[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 23909-23910]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               ADMINISTRATION'S AMTRAK REFORM LEGISLATION

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JAMES L. OBERSTAR

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, October 1, 2003

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I join Chairman Young in introducing, by 
request, the Administration's Amtrak ``reform'' legislation. It is a 
common practice for the Chairman and Ranking Member of a Committee to 
jointly introduce an Administration's bill, regardless of which 
political party controls the White House or Congress or the specifics 
of proposed legislation, and I do this as a courtesy to the 
Administration. However, introducing a bill ``by request'' should not 
be interpreted to imply endorsement. In fact, in the current instance, 
I am vehemently opposed to the direction the

[[Page 23910]]

Administration has chosen for intercity rail passenger service for our 
nation.
  For nearly two years we have awaited the Administration's legislative 
proposal for the future direction of Amtrak. Time and again we have 
heard that the vision would be revealed ``any day now.'' The 
Administration revealed the outline of its plan last year and now has 
given us the final product. It wasn't worth the wait.
  The Administration's proposal is little more than a rehash of the 
widely discredited proposals of the Amtrak Reform Council (ARC): 
separate ownership of the Northeast Corridor infrastructure from 
operations; allow entities other than Amtrak to compete for franchises 
to operate service over potentially profitable routes; and replace the 
current national network with regional systems that shift the costs to 
the states. These are all ideas promoted by the ARC. The bill would 
also phase out Federal operating support for all intercity passenger 
trains over a four-year period. As a result, the proposal would 
eliminate nearly all long-distance train service by the end of the 
third year.
  The bill places numerous restrictions on Amtrak management's 
discretion in running the Corporation--it even forbids Amtrak from 
using authorized funds for developing high-speed passenger train 
service. In short, Amtrak is to have no future. In addition, this bill 
also makes it clear that the Administration believes that labor is a 
large part of Amtrak's problem. The bill requires that Amtrak negotiate 
substantial operating cost reductions with its employees as the price 
of receiving its Federal operating grant.
  The Administration is apparently placing its trust in the magic of 
privatization and decentralization to solve Amtrak's problems. These 
changes were at the heart of the ARC proposals. Those proposals missed 
the point when they were advanced more than 1\1/2\ years ago, and time 
has not transformed them into valid solutions.
  Amtrak's problem has one root cause: money! From the outset back in 
1971, the Corporation has been on a starvation diet. Its opponents 
insinuate that successive Amtrak managements have somehow conspired to 
misappropriate funds and not run a profitable operation. The truth is 
that a succession of hardworking and dedicated management teams could 
not do the impossible--that is, operate intercity rail passenger 
service in America and generate an accounting profit. Even under more 
favorable conditions, no nation in the world has operated intercity 
passenger trains profitably. But many in Congress have insisted on the 
impossible, and Amtrak's previous leaders have tried to demonstrate 
progress toward this illusive and ill-advised goal.
  Now we have new leadership at Amtrak, and this Amtrak team has 
abandoned the long-standing defensive practice of telling Congress what 
Congress wants to hear. Amtrak's new President, David Gunn, has told 
Congress what is needed if we want to have decent and reliable 
intercity passenger rail service in this nation, and he says that this 
can be achieved without the dismantling of Amtrak as suggested by the 
Administration's legislative proposal. We should heed his advice and 
give him and his team a chance.
  President Bush has begun naming a new Board of Directors, as well. I 
have met with the new Chairman, David Laney and he, too, is impressed 
by the efforts of David Gunn and his management team and their 
successes to date.
  Therefore, while I join in introducing this bill as a traditional 
courtesy to the Administration, I want to be clear that I support none 
of its initiatives. I strongly support both H.R. 2572, the Amtrak 
Reauthorization Act of 2003, and H.R. 2571, the Rail Infrastructure 
Development and Expansion Act for the 21st Century (RIDE 21), recently 
reported with near unanimity by the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure. I am hopeful that the House will soon consider this 
bipartisan legislation and begin to provide the necessary investment 
for our nation's intercity passenger rail system.

                          ____________________