Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Amends 49 U.S.C. 24315(a) to require Amtrak to submit to Congress and post publicly on its website the annual base pay and any bonus compensation for members of Amtrak’s executive leadership team (including CEO, president, and officers), and to disclose the criteria and metrics used to determine such bonus compensation.
Liberals emphasize use of transparency to restrain excessive pay.
Relative to its intended legislative type (a reporting/transparency amendment), this bill is concise and functional: it amends the relevant statutory reporting provision to require annual disclosure of base pay, bonus compensation, and bonus-determination criteria for Amtrak executives, and it mandates public posting and submission to Congress.
Amends 49 U.S.C. 24315(a) to require Amtrak to submit to Congress and post publicly on its website the annual base pay and any bonus compensation for members of Amtrak’s executive leadership team (including CEO, president, and officers), and to disclose the criteria and metrics used to determine such bonus compensation.
Narrow, low-cost transparency requirement improves prospects; still needs Senate committee approval and final passage, with limited stakeholder friction possible.
Relative to its intended legislative type (a reporting/transparency amendment), this bill is concise and functional: it amends the relevant statutory reporting provision to require annual disclosure of base pay, bonus compensation, and bonus-determination criteria for Amtrak executives, and it mandates public posting and submission to Congress. It is specific about the core deliverable but leaves several operational and legal details unspecified.
Liberals emphasize use of transparency to restrain excessive pay.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize use of transparency to restrain excessive pay.
Likely supportive because the bill increases transparency and public accountability for a federally funded corporation’s executive pay.
May view it as a modest step toward curbing excessive bonuses, though some progressives could want broader disclosures or pay limits.
Generally favorable as a modest, non-punitive transparency measure that strengthens oversight without imposing pay controls.
Would want clear definitions, cost estimates, and safeguards against revealing sensitive negotiation information.
Mildly supportive in principle because taxpayers have a right to know how public money is used, but wary that additional reporting may politicize compensation and harm Amtrak’s ability to recruit executives comparable to the private sector.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, low-cost transparency requirement improves prospects; still needs Senate committee approval and final passage, with limited stakeholder friction possible.
The House fast-tracked this bill — skipping normal debate — and it passed with a two-thirds majority. It now moves to the Senate.
Suspending the rules allows the House to bypass normal debate procedures and pass a bill immediately with a two-thirds vote.
Liberals emphasize use of transparency to restrain excessive pay.
Narrow, low-cost transparency requirement improves prospects; still needs Senate committee approval and final passage, with limited stakeho…
Relative to its intended legislative type (a reporting/transparency amendment), this bill is concise and functional: it amends the relevant statutory reporting provision to require annual disclosure of base pay, bonus c…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.