Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Facebook
Twitter
Google+1
del.icio.us.
Digg!
Yahoo! Buzz
Diigo
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Yahoo!
MyspaceOn July 6 and 7, California lawmakers approved funding for a high-speed rail line connecting Los Angeles to San Francisco. The bill passed the State Assembly and Senate and now heads to Gov. Brown for his signature. It was approved by Democrats and was spear-headed by Gov. Brown and labor groups.
How much will this massive undertaking cost? According to Judy Lin of the Associated Press, the bill allows the state to begin selling $4.5 billion in voter-approved bonds that includes $2.6 billion to build an initial 130-mile stretch of the high speed rail line in the Central Valley. That will allow the state to collect another $32 billion in federal funds. The first segment will connect Madera to Bakersfield and the final cost of the completed project from L.A.-S.F. will be $68 billion.
The problem: California is broke and the debt-ridden federal government is out of money.
Senator Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, said public support has waned for the project, and there are many questions about financing to complete it. Where are additional commitments of federal funding, private funding, or dedicated funding sources for the future? There are none.
Fellow Californians, once again, the Democrat-controlled California State Legislature wants to spend money we do not have and tax us more. It is outrageous and unrealistic. California is going over a cliff. Does anyone care?
In November, we must change the direction our state is going. Vote out every politician who supported this costly high speed rail legislation.
Previous Month
Comments
"The first segment will connect Madera to Bakersfield and the final cost of the completed project from L.A.-S.F. will be $68 billion."
It's actually over $100 billion and counting.
So we have $100 billion for a high speed rail but we don't have enough money to house the homeless and educate the kids.
Read this article from the Wall Street Journal about this boondogle.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001...
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 16, 2012 at 7:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How many jobs would it create?
MysteryZ (anonymous profile)
July 16, 2012 at 8:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is the first time EVER that I've agreed to an opinion expressed int SB Independent. So I guess there's something we can all agree on. It's a hopeful sign
Wasting huge amounts of money is not an effective way to improve the economy for anyone.
ramey (anonymous profile)
July 16, 2012 at 9:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Republican/Conservatives could always stop promoting the growth that spurs growth projections requiring these massive futuristic projects. Otherwise more pragmatic people will look to plan for that growth. So if we're going to have this throw out the bums mentality we should stop electing these one-sided and narrow republicons.
And why is it that republican/conservatives and the average whoop-d-doo yahoo motorists (presumably reared with poor potty training resulting in car collecting disorders) never complain about all this deficit spending on highway expansions. There are quite a few environmental impacts to our own urban environments with these lofty projects. The usual eminent domain takings of property rights not to mention that these freeways and highways are not very efficient should also be a concern to well meaning republicans.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
July 17, 2012 at 6:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How many commenters here have said we don't have enough money to educate Californians properly and the only solution is to raise taxes? Here is a blatant reminder that other options are available to accomplish that goal.
Botany (anonymous profile)
July 17, 2012 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Republicans were planning on growth spurts in Bakersfield DM?
I'm moving to Bakersfield so I can ride the train...I'm sure many shall follow suit to support this great contribution to the Union Labor lobby and their ownership of the California Democratic legislative members.
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
July 18, 2012 at 1:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
For $8 billion, we could double track and upgrade the ENTIRE U.S. Amtrak rail system, which would allow the current 125MPH engines to pull trains 2x faster than they do today. No more waiting on a siding for the other direction train and. Example: SB to LA in 60 minutes. NY to Boson in 2 hours (instead of current 4 on "fast" Acela train). But this would not employ 20,000 union paid employees in California for 30 years to build dumb high speed rail that will cost same as a Southwest flight and take same amount of time (including airport security time).
willy88 (anonymous profile)
July 20, 2012 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
They say this California project will take twenty-one years, (after all, it's California, and there are all the hoops one has to jump through) whereas the Trans-Continental railroad took only six years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Tr...
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 20, 2012 at 3:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"The problem: California is broke" False.
spacey (anonymous profile)
July 23, 2012 at 2:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why then, is the state so deep in debt?
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 23, 2012 at 7 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The independent reporter on this matter should have done a little fact checking. While they may have gotten the financials correctly parroted, it would have been nice for the reporter to get the segment info correct. The central valley segment that would be first up would initiate in Merced and go south to Fresno.
theresathefarmer (anonymous profile)
July 24, 2012 at 2:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)