VICTORY! State Senate Approves High Speed Rail Funding
The vote just happened and we won – by a vote of 21-16, the high speed rail funds have been released. Governor Jerry Brown is expected to sign SB 1029 in the near future. Key “yes” votes came from Leland Yee, reportedly a “no” earlier, Noreen Evans, and from Gloria Negrete McLeod. Our thanks go out to all those State Senators (all Democrats) who voted yes to move California into a cleaner, more sustainable future.
Democratic “no” votes were the anti-HSR troika of Mark DeSaulnier, Joe Simitian, and Alan Lowenthal, joined in a shocking move by Fran Pavley. Pavley was the author of AB 32, the state’s global warming bill. We’ll analyze that later. Now is a time to thank everyone in Sacramento who helped get this done, the advocates who worked tirelessly for years to bring HSR to California, and everyone who made calls to Senators to get them to make the right choices.
We did it – again. The fight won’t end, of course. As we learned after November 2008 when Prop 1A was approved, the fight to build HSR will continue until the system is open to the public. The other side is relentless. So are we.
UPDATE: High speed rail supporters are properly celebrating tonight. Below are some statements about today’s vote. But first, a photo of Governor Jerry Brown signing the Senate’s vote card for California High Speed Rail Authority board chairman Dan Richard:
Governor Jerry Brown’s statement:
“In 2008, California voters decided to create jobs and modernize our state’s rail transportation system with a major investment in high-speed rail and key local projects in Northern and Southern California. The Legislature took bold action today that gets Californians back to work and puts California out in front once again.”
CHSRA board chairman Dan Richard:
“Today’s vote to commence high-speed rail construction, like all major public policy decisions, is the result of hard work and collaborative effort. Credit must go to Governor Brown whose courage and steadfast leadership has improved the High-Speed Rail Authority’s plans and operations,” said California High-Speed Rail Authority Chair Dan Richard. “We also express deep gratitude to Assembly Speaker John Perez and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg for passing this measure through their houses. The Legislature’s action sets in motion a Statewide Rail Modernization Plan for California. Not only will California be the first state in the nation to build a high-speed rail system to connect our urban centers, we will also modernize and improve rail systems at the local and regional level. This plan will improve mobility for commuters and travelers alike, reduce emissions, and put thousands of people to work while enhancing our economic competitiveness,” said Richard.
California Labor Federation Executive Secretary-Treasurer Art Pulaski:
“The State Senate joined the Assembly today by displaying much-needed political courage on high-speed rail. By releasing voter-approved bonds, the legislature rejected the voices of doom and decline that want to take California backward. Instead, today’s vote will lead to hundreds of thousands of quality jobs, an easing of traffic congestion and a cleaner environment.
“Today’s vote was a boost of confidence in the spirit of California, a spirit that built everything from the Golden Gate Bridge to the dams and aqueducts that bring our cities water. For California to be a world leader again, we must invest in our future. With this vote, we’re on the right track.”
Tonight is a night to celebrate. We’ll have further analysis of the next steps, and the many battles still to come, starting tomorrow.
YES YES YES!
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Victory! And on My birthday too! Believe it or not I was born in Victory Hospital, that’s on Victory Blvd in Los Angeles, how’s that for irony?
MarkB Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:24 pm
That’s not irony, it’s coincidence. But since it’s your birthday…
Andrew Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 8:31 pm
MarkB: “Let a guy enjoy his birthday when I could show off to everyone that I know the meaning of the word ‘irony’?….Nahhh”
We’ve come a long way gentlemen. We’ve fought through NIMBYs, lawsuits, right wing FUD and the like but we’re still going strong. I was very worried that it would all fail like the other high speed rail projects. I’ve followed this project for a year even though I live on the opposite side of the country from California. I want to thank all of you here, including Spokker and DP. Most of all I want to thank Robert. I am convinced this blog is the key to HSR’s success in California and America as a whole. Thank you all.
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:26 pm
We’re the Spear Point, as CA leads the way once again…
Well done California! I’m proud of you.
Longtime reader, first-time commenter. Congratulations to all the advocates on this important milestone. As Robert mentioned, we will need to continue to fight. Stay strong and enjoy this short victory.
for me living in the uk this is only half the hsr battle won for now – i have got hs2 to worry about too ! i can use this as evidence of yet another hs line being approved. great that this passed ! alsogood news for obama despite the democrats who voted against cahsr for no good reason. if you say you support hsr then you support a bill promoting hsr simple as that.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Nick, you tell your people in the UK that if this thing can be passed in the auto-oriented USA, and in very car-oriented California no less, then they can be very confident for it there!
nick Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
you might be surprised how strong the car culture here is. and how many people drive suvs ! my nephew came by yesterday in his work car – a big nissan navarra double cab with covered bed !
here is the same story as cahsr in that people opposed to building near them tell all kinds of myths and exaggerations. was a bit rich having republicans saying hsr will destroy california;s education when rebuplican tax cuts to the wealthy have put a huge hole in california and the usa finances !
Joe HSR Supporter Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 6:10 pm
Heh…
I guess all things are relative.
I had no idea what a Nissan Navarra was, so I looked it up on wikipedia. Nick, I am sorry to inform you that the typical contractor, or construction type in California is driving a truck that could pack that Nissan in the back.
Full quad cab, triton v10 diesel, full size heavy duty pickup … usually with a single occupant and an empty bed.
You have NO idea what car culture is. Consider yourself lucky.
nick Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:07 am
it isnt what you would call a full size pickup i know that but it is still a large vehicle especially at £1.40 per litre for diesel. driving even a small car here is like driving a hummer in the us as far as fuel cost goes !
Peter Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:32 pm
People here haven’t been watching much Top Gear on BBC America, I guess.
missiondweller Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:49 pm
“how many people drive suvs !”
Not in San Francisco they don’t!
D. P. Lubic Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 10:02 pm
Nick, that was my point, that America in general and California in particular has a VERY strong car culture–yet, the leaders and people realize they need something else as well.
It’s been a long time coming, and we’re not out of the woods yet, but still, if it can happen in car-crazy California. . .
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:41 pm
It was only 4 DINO’s who voted No, out of 25 Democratic Senators, the other Senators 12 who voted No are all Repugnicans voting as the party wants…
I made My share of calls, both on Thursday and Today(Friday), My Grandpa was a Passenger Rail Advocate, before that He owned an Auto Repair Garage, Car Dealership, was a Police Chief(Culver City CA, the family has His Gold Shield still) and then a City Councilman(Culver City CA), He later also owned a Bicycle Shop too(Palms CA), it’s still around under different ownership…
I did let one Senators staffer know this after the staffer told Me I’d reached the Majority Leaders Office, to that I said Wow and Impressive, then I told Her Whom I was related to, She was certainly impressed, friendly too, Grandpa died in Dec 1969, He’s on the Culver City website, mentioned as the owner of the Bobier Garage(that’s what it was called), the Garage/Car Dealership no longer exist of course, It was at Irving Pl and Washington Blvd back in the 1920′s and 1930′s, pictures exist that show the street was a dirt street w/concrete curbs & sidewalks in 1923.
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
Fire Depart section of the Culver City website is where it is.
YEAH! Time for a cold Haywire ;)
I’ll just leave this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np4-4OcZeEs
Andrew Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 8:34 pm
Tell us what it is first, then maybe we’ll click on it.
Check out the action here:
http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23cahsr
One of the more interesting comments from that page, by “Adam Keigwin:”
“Senator Yee thinks it is a flawed plan and #CAHSR authority has a ways to go, but the benefits still out weigh the problems.”
A couple of people have called out on Robert, too, congratulations, you have your chance, let’s go and make it work!
missiondweller Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:51 pm
Yee is my district. I e-mailed him and must been one of many to change his mind.
Congrats everyone!
YAAAHHOOOO…and BOO to Smitian and friends as the will now get Caltrain upgrades and he did not have the male gonads to at least say thank you with a yes vote…Now throw out the teabaggers in congress and lets get HSR funding
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
Vote Democrats in for Congress in November 2012, I will, Keep as many Repugnican out of Congress from CA as possible and CA will have the money it needs to complete the HSR system, today was a down payment on the Future…
THE AYES HAVE IT! Here’s a toast to Morris, Nadia, Elizabeth, Lowenthal, Simitian, DeSaulnier, LaMalfa, Grover Norquist, CARRD, and the rest of ‘em. Congratulations to all who have sweated for high-speed rail and much respect to the State Senators who stuck out their necks today for the future of our great state.
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:58 pm
Hey I see no other mention of Morris, Synonymouse, Elizabeth or other Nay Sayers here, I wonder why? Could it be that they lost? OMG… :)
fake irishman Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 10:30 pm
Don’t forget Wendell Cox and Raymond “Bolo Tie” O’Toole when handing out the golden raspberries.
Why did Pavley vote no? Here are a few reasons that may have affected the outcome:
(1) new district boundaries that create a very tough campaign for her;
(2) coming in second this June to a Republican who had never run for office before;
(3) a desire to shed a liberal/environmentalist reputation by voting with Republicans;
(4) de facto opposition by some environmentalists, like the Planning (sic) and Conservation League and Kathryn Phillips, the new Executive Director of Sierra Club California.
The wavering senators who represent areas with strong labor support voted yes; the Democrats who didn’t vote yes mostly represent districts dominated by middle to upper income areas.
Darrell Clarke Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:02 pm
I’m disappointed in Fran’s vote, too, as a long-time constituent. But, no, Sierra Club California supported this funding measure.
nick Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:27 pm
(5) no backbone
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:59 pm
Oh She has one, a Repugnican one, but that’s why She’s a newly minted Dino…
Official Statement Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:17 pm
Here is the official statement from State Senator Fran Pavley, sent by email:
This afternoon I voted against the initial funding for the construction of high speed rail in the Central Valley. I have heard from many local residents opposing this project and concerns about California taking on new debt to begin building high speed rail.
“There are aspects of the project I support, such as the benefit of improving existing commuter rail corridors and the jobs that come with it.
“I support the vision of a high speed rail system for California, but not this plan.
“The timing of taking on new debt is questionable. California faces continued economic challenges. We need to continue fiscal diligence as California’s economy slowly improves. Right now we need to make our schools, colleges and public safety our priorities.”
Joe Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 10:47 pm
She supports HSR in concept but not this plan.
What, if anything did she say or do to help improve the plan? What were her ideas that did not get into the plan which would have gained her support?
Joe wanted the blended plan, got it and still voted no.
She is a Senator, not a grocery clerk too busy working to dive into details. We gave her the responsibility to act on her judgement.
Fail!
David K Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:05 am
Pavley’s vote was probably a political move to attempt to endear herself to her new, more conservative district. Her current district is a coastal, more liberal district (including Oxnard, Malibu, Agoura Hills, Santa Monica and West Hollywood), but the new post-redistricting district includes Malibu and Agoura, but adds Thousand Oaks, Simi Valley, and Stevenson Ranch (Santa Clarita Valley west of I-5). These are some of the most fiscally conservative parts of Southern California, and this cant have been anything more than an attempt to appear more conservative to her new constituents before November (especially since her largest legislative accomplishment is authoring AB 32)
The wishy-washy quote “I support the vision of a high speed rail system for California, but not this plan.” suggests a weak attempt to appear popular to both coastal liberals and Stevenson Ranch teabaggers, but will probably fail miserably, probably in electoral defeat.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 6:46 am
That conjures up the phrase “Ya can’t have it both ways” and so yeah electoral defeat, She’s boned.
Joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:51 am
You make a good point that her vote might not have been needed so they let her vote no.
Her statement was poorly constructed, she gains nothing by choosing to appeal to the worse of both positions.
I would have expected something more fiscal, “the project needs more federal support. CA loses money with every dollar sent to DC, it is time we got our fair share back. And until we do, i vote no.”
Prideaux Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:36 am
Pavley’s vote was 100% political and Steinberg have get a pass. She frankly doesn’t give a shot either way and would be an Aye if she didn’t have a race on her hands. Shows you how your D’s really feel.
Sad to hear that my state senator (Mark DeSaulnier) voted against – and even sadder that his opponent this autumn is just as bad California’s future.
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:00 pm
My Senator also voted No, but then I have a Repugnican Senator, so Yer not alone.
jonathan Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 6:51 pm
If the open-primary rule applies to state Senate seats, you could vote another Democrat into the November election against DeSaulnier.
DavidM Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:23 pm
Unfortunately, it was just DeSaulnier and 1 Republican in the primary.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 6:48 am
Some choice, Dino or Repugnican, I’d rather not & call the whole thing off Myself.
Peter Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:09 am
Didn’t DeSaulnier also say though that if the measure passed despite his “no” vote, he would do all he could to make it happen?
.. and now the time has come to lobby hard against wasting this money.
For example, lobbying to enforce common platform heights for HSR and Caltrain.
And lobbying to cancel the CBOSS craziness and replace it with something that _is_ compatible with HSR. Even ERTMS-Regional would be better!
What are the corresponding issues in SoCal?
thatbruce Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 4:59 pm
Republicans.
thatbruce Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:30 pm
@jonathan:
Caltrain is an obvious case for the entirety of a commuter operation to use the standards of the long-distance system. With the CHSR running over the full length of Caltrain, it would be foolish for them to run their own, very special system. But the finest rail transportation professionals in America will find a way.
In SoCal, there are three passenger operations that matter, Metrolink, Amtrak and Amtrak-California (Surfliner). The Amtrak long-distance trains would continue to use the freight trackage all the way into LAUS, and would still require a low-level platform or two. The CHSR system would not change how Amtrak operates into LAUS.
Metrolink and Surfliner have the long-term issue of needing to run over freight trackage, and under any blended system, also on parts of the CHSR system.
For Metrolink, the eventual CHSR overlay completely duplicates two of its routes (to Palmdale and to Irvine), and partially duplicates its route out to Riverside. My own feelings on the subject is that Metrolink will eventually end up with a high-platform CHSR-compatible fleet (same ones that Caltrain ought to be using), and a low-platform FRA-only fleet using the freight railroad’s signaling, PTC etc.
The Surfliner service is harder to guess, as there would be a short CHSR overlay in San Diego, FRA trackage until Irvine, another CHSR overlay through LAUS to the Burbank fork, and then more FRA trackage. The Surfliner is likely to remain as a FRA service, low platforms and all.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:43 pm
This obsession with low level platforms comes as shock to Easterners who have been boarding and alighting at platforms that allow level boarding for a over a century. Few if any of Metro North or LIRR riders know that there is a set of stairs under the trap door that they see occasionally.
Alon Levy Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 6:33 pm
The EMUs do not actually have trapdoors; some of the lines only went high-platform when the M1s and M2s were on order, to accommodate them.
As for California, its issue is that it runs low-floor bilevels. The Amtrak California Superliners have no compatibility with high platforms, and neither do the Bombardier Bilevels. So in the short run, Metrolink can’t go fully high-platform. In the long run it can, but this requires eliminating Amtrak California (which means building HSR to San Diego) and also modernizing all of the Metrolink system.
jonathan Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 6:48 pm
.. or “no platforms”, as California St and Atherton and (now closed) Rengstorff Ave.
It’s as mystifying to this former Antipodean as to you East-Coasters. Clem says it has something to do with the 1948 rulebook which allows train-men to hang off the sides of freight cars from the bottom rung.
Are there any Darwin-award trainmen who try that on the East Coast? Or is it only California where the trainmen are assumed to be incapable of obeying signs, if (as Clem oversimplifies it) the sign outside 4th and Townsend is moved to just south of San Jose Cahill St station?
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:21 pm
They see the trapdoors occasionally as they glance out the window and see something from Amtrak or New Jersey transit that does have trapdoors.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:25 pm
And it’s not like Amfleets have never ventured to California. High platforms at the busy stations and low platforms at the bus shelters by the side of the tracks happens all the time on SEPTA. Even on the NEC outside of NY, NJ and CT.
All they have to do is spec out something slightly narrower than Shinkansen and poof Amtrak has cars that can go to California’s high platforms. Or spec out Shinkansen and bolt some wider plates to the doorsills on when the cars are assigned to California.
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:03 pm
Whether the entry are low level or high level does not matter nearly so much as that the platform is at entry level height. 22″, 51″ whatever … pick one, remove that insane California regulation about platforms knocking off workers standing on a foothold to the side of a freight flatcar, and build platforms for the selected height.
jonathan Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
Bruce, is 20cm (8in) not “low-level” in US rail parlance?
CPUC General Order 26-D will need modification in any case, to define permssible standards for 25KV AC electrification, _and_ for level borading as required by ADA. If the relevant parties had a clue, they could ask for level-boarding regulation for “blended” rail corridors at the same time.
Paul Dyson Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:42 pm
@thatbruce, a little correction on the Metrolink dilemma. The LAUS to Oceanside route, which is planned to be extended to San Diego in conjunction with Coaster (not mentioned but important) is a hybrid HSR/FRA route, as is the Ventura County line (which you also failed to mention). The LAUS run through tracks should permit through running say VC line to San B’doo, which we desperately need to provide “inter suburb” service which complicates the picture further. When you think this through, and eventually someone has to think this through rather than guess, one is confronted with some very expensive solutions. One of the reasons LA – Anaheim was dropped early on was that some of the price estimates for coping with at least two passenger technologies and a 12,000teu boatload or two of freight between Hobart and Fullerton had gone north of $10 billion. The so called blended system really doesn’t exist as a working hypothesis. It’s simply a way of pretending that the project is a lot cheaper than it really is.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:52 pm
Ain’t scary when people let the electric passenger trains run on the same tracks as the diesel freight trains.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fZ1G35rmJ8
Paul Dyson Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 8:02 pm
Both FRA compliant, so your point is?
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 8:20 pm
And the installation of ACSES for anything that gets onto the NEC will be complete in 2015. They aren’t going to go out and replace thousands of commuter cars all at once. Nor are they going to be buying FRA compliant rolling stock forever.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 6:42 am
Hey! Did you notice, at 0:57, that ANOTHER passenger train shows up? It’s only visible for a second or two before it passes behind the longer, much slower freight train (and is mostly invisible for that reason), but it is briefly visible, and it’s there–ooh, so scary, passenger and freight trains and HSR (at least kind of) on the same tracks!
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:14 pm
Shh. someone will notice sooner or later that the freight train is traveling in the same direction as the passenger train(s) and all three of them are on the express tracks.
PeakVT Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 6:03 pm
Good advice.
synonymouse Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 10:16 pm
“lobby hard” for what? Guess again, you all have zero juice with these apparatchiks.
A boondoggle is all about the graft. PB, sidle on up to the trough.
The gravy train.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:23 am
Good morning Cyno, Ya lost. The legislation has increased over sight added, in any case, it’s soon build time. So get used to it as HSR is not going away, as the HSR revote(SB985) was voted down in the CA Senate, I watched it live, down in flames, burnt revote…
I did look for a YouTube video that mentioned SB985, but so far I don’t think anyone recorded the live feed, considering how nice they were in letting LaMalfas bill go before the HSR vote, I think the words party line vote sums it up best, but flames is good too, Oh and that puny petition? I hear It has money problems, it needs millions to get underway and no official support either, too bad, so sad…
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
I never had any doubts whatsoever that it would not pass. Done deal. And any and all litigation is doomed to be thrown out. The fix is in.
But do you really think your system is sustainable? All your political heroes are crooked one-percenters.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:08 pm
Bitterness anyone?
The train sustains and mainly on the plain!
Thank you Robert, Senators, Gov. Brown, and all the commenters of all stripes on this blog!
Prideaux Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:38 am
Robert and this blog had nothing to do with it. All crony capitalism, from top to bottom.
Joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:57 am
Yes, that is why you commented. It is meaningless.
I lobbied my city gov’t using info from the blog. Studies show towns on HSR in Europe gain GDP.
Gilroy endorsed the project. Small steps.
So Mark DeSaulnier, Joe Simitian, and Alan Lowenthal can report back to their districts that they fought the good fight and lost. They may be punished by the Democratic Party but, the reality is that they knew, before the vote, that their symbolic “NO votes, wouldn’t actually stop the process of issuing HSR Bonds. Everyone wins. Dissent is tolerated in the political proccess as long as you don’t defeat the legislation that your own political leaders have proposed. Many times the House of Reprentatives’ Republican Leaders have pulled legislation because they don’t have enough votes in their own caucus to pass it and they dont’ want to be beholden to Democratic votes to get it done. Brown got what he wanted – the law passed – and he didn’t have to crawl across broken glass to get a single Republican vote.
Joe Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 6:38 pm
Symbolically, I will tell Alan to Pound sand when he asks for support. Joe can retire. Mark is on his own. Symbolicaly.
The opponents of HSR will use thier symbolic dissent to continue to attack the project.
Great news!!!!! The approval for funding has been given for construction of a true LGV in the USA. We are going to have to be extremely vigilant and rock solid in fortitude as the oil lobby steps up the campaign to kill this thing by the hook or the crook. They realize we are getting too close. The lawsuits will start flying with much more vigour now.
By the way “Happy Birthday” VB. You received a tremendous present.
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:13 pm
And don’t I know it! Thanks HSTSheldon!
Yeah Big Oil will do anything to stop what it sees as competition, a threat, My Dad was always suspicious of Big Oil, “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps, the end of the beginning“, Sir Winston Churchill Prime Minister of the UK 1940-1945 & 1951-1955.
nick Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
he also said “never have so many have owed so much to so few” ! thanks assembly and senate ! no thanks to the rat pack (and i dont mean dino frank and sammy ? !) and “we shall fight them on the beaches we shall never surrender (hsr!) “
nick Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
“we shall go forward together”
Paul Dyson Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 7:49 pm
He also opined the Americans can be relied upon to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other possibilities….
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 8:01 pm
He was also half American too.
Occasionally the good guys win one; and this was a big one.
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:17 pm
Yep, a WWII type Block Buster Bomb in fact, the Nay Sayers thought they’d win, Oh how wrong they were, but it’s not over yet, not until HSR trains roll I’d think.
I dont even understand why this was a question.
The people voted yes in 2008.
The people voted yes again in 2010 when pro-rail candidates swept the elections.
The mandate was clear, all this nerve-wracking show should have never happened.
YESONHSR Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 5:43 pm
Because the sideshow was put on by these 3 clowns that have been after HSR for over a year or more..and of course they put on more acts today before voting NO..which they always would have.
Alan Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 8:49 pm
Why? Because we all know that polls comprised of an infinitesimally small fraction of the state’s population are *so* much more representative of what people think, than a real, honest-to-gosh election where *all* of the people could vote–not just those “scientifically” chosen to take part in the push poll…
Spokker Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:22 am
An election is the ultimately survey, and yes, the polls with n=1000 are less accurate, but it doesn’t always work in your favor.
When Fran voted no, I let out a gasp. I can’t believe it. She has got to be the greenest Democrat in the Senate. Hopefully moving to a more Republican district won’t change her outlook on the future.
RT
Robert, thanks for keeping the light on when the darkest clouds gathered, when many weak-minded individuals succumbed to peer pressure and misinformation, for making sure that the facts would not get lost in the sea of lies. It is important to remember that even when the echo chamber resonates with The Big Lie, on whatever issue, that one should not give up the good fight: it may still be possible to prevail, as we did today. You may never know how many people were influenced directly or indirectly by your blog, but it is quite possible that the outcome may have been different without it.
So now, the fight in the valley over who gets the heavy maintenance facitly can resume. It will be intersting to see if my republican senator from merced will next try to screw his constiuents out of these good paying jobs.
can we see the entire vote tally somewhere please?
Vote Tally Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 6:52 pm
Here’s a photo of the vote tally:
http://p.twimg.com/AxKFdsaCIAA64eD.jpg
The link is from John Myers of KQED’s Capitol Notes blog; appears to have been tweeted by Mike Rosenberg of the San Jose Mercury-News:
http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2012/07/06/calif-senate-debates-high-speed-rail/
The three senators who didn’t vote were all Republican. Interestingly, two (Berryhill and Runner) represent competitive districts through which the project will pass, while the third, Emmerson, is the most moderate Republican member, who occasionally even votes with Democrats on minor issues, and whose district is trending more Democratic, though still Republican for now.
jimsf Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:31 am
thanks. yep I see my Sen. Cannella voted against. So Cannella, are you gonna do nothing to try to get the HMF in this district too so folks can have decent jobs when we have 20 percent unemployment in merced?
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:28 am
It would have to be April fools Day before I’d believe that a Republican would vote Yes on HSR anymore…
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:11 pm
Maybe it’s not a coincidence these three were absent. I do expect we’ll see Republicans supporting HSR in Texas within 10 years, and maybe a couple from SoCal supporting something to span LA-Bakersfield in the next 5 years.
Great News!!! I am a little late in finding out. Thanks for all the hard work everyone, especially Robert.
Good thing Meg didn’t win the election. This thing would have been toast a year ago.
synonymouse Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 10:32 pm
A Republican cannot win in California. Ronald Reagan could never be elected Governor today.
This is a one party state, like its paragon Mexico, and moving toward the same failed status.
BruceMcF Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 10:39 pm
A One Party State, like Mexico, where the PAN party just lost the Presidency after eight years in power and is being replaced by PRI.
Alon Levy Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:29 am
12 years. Presidential terms in Mexico are 6 years, not 4.
William Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:40 am
6 years. The President of Mexico is limited to one 6-year term, and cannot run again in the future.
Alon Levy Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:42 am
Yeah, but both the outgoing president and the previous one were PAN.
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:57 am
Wait, but if it is 12 years that would make this 2012? Let me check that out … well, what do you know, you are right.
Yes, the Constitution after the revolution dictated a single 6 year term, to eliminate “Presidents for Life”, and so what they built after that was a system in which the current president “tapped” the next President, for seven decades of “succession of PRI presidents”.
But that was under a single party electoral system founded on buying rural votes with a collection of local subsidies and coopting political opposition by bringing them into PRI. That system has fallen apart, and while PRI has the Presidency and a majority in the Senate, they do not have a majority in the Chamber of Deputies. And perhaps the only thing that the right wing PAN deputies and the left wing PRD deputies can agree on is that PRI should not be allowed carte blanche to re-establish the one party rule that PRI dismantled in the 90′s.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:32 pm
In Mexico teachers have to buy their jobs. Doesn’t that tell you everything?
Nancy & Jerry: take note.
Paul Druce Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:40 am
The PRI which held control of the country for 71 years before that?
Though I’ll give them a pass for the sheer hilarity of their name.
Phoenix Woman Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 11:45 pm
You mean like where Darrell Issa tried to buy himself into the Governor’s Mansion only to be told — after spending a few million of his own dough on the recall — that the state GOP and Pete Wilson wanted Wilson’s fair-haired Aryan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, to run instead?
By the way, Gray Davis’ last budget proposal, had it not been blocked by Republicans, would have closed California’s budget hole a decade ago. But noooooo: You guys put in Ahhhhrnold, who by refusing to tax his rich buddies made the deficit much, much worse. (But of course the truth is that you love deficits because they give you an excuse to cut social spending, especially that which might benefit people with darker skins than yours.)
jonathan Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:30 am
which “you” loves deficits and the excuses? SoCal Republicans, or all Californians?
Travis D Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 3:53 am
In other words California is not stupid. We have endured the shame for unleashing Reagan for too long!
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:32 am
Mr. Mouse, you sometimes write like an intelligent person who is annoyingly repetitive, but other times you show complete idiocy, like this. California is a democracy with regularly scheduled elections and with full opportunity for Republicans to compete. That they fail to attract votes is a reflection only on the fact that their policies and programs do not resonate with the voters. (And of course as noted you completely bungled your attempted comparison to our neighboring nation to the south.)
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:55 am
Schwarzenegger is in reality a moderate Democrat whose ego prevented him from accepting the fact that he had essentially become part of the Kennedy political family. In a place like Ohio he would be seen as tilting somewhat to the left.
California is run by a patronage machine – a great portion of the populace depends for their bread and butter on either state entitlement or work. Next to impossible for a pol to reduce state spending and get elected, outside of a few enclaves. That’s why Moonbeam’s ratings have been going down with his feeble and phony attempts at austerity.
Third world values and practices(if you don’t cheat you are retarded)are taking deep root in the Golden State. It was always pretty corrupt but we are acquiring our own indigenous camorristi. Modus operandi is whatever the **** you can get away with. Ergo PB’s porkfest.
A hundred years from now we will be futilely arguing the same issues but in Spanish.
jonathan Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:16 pm
That’s an insane thing to say. Some Republicans were even mumbling about amending the Consitution so that Arnie could run for President.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:59 pm
Scwarzie is virtually identical with Feinstein politically. To the left of Bloomberg.
Conservatives are finished in California.
joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:44 pm
Your brand, yes.
Parsing your political demons, it’s a wonder any person under the age of 45 would even understand the symbolism.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Cruft in the Turing machine.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:11 pm
Mouse, I think you are a good observer but then your conclusions oversimplify. Consider that Californians are very liberal socially and favor protecting the rights of gays, latinos, women, etc. Do the Republicans offer voters a choice of being fiscally more conservative while socially moderate? No they don’t, instead they believe they need to march in lockstep with their national party and they pursue follies like Gov. Wilson’s Prop 187.
Also consider that voters here do want a higher level of government services than some other states. A successful strategy would be to engage, compromise, and work to reduce the excesses of a bloated state. Do they do that? Noooo, they adopt the national no-compromise dogma and reduce themselves to irrrelevant players in Calif. state politics. That seems neither effective nor loyal to California. How else should we interpret the Calif. Republican’s decision to marginalize themselves in state politics?
If the national party brooks no flexibility to support local state realities, perhaps the Calif. Republican party should rename itself and loosely ally with the national party, like the Conservative party in NY State, or the CSU in Bavaria allied with the CDU in the rest of Germany.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:47 pm
Unless you are a huge actor with huge muscles and an Austrian accent…. You’re probably right. You might still be right if California voters realize that celebrities don’t make good governors.
A good day, it will be second only to the day that shovels break ground.
I haven’t seen many public statements issued yet. Looks like LA Mayor Villaraigosa is in DC for the signing of the Surface Transportation bill and I haven’t seen anything yet from SF’s Lee.
Fresno Mayor Ashley Swearengin issued this statement after the Senate vote: “This is an historic day for Fresno. A lack of transportation infrastructure has always been one of Fresno’s greatest challenges to overcoming our biggest gaps, and high-speed rail closes that gap. With high-speed rail, the rest of California can easily access Fresno, and Fresno can easily access the other major urban areas of the state. This is great news for our economy, both in the immediate term and in the long run.”
http://www.fresno.gov/News/PressReleases/2012/HSR.htm
I am literally jumping up and down right now.
Ever since Rick Scott rejected Florida’s money, Cali has been the ONLY state proposing a truly high-speed system. The 110mph diesel trains proposed for the Northwest, the Midwest, and the DC-Raleigh corridor are mere consolation prizes.
California has today set a new benchmark for speed for domestic trains. Cali’s HSR will now be a point of comparison for any discussion of HSR in the Texas Triangle, which brings a fully separate system on new alignment that much closer to reality. After all – Los Angeles invented the stack interchange, Houston perfected it. (Try finding a cloverleaf anywhere on the Houston freeway network – just try). Likewise, Cali will now bring true HSR to the US.
As someone who harbors a dream of being able to hit shows in Austin, H-town and the Big D all in the same weekend, I’d just like to say thanks y’all.
Donk Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:51 am
I don’t know, it will be a long time before the rest of the people in your state will vote to support HSR, especially now that it has become a partisan issue. Or maybe since Texans seem to hate everything about CA, they will recoil even more now when someone mentions HSR. Hopefully I am wrong.
Paul Druce Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:35 am
Texas has a private group backed by JR Central trying to do HSR.
swing hanger Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:45 am
There also appears to be another group in Texas pushing an HSR scheme, more in the mold of the original Texas T-Bone, as well as Texas DOT doing “studies”, including HSR north to OK City.
Keep Houston Houston Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:57 am
The thing about Texas is that stuff that’s partisan at a national level ceases to be partisan at a state level. Perry actually tried to go the full Reason Foundation route with a massive private toll road plan, but the grassroots opposition was so strong that it got shelved and the only segment that will ever be privately built is the portion of SH 130 between ABIA and Seguin.
Texas also got very, very close to having full HSR in the early 90′s with a consortium that included (then) Morrison-Knudsen; at the time, the biggest opponent was Southwest Airlines. But SWA’s signature Houston-Dallas run carries 1/3 fewer passengers today than it did 20 years ago, and in the meantime the company has undergone rapid expansion. Competition from bullet trains just ain’t a big deal anymore.
At least within Houston, support for HSR among political elites is damn-near universal. And while the “boondoggle” people are also well-represented, there really isn’t any George Will-esque “this is a secret plot to ban driving”-type sentiment. Hard to believe that they’re coming to take away your cars when TxDOT just widened your local freeway out to 14 lanes…
neville snark Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:54 am
Good stuff – perhaps, and I hope, the average repug is like a man who won’t do what his wife suggests, but later does exactly the same thing and says ‘I’m glad I thought of it!’.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:41 am
Nice posting. I do believe that ‘Cali’ will pave (track?) the way for many other regions to build HSR projects of all speeds, including ones faster than ours. I believe Texas will build their network sooner than many folks might predict, and they will do it in a uniquely Texan way with a large share of private capital. Absolutely folks should be able to travel between Houston, Austin and the DFW Metroplex in the same weekend without car or plane. It will reinforce Texas’ economy just as it will for California’s.
And once Texas starts building their HSR system, every region in the country that can possibly justify it and cobble together funding will start their own projects. There will soon be a huge opportunity for international rail firms from Asia and Europe to come help us build and run 1000′s of miles of HSR throughout this large country. The firm that gets in early with the Calif. system will be extremely well positioned for 100′s of $Billions of business to come. So I predict you will see offers to advance several $Billion to the Calif. network to close the LA-Bfd gap and maybe do something in the North within the coming 12 months.
I’m pretty certain that this guarantees that the Feds will now also fund XpressWest’s first leg. I’d expect that news next week, referencing the plan to connect to HSR in Palmdale.
VBobier Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 8:03 pm
I hope so too, the more the merrier.
Donk Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:53 am
Well there still is no real money for the LA-Palmdale leg. The Desert Xpress project will be derided as a train to nowhere until that changes. Hopefully NV can get the feds to pony up more for LA-Palmdale.
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:51 am
And as Thursday and Friday’s vote shows, deriding a corridor as a train to nowhere is a sure fire strategy for killing it.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Roundabout Stilt-A-RAil will always be a train to nowhere because that is what it is supposed to be.. Why do you think the airlines don’t give a damn. Just don’t go anywhere near THE golf course.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:54 pm
Well said Bruce
Paul Druce Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:09 am
Doubt it. It really just doesn’t meet RRIF standards (they are, after all, supposed to be repaid: XpressWest does not have a business plan capable of doing so).
So…. when will construction begin? Are there segments that are shovel-ready?
RubberToe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:11 am
Emma,
I haven’t been following the details as well as some, but if I recall correctly there is a 23 mile segment that would actually be the first contract to go out. Keep an eye on this blog or the CAHSR site for further details. Now that the political process has been completed, we just wait now for the legal process to see if anyone challenges that first contract.
RT
RubberToe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:22 am
Found the reference in the blog:
Yesterday, the California High-Speed Rail Authority approved the terms and conditions that bidders will be expected to meet in designing and building a 29-mile segment of the line from east of Madera to the south end of Fresno – a stretch that is expected to cost about $1.5 billion….
http://www.cahsrblog.com/2012/03/ca-hsr-contracts-to-be-signed-in-2012-as-planned/
RubberToe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:25 am
That references this page too:
http://californiawatch.org/node/15137
The work through Fresno is the first of five construction packages on the line between Merced and Bakersfield, a 130-mile stretch that would form the backbone of a system ultimately connecting the San Francisco Bay Area with the Los Angeles Basin.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:36 am
Yeah that mentions 5 firms for possible construction contracts on that 29 mile stretch, Me I’d like the firm or firms that built HSR in Spain, whoever that is. In other words the most experienced, not the least expensive, the least expensive is a low ball figure, usually leads to overruns.
datacruncher Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:03 am
I’ve heard the Fresno Street underpass in downtown Fresno (part of section 1B in the design/build RFP) would be the actual first construction.
That CaliforniaWatch article mentions “Roelof van Ark, who is retiring as the authority’s chief executive officer, said there are some smaller construction projects – including an extension of the Fresno Street underpass to below G Street, the proposed high-speed line and the existing Union Pacific Railroad tracks – that are not part of the major contract and could begin earlier, once environmental reports for the Merced-Fresno section are approved.”
In the RFP that is currently out it says “The HST Authority has subsequently agreed that the City of Fresno may allow the design and construction of this overpass (HSR tracks over street undercrossing) as a separate contract in advance of the main works contract. This means that the overpass would have been constructed before the main works contract commences.”
Page 39 at:
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/assets/0//443/447/f1f7279c7dec45a8a2797624b6afec2d.pdf
Unless that has been a change in plans that I have missed, look for the first construction crews to start in downtown Fresno.
Can someone explain something to someone following this afar? The initial (and so far only funded) segment is through the central valley, and I’ve heard it criticized as a “train to nowhere.” This has always seemed silly to me, because trains need to go through the Central Valley in order to get from SF to LA. So, ordinary (non-HSR) trains will still be able to take this route when it’s done, right? And will be faster for it, even if they aren’t electric HSR trainsets? My understanding is that most current Amtrak diesel locomotives can in theory go up to 110 mph, but there’s almost no trackage in the country that actually allows them to go that fast.
BruceMcF Reply:
July 6th, 2012 at 10:37 pm
Yes, its the longest segment (130miles) of the proposed system between SF and LA. In response to demands from the Federal government for “independent utility” when funding a segment of a larger project, it is being built to accommodate the Amtrak trains. As a result of the latest revisions to the Business Plan, the San Joaquin services will indeed use the ICS when it is completed, so that they will indeed be able to run 110mph.
Alon Levy Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:45 am
The plan is to let Amtrak use the ICS as a last-ditch effort, if they fail to extend it in such a way that it could form a standalone IOS. Once the IOS opens there will not be any Amtrak trains on the line (and probably the San Joaquins will be cut back to the terminus of the IOS due to the low ridership of the stations that HSR won’t serve), as they are still much slower and would interfere with the faster trains.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:46 am
Your main point is correct, that it does have ‘independent utility’, it will be used when finished, and it will significantly speed up existing routes that already have strong ridership which will only increase.
My Democratic state senator Simitian is an idiot, I’m not sure who he thinks he represents.
Who has the details on exactly what they are funding in LA and elsewhere?
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:46 am
That’s my question too
Clem Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:54 am
Here is the list, and via CARRD the Leg Counsel’s opinion that projects on this list may not be legal under Prop 1A.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:54 pm
It would appear that Villa got everything on his Xmas list.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:22 pm
Thanks Clem. So if NorCal gets ~$800m does that mean that $1.1B goes toward this list, which with local match might get the vast majority of it done? Grade seps and double tracking seems like good investments (even if some are only tangentially related to inter-regional transportation).
BTW Mouse, Mayor V. has one of the best wish lists of any mayor. You really are anti-transportation options aren’t you?
blankslate Reply:
July 9th, 2012 at 11:48 am
Can anyone translate this list into something along the lines of, “Trains between [X] and [Y] will see a reduction in [Z] minutes of scheduled time due to speed increases and/or will see [W] increase in frequency”? Thanks
I love California.
So….when can we turn dirt?
I emailed each state senator last night with an impassioned plea to vote yes on this today, and I called each and every one of them this morning. It felt incredible to be so connected to this victory today (not that my messages changed anyone’s mind, lol).
D. P. Lubic Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 6:51 am
Erika, you and Matt (below) reminded me of something. As important as this is, as important as it was to keep the pressure on and get this vote, let’s also reward your state senators and the people in the lower house, too. Send them a letter or a phone call thanking them for this action. Let them know you appreciate it, let them feel good, too.
We’re not out of the woods yet, and we can’t let our support wither.
This is a great day. Makes it feel like I accomplished something when I tried to get people to vote for this back when I lived in California. What else needs to get done before the contracts go out and we start construction? Definitely making a trip back out or hopefully moving back out when it’s ready to run.
I heard the news on NPR coming home from farming. Great job Robert in keeping up the conversation and the support. Now its time for the hard work in putting the project on the ground and put thousands working hard on providing the first truly HSR project in the U.S. Again, awesome news…
Awesome. Here’s to a quick time to groundbreaking.
James McDonald Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 2:41 am
Yes. I agree. I hope they come up with a groudbreaking date soon. Please don’t wait until 2013. Let’s get the parking area and storage area prepared for the construction workers and put that golden shovel in the ground. I want to see some dirt moving and some steel laid down.
How about a LIVE webcam so we can watch the construction.
Thanks Robert for all of your work. I called all of the Senators and had my family and friends do the same. Disappointing that my own Senator Alan Lowenthal voted against the project, but so happy that it passed!
The next few months are critical as this story continues to get media attention in a major election year. We need to get our side out there and in the media.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 6:49 am
Matt, you just reminded me of something. As important as this is, as important as it was to keep the pressure on and get this vote, let’s also reward your state senators and the people in the lower house, too. Send them a letter or a phone call thanking them for this action. Let them know you appreciate it, let them feel good, too.
We’re not out of the woods yet, and we can’t let our support wither.
Yes! :)
I think a “so now what?” post would be helpful to all of us who follow this issue but aren’t involved in the daily politicking or are not infrastructure experts. What’s the next step?
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:14 am
Yep, I’m working on that right now and will have a post ready on that topic either today or tomorrow.
Roger Christensen Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:29 am
I would think our What Next should include properly thanking some of the key votes.
Rubio is already taking front page headline heat in the Fresno Bee for his support.
Expediting the Fresno-Bakersfield Draft EIR is crucial. Route decision MUST be made this fall to stay on schedule.
My personal favorite route is Hanford West.
Straighter.
Shorter. (4 miles shorter)
Faster.
Cheaper.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:47 am
You rock Robert!
Joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:10 am
I am worried about the emphasis on ridership tied to cars & parking at the stations.
The contractor model assumed car ridership as a simplifying assumption so they could model the system without details on local transportation systems connectiong to HSR.
That means 6,000 parking spaces at Gilroy. 6,600 for the proposed Palo Alto station.
I want to see trades between drive and park with alternatives, like drop off, on-site transportation hubs and walkable stations. Wr can’t build a car dependent system.
Endorsing HSR is not an endorsement of the Simplified model and ridership is key so the motons will demand parking be built or the system will fail to meet rider projections.
Max Wyss Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:14 am
Interesting, considering the foreseeable connections from Gilroy or Palo Alto, and compare it to Avignon TGV (which essentially can be easily reached by TGV, and nothing else … well there are regular buses to the city center, and they look to be used). Avignon TGV has around 2000 parking spaces, and you always find a space… And, yes, people are driving for an hour or more to get to that station.
Clem Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:29 am
They should clearly have built the HSR station in front of the Palais des Papes.
Clem Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:36 am
Funny you should ask, I’ve got a Now What post for the peninsula up on my blog.
Not to be a downer but did anyone notice in the text of the senate bill funding for Altamont Pass design and acquisition but nothing about Pacheco?
Darrell Clarke Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:47 am
Perhaps because the Business Plan’s “blended” approach contemplates Amtrak upgrades from the north end of the initial HSR segment and over Altamont (the current ACE route)?
I hope the whole Pacheco vs. Altamont thing can be set aside for awhile. CA HSR will be quite busy for the forseeable future in the San Joaquin Valley and then going south over the Tehachapis.
Joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:09 am
The alignment is decided. Altamont is part if the system.
I expect an altamont connection and eventual HSR service which is in the long term plan.
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/Altamont_Corridor.aspx
We should thank Joe for the blended plan which sneaks HSR into the Pennisula with fully electrified Caltrain and for his bad faith in a no vote once he was given that generous accomidation.
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:45 am
Indeed the Altamont Tunnel could take a slice off the time for a San Joaquin to Bay Area trip ~ connect to the BART at Livermore, trundle through the slow section to connect to BART and the Capitol Corridor in the southeast Bay, and connect to the Caltrain Corridor to get to Silicon Valley in San Jose. Combine that with a substantial slice off of the ACE transit time, there’s something that could be done with cap & trade, New Start funds, and a bit of the Amtrak California share of the Prop1a $900m for connecting rail.
Clem Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:35 am
How is that a downer?!?
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:48 am
Yeah … and? The Altamont corridor offers a set of fine incremental upgrade opportunities, and not being on the critical path between SF and LA for the main trunk line, also offers opportunities for value engineering the corridor for an transitional San Joaquin / Bay Area connection and the long term main South & East Bay Area / Sacramento connection.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:57 am
I think both routes will be used with a Pacheco dedicated HSR routing one of the last parts of phase 1 to be built. It will get funded when the Bay region comes together to insist on it and help identify funds. the Altamont routing will never be upgraded to true HSR, so everyone in SF, the Peninsula, the South Bay and even 510 who wants to save 30-45 minutes travel time, plus everyone from 925 who wants to reduce the number of trains travelling through their bucolic environments will unite to get Pacheco finally built and true HSR running to SF & SJ.
Clem Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:03 pm
The Altamont route can be built to HSR standards–there’s no real reason why not. If it is built, the extensions to Sacramento and San Diego will be a much more pressing need than a duplicate entry into the Bay Area. The plan says both should be built, but the reality is only one will ever be built. The final choice is yet to come, still several years off.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:49 pm
All due respect, Clem, but the fix is on a roll. Richard has already demonstrated that he s wheeler-dealer type of the shiftiest order – do not anticipate any scheme is not of the worst possibly imaginable.
The only hope to regaine any meaningful public influence on the planning is to defeat Brown’s tax increase and perhaps to see a real grassroots rebellion in the farm fields. If Valley farmers and Berkeley-Stanford hippies can do a kumbaya joining of hands in front of the bulldozers that would make Jerry look like the anti-environment jerk he really is
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:56 pm
I previously implied that you moments of rationality Mouse, I take that back.
Neil Shea Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:47 pm
Clem, are you thinking of stages like:
1-Extend ACE to Merced
2-Get full trackage rights and/or secure right of way, eliminate grade seps, double track, electrify, add signalling, etc.
3-Span Bay at Dumbarton/DEWR via bridge or tunnel
If so, #2 would seem to entail many incremental steps at which the already opposed communities would prevent progress. #3 is a big deal which may be impossible to pull off (it may be easier to find $5++ B to build a bridge or tunnel OAK-SF).
So I’m picturing the Altamont routing as diesel, with double track and grade seps, that goes via San Jose. Even making those improvements may entail compromises with the communities traversed that limit the number of trains per day. That’s why I still picture a Pacheco dedicated routing as being a consensus choice of the region at the time.
It’s hard to picture a true HSR extension to Sac before this is addressed, but I can picture investments made toward the Inland Empire (although we’d prob need compromises between No. & So. Cal. with tranches of investment in each.
How can you all celebrate here after reading this bit of news: http://washingtonexaminer.com/california-high-speed-rail-is-dead/article/2500302 ?
It seems that even though the California Legislature passed the High Speed Rail measure to commence issuing bonds, it’s going to
prove to be no more than a symbolic act, as Governor Brown did not stand in the way of allowing lawsuits to be brought against the
project, and you can bet your bottom dollar that the opponents of this project will do everything in their power to stop it. This thing will be lawsuited to death, and even a decade from now, not one shovel will go into the ground. Seems the Washington Examiner has hit the nail on the head – High Speed Rail Is Dead – there’s no chance for it – especially considering that the U.S. Government has stated that construction must begin by the end of 2012 or all Federal funding of the project will be forfeited. The lawsuits will most certainly guarantee delay past this deadline.
How can you celebrate, knowing this?
RubberToe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:02 am
Everyone knows the lawsuits are coming. It’s a question of whether the people who are filing the lawsuits have pockets deep enough to take on the authority, and for how long. I would hazard a guess that the provision that “construction needs to start” by the end of 2012, actually says something more like “contracts need to be signed” by the end of 2012. If thats the case, then filing lawsuits isn’t a sure path to stopping the project. It seems unlikely that project proponents wouldn’t have taken that possibility into account when writing the provisions.
With the upcoming election, it would seem prudent to act as quickly as possible in any case. You don’t build the largest public works project in the Unites States without there being lawsuits. I would also think it unlikely that a “technicality” would derail such a project. If you recall, LaHood said California needed to decide by June 30th whether to accept the federal money or not, and the vote wasn’t until July 6th. If anyone has a link to the federal law please provide it, so we all can see how the project will supposedly be derailed.
As actual construction gets closer, look for ever more desperate claims from non-supporters. I’m sure Robert will address these issues in his forthcoming post.
RT
J. Wong Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:08 am
Because so far the courts have been entirely sensible with respect to the suits nine of which have presented any valid basis for being upheld.
J. Wong Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:10 am
“none”
Joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:58 am
Critics insist it is important to interpret the law and proposition 1a such that it is impossible to build HSR.
I am told it would be totally irresponsible for a judge to consider the popular vote and legislative vote when interpretating the language in the Proposition.
Surely the CAHSRA and goverment officials can NOT be allowed any discression or latitide in carrying out their duties.
RubberToe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:09 am
From the linked article:
“However, according to the stimulus law, California must begin construction on the project before December 31, 2012 or they will not be eligible for any more high speed rail stimulus dollars.”
There are $400,000,000 of stimulus money currently being used to construct the train box in the basement of the Transbay Terminal. Construction has already begun. Visual proof right here:
http://transbaycenter.org/construction-updates/construction-cameras/mission-camera
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:08 am
We’ll just have to wait & see what happens next, as that’s the way it goes, as to Governor Brown not standing in the way, He’s only the Governor, not the legislature, action to stop frivolous lawsuits would have to be a concerted action between Him & the Legislature, that could still happen, also cap & trade could be a source of future HSR funding, some say that would be illegal, sounds like FUD to Me, but I’m sure that could be changed if it were a problem, We’re a can do state, not a can’t do state like Texas…
This is a great day for California and a great day for reliable, sustainable, transportation that will create good jobs but none of you on this blog can get complacent. Yesterday’s vote will mean little if Obama isn’t re-elected or if RepuB(P)licans control Congress. We need to make sure there are people in Washington committed to good infrastructure. If you live near one of the competitive House races or if you live near Nevada, please volunteer to campaign for candidates who will invest in transit and high speed rail.
Can someone help me out here: I keep hearing (reading) from some media outlets that the money authorized is a “mere chunk” of the $68 billion needed to complete the project. But isn’t that $68B figure in 2030 dollars? If so, perhaps the nearly $8 billion released yesterday is a lot more than a “mere chunk.”
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:21 am
It builds 130 miles of HSR/Amtrak compatible rails and funds local projects in the bookends, plus as far south as San Diego, which without the DOT money would never have happened, Oh and the overhead wire known as Catenary is the last to go in after the tracks and everything else is built and the trains are bought, Why? Cause the wires are vulnerable to theft while their not electrified with high voltage, I was in Security for 10 Years, so I know this to be true. Shocking isn’t it? Although energized wire has no such problem as it’s then loaded with High-Voltage, can Ya say crispy crook? Maybe fried to a burnt crisp? I’ve heard of it happening, guys try and steal wire that’s electrified winds up dead, wire becomes it’s own guard, nuff said.
Alon Levy Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 8:46 am
In 2010 dollars, it’s $53 billion.
Joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:20 am
I read the funding provides a fifth of the funds needed. Not that bad but the spin is we are doomed inless every penny is identified.
Note we went to war in Iraq without identifying any way to pay for it.
Chewie Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:47 am
“we went to war in Iraq without identifying any way to pay for it”
And look how well that worked out.
Joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:11 am
Okay, so let us not declare war on HSR.
Peter Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:46 am
Or at least not use a budget-sized invasion force that wasn’t large enough to ensure internal security, leading to a protracted conflict.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:33 pm
Ah but the dogma back then was “deficits don’t matter” and “it’s going to cost 150 billion dollars and be over in 6 months”
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 3:45 pm
Of course “deficits don’t matter” when its a Republican President and the invasion will act as
extremely inefficient stimulus spending as well as an efficient profits boost to Defense contractors. “Deficits matter” to Republicans when there is a Democrat in the White House. While they criticize Republican Presidents for deficits, its only in the past tense ~ during a Republican administration, they fall in lock step with some bogus story about how there isn’t going to be deficits, and then that the deficits are temporary because all the deregulation is going to cause an economic boom.
And meanwhile, the sleight of hand has gotten it into people’s heads that a federal government “deficit” is automatically a bad thing, rather than it being a question of how big a deficit under what circumstances and, over the long term, whether its something useful being bought with the money or the money is being spent, as with Iraq, on something to make the country worse off than it was before.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 4:27 pm
To a Repug deficits only matter when their not in power, When Democrats are in power, It’s Tax and Spend Liberuls… That’s Democrats Tax the Wealthy too much & Spend on all the Undeserving Wretches of Society like the Poor, Seniors and the Disabled, Democrats come up with ideas Repugs hate, like totally funding HSR($150 Billion the 1st year would be nice, $50 Billion after that), Fixing Roads ($60 Billion a year), Helping Seniors and the Disabled($600 Million for an increase in monthly SSI Benefits to Seniors and the Disabled instead of cuts), A decrease in Fraud and real toxic waste to the Oil Industry, cut 3/4 of what Farmers get, Switch corn subsidies from Corn Alcohol to Switch Grass Alcohol production, cut defense to $500 Billion a Year, renegotiate all weapons programs to competitive bid w/penalties for cost overruns, institute a Wall Street Tax of 1% on all Stock Transactions, Renable all provisions of Glass-Steagall to break up Banks, Insurance & Wall Street from each other, forbid all Commercial Lobbyists, Constitutional Amendment to overturn the
hated Citizens United, Raise all the Taxes on the Wealthy to 80% across the board(a Flat tax for them, on all types of incomes on Millionaires & up only, the Millionaires Tax), get rid of all overseas tax shelters by agreements with foreign Governments(Embargo trade w/countries that won’t go along until they do), get rid of Corporate tax exemptions & shelters, Drop the Corporate Tax to 25% from an unattainable 35%(more than the US Government gets now, more like 10-15% now out of 35%), Increase IRS enforcement of Tax Collection, Mandate Justice Department prosecute Tax evaders, loosen up Visas issued to countries South of the US to allow for Legal Emigration to suppress Illegal Immigration(right now they are limited artificially to keep Emigration low, doesn’t work, makes people come here Illegally), etc…
jonathan Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:58 am
Not true. Neo-Conservatives like Paul Wolfowitz claimed that the war in Iraq would be “self-financing” via Iraq’s oil deposit. But of course invading Iraq and looting its oil reserves is blatantly illegal in international law. “Oops”.
“We Won?” Seriously?
I don’t feel like the State of California won. We just decided to start building a project that has identified no realistic funding source that can carry out the entire plan without cannibalizing other critical state spending. Right now, a solid majority of Californians feels about the same way about this project.
This project is incredibly controversial, and to actually build it in a fiscally responsible way, 2/3 of Californians would have to be convinced to pass a statewide tax that can cover the debt service. That means you have to actually convince some Republicans.
Do the state a favor and stop demonizing the “other side”. Instead get to work on passing a tax that would allow this project to be done in a responsible way. That would be a true victory, and it’ll be much harder to achieve than this vote.
Spokker Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:19 am
I think a lot of the future federal funding will depend on whether Obama wins or not (he will, unfortunately). Hopefully in his second term he fights for funding better than he did in his first.
Still a huge think to bank on, though.
Joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:49 am
The GOP refuses any and all tax proposals. I am so sorry that fact demonized them. Please tell us your plan to pursuade them on a tax increase.
Chewie Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 10:16 am
I don’t know if they’re persuadable or not. These are the kinds of issues that should be settled before we start borrowing money and building things.
I think HSR could be good, but this method of paying for it just really strikes me as sketchy at best, and that gives me serious heartburn.
Matt in SF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:27 am
Some things you can’t always 100% fund in advance. Does everyone who ever starts a family always have all of the money lined up to pay for a house, to pay for their future children’s’ college educations? Or do you look at your situation and decide that you have enough organized to get started and you’ll continue to work on it as you go through life?
California and the US are both very wealthy. We can afford to build 50 HSR lines if we were to want to do that. The money is there if we make it our priority to spend it on this project.
This is just one important step along the way to getting HSR built in CA, but it’s an extremely important step, so people who are in favor of HSR are pretty excited. Please excuse us if you don’t agree.
joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 4:22 pm
Who signed their mortgage knowing they had a guaranteed job for the 30 years?
And it’s nuts to suggest government be as constrained as a family budget (governments have the power to tax – families don’t).
Still we *could* fund HSR like a family budget – we just put 20% down.
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:36 am
A big chunk of the cause for unease can be traced back to the excessive state match promised by ex-Gov Schwarzenegger. Prop1a specified a minimum match of 50%, but the ARRA funds were no-match-required funds, and the FRA funds were 20% match funds ~ if Arnold had offered 25% it would have beaten the matching funds offered by any other state with a stick.
But history would not have consented to remain frozen in place if California had decided to not move ahead: gambling the state’s economy on entirely oil-dependent transportation system is becoming increasingly risky with each passing year. Given the size of the California economy and the size of the California delegation to the House of Representatives, rather than sit back passively and wait for the Federal government to commit to an assured source of funding before slicing time off the construction calendar, it is more prudent for California to get moving and to work on assuring that there is a source of funding in place when 2018 rolls around and its time to get to work on the next Express HSR segment.
joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:48 pm
You haven’t any idea how to change NO NEW TAXES so we’ll just have to move on with majority rule.
I can’t wait for a unicorn. What you want is extreme – the majority does not wait until a minority decides to moderate. They have no incentive.
Compromise is rooted in fear of losing. They get 100% of what they want – no rail project. The compromise is they vote for taxes and influence the scope/design.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 2:19 pm
You must be occupying an alternate universe. The CHSRA is permitting absolutely no influence over the “scope/design” except for the most powerful Members and Friends of the Machine, who have already spoken when Prop 1A aka FrankenRail was stitched together in the lab.
The reason for the hardline No New Taxes is that it is only way to cope with the Machine, which demands a barrage of new taxes. FYI study the extensive list of new taxes Francois Hollande wants to impose in France. The welfare state can only grow costs and cannot cut back so new taxes are constantly required. Even worse if the rich go on strike and the economy slumps.
joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 4:16 pm
Why yes, I occupy a different universe than you.
I’ll continue to work with my City and suggest the initial parking requirement (6,000) be build in stages as needed. I want that model to continue – more transit and walkable station with room for drop-off and pick-up closer to the station than parking.
Since the train station in Gilroy doubles as the main VTA and regional bus station(s).
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:51 pm
Yes, the “identify” 6,000 places, build the spaces as required model seems like a lower resistance fight than the “admit that it doesn’t need 6,000 spaces” fight. As long as the expand as required approach credibly can expand as required, its just a different way of saying “build 6,000 spaces” for those who assume that 6,000 spaces would actually be required. But then in reality, if and when the need for 6,000 spaces does not show up, it won’t be a white elephant.
nick Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:29 am
they’re quite good at giving taxpayers money back to the wealthy – who agreed to that – it wouldnt have pased a 2/3 majority vite thats for sure !
her in the uk hs1 (london to channel tunnel and onwards to the european hs network) has estimated benefits of £20 billion according to a 2009 report. uk right wingers, but luckily not the conservative prime minister and his chancellor, like to spin only the negatives of costs increases and possible debt but choose to completely ignore these wider economic development. but then they suddenly seem able to give tax cuts to people who (a) dont need more they have enough and therefore (b) dont spend it so there is no economic multiplier as promised !
The extreme right have developed a very backward inward thinking strategy on everything. they seem to want to turn back the clock to a world that doesnt exist any more. maybe thats why they can strike a chord with some older members of society. tea party is a good example that was a very long time ago significant as it was historically. the british people who moved to america initially were not against the principal of taxation but that they had taxation without representation. in the past right wingers were positive and forward looking, it is how america was built. negativitity and a cant do attitude wont get us out of this recession. hopefully now hsr is approved we will see investers forming an orderly queue. in the uk a canadian pension fund took out a 30 year lease on hs1.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
Tehachapi Stilt-A-Rail has about zero relevance to the Chunnel.
A more appropriate analogy would be the NdeM, which doesn’t even exist any more. No passenger trains in Mexico, just like no service over the Loop.
Carlos Slim could build hsr between Mexico, DF and Guadalajara with his chump change and have lots of passengers. Why not – “cause it would not make money when you figure in the cost of the infrastructure.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 4:44 pm
Yer not getting anywhere, rerun…
2012-06-23: Taiwan High Speed Rail Co recorded a profit in 2011 for the first time thanks to a refinancing program that began three years ago, the company’s chairman told a shareholders’ meeting Friday.
Imported from DETROIT: MAD CAR DISEASE + NATIONAL OBESITY!
D. P. Lubic Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:14 am
National obesity has gotten a lot of press, but mad car disease?
Well, there are entries for it:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mad%20car%20disease
Hmm, a poem:
http://www.brideswell.com/mot/madcar.html
A piece of music with that name–ugh! I’ll take traditional train songs, blue grass, classical and big band, thank you. . .
http://soundcloud.com/the-h-files/mad-car-disease
OH NO!! It’s really a secret plot to take our cars away–at least according to the SF Gate in 2004:
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Berkeley-s-mad-car-disease-2815275.php
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:39 am
Yeah, of course obesity is not from one cause, Me I gained weight after a 2002 surgery to fix a broken lower left leg, after that I’ve had leg/hip joint problems that combined with My weight keeps Me from being able to walk a lot, after a certain amount of time My left ankle gets painful as does My back from just standing with not enough support, when I go shopping food, about once a month, I push a cart around the store for support, as I need the support no matter how much I shop for or don’t shop for. Most of the time I’m just here in front of this PC or doing something briefly around the mobile home, it’s not like I run out of breath, My back just can’t take the strain for long, just like I can’t sleep for more than 4-6 hours on My bed and the bed is a stiff one, it is comfortable before 4 hours have elapsed, if I wake up before 4 hours the bed can be a bit too stiff to go back to sleep on.
Quoting Senator Carl Levin of Michigan: “Michigan is a Bus only State”.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:06 am
You got me curious, and what I found isn’t quite that bad, but. . .
http://www.levin.senate.gov/newsroom/speeches/speech/levin-floor-statement-on-bipartisan-transportation-bill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Levin
We may be looking at that generational bias again, combined with being from a state so dominated by the auto industry for so long. And do note, he is a Democrat.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 11:17 am
Yeah He’s 78 according to the wiki entry, probably a Blue Dog.
Yer other link mentions rail investment, of course this bill would have to be reconciled with the Republican version from the House.
fake irishman Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 3:42 pm
Levin isn’t a Blue dog.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
He isn’t? Then what is He? Does Levin like HSR or not?
joe Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 4:17 pm
He’s a Dem with a power state special interest – the auto industry.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 4:46 pm
I thought they all moved to Canukia…
Jo Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:05 pm
Poor Michigan: condemned to mediocrity because of antiquated politicians like Levin.
fake irishman Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 3:48 pm
Don’t give up on us yet. We’ve got three state aided Amtrak lines. Ridership has been steadily ticking up over the last decade or so, and Amtrak and the State DOT sank about $40 million in positive train control and track upgrades in the western part of the state. The result is that we were the first outside the NE corridor to raise speeds to 95 and then 110 miles on the Amtrak-owned parts of the line.
We took in about $400 million in federal funds under ARRA and other grants to improve stations, upgrade and construct more track, install PTC, harden crossings and up speeds from 79 to 110 mph. About half of that we stole when Florida decided to chuck its money back. And our state legislature is almost as useless as Ohio’s or Wisconsin, but voted 101-8 to fund the state match — it’s about the only worthwhile thing they’ve done the past two years, but still it’s something.
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
More power to ya then, now if Ya could push speeds to 150mph from 110mph…
BruceMcF Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 5:52 pm
Extending the 110mph further east toward Detroit and having an untangled path into Chicago Union Station would be a higher priority. At 281 track miles Chicago US to Detroit, 125mph would be nice, but getting it down from 6:30 to 4:00 would be a tremendous improvement on its own.
Jo Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 5:49 pm
Glad to hear that. Good for Michigan.
Regressive-Conservative-Republican ‘Mad Hatter Tea Party Anti-Railers’ are just puppets of the—
‘FLY-DRIVE-CLIQUE’
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 4:52 pm
A very anti-social bunch indeed, a bunch of Losers…
Honest question, at what point do we invite Angela Merkel to come to California to help us? At what point in time or construction can expect France, Germany, Korea, Japan & China to offer their packages to California?
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
My take is that Angela Merkel will join Sarko shortly.
Gianny Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 12:22 pm
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-06/merkel-approval-rises-to-highest-since-2009-in-post-summit-poll.html
Her approval continues to rise!
Let’s order some ICE Trains.
jawohl, the miracle of merkel – maybe if california joined the euro germany could pay for hsr !
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:05 pm
The Germans would never go for the Tehachapi Grand DeTour. Look at what happened to Roelof Van Ark. Experienced and practical Europeans need not apply.
Peter Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:14 pm
Dude. For the last time. Van Ark was South African.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 2:08 pm
same difference. You are missing the point: competent, professional, experienced, responsible, ethical – the very antithesis of what Brown seeks in his toadies.
ComradeFrana Reply:
July 8th, 2012 at 10:18 am
“The Germans would never go for the Tehachapi Grand DeTour.”
No, they would go through Erfurt…
Michael Reply:
July 8th, 2012 at 10:32 am
…and build the autobahn first. Then take 20 years to finish the NBS. But they do use the correct number and length of tunnels to match a Tehachapi crossing.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
July 8th, 2012 at 11:15 am
Are you trying to make a point of some type? What’s your clever routing that avoids Erfurt and what do you believe might have been gained by doing so?
There are about five billion reasons to build Santa Clarita — Tejon — Bakersfield west bypass — Shafter bypass.
Erfurt bypass? (And Erfurt is a major rail node, not to mention an actual place with a city centre) I’m missing your motivation, missing project advantages, and missing your point.
Besides Germany, also invite the Japanese. Also Saudi Arabia recently hired the Spanish to begin building their high speed rail system. You think some wealthy Saudi Arabian group may be interested in investing in California high speed rail?
Gianny Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 1:20 pm
That’s what I want to know. When we we expect them to join us?
Neville Snark Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 2:43 pm
That would be nearly a perfect storm, if the Saudis (terrorists! Osama bin Laden!) were seen by the Repubs as bankrolling CAHSR …
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 3:47 pm
That would prove their fear monging bigots, the Repugs that is. Bring’em on.
Jo Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 5:50 pm
It would be good PR for the Saudis – investing in America – investing in jobs.
Paul Druce Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
The Saudis have absolutely no reason to invest in American HSR.
Jo Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 7:05 pm
Then we should be doing it, we do have a reason.
Bullshit, misleading poll on SacBee. Should the state be paying for a high-speed rail project?
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 2:41 pm
What’s misleading about a simply worded question that is almost harshly blunt? If you find the question misleading simply vote no. But it is not – the upshot of a “no” vote is simple – the nays want private interests to pay for the thing, lock, stock and barrel.
You guys are sore winners – you insist the “yes” vote on anything hsr be 110%.
The pool of discontent with Moonbeam is deep.
synonymouse Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 2:49 pm
Hey, I should have said vote “yes” if you did not like the question.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 3:06 pm
Answering no on that question could mean the respondent means “The federal government should be paying for all of it” or “Private companies should be paying for all of it” or “I think Nancy Pelosi should use her mind rays on the pilots of the black helicopters and have them build it”
VBobier Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 3:49 pm
Yer a sore LOSER Cyno, nothing more than that…
Jo Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 5:54 pm
We should not pay too much attention to polls, poll results change like the wind. Forget polls, just do the right thing – which the California Senate did on friday. Just move on and make it happen.
Heh, SacBee: Why didn’t you ask: “should the state be investing in a high-speed rail project?”
Thoughts from Pennsylvania on California’s HSR; Bruce McF in particular may be interested in this fellow’s observations:
http://testplant.blogspot.com/2012/07/california-hsr-thoughts.html
D. P. Lubic Reply:
July 7th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
From Daily Kos, other commentary (mostly by commentors) on the victory:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/06/1107040/-BREAKING-California-Legislature-Votes-For-Continuing-High-Speed-Rail
Also from Daily Kos, and argument that solar energy is part of a sound civil defense:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/04/1106179/-Minimal-Energy-Independence-Solar-IS-Civil-Defense
This parallels some comments I’ve made that HSR and electric rail in general are important to help us get away from an oil-dependent transportation system, a system that is an Achilles heel, vulnerable to supply disruptions and price shocks, not to mention a global oil market that helps to feed at least some of our terrorist enemies.