Congressional Budget for the United States Government for the Fiscal Year 2006

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2006

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, thank you, once again, to my friend from West Virginia for offering this important amendment.

It is somewhat hard to believe we have to offer this amendment. There should not be a debate about the importance of Amtrak and national passenger rail service, but there is, so once again we are making the case and asking the support of our colleagues in this body on behalf of Amtrak.

As Senator Byrd pointed out, the President's budget and this budget resolution does not provide a penny for the continued operation of Amtrak. It provides just enough money to shut the trains down, but there is very little thought given as to the consequences of shutting the trains down, of ending the services that Amtrak offers, and the impact on the regional rail services that, in addition to Amtrak, provide so much support for our national transportation system.

I know there are members of the administration and even of the Congress arguing that Amtrak should not receive another penny because it is not self-sufficient. I have to respectfully ask, are the airlines self-sufficient? We keep bailing them out. Are the highway systems self-sufficient? We continue the development and maintenance of highways, transit systems, buses. No form of transportation is self-sufficient.

We have a fundamental decision to make which apparently the administration is making by this budget request that we give up on national rail for passenger travel. That is a very shortsighted position and a critical mistake.

I ask my colleagues to think back to the days after September 11. Our airports were shut down. The bridges going in and out of Manhattan were shut down. The only way in and out of Manhattan was Amtrak. That was it. If we could not have moved through the Amtrak system in and out of Manhattan, we would not have had any contact, any continuing communication, any movement of people.

I am amazed we have such a short memory. I am also amazed we do not recognize the benefits that Amtrak offers in providing this service to so many commuters and passengers. In fiscal year 2004 Amtrak broke the 25 million passenger record. That was an extraordinary accomplishment. I give David Gunn and the leadership team he brought in, which is turning Amtrak around, tremendous credit. The record of 25 million was a million greater than 2003, which itself was a record.

So we are making progress in running a railroad that meets people's needs. The new Acela trains are a great gift, moving us back and forth between Washington and New York in a little over 3 hours. I obviously have a very personal interest in this because New Yorkers rely on rail more than perhaps any other citizens in our country. Penn Station on 34th street in Manhattan is the busiest passenger rail station in our country, servicing almost 9 million passengers who boarded Amtrak trains there in 2004. Our Albany Rensselaer Station is the 10th busiest in the country. Much of our upstate economy depends upon Amtrak. We also have the busiest commuter rail system in the country. I have to point out we are putting our commuter rail system on the path to obliteration as well as Amtrak because our commuter rails operate on Amtrak rail lines. They use Amtrak tracks. Much of the system would not be able to operate if they did not share expenses, share maintenance, with Amtrak. So we are not just writing the death warrant for Amtrak but also writing the death warrant for commuter rail.

Why are we doing this? Some are ideologically opposed to passenger rail. We might as well be ideologically opposed to air travel, if we say if you cannot make a profit you go out of business. In many instances it is the combination of Government funding and passenger use that works around the world. Why do we think we can be different?

The effect of this policy the administration has embedded in its budget will be so far reaching that I don't think people have stopped and considered the impact on the economy, the impact on our transportation infrastructure.

I was talking to one of the people who is quite an expert in railroads who said if you take Amtrak off the tracks, Amtrak is no longer responsible, the burden of keeping the tracks will fall completely on the freight companies. The freight companies have not done that good a job of keeping up their tracks and we will have all these bottlenecks that have a ripple effect through the economy, the likes of which we did not contemplate.

This has long-term effects on our economy, on our homeland security. To remove this necessary form of transportation at a time when we face all of these dangers and risks is extremely shortsighted.

What is going to happen with our airports and our highways? Amtrak right now accounts for 50 percent of the Washington, DC-New York air and rail market and 35 percent of the Boston-New York travel market. Are we going to put all of these passengers into our airports which, as anyone who has traveled lately knows, are pretty chaotic to start with? Are we going to add them to the highways and to the congestion? What are we thinking about? I wish we would take a deep breath.

The administration says it would like to reform Amtrak. I am very impressed with the steps David Gunn has taken. If the idea of reform is transferring the costs for funding Amtrak on to the States, that is a nonstarter. We will be burdening the States with expenses they cannot meet now. We will be thinking of cutting Medicaid, cutting housing. We will cut community development block grants and then say, by the way, pick up the costs of keeping your economy and business travel going by paying for Amtrak. I don't know any State that can accommodate that kind of hit.

I hope we will take the moment to support Senator Byrd's amendment. It is the right approach to take. I am the first to say if we can do some smart reforms in the context of keeping the railroad operating, let's do it. But what are the smart reforms? David Gunn has said if he can have some money for capital investments, we would cut the amount of time for commuting between Washington, DC, New York, and Boston. We could have high-speed rail along the east coast. We would make some of the routes that are not now a very effective means for transporting passengers much more so because we would make the investments that are necessary in the underlying infrastructure.

I join very happily with my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from West Virginia. I hope on both sides of the aisle all Members will think hard about this amendment. I cannot stress strongly enough the impact on the Northeast of killing Amtrak.

For people who say, well, I live a long way from there, what difference does it make, the financial engine that the Northeast still is, that provides the funds for so much of what we offer to other States far from New York, far from West Virginia, far from Boston, far from the east coast, will be at risk. This is a necessary part of our financial engine in the Northeast, particularly in New York.

I respectfully request every single Member to vote in your own self-interests. Vote for passenger rail. Vote for the economic benefits that it necessarily provides. But vote for the Byrd amendment and make us once again supportive of passenger rail as part of our overall transportation infrastructure.

Mr. President, I thank my friend and colleague and the Presiding Officer for this time.

http://thomas.loc.gov/