WASHINGTON — Funding for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor would be cut from $1.14 billion to $850 million — a 25% decrease — under President Donald Trump’s budget proposal for fiscal 2026, according to budget information released by the Department of Transportation on Friday.
According to the detailed DOT budget request, Amtrak national network funding would increase by $291 million, with the overall Amtrak budget down by $763,000.
Still to come is Amtrak’s own budget request, which usually comes in a request to Congress in response to the adminstration’s budget proposal. That request has usually happened earlier in the year but has been awaiting the release of the President’s detailed budget [see “Trump budget, Congress mum …,” Trains News Wire, May 2, 2025].
The cuts to Northeast Corridor funding were first reported by Bloomberg Government.
The Amtrak funding is part of the budget for the Federal Railroad Administration, which would increase slightly compared to 2025, from $16.124 billion to $16.439 billion. The Federal Transit Administration would also see a slight increase, from $20.937 billion to $21.247 billion. The overall DOT budget would rise to $147.1 billion from $144.7 billion, although after offsets it would fall from $152.6 billion to $142 billion. Much of that difference is attributable to the elimination of just over $8 billion in Federal Highway Administration emergency relief funds.
An even more detailed version of the FRA budget submitted to Congressional appropriations committees includes administration justification for its requests. That report says that while Amtrak has made progress in recovering from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the passenger operator’s revenue growth of 9% since 2019 has been “significantly outpaced” by operating expense increases of 29%. “Under the leadership of President Trump, FRA will reviewing avenues to close the gap,” the document states. It does not specifically address the decrease in Northeast Corridor funding.
The most notable increase in the FRA budget is for the Consolidated Railroad Infrastructure and Safety Investment, or CRISI grants. The administration’s budget calls for a $500 million increase to an overall total of $1.5 billion, including the $1 billion already committed under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021. Of the $16.439 billion for the FRA, $13.2 billion is previously established under the IIJA.
The proposed increase in FTA budget comes from a boost in transit formula grants from $14.279 billion in 2025 to $14.642 billion in 2026. Those grants are used for capital projects and planning to improve service and maintain a state of good repair. The administration’s budget proposal also includes $2.05 billion for transit infrastructure grants previously authorized under the IIJA, but eliminates additional funding; the last two budgets included additional amounts of of $253.4 million in 2024 and $45.6 million in 2025.
Funding for the FTA’s capital investment grant program remains unchanged at $3.8 billion, including $1.6 billion under the IIJA. Eliminated entirely are $7.5 million for technical assistance and training grants.
American Public Transportation Association CEO Paul P. Skoutelas said in a statement that APTA applauds the “historic investment in public transit and passenger rail” in the budget request, saying the increases of more than $300 million for both the FTA and FRA “represent a significant commitment to strengthening our economy and building a better America.”
— Updated at 11:33 a.m. CT with additional information, link to appropriation committee version of FRA budget.
I’m not sure how this got by OMB Director Russell Voight? DOT Secretary Sean Duffy must have signed off on it. Maybe this is all grandstanding by Trump to show that he cares for rural heart of America. Let’s see what the House of Representatives comes up with, because it will take draconian cuts to many domestic programs to make the big beautiful spending bill a reality. I’m all for the increase in long distance train funding, but this re-prioritization, and possible political messaging of Amtrak funding, may create chaos within the company! I would be surprised if this increase in long distance train funding gets past House Appropriations! This part of the President’s proposed budget flies in the face of Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, and many of the ultra conservative budget hawks in Congress!
Wow. A Republican administration proposing an increase in the national Amtrak network. I often wondered if I would ever live to see this happen. Yes, I’m very happy. Being almost 71 (next month) and a lifelong rail advocate, how well I remember the bad old days of the 1970’s and 1980’s when even some Democrats wanted to shrink passenger service to the NEC and maybe a few other “hubs”.
So far so good, but remember folks-as I’ve often posted-Amtrak needs a lot of new cars and soon.
So let’s be happy with this news and work forward from here.
Great news!!! It’s time the long distance trains get some attention and resources necessary for better service. No train stands at the bottom of the barrel more than the CARDINAL. The Cardinal despite being on a tri-weekly schedule runs only TWO Amfleet II coaches, a single cafe car, ONE Viewliner sleeper, and a baggage dorm car. Too often sold out leaving travel unavailable for days at a time! Would love for Amtrak to explain why they took off a sorely needed third coach that was added in March just in time for summer. Also the Sunset Limited lost a coach-baggage car at the start of summer leaving service btw San Antonio and New Orleans with ONE COACH!!!! Even the Texas Eagle, which FINALLY got a Sightseer Lounge back and an additional sleeper after five long years of neglect still lacks traditional dining service. The Crescent also has a Viewliner Diner, added last year. It’s disappointing that some trains have dining cars and yet continue serving reheated food. But seriously if any train needs attention it’s the Cardinal. Often sold out, no dining car. A third Amfleet coach, a second Viewliner sleeper, and a Viewliner diner would be a welcomed addition to the train that is easily the most scenic in the East!
I suspect Amtrak taking off coaches from the Cardinal and other LD trains is to put them to use as replacements for the Horizon coach fleet now removed due to salt corrosion issues.
I’ve thought from the beginning (i.e. during discussions before May 1 1971) that the NEC should be be a Multi-State Compact (along the lines of Bi-State Compacts such as the Port of New York Authority. This would not preclude Federal participation the same as in other State-supported services, but would put the NEC on the same footing. This could also be an opening for renegotiating the Amtrak/Commuter rail authorities along the route, including the always-vexing issue of sharing traction power expense. A uniform power-by-the-hour contract rate across the whole corridor, including peak hour charges and of-peak charges, with meters on the equipment automatically taking account of the heavy acceleration demand of the fastest Amtrak trains. It could also result in Amtrak simply taking over operation of the commuter service at a uniform negotiated rate, and uniform labor agreements.
I’ve believed for many years now that there should be a separate corporation for the NEC, possibly including the Amtrak owned track to Harrisburg. Only then can the rest of the country have its rail passenger needs adequately addressed, which probably means different state supported entities in parts of the USA.
I have always believed that the NEC and LD train funding should be totally corporate separated and with “firewalled” budgets so that the NEC would have to account for their own operations by not stealing revenue from the LD trains as they done for many years under the fuzzy Amtrak accounting practices in place. Congress mandated a subsidy for passenger rail travel but they did not intend it all to go to the NEC at the expense of the rest of the country so Jerry and I, as well as many others are in complete agreement…
It’s awesome that this bill INCREASES funding for the long-distance, national Amtrak network! Taxpayers from all over the country, pay to fund Amtrak. Yet, Amtrak has always focused on optimizing the number of trains and on-board services to the select-few corridors along the east and west coasts.
Case in point — The poor CARDINAL route. Amtrak’s red-feathered step-child, that it has treated as a 4th-class service with tri-weekly operation and the bare-minimum of cars throughout it’s existence.
Over the past few years, the CARDINAL trains have operated with only two Amfleet II Coaches, a Cafe, A Viewliner Sleeper and a Baggage/Dorm. Earlier this Spring, Amtrak announced it was adding coaches and sleepers to various trains around the system. The CARDINAL was to receive a 3rd Amfleet II Coach, boosting seating capacity from 116 seats to 174 seats per train. However, after several weeks of having the 3rd coach, and #50/#51 still selling out with the desperately needed additional seating, Amtrak has REMOVED the 3rd coach. Seating capacity has again dropped back to 116 seats as the Summer travel season gets into high gear. No explanation has been given for the equipment reduction, but the consist change has been verified by multiple videos from railfans who regularly film the CARDINAL. Other previously announced car additions, on other Amtrak long-distance trains, may now have been removed as well.
You would think that if Amtrak operated a tri-weekly train, it would at least run MORE coaches on it, so as to carry as many passengers as possible on the fewer days the train runs. This is another example of how Amtrak management “discriminates” against the public, on long-distance routes, by not offering an equivalent number of seats (or rooms, or food service) so that all trains offer the same level of service. For the CARDINAL, Amtrak could easily pull 1 coach off 4 or 6 corridor trains (that operate with 8 or 9 coaches each) and use those 4 or 6 cars to add 2 or 3 more coaches to each #50/#51 train set. And, the CARDINAL hasn’t had a Dining Car for over a decade, while Viewliner Diners sit idle at Beech Grove Shops. And, a second sleeper hasn’t been operated for several Summers, even though the single Viewliner Sleeper is constantly sold out weeks in advance, while spare sleepers, needing refurbishment, sit in limbo at Beech Grove.
Here are comparisons of unequal seating space on some Eastern trains —
* LAKE SHORE LTD #48 — 5 coaches = 290 seats per train, 2030 seats per week
* FLORIDIAN #40 — 4 coaches = 232 seats per train, 1624 seats per week
* SILVER METEOR #88 — 4 coaches = 232 seats per train, 1624 seats per week
* CRESCENT #20 — 3 coaches = 174 seats per train, 1218 seats per week
* CARDINAL #50 — 2 coaches = 116 seats per train, 348 seats per week
It’s a shame Amtrak has always focused the vast majority of it’s attention and it’s money on the NEC and not given fair treatment to long-distance routes. I don’t begrudge 40 trains a day in each direction on the NEC. But with that many trains, operating with 8-9 coaches per train, it makes no sense that Amtrak severely restricts Eastern long-distance trains, like the CARDINAL, to just two coaches and a single sleeper on a tri-weekly route. It’s time the national network gets some attention so that the taxpayers all across the country get a level of service they deserve!
Jeff,
I love how you go into details in your posts on this forum (which your posts are spot on) just like when I would queue 40 years ago.
Ironically the Cardinal was at its peak 40 years ago other than being tri weekly when the train got a full diner. It ran with 2 sleepers, than a sleeper and Slumbercoach and a healthy amount of coaches. Graham Claytor even defended the Cardinal saying what a good train it was.
Amtrak was better 40 years ago vs today where most of the long distance trains are pathetic remnant of what they were and all the LD trains are on slower schedules than they were in 1971
Agree with Mr.Lustig’ that Mr. Ashenfelter’s post is “spot on”. One small detail regarding the number of coaches that have historically been in the consists of the Lake Shore. Back in the middle to late 80s and through the 90s too, IIRC, that train had 6 coaches assigned, 2 BOS, 4 NY. So it too has had its number of coaches cut.
And speaking of a train that has never “grown” and has actually shrunk, is the Lake Shore’s Boston section, Nos. 448/449. I rode it several times before the introduction of the Amfleet 2s and it had more than 2 coaches, maybe 4or 5. Ever since the introduction of the Amfleet2s it’s been 2 coaches, one cafe, and one sleeper. A Pretty anemic consist IMO. I’m kinda surprised 448/449 still exists. I don’t think MA funds even a little towards its operation. Since I share Charles Landey’s and others’ opinion that these once daily LDs that condemn certain cities and towns along their routes to service at uncivilized times, that 3-4 trains in the route are needed to grow ridership and make funding the LDs worth the money, think of what could have been had that se ice been even doubled, with twins on complimentary schedules, and the switching at ALB/ Rensselaer eliminated. A CHI-BOS through train. with a NY connection and the NY-CHI a through train with a BOS connection. Service across MA via Pittsfield, Springfield, and Worcester would have been doubled thus giving more steam to the supporters of the state’s recent studies for the implementation of a multiple-frequency East-West”,that will never go anywhere beyond the “study” stage.
Amtrak’s new Airo trains are being introduced next year. What are the chances though they will be on time?! The brand new Acela’s four years behind schedule are still not in service. But suppose the new trains get introduced on time maybe Amtrak could convert a small handful of the Amfleet I coaches to the long distance standard Amfleet IIs for more coach capacity on East coast trains. They have plans to bring back all idled Viewliner I sleepers out which can allow for sleeper capacity expansion. Every East coast train is running with one less coach than pre-pandemic summers.
It’s in the Constitution right next section on interstates & aviation!
Where is operating passenger trains mentioned in the U.S. Constitution as a responsibility of the Federal Government?
It’s in the section with highways, airports, and waterways. Following farm price supports if I recall.
Mr. Findlay, in other words, a lot more stuff for DOGE to cut!
This proposal of shifting money from the NEC to long-distance trains is a reward to red states wherein trains are often vital cogs for those living in rural areas. The NEC serves all those “over educated Ivy types” not real Americans. Oh wait, but DJT and JDBowman (his real name) have Ivy League degrees.
Well if you remember, Amtrak was mandated to pursue and enhance rail travel throughout the US, ESPECIALLY in areas where it may be the only form of public transportation. With that being said, the people riding the NEC have many forms of public (or private) transportation where those in the hinterlands may have very few. And you probably ignore that these mandates were proposed by the real 70’s middle class democrats of congress, not the elite liberals that masquerade as democrats now and are all really socialists.(oh yes with Ivy league degrees from “Havaard”. Princeton and Yale… lol!)
I must admit I’m actually shocked “ and amazed” that the national network funding would be increased in this bill. Especially coming out of a GOP held House. Keeping my faith fingers crossed this part at least makes at through the Senate.
Actually, the probable reason for this is the GOP currently controls the House. All of the states in the NE corridor are controlled by the DEM on both the state and Federal levels, except PA which is split. [PA has a GOP controlled state senate, plus it has the only GOP US senator in the NEC and is the only NEC state whose GOP US House members are the majority for the state.]