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…
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.