At the same time, funding levels for aviation and highway spending would be increased by 6.4% and 5.4%. [1]

The subcommittee members said its action would "fully support rail service for 4 out of 5 riders or 80% of Amtrak's ridership..." But the Administration's own Department of Transportation inspector general, testified that "intercity passenger rail needs federal funding between $1.4 billion and $1.5 billion, plus [a continuation of] existing state contributions, in order to maintain the status quo" -- and even this would not be enough "to move the system to a state-of-good-repair." [2]

The committee used misleading examples to justify the Amtrak cuts. Citing the route between Orlando and Los Angeles, the committee pointed to low airfares between destinations -- but neglected the fact that the majority of riders on the Orlando-Los Angeles line are riding between intermediate points, which lack convenient air service. [3]

"Practically speaking, there is no difference between the President's $0 budget and the $550 million that the U.S. House offered Amtrak today," said Colin Peppard, transportation policy coordinator for Friends of the Earth. "Amtrak cannot survive on either. Both numbers are simply a recipe for bankrupting a system that is more fuel efficient and less polluting than autos and airplanes."

Automobiles cause about half the smog and other hazardous air pollutants in the U.S., as well as consuming almost two-thirds of the oil used annually; airports in Los Angeles, Chicago, and the District of Columbia are among the nation's top 10 industrial air pollution sources. [4]

###

SOURCES:
[1] National Association of Railroad Passengers press release, Jun. 15, 2005.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Factsheet: Amtrak, Energy, and the Environment, Friends of the Earth.