,,ii #aafth ,,congress #ast ,session ,s4 #bibb ,,in ,,the ,,senate ,,of ,,the ,,united ,,states ,november #bj1 #bjai,mr4 ,durbin introduced the following bill2 which was read twice and referred to the ,committee on ,commerce1 ,science1 and ,transportation ,a ,,bill ,to permit ,amtrak to bring civil actions in ,federal district court to enforce the right set forth in section #bdcjh7;c7 of title #di1 ,united ,states ,code1 which gives intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation preference over freight transportation in using a rail line1 junction1 or crossing4 #a4 ,short title ,this ,act may be cited as the ,rail ,passenger ,fairness ,act4 #b4 ,findings 7#a7 ,congress created ,amtrak under the ,rail ,passenger ,service ,act of #aigj 7,public ,law #ia-aeh74 7#b7 ,amtrak began serving customers on ,may #a1 #aiga1 taking over the operation of most intercity passenger trains that private1 freight railroads were previously required to operate4 ,in exchange for assuming these passenger rail operations1 ,amtrak was given access to the national rail network4 7#c7 ,in return for relief from the obligation to provide intercity passenger service1 railroads over which ,amtrak operated 7referred to in this section as host railroads7 were expected to give ,amtrak passenger trains preference over freight trains when using the national rail network4 7#d7 ,in #aigc1 ,congress passed the ,amtrak ,improvement ,act of #aigc 7,public ,law #ic-adf71 which gives intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation preference over freight transportation in using a rail line1 junction1 or crossing4 ,this right1 which is now codified as section #bdcjh7;c7 of title #di1 ,united ,states ,code1 states1 ,except in an emergency1 intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation provided by or for ,amtrak has preference over freight transportation in using a rail line1 junction1 or crossing unless the ,board orders otherwise under this subsection4 ,a rail carrier affected by this subsection may apply to the ,board for relief4 ,if the ,board1 after an opportunity for a hearing under section #eec of title #e1 decides that preference for intercity and commuter rail passenger transportation materially will lessen the quality of freight transportation provided to shippers1 the ,board shall establish the rights of the carrier and ,amtrak on reasonable terms44 7#e7 ,many host railroads have ignored the law referred to in paragraph 7#d7 by refusing to give passenger rail the priority to which it is statutorily entitled and giving freight transportation the higher priority4 ,as a result1 ,amtrak's on time performance on most host railroads is poor1 has declined between #bjad through #bjai1 and continues to decline4 7#f7 ,according to ,amtrak1 #f1ejj1jjj customers on ,state-supported and long-distance trains arrived at their destination late during fiscal year #bjai4 ,nearly #gj percent of these delays were caused by host railroads1 amounting to a total of #c1bjj1jjj minutes4 ,the largest cause of these delays was freight train interference1 which accounted for more than #a1jjj1jjj minutes of delay for ,amtrak passengers1 or approximately #b years1 because host railroads chose to give freight trains priority4 7#g7 ,poor on-time performance wastes taxpayer dollars4 ,according to a #bjai report by ,amtrak's ,office of ,inspector ,general1 a #e percent improvement of on-time performance on all ,amtrak routes would result in #ab1ajj1jjj in cost savings to ,amtrak in the first year4 ,if on-time performance on long-distance routes reached #ge percent for a year1 ,amtrak would realize an estimated #da1ijj1jjj in operating cost savings1 with a one-time savings of #ccf1jjj1jjj due to a reduction in equipment replacement needs4 7#h7 ,historical data suggests that on-time performance on host railroads is driven by the existence of an effective means to enforce ,amtrak's preference rights3 7,a7 ,two months after the date of the enactment of the ,passenger ,rail ,investment and ,improvement ,act of #bjjh 7division ,b of ,public ,law #aaj-dcb71 which included provisions for the enforcement of these preference rights1 was enacted1 the on-time performance of long-distance trains improved from #ef percent to #gg percent and ,class ,i freight train interference delays across all routes declined by #dj percent4 7,b7 ,one year after such date of enactment1 freight train interference delays had declined by #ed percent and the on-time performance of long-distance trains reached #he percent4 7,c7 ,in #bjad1 after some of the provisions in the ,passenger ,rail ,investment and ,improvement ,act of #bjjh related to enforcement of preference were ruled unconstitutional by a ,d4,c4 ,circuit ,court1 long-distance train on-time performance declined from #gb percent to #ej percent1 and freight train interference delays increased #ei percent4 7,d7 ,the last time long-distance trains achieved an on-time rate of more than #hj percent in a given month was ,february #bjab4 7#i7 ,as a result of violations of ,amtrak's right to preference1 ,amtrak has been consistently unable on host railroad networks to meet its congressionally mandated mission and goals1 which are codified in section #bdaja of title #di1 ,united ,states ,code 7relating to providing on-time and trip-time competitive service to its passengers74 7#aj7 ,amtrak does not have an effective mechanism to enforce its statutory preference right in order to fulfill its mission and goals4 ,only the ,attorney ,general can bring a civil action for equitable relief in a district court of the ,united ,states to enforce ,amtrak's preference rights4 7#aa7 ,in ,amtrak's entire history1 the only enforcement action initiated by the ,attorney ,general was against the ,southern ,pacific ,transportation ,company in #aigi4 7#ab7 ,congress supports continued authority for the ,attorney ,general to initiate an action1 but ,amtrak should also be entitled to bring a civil action before a ,federal district court to enforce its statutory preference rights4 #c4 ,authorize ,amtrak to bring a civil action to enforce it preference rights 7a7 ,in general ,section #bdcjh7;c7 of title #di1 ,united ,states ,code1 is amended1 by adding at the end the following3 ,notwithstanding sections #bdajc7;a7 and #bdcjh7;f71 ,amtrak shall have the right to bring an action for equitable or other relief in the ,united ,states ,district ,court for the ,district of ,columbia1 or in any jurisdiction in which ,amtrak resides or is found1 to enforce the preference rights granted under this subsection44 7b7 ,conforming amendment ,section #bdajc7;a77#a7 of title #di1 ,united ,states ,code1 is amended1 in the matter preceding subparagraph 7,a71 by striking of this subsection and inserting and subsection #bdcjh7;c74