Getting America’s passenger rail back on track requires a radically different approach

$66 billion was dedicated to rail in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), but this historic amount was directed into a federal structure that has repeatedly failed to efficiently manage passenger rail projects, including those already funded. We cannot afford to repeat that experience. We can’t build tomorrow’s rail system with yesterday’s tools—reform is long overdue.

Transportation for America’s policies to restructure federal rail governance

In our platform for reauthorization, under our core principle of Invest in the Rest, we propose building a world-class passenger rail network. One of the five specific policies we recommend is to restructure the roles and responsibilities of the federal entities that govern passenger rail. To build a world-class rail network, we need a coordinated system working toward a clear goal—one with clear authority, transparency, and accountability. This proposal includes four specific policy changes:

1. Amtrak should be responsible for the operations of every federally funded long-distance route and for operating the Northeast Corridor. It would work with state rail commissions on planning, identifying funding needs and priorities, and conducting outreach to communities.
2. Amtrak and new service providers should be responsible for the state-supported routes, as well as managing stations and marketing passenger rail routes.
3. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) should oversee national planning for passenger rail infrastructure, network connectivity, and safety standards. FRA would set standards for stations and maintain a registry of station features and conditions. The agency would also facilitate information sharing between freight and passenger rail providers and enforce regulation and oversight of both sectors.
4. The Surface Transportation Board’s (STB) authority should include initiating independent proceedings, expediting cases with additional funding, and ensuring access to data for decision-making. Congress must ensure the STB has the funding and authority to move actions expeditiously and in compliance with legal deadlines.

For decades, the federal government has poured hundreds of billions into highways, while rail, transit, and other options have been left behind. That lopsided approach has left much of the country without viable alternatives to driving. T4America’s Invest in the Rest principle aims to change that by committing real resources to the modes that have been underfunded for generations, particularly passenger rail.

Amtrak’s national network, which includes long-distance routes, the Northeast Corridor, and state-supported lines, connects small towns and major cities alike. These services are essential. But the past few years have taught us that these existing structures and systems are poorly suited to building what we need tomorrow. To make lasting progress, the next surface transportation bill must not only invest in rail, but it must also build a modern system to plan and deliver it.

That starts with restructuring the federal roles and responsibilities that determine how rail service gets on the ground.

A new federal structure for rail

Each agency needs a clear mission and the authority to fulfill it. Amtrak should run service. The FRA should lead planning and regulation. The STB should resolve disputes swiftly and transparently. This kind of structure is how we move from good intentions to real outcomes. And it is the only way to build a passenger rail network that lives up to the investment we are making.

The vision: many routes, many providers

Amtrak should retain operational authority over its long-distance routes and the Northeast Corridor. These are the core services it already runs, and it remains best positioned to manage them. But even within this scope, Amtrak’s role should be strictly operational: running trains, managing stations, marketing the routes, and ensuring service quality. When it comes to state-supported routes, however, the model needs to change: Amtrak has proven that they are poorly situated to be in charge of developing new rail service. 

Over the past 15 years, the federal government has made significant investments in passenger rail with the goal of making Amtrak a more flexible, responsive partner to states. However, this funding has not translated into fast or widespread service expansion. The reality is that Amtrak has not successfully expanded either long-distance or state-supported services. As the only show in town, Amtrak is the only partner that those trying to launch or grow service can turn to, regardless of how easy or difficult they are to work with. The delays are not associated with one side of the aisle. While the Trump administration did not prioritize passenger rail during his first term, the Biden administration was slow to get the historic amount of funding in the IIJA out the door. 

Under current investment planning practices, where Amtrak plays a central role, reinvestments in passenger rail corridors such as the Northeast Corridor now struggle with ballooning expenses and inefficient project management. The Northeast Corridor is critically overdue for repairs and upgrades, facing a $5 billion State of Good Repair backlog. Despite owning a significant portion of the corridor’s track, tunnels, and bridges, Amtrak has struggled to maintain or modernize the corridor at the pace needed to meet today’s demand. 

The current structure simply struggles to deliver. Amtrak is not set up to rapidly deploy new routes or scale service across states. This is not a criticism of Amtrak’s core mission. Instead, our proposal recognizes that no single entity can meet every state’s needs, and Amtrak should focus on its core mission of running existing routes. That is why states should have the flexibility to work with other qualified rail operators that meet their needs. Amtrak could be one option to provide service, but it should not be the only one.

Brightline, a private passenger rail provider, is in the process of building a new service from Southern California to Las Vegas and currently operates regular service in Florida. Amtrak is not the only organization in the United States that can run a passenger rail operation. States, ideally through interstate rail commissions like the Southern Rail Commission or similar entities, should have the authority to choose the operator that best fits their needs.  A more competitive model would drive innovation, improve customer experience, and help translate policy support into real-world results.

We will explore the role of alternative service providers in a future post. For now, the takeaway is clear: the current system is not working fast enough. If we want better rail service in America, we need to reorganize how it is delivered and give states the power to move forward.

Planning a national network with the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)

The FRA should take the lead on national passenger rail planning. While it currently serves as a regulator, grant administrator, and technical advisor, its authority is often too limited to proactively guide development. That needs to change. We envision a stronger FRA that leads network planning, enforces safety standards, and maintains a national database of station conditions and network assets. The FRA should also be empowered to facilitate data sharing and coordination between passenger and freight railroads. Right now, too many delays stem from freight railroads withholding critical data, leaving other parties in the dark. The FRA must have the authority to compel the disclosure of data and ensure that proprietary claims are not used to avoid transparency. Knowing how many trains and how long they run on a line should never be considered confidential. That is public infrastructure, and the public deserves to understand how it’s being used.

Empower the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to be proactive in problem-solving

The STB, meanwhile, needs expanded powers and resources to actually serve as an effective arbiter of passenger rail access disputes. The STB is an independent federal agency that regulates certain surface transportation modes, including freight rail. Right now, the STB is reactive. It must wait for a provider to bring a complaint, and often waits years before anything happens.

A case in point is the long-running effort by the Southern Rail Commission, an interstate rail compact comprising the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, to restore passenger rail service along the Gulf Coast, which was wiped out by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. This 20-year, multi-state effort was continuously stalled due to freight rail opposition. Despite the Commission and its partners clearing every conceivable obstacle, from station renovations to funding commitments, the freight railroads operating in the region (CSX and Norfolk Southern) refused to comply with sharing their tracks for the passenger rail service, claiming that the proposed two trains per day between New Orleans and Mobile would “unreasonably” impair their freight operations. 

As a result, it took nearly ten years and direct intervention by the FRA to force a resolution. In 2021, Amtrak finally submitted an application to the STB, petitioning them to intervene and arbitrate the conflict if CSX and Norfolk Southern continued to delay the project in bad faith. Notably, the FRA Administrator at the time himself testified to the STB to compel the freight railroads to adhere to federal law and provide Amtrak the use of track for the service. Two decades after Hurricane Katrina disrupted the line, the Gulf Coast Mardi Gras service is finally launching on August 18, 2025. It should never have taken this long to deploy service on a previously existing route. Government partners need to be positioned to deliver projects on clear timelines, starting with allowing the STB to mediate disputes efficiently. 

STB is too cautious and deferential. Congress should give the STB the authority to initiate proceedings on its own when there are substantial disputes, delays, or risks to public investment. If a host freight railroad is blocking a funded passenger rail project, and the STB knows about it, the Board should not have to wait to step in and render a verdict. Regional commissions or public agencies should be allowed to initiate or request action even if they are not the operator or the host. And to make this possible, the STB needs the funding to hire staff with specific passenger rail expertise. Too often, the Board has treated these cases like freight conflicts, when they require an entirely different set of experts.

Why it matters

Right now, the biggest threat to passenger rail is not just a lack of funding—it is a lack of a functioning system to deploy existing funding efficiently to create and support new or expanded passenger rail service. The IIJA allocated $66 billion to rail, but without clearer roles for the key players, a clear, scalable structure, and real accountability, this money is not delivering the transformation the public expects.

Rather than creating new layers of bureaucracy, we are calling for a clear division of responsibilities between Amtrak, the FRA, and the STB that is designed to support growth, increase transparency, and speed up service delivery. We’ve had record levels of funding, new laws and programs,  and a decade of political momentum, and yet we still don’t have real results. That’s not just a policy failure, it’s a structural one. If we want to make rail work in this country, we need to start building a system that can deliver it.