President Obama Proposes Nearly $50 Billion for High Speed Rail
President Obama’s proposed FY 2013 budget should be tattooed to the foreheads of the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the State Auditor, the Peer Review Group, and any other California government agency that has criticized the state’s high speed rail project as “risky” due to concerns about federal funding. Obama’s budget includes $47 billion for passenger rail, especially high speed rail over the next six years.
Combined with strong support among Congressional Democrats for HSR funding, this is a clear sign that HSR’s federal funding issues are merely a temporary problem stemming from control of the House of Representatives by one of the most extremist groups in Congressional history. If Republicans lose the November 2012 elections and Obama hangs on to the White House, then by 2013 it is highly likely that HSR will be fully funded and California’s project will be in a strong financial position.
If Republicans win, then there’s a LOT more than HSR that will be in trouble. The House Republican version of the Transportation Bill would defund virtually all forms of non-automobile transit. John Boehner calls it the “highway bill.” The effect on California would be catastrophic.
For state legislators in Sacramento, then, the choice isn’t between high speed rail and the status quo. The choice is between President Obama’s vision for a transportation system that saves money and time via high speed rail and the Republicans’ vision of a transportation system that is incredibly expensive to the average user, enriches the oil companies, chokes metropolises with traffic, and makes our environmental and climate problems a LOT worse.
It’s true that President Obama’s budget doesn’t stand a chance of passage this year. Its purpose is to show what is possible in 2013 if Nancy Pelosi can get the 25 seats she needs and reclaim the House. Sacramento Democrats need to be supporting that effort, rather than sabotaging it and siding with Republicans by opposing Governor Jerry Brown’s request for high speed rail spending in 2012.
I learned early in life that if you want something, and have a minimum in mind, ask for more as a negotiating point knowing that you will get less.
Emma Reply:
February 13th, 2012 at 11:32 pm
That’s probably the strategy in hope that he’ll get 1/10 of that money: $5 billion.
Thou I think he will be relected maby with a larger margin the some think the House will be a fight… and if they pull it out .This time HSR may be actully see secure long term funding..IF they have the male gonads to get a gas tax increase with an Oberstar type transportation bill..
What specific steps can average HSR supporters take at this time to support the $ 50 Billion coming to CA and to counter the NIMBYism and ideological opposition?
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:22 am
Hard to say, but absolutely anything which gets Republicans out of the House of Representatives and the US Senate would help.
To bad the GOP is littered with a bunch of a$$hole$! But I digress: no way in hell do the RePIGlicans keep control of the House come November. Are the American people really that stupid? Anyhow, glad to see President Obama showing full support for HSR. Just think, if he had his way, we wouldn’t be talking about ICS, bookends, NorCal or SoCal, etc. We’d be talking full construction now!
VBobier Reply:
February 13th, 2012 at 11:34 pm
And We’d be going full speed ahead, We also need to repel any & all assaults on the US Senate by Repugnicans & take back a bigger majority there too, like 61 seats. 10 in the Senate and 25 or more in the House, plus the White House, then ram It home down their throats.
Obama isn’t serious. If he was, then 2009 and 2010 would have been much better. Yes, there was HSR funding…but Obama asked for less than what the Senate was looking to provide.
We don’t just need the GOP to lose badly this year, we also need some strong independent (3rd party) pro-transit and pro-consumer representatives to run and get elected.
VBobier Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 6:42 am
Nah, He’s crafty and serious, He thinks He can gain points, He does know Repugs will never support anything from Him, so their walking into a Bear trap…
synonymouse Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 1:59 pm
Not that crafty, or he would have avoided rumbling with the Catholic Church.
He is not that good a learner; otherwise he would not have presented another unreformed stimulus budget dressed in a virtual Santa suit.
One of the WSJ pundit types put it well: Mitt Romney is trying to sell himself as doctrinaire when everyone knows he is pragmatic; Barack Obama is trying to present himself as pragmatic when everyone knows now he is the reverse.
It will be a very close election in the end despite the polls. All the GOP potential candidates will be able to move a little to the center where Barack has made room by veering to the left with Nancy Pelosi. There is a residual feeling in the country it is time to send in a new quarterback.
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:31 am
The Catholic hierarchy are an out-of-touch bunch of child abusers, and anyone worth their salt will find that they have to fight with them.
Beta Magellan Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 1:57 pm
They tried something like that in Chicago’s northeast suburbs—it didn’t work out as planned. Unless the US switches to instant-runoff voting and proportional representation, third parties will remain, outside the odd spoiler, marginal players in American politics.
Alon Levy Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 10:08 pm
IRV is designed to keep third parties marginal, just without the spoiler effect. When more than two candidates are viable, it fails so spectacularly it can create situations in which a candidate’s voters can make their candidate win by voting for a weak opponent.
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:23 am
Approval voting, on the other hand, actually works.
The House isn’t flipping to Democrat control, and the Senate has too many Democrat seats in play to avoid a probable Republic takeover.
Most likely scenario for the 2012 election is Obama gets re-elected by the House and Senate gets more conservative. We get a stalemate in DC and an impasse on the authorization bill.
Tony d. Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 3:15 am
So what you’re really saying Mark is that you feel the American people ARE stupid and would want more insanity out of the House and Senate. I think you’re wrong.
Peter Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 4:29 am
Half of the American people sure are out of their minds.
VBobier Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 6:46 am
I think Mark is wrong too, the natives are restless…
jimsf Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 11:05 am
I think Mark is wrong too. If you read blogs, newspaper comments, watch fox, and listen to rep. speeches and commentary you get the impression that the country is turning hard right. But those people tend to be overly vocal and over represented in those forums. Democrats and moderates are far less likely to be as vocal. The key will be the middle. And the middle has enough common sense to see what’s going on and to see the games the house is playing. They know that some infrastructure spending is a good idea. They know that unemployment benefits need to be extended. They know that you can’t dump medicare for a voucher program, that you can’t dump social security, and that the wealthy need to pay more. They see Obama offering some common sense solutions. they don’t love him, but it comes to making a choice in November they are going to vote for the reasonable person. And Obama has presented himself as a reasonable person. The only think that will keep him from winning in a landslide is that the left wont’ vote too. The left are crybabies and they are completely unrealistic when it comes to their issues. The right gets mad but they vote anyway, the hippies get mad and don’t vote. That’s what puts the house and senate in danger. The left needs to grow up. ( and get a haircut)
VBobier Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 12:14 pm
Agreed on most everything Jimsf, Especially the left who seem to think having a tantrum by not voting will do any good, their nuts, their message will never be heard, it’ll just get lost in the noise. Now as to haircuts, Mine might be a while as My income is limited(I’ll be lucky if I can get the car washed), but I can at least trim My bangs on My own for Free, as to the left that’s their problem as I don’t really care, besides I have a beard that I trim from time to time.
jimsf Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 12:39 pm
A good example is the occupy movement. A worthwhile cause that accomplished nothing. All that momentum and national attention for what.
synonymouse Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 2:27 pm
There is genuine,deep populist anger on both the right and the left, especially about the TARP scandal, where W was panicked into opening our national treasury to international financiers.
Problem is no obviously superior economic model is in front of us.
Reaganism is greedy, shallow and classist.
Welfare-statism simply flops. Fiscally unsustainable with abuse and corruption.
The WSJ’s Mr. Murray claims on PBS the founding fathers felt the democracy would require a certain kind of practical mindset to survive and one that is missing from the masses these days. The mind that looks for the best solution – most cost-effective- is certainly and systematically missing from the CHSRA plan. And just when Van Ark seemed to be making a “volte-face” in the right direction. He’s probably better off outta here with this piece of Palmdale-philic crap.
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:29 am
The Scandanavian countries do very well with welfare states. It’s fiscally sustainable and extremely clean.
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:30 am
Occupy changed the national conversation.
Oh — and it’s not done.
jimsf Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 8:29 am
they didn’t change the conversation. Teh nation was already talking about all that stuff in a quiet more civilized manner. just because some people weren’t out in the streets doesn’t mean they were oblivious or not outraged.
Occupy COULD HAVE made a difference if they had organized into a solid political voting block and set out to specifically target candidates. If they can do that then its worthwhile.
joe Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 6:30 pm
Which election cycle did OWS miss?
Dismissing the 2011 OWS phenomena for failing to impact the 2011 national election?
Beta Magellan Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 1:59 pm
I think you’ve got this pretty much right. People tend to forget about voters who, while they may be socially conservative, are nominally liberal or populist in their economic views. Unless Santorum wins the nomination or Romney’s able to change his image, it’s going to be difficult for such voters to be too enthusiastic about the current crop of Republicans (some might vote for Obama, others might just stay home). Culture wars don’t play as well when people are hurting.
nslander Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 2:03 pm
jimsf-
Is refusing to authorize the indefinite detention of American citizens an unrealistic expectation? Your dismissal of what comprises the “American left” is far too categorical to be of any use and, frankly, lazy.
jimsf Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 3:37 pm
So can I assume you are going to what… stay home, or vote republican?
nslander Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 4:58 pm
You are mistaken in assuming anything. This only reinforces the “with us or agin” mentality that shapes and limits our political decisions.
My vote is merely an individual decision, and it has no more or less value than anybody else’s. I’m not pretending to divine the motives or political values of millions of other citizens with whom I presume to share considerable common ground, and certainly not to the extent those perceived shared values should determine their decisions for whom to vote. I think Its more appropriate to flip the question: even if you think its necessary to view your vote as a purely strategic and necessary act, why would you 1) castigate those who refuse to endorse any political party who advances the indefinite detention of American citizens (particularly in a society in which half its citizens never bother to vote in any election), and; 2) assume most, if not all, of those same folks won’t likewise vote defensively?
No does the assertion that all Conservatives turn out and vote all-GOP all-the-time square with reality. Self-identified lefties are greatly outnumbered by self-identified conservatives in America. But liberals do indeed vote. Blanket statements to the contrary only reinforce a meme that serves to marginalize the American Left ever further in the conventional wisdom of political relevance and I have no intention of carrying that water.
jimsf Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 7:10 pm
If young people come out and vote like they did in 2008 obama can have a significant win, and they can turn the house back over to the dems which will help obama get his policies through. If not, then they are to blame. We will see what happens.
jimsf Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 7:16 pm
so are you voting for obama and dems in the house or not?
nslander Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
Are you the Grand Inquisitor of Appropriate Voting? If it makes you feel any better, I’m pretty much voting D straight ticket. And as dissatisfied as I am with that prospect, I’m not presuming I can crawl into the hearts and minds of you or millions of other citizens and lucidly pass judgment on the wisdom of their individual voting decisions. The closest thing anybody can do is evaluate whether a voting pattern is consistent with the interests of the individual an/or the nation. If certain voters find certain action by their electeds wholly unacceptable, blame the damn politicians for failing to earn those votes, not the citizens they are paid to serve.
You’re working with mental construct of liberal voters that is helpful only to Republicans. But go ahead and keep playing that hackneyed “liberals cry and take their ball and go home” BS for all its worth. Frank Luntz would be proud.
joe Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 6:34 pm
Thank God nominating. MIT ROMNEY will have no bearing on evangelical or conservative voters enthusiasm or Get Out The Vote efforts.
jimsf Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 3:42 pm
Move to Canada?
Peter Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 4:02 pm
They’re not much better, the Conservatives are in power there. A Canadian here recently complained to me that their politics follow our “lead” in many things. Hence, they’re dealing with a lot of the same crap we are. Just look at Toronto’s mayor and his (illegal!!) unilateral cancellation of “Transit City”.
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:28 am
The Toronto City Council just declared that they have the power and Ford had better do what they tell him to.
This is gonna get interesting, but I think this is the beginning of the end of that fool Ford. I wish Harper were less canny or he’d have been thrown out by now, what with the multiple crimes his administration has been convicted of.
nslander Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 5:01 pm
Really? Move to Canada? Effecting change from the bottom up is not even on your radar?
jimsf Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 7:11 pm
No.
nslander Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 5:00 pm
Really? C’mon man.
Tom McNamara Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 12:52 pm
<blockquote. Most likely scenario for the 2012 election is Obama gets re-elected by the House and Senate gets more conservative. We get a stalemate in DC and an impasse on the authorization bill.
Bear with me on this:
The current House is the product of basically 40+ years of gerrymandering to create a bunch of moderately conservative districts and fewer, but more heavily liberal ones. The reason the Democrats had such success in 2006 was that they got to run against a one-party government that had a deeply unpopular leader. And even then, it was surprising how well they did among conservative districts. In 2008, the Democrats won because of turnout that was 4-5% above average across the board.
Even with redistricting, the GOP knows we are still a few years away from having a majority of truly liberal districts in the House, and thus “solid, solid like Barack” control for Democrats.
The President’s fortunes, meanwhile, are also completely intertwined with the Senate. Almost all the battleground states for the Senate are the ones Obama needs to win too. However, because that involves pulling in moderate and more reliable voters, Harry ‘n Barry are going to pursue a “centrist agenda”.
In regard to the transportation bill, the GOP is ready, I think to force government shut downs this summer to achieve their ends. They will use “guerilla tactics” both to make Obama look bad and because it placates the Tea Party types who want more, um direct, methods of attack.
In the end though, once November is behind us, if the Dems retain the Senate and Obama gets another four years, the Boehneristas (also known as the 1%) won’t hesitate to use the threat of bipartisanship with Dems on bill to keep the Tea Partiers in line in regard to the necessity of continued corporate welfare….
adirondacker12800 Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 1:29 pm
the GOP is ready, I think to force government shut downs this summer to achieve their ends.
That worked out so well in the 90s.
I can hear the robo-calls now. “The Republicans made Grandma’s Social Security check late…..”
Tom McNamara Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 3:29 pm
It actually worked out quite well this summer, when there was a stand off over the FAA and the Senate had to cave after the House made the agency shut down.
There will be no 1995-style grand showdown. Instead, the strategy will be to threaten various authorization bills that would have limited overall impact. Any Department that does not use General Fund (hint, hint, DOT) is a prime candidate to suffer this fate. The only recourse will be to attach riders on the budget reconciliation bill (if there is one), and that’s not going to be popular.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
It worked out quite well if you your aim was to make grandstanding Republicans look foolish.
synonymouse Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 1:42 pm
Pols like Boehner and McConnell hail from largely rural areas and not nearly as stone one-percenters as Bloomberg, or for that matter, the billionaire Feinstein.
You are assuming that the Democrats are in inevitable ascendancy and, even further, that these Demos will always remain fervent welfare-staters. Maybe, but then Ronald Reagan should not have been elected and re-elected, or his anti-welfare state policies imposed.
Hard to predict social trends and/or fads. By your thinking the PRI in Mexico should never have been challenged. Nancy Pelosi is a pure patronage machine PRI functionary. Never know – down the road her political descendants may be uprooted by a Mega-Meg type.
Tom McNamara Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Pols like Boehner and McConnell hail from Cincinnati, who’s biggest rival in the Midwest happens to be…wait for it Chicago.
“Ascendancy” is a great choice of words. That is exactly the opposite of how it works in a two-party system. The party that rules is the one which needs the fewest number of blocs to win the plurality of seats. The only reason the GOP every had anything to fear after the Civil War was that it slowly but surely allowed more and more blocs of voters to be disenfranchised, figuring there was no chance in hell that the Catholics, blacks, Jews, _____ etc. would ever be the nation’s demographic majority.
And then, in 1964, Republicans allowed the Hart-Cellar act to pass, and made that an absolute certainty. The Dems are able to gain ground because their core constituencies are the very ones who are about to be the face of America….
synonymouse Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 9:48 pm
The cacophonous ward healer ghetto you champion cannot support a democracy. It will inevitably devolve to sectarian strife and mob rule, with an Hugo Chavez clone and clown as its master of payola. panem et circenses
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:27 am
So what? Bread and circuses is better than what we get from Republicans (who don’t supply bread).
adirondacker12800 Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:51 am
They ain’t too good at circuses either. Have you ever watched a Republican try to tell a joke? It gets worse if they try anything more complex or artistic.
Mike Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 2:23 pm
For what it’s worth (and it’s probably worth more than is idle speculation and armchair political analysis), the leading political prediction markets both strongly predict the House will remain in Republican control.
Intrade (“ask” prices)
0.33 Dem control
0.69 Rep control
Iowa Electronic Markets (“ask” prices)
0.284 Dem control
0.716 Rep control
Tony d. Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 3:42 pm
Huh? Can these “electronic markets” measure how sick the American people are of RePIGlican antics in the house!? Manufactured crisis’, favoring tax cuts for the rich while pissing on the middle class, not giving a damn about infrastructure or the well being of your average citizen (I could go on and on)? Trust me; the only way the House remains in control of the Teahadists is if the American people are really, truly stupid!
Mike Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 4:36 pm
Tony d, I appreciate your view, and I hope you’re right! But I’ve learned over time that I, and most people, live in a bubble in which it’s impossible to truly appreciate the great diversity of views in America (much less their accurate statistical distribution). Prediction markets are not perfect, but they have an excellent track record of predicting outcomes; vastly better than that of any one individual, no matter how astute. (I don’t mean that to sound like a dig on your political analysis; what I mean is that because political prediction markets aggregate the knowledge and insights of vast numbers of people, it’s impossible for ANY one person to do as well).
Joe Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
The electronic markets cannot measure, they react and without much at stake. This isn’t a retirement fund magaging risk. It is 5 a month tomparticpate.
Right now the GOP nominee and voter enthusasium, candiates for the house in some case are TBD.
In light of the paucity of information, persistance is the best predictor.
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:25 am
Why do you think Republicans can retain control of the House?
(1) Redistricting is moving seats from rural and suburban areas to urban areas.
(2) Republicans are losing seats in TEXAS due to excessive attempts at gerrymandering rejected by the courts.
(3) EVERYONE hates House Republicans right now. Astoundingly low approval ratings.
What do you think they’ll do, just steal a whole lot of seats? Admittedly that IS a possibility.
Obama proposed a Federal Railroad Administration budget of $47 billion over 6 years. Page 8 of the DOT budget report shows $12.5 billion would go to Amtrak in the System Preservation fund leaving $34.6 billion for the Network Development fund which lumps in everything else including the High-Speed rail corridor development program which makes up most but not all of the fund. The funding is end loaded with $1 billion for development in 2013 going up each year to $7.8 billion in 2018. There certainly would be enough budgeted to construct the initial operating segment in California.
Jonathan Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
actually, it says $12.5bn for the System Preservation Fund, and that Amtrak can make bids for that Fund.
I have no clue who else might bid, or who might get awarded money. It needn’t _all_be Amtrak (though pro-Amtrak people are certainly seeing it that way).
For SoCal Metro fans nice to see money for Regional Connector and Wilshire subway. But the House budget will be terrible as usual. Happy to hear that first segment of Purple Line is now planned for La Cienega instead of Fairfax.
Ralph Vartabedian at the Los Angeles Times gave an optimistic report on high speed rail in the Obama budget .
synonymouse Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 11:44 am
If anything the battle lines are hardening between stimulus spending and austerity. The latter will eventually prevail as the US economy can go one of two ways – the listless doldrums of stagflation or another bubble. If bubble(say peddling cell phone-based I-Crap), it will burst and you are back to austerity. Stagflation is boring so, since stimulus did not work, the Reaganites(the Grinch et al)will get another chance at social budget austerity with Voodoo Supply Side overtones(big military budget).
All rail transit will likely go into a period of decline, as in the fifties, due to wasteful, stupid planning and ridiculous union labor costs.
The unions are already getting a kick in the teeth in Greece. Still who knows where that 70% haircut is going to end up. Same in the US with the huge loss in personal worth due to the real estate collapse. I guess they will try to finesse it onto the backs of the little taxpayers in the form of future debt load since the “lower level employees” are for the present totally broke. That won’t play and the banks will get even by loaning only to the those with a gold-plated credit rating.
My cracked crystal ball predicts global depression, sparked by a Chinese financial panic. California won’t be able to give away the Grand DeTour, not even to Amtrak.
jimsf Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 11:52 am
Meanwhile back on earth…
synonymouse Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 12:02 pm
Where, say at Muni, we call in sick and then do some holiday gravy OT.
Tony d. Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 3:46 pm
Stimulus kept our country out of a full- blown depression you idiot. Synonymous not knowing what the hell he’s talking about: who would’ve thought.
synonymouse Reply:
February 14th, 2012 at 9:58 pm
Did stimulus help the PIIG’s to prosperity?
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:32 am
The PIIGs didn’t do stimulus. Try actually doing your research, syn.
Nathanael Reply:
February 15th, 2012 at 12:33 am
By the way, stop making political and economic predictions; you are crap at it.
Greece is going to have a revolution; the police union letter is the first crucial sign of it.