PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 18, 2015
This bill revises the limitation on passenger rail transportation liability to increase from $200 million to $500 million, adjusted annually for inflation, the aggregate allowable awards to all rail passengers, against all defendants, for all claims, including any for punitive damages, arising from a single accident or incident.
The Department of Transportation (DOT) must consider, within two years after enactment of this Act, whether to:
make any needed additional adjustments to the liability cap; and
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
establish or adjust mandatory coverage for Amtrak, any high-speed railroad authority or operator, any commuter authority or operator, any rail carrier, or any state (listed entities).
The total minimum liability coverage Amtrak must maintain for claims through insurance and self-insurance shall increase from $200 million per accident or incident to $500 million, unless DOT, by regulation, determines that a different minimum level of financial responsibility is necessary or sufficient to satisfy claims.
DOT may make a grant to Amtrak or another listed entity as a reasonable reimbursement, considering ability to meet increased costs and impacts on safety and service, to offset any incremental increase in the cost of insurance resulting from this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Nelson, Bill [D-FL] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1360 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1360 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1360 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1360 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.