The McCain absence is interesting. Either he sees some political benefit for not hating Amtrak as much or he just slept in.

by Rj on Jun 11, 2008 9:48 am  

The sooner the guy currently occupying the White House is out the better.

That's terrific that Obama was one of the bill's co-sponsors in the Senate. I like him more and more by the day and McCain less and less.

by Steve P on Jun 11, 2008 9:52 am  

That was a vote on the rule which provides for "rules" for the debate on the final passage of the bill.

The final vote on the bill will happen today.

Many lawmakers vote against the rule but will vote for final passage. I expect Baron Hill and several GOP lawmakers to do that today.

by Keith on Jun 11, 2008 10:18 am  

Echoing Keith: many Republicans who voted against the rule governing consideration of the bill will vote for the actual bill. In general, members of the minority party often vote against all rules, whether or not they support the underlying bill.

by rg on Jun 11, 2008 10:31 am  

interesting juxtoposition in the news yesterday - Senate Republicans vote to protect continued subsidies to record-breaking profit oil companies while House Republicans vote against and the President threatens a veto of support for Amtrak. You know where their priorities lie.

by andy on Jun 11, 2008 12:11 pm  

HOUSE EASILY PASSES AMTRAK REAUTHORIZATION MEASURE

By Darren Goode

The House today strongly passed legislation boosting funding for Amtrak

and high-speed rail despite a veto threat stemming from its cost. By a

311-104 vote, lawmakers approved the bill authorizing $14.4 billion for

Amtrak over the next five years and permitting construction of a high-speed

rail line between Washington and New York. "We stand on the threshold of a

transformational moment in the history of intercity passenger rail service

in America," Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar

proclaimed at the start of the debate.

Supporters of the bill said it is timely due to record gas prices and

would relieve air and vehicle congestion, especially in the Northeast. The

White House has threatened to veto the measure because it would boost

funding for Amtrak "without requiring any meaningful reforms in Amtrak's

governance or operations and without allocating resources based on the

demand for passenger rail service," according to a Statement of

Administration Policy released Monday. The bill "authorizes an

unprecedented level of funding but does not include basic measures to hold

Amtrak accountable to taxpayers for its spending decisions," according to

the SAP.

Transportation and Infrastructure ranking member John Mica said the money

would be well spent. "Some are saying this bill may be too much. That's

bunk," Mica said. "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." Mica has opposed other attempts in recent years to

reauthorize Amtrak; he came on board this time after he secured language

paving the way for a publicly or privately run high-speed rail system from

Washington to New York. Republicans inserted other language intended to

make Amtrak more accountable and allowing the private sector to take over,

including identifying the two worst performing lines. Passage of the bill

would mark the first reauthorization since 1997.

Some Republicans said the bill does not do enough to ensure fiscal

solvency at the federally subsidized rail service. Rep. Pete Sessions,

R-Texas, offered an amendment to eliminate federal funding for Amtrak's

worst fiscally performing route, which runs from New Orleans to Los

Angeles. Sessions said his amendment was a small step in saving taxpayers'

money. Oberstar countered that the amendment was an unnecessary

"pre-emptive strike" by Congress and that the bill does several things to

help Amtrak's performance, including requiring the Transportation

Department's inspector general to evaluate the performance and service

quality of the five worst performing routes.

Most lawmakers shunned any attempt to strip targeted money in the bill,

and they rejected Sessions' amendment by a 275-150 vote. Another fiscal

conservative, Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., did not even bother to show up when

it was time for him to offer his amendment, which went after an earmark for

a Baltimore tunnel project. Lawmakers approved an amendment, 295-127, from

D.C.-region lawmakers in both parties authorizing $1.5 billion in grants

over the next decade to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.

The underlying bill would give Amtrak $3 billion in FY09, $2.2 billion more

than sought by the White House and $1.3 billion more than requested by

Amtrak. It also gives more overall than Amtrak reauthorization the Senate

passed in October, which authorizes $11.4 billion. Sen. Frank Lautenberg,

D-N.J., the sponsor of the Senate bill, will seek a potentially difficult

conference this year to work through the differences in the two bills. He

has cited concern over privatizing rail service, including possible loss of

jobs and service.

by Ryan on Jun 11, 2008 4:09 pm  

Andy- A tax break isn't a subsidy. You may think the 199 exemption sucks (and I don't the tax code should discriminate), but it's not a subsidy. Subsidies are affirmative outlays by the government, not reduced revenue. It's not a distinction without a difference either, it gets to the heart of property rights and who owns your property: you or the government.

BTW, this has nothing to do with transit. Funding transit is about priorities. Big highways are just as much a government project as transit. We should be defunding roads and funding transit, at all levels, regardless of what is in the tax code. It is royally screwed up, and if we are going to fix the tax code before we get down to doing transit, we're all going to be screwed too.

by Gleb on Jun 18, 2008 3:41 am