The House Appropriations Committee is expected to consider a fiscal 2003
transportation appropriations bill tomorrow which has only $762 million for Amtrak, $438 million short of Amtrak's $1.2 billion request. That request is the minimum Amtrak needs. Amtrak President David Gunn, who inherited the $1.2 billion figure, has called it too low.
In addition, the House committee takes aim at the six routes the General Accounting Office says lost more than $200 per passenger in 2001. They are:
--Sunset Limited
--Pennsylvanian
--Texas Eagle
--Three Rivers
--Southwest Chief
--Kentucky Cardinal
The committee would terminate federal funding for those lines if support
above the $200 loss is not received (presumably from states) by July 1,
2003. NARP generally argues that the existing system is so skeletal that
removal of any major route eliminates service to entire states and to major cities, and that many fixed costs will simply be shifted to surviving routes, helping set them up as the next targets.
We also urge that Union Pacific not be rewarded for its atricious handling of the Texas Eagle and Sunset Limited; UP has not earned any Amtrak incentive payments for on-time performance in the past two years.
Because of severance payment requirements, route discontinuances generally do not produce net savings the first year, so these cuts would not help Amtrak deal with an inadequate funding level.
Finally, even if one accepted the concept of a threshold, "subsidy per passenger" is not a logical choice because it does not parallel economic viability. For example, according to figures on page 96 of the final
Amtrak Reform Council report, the Southwest Chief has the fifth best operating ratio among long-distance routes. However, because it carries a relatively small number of people relatively long distances, it has
the fifth WORST loss per passenger. (Operating ratio is costs divided by
revenues; the lower the figure, the better the performance.)
Also, the Southwest Chief and the Three Rivers are linchpins in Amtrak's mail business, which Gunn says is profitable and which he wants to keep.
It is important to note that, although this bill is going straight to full committee -- skipping the usual subcommittee consideration -- the threshold language is the work of Subcommittee Chairman Harold Rogers (R.-Ky.), not Full Committee Chairman C. W. "Bill" Young (R.-Fla.).
Please urge your representative to work for and vote for any amendment aimed at increasing Amtrak's funding, and/or eliminating the $200 threshold. Below are links to two articles about this situation. The Washington Post story includes this: "Political insiders expressed
surprise that the Republicans would take such an action before the November elections. The six trains pass through the districts of several key Republicans who are in tight races."
"Bill Would Leave Amtrak Short; GOP Draft Could Mean Shutdown of Long-Distance Routes," Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62467-2002Sep24.html
"Bill aims to cut Amtrak funding in Houston," Houston Chronicle, http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/front/1589349
--Ross B. Capon,
NARP Executive Director
--------------------------------
To my Congressman, Sam Farr:
I understand that tomorrow, September 26, the House Appropriations Committee will be considering funding Amtrak for 2003 at only $762 million, far short of the $1.2 billion it needs to keep the national rail network intact. If anything, Amtrak needs more than requested, not less!
I understand the funding bill also targets several popular Amtrak routes for elimination if states do not help fund them. Eliminating Amtrak routes is the worst thing we could possibly do.
Experience has shown time and time again that cutting routes only results in greater financial losses. Amtrak will never make a profit by NOT selling its primary service. Amtrak needs to GROW in order to make money. Routes need to be expanded so that Amtrak can sell more tickets and cover its fixed costs more easily. Looking at the bottom line on a train-by-train basis is fiscal foolishness!
-----------------------------
The best way to send e-mail to your Congressman is to go through this web form: http://www.house.gov/writerep/ Mail from this doesn't get mixed up with SPAM, and doesn't have to go through Anthrax screening so it is more likely to be read promptly.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
It's sad (but not surprising) that the "promises" made months ago are worth zero. Unless you're running an airline, of course.
Even less surprising is that we've heard nothing about this $438 million "trimming" until now, mere hours before the bill goes to the committee.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy
Senators have a lot of power, so my guess is that this will be eliminated in the Senate version and not re-instated during the conference committee, unless they want to deal with one PO'd Texas Senator.
------------------
Trust God, love your neighbor, and never mistake opinion for truth.
-Mr. Toy