Providing for Consideration of H.R. 6003, Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 6003, PASSENGER RAIL INVESTMENT AND IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2008 -- (House of Representatives - June 10, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today and want to thank my friend from California, a member of the Rules Committee, for yielding this time to me to discuss the proposed rule for consideration of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act.

I rise in opposition to this rule, and to the legislation, neither of which will meet the Democrats' campaign promises about how they said they would run the House in a fair and transparent manner, nor the American taxpayers'
expectations how the Federal Government should manage tax revenues that it takes from hardworking Americans.

The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 would reauthorize Government spending on Amtrak over the next 5 years at a cost of almost $15 billion without requiring any meaningful reforms in Amtrak's governance or operations and without allocating taxpayer dollars based on a demand for the service.

As we know, Amtrak is a private corporation that continues to receive large Federal operating subsidies, despite laws passed by Congress requiring after 2002, over 5 years ago, that they should be able to run their operations without Federal grant funds.

Despite the fact that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved this legislation, I am not alone in believing that Amtrak should conduct its operations without picking the pockets of American families who are already being asked to do this by the do-nothing Democrat Congress to pay for record prices for energy, and can little afford to subsidize the inefficiencies of a transportation system that many of them will never use.

Like me and many of my Republican colleagues, President Bush has urged this Congress to pass legislation that would: (1) create a system driven by sound economics where services are provided based primarily on consumer demand; (2) promote competition; (3) focus Amtrak on core operating competencies; (4) establish funding partnerships with States; and, (5) improve investment in and management of the Northeast Corridor.

I include for the Record the Statement of Administration Policy for H.R. 6003.

Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget

Washington, DC, June 9, 2008.
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

H.R. 6003--Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, (Rep. Oberstar (D) Minnesota and 41 cosponsors)

The Administration believes that a significantly reformed intercity passenger rail system has the potential to play a role of growing importance in providing transportation options in the United States, including helping to reduce congestion along heavily traveled intercity corridors. However, the Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 6003, which would reauthorize the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) for five years, because it would authorize an appropriation of more than $14 billion without requiring any meaningful reforms in Amtrak's governance or operations and without allocating resources based on the demand for passenger rail service. For this reason, and others set forth below, if the bill were presented to the President in its current form, his senior advisors would recommend he veto it.

Amtrak is a private corporation that continues to receive large Federal operating subsidies, despite longstanding existing law requiring that, after 2002, ``Amtrak shall operate without Federal operating grant funds appropriated for its benefit.'' H.R. 6003 authorizes an unprecedented level of funding but does not include basic measures to hold Amtrak accountable to taxpayers for its spending decisions. For example, H.R. 6003 provides scant opportunity for competition on existing Amtrak routes and does not include provisions that would condition Amtrak's funding based on progress on reforms. Measures to address these areas are included in S. 294 and should be adopted before Congress completes its work on this measure.

The Administration also would strongly object if bonding authority were added to the bill. Language in the introduced version of H.R. 6004, the Rail Infrastructure Development and Expansion Act for the 21st Century, permits State issuance of $24 billion in bonds, including but not limited to tax credit bonds. In particular, the use of tax credit bonds to finance the construction of high-speed rail capital projects would be expensive and highly inefficient, and costs would be borne by taxpayers, not system users.

To move Amtrak towards a sustainable business model, the Administration urges Congress to pass legislation that reflects the following core reform principles consistently articulated by this Administration: (1) create a system driven by sound economics where services are provided based primarily on consumer demand; (2) promote competition; (3) focus Amtrak on core operating competencies; (4) establish funding partnerships with States; and (5) improve the investment in and management of the Northeast Corridor.

The Administration appreciates that H.R. 6003 includes measures to promote private sector development of the Northeast Corridor and other potential high-speed routes. Making use of the private sector's operational and financial management capabilities could help new rail services to perform at a high level for the traveling public. However, the Administration is concerned that the authorized funding levels for high-speed rail in H.R. 6003 send the wrong message; any expansions of rail service should be based on a sustainable business model.

Titles III and V would establish certain capital grants programs requiring workers employed with funds obtained under these programs be paid pursuant to Davis-Bacon Act requirements. Thus, Titles III and V would expand Davis-Bacon Act coverage, which is contrary to the Administration's long-standing policy of opposing any statutory attempt to expand or contract the applicability of Davis-Bacon Act prevailing wage requirements. This expansion could undermine the effectiveness of the enumerated programs.

--

This statement, which outlines these goals for the improvement of Amtrak, makes clear that the President's senior advisers would recommend his veto of today's legislation that falls far short of this mark.

During testimony in the Rules Committee last evening, it was represented to the committee that the legislation would allow some minimal privatization of a few routes, and that some additional studies and the rearrangement of some management duties at Amtrak were included in the bill to improve its efficiencies. I appreciate these efforts, and although I do not think that they go nearly far enough, because as we speak Amtrak continues to hemorrhage money due to labor disputes, energy costs, and the requirement that they maintain service on very lightly used, long-haul routes through rural areas of the country.

Unfortunately, through their inaction, the Democrat majority has already demonstrated its lack of interest in doing anything serious to address this issue as well as soaring energy costs. Through its flurry of constant action on behalf of big labor bosses, they have demonstrated that they are equally unwilling to do anything to address that problem for Amtrak, its riders, or the American public.

That means that the only opportunity that Members have to reform Amtrak in this bill is through cutting the fat from these underused, rural long-haul lines that are often subsidized at a cost of multiple hundreds of dollars per ticket by American taxpayers.

To address this problem, I have offered an amendment that is very similar to my efforts in the past on this issue, but is this time even more direct in its approach.

In March 2007, I offered an amendment to the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act that would have prohibited Amtrak from subsidizing its 10 worst revenue losing long-distance routes, as determined by its own September 2006 monthly performance report unless the Secretary of Homeland Security determined that the route was critical to our homeland security needs. Unfortunately, this commonsense and fiscally responsible amendment failed.

So today, I will be offering an amendment that is even more direct in its purpose and even more clear in its intent, an amendment that will simply prohibit taxpayer subsidies from flowing to the absolutely worst, most wasteful, most expensive long-distance route that Amtrak runs, according to its own performance report as of March 2008, unless this route is deemed to be critical to our Nation's homeland security.

My amendment simply seeks to prevent further good taxpayer dollars from being thrown after bad by limiting the cost of Amtrak's number one least profitable route; the number one least profitable route, that's all we are asking in this bill.

Madam Speaker, if Members cannot support this simple, security-conscious amendment on behalf of fiscal discipline, I don't know if there is anything that we can possibly do to help the American taxpayers any more.

I ask all of my colleagues to vote against this rule which does not match the Democrats' rhetoric about running the most honest, open and transparent Congress in history. I also ask them to oppose this underlying legislation which even if my amendment were included does not go far enough to protect the hard-earned money of American taxpayers from wasteful spending at Amtrak.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source