-
The Man With the Plan: April 2010
August 11, 2012 | 0 comments
-
A Wonk in Sheep’s Clothing
March 25, 2011 | 293 comments
-
Scapegoating Mitch Daniels
March 17, 2011 | 150 comments
-
The Race for Comparative Advantage
February 14, 2011 | 87 comments
-
Obama Builds Bridge to Clinton
January 26, 2011 | 76 comments
Feature
Money Train
In California, Obama’s grand vision of America’s high-speed rail future is meeting reality.
“Within 25 years, our goal is to give 80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail,” President Obama declared in his State of the Union address, making it the most ambitious element of his vision for “winning the future.”
Invoking national pride, Obama mused that “America is the nation that built the transcontinental railroad, brought electricity to rural communities, constructed the interstate highway system.” Sadly, he lamented, the U.S. now lags behind Europe, Russia, and China in modern transportation infrastructure.
If the nation met his goal for high-speed rail adoption, he said, “This could allow you to go places in half the time it takes to travel by car. For some trips, it will be faster than flying — without the pat-down. As we speak, routes in California and the Midwest are already under way.”
To most Americans, the passing reference to California was likely an afterthought, lost amid all the dreamy rhetoric of rebuilding the nation. But upon closer inspection, the state’s proposed high-speed rail system serves as a perfect example of the gap between the promise of transformational liberalism and the reality of big government. Taxpayers everywhere should pay attention, because the project has already been granted $3.2 billion in federal funds, mostly through Obama’s economic stimulus package — and its backers hope to gobble up billions more over the next decade.
The $43 billion transportation project to link Los Angeles to San Francisco with a bullet train by 2020 would be considered grandiose during the plushest of times, yet it’s being pursued during an era when governments at all levels are mired in deep fiscal crises. The plan has been subject to a series of scathing reports by independent analysts, raising concerns about everything from its cost estimates to its business model. The University of California at Berkeley has questioned its lofty ridership projections. And even the Washington Post has editorialized against it.
Although voters in the financially strapped Golden State approved a ballot measure in 2008 authorizing up to $9.9 billion in bonds to build the rail system, the project has encountered a lot of opposition as it has progressed. Several cities are suing to prevent the trains from tearing through their downtowns. Farmers are worried that the tracks will carve up their land. Some environmental groups normally predisposed to supporting high-speed rail have turned against the proposed route, fearing its effects on undeveloped areas. When the High-Speed Rail Authority announced that the initial section of the line would be built in the state’s less inhabited Central Valley region, many were puzzled as to why they didn’t begin by connecting large cities with more potential riders. As a result, critics dubbed it the “train to nowhere.”
“The cost projections are overly optimistic,” Wendell Cox, a public policy consultant and co-author of a critical report for the libertarian Reason Foundation, says. “The ridership projections are absolutely crazy. The thing will have no impact on highway traffic and will have little or no impact on the amount of planes in the air. This project really defines the term ‘boondoggle.’”
The project will rise or fall based on federal commitments, a reality that spurred California state senator Doug LaMalfa to visit Washington in early January to make a rather unusual request for a state legislator.
“I know they’re not used to this, but I asked them to stop sending us money,” LaMalfa, a Republican, said. “Please stop sending us money….When they send us money, it actually costs us money.”
So, at a time of unprecedented debt, why are the state government and the Obama administration still committed to the high-speed rail project? Why are planners starting the construction in a tiny, almost-unknown town outside of Fresno rather than in a major population center? And is there any chance of putting the brakes on the project?
BRINGING HIGH-SPEED RAIL to America has been a decades-long dream for liberals, who have long envied Europe’s extensive rail system. Building a high-speed rail network, they hope, would move the nation away from automobiles and reduce pollution. It has the added bonus of being a massive, centrally planned public works project. The problem is just because rail has worked elsewhere, that doesn’t mean it makes sense here.
“We’re not like Spain or France, where the population densities are a lot higher, and the cities are not as spread out,” Ken Orski, a former transportation official in the Nixon and Ford administrations and publisher of the newsletter Innovation Briefs, says. “So you can connect cities like Barcelona and Madrid or Paris and Marseilles easily.”
In addition, large European cities have “distribution systems,” meaning that when passengers arrive at a station, they can get where they need to go by public transportation or walking, without a car. By contrast, in a city like say, Fresno, a person would be stranded without one.
“So people who are saying ‘Look at Europe, why can’t we be like Europe?’ I don’t think they really realize the difference between our geographic and demographic conditions and theirs,” Orski says.
The only place where high-speed rail could theoretically make sense would be the Northeast corridor from Washington to Boston, which would pass through Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York. The problem is, Orski explains, it’s likely “50 years too late,” because the area along that route is already densely populated and developed, making it cost prohibitive to acquire right of way.
About the Author
Philip Klein is The American Spectator’s Washington correspondent. You can follow him on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/Philipaklein
Letter to the Editor View all comments (112) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Philip Klein
More Articles From Feature
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/01/money-train
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Mimi| 3.1.11 @ 7:07AM
This city to city train-stuff is about 130 years too late! Think back to what this country did in the early years of the 20th century...ie CARS, PLANES, ELECTRICITY and heat and water in homes..On and On. The tracks built then...may have worked. NOW we need imagination and something NEW..off the (expensive) land and into the AIR! Boeing should invent some AIR-BUS models.
Our financial problems must be solved first, before any new 21st century grand schemes.
Their calling "O" a dollar short and a day late! I'd say he lacks the smarts to set his priorities. He should be maling PAUL RYAN his best PAL....but his HUBRIS won't let him!!!!!
Redstateboy| 3.1.11 @ 4:14PM
After reading this.. Why am I Not surprised?? I now Hussein the Insane is purposely out to destroy this country and California? They on a collective suicide mission
FTM| 3.1.11 @ 11:54PM
Actually the high speed rail thing will work if your national transportation infrastructure gets bombed flat in a world war. Once again folks, the truth of the matter is that the US destroyed the European and Japanese internal transportation networks. Have any of these folks read a book? Then to add to all that we, the US spent bazillions over a twenty to thirty year period to rebuild what was destroyed.
The solution to the problem is obvious, give California to Mexico.
MikeD| 3.1.11 @ 7:14AM
I love trains of any kind, especially the really fast bullet trains I've ridden in Japan and Europe. They actually work, quite well; running on time. but the dirty little secret is that they lose a ton of money. They require massive subsidies to exist.
But the most insidious aspect of the whole this is that high speed rail is just the latest effort by barry the muslim and his fellow left wing thugs to add another layer of centralized control in America. Oh, by the way, we can't afford it. Actually, we don't need it after spending 50 years building the most extensive network of high speed ROADS, actually, SUPERHIGHWAYS, across our Country. We're out of money! I wonder what part of that barry and his dems do not get?
This whole situation must be viewed in context. Everything barry and his thugs are doing is part of a well orchestrated plan to re-make America in his, and their, demented vision. We need to stop him at every turn. It's not politics, it's war. Don't forget that for one minute.
MoeBlotz| 3.1.11 @ 10:06AM
Little Barry Sotero did not have a Christmas tree with a train running round it whilst he was growing up as a Muslim on the Pacific Rim. Now B.Hussein Obama has transformed himself into an American Christian and he wants to build himself the biggest,best train set the world has ever seen.... with your money. He ought to just go visit Northlandz.
MikeD| 3.1.11 @ 11:04AM
Great post!
RN in Houston| 3.1.11 @ 2:56PM
Mike, you nailed it. Commuter rail requires massive subsidies. I wish that the broad public was economically literate enough to understand this rather than succumbing to bells, whistles, and flashy trains as does the POTUS.
Appleby| 3.1.11 @ 7:29AM
We have a network of commuter trains in the Greater Toronto Area which funnel lots of people into our downtown area where they can board the subway to their offices. Yesterday a car was punted off the freeway onto the train tracks and the entire system ground to a halt. Meanwhile downtown at the same time, an idiot jumped onto the subway tracks and that too ground to a halt.
The bottom line against relying on trains is that they are just too easy to screw up.
Old Soldier| 3.1.11 @ 7:54AM
Here is why we should not have a President with zero business experience. Any business manager would demand an anlysis of the project with the expected Return on Investment.
Does Barry not know that the investment will never be recovered, or does he not care? Sheer stupidity either way.
Look at a map. Americans aren't going to start riding trains, it just isn't going to happen no matter how hard Democrats wish for it.
Aquanomics| 3.1.11 @ 10:53AM
Romney has business experience and look what happened with RomneyCare.
What we need is a federal government that is forced to stay out of the way of the 98% of things they are now interfere.
The government that governs least.....
Old Soldier | 3.1.11 @ 1:21PM
I don't care for Romney in the least, but, he was Govenor of MA... It was going to happen either way.
George F.| 3.17.11 @ 1:47PM
Why is the left so brain dead when it comes to practicality?
I read an article yesterday from a far left writer who thinks that we're in greater danger from nuclear power plant meltdown that aren't in earthquake zones than we are from those on the west coast that are in earthquake zones.
I'm still scratching my head.
Melvin| 3.1.11 @ 8:00AM
Geographically, the United States isn't built like Europe or Japan. Like Mike D, I to absolutely enjoy a long train ride, but the way that our towns and cities are spread about, even the best case scenario would not work.
As Mimi has noted were a day late and many dollars short.
A classic example of this is, the Big Dig in Boston MA. It has nothing to do with trains, but is an excellent example of capitol projects that didn't even begin to come close to be completed on time, or on budget.
The Big Dig is just a micro-shot of this Country's lack of ability to embark upon a Capitol Project of such immense magnitude.
Even if this project was completed how in thunder are we supposed to power it. Our electrical grid is aging, newer more efficient plants are being denied permits to be constructed, the environmental terrorists would keep this project in the judicial system for decades before even on inch of track is laid.
And we haven't even began to discuss all the political shenanigans of graft and corruption with politicians and the Unions yet.
MikeD| 3.1.11 @ 11:11AM
Melvin:
I didn't even think of the power needed to run this system! Barry and his fellow cretins still think battery powered cars are nirvana; without the faintest ide where all our energy comes from. That doesn't even factor in the very real losses from resistance and heat conversion, just to name a couple reasons why electricity is not the panacea he thinks it is. Plus, we have all his insane buddies in the tree hugger movements who want to destroy our already existing hydro plants to help some fish. The farmers in California can't even grow food because barry, the stupidest person to EVER slither into the White House, won't intervene in the name of common sense.
I sincerely hope the American electorate thinks just a little about the real intelligence level of the next occupant of the White House. Barry proves every day that he's just not smart enough to handle the job; and we're all watching the destruction of our once magnificent country caused by his abject stupidity.
RacerJim| 3.2.11 @ 9:31AM
Abject stupidity on Obama's part would be one thing, intentional fundamental transformation of the United States on Obama's part would be quite another thing altogether.
Achilles Toejam| 3.18.11 @ 12:59AM
Folks, let's truly understand about the people were talking about. These are Saul Alinsky rules for radicals revolutionaries their words not mine, Obama has surrounded himself with them taught it, he is one.
David Horwitz freedom Center http://www.horowitzfreedomcenter.org in their bookstore section there's a red pamphlet entitled "Rules for Revolution," (The Alinsky Model).
Read this 51 page booklet and understand what motivates these peoples and what their goal is, it is truly frightening and evil. Our elected representatives must understand the disastrous consequences to our country if this revolution isn't recognized and directly confronted or Obama will make good on his promise to "fundamentally transform the United States," but what he never told the people is transformed into what? I'm sure there are good people that are Democrats but I'm also sure that most of those really don't understand to what extent the political party of their fathers has been hijacked.
Ken (Old Texican)| 3.1.11 @ 8:27AM
Business travelers are the airlines mainstay.
Business travelers simply cannot afford the down-time associated with train travel.
I have traveled extensively for most of my career. Plug in travel time and my weeks often exceeded 80 hours.
Business travelers will opt for "virtual" travel via the cool web-cam conferencing call set-ups.
Bottom line, trains are the biggest boondoggle yet, and once development begins, how do you stop the hemorrhage of billions?
Can a politician simply say "oops" we screwed up?
Pecos Pete| 3.1.11 @ 8:32AM
New Mexico recently built a train line that runs from Belen through Albuquerque to Santa Fe. The major stop is at the state government offices in Santa Fe. State workers ride the train to Santa Fe, some federal workers ride the train from Santa Fe to Albuquerque.
Construction cost was about $500 million. Operating loss per year is about $20 million.
Great benefit for government workers. The operating loss of $20 million has to be paid by the state which is finding it very difficult to overcome an annual budget deficit.
Rail travel from Belen to Santa Fe is paid for by the whole state. There is no benefit to outlying communities (tax payers) like Las Cruces, Clovis, Farmington, Taos, Roswell, Gallup, Carlsbad, etc.
Hopefully the state legislature will realize the inevitability for shutting down this money losing boondoggle aka The Richardson Express. Likewise, California should stop wasting its money.
michigander_sandusky| 3.1.11 @ 8:49AM
"There's no reason why we can't do this,"
Yes there is! This plan creates a money pit that would suck in billions in over runs. High speed rail is a plan to "high speed fail"!
RacerJim| 3.2.11 @ 9:34AM
Best reason I know of is "We the people..." don't want to do it!
Old Soldier| 3.1.11 @ 9:00AM
Ironic that the "Progressives" are pushing a 150-year-old idea on us. Why not something new?
How about we use that money get going on a Space Elevator? Get those carbon nanotube designed then build the thing.
The first one would be expensive, the price goes down as more are constructed from space. It would open up space to manufacturing, mining, and high-speed travel and alleviate pollution in our atmosphere. Isn't that what "Progressives" want? (Other than the capitalists making money part)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator
A. C. Santore| 3.1.11 @ 9:39AM
Thank you for that link. The article is an absolutely priceless modest proposal, verneworthy in fact. Readers should not miss it!
The concept is right down Progressive Alley. If the Proto-Dictator learns of it, he can complete the wrecking of America with one hare-brained project.
Old Soldier| 3.1.11 @ 9:58AM
Well if it succeeds, great! We just opened up space for business.
If it fails, we wasted a lot of money but we didn't dig up the downtown areas of every city in the country and bankrupt the states as well.
chris haynes| 3.1.11 @ 9:22AM
Trains cant compete with busses.
There is a bus, every half hour, Boston to NY. The fare is $20. It takes 4-1/2hrs . the bus comapany makes money. The riders are poorer people, students etc. There are also ritzy, extra-fare busses.
The train. There is a "cheap" train every 2 hours. It costs $68. 4-1/2 hours. There is the Acella Limited, every 2 hours. $138. 3-3/4 hrs. The trains do not pay for their capital investment. High Speed rail is a subsidy for the well to do.
MikeD| 3.1.11 @ 11:13AM
If you look at history, back in the first 30 years of the 20th Century, democratically controlled cities were bribed to rip out their light rail and trolly systems. Now they want to go back. These idiots will NEVER learn.
Appleby| 3.1.11 @ 11:50AM
We have MegaBus going between Montreal and Toronto, and between Toronto and New York City with stops in between. The bus is double-decker, has bucket seats with seat belts, WiFi, and the lower deck has table seating so you can work or play cards or eat dinner there. The price is set according to when you book your tickets -- the longer the lead time, the lower the price. I got an overnight bus to Montreal with a rest stop in Kitchener for $40.00.
There is no longer an overnight train on that route, but when there was, it cost $300.
talkradio55| 3.1.11 @ 7:13PM
We have the BoltBus, on which you can get from Penn Station here in NY to Baltimore for $33 both ways. Amtrak on that route is almost as expensive as taking a plane and of course twice as long. Amtrak is the living proof that this light rail idea is stupid. Amtrak is subsidized by the federal government and always bleeds red ink. Plus the constant train wrecks, light rail is a failure.
Bill Turner| 3.17.11 @ 1:28PM
I like the MegaBus idea vastly over light rail or speed trains. From the Klondike to the Rio Grand, this continent is way too spread out! Once a train destination is reached, you either walk, ride a bus, or taxi. All use roads...
John Mack| 3.17.11 @ 1:35PM
New city buses in Providence, RI, widely used, but mostly by poorer people, are diesel-electric and cost little to operate. The federal government paid a large part of the purchase price, relieving the state of long-term operating costs and the inevitable huge spike in the price of oil.
Bus systems between cities make more sense than trains. They would be far cheaper to finance and operate. They could be operated by the government or by private companies. In either case initial subsidies would be required but operating costs would be low, enabling low fares.
Melvin| 3.1.11 @ 9:30AM
Government definitely cannot be trusted, and the public/private partnership that politicians love to tout. Is an even more repugnant plan.
Capital projects as of late are just vehicles for new tax payer money laundering schemes for politicians.
Louis Jenkins| 3.1.11 @ 9:53AM
Video conferencing is the way to go, the space elevator is the another way to go, building airbuses is another way to go, but building a high speed train is unwise. Gotta have that glossy shiny stuff from Europe and Japan, so we can be just like them. (Another reason) Obama wants the US to be like Europe.
KyMouse| 3.1.11 @ 10:01AM
I love trains as much as anyone else, but one problem I forsee is government finding some excuse to shut down rail travel in order to make large numbers of people stay put. That sounds paranoid, but controlling the movement of populations might appeal to certain leaders. Especially in times of civil unrest.
Besides, I love to drive, and can happily cover 600 miles a day with audio books and the occasional Cracker Barrel.
Melvin| 3.1.11 @ 10:39AM
Nahh, your not being paranoid. Portland Oregon has light rail connected to the burbs in which they attribute that to smart planning. The planners are basically building these hight density developments which narrow or at the very least reduce the choice of where people want or chose to live.
Le Cracquere| 3.2.11 @ 10:11AM
Wait a minute. There's a single Portland, sitting in stark, lonely contrast to thousands of suburbs where a car and a subdivision is the only realistic way to go ... and it's PORTLAND that's reducing people's choices?
So many of us are protesting "prescribed solutions," while the other side of our mouths is prescribing a one-size-fits-all method of transport, and a one-size-fits-all living environment. Anti-rail folks are welcome to their arguments, but you'd think that an ordinary capacity for human shame would keep them from pretending that THEY'RE somehow the champions of consumer choices and liberties.
Alert1201| 3.1.11 @ 10:46AM
I agree. My family is planning a trip from Dallas to the Northeast to visit some relatives. This will be the third trip we have made with our kids by driving. We would never take a plan or train; the driving is far to enjoyable. We can stop and visit some of the civil war sites along the way or go to the many caverns that are advertised in the hillsides or just stop for an extra night becuase of the beauty of the surroundings. If we get tired of highway driving we can do some "shunpiking" and take the back roads for while and see even more of our countries beauty.
Driving is the ultimate freedom, something the dems do not like.
Richard Baker| 3.1.11 @ 10:02AM
Ah California. I guess all the idiots and nuts in the country migrated there. They deserve the disaster that's coming and the rest of us should REFUSE to bail them out.
Albert| 3.1.11 @ 11:12AM
As a California resident (life-long) I simply must agree with you. No one should bail out this Great State of Confusion and the voters here deserve everything (e.g bankruptcy) that is coming to them. I just wish I could get out of here ("We gotta get outta this place, if it's the last thing we ever do..."). What facinates me is that California is reputed to be the "leader" in cutting edge technology and that technology will bail out the economy and everyone will prosper, as long as the government directs that it be so. The nasty little truth is that California is going backwards. First people moved around on foot. Then in donkey drawn carts. Then wagons and horses. Along came trains and AFTER trains came automobiles. Each step was an improvement in the ability of people to move about, with the automobile being the ultimate in personal transportation and consequently, personal freedom. But government wants to go back to trains. Trains are fine for freight (although trucks are still indispensible) but because people are not freight and don't wait in warehouses and train depots for weeks at a time, trains make a comparatively poor selection for personal transportation. This will never change. Trains are heavy and fuel guzzling and only go where tracks go. Cars go where you want and when you want. Frankly, it is not surprising that California's Socialist government wants to go backwards and eliminate cars and subsidize trains. Socialists always go backwards and never deliver on their promises.
conservative to the core| 3.17.11 @ 1:20PM
Seems to me that everything published regarding California's dire financial plight points to one thing - they have too high a ratio of voters who lack the intelligence to understand the full implications of the issues they vote on. I see no immediate or simple answer to that problem!
Americans who are tempted to swallow Obama's campaign hype spouting the desirability of high-speed rail travel and Californians who voted to spend the money on this rail project are all very shortsighted. Instead of trying to emulate Europe or Japan, America should put it's sharp minds to work finding better solutions. Let's not be followers, but leaders!
Albert| 3.1.11 @ 11:15AM
By the way, Will Rogers once quipped that when the Okies migrated from Oklahoma to California during the dustbowl days of the 1930's, it raised the average IQ in both States. Need I say more?
RacerJim| 3.2.11 @ 9:40AM
Will Rogers had a way with words like no other, except maybe Yogi Berra. :-)
cowgirl| 3.1.11 @ 11:40AM
I am a native California from the Bay Area. California is no longer the name of the state. The Stupid State or the Charlie Sheen state is more appropriate.
No worries though - the state will be dead broke in a matter of a few months. This is good because the state needs to start over. This will clean the slate with the state unions and the public schools.
The Charlie Sheen State will go down. I guarantee it.
Strider| 3.17.11 @ 5:48PM
How about "the Granola State" -- full of fruits, nuts and flakes.
David W| 3.1.11 @ 11:15AM
KyMouse may have hit on one reason. I read on another site that the reason progressives want rail is that it gives them much more control on movement of people. With a car/cycle I can go where I want when I want. Even with a bus there is some flexibility. With trains no flexibility. Same schedule, limited number of trains, always the same tracks. If it becomes too expensive (or even "illegal" to take a car on any drive longer than 100 miles) then we become trapped, at the mercy of government control.
As someone else has mentioned, where is the "scientific" rate of return calculations that any project should have? You know that the train idea is not viable - nothing but costs and limited income.
Richard Baker| 3.1.11 @ 11:40AM
Remember, Amtrak has NEVER made a profit and huge subsidies are the only revenue source which keeps it alive. This is the model for passenger trains everywhere and this includes Deutsche Bahn in Germany and SNCF in France.
Richard| 3.1.11 @ 12:10PM
It is fitting that Obama wants to be known as for high speed rail, a leftist fantasy ignoring the American experience and character and an unpopular top down project with central planners, corruption, and coercion. I bet there are even plans for Michele to plan the dining car menu.
Paul from SA| 3.1.11 @ 12:29PM
-waiting time
-inconveniences
-diseases, flu
-muggers
-security lines
-terrorist attacks
-mass murderers
-lack of freedom
-bad environment
-bad music, temperatures, lights
-union workers, thugs
Hillel| 3.1.11 @ 12:39PM
I live in Conecticut where once again the Democrats are talking about reviving the Waterbury,Hartford,Springfield line. It was abandoned 50 years ago. Even though the state owns the right of way,(I think) It won't make money. Anyway they took the cars off the Waterbury Bridgeport line to service New Haven to New YOrk. (WE bus to Bridgeport) (Might as well take the private bus all the way to New York. )Meanwhile the trains kept breaking down on the way to New York because of the snow. (Some planner appears to have forgotton we get snow in winter.) We have 30 new Kawazaki (Japanese) cars for the New Haven Line. We've had them for a year. They're not in service because they keep breaking down. If they could revise Lionel Lines or American Flyer (both made in New Haven), we might have a chance. Either that or get the old Deisals and Steam locomotive and cars that were reliable during WWII!
Alert1201| 3.1.11 @ 1:18PM
We took that New Haven to New York train last time I visited my folks and it was a nightmare. We planned a day trip and got there around 9:30 and had to park about 3 miles away in expensive garage in down town New Haven. There was no way to cover the 3 miles back to the station but to walk.
Then on the way home the AC stopped in the train so we rode most of the way back to CT in a sweltering train. We finally got back about 10:00 PM and had to walk the 3 miles back to the car to get home in Uncasville CT.
I will never ride that train again.
PattyMor| 3.1.11 @ 2:01PM
Why do the Demons love trains: Union labor to build them and union labor to operate them. Then they get the rest of us to subsidize the others that use the choochoos. And, then they can let roads deterioate and force you onto their trains.
Tony| 3.1.11 @ 2:04PM
Has anyone on the CA rail authority actually been to LA?
When I arrive there on this train how am I supposed to get anywhere? - where do they intend to build these huge rental lots downtown?
How is it more economic to get a train and rent a car rather than just drive / fly?
How do they intend to secure the tracks from terrorist attacks? Have they considered the damage from a derailed 220mph train? Are guards every couple of hundred yards part of the cost estimate?
Are they going to secure the drivers compartment like on airlines? How?
Presumably they'll have to search everyone before boarding. What does that do to the journey time?
Pat| 3.1.11 @ 2:46PM
Does California really need High Speed Pork? Because that’s what this is actually about – a deserving special interest group gets a piece of the action – Supersize that piece for them please - friends of Obama get financial favors plus high pay, low work jobs and Democrats get votes in future elections. The high speed rail debate is a smokescreen, however the High Speed Pork issue should be debated because someone will get very wealthy, the average taxpayer will get poorer and life will go merrily on. Sure, we can pretend to debate this latest Swindle of the Day in all its various facets, it’s our First Amendment right to discuss issues in a thoroughly civil fashion – but what does that have to do with reality?
In my area of California, we don’t have harsh winters, our streets lack proper potholes while doing without the kinds of enchanting road hazards normally prevalent in the snow belt states and our many boulevards are planted with trees and shrubs; we don’t favor ugly roads here, we like every road to be described as “scenic”. So, naturally, Obama’s Stimulus funded road repair here last year. Street signs proudly proclaimed the money came from Obama’s program in the event anyone was curious as to the source of all that lovely Pork. The roads were perfectly serviceable before the “repairs”, the work went on for 7 months and several unindicted co-conspirators got rich in the process. So, give California more money it doesn’t really need, our Democrats will deliver the state to their Party out of gratitude and you’ll have the privilege of funding all this High Speed Pork.
Impeach Don't Wait| 3.1.11 @ 3:25PM
They need to drop this like a hot coal. California is bankrupt. This will be a continual money drain. California can't afford the maintenance and the escalating wages to run this thing! It will have to be federally subsidized! Therefore: There should be NATIONAL outrage and opposition!
(Can you tell I have an opinion?)
Larry Sheldon | 3.1.11 @ 3:58PM
Complete with an Obama Royal Seal, rendered in tasteful blue and gold.
Stan Redmond| 3.1.11 @ 3:59PM
I go so far to say that the democrats that love these full size train sets KNOW they will never get built. Every democrat special interest group is guaranteed a hand in this cookie jar without ever moving a shovel full of dirt.
First you have 10 years of guaranteed employment for the lawyers and EPA types.
Then 10 years in lawyers and local politicians to condemn the properties of thousands of people.
10 years or government reviewers.
You have 30 years of red tape to cut and not a single track needs to be built.
Pat| 3.1.11 @ 5:10PM
Stan Redmond, you’ve got a laser like bead on how these things work but AmSpec readers are never told how the average guy or gal can get in on these rackets. We know some unnamed person or persons will directly benefit from Obama’s giveaway campaigns. We know the rest of us will have to pay so a few “special” folks can reap the rewards, but how does one become a “special” person? Are there government pamphlets which describe how the average Joe can get a hefty serving of Pork? Is there a way for taxpayer John Q. Public to get his very own slice of the pie – wouldn’t you like a Stan Redmond Stimulus Project? Maybe not and, like yourself, maybe most folks are too honest or too decent to demand their very own serving of graft with a side order of corruption - but, obviously, somebody must be cashing in on these never ending rackets, apparently we’re just not allowed to know who.
Instead, we’re asked to seriously debate these latest swindles as if they were real-life issues intended to improve our collective lives, as opposed to just another smokescreen for income transfers from ordinary taxpayers to “special” people. And it’s not like the media is forced to pretend these are necessary debates where we all have a say in how the Pork gets distributed – it’s 2011 after all, everyone knows what’s going on with this Federal money, so why do our media folks need to perpetuate the myth?
Stan Redmond| 3.1.11 @ 10:53PM
The first, and most important, step is to graduate from a liberal arts college. Once you do that you can get a job writing grant request for an environmental lobby or approving grants for environmental groups on behalf of a government agency.
Yah got it made then!!!
BL in AK| 3.1.11 @ 10:08PM
Don't forget the environmental land assessments and cleanup costs if any parcels in the ROW are contaminated and the soil or water must be treated or removed. Add $$$$ and lots of time if groundwater is involved. And California has loads of layers of state agency environmental oversight to slow the process to a trickle of productivity.
Stan Redmond| 3.1.11 @ 10:54PM
AND ALL without building a single rail line!!!
RacerJim| 3.2.11 @ 9:55AM
After 50 years of liberal Democratic red tape the first few miles of the Montgomery County (MD) Inter County Connecter (I270 - I95) opened last week - $2.5BILLION (est.) for 18-miles.
Osamas Pajamas| 3.1.11 @ 5:16PM
Taxpayer-funded rail --- highspeed or not --- is a corrupt process of hijacking and wasteing tax money to pay off rail system developers and the rotten rail unions. These should be 100% private enterprises --- and if they can't turn a profit, then they should be allowed to sell off their assets and go out of business at "zero" cost to the taxpayers.
Le Cracquere| 3.2.11 @ 10:13AM
Long as we do the same for roads everywhere, and the utilities built in their paths.
Berl Goetz| 3.1.11 @ 5:50PM
We know that BNSF, Union Pacific and CSX already have solid infrastructure. They would offer passenger trains if there were a demand. There is not. I fear that light rail would be even more expensive than Amtrak mainline rail. Instead, I would like to see Barack Obama propose making existing airports into more accessible hubs. He could take credit for it, and we could enjoy the convenience and the cost savings. Don’t we have a Department of Transportation?
Stan Redmond| 3.1.11 @ 10:51PM
If you're a hobo, then I guess you can say they DO offer subsidized train travel... but hobos actually have to work for their trips...
PCP Smoker| 3.1.11 @ 5:50PM
Why would anyone want to miss the scenery offered by the Central Coast? The dramatic cliffs and winding road, the Santa Lucia Mountains, Pfieffer State Park, Big Sur, the mission in Carmel, the mild chill in the air, the perfect blue sky...
If you are in a hurry take a flight. If you are on vacation, enjoy the ride, either way fuck the train
Impeach Don't Wait| 3.1.11 @ 6:55PM
"Under the terms of the ballot measure, the high-speed rail system, once built, cannot have its operating costs subsidized by taxpayers,"
Did I read that right? Now how's that likely? This is quickly turning into fraud!
ObamaRail indeed!
Martin Owens| 3.1.11 @ 8:50PM
In 2030, the entire population of CA is only projected to be 48 million. Yet the Magic Choo-choo Club insists that ridership will be 100 million.
In case you're wondering where Enron's accounting team went....
Kingofthenet| 3.1.11 @ 10:44PM
Alright, 'Slightly OT':
Do you Know I have DRAGON BLOOD...
and Hercules DNA?
Size38pants| 3.1.11 @ 10:58PM
---->We are the only advanced country in the world that doesn't have high-speed rail."
I am not sure if Prez O does not count Canada as advanced or if he thinks Via Rail's rolling stock from the last century constitutes high speed.
IzeHavitt| 3.2.11 @ 1:43AM
I have mixed views on passenger rail. I don't think it'll work inter-city, but can work within a given metropolitan area. Chicago's "Ell", or the New York Subway come to mind. However, either way, it's Kiss Of Death is when Government owns it, or runs it (in conjunction with the unions). One primary reason it is doomed-if-owned-by- government- is the way it is financed. If it is ever to work, it can't involve any government funding. That just makes things way too expensive. The two ways they usually use to finance infrastructure projects are either bond sales, or higher sales taxes, both of which have limits. However, a private enterprise has a variety of ways to finance things. The problem with government bureaucrats is that they inherently don't have the creativity necessary to figure out these various ways of finance. It is likely that only private entrepreneurs do. Bureaucrats only think it terms of debt or taxes, and right now, those are the last things we need more of.
Conservative Tothecore| 3.17.11 @ 1:50PM
VERY ASTUTE COMMENTARY! If a private enterprise should research it and deem it doable, then it would be a great project, but something like this should absolutely not be undertaken by the government or in any way be subsidized by taxpayer money!
dvd| 3.2.11 @ 1:48AM
I'm more than happy to slash the subsidies to rail, but while we're at it let's slash the significantly larger subsidy hog called the national highway system.
Level playing field maybe cars win maybe trains win; I don't care. But I dislike paying for yet another service that I don't use.
Le Cracquere| 3.2.11 @ 10:15AM
Multitudinous amens! When it comes to transportation, too many TAS writers and respondents believe "the public teat for me, but not for thee."
knerjod| 3.2.11 @ 3:09AM
Americans seem unaware or uninterested in the fact that Japan National Railways was finally bankrupted by cost overruns on the Shinkansen (bullet train). JNR was a government monopoly that dominated the market for nearly 100 years. High-speed rail destroyed the company.
Travelwise42 | 3.2.11 @ 4:35AM
The only reasons for "high speed rail" are either to meet the demand for the mass exodus out of the state to saner climes or for B.O. to make a James Bond villain's style get-away when the U.S.A. implodes...
Paul from SA| 3.2.11 @ 12:32PM
How do I get from my house to the train and back?
How do I get from the train to work and back?
PolishKnight| 3.2.11 @ 1:13PM
Overhead monorail has a lot of potential to both be cost effective and deal with the right of way issue in addition to being immune to snow unlike rail. Flaws? Not as fast as underground or heavy rail and some noise issues.
So why don't we have it? An unholy alliance between democrat politicians taking bribes from big business automobile companies wanting to tear up right-of-ways as another commenter observed. In addition, and this is unPC, certain people don't want to use public transportation that's too "public". They like having a seat that is only used by them.
I don't buy the claim that the cities are too far apart to make train travel in the states practical. If so, why are trains still popular in Russia and Siberia? If you need to go from Moscow to Siberia, you can get a sleeper car for a fraction of the price of an overnight plane flight.
If you travel Amtrack and just want a place to lie down, they'll charge you the price of a business class plane ticket. If you go on a European train and especially Eastern Europe, there are cabins that take up to 7 people where you can lie down for 30 bucks!
Finally, the unions have a stranglehold on Amtrak just like with education and the police...
Morgan| 3.2.11 @ 3:20PM
Long ago in a galaxy far, far away I lived in a semi-mythical city named Los Angeles and we had an amazing light rail system called "the Pacific Electric Railway". It was largely developed by Henry Huntington; at its peak it had 900 cars and 1,150 miles of track covering four counties. In 1944 it had a peak of 109 million riders. http://www.usc.edu/libraries/a.....c/redcars/ There was a terminus right outside the door of the small duplex in which we lived in Echo Park; get on that car and you could get to the beach in 45 minutes.
This system was dismantled in the 1950s in part to accommodate the development of the freeways, and in part through a concerted scheme by General Motors, Firestone Rubber and Standard Oil to buy up the rail systems and close them. There was an anti-trust lawsuit in Los Angeles that found these companies guilty of violating anti-trust laws and fined them $1. So far as I know, they paid it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.....ar_Scandal
So what's the point? While one can look at a map and see all sorts of possible ways to build high-speed rail in California, the fact is that the time to do it was in the 1950s, and any possibility of doing it then was sabotaged by those who had a real interest in the automobile and the freeway system. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.
Conservative Tothecore| 3.17.11 @ 1:43PM
GREAT COMMENTARY!
historymike| 3.17.11 @ 7:03PM
Stuff and nonsense! The light rail systems in L.A. and many other places died because, once automobiles became available to the masses, the fixed rails didn't have enough riders to cover their operating costs. To blame GM, tire companies, oil, et al, is left-wing propaganda. Even urban buses, not trapped by rails, have a hard time and require subsidies. There are no witches to burn. As Pogo said, "We have met the enemy and he is us." We prefer the freedom of private autos over mass transit in most circumstances.
JeffT| 3.3.11 @ 8:53AM
Never believe what people say in a poll. There is no commitment in answering a poll question. No one is going to take your name and see if you do what you said you'd do. Years ago, I was working for a big company that introduced a new conditioner to go along with an established shampoo. The test panelists said they'd buy it and we made it. They didn't buy it, for whatever reason, and it no longer exists. In the real world, things like price and convenience affect our buying decisions. It will be the same with these HS trains. Unless they are heavily subsidized, a la Amtrak, they will fail. When the rubber meets the road, that's where most people would rather be:in their cars.
Conservative Tothecore| 3.17.11 @ 1:41PM
Regarding your statement, "Unless they are heavily subsidized, a la Amtrak, they will fail." - wouldn't that be failure?!?
JF| 3.17.11 @ 12:35PM
I admit that I enjoy train travel and I would love to have an alternative to my daily 74 mile round-trip commute, especially when I have ice and snow to contend with. What I don't want, however, is some poorly planned, badly managed, government subsidized public transportation system. In Indianapolis, there is a move underway to install light rail. The proposed routes are ones that serve a fraction of the population, and there are no provisions built in to accommodate the thousands of drivers who travel to office parks that are east and west of the rail line's path. Spare us from Obama's help - let a private sector rail line take up this cause, do the logistical planning and market research that should go into starting up a service like this, and let them take the risks and pay the costs involved.
Conservative Tothecore| 3.17.11 @ 1:38PM
AMEN!!!
Larry| 3.17.11 @ 12:48PM
Allow me to preach to the choir. This latest Obama fantasy is about 57 years too late. The die was cast back when Eisenhower signed the federal legislation that created the Interstate Highway System. Now that we have a well-built, functioning interstate highway system (for the most part, anyway), and now that population demographics have changed to take advantage of automobile traffic, increasing real estate values in the process, a high speed rail system is prohibitively expensive to build and maintain, with virtually no prospect of recovering the initial investment that has to be made, and leaves little doubt that the expense of operating and maintaining such a system is cost prohibitive and cannot be paid for through fares.
That having been said, it would have been nice to have a national railroad system of this type 57 years ago. I think it would have worked at that time. But thanks to GM (which I have always referred to as Government Motors, since they have always tried to use government to gain a financial advantage of some kind), the opportunity is lost. And Obama continues to dream. . .
Conservative Tothecore| 3.17.11 @ 1:35PM
Very well said! But as a footnote, I doubt it even being viable 57 years ago due to the widespread of the U.S.
amsron| 3.17.11 @ 1:03PM
Having seen the Eurail TGV trains in action, I'm a little less pessimistic about their usefulness in the coming age of $12 a gallon gas...and Fresno? LA to San Francisco (where BART is a commuter's dream) would be practical, not useless.
Oh yeah, and trains are more useful to all of us than President Bush's goal of putting a man on MARS! I'm just throwing that out there as an example of a President hoping to get credit for something that would happen after he left office.
BTW-3 pages of this rant is way too much. Just because it's the Internet doesn't mean people have time to wade though mountains of self-serving nonsense.
Conservative Tothecore| 3.17.11 @ 1:22PM
Americans who are tempted to swallow Obama's campaign hype spouting the desirability of high-speed rail travel and Californians who voted to spend the money on this rail project are all very shortsighted. Instead of trying to emulate Europe or Japan, America should put it's sharp minds to work finding better solutions. Let's not be followers, but leaders!
Seems to me that everything published regarding California's dire financial plight points to one thing - they have too high a ratio of voters who lack the intelligence to understand the full implications of the issues they vote on. I see no immediate or simple answer to that problem!
John Mack| 3.17.11 @ 1:28PM
Don't worry. When Obama makes pronouncements in high-flying rhetoric he is signaling that he will do nothing, or the opposite. Check his record of rhetoric and action. The pattern is there.
mzk1| 3.17.11 @ 1:50PM
In the Northeast, the train is arguably faster than flying (counting getting to and from the airport). But it is also arguably more expensive.
Ironically, the speed-up Amtak accompished in the Northeast (even for the regular trains) during my youth is impressive, and that is one region where real high-spped rail might work. But who will be able to afford it?
mzk1| 3.17.11 @ 1:53PM
BTW, growing up in Brooklyn it was indeed my impression that anything under an elevated railway tends to end up delipidated.
mister Z| 3.17.11 @ 1:54PM
Of many good things about busses, here's a really good one: busses can be rerouted to suit changing demographics. Try that with a rail system...
su winn | 3.17.11 @ 1:55PM
O IS TOTALLY STUPID! DISNEYLAND THINKING OVER REALITY. THEIR IS NOT ENOUGH MONEY IN THE WORLD TO PAY FOR HIS DREAMY WISH. USA IS TOO LARGE, GOV'T CAN NEVER DO ANYTHING THAT WORKS,AND ANY CITY THAT WANT FEDERAL DOLLARS FOR THIS - SHOULD BE ASHAMED AS THERE IS NO MORE MONEY
AND FEWER TAXPAYERS NOW.
KP California| 3.17.11 @ 3:22PM
Not only is California using what funds that have been granted to them, they are wanting to get Florida's share that they are not going to use.
This grandiose plan needs further research!!!
What is being done now is a train from a little bitty town to another little bitty town like Fresno.
I believe the voters turned down the train project that would go from San Francisco through the Peninsula to LA. So money is being spent for the sake of just spending. I already wrote in to You Cut and asked them to defund this whole project.
It is not a positive move in California, except givi ng jobs to union workers. Our taxpayer dollars will not be used to employee private sector jobs, just union jobs. In fact the whole infrastructor project that Obama wants to do is for union workers ONLY. So taxpayers, through the government ,will pay more union worker's wages, medical, and pension.
Nobammy Bin yin| 3.17.11 @ 3:37PM
Yes!! Finally, progress! Who needs that stupid old technology used in space shuttles and for space flight? We need to think big and waaaay outside the box here. We need something that the American people can rally behind, something grand and spectacular befitting of the worthiness and outright holiness of our very own beloved leader. Yes, we need RAIL! Come on workers of the world, lets go swing our picks and shovel our shovels while we sing patriotic songs and lay some ties. Everybody do the locomotion! We can defund Amtrak to start to pay for it, tax the rest out of us for 10 years to get 3 years service out of it then watch the rest of the susidies just fly out the window at 190 mph instead of the paltry 45 mph Amtrak window we're throwing our money out of now. That's leadership. Im getting a chill up my leg just writing this! Oh sorry, that's my dog. Either way, I know when I'm getting screwed.
Gidge| 3.17.11 @ 3:56PM
I commuted for many years by rail from the Jersey shore to Newark and New York. During those years they had many power problems on the electric part of the tracks. They were operated by Amtrack. To the shore we used diesels because electric did not go down that far. Well I have to tell you I can't say how many times our diesels pushed or pulled those electric trains out of the way to clear the tracks. Those diesels were strong. We had to get them out of the way so the diesels could continue.
Strider| 3.17.11 @ 6:01PM
The author forgot to mention Florida governor Rick Scott, who also wisely rejected the high-speed rail loot. That and his support for the 2nd Amendment already make me glad I voted for him!
When it comes to BHO and his "stimulus" schemes like this rail boondoggle, think of him as Kananga -- the guy who wanted to give away free heroin in order to create more addicts and corner the market.
steve| 3.17.11 @ 6:48PM
If Obama really believes that the US needs this then he should try to educate people as to why and make his case to the American people. If people really want it, then someone will build it. No need for taxpayer dollars to be involved. If Richard Branson believed for a second that people really wanted high speed rail in the US he would build the nicest, fastest, most efficient rail system possible. And it would be proffitable. As opposed to sucking the taxpayers dry with typical govt creep and inefficiency.
historymike| 3.17.11 @ 7:21PM
Given the balcanized way California government works--or for that matter, most states--the likelihood of a high-speed rail line from L.A. to S.F. is close to zero.
Several years ago, being a rail fan, I investigated taking a train, even a slow one, from LA to SF. Could not be done: the tracks do not connect for passenger trains. It would be necessary to detrain, board a bus for some hours and some distance and then board another train.
So I flew from LA to San Jose on Southwest for a very reasonable price and scenic views. But at the San Jose Airport, there was no connection to public transit to anywhere available--I had to rent a car--despite all the blather about BART. Later, to continue to Sacramento on the same trip, I turned in the rental at the airport and had to take a $17 cab ride to the rail station in downtown San Jose. There I caught a subsidized $24 ride to the state capitol. But it was held up by freight traffic on the same tracks and arrived two hours late, causing me to miss a luncheon appointment.
Bottom line, all other considerations aside, California is not capable of handling high-speed train travel and the infrastructures required. I'm sure Bay commuters love their subsidized BART rides, but it is not set up for inter-city travelers because of the ineptness of local government.
S&WM;&P| 3.17.11 @ 7:35PM
The Libs in WI are still crying--between protesting a budget bill that will SAVE our state and sending death threats to Rep. Senators/and Rep. Congressmen-- that Gov. Walker sent the $$ for high speed rail packing. How in any stretch of the imagination could that have made sense? Oh, wait a minute--Libs have no sense...I forgot!
Elaine| 3.17.11 @ 7:59PM
High speed rails are only for countries that are Socialists or Communists. We refuse to become either. That doesn't make us behind in times but makes us more independent and well off enough to own our own transportation and not have to share with a bunch of strangers and their germs.
RoberrK. Dean | 3.21.11 @ 11:55AM
An absolute, on-target piece you've written on this, one of the greatest and most deplorable scams being foisted on the American taxpayers. Pork-rail is unaffordable and unsustainable.
Thanx for the investigative report.
Christian Louboutin | 6.23.11 @ 6:12AM
Invoking national pride, Obama mused that "America is the nation that built the transcontinental railroad, brought electricity to rural communities, constructed the interstate highway system." Sadly, he lamented, the U.S. now lags behind Europe, Russia, and China in modern transportation infrastructure.
Creative Recreation | 8.11.11 @ 2:27AM
is good
althea | 12.4.11 @ 10:52PM
This is a great news for you. We don't have a high speed rail here in our country.
Office Carpet Cleaning
CarpetCleaningSydney | 12.5.11 @ 1:28AM
Hi! I found your post nice and interesting. Although, it takes time for me to read this article but its worth the read.
CarpetCleanerSydney | 12.5.11 @ 3:45AM
Nice post! It is very informative. Thanks.
CateringMelbourne | 12.8.11 @ 2:24AM
Great post!
CateringMelbourne | 12.8.11 @ 2:24AM
Great post!
العاب بنات | 4.11.12 @ 6:11PM
They need to drop this like a hot coal. California is bankrupt. This will be a continual money drain. California can't afford the maintenance and the escalating wages to run this thing! It will have to be federally subsidized! Therefore: There should be NATIONAL outrage and opposition!