Expressing support for the designation of National D-Day Remembrance Day, and recognizing the spirit, courage, and sacrifice of the men and women who fought and won World War II.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, we stand on the threshold of a transformational moment in the history of intercity passenger rail service in America.

There was an earlier such moment. That was Amtrak, the creation of the Passenger Rail Corporation in 1970 when the freight rail interests of America gradually had been abandoning passenger service, discontinuing lines, discontinuing less-than-carload service, discontinuing the overnight railway Post Office service aboard intercity passenger rail. And as the RPO was discontinued, the passenger portion of the

rail service became unprofitable and the railroads one by one appealed to the Interstate Commerce Commission for discontinuance authority, to discontinue service on that portion of the line. And gradually, passenger rail service disappeared from the landscape until finally the Federal Government was left holding the bag, if you will, and created, through act of Congress, the passenger rail service we know today as Amtrak.

But over the intervening years, Amtrak was never given the funding it needed to improve the track, the rail bed, to improve the rolling stock, and to operate independently from freight rail service on the lines and corridors where passenger service operated. And especially over the last dozen years, we have seen declining investment in Amtrak's operations, and in the last 6 years we have had at least one bankruptcy budget submitted by the administration, candidly stated so by the Secretary of Transportation. But with a combination of Republicans and Democrats looking to the future, we have been able to just keep Amtrak's nose above water during these intervening years. Today, we change that model.

With passage of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act, we will transform the future of intercity passenger rail in America.

We heard all this morning from the one-minute speeches, the price of a gallon of gas breached $4 a gallon for the first time in history. The American Automobile Association says gas prices have gone up more than 10 percent in the last month and a dollar in the past year. Those prices are reverberating across the Nation, changing people's travel patterns and habits and causing them to look more to transit, and transit across the country has exploded in its growth.

Last year we added more than a million new passengers to transit services a day across this country for 375 million new transit trips last year. Amtrak has similarly experienced enormous growth.

Our airlines are cutting back. Eight airlines since December of last year have shut down. One filed for bankruptcy, largely because of rising fuel costs. Fuel now represents 40 percent of the airline industry's expenses. A small increase in gas prices, and I know that a dollar a barrel increase in the price of oil for Northwest Airlines causes an increase in cost to that airline of $42 million. You can increase that by 50 percent more for Delta, and double that for United and American. That means less competition, less mobility, and higher prices for our fellow citizens.

The Department of Transportation says vehicle miles traveled in March fell 4.3 percent from last year. That is the first time we have seen a drop in miles traveled on public roads in over 30 years.

I yield myself an additional 2 minutes.

The Center for Housing Policy says that working families in large metropolitan areas spent nearly a third of their income on transportation. That means families are not able to buy homes, they are not saving, they are not investing in their children's education, they are spending it on transportation.

People are beginning to realize, just as they did in the days after September 11, that Amtrak service to move people from one city to another, is vitally important. One full passenger train can take 250 to 350 cars off the road. Intercity passenger rail removes 8 million cars from the highways every year and eliminates the need for 50,000 fully loaded passenger airline trips each year.

Amtrak in the Northeast corridor has 56 percent of the air-rail market between Washington, D.C. and New York City, 43 percent of the market between New York and Boston. And now we come to the American public, perhaps 20 years too late, but just in time with the legislation before us today that will upgrade passenger rail intercity service.

There is $14.9 billion authorized in this bill to rebuild Amtrak, construct high-speed rail corridors across the Nation, and I won't go into the specifics of it.

At this point I simply want to express my deep appreciation to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) who extended his hand of cooperation, his enthusiasm for rebuilding passenger rail service in this country with some innovative ideas and a willingness to join hands and bring a truly bipartisan bill to the House floor, and to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) the Chair of the Rail Subcommittee who has been Amtrak's most vigorous cheerleader and advocate.

I yield myself an additional 30 seconds.

She did a Harry Truman-style whistle-stop tour on Amtrak when it was just about to go under and joined forces with a bipartisan initiative to save the funding for Amtrak. And Mr. Shuster from Pennsylvania who has been a true partner in shaping this legislation today; his ideas and contributions have been enormously valuable.

We bring to America an opportunity to join the rest of the world in world-class, intercity high-speed passenger rail service. And again, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Chair of our rail subcommittee, Ms. Brown.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Maryland, the Chair of the Coast Guard Subcommittee (Mr. Cummings).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I want to express my appreciation both to Mr. Shuster for his comments and to Mr. LaTourette for his observations. But it must also be added that in the bleak years of those starvation budgets for Amtrak, the gentleman from Ohio was out front with Ms. Brown and myself advocating for increased funding for Amtrak.

If you look at the New York Times today, the gentleman referred to the price of fuel. Every increase in the price of fuel, already up 84 percent compared with last year, increases pressures on airlines. We have to pump 7,000 gallons into a 737 and 60,000 into a 747.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself another 15 seconds.

So airlines are doing a whole host of new initiatives including washing their engines frequently. They get grime out of the engine which increases efficiency. And they're cutting back on a whole host of things like less water onboard aircraft for the lavatories, and they're trying to cut the paper manuals for the pilot and copilot in half to save weight onboard the aircrafts. It's all reported in today's New York Times and are things we've known on the committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself another 15 seconds.

Today's bill puts us on course to do the right thing for the American public. Save fuel. Save the impact on the environment. Move people more efficiently.

Now I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from the land of high-speed intercity rail passenger service, the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa).

Mr. Chairman, I will yield an 30 additional seconds.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.

I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Salazar), and before the gentleman, I yield myself 10 seconds to observe that the gentleman who just spoke representing New Jersey, New Jersey is the only State in America to have achieved a mode shift of 10 percent of all travel by transit. If the rest of America would do that, we would save 550 million barrels of oil a year, the amount we import from Saudi Arabia.

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar).

May I inquire how much time remains on both sides, Mr. Chairman?

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts to engage in a discussion about Amtrak.

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

I appreciate the gentleman raising this issue. It's a matter of very deep concern to us on the committee. It goes to the heart of safety and security on our domestic passenger rail system. I certainly will join enthusiastically with the gentleman in making this request to the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security.

I thank the gentleman for his concern.

The gentleman can yield directly to the gentlewoman.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. And again I express my great appreciation for the many hours of consultation that we have had between the distinguished ranking member, the gentleman from Florida, and myself, and with Mr. Shuster and myself, and with Ms. Brown. Mr. Mica has been a vigorous advocate for high-speed rail passenger service with changes, with changes in the way we conduct the business of passenger rail service in America. And as he said, this wasn't easy. But if it were easy, they wouldn't need us. They wouldn't need Congress if things were all easy.

But the point of the legislative process is to be open, to be receptive, to think constructively, to trust that the ideas advanced by one or the other side are set forth in earnest pursuit of a valid public purpose goal. And that has been a long tradition of this Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the principal reason that we have succeeded over so many years in being the building committee of the Congress.

The gentleman from Connecticut said that there weren't reforms or deplored the lack of significant reform in this legislation. I just want to say we have management improvement. It is requiring a financial accounting system for Amtrak operations and a 5-year financial plan monitored by the Department of Transportation's Inspector General, an overall assessment being to be done by the Inspector General, progress made by Amtrak management and by DOT in implementing the provisions of the bill. We direct the Secretary of Treasury, and there has been

a consultation with the Secretary of Transportation and Amtrak, to negotiate restructuring of Amtrak's debt. We include a corporate governance provision restructuring Amtrak's board, expanding the board to ten persons serving 5-year terms and requiring that the President consult with Congress to ensure balanced representation of regions served by Amtrak in that board, and to have rail transportation or business background among those members.

In consultation with the Service Transportation Board and Federal Railroad Administration, Amtrak is required to develop standards for measuring performance of quality of intercity train operations, including cost recovery, on time performance, ridership per train mile, on board and station services and interconnectivity of routes and requires the DOT IG to evaluate performance and service quality of intercity passenger rail service and identify the five worst performing Amtrak routes from which then IG will recommend a process for the DOT to consider proposals for competitive service by the private sector to Amtrak on that route.

Those are significant reforms. And I invite the attention of the gentleman from Connecticut, and I will send him the specifics that I just mentioned.

We are ready to move ahead with the balance of this bill. This is an exciting opportunity. This is the beginning of the transformation of passenger rail service in America. It is not going to lead us tomorrow to the Grande Vitesse, the TGV of France, or the Talgo of Spain, or the ICE of Germany, or the Shinkansen of Japan, or the 220-mile-per-hour train service between Beijing and Shanghai in China. But it will put us on a course to get there, to achieve those speeds over those distances.

When I traveled, as a student, to begin graduate studies in 1956 at the College of Europe, from Paris to Brussels, the trip was 6 hours. Today that trip is 80 minutes. There is no air service, no commercial air passenger service between the capital of Europe, Brussels, and the Capital of France, Paris. But there is a train leaving every 3 minutes in each direction with 1,100 passengers on board traveling at 184 miles per hour, all day long from 6 in the morning until midnight.

We should be able to achieve that kind of service on the east coast. We should be able to achieve that kind of service in the Southwest, as was referenced by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar). We should be able to do that in California, as was referenced by the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa), and in the Pacific Northwest and in the Southeast of the United States. And this bill will put us on a track to do that.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.

The manager's amendment requires the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study on ways to streamline compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act requirements for Federally funded rail infrastructure projects. This issue was raised in committee by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, the ranking member, Mr. Shuster, for himself, for North Carolina and for Alaska. I felt that we needed to explore the matter further, so we scheduled a hearing on the issue because this matter had not been raised previously.

We heard from the Alaska Railroad, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the National Trust For Historic Preservation and the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy.

At the conclusion of that meeting, it was obvious we weren't going to be able, in the course of the hearing, to reach agreement. But we saw a path toward agreement. And I directed the parties and the staff to work through the weekend to develop a compromise proposal, which they did, and we have reflected that understanding in the manager's amendment.

I want to thank the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) for bringing this matter to our attention, and to Mr. Mica for participating and working out what I think is a reasonable approach.

I also what to thank colleagues who had amendments that were proposed to the bill for agreeing to incorporate those amendments into the manager's amendment to expedite consideration. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri), the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry), and Tennessee (Mr. Cohen), from Delaware (Mr. Castle) Mr. Cuellar and Mr. Hinojosa from Texas, Mr. Weiner and Mr. Blumenauer, from New York and Oregon respectively.

The Arcuri amendments ensure that the financial contributions and in kind services provided by commuter rails are taken into account in developing a standardized formula for Northeast Corridor commuter cost allocation.

The Berry-Cohen amendment requires a feasibility analysis on extending south central high-speed rail service to Memphis, Tennessee. The Castle amendment ensures that all proposals for high-speed rail on the Northeast Corridor plans to allow station stops at or in close proximity to the busiest Amtrak stations. The Cuellar-Hinojosa amendment requires a feasibility analysis on extending South Central high-speed rail to a location in south Texas to be determined by the Secretary.

The Weiner-Blumenauer amendment authorizes intercity passenger rail grants for bicycle access on rolling stock and bicycle racks on trains. And the amendment also provides that none of the funds may be used to employ workers in violation of section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act and makes a number of technical corrections in the reported bill.

There are other items of a bipartisan nature included in the manager's amendment, and I think we have worked these matters out satisfactorily.

I urge all Members to support it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.

Mr. Chairman, a distinguished member of our committee, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Braley), intended to be here and had actually requested time to be heard on general debate. But, unfortunately, he is home in his district, probably handling sandbags to deal with flooding in Waterloo. Late yesterday, the flooding washed away a Union Pacific Railroad bridge over the Cedar River in downtown Waterloo and our committee colleague is back home with his constituents, as he rightly should be.

I also want to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Braley), who I know wanted to be here during consideration of the bill.

Regrettably, he is home in his District to help his constituents deal with flooding in Waterloo.

Yesterday, the flooding washed away a Union Pacific railroad bridge over the Cedar River in downtown Waterloo.

I include a report from the local newspaper on the tragedies in Iowa.

Update: Railroad Bridge in Downtown W'loo Collapses; CF Orders More

Evacuations

(By Jim Offner, Courier Business Editor)

Waterloo, June 10.--One-third of the Union Pacific railroad

bridge parallel to Sixth Street over the Cedar River in

downtown Waterloo has washed away in the flood waters.

The third of the bridge adjacent to the east bank of the

Cedar River washed away at 2:45 p.m.

Roger Verch saw the bridge section give way.

``We were actually standing on the 18th Street Bridge''

downstream when it gave way. It struck the 18th Street

Bridge. `` We really felt the vibrations,'' Verch said. A

portion of it remained lodged in the 18th Street Bridge and

another portion of it washed down river.

The bridge is used by the Iowa Northern Railroad to serve

John Deere's East Donald Street Tractor Works, and Deere

tractors are transported by rail over that line to Cedar

Rapids.

Iowa Northern general manager Mark Sabin said the railroad

is assessing the flood's impacts all along its line and had

not yet had an opportunity to assess the effects of the

bridge washout.

We will provide more details as they become available.

Also, the city of Cedar Falls has now expanded its area of

evacuation. The mayor has ordered an immediate evacuation of

everyone in the following areas:

--On Franklin Street from Sixth Street to the north; on

Sixth Street to the east toward Main Street; on Main Street

from Ninth Street to the north; and all downtown areas from

those streets toward the river.

Unauthorized vehicles will be removed beginning at 3 p.m.

People who are evacuating are urged to turn off their

power, utilities, water and gas. Security will be provided

for the area to safeguard property by the Cedar Falls Police

Department and the National Guard.

Volunteers may remain in this area if they are assisting

with the sandbagging efforts. Volunteers will be needed

throughout the night. It cannot be emphasized enough that

volunteers are needed and must report to the north parking

lot of the UNI-Dome to assist with sandbagging. Volunteers

must not travel downtown or go near the levy. Transportation

will be provided to volunteers.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 seconds to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Florida for that statement, for his charts, for the genuinely sincere effort that brought us to this point today.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished Chair of the Rail Subcommittee, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).

We have no further speakers on our side.

I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, we have all spoken to one another as colleagues about the work that we have done and the time we have invested to bring this legislation to the floor in the shape that it is in, which is remarkable. But we stand on the shoulders of skilled, dedicated professionals who make our work possible and make it effective.

On the full committee, our Chief of Staff, Dave Heymsfeld, Ward McCarragher, Jen Walsh and Erik Hansen. On the Republican side, Jim Coon and Amy Steinmann.

On the subcommittee, our very dedicated Jennifer Esposito, John Drake, who has filled in for Jennifer while she was raising a new passenger for Amtrak, Rose Hamlin, Niels Knutson and Nick Martinelli of Chairwoman Brown's staff. On the Republican side, Allison Cullin and Joyce Rose, whose distinguished service and experience contributes enormously, and Mike Meenan and John Brennan, who Ranking Member Mica mentioned has left the committee staff to take an operating position with a railroad.

The Office of Legislative Counsel has been of enormous help, Tim Brown. And at CBO, Sarah Puro.

All of whom have made their unique contribution without whose wise professional guidance we couldn't be at this point. And, believe me, I know. I served on the staff for 12 years in this body, and I know what hard work it is.

I know what hard work it is. All the digging is done there, and I thank them, the staff.

The gentleman from Pennsylvania cited one of the cornerstone breakthrough provisions of this legislation, and that is opening up an opportunity for competition from the private sector to demonstrate whether private sector funding, financing, management, expertise, can operate passenger rail routes successfully, and I welcome that opportunity.

I know that for good friends in the railroad brotherhoods it initially caused a great deal of concern, but I recall the words of President John F. Kennedy, who said we should never fear to negotiate, but we should never negotiate out of fear. There is nothing to fear in this proposition.

There is an opportunity for us to expand the horizons. We are going to have to do this in the surface transportation authorization next year, inviting private sector investments in key elements of our national transportation system.

To open Amtrak to that kind of investment, that challenge of expanding the horizon, is necessary, and I welcome that opportunity. We will monitor it very closely, we will have a very careful evaluation step-by-step of how these provisions will proceed. But I think, net, it will be a benefit to our passenger rail service in America.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of our time and ask for a favorable vote on the manager's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by my metropolitan Washington colleagues, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen), and the Majority Leader (Mr. Hoyer).

This amendment authorizes the Secretary to make grants to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (``WMATA'') to finance capital and preventive maintenance projects included in the agency's Capital Improvement Program.

The amendment will also require that all local payments for the cost of operating and maintaining the area's regional rail system--known as the ``Metro''--be made from dedicated funding sources.

This is especially important in light of the fact that WMATA is currently the only transit system of its size that does not have a fully dedicated source of State or local funding.

The WMATA transit system is one of the busiest in the entire country, providing over 415 million passenger trips each year. Each day, more than 800,000 people ride Metro trains, and over 150,000 ride Metro buses.

Only the New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles transit systems produce more yearly transit passenger trips than WMATA in Washington, DC.

Further, the Federal workforce relies heavily on the reliable and efficient service that the WMATA system provides. More than 165,000 Federal employees, or one-third of Federal employees in the region, are currently enrolled in the transit benefits program with WMATA.

According to a study by the U.S. Department of Transportation, the service that WMATA provides to our Federal employees helps keep an additional 15,500 automobiles off the roads in the National Capital region, and saves those commuters over 8.2 million gallons of gas each year.

The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority is an important part of our Nation's strategy to provide commuters efficient and reliable transit options, thereby allowing them to reduce their transportation-related emissions, energy consumption, and reliance on foreign oil.

Regarding the specific language of this amendment, it is important to note that these new grants will be subject to the same labor, environmental, Buy America procurement, diversity contracting, and other requirements applicable to all transit projects funded under Chapter 53 of Title 49, United States Code. If this amendment is adopted, in conference on H.R. 6003, 1 would like to further clarify the specific terms of Chapter 53 which may be inconsistent with the purposes of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the amendment.

I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by the gentleman. Commuter rail certainly is one of the fastest growing modes of transportation in the public sector. We had over 461 million trips by commuter rail last year, and that is a 5.5 percent increase over the previous year.

The amendment offered by gentleman directs Amtrak to engage in good- faith negotiations with commuter rail entities and public transportation authorities to move more efficiently the maximum number of intercity rail passengers, especially during peak commuter hours.

As the gentleman from Pennsylvania said, it is a good, commonsense amendment, and I urge support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith).

Commuter rail is one of the fastest growing modes of public transportation in this country. In 2007, Americans took 461 million trips by commuter rail, a 5.5 percent increase over 2006. As a result, many commuter rail operators are seeking to expand their services while contending with other rail traffic.

In response to these challenges, this amendment directs Amtrak to engage in good-faith discussions with commuter rail entities and public transportation authorities operating on the same track to efficiently move the maximum number of commuter, intercity, and regional rail passengers, especially during peak commuter hours. It also directs Amtrak to work with these parties toward the expansion and enhancement of commuter rail and regional public transportation service.

This amendment helps ensure that Amtrak is doing everything it can to not only maximize the efficiency of its operations but also ensure the maximum growth possible for other rail services.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas.

We had a thoughtful, constructive discussion about the gentleman's proposal in the Rules Committee on Monday, and the gentleman is very sincere and very genuine in his proposal. However, we have a number of provisions in this bill to improve Amtrak's operations, to reform the way Amtrak conducts its business, to get at the lowest-performing routes.

We specifically direct the Amtrak board of directors to implement a modern financial accounting system to save money, improve operations, and increase revenue.

In section 204, we direct Amtrak to report on projected revenues, expenditures and ridership over a 5-year period to promote improved financial stability and how best to allocate the resources we provide to Amtrak. We direct Amtrak to work with the States to institute a nationwide methodology for allocating, operating and capital costs, to standardize financial support of Amtrak to the States and the Federal Government to ensure each is contributing their appropriate and fair amount, and to address specifically the performance of poorly performing routes, and they may be different from the one that the gentleman has in mind at this particular moment.

We further direct the inspector general of DOT to evaluate performance, service quality of the five worst performing Amtrak routes and recommend a process for DOT to consider proposals by Amtrak and other operators to provide service both on under-performing Amtrak routes and routes not served by Amtrak.

So the gentleman is proposing that Congress make a preemptive strike and direct dropping a route when we have in place with the enactment of this legislation a process by which we are going to improve these processes. It would be better to look and reexamine at the end of that process rather than at the beginning and prejudge the outcome of these sincere efforts that we are making to improve all of Amtrak's operations.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I will yield the balance of our time to the gentlewoman from Florida, but I wish I had known about the opposition of the gentleman from Virginia before he offered his amendment. I might have had a different view about his amendment and his seeking special consideration for WMATA.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition to the amendment though I do not intend to oppose the amendment.

I support the amendment offered by the gentlewoman which directs a study of train horn technology as part of the Rail Cooperative Research Program authorized at section 304 of the bill. And the gentlewoman has worked tirelessly to highlight her concerns with constituents on locomotive horn noise.

I can understand how horn noise is terrible and disturbing. We've heard many iterations of that over the years in hearings in the committee in close urban quarters.

But out on the prairie, the sound of a train horn late at night is a very comforting sound, I can say for those of us who live in those environments.

I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

The key issue with train horns, again and again, is safety. Where they are removed in an experimental basis there have been fatalities or incidents or accidents, and where the train horn has been reinstated, lives have been saved. But technology can lead us to better train horns that don't intrude on the daily lives or nightly lives of citizens alongside railroad tracks.

So I reserve the balance of my time, and I appreciate the gentlewoman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment.

This amendment expresses support for expanded commuter rail service on the rail line between New Haven, Connecticut, and Springfield, Massachusetts, and encourages Amtrak to work cooperatively with the States of Connecticut and Massachusetts to enable expanded commuter rail service on the line. Further, this amendment directs Amtrak to report to Congress and the States on the total cost of uncompleted infrastructure maintenance on the New Haven--Springfield rail line.

Commuter rail is one of the fastest growing modes of public transportation in this country. In 2007, Americans took 461 million trips by commuter rail, a 5.5 percent increase over 2006. Since 1990, New England's highway traffic has increased two to three times faster than its population and commuter rail is a critical transportation link in the Northeast.

According to the 2000 U.S. Census, Connecticut has one of the nation's longer average commute times (24.5 minutes) in the nation, and 80 percent of Connecticut commuters drive themselves to work. The State of Connecticut is seeking to provide additional transportation alternatives to its commuters and is hoping to expand commuter rail service to address its congestion.

This amendment will help Connecticut understand the capital costs needed to better develop its commuter rail infrastructure as it works to develop its passenger transportation systems.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment.

Would the gentleman yield?

I rise in support of the Murphy amendment. I feel the amendment is an important contribution to the work of this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murphy), the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Schwartz), and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).

This amendment directs Amtrak to evaluate the passenger rail service between Cornwells Heights, Pennsylvania, and New York, New York, and between Princeton Junction, New Jersey, and New York, New York, to determine whether to expand passenger rail service by increasing the frequency of stops or reducing commuter ticket prices for the route.

Until a few years ago, Cornwells Station was the primary SEPTA and Amtrak station for service into New York City from the Bensalem Township. It has direct access to Interstate 95 and Pennsylvania Route 63, with the largest parking lot on the SEPTA network, making it an ideal terminal for commuter service into New York for many people in the surrounding region.

However, Amtrak recently reduced the number of trains serving the station each day by one-half, while greatly increasing the ticket prices for the service. As a result, ridership has plummeted, leading Amtrak to consider dropping service to the station all together.

This study has several potential benefits. For one, the Bensalem region is enjoying an economic revitalization, which could be enhanced by increased Amtrak service to Cornwells Heights. Increased Amtrak service would allow for better mobility in the region as well as help relieve local congestion.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the amendment.

I object.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion.

Mr. Speaker, this is only a halfhearted attempt. If it were a wholehearted attempt, the motion would have included soybean oil and ethanol and it would have included the word ``forthwith'' and we could have accepted it. In fact, if the gentleman had come to the committee, both the Republican and Democratic side of the committee in the course of consideration of the bill, if he were serious about this matter, we would have included it in our section 219, Locomotive Biofuel Study. There is no reason we couldn't include all of what the gentleman is saying, plus additional items. But I think by using the word ``promptly,'' clearly this is just another gesture, a political gesture, to sidetrack the bill. Sending it back to committee simply delays the benefits of Amtrak.

We have worked diligently over the better part of a year-and-a-half, Republicans and Democrats together on the committee, and fashioned a wide-ranging proposition for the future of inter-city passenger rail in America, introducing extraordinary reforms that have not been considered or have been rejected in the past. We have included those in this bill.

We include a locomotive biofuel study. We require locomotive testing. We require a report. We require it to be done in a very specific period of time. We also require a study on the use of bio-based lubricants for Amtrak to use.

In fact, soybean-derived fuel is being used by the freight rail sector in what is known as Green Goat technology, Green Goat locomotives and freight rail makeup switchyards with great success.

The Green Goat technology using soybean-based fuel is reducing particulate emissions in rail makeup yards reducing noise and also reducing cost of maintenance of locomotives because the fuel also provides lubricating quality to a locomotive engine.

Furthermore, to insist that we move on this amendment--I think an earlier version I saw would have required implementation immediately-- Amtrak has warranties with General Electric, who produces the P42 locomotives for Amtrak's fleet. That's the backbone of their diesel locomotive fleet.

To force Amtrak to rush into applying some not-yet proven technology would vitiate the warranties, would increase the cost, would subject Amtrak having to absorb all the costs instead of GE, the locomotive engine producer, absorbing the costs.

Again, I say we are very accommodating on this committee. We want good ideas. We would have welcomed the gentleman's ideas in the fashioning of the legislation. In fact, if this had been a forthwith motion, we could have accepted it with an amendment to include biodiesel fuel, soybean-based fuel.

But the way it's fashioned simply sidetracks the very good bill, the extraordinary progress we have made with bringing passenger high-speed rail service to all of America. This is a transformational moment, this Amtrak legislation, a transformational moment in American transportation to bring our country into the first world of intercity high-speed passenger rail service, to make changes in the way Amtrak operates, to invite the private sector in to be a partner in fashioning a future for Amtrak.

Don't sidetrack it with this frivolous motion that comes way late in the process and is not serious at all in its purpose. If it were serious at all in its purpose, it would have come to the committee, we would have done something about it, we would have included this language earlier on in the bill.

Oppose the motion.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I must pay tribute to the chairman of our full committee, Mr. Oberstar, at this juncture. He began his remarks by saying this is a very historic occasion. And, indeed, for rail passenger service in the United States, this is a watershed moment.

I have been one of the harshest critics of Amtrak. I don't think I have ever voted for an Amtrak appropriation or authorization. In fact, we have not done an Amtrak reauthorization in Congress since 1997. And through the leadership of Mr. Oberstar, Ms. Brown, Mr. Shuster from Pennsylvania, today we have for the first time probably one of the most dramatic changes in rail passenger service proposed before the United States Congress in its history. This is really evolutionary because we have taken in a bipartisan fashion some of the desires, some of the ideas from the Democrat side, we have combined it with some of the ideas and initiatives proposed by the Republican side, and melded it into a piece of legislation.

Nothing could be more fitting to bring before the Congress today, on a day when gasoline has reached $4.05 a gallon across the United States on average, nothing that this Congress has considered to date that I know of will have a more dramatic, positive effect on the environment, and helping to change also the patterns of travel and the consumption of fossil fuel than this legislation proposed here today, and it is a bipartisan effort and I thank all of those involved for that.

Let me first address some of the concerns expressed by my administration. My administration has raised some concerns, one about the cost. Yes, the cost is higher; but for the first time we bring forward a program that doesn't just benefit Amtrak and an old Soviet- style train operation, it brings passenger rail service into the 21st century in the United States. It allows free enterprise and the best private sector initiatives to come in and help design, construct and finance high-speed rail service first in the Northeast corridor, but not just to the Northeast corridor, throughout the United States of America.

It takes ideas like Mr. Shuster brought forward also, also Ms. Brown contributed too, in taking some of the money-losing operations. And I've been a critic. We subsidize every ticket on Amtrak right now at $50.60, $50.60 for every ticket.

But what we do is we look at what the best solutions are, the best innovative private sector practices, and taking the money-losing operations and giving them a chance to succeed, to lower the cost to the taxpayers, and to provide service in public/private partnerships, and also partnerships with the State governments. Where we need service, we'll get service, and we have to help pay for service.

Now, people are saying this bill may be too much. That's bunk. $14 billion over 5 years?

I'll give you two projects, let me just give you two transportation projects that, one I visited a week ago in New York, a tunnel from Long Island Railroad down to Grand Central Station. $7.2 billion for one line.

The Federal Transit Administration just approved approximately $5 billion to extend 21 miles of light rail with the Dulles extension, 21 miles, $5 billion. Those two projects are equivalent to what we're talking about spending for a nationwide passenger rail system.

And also launching the first high-speed rail effort in the United States. Right now we don't have that. Amtrak Acela, they do their best, they run 83 miles an hour. But we need a dramatic investment in that route to get high-speed service. It's going to cost money, and Congress doesn't have to provide all the money.

Everybody finally woke up to the fact that, with the private sector involvement, we can create high-speed service, separate the traffic, improve commuter service in one of our most congested corridors. Commuters will do better, improve freight traffic. Freight traffic in the United States for rail moves at an average of 23 miles an hour. That's pitiful in a Nation like this.

So, finally, this proposal takes, I have a little diagram here. This is what we have across the country, from sea to shining sea. Congestion. And what we want to have is not just Acela, which runs at 83 miles an hour, the Japanese bullet train runs at 180 miles an hour. Maglev has gone 350 miles an hour. I've ridden it at 269 miles an hour. In China. That's where they have high-speed magnetic next generation technology. Not United States but in China. That's pitiful today.

What we do is we take an asset. Finally, this is an asset the public all owns. It's part of Amtrak. It's from Washington to Boston through New York City.

It's time that we stopped sitting on our assets. This is one of the most valuable assets that the public owns, that Amtrak owns, develop that to its maximum capability.

And finally, the benefits. We'll relieve northeast corridor congestion. We can take passenger cars and trucks off the highways.

The other thing is 75 percent of our delays in the air system that radiate throughout the entire United States start in the New York City airspace, in that Northeast airspace. So the first time we have a solution to deal with freeing up that airspace. It'll have positive economic development, reduce air pollution and emissions.

No project is more friendly to the environment than what we're proposing here today. We'll have reliable transportation alternatives, enhanced commuter and freight operations in that congested but important corridor.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I'm pleased to yield to the ranking member of the Rail Subcommittee, Mr. Shuster from Pennsylvania, a total of 6 minutes; 5 minutes for his presentation and 1 minute for a colloquy with the gentlelady from Ohio.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished former Chair of the Rail Subcommittee and current ranking member of the Coast Guard Committee, one of the leaders of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).

Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time remains on each side?

I have at this time no further speakers. I will reserve the balance of my time for my closing remarks and whatever time that Mr. Oberstar chooses to take, or if he needs additional time, I will be glad to assist him.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve.

Continuing to reserve, and I would be glad to yield some time to the other side if they do need it.

Mr. Chairman, first of all I would like to insert in the Record a letter by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, commonly known as AASHTO, in support of the measure and also a letter from the Association of American Railroads in support of this measure.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials,

Washington, DC, June 10, 2008.

Hon. John L. Mica,

Ranking Republican Member, Transportation and Infrastructure

Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Congressman Mica: On behalf of the Standing Committee

on Rail Transportation and the Intercity Passenger Rail

Leadership Group of the American Association of State Highway

and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), I am writing to

support House passage of H.R. 6003, the Passenger Rail

Investment and Improvement Act of 2008.

The States have been leading the way in developing rail

corridors through investment in capital projects to increase

capacity, reduce travel times and improve on-time

performance. In addition, 14 states support intercity

passenger rail through payment of operating costs on

additional frequencies on routes. According to a survey by

AASHTO, at least 35 states are developing intercity passenger

rail plans for additional future service. I would like to

thank you for including funding for the intercity passenger

rail capital grant program to assist states in improving

infrastructure on intercity passenger rail routes.

As you know, intercity passenger rail ridership across the

United States is on the rise in part due to congestion on the

highways and at the airports and the rising cost of gasoline.

Having another truly viable transportation option in

intercity passenger rail will give consumers another choice

in both business and leisure travel and a choice that is the

most environmentally friendly. Intercity Passenger Rail

consumes 17 percent less energy per passenger mile than

airlines and 21 percent less per passenger mile than

automobiles. The average intercity passenger rail train

produces 60 percent lower carbon dioxide emissions per

passenger mile than the average auto, and half the carbon

dioxide emissions per passenger mile of an airplane.

For too long, intercity passenger rail has been an

underutilized mode in our national transportation system.

With this historic legislation, you will make intercity

passenger rail competitive and marketable to an anxious

public. The time for intercity passenger rail investment is

now. I commend you for your leadership and for moving this

legislation so quickly and pledge my support to the effort.

Sincerely,

Astrid C. Glynn,

Chair.

Is it possible for me to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas?

I want to make sure I do everything by the rules, Mr. Chairman.

Then I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

Again how much time remains, Mr. Chairman?

Am I allowed to give Mr. Oberstar 2\1/2\ minutes or 3 minutes?

Let me just conclude by again thanking folks. Around this place it is very difficult to bring new ideas forward. I've said in the past that sometimes trying to get a new idea through Congress is like giving birth to a porcupine. I can't say that this has been the easiest task we have undertaken, but we have given birth today to a new idea.

And the answer is not to just say ``no,'' or to zero out a program that is so essential to this country. The answer is to come up with a positive solution, a positive solution for energy. And today, again, when gas is $4.05 a gallon, this gives some little hope, but it is probably the biggest thing that we are going to do. And it will have the greatest positive impact on America's environment and its energy needs of anything we have done this session.

So I am pleased at this time to yield time to Mr. Oberstar. How much time do I have remaining?

I would like to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to Chairman Oberstar.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I brought this chart that shows $4.05 a gallon gasoline today. That is the average national cost. In some jurisdictions it is more. This is not an energy policy. This is not acceptable to the American people, $4.05 a gallon gasoline.

First of all, I strongly support the manager's amendment. Contained in it are provisions that we would have high-speed rail service. We heard the gentleman, the former Governor of Delaware, Mr. Castle, the distinguished Representative now from Delaware, talk about having stops. I think when I visited Wilmington, when I visited Philadelphia and New York and stops along the way, people were excited about this proposal, because it offered them an option to expensive gasoline.

The proposal that we bring forward is revolutionary. It does allow the Secretary of Transportation to take proposals. The reason we took the Northeast Corridor first is because that is the only real estate and asset that Amtrak wholly owns, almost all of it all the way to Boston. There is a little bit between New York and Boston that they don't own. That is why we took the first leg of this high speed proposal from Washington, D.C., right down the block to downtown Manhattan.

We don't specify technology, but we say it must be there within 2 hours, and we have a provision that assures stops along the way. Revolutionary. Again, what it would do for air travel congestion would be monumental for this Nation.

This isn't limited to the Northeast Corridor, that first segment. Everyone has a possibility of doing that through the provision Mr. Shuster, Ms. Brown and Mr. Oberstar worked out.

We also have the possibility of opening for the first time public- private partnerships cutting the cost and the subsidy of some of the money-losing routes and bringing in private sector innovation. This whole attempt today, again, is revolutionary.

So, again, this outlines the high-speed rail proposal, and it shows that it is not just limited to Washington and to New York. It is open to the entire Nation, and it provides a cost-effective alternative to just saying no, to trying to zero out Amtrak, and to not having high- speed rail passenger service either in that corridor or any other corridor of the United States.

So I urge adoption of the manager's amendment and I urge passage of the final bill. I think most of the amendments are acceptable. We have a couple of questions on them. They will be debated here and Members will have to pick and choose between those amendments. But, all in all, this is a good, bipartisan effort to get us away from being dependent on $4.05 gasoline, escalating energy costs and limited choices for the traveling public. This is a very significant step forward, and I thank again Mr. Oberstar, Ms. Brown and Mr. Shuster.

Mr. Chairman, I don't rise in opposition of the gentleman from Pennsylvania's amendment. In fact, he's looking for solutions in his district, in his area to provide commuter service to get people out of their cars to deal with increased congestion and high-rising fuel costs.

But the gentleman from Pennsylvania is no different from the gentleman from Connecticut, from the gentlewoman from Arizona, the gentleman from California, from the gentleman from Ohio. We're drowning in congestion in this country. This bill provides a first opportunity to look at cost-effective ways of providing that service.

So we've got to support commuter rail across the Nation. We've got to take some of these underutilized urban rail corridors that formally serve freight and convert those to commuter rail systems. We've got to find a host of solutions and incorporate private sector initiatives in these to make it happen because they can bring projects in on time and under budget and at the lowest cost possible.

It is true that we may have to subsidize commuter rail service, long- distance service, and some high-speed service, but we want that at the minimum cost to the taxpayer, the maximum benefit to those that we need to serve.

So we will support the amendment, but again, what you hear from the gentleman from Pennsylvania is what we're hearing from 435 congressional districts.

Mr. Chairman, today Congress can finally do something positive when it comes to energy, the energy situation in this country, and that is to pass this landmark legislation, The Passenger Rail Investment Improvement Act of 2008.

With gas prices today at $4 a gallon, we, on both sides of the aisle, can join together and move to improve passenger rail in this country. And it is, as I said, something that will be a positive for the energy situation.

When you look at the airlines, they consume 20 percent more energy per passenger mile than Amtrak does to move a passenger. Passenger cars consume over 27 percent more energy per passenger mile than Amtrak. Amtrak is the most efficient way to move large numbers of people in our country today. So this is going to help with the energy situation. It's a positive step in the right direction. We still need to do much more but this is a positive step.

The other situation that we're facing in this country is a growing population. It took, we just recently crossed over the 300 million threshold in population in our country. It took us 65 years to go from 200 million to 300 million. It'll take us just 35 years to go from 300 million to 400 million.

And if you look around the country, and what I have is a chart that shows these corridors throughout the country. This is where the population density is going to get even thicker and more dense throughout this country. And this is where we're talking about down the road expanding high-speed rail across the country to help move passengers, to get people out of their

cars, to move them efficiently, to get them into our major urban areas and get them out again and get them between major urban areas.

So, as I said, as the population grows, Amtrak can be there with intercity travel helping us to move people. And people are desperate to get out of their cars, I believe, especially when you're traveling to and from. I know in Pennsylvania we've had a fantastic partnership between the State and Amtrak to establish the Keystone line. It travels over 100 miles an hour, and gets you from Harrisburg, the State Capitol to downtown Philadelphia in about an hour and 35 minutes, an hour and 40 minutes; no messing with traffic, no congestion.

Once again, the American people, I think, will get out of their cars and get on this intercity travel if we establish a system that works, a system that moves people fast and conveniently.

Three provisions in this legislation that I'm very pleased to see we've put in here. First, a private partnership with Amtrak, the Department of Transportation, identifying two of the worst performing lines in the country and putting them out for bid, allowing the private sector to come in and take those lines over and have a hand at trying to make them more efficient, trying their hand at finding ways to improve rail traffic, to decrease costs. So I'm very pleased that that's in here.

Second, a private partnership that we're looking at is, as my colleague from Florida stated, to re-establish a line that has been abandoned by Amtrak, that's no longer in service, to have the private sector come in and around the country see where one of those lines are and to re-establish that.

And third, as the gentleman from Florida talked about the Northeast Corridor, putting a request for a proposal in to have private industry come in in a partnership to look at how much it's going to cost us to take the Northeast Corridor and truly make it a high-speed rail corridor from New York City to Washington, D.C., traveling in 2 hours or less, which is something that, once again, I believe that the American people will embrace.

So for my colleagues that we've debated on this floor, I've watched debates for the last 20 years on this floor. There's always been an argument; can the private sector do it better. No, the government has to do it. Well here we're going to have some tests. We're going to have I believe some positive results in a public/private partnership that we'll be able to look to be able to expand passenger rail in this country. So I'm very pleased with that.

One thing I do want to point out in this that I've heard a lot of talk, that this legislation does not change Davis-Bacon law. There are people running around town here saying that this does change Davis- Bacon law. It does not change Davis-Bacon law. So for any of my colleagues that wish to have a discussion with me on that, I'm happy to do that. But I want to make sure that that's been pointed out here.

And finally, I want to say thank you to the chairman for his goodwill and his allowing me to put some of my ideas in this legislation. Also Chairwoman Brown and our partnership on the subcommittee. I appreciate her leadership. I thank you both very much.

And also to Mr. Mica for giving me the opportunity to be the ranking member and also including me deeply in all the discussions as we were able to craft this legislation.

So I would encourage all my colleagues to support this today. This is something positive we can do for America, a positive step we can take to help with our energy situation. And I think it's just a win/win for everybody in America today as we move forward to establish some high- speed rail corridors around this country.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.

I appreciate the gentlewoman from Ohio bringing this issue to the forefront. We had discussed this in committee while putting this legislation together, but it is not addressed in the underlying legislation, and I certainly believe it's an important issue that needs to be resolved; and I will be pleased to work with you and other members of the committee to try to address this situation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

I rise in support of this amendment. And I am not going to run down through. The chairman did a good job of going over all the provisions in this manager's amendment. But we have reached a bipartisan agreement between Mr. Oberstar and Ms. Brown, Mr. Mica and myself, so we support the amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

At this time I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), the ranking member.

Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers. I am prepared to close, if the gentleman is through.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to close by talking directly to my colleagues who have over the years been on the floor arguing against Amtrak, arguing to cut Amtrak. I think that this agreement we have here today, there are two important reasons to support this.

First, because of the energy situation in our country. Amtrak does provide a positive alternative to get people out of their cars and to travel, inter-city travel around this country. So that is the first point.

Energy, it is a positive thing we can do for America for energy, and we haven't done anything positive in the last 18 months. Here is something positive we can do on that front.

Second, my colleagues who argue against Amtrak talk about the private sector and how they can do things. Well, this bill has three provisions in it that allow for pilot projects for the private sector to come in to take over underperforming lines, to reestablish lines that are no longer in operation by Amtrak and reestablish them, and to demonstrate what the private sector can do in passenger rail service.

After these lines are taken over, we will have concrete evidence as to what the private sector can do. I feel confident they will be able to perform very well and we will no longer be on the floor theoretically debating. We will say, look what the private sector has done on this line. Look what they have done on the other line. We will have that evidence and have real world facts before us, and that is a positive thing.

So those are two things that my colleagues that have been down here opposing Amtrak today can come to the floor for. I urge them to support the manager's amendment and I urge them to support the underlying legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.

I just want to say that the gentleman from Washington has a commonsense amendment. I think encouraging collaboration between Amtrak and commuter rail systems is a positive thing. I urge all Members to accept and support this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

I just wanted to say that we accept the amendment. Anything to do with improving technology on trains we certainly support.

I rise to claim the time in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.

I just wanted to say that the situation highlighting the situation is certainly important, and I understand why the gentleman is highlighting it.

It would have been covered, it is covered in the underlying bill I believe. But as I said, I understand why the gentleman wants to highlight the situation. And this report to determine the cost of uncompleted infrastructure maintenance is extremely important, and we need to tend to that. This Northeast Corridor is extremely important and, as I said, I do not oppose the amendment, and would accept it.

I yield back my time.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim my time. I yielded back prematurely.

Mr. Chairman, I was hoping to get this train running on time, excuse the pun, so if somebody needs me to yield time to them, I will make it available.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the chairman.

(Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes of our time to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition although I do not oppose the amendment.

We support it, accept the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I will yield to the gentleman.

(Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. Chairman, I've got to say that one of the joys of serving in this Congress is serving on this Transportation and Infrastructure Committee with Mr. Oberstar, who is the guru of transportation, not just for Amtrak, but every single area of transportation. And for helping to develop this Amtrak bill. Eleven years without a bill. The last authorization was 11 years ago.

And of course I want to thank Mr. Mica for his leadership in this area, and Mr. Shuster, and also Mr. LaTourette, because I want people to know that we didn't just come up with this bill today. This is a bill we've been working on for years. And this is an exciting day for the American people, a real milestone.

The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act provides over $2 billion per year for capital and operational grants, $500 million per year for developing State passenger corridors, $345 million per year to pay down debt, $345 million per year for high-speed rail programs, and requires a plan for restoring service to the Sunset Limited Line.

Amtrak's improved physical state and recent focus on customers service, along with increased highways and airport congestion and rising gas prices, have made intercity passenger rail more popular and necessary than ever.

In Fiscal Year 2007, Amtrak carried more than 25.8 million passengers, the fifth straight fiscal year of record ridership. Like its ridership gains, Amtrak's financial performance has improved as well, posting approximately $1.5 billion in ticket revenue, a gain of 10.8 percent over 2006 ticket revenue, and the third consecutive year that ticket revenues increased.

More than just a convenient way to travel, Amtrak is also energy efficient. Rail travel is more energy efficient and uses less fuel than cars or airplanes. According to the U.S. Department of Energy data, Amtrak is 17 percent more efficient than domestic airline travel and 21 percent more efficient than automobile travel.

And let me just say that there is no mode of transportation that pays for itself. We all subsidize every form of transportation.

Current initiatives include a more sleek model, more efficient Auto Train fleet, reducing annual fuel usage by 640,000 gallons, and remanufacturing brake systems throughout the Amtrak fleet that will reduce energy consumption by 8 percent.

Passenger rail also reduces global warming. The average passenger rail train produces 60 percent lower carbon emissions than cars and 50 percent less than airplanes.

On May 10, Amtrak celebrated National Train Day by holding events throughout the country, over 60, to be exact, showcasing intercity passenger rail and its importance to this Nation. I celebrated National Train Day by holding events throughout my district, including press conferences and events in Jacksonville, Winter Park and at the Sanford Auto Train station. Every event had great turnout, showing strong support for Amtrak, and I got to hear firsthand accounts of people who use Amtrak every day to go to work, to visit friends and family all over the country.

Congress also showed strong support for Amtrak and passenger rail by passing legislation supporting National Train Day by 415-0.

Fifty years ago President Eisenhower created the national highway system, which really changed the way we travel in this country. Today we need to do the same thing with passenger rail, and make the level of investment necessary for it to become more successful in the future.

The American people deserve the best passenger rail in the world, and I believe that this Amtrak authorization will go a long way to raise the U.S. to its rightful place as a world leader in passenger rail.

Passing of H.R. 6003 will be the first major step in bringing our Nation's intercity passenger rail system to the 21st century. I encourage all of my colleagues to vote for the Passenger Rail Investment Improvement Act.

Mr. Chairman, once again I want to thank Mr. Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica, Subcommittee Chairman Shuster and the staff. On behalf of the American people, I thank you. This is really a great day.

Let me say thank you, Mr. Oberstar, for your hard work on this bill and helping to develop this manager's amendment which incorporates provisions in the bill that would improve the overall Amtrak system. We are falling behind other industrialized nations who have prepared their country for the future by investing heavily in high-speed rail.

Mr. Oberstar talked about what he did when he was right out of college with his scholarship and how it took him 6 hours to go from downtown Brussels to downtown Paris. Now it takes 1 hour and 15 minutes, over 200 miles. We went less than 6 months ago to visit a new system, downtown Barcelona, Spain, to downtown Madrid, over 300 miles, 2\1/2\ hours, and we didn't even know we were moving.

That is our competition. That is who we are competing against as far as when we talk about trade and other issues. They are able to move their people, goods and services, and we are falling behind.

Amtrak reauthorization legislation is one of the few pieces of transportation legislation that has passed the Senate. Let me repeat that. Amtrak reauthorization legislation is one of the only pieces of legislation that has passed the other body. We have a great opportunity to go to conference and send a bill to the President's desk that provides a tremendous benefit for the traveling public, creating economic development and decreased energy consumption.

The American people deserve the best passenger rail system in the world. I have said over and over and over again, we are the caboose, and we don't use cabooses anymore.

This legislation takes a proactive step in addressing the outrageous cost of gas, now over $4 a gallon, and it makes a statement that we are serious about improving our dependence on foreign oil. Rail travel is more efficient and uses less fuel than both cars and airplanes.

I would encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment and support the bill so we can quickly move this bill through the process and have it on the President's desk for his signature.

Mr. Chairman, the Washington D.C. Metro system is the fourth busiest transit system in the nation. The system provides transportation to the federal employees who work here everyday and the millions of visitors that visit the city each year.

This amendment will require a dedicated funding source provided by the local governments that are served by the Metro. Something for which the Metro has been without for far too long.

It also creates an office of Inspector General to help provide oversight of the system.

This legislation also ensures that rail customers will have access to a broad range of wireless providers in case of an emergency and will provide additional dollars to the Transit Authority.

The Metro system that serves this country's capital is a national asset and I hope that both the local and federal government will continue to show full support for the system.

Mr. Chairman, we would encourage Amtrak to work closely with all the states they operate in to ensure that they are operating in conjunction with local commuter systems.

This is one more example of the need for additional rail capacity and the affect this lack of additional infrastructure can have on a state.

As more and more states turn to commuter rail service to move their citizens, it will be imperative that passenger, commuter, and freight rail work together to best utilize limited rail resources.

I encourage my colleagues to reject this sham amendment. Prohibiting funds for one route will have negative effects on the entire system, and it's already addressed in this legislation in a way that won't harm Amtrak and the services it provides.

Opponents of passenger rail have repeatedly tried to siphon off the growth of our Nation's rail system by cutting funds, zeroing out the budget, and now cutting out the only transcontinental passenger route; all while in the same time the opponents have the gall to ask for a better profit model.

Let me tell you, I've got some breaking news for you. There is something

more important than profit. Amtrak was the first responder during Hurricane Katrina and used the Sunset Limited line, which is being restored in this legislation, to help evacuate thousands of gulf coast region residents while President Bush and his administration was nowhere to be found. Now, that is a part of every key State future evacuation plan.

This amendment will have a negative effect on major States, eight-- California, Arizona, New Mexico, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida and Texas, Texas, Texas.

The Sessions amendment will do the exact opposite of what we're trying to accomplish with this legislation, which is to expand passenger rail service, reduce congestion and improve our energy independence.

Passenger rail's ability to reduce congestion is well known, with ridership numbers increasing steadily each year. One full passenger train can take 250 to 350 cars off the road. Passenger rail also consumes less energy than both automobiles and commercial airlines.

I would encourage any Member who don't want to explain to their constituents why they no longer have access to Amtrak service, to vote ``no'' on this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, anyone who has railroad tracks in their district has heard from constituents who are upset by repeated train whistles.

Unfortunately, these train whistles are the most effective way of warning people of an oncoming train. And even still we see constant reports of injuries and deaths on the tracks.

Technology holds the key to many improvements throughout our rail system, including improved safety. And hopefully it can help with the age-old problem of train whistles.

We also need to invest in more grade separations at rail crossings to improve safety and

cut down on the need to blow warning whistles in the first place.

Mrs. McCarthy of New York. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 6003, the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, legislation that would authorize $14.9 billion in funding for Amtrak over the next 5 years.

Rail service has integrated small communities with large cities across the country providing opportunity for economic expansion, increased mobility, and environmentally sound transit. Since Amtrak was founded in 1971, our country has benefited from organized, reliable and safe service to individuals commuting to and from work and individuals using rail service for extended travel. With the skyrocketing costs of airline flights and gas prices at over $4 a gallon, individuals are relying more and more on rail service.

It is no exaggeration to say that rail service is the lifeline from which New Jersey's state economy draws nourishment. Our region's employers--small, medium, and large--depend upon an integrated rail operation to enable many of their employees to get to and from work. Clients, potential clients, and business partners use the train to come to New Jersey. Our local entrepreneurs use Amtrak to pitch their ideas and sell their products outside of our home state.

For the last 12 years, Amtrak has been suffering from a lack of federal support and for the last 6 years it has been operating without Congressional authorization. In order to keep from going out of business, Amtrak was forced to delay necessary repairs and security improvements, freeze the salaries of its employees, rescind on employee pensions and go billions of dollars into debt. The legislation before us today would authorize the funding necessary to improve Amtrak's operations throughout the country and bring our country's rail service into the 21st Century.

H.R. 6003 authorizes $14.9 billion for Amtrak over the next 5 years. $4.3 billion of which would be used for capital grants to help Amtrak afford to make necessary repairs and upgrades to the Northeast Corridor. It would also allow Amtrak to procure new rolling stock, rehabilitate existing bridges, as well as make additional capital improvements and maintenance over its entire network.

As a regular Amtrak rider, I appreciate the professionalism and service that customers enjoy every day. Amtrak's hard working employees, including the over 1,300 employed in New Jersey, have continued to provide high quality service despite Amtrak's payroll freezes and pension problems. The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act would provide Amtrak with $3 billion in operating grants, which would help Amtrak make good on its promises to these employees. A portion of these funds would be used to pay employees salaries, health costs, and overtime pay. It would also help Amtrak pay for increasing fuel costs, facilities, maintenance and train operations.

This legislation would also create a new State Capital Grant program to provide grants for States for intercity passenger rail capital projects. In New Jersey the demand for public transportation has skyrocketed, with NJ Transit providing 900,000 trips per weekday on its trains, buses and light-rail vehicles. H.R. 6003 would authorize over $2.5 billion in grants to states over the next 5 years to help organizations like NJ Transit pay for the capital costs

of facilities and the equipment necessary to provide new or improved intercity passenger rail.

The Passenger Rail Investment Reauthorization Act would provide $1.7 billion annually to help Amtrak pay off the debt it incurred when Congress drastically cut its funding in 2000 and 2001. Amtrak has aggressively targeted this debt, paying down $600 million from 2002 through 2007. This bill would help Amtrak take further steps to reduce its debt, and allow Amtrak to focus its resources on improving existing services and making additional capital and operational improvements.

H.R. 6003 would bring American passenger rail into the 21st century, authorizing $1.7 billion for the construction of eleven high-speed rail network spanning the entire Nation. The first of which would be a high- speed rail corridor between Washington, D.C. and New York City. Countries like France, England and Japan have greatly improved the experience of commuters through the utilization of high speed corridors. This would lead to more efficient public transportation and help the over 1.5 million New Jerseyans who use Amtrak spend less time commuting and more time at home with their families.

Supporting public transportation especially passenger rail, should be a crucial element of our national effort to slow the rate of global climate change and reduce our dependence on foreign fuels. Passenger rail consumes 21 percent less energy per passenger mile than automobiles and 17 percent less than airplanes. It releases half the amount of greenhouse gases per passenger mile as both air and car travel. The continued operation of Amtrak is an essential component of easing traffic congestion, reducing wear and tear on roads, protecting our environment and preserving open space in New Jersey and across the country.

Rail service is a fundamental component of our Nation's continually growing transportation system, and Amtrak has demonstrated the capacity of integrated rail service to expand economic opportunity, commuter options, and make vital contributions to the fabric of our communities. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6003.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for this amendment and for yielding me time. He is very diligent in looking after the concerns of the people of his area in Pennsylvania, and in this amendment, I must say it also benefits--would benefit the people of New Jersey as well.

When you look at the numbers where Amtrak is setting record highs for numbers of users--25 million users last year--and look at how in New Jersey the State rail system is breaking ridership records for the 6th straight year with over 900,000 trips per weekday on its trains, buses, and light rails, and you match that with the increased costs of commuting by internal combustion cars, it should be apparent that Amtrak should do everything it can to attract riders on these underused routes; and that is exactly what the Murphy-Schwartz-Holt amendment seeks to do.

It would require Amtrak to re-examine the service cuts that it's made at two stations to see if it would be feasible to increase services at those stations. They can do this through service and pricing. I hear from my constituents about this. One constituent, John, who commutes from Princeton Junction, summed it up by saying Amtrak seems to be driving customers away. It has negative effects, including increased automobile traffic and consequences on the environment.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I thank Mr. Murphy for preparing it.