Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 09:47 AM Jan 2015

Why today’s high-speed rail launch is miraculous

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/06/americas_most_ambitious_infrastructure_project_of_the_century_why_todays_high_speed_rail_launch_is_miraculous/


California High-Speed Rail (Credit: CAHSR Authority)


The most important kickoff in America today will not happen in Washington, where the 114th Congress begins its work. No, a far more consequential beginning takes place on the other side of the country, in modest Fresno, California, at an invitation-only ceremony on the corner of Tulare and G Streets. There, officials will break ground on America’s biggest and most ambitious infrastructure project of the century, a high-speed rail line linking San Francisco and Los Angeles that, when completed, will run at speeds of 220 miles an hour and move people between those metropolises in around two and a half hours, half the time it takes by car.

The bullet train won’t begin serving Californians until the next decade, and only if the remaining funds needed for completion can be located. But it’s kind of a miracle that shovels ever hit the ground at all. The estimated $68 billion project defeated legal challenges, conservative grousers and even a short-sighted attack by the environmental lobby to make it this far. And if it succeeds, a nation with few recent, tangible examples of what government can actually do to improve people’s lives will finally have a cutting-edge piece of infrastructure to point to.

High-speed rail in California got started in 2008, when voters approved Proposition 1A, a $9.95 billion bond measure to begin construction. Shortly thereafter, President Obama made high-speed rail a priority in the 2009 stimulus, with $8 billion earmarked for projects throughout the country. California eventually scooped up $3.5 billion of that, after conservative governors in Ohio, Wisconsin and Florida returned their funds in 2010. Officials expected to start laying steel in September 2012 on the first segment, a 29-mile stretch from Fresno to Madera. The idea was that building in the Central Valley first would be cheaper than securing land in the pricey Bay Area or Los Angeles basin.

But lawsuits and cost overruns nearly disabled the project. Not-In-My-Backyard farm owners disputed route planning, forcing more expensive alternatives. Environmental challenges piled up. The GOP House blocked new federal dollars for the project. Conservative groups then sued the California High-Speed Rail Authority, saying their business plan did not have the required funding blueprint to cover the ballooning cost, making it illegal under the statute. A judge agreed and blocked the sale of bonds.
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why today’s high-speed rail launch is miraculous (Original Post) xchrom Jan 2015 OP
Land is only going to get cheaper in LA and SF in the next ten years... Jesus Malverde Jan 2015 #1
So exciting and so overdue.. mountain grammy Jan 2015 #2
DO IT. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #3
+1 daleanime Jan 2015 #4
So excited. Plan to be standing right down onecaliberal Jan 2015 #5
Yay! MatthewStLouis Jan 2015 #6
Most overhyped project in history JayhawkSD Jan 2015 #7
I voted against this project Auggie Jan 2015 #8
Me too, for the same reasons. Throd Jan 2015 #9
In theory we can afford both Johonny Jan 2015 #11
Yes, especially with Federal money ... Auggie Jan 2015 #12
I enjoy that the Republicans that hate it because it is too expensive Johonny Jan 2015 #10

Jesus Malverde

(10,274 posts)
1. Land is only going to get cheaper in LA and SF in the next ten years...
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 10:11 AM
Jan 2015
The idea was that building in the Central Valley first would be cheaper than securing land in the pricey Bay Area or Los Angeles basin


mountain grammy

(26,625 posts)
2. So exciting and so overdue..
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 11:05 AM
Jan 2015

Denver has been building light rail for years, and it's a huge success. It would have been up and running years earlier if not for conservative opposition. You know the routine; every individual should build their own... freedom, blah, blah.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
3. DO IT.
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 11:08 AM
Jan 2015

It might be hard, it might be expensive, but we have to start working on this stuff. For the general health of our own society, do it.

MatthewStLouis

(904 posts)
6. Yay!
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 11:49 AM
Jan 2015

A move in the right direction.

Our nation has such backwards priorities. Why we can't board a train this morning in St. Louis and be in LA by dinnertime is beyond me. Pathetic America. Pathetic. If all advances were left up to conservatives, you'd have to buy your own horse. Hell, we'd probably still be fighting outside our cave over who gets which bison scraps.




 

JayhawkSD

(3,163 posts)
7. Most overhyped project in history
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 11:50 AM
Jan 2015
“will run at speeds of 220 miles an hour”
Actually, that’s the speed promised by Prop 1A in order to get people to vote for it. In it’s current configuration, the average speed is projected to be about 120 mph because the train will run on the same tracks as common rail carriers part of the way.

“won’t begin serving Californians until the next decade”
Currently planned to start 2029, if then. See note about funding.

“only if the remaining funds needed for completion can be located.”
Highly unlikely. The original cost was pegged at $40 billion and is now estimated by the high speed rail commission itself to be $98.5 billion to $118 billion. Other than an undetermined amount from cap and trade, none of that has currently been secured.

The funding from cap and trade is speculatively estimated to produce between $850 million and $1 billion annually, so at best that funding will require 118 years to complete the project, by which time it will be obsolete. And that is the most optimistic projection.

“Environmental challenges piled up.”
The project did not and does not meet state environmental standards. The commission sued in federal court and obtained federal exemptions from state environmental standards. We prove, here, that liberals (and I consider myself a liberal) are far more interested in promoting big flashy projects than they are in protecting the environment, and I find it ironic that the “cap and trade” funds which are produced by legislation passed for the purpose of protecting the environment, are used to fund a project which does not meet environmental standards.

“Conservative groups then sued the California High-Speed Rail Authority, saying their business plan did not have the required funding blueprint to cover the ballooning cost,”
Actually, the issue was that Proposition 1A contained a provision that the $9.95 billion could not be spent until a firm plan for the balance of the funding, at that time $31 billion, was in place to build the entire project. The plaintiffs claimed that such was not the case and wanted the bonds sale to be delayed until the stipulations in the proposition were met. The court agreed, as did the appeals court. The 3rd District Court of Appeal's three-judge panel reversed the decision without explaining why they did so.

As presently under construction, the high speed rail will carry people at 220 miles per hour for 29 miles from Fresno to the state prison at Corcoran. There is presently no money on hand to extend it beyond the state prison toward Bakersfield, but cap and trade money will begin flowing into the project in a couple of years, allowing about four miles of track to be built per year, so Bakersfield can expect to see service sometime during the current generation.

Auggie

(31,174 posts)
8. I voted against this project
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 11:56 AM
Jan 2015

In theory, it's great. In reality, the money would be better spent on improving /expanding local public transportation used for daily commutes.

Johonny

(20,852 posts)
11. In theory we can afford both
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 12:25 PM
Jan 2015

in practice we claim poverty of resources so as to never do anything for the American people.

Johonny

(20,852 posts)
10. I enjoy that the Republicans that hate it because it is too expensive
Tue Jan 6, 2015, 12:24 PM
Jan 2015

are the ones that put up constant legal challenges that made it more expensive. Republicanism is a disease.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why today’s high-speed ra...