[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 51 (Thursday, April 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3915-S3916]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AMTRAK
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I am concerned about Amtrak's future. Though
Congress has worked to ensure its continued existence, the
Administration has yet to fulfill its statutory responsibilities which
are necessary if Amtrak is to have any hope of turning into a viable
operation.
As my colleagues well know, the Senate has invested countless hours
during the past several Congresses to enact legislation that would
enable Amtrak to reinvent itself, both operationally and financially.
After three long years, Congress achieved a bipartisan reform package
that was signed into law by the President on December 2, 1997.
This package, the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act, was touted as
Amtrak's ``last chance.'' It provided significant changes, allowing
Amtrak to operate more like a business. Congress expected Amtrak to
immediately begin implementing the many reform provisions. Certain
responsibilities concerning Amtrak's future were assumed by Amtrak's
union and management employees, the American taxpayers, Congress and
the Administration.
For their part, Amtrak's employees agreed to negotiate employee
benefits just like other segments of industry in exchange for financial
security. The taxpayers contributed considerably--$2 billion for
capital improvements in addition to the $22 billion already given to
Amtrak to date.
Congress fulfilled its part of the deal, too. The Congress appointed
its members to the newly created Amtrak Reform Board. Further, the
Senate recently adopted a provision in the budget resolution urging
full funding for Amtrak to enable it to reach its goal of zero
operating assistance by 2003.
Who is missing from this effort? Mr. President, I content it is the
Administration.
In the past months, the Administration has missed numerous deadlines
and issued contrary proposals.
First, the law requires the Department of Transportation (DOT)
Inspector General to begin an independent audit of Amtrak's financial
situation. The audit was supposed to begin within a month of enactment,
which would have been this past January. The DOT Inspector General has
worked to abide by the statute, but the Secretary of DOT has refused to
allow the audit to go forward. DOT's refusal prompted both the House
and Senate Appropriations Committee to provide specific funding to
cover the audit's expense. DOT knows that funding is on its way, yet
the Secretary has refused to permit the IG to begin the process.
Second, the law required the President to nominate a new 7-member
Reform Board to replace Amtrak's current Board of Directors. Since the
reform package required Amtrak to operate like a business. Congress and
the Administration agreed that new leadership was imperative. After
all, instilling a `new culture' among Amtrak employees and management
necessitated that changes start from the top.
The law requires the Reform Board to be in place by March 31, 1998--
almost 1 month ago--yet we still have not received a single nomination
from the President. Most troublesome is the fact that if the new Reform
Board has not assumed the responsibilities of the Amtrak Board of
Directors before July 1st, Amtraks' authorization lapses. I do not
think the Administration would want this to happen.
Mr. President, in addition to the Administration's recent
shortcomings, it has also failed to announce the names of individuals
who will fill the Administration's three slots on the Amtrak Reform
Council. Because the Council is expected to play a critical role in
formulating passenger rail in the years ahead, I have encouraged the 8
members appointed by the Congress to begin their work. I understand the
first meeting of the Council should occur in early May.
The only action taken by the Administration thus far has been to
propose a budget that underfunds Amtrak in fiscal year 1999. The
Administration's budget submission seeks to take money away from
capital expenditures and to use it to pay for Amtrak salaries and
operating expenses. This diversion proposal is in direct violation of
the statutory language in the law which established the capital funding
subsidy.
Ms. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I share the Majority Leader's concerns
about Amtrak. As the primary author of the Amtrak reform law, I am very
concerned that Amtrak has yet to have the opportunity to avail itself
of the statutory reforms we all worked so hard to provide. The Amtrak
Reform Council positions are an essential element in the overall reform
scheme.
Amtrak needs to make long-term plans and commitments. That action has
not yet begun. I hope the Administration will take prompt action to
fulfill its responsibilities and give Amtrak the opportunity to achieve
what we all hope is possible--a fiscally sound and efficient national
rail passenger system.
Mr. McCAIN. My colleagues know all too well my frustrations with
Amtrak. However, I worked in good faith with my colleagues and the
Administration to move the Amtrak reform legislation through the
legislative process. Therefore, I expected similar ``good faith'' to be
applied in fulfilling the statutory provisions under the Act.
I find it unconscionable the Administration continues to obstruct the
independent assessment. This is one of the most critical elements in
the entire reform package. How can anyone determine if Amtrak is
meeting its financial obligations if we don't have a baseline to start?
What is it about Amtrak's finances the Administration is trying to keep
covered up?
Equally troubling to me is the Administration's lack of regard for
upholding the statute. A new Reform Board was to be in place nearly a
month ago. These positions require Senate confirmation which
necessitates hearings and review by the Commerce Committee. I have
every intention to uphold our Committee's responsibilities. Yet, we
have not received even ONE nomination from the President.
Worse still, the rumors we hear is that the Administration is
considering reappointing current Board members. I have been very clear,
that the Commerce Committee will not report favorably any Board hold-
overs and I stand firm on that position. I would think even the
Administration would acknowledge we didn't create a new Board only to
reappoint the same members.
Why isn't the Administration interested in fixing Amtrak's problems
while it is under their watch? I never cease to be amazed.
[[Page S3916]]
Mr. President, the Congress worked long and hard in a bipartisan
fashion to give Amtrak one more opportunity to do what they keep
telling us they can do given the chance. The President let Amtrak,
Congress, and the taxpayers think Amtrak was being given that chance.
Sadly, the Administrations subsequent lack of interest is quickly
taking that chance away.
____________________