California Just Got $624M in Federal Funds for High-Speed Rail That Ohio and Wisconsin Turned Down

[impik]

Because the news received very little attention in the press, I find it an obligation to report that Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood just re-directed some of the funds for high-speed rail that were included in the stimulus bill passed more than a year ago by Congress. You may recall that the Governors of Ohio and Wisconsin indignantly denied the need for any such projects, and argued that the money should build more or larger highways instead.

So last week (December 10, to be exact), Secretary Ray LaHood announced that the money set aside for Ohio and Wisconsin would go to California instead, to be used for the much-anticipated high-speed rail line connecting San Diego-Los Angeles-San Francisco. "So many other states are enthusiastic about the additional support they are receiving," he said, "to help bring America's high-speed rail network to life."

The high-speed rail line that had been envisioned for Ohio would have connected with other such lines, beginning in Cincinnati. It would then have gone to Columbus and from there to Dayton and Cleveland. As another Ohioan pointed out, "There were further plans to expand from Dayton to Toledo after that, and potentially Chicago and Detroit after that." But 'twas not to be.


Read more: http://www.frommers.com/blog/?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3A3ec3ac40-db8a-4d10-a884-acf9ccad0879Post%3A4dfc58be-79e8-49ca-8fee-9a041416cf7e#ixzz1DJSuwvLW

[WhiteTara]

1. Small minds with short sighted vision.

It used to be that cream rose to the top...now it's just the flotsam from the bottom of the pond.

[goddess40]

2. I'm from Wisconsin

And if our money had to go to any state I am glad California got it. I really, really dislike our poor excuse for a governor. So far his only idea about cutting the budget is to take money and benefits from public employees.

[demosincebirth]

4. Must be a repub.

[demosincebirth]

3. High speed rail is a losing proposition in Ca. Its cheaper to give Amtrak

its own right-of-way instead of having to share with UP. That should cut the time in half between SF and LA.

[AndyTiedye]

5. Why Shouldn't We Have High Speed Rail Here? We Want It and We'll Use It

What makes it a "losing proposition"?

Why go to the expense of a dedicated right-of-way and run slow trains on it?
Land is still expensive here, so you wouldn't save much, if anything.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

7. High speed rail is the thing now

why should be in dinosaur mode?

[jeff47]

15. What do you think high-speed rail is?

High-speed rail requires it's own right-of-way.

[LooseWilly]

20. Are you proposing to make freight trains stop, then re-start, for the sake of passenger trains?

Does that not seem... ineffecient to you? I mean, just physics-wise?

A better solution than just giving Amtrak right-of-way would be to build them their own tracks... but, as long as one's going to that expense, why not do it right and build a set of tracks that can accommodate high speed rail?, and reduce the number of flights between the Bay Area and LA every day (I know it's nearly one flight an hour on SW just from Oakland to LA, 9-5, M-F ...)?

Cheaper?... Hell, it's cheaper to make commuters just walk. Or, we could talk about efficiencies...

[CreekDog]

27. I think the poster is suggesting Amtrak get its own right of way, free from freight traffic

:hi:

[Botany]

6. Thanx John Kasich

[kestrel91316]

8. Heh heh. My sister and BIL in WI aren't happy. But I am.

[Bluenorthwest]

9. Good for CA, my home State, which needs that line and asked

to get any money rejected by foolish Republicans in other states. High speed rail SD to SF will improve CA and the nation the day it opens.

[StarsInHerHair]

16. I hope that extends allthe way to Sacramento too-I love those Pullman

train cars from 40s films; the amount of other jobs that'll spring up around new rail-lines may get us out of this Depression.

[Control-Z]

10. I love my California

and am pleased that the funds will go to our system, but I'm sorry for the residents of Ohio and Wisconsin who could have benefited from High-Speed Rails. Perhaps we can be an example for future plans? I know I will travel more once it's in place.

Does anyone know where the plans to Vegas ever landed? It would be so great to be able to take a quick trip there every now and then.

[Ikonoklast]

11. Kasich is already a disaster.

His Wall Street friends are slobbering over how much tax money they're going to steal from this state.

[golfguru]

12. California has $20 Billion projected deficits for each of next 5 years

CA can use all the help it can get. Unemployment is currently 12.5%.
There are 118 "advisory commissions" with 6 figure salary positions for
un-reelected or termed-out politicians. There also are 91 overlapping
state agencies, and by some estimates 12,000 excessive government positions.

So keep the money coming. California needs it!

[flamingdem]

13. Ca can use some good news like this! nt

[LooseWilly]

19. Try $25.4 Billion in deficits, projected to be cut in half this year

And as for the claim of "12,000 excessive government positions," even if it were true I don't think it'd last while Jerry Brown forces state workers to give up their employment-related cell phones, employee vehicles... and is shelving the idea of buying new state vehicles wherever possible... not to mention billions in cuts from education and social services.

Nice use of the exclamation mark though... :+

[golfguru]

33. Jerry Brown does have one big thing going for him

He is too old to worry about his future career! I have a feeling he
will be able to bring CA budgets under control better than any one else.

However I will not hold my breath, since he has to overcome years and years
of mentality in the legislature.

[slackmaster]

25. This kind of "help" usually turns out badly in the long run. It's a pig in a poke.

Rail projects in this state are notoriously over-budget, late to implement, and suffer from low ridership. Service levels get cut, and systems fail to become self-sustaining.

It will create some jobs in the short run, but that's about all the good that will come of it IMO.

[CreekDog]

29. name 1 rail system in the entire country that's self sustaining

meaning no taxpayer or government support.

:hi:

[slackmaster]

30. They're especially bad in California, and the last thing we need is a drain on the budget.

Even the highway system has taxpayer support, but it's not a net money loser because of the commerce it facilitates.

[CreekDog]

32. i asked you a question

:shrug:

[slackmaster]

38. I don't know of an example, but I'm not sure there aren't any

The subject here is putting a high-speed rail system in California.

[CreekDog]

40. no the subject is that you specifically called California rail projects unsustaining

implying that they are sustaining elsewhere.

[slackmaster]

42. My concern is the long-term financial viability of the project. Here's a glaring example...

http://www.10news.com/news/15000695/detail.html

...The Sprinter was first approved by the North County Transit District in 1990 with the expectation that it would cost $60 million and be completed by 1999. But the project's price tag has ballooned to $477 million.

Material cost increases and delays, including a failed lawsuit by the city of Vista over traffic and noise impacts, contributed to the project's problems, the Times reported last month....

The Sprinter project racked up a whole lot of debt that's going to be absorbed over a very long time. Its operators are said to "hope" that daily ridership will exceed 18,000 by 2030. That's not the deal that the district sold to the public in 1990.

[golfguru]

35. When gasoline goes up to European levels ($7 to $8/gal)

then all railroads will start making profit.

[slackmaster]

43. Unfortunately it may take just that

I'm not looking forward to it, but we all should plan for it.

[jeff47]

44. You're a bit out-of-date

Several of LA's commuter rail lines are now self-sustaining.

Considering no CA highways are self-sustaining, it's rather disingenuous to demand rail achieve something that highways are never asked to do.

[CreekDog]

28. where does most of California's budget go?

do you actually know what percentage of it goes to what you're referring to?

[golfguru]

31. No, I have not calculated percentages

The important point here is that in spite of record breaking deficits,
California continues to waste money. When you are broke, even a 1 dollar
splurge on superfluous things is irrational and stupid.

[CreekDog]

34. how is using outside money a problem?

especially since it offsets in state money?

and the voters already approved moving forward with high speed rail.

nevermind that yours is extremely simplistic thinking.

[golfguru]

37. Not talking about outside funded projects

read my post above stating stupid items CA spends money on.

[CreekDog]

39. but you don't have any idea what portion of the budget these things are

i don't think i want to rely on you for budget advice.

[hedgehog]

14. We could always go from Buffalo to Detroit via Ontario......

[DrToast]

17. It's a shame these take so long to build

I want to see this trains today!

[krawhitham]

18. I hate kaShit

[JI7]

21. how long would it take to get from LA to SD , and LA to SF ?

i think this would be a huge help to our economy. and hopefully less car use.

it's too bad we don't have it throughout our entire country. hopefully in the near future we will.

[LooseWilly]

22. I think they're talking about times that rival flying from SF to LA...

and that's not even counting all the security lines and taking off your shoes and belts crap...

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/

Estimate is 2:40 from SF to LA (vs. about an hour on the plane, and 20-50 minutes in security hassles) and 80 minutes LA to SD.

A bit slower... but not much.

[martymar64]

46. It would beat an 8-9 hour drive

People that drive would enjoy having an alternative as well.

[CabalPowered]

26. 3-4 hours for SD to SF

Depends on LA.. if they get dedicated passenger rails, the time will be much shorter than mixed rails. I last read that they had pretty much nixed the dedicated line idea so I think.. SD to SF is around 4 in a mixed scenario.

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/trip_planner.aspx

[Yavin4]

23. This May Help CA's Sagging Property Values As Well

Heck, if you can live in San Diego and commute to LA every day for work, then that alone may prop up sagging housing values.

[slackmaster]

24. Housing affordability index is chronically low in San Diego. We don't need higher property values.

We need more private-sector jobs.

[martymar64]

47. Hi speed rail might make a SD-LA commute feasible

A 30 min -1 hr hi speed ride would be shorter than driving by a long shot.

[ej510]

36. Thank You right wing idiots we need the transportation funds.

[robinlynne]

41. yep. made in china. every piece of it.

[fishwax]

45. what a dumb move turning that money down

:grr:

[marybee]

48. support the golden rails

its a start

[zulchzulu]

49. Scott Walker turned down $810 million for a train line because he is a coward

Find out more:

www.scottwalkerwatch.com

[Dark]

50. What does "high speed" mean? 70 mph? 100? 200?

That's going to be the big one - If it only takes 4 hours between SF and SD, with stops, that's great.

But if it takes 15 hours, f#@! that.

[RBInMaine]

51. Good! And all the more reason to get rid of the pukes in the midwest.