Diane Harkey’s Crazy Comments
Assemblymember Diane Harkey is a Republican from southern Orange County, and like most Republicans from that part of the county, is a total wingnut. In 2010 she proposed a bill to gut the high speed rail project by preventing the sale of the HSR bonds that California voters had approved in November 2008. The bill went nowhere.
Unlike the Central Valley Republican members of Congress, who flip-flopped on HSR once the Koch Brothers demanded it, Harkey has always opposed high speed rail. Harkey’s ideology appears to be a typical right-wing one of opposing government spending on anything but roads and oil. Peak oil and climate change are liberal lies in her mind, and of course, nobody rides trains in California as far as she is concerned – even though there are several popular stations in her own district.
Still, that didn’t prepare California for Harkey’s shocking and offensive comments today about the high speed rail project:
Harkey pointed to California’s high speed rail project as an example of unnecessary spending. She also objected to it being built through farmland.
“This is cultural genocide, and we can’t tolerate that,” she said.
Wow.
Cultural genocide.
Harkey is unhinged. The loss of some 3,000 acres of farmland – a pittance – is nothing remotely like “cultural genocide.” Only a small handful of farmers will be affected by the project, probably less than were affected by the construction of Interstate 5 in the 1960s. And many more will be protected by the project, since the train would save farmland by channeling future growth into the existing urban areas and cut down on pressure to convert farms to subdivisions.
Harkey’s comments do nothing to help the cause of a small group of Central Valley farmers agitating for a different route for the project. As I’ve said before, these farmers can’t stop the project, and would only undermine their own efforts if they tried. But it really doesn’t help for people like Harkey to make offensive and frankly crazy comments like these.
“the train would save farmland by channeling future growth into the existing urban areas and cut down on pressure to convert farms to subdivisions.”
And rail will reduce automobile sources of air pollution relieving pressure on farming equipment and practices to meet EPA air quality standards.
But really, the way to deal with nut-case arguments is to ridicule the argument.
morris brown Reply:
April 7th, 2011 at 10:55 pm
Joe:
I have been trying my hardest to deal with nut-case arguments. The whole California High Speed Rail project is just that — “a nut-case”, terribly designed, promoted though lies and deceit — “a project like the “Emperor without Clothes”.
At least more than a few are finally realizing its true nature, not only here in California, but also nationwide. The quicker this project is killed, the quicker this ghastly waste of public funds, both State and Federal, will cease.
YesonHSR Reply:
April 7th, 2011 at 11:50 pm
Shut up old bitch..Nadia put your fingers in your nimby ears…
dave Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:19 am
I don’t think that’s necessary. Just ignore it, he’s passionate about killing Ca HSR, and I’m passionate about it being built. What’s the big deal? You can convince him HSR is a good idea as much as you can convince me it’s a bad one.
YesonHSR Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:35 am
Its very necessary..I not PC baby deal with it.. and I’m sick and tired of the NIMBY’s .. it would get this thing built we have to stop dealing with every little tweety bird being upset… did you ever play football high school?.. I’m from a steel town… they called you ladies until you could knock them down…
Donk Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 9:21 am
Agreed. Calling him names just makes you look bad.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 7:31 pm
I’m inclined to go with the no-name-calling strategy myself, not so much as to try to convince someone like Morris (or Richard or Synonomouse) whom you can not convince, as much as to convince others who may be sitting on the fence, but who may be put off by excessive roughness by us.
Rather, let us let circumstances and the anti-rail crowd’s foolishness work for us. Let them show themselves as the fools that they are.
You might say we will let them be like the emperor who ordered the suit of magic cloth, which was supposed to be invisible to fools. Instead, the emperor revealed himself as the fool when the little boy on the parade route called out, “The King is naked!”
Let the anti-rail crowd reveal and “expose” itself–that can be more fun!
* * *
“You can’t make a monkey out of me!”
“I can’t do that, and don’t have to. You do that yourself because that is you!”
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 7:40 pm
People make good money hurling insults on TV and radio, and they are celebrated for it. You overemphasize the importance of civility.
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 7:41 pm
And, sometimes calling someone like Harkey an asshole is the right thing to do.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
Maybe you’re right, but maybe we can still do something–along the lines of “good cop, bad cop.”
Hmm, should be able to have some fun with that. . .
joe Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:41 pm
Morris:
I am damn sure that when HSR comes up the peninsula, you and your kind will have so poisoned the well that each of the awesome, anti-rail cities will be unable to raise a cent to improve the basic structure.
Enjoy the wall.
I sure will be laughing at consequences of NIMBYism.
Berkeley is your role model.
Matt Korner Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:21 am
As long as there are people who profit from keeping Californians enslaved to oil, then there will be people like Assembly Member Harkey to keep these interests fat and happy.
The real cultural genocide would be killing the corrupt politicians and their masters.
Matt Korner Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:34 am
By the way, what’s with all the violent rhetoric these regressive politicians like to use?
Genocide…. ? Anyone who would use that word in this context is a nut-job; she discredits herself with that too-cute terminology.
Joe’s point is more significant than he explains since California produces more of the world’s food than any other region on the planet. That fertile agricultural land is threatened by highway-induced development patterns. Is Harkey discussing these issues?
Is Harkey even complaining about government-built highways at all? She seems perfectly content to spend public money on those things that keep Big Oil pleased with her.
I think we need to start linking the rhetoric with the donors financing it.
Peter Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 9:24 am
It’s like the Palin “blood libel” bullshit. People seriously should not resort to such hyperbole, or, as in Palin’s case, use terms she doesn’t know what they mean.
Nathanael Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 10:12 am
It’s projection. The right-wing regressives have strong links to violent groups who *actually want* to kill their opponents; remember that they derive from the Confederacy, which was happy to start a war in order to expand slavery. So of course they think in violent terms, and assume that their opponents are out to kill people.
We aren’t. Unfortunately, they often actually are. Remember the assassination attempt on Gabby Giffords?
“…and like most Republicans from that part of the county, is a total wingnut”
I’ve been a longtime reader of this blog, and while Republicans are undoubtedly anti-HSR, it would be nice to see some of the political rhetoric toned down a bit. A blog like this one could be a great tool in dispelling misinformation, but if it comes across as partisan that job becomes significantly more difficult. Statements like the above, and frequent references to the Koch brothers and other demons of the Left do not help the credibility of what are otherwise very well thought-out posts.
While it’s unlikely that anything written here will sway the far right, PLEASE try to avoid rhetoric that might alienate the middle-of-the-road partisans whose support is key to actually getting HSR built and running in California.
Moly Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Agreed. I love this blog and its daily updates, gathering information on all facets of the project in one convenient place and opening the forum for discussion, but the rhetoric has taken a decidedly nasty turn in the past few weeks especially, which irks me. That sort of behavior and language is precisely the thing that Robert rails against night and day with NIMBYs, and I’m not even sure he realizes he’s doing a very similar thing here.
I concur that this blog could be a vital part of the fight for HSR not just in California, but nationwide, but so long as this sort of language creeps into the posts, I’m hesitant to actually link it to people in many cases because it has so many ‘trigger words’ that can instantly derail a discussion (such as ‘wingnut’).
Please, Robert, don’t fall for the same opiate of poisonous passion as others have.
Donk Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:56 pm
Agreed.
joe Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 5:13 pm
….Because people will be turned off by a blog post and oppose HSR?
Uh, that’s kind of insulting the economic intelligence of a conservative. Sure HSR makes sense but my fee-fees were hurt by the intertubes.
If I saw a post that insulted Liburls for opposing HSR I’d correct the mistake.
rholliday Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 9:59 am
“Sure HSR makes sense but my fee-fees were hurt by the intertubes”
It’s not about hurting feelings, it’s about undermining your own argument. Calling someone out for saying that a loss of 3000 acres of farmland is “cultural genocide” is fine. Clearly, that person’s arguments don’t add up, and by pointing this out you’re strengthening the case for HSR. HOWEVER, if in the process of making that argument you engage in name-calling and make vague assertions that some shadowy conspiracy led by the Koch brothers is the cause of all opposition, you put yourself right back on shaky ground.
Put another way, if you tell me you disagree with me and state your reasons for disagreeing with me then we can have a civil discussion and possibly find some common ground. If you say you disagree with me, state your reasons for disagreeing with me, and pepper that explanation with claims that I’m obviously an idiot, crazy, and manipulated by *insert random bogeyman here* then it’s far less likely that I would see any point in taking you seriously.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Where are you when the anti-HSR commenters are hurling invective?
rholliday Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 12:39 pm
If a comment is full of invective (example from Morris Brown above: The whole California High Speed Rail project is just that — “a nut-case”) I generally skip over it. That’s the point I’m trying to make: there are real, valid arguments against HSR, but calling the entire project “nut-case” loses me immediately, and as a result I won’t be considering Morris’ arguments. Similarly, a post that resorts to calling opponents of the project “wingnuts” (even if an argument could be made that such a description is valid) decreases its credibility. Words matter, and when someone chooses words designed to provoke the other side it’s far less likely that the substance of their argument will be heard.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
You didn’t answer my question.
If your aim is to keep the conversation civil that applies to every side of the conversation. If you hve some other ulterior motive maybe not.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 10:09 am
Someone in the middle of the road would not be offended by someone calling Diane Harkey a “wingnut” – that is exactly what she is. She is a right-wing extremist who, at any other time in American history aside from the last 11 years, would be seen as a fringe character. I’m not going to shy away from speaking the truth about that. One of the biggest problems in American politics is that we have let the discussion be hijacked by truly insane ideas because we’re all so afraid of hurting someone’s feelings by calling it out as the truth.
I make a point to never criticize “Republicans” with a broad brush. Many Republican voters back HSR, as do some Republican politicians. But Harkey is an extremist and should be treated as such.
Although don’t worry, Democrats – namely President Obama – are going to get their share of criticism in the next post.
rholliday Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 10:42 am
Robert – to clarify, I am not “offended” by your use of “wingnut”, but if your goal is to promote HSR then you are doing yourself a disservice by using such language. Just as a left-leaning reader might turn away from an otherwise-sensible post on defense that calls Kucinich a “nutjob”, or a post on fiscal matters that casually attributes opposition to the money of George Soros, these characterizations are unnecessary distractions to the arguments being made.
Nathanael Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 10:15 am
The problem is saying “like most Republicans from that part of the county”, Robert. That should be fixed. Obviously Harkey is a wingnut. It doesn’t help to characterize the whole region that way. It should at least be “like most Republican *elected officials* from that part of the county”, it gives the benefit of the doubt to the voters.
Who cares a a fucking Moron thinks about HSR…let alone a rebpigracists form ugly stupid Orange
Paulus Magnus Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:21 am
You do realize that you and your attitude are one of the most effective means to sway people against HAR, right?
Paulus Magnus Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:22 am
That should be HSR, not HAR
YesonHSR Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:42 am
And what shall we do??? Given them a sweet cake of the lemon meringue pie?? I don’t think my attitude will sway anybody aganist high-speed rail .. they are more than able to loudmouth about high-speed rail.. and why don’t you speak to the Reason foundation since your so self-righteous..
joe Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:46 pm
Laughing at NIMBY’s and the rhetoric of anti-rail loonies is NOT going to set the HSR project back one step.
Gasoline is 4.15 a gallon and we’re passing the global oil production peak.
The current generation rides mass transit to text/surf instead of buying a 2 ton piece of metal to move themselves around town at 0.50 per rmile.
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 2:52 am
There’s maybe 20-30 people who read and comment on this blog and they all made up their minds years ago. YesonHSR has no more sway than Robert, Clem, Morris or Richard.
D.P. Lubric, however, is turning me toward steam trains.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:41 am
:-)
Risenmessiah Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 8:11 am
…and they are all overweight, single men typing in the basement with just underwear on….
I would defer to Robert about just how many page views that this site gets. You never know. That said, while it wouldn’t be conducive to have HSR advocates shout everyone down…some frustration is understandable from time to time.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 2:14 pm
I haven’t checked the Google Analytics in months. I hope I remember my login.
The comments here, much as I love them, play barely any role in driving public opinion on the project.
joe Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
Your info here helped win over a Gilroy city council member.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 10:09 am
In the comments or a blog post?
Would love to hear more about that via email…
Risenmessiah Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 10:29 pm
Well, in that case….
YesonHSR Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
and they are all overweight, single men typing in the basement with just underwear on…….NO my weight is 185lbs and 33 inch waist..and I live on the 5th floor with my PC facing out the window with a view of SFs downtown..and no underwear just sweats..!!!
VBobier Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 3:08 pm
Well there’s no basement here(I live in a Mobile Home), I am single, About 400lbs in weight w/a 64 inch waist, Of course I’m 6’1″ tall, Blond(no grey hair either, My hairline hasn’t ever changed and Its still thick), Blue Eyed and 50… Oh and I’m fully dressed, As I usually am.
dave Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 6:42 pm
OMG, this thread is hilarious.
John Burrows Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 6:25 pm
Unlikely that any minds are going to be changed on this blog. But hanging around here for the last year or so has given me (at least in my mind) the confidence to defend high speed rail whenever I see an opportunity. Who knows—Maybe somewhere on the internet I will change someones mind.
BruceMcF Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
Actually, I’d like “rebpigracist” votes in favor of HSR where its in their self interest ~ as it often is out here in the real world as opposed to the shiny fantasy Reason/Heritage/Cato world.
I’d like to see research into the amount of farmland that can be saved by high-speed rail and the corresponding amount of food that is able to be produced by that land that would, in turn, feed the world.
High-speed rail is likely to not only preserve farming, and its culture; the lives of real human beings who will starve with the lack of available food at affordable prices will be saved.
Matt Korner Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:42 am
Now, who is the person committing genocide, Ms. Harkey?
YesonHSR Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:57 am
Ms. White thang in Dana Point….. I have to say my year living in Orange County made me realize what a buch of racist live there… when your friend’s father tells you how the wet backs have ruined California and then in the same breath give you advice on where good Mexican restaurants are gives you an insight to the mindset of these people
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 2:54 am
Even the wet backs in Orange County are pretty conservative. My grandfather hated illegal immigrants more than white people!
dave Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
Haha, former wet backs hating current wet backs, that’s classic. I know, I’m Mexican myself.
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 7:43 pm
It’s a weird thing.
With my grandpa, it wasn’t so much hatred of illegal immigrants, but he despised any Mexican nationalism. I remember vividly him cursing out another guy who had a Mexican flag on his pickup truck. He yelled at him, “If you love Mexico so much, go back there!”
God, my grandpa was such a patriot that he would make many white Republicans green with envy. His father, my great-grandfather, came over here from Jalisco God knows when, and never looked back.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 8:00 pm
Spokker, I don’t know your family’s background, but I find it interesting that so many in California and some other Western states think so poorly of people of Hispanic descent; California was settled by Spaniards, and many Hispanic families in your state have histories there that go back about 200 years before the first “gringos” showed up.
Like you say, a weird thing, at least to me. . .of course, I also think it weird that the (cough) “conservatives” of this country think trains are so “un-American,” considering our rail history. . .I guess I need to get on an oil company payroll somehow to be an American today. . .:-)
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 8:52 pm
That’s true, but my family descends from Mexico Mexico, so people definitely want me to go back where they think I came from.
Which would suck if my citizenship were stripped away and I got deported back to Mexico. I don’t even know Spanish.
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
I don’t even look all that Hispanic.
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 3:07 am
And despite Orange County being and becoming more heavily Latino, they have fuck-all for representation in this county. Outside of Santa Ana there’s Loretta Sanchez, whose district is gerrymandered to include practically every brown person here.
Aaron Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
In the past I have heard that for every $1.00 that agriculture produces it has a $3.00 economic impact within a community. If the HSR takes 100′ of land (12 acres per mile) and lets use a very low production rate of $3,000 per acre, then the production per mile is approximately $36,000 per mile and economic impact to a community would be approximately $110,000 per mile. This assumes that the HSR only has an impact on the 100′ worth of production, but in some instances it can be larger.
This does also not take into account the issues in our area that the HSR presents by creating a new transportation corridor between two existing corridors that will require massive relocation of facilities, increased traffic patters, and a use of adjacent parcels for resources. Forgot to mention that the HSR has been talking with farmers about using land to mine dirt for the project.
Spokker Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 5:51 pm
But HSR has no economic impact at all! It’s a negative economic impact actually!
For every $1 in agriculture there’s $3 magically generated. But for HSR, no such argument can be made, for we know that for every $1 invested in HSR many dollars are ripped from the economy and poor farmers and oh the humanity.
HSR = no benefits from time saved, no benefits from a more comfortable mode of travel, no benefits from taking cars off the road or planes out of the sky, no benefits from construction jobs, no benefits from increased commerce due to being able to get around the state more easily. No beneifts!
But farming = sacrosanct. Taking an inch of land erases millions of dollars in economic prosperity and oh we can’t afford it and oh we can’t perform agricultural genocide!
joe Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 2:27 pm
And central valley ag uses “free” water – from the public built infrastructure.
The infrastructure we built has more than paid for itself but we never demanded full cost recovery from farmers.
Alon Levy Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 4:08 pm
$110,000 per mile for a project whose cheapest segment costs $35m per mile is trivial. Sorry.
Clem Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 11:05 am
$110,000 per mile per year.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 11:12 am
How many acres of farmland would be taken out of production if HSR isn’t built and instead more highway lanes and airports are built?
Clem Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 11:33 am
Many more. I was just pointing out that one cost is fixed while the other is ongoing, which makes a direct comparison invalid.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 11:55 am
Unless someone figures out teletranport or there’s a collapse of the population there’s going to be something built. HSR uses the least amount of land. If you don’t build HSR the land you use for more highway or more airport will also be forgoing that ongoing revenue.
Alternatively the price of whatever they are growing out there could collapse. Or their could be a drought and the irrigation fails. Or it could sprout McMansions. The argument falls apart once you get past “oh noes the economic activity!!!!”
Clem Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
Yes indeed. To make omelet, you need to break some ags.
Alon Levy Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Sorry, I was blithely assuming that Aaron doesn’t ask me to believe farmland is worth so much that its net present value would be $250,000 per acre.
But okay, let’s go with his numbers. The net present value of farmland loss is about $3m per mile, still about an order of magnitude less than the cost overruns that would come from putting aerials in existing corridors.
Nathanael Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 10:46 am
Unfortunately for your argument, the estimated economic benefits from California HSR are far, far greater than $110,000 per mile. The estimated benefits within the CV alone are more than that if I remember correctly.
Nathanael Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 10:48 am
Um, also, HSR isn’t actually going to use the full 100 feet. “Takings” are somewhat in excess of the actual amount of land removed from production, so you probably have overestimated by a factor of between 1.25 and 1.66, depending.
Clem Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 11:08 am
The two-track HSR right of way with open drainage (as would be the case in agricultural areas, where the cost of closed drainage is not justified) is 100 feet wide, fence to fence. See CHSRA technical memo TM-1.1.21 for details.
Well, one of the arguments I’ve been making is that our oil-driven, auto-centered lifestyle is also a serious national vulnerability issue and security risk.
Turns out that our military thinks the same way–and check out how they are dealing with it:
http://getenergysmartnow.com/2011/04/08/its-all-about-capability/
By the way, I don’t have the source immediately available to me, but reportedly the Army calculated the cost of diesel fuel in either Iraq or Afghanistan at being something like $400 per gallon delivered in the field. Dealing with IEDs and the necessary (and heavily) armed escorts for truck convoys accounted for much of this. This combination of cost and vulnerability is also why the Army has been looking at solar power to replace diesel-driven generators for field base operations; anything like this they don’t have to haul in is an improvement in their capability as well.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:44 am
I don’t have the link immediately available for this one either, but Bruce McF has made the case that the Republicans should be called on this as a defense issue. This insistence on a national oil-based transport system is something the military has to deal with, with all the costs, human and financial, that implies.
We certainly wouldn’t have had people, including the Republicans, insist on everyone driving cars and burning gasoline (and using up the stockpile of rubber) in WW II.
Derek Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 1:59 pm
If the strategic highway network has outlived its usefulness, perhaps those funds should be redirected to electric rail projects. Besides CA-HSR, Caltrain could also use the money for electrification.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
Ah, yes, here is the Bruce McF commentary on Amtrak, in which he has a brief mention of the defense angle:
http://midnight-populist.blogspot.com/2011/01/sunday-train-going-on-attack-for-amtrak.html
A Siegel Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 6:13 am
The $400 per gallon is possible to reach but is, truly, an exceptional amount that occurs in rare occasions. Imagine the Fully Burdened Cost of Fuel (FBCF) of a gallon of gasoline that gets airlifted into a country, then flown by helicopter to a refueling station, where it is loaded on a HMMWV which drives perhaps 30 kilometers to deliver 40 gallons of fuel to an outpost for their generator. What is the cost of those 40 gallons of fuel when we consider security personnel, equipment acquisition, opportunity costs, etc …? And, imagine what the cost per kilowatt hour of electricity would be in these circumstances? It is those sorts of ‘scenarios’ that lead to $100s per gallon FBCF and >$2 per kWh costs.
The reality in an Afghanistan (or Iraq or …) is that the majority of the fuel is not in such extreme circumstances. However, even at oil prices half of today’s, even the most conservative FBCF analyses put the average FBCF above $10/gallon and there are reasoned cases that would put it above $20.
By the way, key point is that this is first and foremost about capability … the fiscal costs are truly important but are less important for convincing the military that this is a critical issue since the ‘people costs’ (including in blood) are much higher.
Yes, if there is any impact to farmland culture, it is “cultural preservation”.
…as future growth will be more centralized in already urbanized areas. Less homes to eat up farmland.
Stuff like this makes me wonder if there is a monetary game naysayers are playing…. like, the daily challenge to dis-credit taxpayer funded projects, and if you win, some god will come down and award you campaign funding for your next election.
Risenmessiah Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 8:13 am
Twin gods, actually. Their names are “David and Charles Koch”.
VBobier Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 9:27 am
More like Twin Demons to Me…
I just want to point out that California has 25,364,695 acres of farm land – 25 million! And she’s worried about the effects on 3,000.
But then She’s a screwball(As in Elmer Fudd, See pic, Classic) Wingnut.
Dear Ms. Harkey,
You’re a disgrace to your district. And your district doesn’t have very high standards to begin with.
Yours,
A third-generation survivor of real-life genocide.
Bobierto Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 10:13 am
Thanks, Alon, I didn’t feel I quite had the credibility to make a comment like that. But when people toss around the word “genocide” for idiotic things like the loss of some farmland, it cheapens the word and demeans the victims and survivors of genocide, pogrom, and persecution all over the world.
VBobier Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 1:37 pm
I couldn’t agree more Bobierto.
Andre Peretti Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 3:54 pm
As we say in French: “ce qui est excessif est insignifiant” (all that’s exaggerated is insignificant).
Fran Florez is off the board – and has been replaced with Peninsula based Jim Hartnett.
Mr. Hartnett is married to RWC Council Member Roseanne Foust (Foust got in to some trouble over the Cargill project http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula/ci_15636100 – which coincidentally is a Peter Calthorpe project – same guy doing Vision California).
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=156256&title=Peninsula%20gets%20voice%20on%20high-speed%20rail%20board
It is a small world after all.
Clem Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 11:08 am
Foust is also behind the Alliance for Sustainable Transit and Jobs (listed in HSR links in the right-hand column of this blog), a group that advocates for HSR on the peninsula.
Any bets on where the mid-peninsula HSR stop will be located?
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
Excellent news – if Florez wasn’t going to stay, then it’s good that the Peninsula got someone and that the person is a project supporter. After all, the job of the CHSRA board is to *build the train* as the people of California have mandated.
She’s crazy, but I’m going to sound a cautionary note here. We should not dismiss concerns about loss of farmland so blithely, making appeals to progress no matter how well-intentioned with a callousness that ignores the real costs, even when those costs are worth it on balance. The construction of freeways was and continues to be a scar on the land and a scar on human life, and it was justified with exactly the same motives and language that you are now using.
A better approach would be to openly acknowledge the costs, and work toward bringing farmers in as partners to find a way to mitigate the costs. Maybe pair the construction of the tracks with measures to protect farmland from suburban development. Maybe provide space for farmer’s markets near future stations, so that the train is bringing them more potential customers. I don’t have lots of ideas but that’s not the point. (A better approach–ask the farmers about their ideas!) The point is to not be blinded by idealism and hubris into making the same mistakes made by the construction of the interstate highway system, and to use the investment in high-speed rail to embrace and implement a broader vision of human progress.
synonymouse Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:47 pm
I doubt there is any effective way of protecting “farmland from urban development”. This is an historical juggernaut fueled by huge amounts of money and demographic pressures. The best recourse is to not further enable sprawl or speed it along.
That means moving the hsr back to the I-5 express racetrack and acceding to the UP’s offer to upgrade their 99 corridor trackage to 110 mph operation, not that bad when you consider the stops that will required to serve the cities and towns enroute.
VBobier Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
Terms for the UPRR’s surrender CHSRA: Unconditional
joe Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:53 pm
Feeding the troll:
More people live in Fresno Co. than Milwaukee Co & more live in Bakersfield than Madison – the HSR corridor Milwaukee to Madison is far shorter than Fresno – Bakersfield.
I-5 I-5 I-5 …….
datacruncher Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 10:47 am
Developers have been pushing plans for new town developments along I-5 since before the recession. For example, Quay Valley is a 12,000 acre, 50,000 house proposed development in an undeveloped area along I-5 about 5 miles south of Kettleman City.
http://www.quayvalley.com/location.html
Move HSR to follow I-5 and I would expect the developers would push a proposition for a new station to feed their dreams. Better to keep new development in and adjacent to existing urban areas.
synonymouse Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
You are correct, but the chances of putting off stations – for “technical reasons” – are better on the racetrack than on the 99 corridor. Besides once the I-5 line is up and running to Sac and Altamont any future outlays should be directed to the 99 line, which is much more controversial, expensive and given to the incremental approach.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 2:14 pm
So we are now going to build four tracks of railroad? two along I-5 and two along SR-99? How is that shorter, cheaper, built more quickly, than two tracks?
synonymouse Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 10:59 am
The future outlays I am referring to would be to the UP for trackage upgrades on the 99 corridor.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 11:19 am
UP doesn’t ship things using hovercraft, even then there would be a mowing budget. How is building two tracks of railroad and upgrading two other tracks, which is going to be almost as pricey as upgrading them to full HSR, cheaper?
synonymouse Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 11:36 am
You have superb, genuine hsr travel times SF to LA via the racetrack and pretty decent passenger rail service on the 99 corridor.
Of course, lose the wretched Tehachapi detour, which for all that meandering still has, what, 3.5% gradients and can’t be used for freight. The detour will end up an under-utilized, high maintenance white elephant.
Jerry Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:23 pm
Cascadian – “ask the farmers”
If they help plan the battle, they won’t battle the plan.
thatbruce Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 4:50 pm
Were I a benevolent Governator, I’d simply ban urban development in the CV (more specifically, the flat bits up to the foothills which I-5 and CA-99 broadly follow) and leave the rest to market forces.
Nathanael Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 10:50 am
We have farmland protection laws in New York State. Do you have them in California?
thatbruce Reply:
April 11th, 2011 at 9:26 am
That I’m not sure of. The pattern of subdivision in the CV over recent decades implies that there is not.
Sometimes I wish the Chinese would just take over and show us how it’s done: shut up or die.
Much faster and much more efficient, and in the end, much more cost effective that way by just getting things done now than spending years and decades trying to deal with NIMBYs and all these preliminary studies.
Wad Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 4:57 pm
You’ll only have to wait until the U.S. can’t meet it’s Treasury obligation.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 5:07 pm
That’s never going to happen. All we have to do is run the printing presses faster. We may not like what happens when we do that but the US is never going to default.
Sorry, totally OT, but I was looking around Google maps around Redwood City and noticed something interesting. Does anyone know the the story is with the old passenger rail cars near the bay, here?
thatbruce Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
Either current (or previous) storage for cars used for private charter, or an ongoing restoration effort, possibly loosely connected with some other group. I’m left wondering whether the small yard engine is associated with the plant or the storage/restoration group.
Eric M Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 6:01 pm
If you use Bing maps for that same area, the little yard engine is gone and a bigger one has taken its place.
YesonHSR Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 9:19 am
it looks like scrap yard..poor dome car!!
This was linked through Bruce McF’s site, via Streetsblog.net:
http://www.energytrap.org/content/what-energy-trap
http://www.energytrap.org/content/commuters-story-maine
Now, HSR won’t necessarily be a help in this particular case, but it is part of the general strategy we need to get off the oil diet.
I highly recommend both these posts, and the video clip in the first one, for any rail skeptic (as if it would make a difference).
Government shutdown avoided. Official announcement is at:
http://appropriations.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=284
Note regarding HSR:
Chairman Rogers will also bring to the House Floor tonight a temporary measure to keep the government operating until Friday, April 15, to allow time for the Congress to prepare and pass the final funding legislation. The temporary measure also cuts nearly $2 billion in spending from transportation and housing programs -
including $1.5 billion from High Speed Rail Corridors and Intercity Passenger Rail Service Capital Assistance,
$280 million from Capital Investment Grants, $149 million from the Public Housing Operating fund, and $25 million from the University Community Fund.
Brandi Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 5:28 am
So does that mean the HSR money for FY 2011 was cut in the one week extension? I’m confused.
jim Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 6:05 am
No. I think (though the process is anything but transparent) that the cut is from a baseline of last year’s appropriation, $2.5B, so there’s $1B appropriated for this year.
Brandi Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 6:30 am
That’s a good point. They probably mean cut to $1 billion. Also I thought that the senate made up the stop gap bill and quickly passed it to the house so maybe that wasn’t part of the final bill that was voted on.
Alan F Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 6:50 am
That is what I’m thinking. The FY11 appropriations bill that almost made it through the Senate last December (didn’t get voted on because of the need to have a 60 vote super-majority to do almost anything last year) had $1 billion for HSIPR, which was down from $2.5 billion that was in the earlier House appropriations bill. Since you can’t cut $1.5 billion from $1 billion – well, in most places – my take is that the FY11 amount will be $1 billion for HSIPR. Better than zero, but not nearly enough.
The Senate FY11 appropriations bill last December also had funding for TIGER – $600 million IIRC – and increased capital funding for Amtrak above the FY10 amount. The TIGER grants covered a range of transit, commuter, and freight rail projects that benefited Amtrak and transit interconnections to intercity passenger rail. So how did TIGER and Amtrak fare in the budget deals – for a fiscal year that is already HALFWAY over??
It would also be good to confirm that there is no rescission language in the budget deal for the unobligated HSIPR & TIGER stimulus and FY10 funds.
YesonHSR Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 7:31 am
I think you’re correct in that the FY 11 never was confirmed as the funding levels are back to 2010… and this is where they cut that 1.5 billion from.. Obama probably went along with this because all he ever wanted was 1 billion for this fiscal year plus the fact the Florida monies returning will possibly lead to 3.4 billion for high-speed rail this year… not too shabby but sure would’ve been nice with the extra 1.5…. of course Republican House is playing this up as is stated in their press release a big whopping 1.5 billion when trillions are being spent elsewhere…ie they proposed 7 billion increase in the defense budget their last CR … that woud almost equal that ARRA entire appropriation for high-speed rail.
Alan F Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 7:17 am
BTW, there was apparently a push to sign the contracts and get a bunch of the original HSIPR stimulus selected projects obligated in the past several days. Wonder if the threat of a shutdown got the states and FRA staffers to hurry up and get the funds released into the accounts so work could proceed on these projects in case of a shutdown.
US DOT press release at http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2011/fra0711.html. “U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced more than $300 million in obligated grants that will enable the expansion of high-speed intercity passenger rail corridors from coast-to-coast”
Among the projects were four in CA, but not for HSR:
“California Department of Transportation – Four projects totaling more than $22 million. A $13 million grant will refurbish 15 locomotives and upgrade engines to reduce emissions. An $8.2 million investment will go for several coach cars on the San Joaquin Corridor and Capitol Corridor. $950,000 will provide for preliminary engineering and environmental work on the Pacific Surfliner to Ortega. And $200,000 will provide for planning of the Pacific Surfliner route from San Diego to Los Angeles and San Luis Obispo.”
Washington state got another $145 million obligated for the Cascades corridor.
YesonHSR Reply:
April 9th, 2011 at 7:35 am
Yes the authority and the FRA have yet to signed off the $712 million from the 2010 HSIPR lets hope that recession stupidity has been taken out and I’m sure Obama along with Boxer and Feinstein would never let that go through as we would have to make a big cut in what we could build for the first leg