PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 667.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 25, 1994
Amtrak Investment Act of 1994 - Amends the Rail Passenger Service Act to establish as one of the goals for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK) management of its capital investment in such a way as to provide its customers with world class service. (Sec. 4) Requires AMTRAK to include in its annual report on its operations to the President and to the Congress projections of anticipated and realized benefits of proposed and previously funded projects. (Sec. 5) Requires applications by a State, agency, or person for the institution of rail passenger service, or the retention of a route, train, or service which AMTRAK intends to discontinue, to include a statement that it agrees to pay in each year of service specified percentages of the long-term avoidable losses for each year (currently, short-term avoidable losses) of the operation of such service. Authorizes AMTRAK for each year of service to contribute specified percentages to such losses. Requires such State, agency, or person, with respect to the renewal of such service, to provide a statement that it agrees to pay at least 65 percent of the long-term avoidable losses of operating such service and at least 50 percent of the associated capital costs. Directs the Secretary of Transportation to review AMTRAK's state-assisted rail passenger services program and report the results, including recommendations for revising such program, to the Congress. (Sec. 6) Amends the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 to direct AMTRAK to make any capital improvements for the Northeast Corridor improvement project necessary for reliable, high-speed rail passenger service and enhancement of capacity for intercity and commuter passenger service. (Sec. 7) Amends the Rail Passenger Service Act to authorize appropriations for: (1) AMTRAK operating expenses; (2) State requested rail passenger service; (3) capital investment projects; (4) construction expenses to convert the James A. Farley Post Office, New York City, into a train station and commercial center and for redevelopment of the Pennsylvania Station, New York City; (5) capital expenditures for the Northeast Corridor improvement project; and (6) certain mandatory payments.
People & committees
Sen. Exon, J. James [D-NE] · D–NE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 667.
Committee on Commerce. Reported to Senate by Senator Hollings with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Commerce. Reported to Senate by Senator Hollings with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Commerce. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Subcommittee on Surface Transportation. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 103-631.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3984)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.2002 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.2002 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.2002 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.2002 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.