Questions Loom as House Committee Passes Transportation Budget

By Sean Jeans-Gail | VP of Gov’t Affairs + Policy

--

The House Committee on Appropriations passed its Fiscal Year 2026 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD) bill today, providing a total of $89.9 billion—or $4.46 billion (4.7%) below the Fiscal Year 2025 enacted level. The Republican-led committee voted to advance the bill along a party-line vote of 35 to 28.

As we reported earlier this week, the bill provides solid funding levels for select rail programs—including $2.31 billion for Amtrak and $538.4 million for the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program. However, the bill pays for next year's operations via the raiding of funds provided by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) for expansion and upgrades to the intercity passenger rail network.

“Investments maintain vital missions while advancing fiscal discipline through the elimination of wasteful and duplicative initiatives,” said Chairman Tom Cole (R-OK)—referencing, in part, cuts to the Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail (FSP) Grant Program, which provides funding for capital projects that address state of good repair, improve performance, and expand or establish new intercity passenger rail service.

Specifically, the House THUD bill:

• Transfers $2.3 billion in advanced appropriations from FY26 FSP advanced appropriations to pay for Amtrak operations;
• Draws $500 million in FY26 FSP advanced appropriations to fund CRISI grants, which are used for freight and passenger rail upgrades; and
• Rescinds $75 million in unobligated FY25 FSP funding.

These cuts to future investments in passenger rail infrastructure, along with cuts to transit investment, drew rebukes from the Democratic minority.

“[This] bill strips away critical investments in housing and community development while cutting Amtrak and other critical transportation resources, putting more commuters on the road, and adding more delays getting to work,” said Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-CT).

While the bill takes a better approach to Amtrak operations than the House GOP has outlined in years past, it is still disappointing to see desperately-needed investment in increased capacity, increased frequencies, new equipment, and new routes raided to keep the trains running over the coming fiscal year.

“Rail Passengers Association appreciates the Committee’s recognition that Amtrak and CRISI are important transportation programs that deserve to be funded,” said Jim Mathews, President & CEO. “However, we cannot condone an approach which robs future generations of passengers of a sustainable and reliable rail network to keep today’s trains running. We find it noteworthy that the reduction in advanced appropriations for passenger rail is roughly equivalent to the increase in spending for the Federal Aviation Administration in this year’s THUD bill, given that our nation’s air traffic control system is a cautionary tale about the consequences of deferred capital investment.”

Three Outstanding Questions Following Today’s House Action

How Much FSP Funding Remains in Play?

In its defense for not including any additional funding for FSP in FY26, the House THUD report language states that the “Committee notes the IIJA provides $7,200,000,000 in advance appropriations for the program in fiscal year 2026.”

But of course, elsewhere in the bill, the committee redirects $2.8 billion of these FY26 FSP advanced appropriations for other uses.

Complicating things further, President Donald Trump’s U.S. Department of Transportation has frozen roughly 1,300 approved grants as part of its effort to eradicate “DEI elements" included in the IIJA; these 1,300 grants include billions worth of investments in passenger rail corridors. It’s not clear how much of this funding will be eventually released, which of these grant agreements will be altered, and which will be canceled. Just this week, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) issued a letter formally terminating a $4 billion FSP grant with California’s High Speed Rail Authority, part of an ongoing feud between President Trump and California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom. This decision may be subject to legal action, but assuming it holds up: will the FRA seek to redistribute these funds to other projects, shift them to other modes, or rescind them entirely?

Complicating things further, in previous rounds of FSP grantmaking—under the Biden Administration—the FRA had included Phased Funding Agreements (PFA) as part of its grant selections, including both initial obligations and contingent commitments from advance appropriations in future rounds of funding. Thus, theoretically, some of the FY26 FSP funds are already committed—but there’s no guarantee that the Trump Administration will honor these agreements.

All of which adds up to a giant question mark about how much funding the next Notice of Funding Opportunity for the FSP program will include (tentatively scheduled for Dec. 2025).

Which States Will Lose Out?

Additionally, the fact that the advanced appropriations being taken from a discretionary grant program—where eligble entities submit grant applications to the USDOT, and the Secretary of Transportation has the ultimate say in which projects are selected—makes it difficult to determine which states will be shortchanged. The FRA grant application process has always been frustratingly opaque, and who’s to say which corridors or projects would've benefited from the $2.8 billion the House is attempting to loot from FY26 FSP advanced appropriations.

There are broad guidelines for how FSP money can be allocated. In the IIJA, Congress established parameters for the division of FSP funds between the Northeast Corridor (NEC) and the National Network (NN), stating that the USDOT shall reserve not less than 45 percent of FSP grants for projects not located along the NEC (of which not less than 20 percent shall be for projects that benefit a long-distance route), and not less than 45 percent for projects listed on the NEC project inventory.

The NEC project inventory, at least, outlines a pipeline of projects that are partially funded but still require additional grants. These include the Frederick Douglas Tunnel Program, Susquehanna River Bridge Replacement Program, Saugatuck River Bridge Replacement, and dozens of other critical projects.

Unfortunately, the Biden Administration’s FRA ignored IIJA requirements to provide Congress with a pipeline of NN projects as part of the Corridor Identification Program, which means that—outside the NEC—the American public is largely in the dark about which corridors and projects are positioned to secure funding in future rounds of FSP grantmaking.

One can certainly make educated guesses about which projects are well-positioned. Likely projects include the Heartland Flyer Extension, which would connect Fort Worth, Oklahoma City, Wichita, and Newton; the Charlotte Passenger Rail Facility, to serve future repairs and maintenance for passenger trains and support the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor​; and the Big Sky North Coast Corridor.

Regardless, it’s certain that disappearing $2.8 billion in FY26 FSP grants will end up pulling the rug out from local governments that have invested time, money, and political capital in securing local funding and support for more and better passenger trains in their community.

How Will the Senate Respond?

While the House THUD bill still needs to be passed by the full House, it’s likely that the next round of action will take place in the Senate Committee on Appropriations. And, unlike in the House, the Senate GOP will need to secure at least some Democratic votes to pass out of the full Senate.

That means there’s still time to work for a funding bill that funds current operations and supports investments in a better rail network for the next generation of American passengers.

Rail Passengers needs you to ask your Senators to support investment in a world class passenger rail network.