Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hahn: High-Speed Rail Project ‘Critical’ To Calif., U.S. Economy
CBSLA.com) ^ | December 6, 2012 1:08 PM | Jan Stevens

Posted on 12/06/2012 2:25:25 PM PST by BenLurkin

TORRANCE (CBSLA.com) — A Southern California Congresswoman Thursday defended plans for a high-speed rail project despite spiraling costs and concerns about its long-term viability.

KNX 1070′s Jan Stevens reports Rep. Janice Hahn (D-Torrance) clashed with a Bakersfield lawmaker during a Transportation Committee hearing in Washington.

State legislators in July approved nearly $8 billion in spending on the first phase of the rail project that will ultimately connect the Southland to San Francisco.

Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) appealed to the Committee to review the business plan and to assess the viability of investing more funds into the project.

“There are concerns about the business plan itself, and equally concerning to me, just because we’ve invested money, does it mean we have to invest more?” McCarthy said. “Maybe we say, ‘No, we’re not gonna fund any more,’ and the savings should go to pay down our deficit.”

He warned the current plan would require borrowing a minimum of another $38 billion in federal funding to finish the project on time.

However, Hahn said the project will not only provide much-needed transportation alternatives, but will also bring jobs to thousands of Californians.

“Transportation congestion is strangling the business potential of our state and weighing down the economic activity that isn’t just critical to the success of California, but to the nation as a whole,” Hahn said.

Construction on the project is expected to begin next spring.


TOPICS: US: California
KEYWORDS: highspeedrail

1 posted on 12/06/2012 2:25:29 PM PST by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
I don't think people are leaving California for lack of high-speed rail.

2 posted on 12/06/2012 2:29:26 PM PST by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Janice Hahn is the daughter of Kenny Hahn the long time L.A. County Surpivor.

I met Kenny Hahn yers ago, and had the misfortune of having to interact with his staff. He was a slimeball machine politician of the worst kind.


3 posted on 12/06/2012 2:29:44 PM PST by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Transportation congestion is strangling the business potential of our state and weighing down the economic activity that isn’t just critical to the success of California, but to the nation as a whole,”

BS. It is taxes and regulation that are doing this, not transportation congestion. Hey, you dimwit, how about dealing with the 5,000,000 illegals driving on the roads of California?

Idiots like this should be horsewhipped.

4 posted on 12/06/2012 2:30:44 PM PST by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

If High Speed Rail is so great, and so crucial, why isn’t it being built all across the country by now? Why doesn’t the government do exactly what they did in the 1800’s to get the Transcontinental Railway completed? Bullet trains railways need new tracks and new paths that can be built to accommodate the higher speeds. THAT would be a stimulus...........


5 posted on 12/06/2012 2:31:57 PM PST by Red Badger (Lincoln freed the slaves. Obama just got them ALL back......................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
"High-Speed Rail" translated:

"Democrat-mandated diversion of millions of tax payer dollars to labor unions that donate to Democrat politicians via union dues"

In summary.. MONEY LAUNDERING OPERATION

6 posted on 12/06/2012 2:35:00 PM PST by Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America (IMPEACH OBAMA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

If we could tax, borrow and spend our way to prosperity, we’d all be rich by now.


7 posted on 12/06/2012 2:35:12 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Crucial to train unions,
8 posted on 12/06/2012 2:39:15 PM PST by cruise_missile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

A fact to consider:

Passenger rail service has NEVER been profitable, and has always been subsidized by freight charges.


9 posted on 12/06/2012 2:40:09 PM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

These people are delusional


10 posted on 12/06/2012 2:41:27 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

bump

do not worry.... we’ll boost the economy with unemployment checks for everyone...

:p


11 posted on 12/06/2012 2:44:20 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Willie Green, please pick up the perennial in the red public train courtesy phone...


12 posted on 12/06/2012 2:44:28 PM PST by TADSLOS (No need to watch the movie "Idiocracy". We're living it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitWielder1

But it helps them to leave faster....


13 posted on 12/06/2012 2:44:55 PM PST by wny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BitWielder1

New 52% income tax for wealthy people will be the reason.


14 posted on 12/06/2012 2:48:41 PM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

No, not always. Passenger service at one time was more profitable than freight, and that didn’t all have to do with the continued prevalence of canals (many of which are still in use today, incidentally). Then came the property taxes on the railroads . . . and of course, some “progressive” politicians had the idea of “commuted” fares for workers traveling between home and jobs, which further cut into profits . . . and in the early twentieth century, the next generation of progressive politicians had the idea of city-owned railroads as a “public utility” of sorts, which “competed” with private railroads . . . (see the declension?)


15 posted on 12/06/2012 2:49:40 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Government Corporate Union Welfare.


16 posted on 12/06/2012 2:59:34 PM PST by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soycd

Even more wasted money.


17 posted on 12/06/2012 3:11:01 PM PST by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Take the total cost of building and operating for a decade, divide by ridership, and I’ll bet anything it is more than $1,000,000 per rider.

You can pay people to stay home and it is cheaper than trains. Almost every time.


18 posted on 12/06/2012 3:11:55 PM PST by Uncle Miltie (BOHICA eGOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

A basic problem with this high speed rail is paradoxical.

This is, that about the only place you can put such rail is over the same right of way already used by low speed rail.

And almost all the low speed rail right of ways West of the Mississippi are owned by Union Pacific. Creating new right of way would be insanely expensive.

But this also means that the California high speed rail is intended to take the place of low speed rail lines. And in this case, if low speed rail already existed, it is a great indicator of how profitable high speed rail lines would be.

In a nutshell, it isn’t. The low speed rail lines on this route have long been money losers. There just isn’t the demand they need even for low speed rail.

But, they insist, high speed rail will be profitable. Because it is high! and speed! and rail!

And that is no way to run a railroad.


19 posted on 12/06/2012 3:12:09 PM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Pennies and Nickels will NO LONGER be Minted as of 1/1/13 - Tim Geithner, US Treasury Sect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Barf me out...


20 posted on 12/06/2012 3:24:30 PM PST by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
The low speed rail lines on this route have long been money losers.

Isn't Union Pacific pretty much the most profitable railroad on the planet?

21 posted on 12/06/2012 3:27:32 PM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

I’ve met and worked with her and she did not fall far from the tree.


22 posted on 12/06/2012 3:29:44 PM PST by jettester (I got paid to break 'em - not fly 'em)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
However, Hahn said the project will not only provide much-needed transportation alternatives, but will also bring jobs to thousands of Californians.

I'm sick and tired of these liberal a$$h*le politicians saying we need things for "thousands of jobs"! It's always a lie! Heck, let's build a monorail to Hawaii, that'll create thousands of jobs. But we do not need these things!

Let's spend money because it's critical and necessary, not because it's wonderful to have someone work on it (and worthless middlemen make up the bulk of "jobs"). High speed trains are trains to no where and don't benefit the majority of people who would never use it. You want transportation, provide more bus lines. Far cheaper and more flexible.

23 posted on 12/06/2012 3:44:48 PM PST by roadcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

“Passenger rail service has NEVER been profitable, and has always been subsidized by freight charges.”

That’s why there is an AMTRAK! There is no private passenger service that I know of in the US today, except for maybe the Wine Train up in Napa. But it’s a round trip to St. Helena and you don’t get to get off there. Good food and wine though!


24 posted on 12/06/2012 3:50:49 PM PST by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin; All

High speed rail lines require many things . Long straight runs that don’t have towns & cities along the line because you have to slow down when going thru towns & cities to be safe due to city traffic & noise complaints . You need a dedicated rail line ie no freight trains on the same track as the high speed rail. most important of all is paying customers to ride the damn thing . if you don’t have these things you got a boondoggle ,nothing else.


25 posted on 12/06/2012 3:54:37 PM PST by Nebr FAL owner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TADSLOS

Ha!


26 posted on 12/06/2012 4:01:16 PM PST by Osage Orange ( Liberalism, ideas so good they have to be mandatory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
You're right on target. High-speed rail will lose money in California for a long, long time, simply because in the foreseeable future people will still need cars to get around in California's major cities. By the time train passengers wait for the shuttle bus to the rental car company, stand in line to rent their cars, return their cars and take the shuttle back to the train station, and pay for their rental cars, they will have used up most of the time and all the money they saved by taking high-speed rail instead of driving. So the only people who will want to take the high-speed train are people who are on business and are staying reasonably close to the train station, or people who have family & friends who can pick them up at the train station. This eliminates a big group of potential riders and will cause high-speed rail to lose money at least until 2050. Quite possibly, high speed rail will never be able to break even on cash flow in CA.

For the foreseeable future, high-speed rail is really only going to work well in the Northeast in the Boston to Washington corridor where cities are more compact and it's easier to get around by walking and using cabs, and public transportation takes you to many more places than it cam take you to in CA. In the very long run, maybe in the second half of this century, when public transportation improves greatly in CA, then high-speed rail could make sense and at least break even. We shouldn't be spending tax money and borrowed money on this project until then.

27 posted on 12/06/2012 4:25:01 PM PST by socialism_stinX (The national government is always the most dangerous organization in every country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Critical?

Bull manure! Something we’ve never had does not somehow become critical to have.

Invariably, the more gubmint thugs lust after a thing, the more detrimental it is or will be to JQ Public. That’s Robin’s Law #3.


28 posted on 12/06/2012 4:37:16 PM PST by RobinOfKingston (Democrats--the party of Evil. Republicans--the party of Stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: socialism_stinX

Just to clarify, business travelers who are staying reasonably close to the train station and doing business nearby will be able to take a taxi or a hotel shuttle bus from the train station to their hotel and to business meetings. Therefore the high-speed train will be convenient for these people and I’m sure many of them will choose to take the high-speed trains. But most of the people who still have to rent a car if they take the train will choose to drive their own car or take an airline flight, which will still be much faster between Northern California and Southern California.


29 posted on 12/06/2012 4:38:03 PM PST by socialism_stinX (The national government is always the most dangerous organization in every country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Now that I think about it, since we’re all going to be subsidizing this high-speed train line with tax payments for a long long time, I’d rather build the train line from from LA to Las Vegas. At least then, when we get off the train in Vegas we’ll get free drinks from hot-looking waitresses as partial compensation for our tax subsidies. I suggest we re-route this train from LA to Las Vegas.


30 posted on 12/06/2012 5:05:01 PM PST by socialism_stinX (The national government is always the most dangerous organization in every country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: socialism_stinX

Brown should go to Vegas and meet with casino owners, mayor, and gov of Nevada. If they want to build line Cal will not provide tax money, but will expedite right of way and permits.

Line from Burbank to Palmdale and then barstow. Another from Ontario to Victorville to Barstow. One train from Barstow to Vegas.

Gambling on the train.


31 posted on 12/06/2012 5:09:05 PM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
They would get more ridership and repeat ridership if instead the either restore or build modern replicas of the Golden Age steam locomotives. From the 21st Century Limited to my favorite of which I have almost every engine and passenger car is the Southern Pacific Daylight. Arguably one of the prettiest steam locomotives the GS-4.
32 posted on 12/06/2012 5:55:05 PM PST by Eye of Unk (A Civil Cold War in America is here, its already been declared.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson