# High speed rail project on the hot seat



## DET63 (Dec 6, 2011)

> SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGO) -- California's controversial high speed rail project was the subject of a Senate committee hearing Monday in Sacramento. The price tag for the project has nearly doubled to $100 billion and $12 million has already been spent on PR.
> "I think we're at a critical time in the life of the project," said St. Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto.
> 
> In the coming months, a state joint committee will be deciding the fate of California's High Speed Rail. The next five state budgets will contain a new line item for the project and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are very nervous about the now $100 billion dollar inflation-adjusted price tag -- twice the original estimate. Voters only approved a $10 billion bond in 2008.


Link

Interesting that Democrats, not Tea Party conservatives, are leading the skepticism.


----------



## WhoozOn1st (Dec 6, 2011)

DET63 said:


> Interesting that Democrats, not Tea Party conservatives, are leading the skepticism.


Please point out examples of Democrats expressing skepticism in the item. The only skepticism I see is out of a guy who represents an outfit named for the proto-Grover Norquist, who expresses suspicion, not skepticism - a very different thing. From the Democrats quoted I note only valid, if uncomfortable, questions.


----------



## George Harris (Dec 6, 2011)

Palo Alto is a hotbed of opposition of the project. It is primarily a NIMBE function. They beleive that having an electrified line with no grade crossings will be noisier than to have a diesel powered commuter operation with multiple grade crossings and associated horn blowing. With this sort of thought process, logic is pointless. If you want to bring in the politics, it is interesting that the more liberal the area, the noisier the opposition.


----------



## DET63 (Dec 17, 2011)

WhoozOn1st said:


> DET63 said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting that Democrats, not Tea Party conservatives, are leading the skepticism.
> ...





> "There is no commitment from the federal government, no commitment from the private sector. I think those are serious questions that need to be answered," said St. Sen. Alan Lowenthal, D-Long Beach.


A lack of commitment from either the feds or the private sector is pretty serious skepticism, IMHO.


----------



## leemell (Dec 17, 2011)

DET63 said:


> WhoozOn1st said:
> 
> 
> > DET63 said:
> ...


This sure does not look like a lack of commitment to me:

From the LA Times

" The Obama administration vowed Thursday at a House committee meeting in Washington that it would not back down from its support of California's bullet train project despite attacks from critics who alleged it is tainted by political corruption.

"We are not going to flinch on that support," said Joseph Szabo, chief of the Federal Railroad Administration.

Szabo said that his agency had committed itself to provide $3.3 billion for a construction start next year in the Central Valley and that federal law prohibits any change of mind about where to begin building the first segment of the state's high-speed rail system.

"The worst thing we could do is make obligations to folks and start to renege on our word," Szabo told the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee."


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Dec 17, 2011)

DET63 said:


> Interesting that Democrats, not Tea Party conservatives, are leading the skepticism.


What's interesting is that you can find anything even remotely like that in your own link.



George Harris said:


> If you want to bring in the politics, it is interesting that the more liberal the area, the noisier the opposition.


The only people that seem intent on bringing up politics are you and DET63, although neither of you have provided _anything_ to backup your claims of Democrats and liberals being the primary obstacles to high speed rail.


----------



## George Harris (Dec 17, 2011)

Texas Sunset said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > If you want to bring in the politics, it is interesting that the more liberal the area, the noisier the opposition.
> ...


Ahh, I see that the first sentence, which you did not quote, needs explanation to those unfamiliar with the political perspectives in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Palo Alto, which is an area of strong opposition to the HSR is in the majority on the far left of liberalism.


----------



## guest (Dec 18, 2011)

George Harris said:


> Texas Sunset said:
> 
> 
> > George Harris said:
> ...


And the Central Valley farmers rabidly against the HSR live in an area of very right-wing conservatism.

There's no causation between support or opposition to the HSR and political leanings. You are drawing inferences where none exist. LA Times polling shows that a small majority of Democratic voters would still support HSR in another referendum where most GOP and Independent voters would not. Still, that's not good enough proof to draw conclusions the way you so casually do.


----------



## George Harris (Dec 18, 2011)

guest said:


> George Harris said:
> 
> 
> > Ahh, I see that the first sentence, which you did not quote, needs explanation to those unfamiliar with the political perspectives in the San Francisco Bay Area.Palo Alto, which is an area of strong opposition to the HSR is in the majority on the far left of liberalism.
> ...


Let me highlight: *There's no causation between support or opposition to the HSR and political leanings.*

This is exactly the main point I was trying to make. Obviously, I did not do a very good job of it.


----------

