President Obama’s Jobs Speech Touts High Speed Rail Funding
President Barack Obama gave his big jobs speech today, and it included several items that would give a big boost to high speed rail:
• Making an Immediate Investment in Our Roads, Rails and Airports: The President’s plan includes $50 billion in immediate investments for highways, transit, rail and aviation, helping to modernize an infrastructure that now receives a grade of “D” from the American Society of Civil Engineers and putting hundreds of thousands of construction workers back on the job. The President’s plan includes investments to improve our airports, support NextGen Air Traffic Modernization efforts, and resources for the TIGER and TIFIA programs, which target competitive dollars to innovative multi-modal infrastructure programs. It will also take special steps to enhance infrastructure-related job training opportunities for individuals from underrepresented groups and ensure that small businesses can compete for infrastructure contracts.The President will work administratively to speed infrastructure investment through a recently issued Presidential Memorandum developed with his Jobs Council directing departments and agencies to identify high impact, job-creating infrastructure projects that can be expedited in a transparent manner through outstanding review and permitting processes. The call for greater infrastructure investment has been joined by leaders from AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka to U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue.
• Establishing a National Infrastructure Bank: The President is calling for Congress to pass a National Infrastructure Bank capitalized with $10 billion, in order to leverage private and public capital and to invest in a broad range of infrastructure projects of nationaland regional significance, without earmarks or traditional political influence. The Bank would be based on the model Senators Kerry and Hutchison have championed while building on legislation by Senators Rockefeller and Lautenberg and the work of long-time infrastructure bank champions like Rosa DeLauro and the input of the President’s Jobs Council.
During the speech the president did not reference high speed rail directly, although the graphic slides that accompanied the speech did. He did mention China’s HSR project:
Building a world-class transportation system is part of what made us a economic superpower. And now we’re going to sit back and watch China build newer airports and faster railroads? At a time when millions of unemployed construction workers could build them right here in America?
In any case, Obama’s commitment to HSR remains strong. And the Infrastructure Bank and other transportation funding announced today would clearly be a boost to HSR projects, including those here in California. The sums are small, but could be enough to help deliver billions more in federal HSR funding to California, a project which the Obama Administration continues to support.
Will Congress go along? House Republicans are unlikely to do so:
The fortunes of California’s high-speed rail project, which would connect Southern California to the Bay Area with a 220mph train, took a big financial hit Thursday afternoon, when a congressional panel slashed the Federal Railroad Administration budget.
The Obama administration had asked for $8 billion for fiscal 2012 for high-speed rail projects, including the one in California, as well as other passenger rail programs around the country.
But the House Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development on Thursday cut the request by nearly $7 billion, leaving money only to operate Amtrak and some smaller programs.
House Republican leaders had signaled before the session that they would not support any request for additional high-speed rail outlays. They cited pressure to cut spending and argued such projects don’t make economic sense.
That article is by the LA Times’ Ralph Vartadbedian, same author of yesterday’s scare-mongering article. I am guessing he is new to the HSR beat and is not really that well aware of how this isn’t exactly news – House Republicans have been trying to stop federal HSR spending since they took control in January.
More importantly, today’s speech by the president is intended to begin the work of overcoming Republican obstruction to the stimulus that most economic observers agree is desperately needed. If President Obama can follow up the speech with a political and media strategy to generate public momentum, he has a shot at breaking Republican resistance to new stimulus.
While the media wants to tell a story of Republican intransigence, the president is taking steps to try and overcome it. He may not be successful at doing so, and Obama’s tendency to cave in the face of resistance does not exactly inspire confidence. On the other hand, he has to try and get this package through in order to bolster his chances at re-election.
We’ll be watching closely and carefully to see how this package fares in Congress this fall.
It’s great that I can completely miss events like the Obama speech, login to this blog the same evening, and get the full synopsis on what impact such events have on HSR. Thanks Robert.
Robert wrote:
“That article is by the LA Times’ Ralph Vartadbedian, same author of yesterday’s scare-mongering article. I am guessing he is new to the HSR beat and is not really that well aware of how this isn’t exactly news – House Republicans have been trying to stop federal HSR spending since they took control in January.”
http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x32643.xml
Ralph Vartabedian
Los Angeles Times
Ralph Vartabedian, a national correspondent at the Los Angeles Times, joined the newspaper in 1981. He covered aerospace and defense issues for 10 years at the Times, covering the military buildup that preceded the end of the Cold War and its decline afterward. He spent five years as a Washington, D.C. reporter for the paper and then four years as deputy business editor. In his many reporting assignments, he has written on presidential candidates, environmental contamination, nuclear weapons, immigration, airliner crashes, tax collection abuse, levee failures and space shuttle accidents, among much else. He won a Loeb in 1987 and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2010, among other recognitions. He previously worked at the Minneapolis Star and the Kalamazoo Gazette as a business writer. He was born in Detroit, Mich., and graduated from the University of Michigan with a master’s degree in economics and a bachelor’s degree in journalism.
YesonHSR Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 12:19 am
And what is your purpose??
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 4:04 am
He may be a veteran newsman, but he may still be new to this subject.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:16 am
Precisely – as the section Nadia quoted made clear, I said he was new to the beat. Nadia highlighted “new” and then went off to show his 30-year career, which is entirely beside the point I was making here.
That point is: I have not yet seen evidence that Ralph Vartabedian really understands the HSR project in any great detail, and is simply approaching it from the “OMG BOONDOGGLE!!!1!” position that most journalists use when assessing any effort by government to do anything good.
joe Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:42 am
News Flash!!! Republicans oppose HSR.
Risenmessiah Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:38 am
Nadia,
I said the same thing yesterday. However, the author of the article is “Ara” not Ralph, so I’m betting that his son or daughter was actually the writer. It was a sign of how bad Zell has let the Times crumble in L.A. The journalist was trying to sound balanced and even-handed, and ended up sounding very confused:
Donk Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 8:28 am
Hey Nadia, what’s your take on the new independent peer review report?
I doubt the Repugs will ever go along and do anything like this without some persuasion to generate private jobs using public money, As they’ve sworn an oath to Fuhrer Grover Norquist which violates their oath of office and their sworn oath to the majority of the voters, they’ll have to be beaten over the head by the Democrats a bit to get them to see reality and comply.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 8:28 am
I would really suggest you take back and apologize for your Nazi insinuations.
Useless Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 9:10 am
@ Paulus Magnus
It’s OK. This is a free country and public figures are subject to a greater scrutiny than ordinary folks.
Well, the other side calls Obama a secret Muslim Islamist Manchurian Candidate born in Kenya, yet nothing is done and those people can speak freely, so why can we not speak of the same to Grover Norquist?
Peter Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 2:23 pm
Putting someone as Grover Norquist on the same level as Adolf Hitler is both ridiculous, inappropriate, and offensive. I don’t like the guy either, but until he commits genocide or launches the largest and deadliest war in history, he shouldn’t be generally compared with Adolf Hitler. If you can find certain character traits in common, then compare those specifically.
“Well, the other side calls Obama a secret Muslim Islamist Manchurian Candidate born in Kenya, yet nothing is done and those people can speak freely, so why can we not speak of the same to Grover Norquist?”
Let’s try and not lower ourselves to their level.
VBobier Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 12:31 pm
Like hell I will, don’t like It? there’s a border with Canada, Of course Canada might not take Ya and then there’s Mexico, they might. Elected Repugs loyalty and their oath of office is in question, Who are they loyal to?? The voters who are citizens of the USA or Fuhrer Grover Norquist?
Oh and Fuhrer means Leader as It’s German, Yer Ignorance is showing.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
Germans stopped using the term Führer for a non-Nazi leader after the war.
Reality Check Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 4:08 pm
What bullshit! Who told you that? Führer is an ordinary word. So are compound words built on it: Führerschein (driver’s license) and Geschäftsführer (business leader/manager).
Alon Levy Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 4:54 pm
That, and there’s a math concept still called Führer (conductor in English). But if I’m not mistaken, an unadorned Führer who’s a person is just Hitler.
Peter Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Alon Levy is correct. No single person is referred to as “Führer” anymore.
Compound words including “Führer” don’t have a stigma.
Andre Peretti Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:57 pm
Same as “‘duce” (leader) in Italian. No leader is ever referred to as “il duce”.
synonymouse Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:23 pm
Didn’t they start using “fahrer” instead?
jimsf Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:06 pm
Free speech is free speech. Anything less jeopardizes our future.
Andrew Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
I agree with the sentiment, but there’s a difference between censorship and fellow commenters trying to preserve a civil, restrained, and rational public dialogue.
Peter Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:53 pm
There’s no such thing as “free speech” in what is essentially a private (owned by Robert) forum.
jimsf Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:34 pm
still, if you let people fully express themselves then you know who they are and what you are dealing with. the truth slips out if you give them enough rope. thats the idea behind allowing for free speech. and then they can be judged accordingly. ( that was my only point)
Andrew Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 9:14 pm
OK, I agree with that point. “jeopardizes our future” made me think of big brother, etc.
Stephen Smith Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Godwin’d!
RisenMessiah Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 2:29 pm
…and how!
Do check out today’s Rachel Maddow interview with John Mica. She presses him with “the eyes of America are looking to you for transportation infrastructure” after he dismisses the infrastructure bank and fumbles about hideously.
joe Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:42 am
A Poll sez only 44% would re-elect their representative.
joe Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:47 am
Correction, ONLY 41%
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/09/cnn-poll-time-to-clean-house-in-congress/
Only 41 percent of people questioned say the lawmaker in their district in the U.S. House of Representatives deserves to be re-elected – the first time ever in CNN polling that that figure has dropped below 50 percent.
If we had power in San Diego yesterday I could have watched the President’s address and Maddow’s interview.. among other things.
Robert,
I don’t think his plan includes dedicated funding for high speed rail. I think as Peter noted, they are going to try and extend the current authority FRA has for rail rehabilitation loans ($24 billion at minimum) and award those dollars to Amtrak and other states. But it will happen later, as we get closer to the election and Obama wants to paint himself as the “future” and the GOP candidate as the “past”….
synonymouse Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 10:37 am
The infrastructure spending idea sounds good on paper but soon derails in the real world. It turns out to be just a scam to funnel taxpayer monies to PB-Bechtel-dba’s to erect stilts in the middle of nowhere or baksheesh absolute moneypits like Muni’s Central Subway. The latter is so badly planned that even City machine hacks are critiquing it as a hopeless scandal.
Brown needs to order the CHSRA to re-design and value engineer the entire hsr scheme, purged of the hyperinfluence of LA-Palmdale and San Jose and Fresno-centricity.
Tony d. Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 10:42 am
Robert,
Have you ever considered banning people on this blog? LOL. It would actually be quite boring without this constant naysayer bull shit, wouldn’t it.
synonymouse Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 10:46 am
Unlike the Reaganites who have a visceral hatred dating to the McCarthy era for all things rail including freight rr’s, I do favor upgraded passenger rail. I assert the Tolmach plan has a much better cost/benefit ratio than the Tehachapi detour-neo99-Pacheco scheme.
Jack Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:34 am
Syn is clear in his expectations. He could care less about us here in the valley, were second class citizens. At least he’s honest…
Have we got a retraction from CARRD yet????
synonymouse Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:48 am
An upgrade of the UP to 110mph would be a decent start and avoid the disruption and acrimony of neo-99 eminent domain. Sac gets a big plus from direct I-5 service to LA.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:59 am
According to Google Maps, the difference in LA-Sac distance between I-5 and 99 is 6 kilometers.
wu ming Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
syn’s probably thinking of the speed difference in driving 99 and 5, because of the congestion (which, ironically, signifies ridership potential). so hard for the car-bound to think outside the 2,000 lb. metal box.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 1:46 pm
That, or the difference in distance between I-5/Tejon and 99/Tehachapis on LA-SF, which is much larger (though I-5/Tejon vs. 99/Tejon is just 44 km on LA-SF).
StevieB Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 3:33 pm
Glancing at this CA Population Density Map the CA High Speed Rail route follows the path through the densest part of the center of the state. Following I-5 through low population areas would leave large numbers of people in the central valley with inadequate inter-city transportation.
Drunk Engineer Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:40 pm
Los Banos is the densest part of the state?
Peter Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:54 pm
“Los Banos is the densest part of the state?”
Way to deflect the discussion!
Alon Levy Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
They wanted to make the Los Banos area denser, but the Sierra Club blocked the plan.
Joey Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Way to deflect the discussion!
It’s always at least tangentially related when discussing how to route “where the people are”
synonymouse Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:17 pm
The real question is what is the cost difference between I-5 and the neo-99 eminent domain routes. Slightest possibility Van Ark might want to know too.
Joey Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:29 pm
You could get nearly all of the benefits of the 99 route at much less cost if you selected a greenfield alignment with station loops or beetfield stations (I tend to prefer the former but latter might be more appropriate for smaller places). Agriculture wouldn’t be happy but the fact is that farmland is relatively cheap, even if you buy at above the market value. And building through cities is a helluvalot cheaper when you don’t have to worry about maintaining 350 km/h.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:32 pm
The eminent domain difference isn’t high. CARRD’s cost breakdown has right-of-way acquisition at less than 10% of the total cost. But the cost of a usable IOS would rise sharply, because there’d not be any hope of starting out with LA-Merced.
VBobier Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 12:23 pm
And how are You going to force the UP to cooperate??? Any closer than 100′ away and they won’t cooperate at all.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
UP ROW is along 99 not I-5.
Alan Reply:
September 10th, 2011 at 3:47 pm
UP allowing 110mph *passenger* service on its rails? Thanks…I needed a really good
laugh today…
VBobier Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
Go fly a kite Syno, It will happen like You want it over someones dead body…
wu ming Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
fresno is in the freaking center of the state, any SF-to-LA rail line will by definition be “fresno-centric.”
synonymouse Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 11:05 pm
Fresno is the center of car thefts in the US, so I guess it is the center of something. Actually I always did like William Saroyan’s writing. But maybe if you have too much unemployment you also have too much population.
Cairo, anyone, for all you growth-mongers? I guess the 20 million can find employment burning down the Israeli Embassy.
RisenMessiah Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 2:28 pm
…or….we could look at SFO’s decision when building its international terminal to build for more than current demand or plane size and how that allowed the airport to poach international traffic from LAX which is now playing catch up….
Fundamentally, your conflating two separate choices into one. What is the cost to benefit analysis in present terms for HSR and how much a contractor will inflate costs because government is the deepest pocket.
If William Mulholland or Pat Brown were around today, they would tell you same thing. If they knew California would be this populous some day, they would have pushed for the twice the interstates and quadruple the aqueducts. They would have laughed at the parochial nature of all this resistance. All the regions of the state are interlinked…why would leave Fresno without something that San Francisco and Los Angeles have?
Secondly, although there are plenty of public works projects that have spiraled out of control financially, I would argue most arrived after World War II. It’s really the relationship with defense contractors that sets the tone that PBQD and others on domestic infrastructure. As the military becomes leaner, I think the firms will adapt and focus more on quality. Other contractors (infrastructure, medical, educational) will follow the lead.
Andre Peretti Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:44 pm
“we could look at SFO’s decision when building its international terminal to build for more than current demand or plane size and how that allowed the airport to poach international traffic from LAX which is now playing catch up”
With the polar route, SFO is the best-placed international airport in California.
Risenmessiah Reply:
September 10th, 2011 at 11:53 am
Um…actually Oakland is…but that’s my point. SFO knew there was a reason to built it, and the same argument can be made for HSR….
Peter Reply:
September 10th, 2011 at 11:58 am
OAK only has one major runway (and three smaller ones mainly used for general aviation), and is not anything close to being as attractive for international flights as SFO.
Risenmessiah Reply:
September 10th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
Oak’s location is best…not it’s current infrastructure.
Andre Peretti Reply:
September 12th, 2011 at 2:52 am
If SFO had an easily accessible HSR terminal (like in Paris CDG), a Dubai-LA flight could actually be:
Dubai-SFO: A380 or B777
SFO-LA: HSR.
Economically and ecologically sensible, but not too palatable for LAX: LA’s HSR station would become a remote terminal of SFO, just like Brussels-Midi station is for Paris CDG.
Two questions:
1) When the IOS is finished and we have a hundred plus miles of high-speed rail track, who uses it?
Does Amtrak run San Joaquin trains or do we wait for the CAHSR chosen entity to run their trains? Or both?
2) Do freight trains use it?
Anyone know?
J. Wong Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 1:05 pm
Well, it all depends, doesn’t it? The plan is that before the initial segment is finished, construction will begin on other segments, supposing funding can be found. Once finished, testing of equipment would likely commence as well.
Would the San Joaquin use it? Only if it is not possible to get additional funding for the other segments and/or for testing.
Freight trains would never use it.
jim Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
The IOS will be approximately 250 or 300 miles long (depending on which of three options is chosen).
San Joaquin trains will not run on it. The CAHSR will select an entity (which could conceivably be Amtrak) to run 350 km/h capable trains on it.
Freight trains will not use it.
HTH/HAND
jim Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
I think there’s some confusion of terminology and people are talking past each other.
There is an Initial Constructible Segment (ICS), which is what’s currently funded. It runs from somewhere slightly north of Bakersfield to somewhere about halfway between Fresno and Merced. Stations at Fresno and Visalia/Hanford. It will be complete sometime in 2017, probably early in the year. It has to be complete by September 2017 as a condition of the Federal funding. If there is no further CAHSR funding or construction between now and September 2017, there is a good chance that CAHSR will be abandoned and that the ICS will simply be used to speed up the San Joaquins.
The ICS-Extended, sometimes called the test track, extends the ICS to actual stations in Bakersfield and Merced. That extension, if funded (and it’s fairly cheap), could be implemented in parallel to the ICS and be ready in 2017, too. The intention is that only test operations would be run on that segment.
The Initial Operating Segment extends the ICS-Extended. There are three options that staff briefed the Board on at the July 14th meeting: north to San Jose or south from Bakersfield, either to Palmdale or to the San Fernando Valley. The Board hasn’t selected an option. If one of these is funded and built, then actual HSR revenue operations would be run across it. Construction of any of these extensions could be carried out in parallel to the construction of the ICS.
The 2009 Business Plan timelines suggest that at least the Palmdale option could be completed by 2017, if funding for it arrives in time. In that case there’d be no waiting. All the various components of the IOS would complete more or less simultaneously and revenue service could start in late 2017.
Whether that timeline is still operable, even if funding arrives, we will not know until the 2011 Business Plan is released next month.
peninsula Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:55 pm
Not Quite: There are two segments imaginated: ICS = Initial construction segment, which includes the test track and reaches the entire 170 miles between Merced and Bakersfield, and the IOS= Initial Operating Segment which extends the ICS either north to SJ or South to SFernando. From the Authorities board materials:
“The start of true high speed rail will occur in the Central Valley between Merced and Bakersfield that is capable of 220 mph operations, and will additionally serve as a test track and will form the backbone of the California High Speed Rail system. This is referred to as the Initial Construction Section (ICS). The test track will be used to demonstrate that the elements of the high speed rail system are fully integrated, are safe and reliable, and that the operating/maintenance staff is properly trained and proficient before the system enters revenue service. It will also have independent utility as an enhancement to high‐speed intercity passenger rail service.
The ICS/Test Track will be extended to form an Initial Operating Section (IOS) that we will operate Real high‐speed trains in revenue service up to 220 MPH. The goal is to extend the ICS/Test track to connect with the Bay Area or to connect with the San Fernando Valley (Los Angeles Basin) as a first phase, and then to connect the Bay Area with the L.A. Basin to form Bay‐to‐Basin connectivity. The recommendation on the sequencing of the extension from the ICS/Test Track to the IOS will be further analyzed and described in the 2012 Business Plan. Final sequencing of either the southern extension or the north‐western extension will be submitted to the board at a later date for decision, and will be subject to funding availability, as well as other selection criteria.”
So to be clear, they do NOT have funding for the entire ICS – they have IDENTIFIED $6B, the entire ICS will be more like 10-13B. ($6B not enough to qualify for AB3034 bond funds, so likely they don’t even have this $6B.)
Secondly, the IOS is the Authority’s equivalent to AB3034 required “Usable Segment”. AB3034 requires that they have identified source of funds for a Usable Segment before they qualify for bond funding. They do not.
Thirdly, 2009 Business Plan suggests??!! Really? Are you new?
Lastly, “If there is no further CAHSR funding or construction between now and September 2017, there is a good chance that CAHSR will be abandoned and that the ICS will simply be used to speed up the San Joaquins.” Don’t worry about this scenario – AB3034 protects California from CHRSA pissing away HSR funding on digging random holes; if they don’t have identified funding for a complete usable segment (which authority is calling IOS), no fundy, no diggy, no buildy.
Peter Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:06 pm
That’s not quite correct either.
The initial ICS is as Jim describes it.
The “test track” is an extended ICS the way Peninsula initially defines ICS.
The IOS will be either an extended line from the Chowchilla wye to San Jose, an extended line to Palmdale, or an extended line to Los Angeles.
Please note that Peninsula’s final wish is unlikely to be granted by a court, which will be the final arbiter on the matter if the Legislature releases the bond funding.
joe Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 9:58 pm
CA has 12% unemployment, 20% in the CV, and needs economic stimulus badly.
Is the Legislature going to withhold matching funds for 3.5 B in federal construction spending?
You may think “yes” if you are over 25, white, and college educated because that demographic’s unemployment rate is, nationally, at 4.5%.
I don’t know why we have to come back to this topic. Don’t rely on the federal government to invest even a single penny into HSR under a Republican House. Don’t make yourself hopes about it. Obama can say as much as he wants to. He’ll always end up caving to the House Republicans.
What about they start spending money into our electrical infrastructure. Yesterday in San Diego was a fresh reminder that our grid network is more than 100 years old.
Joe Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 4:01 pm
Eric Cantor King?
Reid Pelosi and Obama want HSR.
O/T, but the crowd here might find this mildly amusing (and perhaps Robert could write a post debunking some of the accusations herein):
http://wondermark.com/754/
My California friend seem to miss the point. The initial money is not to conect no-where-to-nowhere; it is to give Americans a taste of what it would be like to actually have a high speed train in America. The major problem facing HSR in America is that only O.OO!% of us have ever ridden a train going over 180 mph, and absolutely none of us has ridden one going 220 mph.
Build it and they will come!
Denver Man
wu ming Reply:
September 10th, 2011 at 12:22 am
the shanghai maglev goes 268 mph, and i’ve been on that one. unless we’re not calling that a train.
Off topic but does anyone have monthly Caltrain ridership data for all or most years it has been in service? Do they even collect that info?
Spokker Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:06 pm
They haven’t responded to me so I guess I’ll ask here.
All they have on the web site is some yearly ridership survey.
I missed the speech will it replay or is it avail on line?
Arthur Dent Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:39 pm
The speech replay. Open questions on the jobs act. Obama talks the morning after. West Wing Week on the jobs act. Collection of the aforementioned links and more.
Arthur Dent Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
I submitted a bunch of links but my comment is in moderation. The short answer is check here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2011/09/08/president-obama-presents-american-jobs-act-enhanced-version
jimsf Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:35 pm
that works thanks!
Peter Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 7:57 pm
Don’t you have an account on the site? I’ve never had my comments held in moderation…
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 9:43 pm
If there’s more than 2 links it automatically gets held for moderation as an anti-spam measure, though I may increase the threshold to 6…
Alon Levy Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 10:10 pm
You should increase the threshold, and use first-comment-gets-held as an alternative anti-spam tool. At my place, in nearly three months I’ve only had one spam comment even make it to moderation – the other few hundred got thrown straight into the spamfilter.
jimsf Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 8:12 pm
wow that was awesome. I just wish he would gone further in ripping the the right side a new one. still, they were squirming.. except for the real pricks who were smirking, but their days are numbered and they’ll be smirking all the way to unemployment line after their sorry arrogant little asses are thrown out.
Andrew Reply:
September 9th, 2011 at 9:09 pm
+1
Alan Reply:
September 10th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
+ 2
Per Michale DOyle @ Capitol Alert, $4B proposed for HSR/intercity rail:
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/09/obamas-jobs-bill-offers-4-bill.html