Senate Democrats urge Bush to budget $205 million quickly for Amtrak

Associated Press / SFGate

[RCW2001]

JONATHAN D. SALANT, Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, June 25, 2002
©2002 Associated Press

URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2002/06/25/financial1210EDT0115.DTL

(06-25) 09:10 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --

Senate Democrats on Tuesday urged President Bush to include $205 million for Amtrak in a new spending bill as the administration met with labor unions to discuss ways to keep the passenger rail system running.

"If we are going to help Amtrak, they must have resources and they must have them as quickly as possible," said Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D.

Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta was meeting with representatives of transportation unions to discuss the administration's efforts to overhaul Amtrak. Mineta last week proposed ending federal operating subsidies, allowing competition for passenger rail, making states more responsible for paying for train service, and replacing Amtrak as owner of the Boston-to-Washington Northeast Corridor.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations transportation subcommittee, agreed on the need for changes but rejected the Bush administration's plan.

"Their reform package is a reform package for failure," Murray said.

Murray and 16 other Senate Democrats -- more than one-third of the caucus -- sent a letter to Bush asking that he include $205 million for Amtrak in the supplemental spending bill.

On the Republican side, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas said the federal government has an obligation to maintain a national railroad system. "We're all going to be in this together," she said.

But Hutchison, a supporter of Amtrak, also agreed that railroad operations need an overhaul. She said Amtrak's labor costs were "out of line with other workers in our country" and urged rail unions to be open to changes.

A day earlier, Mineta expressed confidence that Amtrak would not shut down for lack of operating funds.

"I am confident that we will be able to avoid a shutdown of services," Mineta said Monday, breaking away from an emergency meeting of Amtrak's board of directors.

Amtrak President David Gunn and board Chairman John Robert Smith said Mineta's pledge would delay Wednesday's threatened shutdown, the first in the railroad's 31-year history, but would not prevent it.

"There has been no reconciliation of the simple fact that Amtrak is running out of cash and (there is) no agreement on how to provide a loan guarantee or appropriation that will continue train service to the end of the fiscal year," the Amtrak officials said.

The Amtrak board met for several hours, but recessed without any final decisions. Transportation Department spokesman Chet Lunner said the board would meet again later in the week.

Mineta has called for a combination of spending cuts and federal aid to close an immediate $200 million Amtrak budget deficit. Gunn said last week he would begin shutting down the railroad without financial help.

In addition, Amtrak is seeking a loan guarantee from the Federal Railroad Administration. The railroad is having trouble borrowing from the private sector because lenders are unsure how long it will remain in business.

Transportation Department Inspector General Kenneth Mead reported in January that Amtrak lost $1.1 billion in 2001, the most in its history, and had made no progress toward meeting Congress' 1997 order to wean itself from annual government operating subsidies by this December.

Mineta said the administration and Amtrak would work with Congress to make sure passenger rail service continued. He said the administration should not bear the responsibility alone for Amtrak's problems.

"This must be a team effort," he said. "The burden is not on the administration to save the rail system from bankruptcy, nor should it be."

Lawmakers, however, said the administration must support additional funding for Amtrak.

"The bottom line is for every other method of transportation the federal government steps up to the plate," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "We have to have a long term plan for Amtrak that's consistent with the way we fund road and air transportation, which means the federal government pays for the infrastructure."

Amtrak trains carry about 60,000 riders a day. About 35,000 of those ride in the Northeast Corridor.

A shutdown of Amtrak also could affect commuter railroads serving hundreds of thousands of people. Amtrak owns tracks and tunnels used by some commuter rail lines, and operates other systems for state or regional authorities.

---

On the Net:

Amtrak: www.amtrak.com

Federal Railroad Administration: www.fra.dot.gov

©2002 Associated Press  

[Ciexyz]

Personally, I believe in the Amtrak system. I've taken the Pittsburgh to Philly run numerous times and I'd recommend train travel as an enjoyable experience.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

But Hutchison, a supporter of Amtrak, also agreed that railroad operations need an overhaul. She said Amtrak's labor costs were "out of line with other workers in our country" and urged rail unions to be open to changes.

That is the real problem with Amtrak, the unions. I read that the contract says that if a union member, and they are all union members, is layed off he must be paid six years salary as severence pay. Amtrak is just a cash cow for unions and, by extension, the Democrat Party.

[Phantom Lord]

How often would you take the train if you had to pay what the trip actually cost? I have seen estimates that each passenger is getting a $300 subsidy in tax payer money.

So, if you ticket was an additional $300 would you be taking the train?

[John SBM]

My thought is that most of the riders on this taxpayer boondogle are NE liberals in the Boston/NY/Philly/DC corridor. It is absolutely ridiculus that taxpayers everywhere subsudize this stuff. Best answer - sell it and let it go it's own way.

[CedarDave]

But Hutchison, a supporter of Amtrak, also agreed that railroad operations need an overhaul. She said Amtrak's labor costs were "out of line with other workers in our country" and urged rail unions to be open to changes.

If Amtrak is to be bailed out (and I believe it should), it should happen only if the rail labor unions agree to the same types of concessions that airlines are requiring in order to get federal loans (See United Airlines seeks $1.8 billion in federal loan help )

See also:

For Amtrak, Which Funding Track Now? and
The Battle Over Amtrak

[Tanniker Smith]

I'm surprised that the Democrats in the NE aren't riding Amtrak outa town on a rail.

Seriously, the NYC-Philly fare on the Metroliner is over 90 bucks. They advertised a NYC-Atlantic City train a few years back that cost most than a bus ride and *took longer* than the bus to boot. (Why? because you had to go to Philly and switch trains!)

I took the Metroliner quite a few times when I worked in NYC, but got on a project where half the team was in Philly. (And I got sick of it fast). The company paid for it. It was a business expense. Big Business. The enemies of the Democrats (and the Free World to hear them tell it.)

TS

[gov_bean_ counter]

Can't do that. You realize that if workers in these areas had to rely on automobile transportation, the simple logistical problems created would force these businesses over time to relocate to perhaps the Midwest, Atlantic Coast or South. NE would lose big time. Congresss will never let that happen.

[goldstategop]

If it were that easy. Republican Kay Bailey Hutchinson has an Amtrak corridor route running through her state. Hence why she's with the Rats to bail this money loser out. I think a bailout plan could clear the Senate but it would probably die in the House. For all the Administration's talk of keeping Amtrak running, it remains to be seen whether Amtrak will make real changes in the way it operates or whether it would just be business as usual after another cash infusion.

[2banana]

Maybe if they would confirm some of Bush's judges...

[N. Theknow]

Personally, I believe in the Amtrak system.

Personally, I believe in passenger rail service.

Personally, I have no faith in Amtrak to provide that service.

[N. Theknow]

How often would you take the train if you had to pay what the trip actually cost? I have seen estimates that each passenger is getting a $300 subsidy in tax payer money.

How often would you take the train if you had to pay what the trip actually cost? I have seen estimates that each passenger the union is getting a $300 subsidy in tax payer money for each passenger.

[Coop]

Best answer - sell it and let it go it's own way.

Personally, I believe in passenger rail service. Personally, I have no faith in Amtrak to provide that service.

And there's the rub. If "perpetually red" Amtrak goes down, it takes a lot of profitable regional routes (including Virginia's VRE and part of the Maryland MARC route) with it. There's no easy answer to this thing. Once again we see what poor planning and procrastination cause.

[RonF]

Why shouldn't Amtrack get subsidized by the government? The trucking industry doesn't come near to paying for the interstate highway system, and the airlines don't come near to paying for all the airports and air traffic control mechanisms.

OTOH, putting the wood to the unions may well be justifiable.

[talleyman]

Maybe if they would confirm some of Bush's judges...

Let's be generous - how about a mil per confirmation?

[Phantom Lord]

Roads are paid for with taxes collected on gas, registration fees, plate fees, inspection fees, and a virtually endless list of fees paid by those who drive cars, trucks, 18 wheelers, etc...

Problem is, the money is collected "for" roads, but is put in the general fund and then spent on every project under the sun and not dedicated to the original reason the taxes were instituted.

I am willing to bet that the amount of taxes collected in regardes to automobiles over the past 50 years far exceeds the amount of money spent on roads.

[robertpaulsen]

Amtrak has been getting bailed out for 31 years; it has never shown a profit. This is not new, or unexpected. It got so bad that, in 1997, the government gave Amtrak 5 years to get its act together. They had 5 years to talk to the labor unions. They had 5 years to get in the black. Nothing. Worse than nothing; Amtrak continues to lose over $900M/year ($23B to date).

If it couldn't be fixed in the last 5 years, it can't be fixed.

[babble-on]

the problem is the total lack of ridership in the national system, not the Northeast Corridor where people actually use the thing. How much are they spending to keep the Illinois to San Francisco route open which is little more than a curiosity? I bet that there could be a decent IPO for the Richmond VA to Portland Maine part of the service, and just flush the rest of it down the turlet. There might be other bits and pieces that someone would buy, too. Los Angeles to Seattle?

[G.Mason]

"Transportation Department Inspector General Kenneth Mead reported in January that Amtrak lost $1.1 billion in 2001, the most in its history, and had made no progress toward meeting Congress' 1997 order to wean itself from annual government operating subsidies by this December.

Quit your "bitchin" and work some more overtime or get a part time job.

The government needs more $$$$.

Ain't socialism grand?