Note: unless something is in "quotes" I am paraphrasing the testimony.
------------------------------------------------------

Senator' make opening statements in this order:

Sen. McCain (Chair) Criticized Amtrak and cited the $400 loss per passenger on the Sunset Limited

Sen. Hollings Expressed support for Amtrak

Sen. Hutchison said the rest of the country should get the same level of support as the NEC, and repeated her "national of nothing" slogan.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg expressed support for Amtrak, and stated that if Congress wants to pull the plug we should get it over with, otherwise Amtrak should be funded properly as other modes of transportation are.

Hutchison and Lautenberg both cited highway congestion figures as justification for Amtrak. (This struck me as justification for urban corridor trains, but not long-distance trains, which both senators support.)

Sen. Conrad Burns R-Montana cited the Empire Builder economic benefit report that was recently released.

Sen Byron Dorgan D-North Dakota expressed strong support for Amtrak.
--------------------------------
First panel: Alan Rutter and Kenneth Mead (approximately 1 hour 15 minutes)

Alan Rutter testimony:

Alan Rutter spoke first Said administration's goal is not to dismantle Amtrak or dump it on the states.

-----------------------------
Kenneth Mead testimony:

Kenneth Mead said Bush plan funding issues were vague.

Mead said Long Distance passengers ride corridor-length segments, not the full route length.

State Funding of operating costs is negotiable

Feds should pay off Amtrak debt. Feds can get better interest rates than Amtrak can, and feds will end up paying it anyway.

McCain asked Mead: Can long-distance trains make money?
Mead: In many cases, no. Long distance trains are a series of corridors. 1 train per day "between" corridors. People who ride long distance trains between viable corridors "should get on a plane."

----------------------------------------

Rutter: BNSF runs Empire Builder mostly on time. Suggests dividing LD trains into a series of short distance coach trains to avoid expense of sleeping cars.

---------------------------------------------
Sen Lautenberg Q&A:
Rutter: investment should go to routes that serve the most people.

Lautenberg: Bush's nominees to Amtrak board don't have experience with passenger rail and one has a conflict of interest with American Airlines.
Rutter: They're business people and therefore qualified.

Rutter on killing Amtrak: "We don't want to do that or we would have last summer... We don't want it to go away, we want to make it better."

Lautenberg: Do any Amtrak board nominees have passenger rail experience?
Rutter: Doesn't answer directly but implies they have more such experience than previous board members.

-----------------------

Here I notice Sen Hutchison has left. Senator Gordon Smith R-Oregon is now in attendance.

Smith: Asks why some states like Oregon have to pay 100% for rail while other states pay nothing.
Mead: All states should pay and have more say, but Bush plan has no source of money in it to assist states. States should pay more but don't impose an undue burden, especially now.
Rutter: Under Bush plan feds would help all states (with capital), and all states would pay (operating subsidies).

Smith asked about revival of Pioneer at least as far east as Boise. Any progress there?
Rutter: "Not that I am aware of." But Bush plan would assist with its revival.
----------------------------------------

Sen. Dorgan Q&A

Dorgan: The administration is really saying with this plan that Long Distance trains shouldn't be federally subsidized. Why not just come out and say it?

In response to Mead's ideas to run only corridor trains Dorgan replied: "You can't stop Amtrak in Fargo and pick it up again in Helena." Dorgan compared the Empire Builder to interstate freeways that run through low population areas in North Dakota as part of a national highway system.

Dorgan (In reference to Bush plan): This is a plan that says 'Let's abandon long distance trains'.... You don't have a ghost of a chance to connect the dots [regional corridors] with this plan."
Rutter: He has talked to states and they all have similar concerns. But they do like the 50/50 federal state capital funding.

Mead: Advised against getting bogged down in discussions of long-distance trains. Said the future of rail is in how many people ride, and the quality of service. Focusing on long distance trains will take everything "down the tubes."

------------------------------------------------------------
Next panel: David Gunn and Claudia Howells of Oregon DOT rail division. (approximately 15-20 minutes)

Gunn: "Troublesome" problems with Bush plan. Requires a series of complex actions in a short time frame. For example, requires splitting Amtrak into "three Amtrak's within six months" all while maintaining existing operations.

Gunn: No specific funding source in Bush plan.

Gunn: Long distance trains are a national service and have value to the public. They are important to rural areas.

Gunn: Bush plan is "impractical."
----------------------------------------

Howells: Before Oregon invested in rail the Coast Starlight served 25,000 riders annually in Oregon. (I think she was referring to the Eugene-Portland segment.) With Cascades service added ridership increased to 125,000. (I don't know if I heard the last number correctly)

Howells: We need federal partnership. We want return of the Pioneer. There needs to be a state role with federal partnerships.

Howells: There are problems with privatization. We need the legal framework of Amtrak to operate.

Howells: Multi-state compacts easy to conceive, not easy to do, especially with private freight railroads also involved.

Howells on this summer's Lewis & Clark train from Portland to Astoria: We learned a lot. Trains were popular, averaging 80% full. But they still required a subsidy. In reference to this and the idea of privatization she added: "Running a railroad costs the same no matter who does it."

Howells: We support continuation of long-distance trains. Contradicting Mead's testimony she said many Empire Builder passengers from Portland do go all the way to Chicago. Long distance trains need modern equipment and reliability.

--------------------------------
McCain grills Gunn:

McCain: Thanks Gunn for his work, but says he is skeptical of Amtrak as a whole. He cites Acela problems in particular. Focuses on an anecdote involving bathroom doors that didn't lock properly. Said the door design was not Bombardier's but Amtrak's.

Gunn: Mistakes were made but we did well this year. We have money in the bank and ridership is up systemwide.

McCain cites NEC figures which show ridership is down. Gunn counters that ridership is up "systemwide" including the long distance trains and western regional trains. McCain repeats NEC numbers are down, and a frustrated Gunn explains it again. McCain looks irked.

Gunn: Costs are finally under control. Maintenance is coming in under budget. Payroll and other budgets are flat for next year. Deferred maintenance is starting to get done. "We're not out of the woods yet." but we're making progress. "We need to put money into nuts and bolts" while Congress debates Amtrak's future.

I agree with Senator Lautenberg in this statement:
[Lautenberg] expressed support for Amtrak, and stated that if Congress wants to pull the plug we should get it over with, otherwise Amtrak should be funded properly as other modes of transportation are.

Either support Amtrak enough to run a quality system, or get rid of them. We have had enough of this halfway type of a passenger railroad.

I would also support a full LD system, but I'll take the "half system" for now. Some trains are better than none...

quote:

---

Originally posted by CoastStarlight99:
Does anyone know what the "decision" of any kind was????

---