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Burton
Capps
Carson
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Crapo
Cummings
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dellums
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Fazio
Filner
Flake
Foglietta
Ford
Fox
Frank (MA)
Frost
Furse
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Gillmor
Gilman
Gordon
Green
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hefner
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holden
Hooley
Hoyer
Hulshof
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kleczka
Klink
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lampson
Lantos
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McDade
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Menendez
Metcalf
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Neal
Neumann
Ney
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pickett
Pomeroy
Poshard
Price (NC)
Rahall
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schumer
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith, Adam
Smith, Linda
Snyder
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stokes
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
Wise
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--16
Bereuter
Bilirakis
Callahan
Chenoweth
Cubin
Dickey
Gonzalez
Klug
McCarthy (NY)
McIntosh
Mollohan
Payne
Rangel
Ryun
Schiff
Smith (OR)
{time} 1247
The Clerk announced the following pair:
On this vote:
Mr. Smith of Oregon for, with Mr. Rangel against.
Ms. SLAUGHTER and Messrs. NEUMANN, TIAHRT, WELLER and METCALF, and
Ms. KELLY changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. WHITFIELD and Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi changed their vote from
``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment offered as a substitute for the amendment was
rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to address the
Committee for 1 minute.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Thornberry). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, is it the
objective of the gentleman that the Committee rise at this point after
his 1-minute?
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, that is my
objective, yes.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, further reserving the right to object,
would not the regular order of business be, without this intervening 1-
minute, to proceed immediately to the vote on the underlying amendment
of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette)?
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It would be the next order of business to
proceed on the vote on the LaTourette amendment, the substitute having
failed.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, when the Taxpayer Relief Act provided $2.3
billion for capital improvements to save Amtrak, it was contingent on
enactment of meaningful labor reforms. Unfortunately by the changing,
the switching votes here since that previous Congress, we find
ourselves in the position where we have no meaningful reforms. Under
these circumstances, we simply cannot proceed. I believe we have
jeopardized the future of Amtrak's existence.
(Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to address the Committee
for 1 minute.)
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I respect the statement the Chairman of
our Committee has just made, but I just want to point out that the
legislation providing for the $2.3 billion simply calls for a reform,
no adjectives to it. The underlying LaTourette amendment is reform. We
could proceed to vote on it. It would do the job and it would release
the $2.3 billion. I want to make that very clear.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Combest) having assumed the chair, Mr. Thornberry, Chairman pro tempore
of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R.
2247) to reform the statutes relating to Amtrak, to authorize
appropriations for Amtrak, and for other purposes, had come to no
resolution thereon.
____________________