Imagens das páginas

in the country. I believe it is not exaggerating to say that we have an opportunity to avert an economic disaster. But we only avert it if constructive leadership is present. We have had years of talk-rounds of faultfinding, bickering, and recriminations-but mainly lack of concerted, coordinated effort. Your committee is in a position to help provide this coordination and leadership, so at long last concrete solutions can be forthcoming.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. New Haven and its railroad are grateful for your interest and appreciative of your help. Congressman GIAIMO. I would like to comment on several things, however.

No. 1, is the status of the bills pending before your committee.

I have introduced a companion bill in the House of Representatives to Senator Pell's bill, and I have also introduced a companion bill to Senator Dodd's bill.

I support both Senators' bills, but Senator Ribicoff's bill is the choice between the two.

I would, with due deference to you, Mr. Chairman, support the Dodd bill, because I believe it provides an immediate infusion of some money by the Federal Government for the first year, whereas the other approach would only have matching grants immediately, and, also, it has a cutoff in termination date, with increased assistance from the States rather than an open-end subsidy-type bill.

What I would like to comment further on, more than anything, is the importance of what your committee is doing in crystallizing, I think, the great deal of talk which has been going on by many people in the past concerning this course of the railroad.

I certainly agree with your statements, Mr. Chairman, that people must sit down and discuss and negotiate, to work out this crisis problem which faces the New Haven Railroad.

I think your committee is to be commended for giving impetus to this, and I hope we are going to see a great deal more of it in the immediate future.

The truth of the matter is that we have many problems here, not just one item.

The New Haven Railroad crystallizes the problems and brings them into immediate focus.

We have the problem of the long-term mass transportation of the future, which President Johnson has supported, and, as you know, it is presently being studied by the Commerce Department.

But this is not the immediate problem of the New Haven Railroad. The immediate problem of the New Haven Railroad is the immediate financial crisis.

Are we going to have a railroad tomorrow, not 5 or 10 years from now, but tomorrow?

And I agree with what you have stated, that if you are going to have a modern future high-speed railroad in the Northeast corridor, which services 47 million people, how on earth, then, can we have a study of that present and future problem, and at the same time allow a presently existing railroad, the only one in the area, and part of that important link, to allow it to go down the drain and to stop operations. It just doesn't make any sense. So I do think that that is of the utmost importance.

The other reason that I think that this is a Federal issue and not just a State and local one, as I have heard some of my colleagues in

46-135-65- -21

Congress state, is that this is one of the great problems of urban America.

That is what it is, when we look upon it, and this is one of our great problems facing us in the Congress today.

Our position is, How do we move the increasing numbers of people, who must depend on our rail service rather than automobiles or any other means of transportation?

And this, certainly, is a Federal problem, and is not one that can be resolved by the States alone.

In our discussions of subsidies, for example, I think Mr. Martin testified, and made a statement yesterday, that we are trying to get out of the business of subsidies.

I know the attitude of the Bureau of the Budget on subsidies. But the fact is that, in the United States, to keep our economy thriving we do subsidize certain basic industries. We must.

I can enumerate the airlines and shipping, and agriculture, and all those, but I will not.

I will enumerate, however, one new type of subsidy, or near subsidy, and that is the Appalachia bill, for example, that was recently passed and signed into law by our President.

Here is an attempt by the Federal Government, recognizing the need for assistance to build up the economy in a depressed area.

I personally do not agree with this. I personally did not support this legislation, but it indicates that the Federal Government must concern itself with the problems which confront us in the economy, and in the Nation, and it is Congress' function to initiate legislation and not to be guided strictly by the Budget Bureau, or the Department of Commerce, you see.

I feel reasonably certain if this committee recognizes the crisis facing the New Haven Railroad, and can initiate leigslation, that it will help a great deal toward resolving this problem.

And, in addition to all of these other problems, there is one that was touched upon by Mayor Lee, and which I think is of utmost importance to us in Connecticut, and that is the employment of the people involved.

There are 5,000 people here in Greater New Haven, and if they are thrown out of work, it would have a tremendous effect and disruption on our economy.

And when we multiply that by the good many thousands of people in the other cities involved, we can appreciate the impact that that would have.

So that I am of the opinion that we must, at the Federal level, have some type of subsidy. And I suggest it is to be found in all of these bills before us, and the committee.

And I think that would be the only way, in addition to which, we can get some participation on the parts of the States, and, certainly, the State of Connecticut has indicated its readiness and its ability already to participate.

That will be the only way in which we can solve this financial problem involving our New Haven Railroad at the moment, but which, Í submit, is affecting, and is going to affect our mass transportation system.

This is the immediate problem, and then, from there, we can get into the long-range problem of how do we modernize, how do we get the

absolutely modern, up-to-date, new type of mass transit system which is some years away, but not too many.

Senator PASTORE, Thank you very much for a very excellent statement.

Is Mr. Beebe here?

Mr. BEEBE. Yes.

Senator PASTORE. We are glad to have you here, Mr. Beebe.

Mr. BEEBE. Thank you. My name is William A. Beebe. I am the legislative representative for the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen. (The statement of William A. Beebe follows:)



I appear before you today as a representative of the State Labor Council AFLCIO of the State of Connecticut. We would like to be recorded as supporting any or a combination of any bills which, in the judgment of your committee, would provide Federal funds as a last-ditch means of saving the rail service on the New Haven.

The freight services of the New Haven are vitally important to the economy of Connecticut and the continuing passenger deficit may endanger the entire system. The one is inseparable from the other. At present, lack of available cash threatens the very day-by-day existence of the line.

Labor, therefore, is not only concerned with the nearly 10,000 railroad jobs involved, but the tens of thousands of jobs in industries where the less expensive rail service is figured in the cost of the product. This rail service includes the shipment of raw materials into the plant as well as the outgoing finished products. Consequently, rail service is an indispensable requisite to industries in the highly competitive fields such as heavy industry, chemicals, oil, coal, and the like. If their only alternative is to use the more expensive motor carrier service they would either shift the work to plants out of the State or relocate entirely in an area providing a rail line.

All of this is part of the record of the ICC hearing finance docket No. 21989 relative to the Penn-Central merger held in Boston May 20, 1963.

Moreover, the loss of the $72 million railroad payroll, coupled with millions paid to employees of industries adversely affected, would deal a staggering blow to the economy of the several States involved.

Last year the railroad carried nearly 20 million tons of freight. Assuming the average truck carries 20 tons per load, this would mean the use of nearly 1 million more trucks on our highways in addition to those already operating. The result would be chaotic.

If these passengers

Last year the line carried nearly 26 million passengers. were compelled to use private cars and buses the States and the Federal Government would then be required to provide funds for more highway construction and their maintenance.

It seems rather incongrous that the Federal agencies will spend billions of dollars attempting to place a man on the moon, and judging by the testimony given yesterday of the Under Secretary of Commerce, is reluctant to assist in the transporting of its taxpaying citizenry from their homes to their places of employment. An aditorial appearing in a New York newspaper yesterday stated that Uncle Sam is loaning East Pakistan $8.7 million for their railroad. It seems to us if money is available that charity should begin at home.

This is not to say that the States involved do not have a large responsibility, for indeed they do. Admittedly they have except for Connecticut-done little or nothing at all. As of late they have come to life and are manifesting sincere efforts toward formulating a plan.

However, we feel it altogether appropriate at this time that the Federal Government should assume the leadership, and insure that all parties concerned will bring about a truly effective and permanent solution to this problem.

In closing, allow me to reaffirm our position in assuring you the support of our organization toward any bill which, in your judgment, will effect this end. Let me thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee.

Senator PASTORE. Thank you very much, sir, for an excellent



I understand that representatives of the trustees are here.

I ask this question of them, if they are prepared to give me an answer on it. If not, they can put it in the record.

How many people are employed by the New Haven?

Mr. DORIGAN. Just shortly under 10,000.

Senator PASTORE. Nine thousand?

Mr. DORIGAN. 9,750-in that neighborhood.

Senator PASTORE. Have you any breakdown at all, if the railroad was shut down, the passenger service, how many jobs that will affect? Mr. DORIGAN. No, we have not got that.

Senator PASTORE. I hope that is possible to get it. If it is possible, I would like to have that in the record.

Mr. DORIGAN. Very well, sir.

Senator PASTORE. I requested certain information, and I have been told here by Mr. Fogarty, a member of the staff, that that has been furnished.

It is a supplemental exhibit, furnished for the record, at the request of the committee.

If there is no objection, I ask that it be placed in the record of the hearing at this point.



Number of passenger trains operated-Operating timetable No. 19,
normal weekday


Operated between




New York and New Rochelle.
New York and Port Chester.
New York and Stamford...
New York and New Canaan..
New York and Danbury..

New York and South Norwalk.
New York and New Haven..
Stamford and New Canaan.
South Norwalk and Danbury.
Bridgeport and Waterbury
New Haven and Springfield..
New Haven and New London.
New London and Worcester.
New London and Boston..

New London and Providence.

Providence and Boston..

Boston and Stoughton..

Boston and Blackstone.

Boston and Needham Heights.

Boston and Walpole

Boston and Dedham.

West Medway and Needham Junction

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Ticketed passengers between Providence and New York (year ending November

[blocks in formation]

Passengers between Boston and New York (year ending November 1964)

[blocks in formation]

Statement of interstate passenger fare changes of the classes shown,

[blocks in formation]

1st class increased from 4 to 4.5 cents per mile in sleeping
cars; 1st class in parlor cars remained at 4 cents per mile;
coach class increased from 3 to 3.375 cents per mile..
10 ride established between Boston and Pawtucket and
Central Falls also Providence on basis of $0.0264 per mile.
10 ride extended to apply for distances not to exceed 40 miles
also between New York and specified stations more than
40 miles distant.

1st class in sleeping cars and parlor cars increased 5 percent
with minimum of 20 cents; sleeping cars from 4.5 to 4.725
cents and parlor cars from 4 to 4.2 cents per mile; coach
class increased 5 percent with minimum of 5 cents, from
3.375 to 3.544 cents per mile..

10 ride increased 5 percent with minimum increase of 50 cents..

46 ride for minimum distance of 4 miles increased 25 percent;
for each mile of progression, arbitraries were added to the
fare for previous mileage distance; 60 ride made 5 percent
higher than 46 ride (established as above) for correspond-
ing distances..

1st class increased 5 percent from 4.725 to 4.961 cents per
mile; 1st class in parlor cars discontinued resulting in an
increase from 4.2 to 4.961 cents per mile; coach class in-
creased 5 percent from 3.544 to 3.721 cents per mile.
10 ride increased 5 percent.

1st class increased 5 percent from 4.961 to 5.209 cents per
mile; coach class increased 5 percent from 3.721 to 3.907
cents per mile.

60-ride and 46-ride commutation increased 10 percent.

10 ride increased 5 percent.

[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinuar »