Amtrak 2008 Appropriation Up For Consideration in the House

[Vogon_Glory]

House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee leaders held a bipartisan news conference Thursday to announce the introduction of H.R. 6003, the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, which includes Amtrak reauthorization provisions, and H.R. 6004, the Rail Infrastructure Development and Expansion Act for the 21st Century (RIDE-21), to provide bonding authority and tax credits for high-speed rail projects. (RIDE-21 had been introduced in previous sessions of Congress.) Chairman James Oberstar (D-MN) was joined by Ranking Member John Mica (R-FL), Railroads Subcommittee Chairwoman Corrine Brown (D-FL), Railroads Subcommittee Ranking Member Bill Shuster (R-PA), and subcommittee members Elijah Cummings (D-MD), Grace Napolitano (D-CA), Daniel Lipinski (D-IL), and Bruce Braley (D-IA). Oberstar’s House floor speech introducing the two bills is available here (PDF).

H.R. 6003 would provide $14.3 billion over five years for passenger rail programs, including $3 billion for Amtrak operations (starting at $525 million for Fiscal 2009 and increasing to $654 million by Fiscal 2013), $1.0285 billion for Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance, and $6.698 billion for Amtrak capital programs and state capital grants (starting at $1.202 billion in Fiscal 2009 and increasing to $1.427 billion in Fiscal 2013). Of the capital funds, 41% would be available to states in Fiscal 2009, declining to 35% by Fiscal 2013. There would also be $1.725 billion ($345 million annually) for Amtrak debt service. $121.814 million would go to Amtrak’s Office of the Inspector General, and $60 million would go to USDOT to move forward with Baltimore tunnel improvements. H.R. 6003 also allows for unspecified grants to alleviate identified chokepoints on existing passenger rail corridors.

H.R. 6003 also establishes a competitive state grant process for higher-speed rail corridor projects (at least 110 mph). $350 million would be available for each fiscal year ($1.75 billion total) for a federal match of up to 80 percent.

<snip>


From the National Association of Railroad Passengers web site

http://www.narprail.org/cms/index.php/hotline/more/hotline_552/

[nxylas]

1. So what does this mean in practical terms?

I have to confess, the story's boring, statistics-riddled writing style made it hard for me to pick the actual meat out of it. As I understand it, it will mean upgrading railways around bottlenecks in order to improve all-round service. A long way from my dream of replacing America's domestic air network with a super high-speed (300mph+) rail network, but it's a start.

[Vogon_Glory]

2. For One Thing, It Means Amtrak Will Keep Running If It Passes

In practical terms, it means that Amtrak will keep running another year if the legislation passes both the House and Senate and isn't vetoed by Buckaroo Bush in a final display of faux "fiscal repsonsibility." Considering that right-wing ideologues have had Amtrak as one of their major targets for over 25 years, having Amtrak just survive would be a good start. I'd like to see a lot of genuine high-speed rail networks, too, but I don't think that we're likely to get them within the next ten to fifteen years because of the costs, because of the fiscal mess left us by the Republicans, and because of the ferocious NIMBY litigation of the sort that helped shoot down Florida's hgih-speed rail network.

What I'd like to see are a few high-speed rail networks like a genuine high-speed rail network with a separate right-of-way between Boston and Richmond, VA. I'd also like to see another couple of high-speed rail routes like between Chicago and Detroit, Chicago and Milwaukee, and Chicago and St Louis and Chicago and Omaha.

In the meantime, I, for one, would like to see conventional passenger rail upgraded. I'd like to see daily runs on trains like the Sunset (LA--NO), which only run thrice a week each way. I'd also like to see some of the former Amtrak routes that got hatcheted under Carter, Reagan, and both Bushes reinstated, like thhe Lone Star between Chicago and Houston, the Pioneer between Seattle and Portland and Salt Lake City and the Desert Wind between Los Angeles, Las Vegas, and SLC.

Amtrak has a lot of customer demand these days. They also have a lot of passenger cars and locomotives that need repairs so they can be restored to service. Furthermore, Amtrak needs new ones. The private passenger train began to whither because of automobiles, good highways, and dirt-cheap gasoline. The era of cheap gas is over and done with; there is now a place for an expanded passenger rail network.

[KamaAina]

3. Guess who wants to shut down Amtrak? McSatan, of course

Reason No. 12,475 to vote for Obama, even if you were a Hillary supporter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3393751&mesg_id=3393751

The Arizona Senator has been attempting for years to dissolve Amtrak and create small, privately owned rail companies. In fact, McCain has sworn that if elected, the shuttering of Amtrak would be a "a non-negotiable issue."

:grr:

[nxylas]

4. Because that approach worked so well in Britain

:sarcasm:

"In addition, McCain's plan proposes breaking the railroad up into three units: an operations unit, a maintenance unit and a rail reservation unit. Each unit would then be privatized within four years, and an Amtrak Control Board would be created to oversee the process."

Sounds exactly like what happened to British Rail. The result: an increase in bureaucracy as the three units had to coordinate everything with each other* and lots of accidents as the privatized rail companies cut corners on safety in order to increase their profits.

*=example: the elevators at Kings Cross station in London broke down shortly after privatization. Before, British Rail would just have sent a maintenance guy out to fix them, but because of the split into different units, they had to waste 90 minutes making a bunch of phone calls and filling out a bunch of forms before they could do that. So much for the inherent efficiency of the private sector.

[Vogon_Glory]

5. Passenger Rail: The 'Puds Are Living In The Past

I have come to believe that when it comes to passenger rail, the Republicans' thinking on passenger rail is stuck somewhere between 1970 and 1985. The Republicans still think that current gasoline and diesel prices are an aberration caused by the Iraq War and "greenie" obstructionism that prevents the oil companies from drilling in ANWR and off of Florida's West Coast.

The irony about drilling in ANWR is that even if it turns out that ANWR's wealth approaches that of the oil companies' estimates that have seen the light of day, many of the pro-drilling ANWR boosters say that the price of oil would only go down 75 cents or so--so we'd only be paying $8.25 a gallon instead of $9.00 should ANWR oil reach "lower 48" markets four to eight years from now. :sarcasm:

We are seeing the end of cheap oil, and self-described "conservatives" are firmly in denial. We are seeing cross-country auto travel begin to recede from the reach of many struggling American families. We need passenger rail not only for "grandma who can't drive and is afraid to fly" (An old pro-passenger rail argument), but also to serve the many larger towns and smaller cities losing or about to lose their commerical air links to the outside world, as a civilized and comfortable alternative to the bus, and as a civilized and comfortable alternative to expensive, uncomfortable, and increasingly undiginified air travel.