TDPS: Which is bigger deal, no special interests at 2012 DNC or $53 billion for rail? TRANSCRIPT

Run time: 03:46 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=730iGmMurHM   Posted on YouTube: February 22, 2011 By YouTube Member: MidweekPolitics Views on YouTube: 209   Posted on DU: February 23, 2011 By DU Member: celtics23 Views on DU: 484

 
From: www.davidpakman.com | Subscription: www.davidpakman.com/membership | YouTube: www.youtube.com/midweekpolitics

David: What's more significant, Louis, what sounds more significant to you, Barack Obama, number one, banning special interests from contributing to the 2012 Democratic National Convention, which we have heard from a DNC official is happening, or number two, proposing $53 billion in spending for high-speed rail? Which, to you, strikes you as more important, more significant?

Louis: That's tough. Tough when we factor in our debt crisis.

David: Well, here's what I think: I think that the DNC special interest thing is a complete sham. I think it is just a posturing move, it is riddled with loopholes, and the reality is it's not going to actually affect campaign finance reform and the completely corrupt system that we actually have now in place, whereas $53 billion, throwing $53 billion at high-speed rail, over six years, mind you, as proposed, it's under $10 billion a year, actually could get things moving in terms of alternative energy and high-speed rail, two areas where the U.S. has been and continues to fall embarrassingly behind the rest of the world.

Louis: Yeah, but...

David: And I know it's a drop in the bucket. It's not enough money, is the reality. If I had to choose, I believe the DNC special interest thing is a political posturing nonsense move; putting money towards high-speed rail I think is good. And by the way...

Louis: The high-speed rail proposal could be a political posturing move as well. It's just a proposal, and if it doesn't happen, oh well, it was quashed, what can I do? Oops.

David: It's not-- but it's more than a proposal, it's an actual request. In other words, the money will be put towards it unless lawmakers get in the way, which many will try to, as we've seen.

Louis: Of course.

David: Governors from the Midwest, they don't have the population density to care about high-speed rail, they've said it, we just don't want the money.

Louis: That and the auto manufacturers might have an effect, too.

David: Yeah, that we know. And you know, every time I talk about that, we get emails. I feel like some people don't accept or take into account how much power auto and airline lobbies have when we talk about high-speed rail. And the logic, to me...

Louis: The same amount of power as the tobacco lobbies and the pharmaceutical lobbies, any of these huge corporations, when it comes to any matter.

David: The mechanism is such that, where we live is a perfect example, from here to Washington, D.C., driving takes, depending on traffic, six and a half to eight hours, OK? The train takes about seven hours. Flying takes 40 minutes, all right? Now, if you factor in, you've got to be at the airport an hour and 15 minutes beforehand, and then you've got to get out of the airport, and then you have to drive, in our case, 40 minutes to the airport, you've got a several-hour trip. If we could get a faster train, and assuming that the price was favorable, I'm definitely not-- I already would never drive to DC, but I would probably not fly, either. I would just drive to the local train station, get on the train, and get to D.C. in, I don't know, maybe five hours, if we were able to increase, you know, 25%, 30%.

Louis: Yeah. Faster, that's the key. And we can go to D.C. by train, but it's slow.

David: It's seven hours, right. So obviously, I'm going to fly less, and if I have a car and really, in town I don't need one, not me, I would keep my car either way, but many people would say I really only... I can get around locally without a car, and now I'm taking the fast train to D.C., I'll get rid of the car altogether. So remember, corporate influence here. Those are dollars out of the pockets of airlines and automobile manufacturers. You had better know that they are going to get in the way as much as they possibly can.

Louis: Definitely.



Transcript provided by Alex Wickersham and www.Subscriptorium.com. For transcripts, translations, captions, and subtitles, or for more information, visit www.Subscriptorium.com, or contact Alex at subscriptorium@gmail.com.