Date: 1990-06-07
Speaker: THOMAS A. LUKEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself 4 minutes. Mr. Speaker. it was just 4 weeks ago that the House overwhelmingly voted in favor of this conference report. Three hundred and twentytwo Members of this body voted for the conference report. and the other body followed suit. and the bill was sent to the President. Why was this vote so lopsided? Amtrak now pays most of its own way. covering more than 75 percent of its cost. while receiving less than half the real Federal dollars it received a few years ago. Amtraks revenuetocost ratio is better than any other national rail passenger system in the world. We regularly pour billions of dollars into our congested and deteriorating highways. and our airports. while Amtrak must fight for its very survival every year. What is the matter with making Amtrak a firstclass outfit? That is what we are trying to do. President Bushs veto message on the Amtrak bill is much more than surprising. It is unbelievable. His veto message does not even mention his longtime animosity toward Amtrak and. his opposition. In his written veto message. Mr. Bush gave only one reason. one purported reason. for vetoing it. He did not veto the bill because it allowed for ways to improve freight and passenger rail service in various parts of the country.. He did not veto because of the cost saving it allows for Amtrak. and he did not veto it because It paves the way for commuter rail in northern Virginia. The only reason that he gave was because it includes the Interstate Commerce Commission provision which has been so adequately described before He states that the ICC provision would impose a new and unprecedented. unjustified regulatory review requirement for the railroad acquisition. That is poppycock. With all due respect. I think the Presidents men missed the mark. The ICC provision under Amtrak merely closes a loophole in the existing law. For example. last week when a group of Wall Street investors attempted a hostile takeover of the C&N Chicago Northwestern Railroad. member of our committee then began to scrutinize the proposed transaction because of its tremendous public interest implications. We were worried about corporate raiders taking over. stripping a major railroad of assets. and selling the real estate and leaving it an empty shell. That would destroy major railroads. and it would destroy the industry in very short time. These major railroads.. I might remind Members.. own over 147.000 miles of track. and over 80 percent of all the tracks in theUnited States. and employ 231.000 people. Have the railroads been objecting to his provision? Quite the contrary. The Association of American Railroads. which. is funded primarily by these large railroads. takes no position. Amtrak wholeheartedly supports the bill. This Amtrak provision also would save $16 million by considering its own favorable employment data. Finally. Mr. Speaker. I would not want Members to vote to sustain on a basis that an identical bill is likely to result and pass in short order. In fact. the obstacles to such legislation are formidable and numerous. Other committees will receive this sequential referral. Once. this bill is unraveled. if it is sustained today. there will be monumental problems in- stitching it. back together. Endless delays will result at a minimum.. Some are considering an end run. legislative. end run. attaching it to an appropriations bill. However. if that does not work. if that is stopped. and it will be stopped.. then we will have endless delays. we. will have costs of equipment soaring. we will have contracts: which have been negotiated which. will be renegotiated. Mr.. Speaker. I thank the people who have contributed to this.. including the gentleman from Michigan and the gentleman from New York . who have done a tremendous job.