Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Madam Chairman, my amendment is really straightforward and one which I have offered year after year after year after year on the floor of the House of Representatives.

It would eliminate funding for the absolute worst performing line, one line, on the Amtrak system, a line that is known as the Sunset Limited, and it runs from New Orleans to Los Angeles.

Madam Chairman, the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997 required that Amtrak operate without any Federal assistance after 2002. Amtrak was supposed to be free of Federal operating subsidies.

Yet, despite this commonsense requirement that Amtrak cease their financial irresponsibility and mismanagement, instead, it costs the taxpayers $396.31 per rider, per year, on this line. That is $396.31 to subsidize the travels of passengers from New Orleans to Los Angeles, a trip that takes nearly 48 hours, assuming the train is on time.

Madam Chairman, we could buy everybody a free ticket on an airline from New Orleans to Los Angeles and probably end up saving money.

However, according to Amtrak's most recent performance report, the Sunset Limited only arrives on time 46 percent of the time. So it might even make sense for somebody to get there not only quicker, but also cheaper.

This places the Sunset Limited as one of the top 10 worst on-time routes for any of Amtrak's routes in its latest performance report.

Madam Chairman, taxpayers should be happy that the train really doesn't run more often. But when it does run, the route loses an average of $40 million a year.

So my amendment is the first step, once again, in instilling just a small measure, joining the gentleman from Georgia, in fiscal discipline that Amtrak should be told today that it has to establish.

If it cannot manage itself with its worst, most expensive performing line, then God help us all. If they won't do it, we are going to. Failure to do so will only allow Amtrak to continue misusing and wasting taxpayer dollars.

Look, it is just very simple. I am asking that my colleagues join with me and say that the worst-performing, the most cost-prohibitive line would be stopped by Amtrak. So, I think it makes sense to say, no more Sunset Limited.

So I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Madam Chairman, once again I stand up in a continuing theme of what I believe fiscally responsible Members who come to the floor should look at--the operation of Amtrak.

Today, once again, I come to the floor to offer my ideas about how we can help, especially during troubling financial times for the American taxpayer with our Federal Government, that we can look at and find ways to where we work with Amtrak.

Years ago I met with the chairman of the board, who openly acknowledged that there were challenges that Amtrak faced, not just safety issues, but many other issues that dealt with their financial integrity.

I told him I would continue doing these kinds of amendments, and he considered this, in a sense, an opportunity for the people who provide money, meaning the taxpayers of the United States, to have a say about the operation of how their money would be used. That is the same spirit that I am here on the floor today.

Madam Chairman, my amendment would eliminate funding for Amtrak routes that have total direct costs that are more than twice the revenue that they produce. That means, if the cost is twice as much as the revenue, I think that that should be a solid reason why someone should consider eliminating those routes.

They are all over the place, and I believe that Amtrak continues to provide these, accept government money, and they don't give two flips about what we think about the use of the taxpayer money. And so I think it is worth our time to be here.

Every single long-distance route that Amtrak provides over 400 miles in length operates at a loss every single month. If they have got a route that is more than 400 miles, I mean, we are helping them out here, Madam Chairman.

We are helping out Amtrak, and we are saying to them, if you have got something more than 400 miles, you are operating at a loss.

Now we are saying, however, if it is twice the cost of the revenue, that is what we would like to have you look at. And I think that it would be an argument for us, as a provider of money, to say, look, we think that you should help people. Maybe when they call in to you to take Amtrak, if it is one of those routes, why don't you suggest to them that they fly aircraft, that they take a bus, that they do something where the American taxpayer is not on the line.

The bottom line is, if you combine seven routes that are taken in this parameter, the American taxpayer pays $332.8 million for this subsidy. $332 million is maybe not a lot of money to Amtrak, but that is a darn lot amount of money for the American people to be putting into Amtrak to have them waste.

I believe it is a waste. I believe it could be not only better allocated, but utilized in a better way, like shifting people who are coming to you--let's take an alternative. Let's maybe take an airplane.

It is clear that the government subsidizes rail service on Amtrak, and it does not make economic sense that they take advantage of that.

So, Madam Chairman, it is real simple. This is an opportunity for the people who represent taxpayers to simply come forth and say, let's have a vote on this, that we believe that that is too much money. 332 million bucks should not be used on these seven routes, and that is why I am here today.

So, Madam Chairman, I urge all my colleagues to support what I think is a commonsense amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source