WASHINGTON -- House Democrats gave a cool reception Thursday to a proposal to break up Amtrak, voicing concerns about routes in their states and the impact of free-market competition in passenger train service, according to a wire service.

"Let's not 'Balkanize' Amtrak," Rep. James Oberstar (news), D-Minn., said at a hearing of the House Transportation subcommittee on railroads.

Oberstar and other lawmakers questioned a 1997 law that has put Amtrak on the brink of major change. The law required Amtrak to operate without government subsidies by December 2003 — something the council has said won't happen.

Amtrak lost $1.1 billion last year, the most in its history.

"We expect Amtrak to operate where the country needs it, yet any profit-oriented business would refuse to serve money-losing routes," said Rep. Jack Quinn (news), R-N.Y., chairman of the railroads subcommittee. He said the federal government has not spent enough on developing a national train network.

The hearing was held to discuss a report from the Amtrak Reform Council, a government oversight panel that recommended that Amtrak be broken into three pieces: one to make policy, one to oversee the tracks and stations Amtrak owns in the Boston-Washington Northeast Corridor, and the third to conduct train operations.

The reform council said that after a transition of two to five years, private companies should be allowed to submit bids for franchises to run various routes.

Passenger rail currently is the exclusive domain of Amtrak, which Congress created in 1971 because freight railways were losing money carrying passengers.

Rep. Rob Simmons, R-Conn., said he believes rail service has a strong future in America, but "I don't believe in (Amtrak's) current organization, and I don't believe in the current management."

Many Democrats on the panel said they support maintaining an Amtrak-controlled system and devoting more federal dollars to rail.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (news), D-N.Y., said the Federal Highway Administration received $32 billion this year, compared to $521 million for Amtrak. "I don't hear anyone arguing the highway system is bankrupting the country," he said.

Rep. Nick Rahall (news), D-W.Va., said trains like the "Cardinal," which serves his state, provide an important public service to people who have few other transportation options.

Gilbert Carmichael, the reform council's chairman, told the subcommittee that Congress should resist spending new money on rail until Amtrak is restructured.

"Amtrak does not have any effective oversight of its business plans, its funding requests or its financial and operational performance," he said. "Nor are its many business operations flexible, innovative or responsive to customer needs."

Some Republicans on the subcommittee signaled they are open to major change.

"Your report proves again that we have a disaster on our hands," said Rep. John Mica (news), R-Fla., an Amtrak critic who has proposed spinning off two profitable routes.

The hearing was the first of three the subcommittee plans to hold on Amtrak's future. Congress is expected to vote this year on whether to authorize Amtrak's continued existence.

Amtrak President George Warrington added a sense of urgency to the debate by announcing Feb. 1 that 18 long-distance routes will be eliminated unless Amtrak receives $1.2 billion in the 2003 budget year, which begins in October. President Bush (news - web sites) has proposed $521 million.