Date: Thursday, June 6, 1996 9:24pm
From: INT:all-aboard@taex001.tamu.edu
Re: House Subcommittee Slashes Amtrak By 38%
Dear Friends of Amtrak:
I have just received word from the National Association of
Railroad Passengers (NARP) that the House Appropriations
Subcommittee on Transportation late this afternoon voted to slash
Amtrak's budget by 38%. The subcommittee approved "nailing Amtrak
to the wall" while virtually freezing highway, transit and aviation
spending at current levels:
Billions of Dollars
Proposed by
House (1997) Current (1996) % Change
"Intelligent
Transportation" 0.115 0.105 +09.52%
Highway
Obligations 17.550 17.550 00.00%
Transit 4.0508 4.0514 -00.01%
Aviation 8.000 8.0299 -00.37%
Amtrak 0.462 0.750 -38.40%
The NARP points to the following:
--Amtrak was singled out for destructive cuts.
--Proposed funding is 38% below the current funding level, and
thus 38% below what the Republican House-passed budget resolution
envisioned (i.e., a freeze). It is also 50% below the $922 million
envisioned for 1997 in last year's (also-Republican) House budget
resolution.
--The subcommittee fully funded Clinton's $200 million operating
request (but not the $250 million requested by Amtrak). This may
not be enough to run the existing system.
--Wolf virtually eliminated capital, supporting our view that
enactment of the half-cent (which he supports but some House leaders
do not) is a life-or-death.
The above information comes courtesy of the NARP.
Craig O'Connell
To all NARP members--the bulletin you got from us yesterday had an error on the Amtrak line. The House bill's actual 1997 Amtrak total is $542 million, or a reduction of 28% from 1996. But the point remains that it is a big cut, and that other transportation programs are essentially untouched. Here is the release we sent out this morning (it will go onto the NARP web site--the Amtrak funding figures themselves, with subtotals, are already there)--Scott Leonard HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS THREATEN PASSENGER TRAIN NETWORK The National Association of Railroad Passengers is deeply troubled by Amtrak funding levels approved yesterday by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, chaired by Frank Wolf (R-VA). For fiscal 1997, which begins October 1, the Subcommittee essentially leaves all major transportation programs untouched, but cuts Amtrak deeply. Compared to 1996, Amtrak is cut 28%, while highway obligations are unchanged, and aviation and transit are cut less than a half-percent. Federal budget concerns are very real, but the Subcommittee's action calls into question any concept of programs sharing the burden in an equitable manner. Total Amtrak funding for 1997 would be just $542 million, down from $750 million in 1996, and much lower than the $922 million envisioned for 1997 in last year's budget resolution. The 1997 Amtrak operations figure of $200 million is 30% below this year's level, 49% below the 1995 level of $392 million, and 20% below Amtrak's request for 1997 (which was $250 million). While $200 million is also the level in the Clinton Administration's budget, that level nevertheless threatens Amtrak's viability and raises the prospect of more, deep service cuts. Amtrak had already reduced its train-miles by 17% in 1995. The capital figure of $200 million is down 42% from this year's level and down 53% from 1995. Of that, $80 million would go to a high-speed train maintenance facility in the Northeast Corridor. A cut in capital investment of this magnitude threatens the viability and efficiency of whatever trains are running a few years from now. Both the Clinton Administration and many members of Congress seem committed to the idea that Amtrak operating grants would disappear in 2002. It is important not to lose sight of the stringent conditions needed for that to happen without destroying Amtrak service. There must be adequate capital investment, as outlined in S. 1395. There must be meaningful reforms that cut Amtrak's costs and increase its revenues, such as reauthorization might permit--if it is ever enacted. The jury is out on whether Amtrak can operate subsidy-free even with those conditions, but it certainly cannot do so without them. Indeed, considering the massive role the public sector continues to play in other modes--especially highways and aviation--it is fair to ask why Amtrak should be required at all to operate subsidy-fee. Requiring such a high standard for rail is all the more puzzling given the environmental and safety advantages of rail. Other industrialized countries have seen fit to make rail investment a priority--so should the United States. The public wants rail--a poll we commissioned a year ago showed 63% in favor of using a cent of the existing federal fuel tax for Amtrak, and the same amount in favor of allowing states the option of using some of their federal transportation funds on intercity passenger trains. NARP is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan membership group dedicated to educating the public about the benefits of rail travel. It was founded in 1967 and has 12,000 members.
Amtrak's response to the cuts is contained in the following Amtrak Employee
Advisory:
** Friday, June 7,1996
House Transportation Committee
recommends Amtrak funding cut
The Transportation Appropriations Committee of the U. S.
House of Representatives dealt a strong blow to Amtrak yesterday
[June 7] when it approved drastically reduced funding levels for
FY (fiscal year) 1997, which begins Oct. 1, 1996. The House Committee
vote was the first in a long series of actions in both the House and
the Senate leading to a final appropriations for FY 97. The action was
particularly disturbing because it made significant cuts in Amtrak's
capital funding. Capital funds are the key to Amtrak's future survival
as Congress phases out operating funds by 2002.
"This action is a strong reminder of the difficult Congressional
environment facing Amtrak. It makes our fight for the half-cent
dedicated capital trust fund all the more important," said Tom Downs,
Amtrak president and CEO.
Members of Amtrak's Management Committee have been asked to
assess the potential impacts and actions that would be required to
try and live with these cuts if months from now they turn out to be
final. The Management Committee has been told that everything must be
considered, so there will be talk of route and service actions,
maintenance or construction changes, etc. The talk does mean that
actions are being discussed, but not that decisions have been made.
Final decisions are made by the board of directors based on the
final Congressional outcomes.
Meanwhile, Tom Downs and Amtrak's government affairs staff are
working hard on Capitol Hill to make the case for our capital funding
in the Senate appropriations and in both houses with respect to
getting the half-cent dedicated capital trust fund enacted.
"Amtrak and its supporters must make it known that these kinds
of cuts in capital funding jeopardize our future," Downs said.
To stay posted on these and other developments regarding Amtrak you can check the Friends of Amtrak website at: http://www.netcom.com/~crocon/amtrak.html
Thanks for your continuing support.
Craig O'Connell
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~