Looks as if this project is in danger of being cancelled:
http://www.kcbs.com/High-Speed-Rail-May-be-Casualty-of-Budget-Stalemat/2765272
I wonder if this is an example of corruption starting with the highway lobby? I know they weren’t mentioned, but I think it is an amazing coincidence that every High Speed Rail Project in the country almost gets built but something happens to stop it. Anybody else notice that?
George
Please define “almost gets built”.
It seems like that as soon as these projects get ready to move forward, something happens to stop them. Case in point, the Forida High Speed Rail project was stopped by Governor Jeb Bush just as it was being laid out to be built. I don’t have any proof of course, but I followed that one fairly closely. It seemed to me that he was a corrupt puppet on a string to the road builders lobby. I have often wished that Trains or Railway Age or someone would have done an in depth article on everything that went on with that.
George
Maybe the people at Trains and Railway Age don’t buy that version of events.
I personally don’t know how things are in Florida, but it doesn’t take any conspiracy theories to explain that high-speed rail was and is DOA in California, at least for the foreseeable future.
California’s state budget, currently the target of big-time political wrangling, is spectacularly out of balance, and there just isn’t a spare $10 billion (or whatever it’'ll take) lying around waiting to be spent. More bonded debt? Please, no.
You don’t have to love the highway lobby to realize that a lot of things have happened (like the death of interurbans and most intercity varnish) with or without its influence.
Me thinks thou hath spoken to soon. The Govenator just signed the amendments to the California HSR bill and it will be on Novembers ballot with the amendments. The latest polls for the 9 billion bond issue show it will pass by at least a 15-20 percent margin. It is about twenty years late. A 200 mph system will certainly make the NE corridor pale in comparison and the estimated 170,000 jobs during construction in order to complete in five years will solve much of the states current unemployment woes.
Al - in - Stockton
I guess I did speak too soon, and apparently underestimated the voters’ willlingness to sink the California state government (which really needs to be another $9 billion in debt, ha!) even deeper into the hole.
Dare we guess that if that amount is budgeted now, then it won’t be nearly enough to finish the job? Whatever amount is requested now, picture another 50%+, easy.
If built, the HSR may turn out to be a fabulous system, and serve the state very well, but it isn’t justifed on the basis of “creating jobs.” A temporary boost in construction work won’t do anything to solve the basic problem of California’s hostile business climate, which is at the heart of the state’s real “unemployment woes,” and there’s no sign whatever that this issue will change anytime soon.
Being a tax professional I could not agree with you more when you stated we had a hostile business climate in our state. It has been that way for years, the last real bright spot was the Pete Wilson years. I recently took a trip around our state and the only area I see with real growth going on is San Diego. The business climate there seems bright and holds the promise of an even brighter future. The San Diego Trolley system, commuter rail, and Amtrak are all going to contribute to this bright future. They all seem to work very well together and the system makes sense when compared to other cities transportation problems in California. The one thing that bothers me about the HSR proposition is that San Diego is not included in the initial system. If I were a younger man I would seriously consider a move to San Diego. And yes I even like their politics.
Al - in - Stockton
California’s HSR proposal’s initial $10 billion will not complete the line but it will get it started and trains operating between San Francisco and LA. The HSR valley connecting service between Sacramento and Merced will be an additional cost although the land aquisition should be covered by the initial $10 Billion. The total cost will be in the neighborhood of $20 billion to $25 billion and this will include improvements to the existing San Joaquin, ACE, and Capitol routes. The Coast line from LA to San Diego will be augmented with HSR service and track improvements to the Coast Line north of LA to San Jose. The latter track improvements should reduce the Coast Starlight times by two hours. North of Sacramento track improvements to Redding should reduce Coast Starlight times by an additional hour.
For the HSR itself those lines will be electrified and Nuclear generating plants are being mentioned once again as the source for California’s growing power needs. I for one would not be surprised if BNSF decided to electrify their mainline that that part from LA to Needles might find help from the State of California.
What the heck, by this time next year California will probably be in the red something like 8 billion anyway. What is another Billion or two.
Until this state starts practicing some fiscal responsibility businesses will continue to exit for greener pastures.
Al - in - Stockton
And because of the number of people and the electoral college votes California has the feds will pony up non-resident tax dollars to bale out the state. Quite frankly that inscences me that I should pay tax dollars to a very rich state that is nowhere near where I live that won’t allow oil refineries but wants half the gasoline used in the country so everybody can drive and is hostile to business and wealth generation. Screw California and any politician who proposes such an idea. Build it yourself if you want it.
passengerfan, I suggest that the $35B which your post uses will be substantially low. This project if completed as you are suggesting may cost 2-3 times that amount and will take 15-20 years to complete. Anyone remember the Boston tunnel project; if you do please quote the final cost versus the initial projected cost. And then add the cost to fix the poor construction and the death caused by it.
Another example several years ago was the House Office Building in DC which cost about three times the estimate which was used to "sell’ the plan. Nothing government does is equal to or under the proposed amount published to convince the public.
I understand what you are saying, I have always been skeptical of anything government says and particularly a project like this. I think Boston will pale in comparison in the long run when and if HSR ever comes to be in California.
The latest highway estimates for California are talking about 128 billion to widen all of the highways necessary over the next fifteen years and that scares me more than the envisioned HSR proposal. One estimate puts California’s gas prices at 5.50 by next summer. All of the states commuter rail systems are fast approaching the saturation point and are bulging at the seams. Many of the early dollars of the HSR project are earmarked for track improvements for existing commuter rail lines, this was done to make the whole HSR project easier to swallow for the taxpayers. Whatever is done California definitely needs something before total gridlock sets in. I pay enough taxes already but am willing to pay a little more to see my grandkids have a HSR system.
Al - in - Stockton
don’t forget the cost of widening the airport as well.
On the plus side this may be the least expensive time for the state to purchase the right of way. I don’t see this happening however as no one in the world has credit money available for anything.
Let us hope that the financial crisis does not cause voters to loose focus and turn down this project.
If they derail this project, Califorina going to derail itself under traffic[banghead] If they have enough money to extend the Gold Line pass union station then they should increase it to freaking Claremont!!!
I would say cancelled but not killed. With the economy in a big time down cycle and who knows what else lies ahead, some proposed Amtrk/transit expansion projects may not get off the ground until the markets can get fixed which most likely will take time.
Big article on the opinion page of the Saturday 10/11 Wall Street Journal saying California should curb it spending before asking for federal funding. AMEN!
Flipped through a show on PBS in Chicago yesterday and they were talking about rail in the San Diego area. Probably seven out of ten they interviewed had no idea about the ballot initiative. One had ridden a bus once in their life. Nne of the others knew anything about bus or train schesules or where to get them and didn’t want to ride with people they didn;t know. Most commuted fifty miles or more and are not giving up their cars or travel by car. A college professor “expert” in mass transit said it is always cheaper to build or expand airports than to build high speed rail and cheaper for the consumer as well as quicker to reach the destination. All I can say is good luck on this one.
Since their are more Californians why should not the rest of the States contribute to our HSR. After all we contributed to the NE corridor, and contribute to Amtrak services that do not even operate within our state. And the rest of the states are not stuck with Pelosi and the two Senators we have, that ought to count for something toward our HSR initiative. In fact not having Pelosi alone the rest of the states should contribute at least half of the cost our HSR. And with the two Senators we have from California that ought to look after the other half of the cost. That should mean California should get their HSR for nothing.
Al - in - Stockton