April 22, 1975
Page 11189
AMTRAK: ADMINISTRATION VERSUS CONGRESS
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, numerous times in recent years the Congress bas been faced with an executive branch which fails to heed, or distorts, the intent of the law. Once again, the administration is dragging its feet – this time on a matter of great importance to States seeking railroad passenger service.
Last fall, Congress agreed that preferential treatment should be given to States which currently have no passenger service in the designation of experimental Amtrak routes. Also mandated in that bill was the establishment of an experimental route through Idaho during calendar year 1975.
On the eve of the signing of the bill, the Department of Transportation announced its decision
for the fiscal year 1975 experimental route – a route which linked Washington, D.C., with Denver, Colo. – and which would not meet the test of service to unserved areas under the newly passed amendments. This announcement was a noticeable departure from the customary practice of announcing the fiscal year designation during the latter quarter of the fiscal year.
Now the administration has prepared legislation to replace the expiring Amtrak authorization. It would completely eliminate the experimental section – and as a result – would wipe out the provisions enacted by Congress last year.
This resistance to compliance with the law has forced Senators HATHAWAY, MUSKIE, MCINTYRE, and me to request a statement of planned action by the Department of Transportation. Because of the interest of all Senators in seeing to it that the intent of Congress is fully implemented, I take this opportunity to inform the Senate of our action.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter we have sent to Secretary Coleman be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
U.S. SENATE,
Washington, D.C.,
April 14, 1975.
Mr. WILLIAM COLEMAN,
Secretary of Transportation,
Department of Transportation,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SECRETARY: Last Summer, we and a number of our colleagues sponsored an amendment to the Rail Passenger Service Act to ensure some measure of Amtrak service to each of the forty-eight contiguous states. This amendment, which would have immediately made such service a part of the basic Amtrak system, was adopted by the Senate without opposition. There was no similar provision in the bill passed by the House.
Because of the concern of several conferees about making such routes an immediate part of the basic system, a compromise was devised in the Conference whose intention was to mandate such service, but to allow adequate time for phasing in the new routes and to allow them to be terminated if they were determined to be unfeasible after a fair test. This compromise took the form of a sentence added to Section 403(c) of the Act (the "Experimental Route" section) which reads as follows:
"In carrying out the provisions of this subsection, the Secretary Shall give priority to experimental routes designed to extend intercity rail passenger service to the major population area of each of the contiguous 48 states which does not have such service to any large population area designated as part of the basic system."
This language makes the initiation of such routes mandatory at the rate of at least one a year (as per the original experimental route subsection but leaves the Secretary with the flexibility to terminate them after two years if they do not meet the standards of the basic system. For your information, we have attached background material on the legislative history and intent of this provision.
We realize that the Administration has recently submitted a comprehensive Amtrak proposal which would, among other things, repeal the experimental route section and our amendment along with it. But assuming that DOT intends to comply with existing law, we would very much like to know of the plans made by your department for the implementation of the present experimental route provision.
We appreciate your consideration of this matter and will look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
EDMUND S. MUSKIE
THOMAS J. MCINTYRE,
WILLIAM D. HATHAWAY,
FRANK CHURCH,
U.S. Senate.