November 16, 2005

Mr. David M. Laney
Chairman
National Passenger Railroad Corporation Board of Directors
60 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002

Dear Chairman Laney:

I am writing to you regarding the November 9, 2005 decision by the Amtrak Board of Directors to dismiss President David Gunn. While I question the current legitimacy of the Board, I would like to ascertain the Board’s reasons for its decision and the Board’s long-term plans for Amtrak.

Like many in the U.S. Senate, I was astounded by the timing of Mr. Gunn’s dismissal. Under Mr. Gunn’s leadership, Amtrak took many needed steps to become fiscally responsible, and Amtrak’s future seemed bright. Congress has recently been considering Amtrak authorization and appropriation measures, and the steady hand of Mr. Gunn factored favorably in Congress’ decision-making. For example, on November 3rd the U.S. Senate voted for an Amtrak reauthorization measure by an overwhelming 93-6 margin. To fire the President of Amtrak on the heels of that vote is an affront to this institution.

There is also a more fundamental question here besides the timing of Mr. Gunn’s dismissal. Specifically, I question whether the Board of Directors had the legitimacy to dismiss Mr. Gunn, since you are the only individual whose position on the Board was confirmed by the Senate. Moreover, there are three vacancies on the Board, and two of the four current Board Members are recess appointments whose terms will end soon. Clearly, the Board’s decision to fire Mr. Gunn was made without the necessary broad bi-partisan representation that Congress intended when it established the Amtrak Board of Directors.

During his time at Amtrak, Mr. Gunn increased ridership and revenue. Illinois is a prime example of Mr. Gunn’s efforts. In Fiscal Year 2005, Amtrak carried more than 3 million people to 30 communities in Illinois, and many of the short and long-distance routes based out of Amtrak’s Chicago hub witnessed a double digit percentage increase in ridership. These ridership numbers show that passengers as varied as business commuters, college students, and leisure travelers are increasingly choosing Amtrak as their mode of transportation.

As you know, no passenger rail service in the world earns a profit. Passenger rail transportation needs government assistance to function, as do all modes of transportation. However, I am concerned that your Board’s dismissal of Mr. Gunn signals an effort by the Board and by the Bush Administration to seek an end to federal government assistance, which would unequivocally portend the demise of Amtrak. The Administration’s unrealistic insistence that Amtrak turn a profit, combined with its recommendation that federal operating subsidies be eliminated, strongly suggests that the Bush Administration wants to let America’s only passenger railroad die.

Amtrak’s announcement of Mr. Gunn’s dismissal stated, “The passenger rail service needed to intensify the pace and broaden the scope of its reforms.” I fear that your vision of reform entails the wholesale dismantling of Amtrak, and that you will seek an end to government support, thereby granting the Administration’s wish to kill Amtrak. If that is not the case, then I respectfully request information as to the Board’s plans to preserve and improve Amtrak service across the nation and in my home state of Illinois.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin

Cc: Mr. Floyd Hall
Mr. Enrique Sosa
The Honorable Norman Mineta