Orsen:Rick Scott rejects money for high speed rail

Originally Posted By TP2000

Also add to the TSA list of sins; by treating passengers like common criminals subject to invasive body searches for doing nothing more than trying to move about their own country on public transportation systems.

Why can't the average airport or the presidents of the various airlines stand up to the TSA thugs the same way Amtrak has just done?

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

I suppose because very few customers complain about it.

It's seen as "status quo" when you take a flight these days.

Much more likely people would balk at the same thing in a train station or bus terminal (for now).

 

Originally Posted By fkurucz

"Germany's ICE high speed trains traverse three countries and security isn't even as high as Eurostar."

True, they don't travel through the Chunnel. Unfortunately it has a huge bulls eye on it. Blow up a surface train and you kill a few hundred people, blow up and destroy the Chunnel and you have
a 9/11 type of event.

 

Originally Posted By davewasbaloo

Exactly. and sadly, I have lost a colleague on a train explosion. Terrorism is not new, it is simply new to America, and like most things in the home of my birth, things are going too far.

 

Originally Posted By Socrates

I'm sorry. It's just all of this time I've simply been assuming that the thugs were the terrorists.

Socrates
"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance."

 

Originally Posted By TP2000

I'm hoping someone in Florida can clear this up for me, as the news reports are rather confusing.

Governor Scott declined the Feds money several times, and each time Secretary LaHood would give the Governor another week to "think about it" even though the Governor didn't ask for more thinking time. Then the Florida Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Governor had every legal right to deny the Feds money, blocking an attempt by local politicians to keep the rail concept going.

But the whole thing where LaHood has given the Governor "one more week" after a deadline passed has happened a couple times now. Has Secretary LaHood finally given up on Governor Scott and moved on? Or is Florida still in one of those "one more week" periods where LaHood is hanging on to the money for Florida in hopes they change their mind?

I'm just trying to figure out if Florida High Speed Rail is truly dead for this decade, or if they are still in a holding pattern forced by Secretary LaHood.

 

Originally Posted By TP2000

Interestingly, the Florida High Speed Rail website is now "unavailable" and simply directs you to the state Department of Transportation website that makes no mention of Florida government owning and operating passenger railroads.

Maybe it's just a fluke website hiccup all day today, or maybe the staff came in on Monday and shut it all down in a huff?

Any locals in Florida know the current status of the High Speed Rail program?

 

Originally Posted By SpokkerJones

"Has Secretary LaHood finally given up on Governor Scott and moved on?"

Yes.

The web site shutdown is no coincidence. The project is now dead for at least four years. If Scott is not reelected another governor may or may not resurrect the project.

There is also the possibility that Scott may succeed in widening I-4, effectively paving over the proposed rail right of way. That would make it more difficult, and costly, to resurrect the project in the future.

 

Originally Posted By SpokkerJones

California is now the only state in the country with a true high speed rail system in the environmental review phase. The anti-HSR editorials against the project are increasing and politicians are coming out against it with greater fervor.

Central Valley congressman Kevin McCarthy is now advocating that California reject federal funds for high speed rail using similar reasons as Scott.

<a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/californias-top-member-congress-opposes-obamas-high-speed-rail-plan_553800.html" target="_blank">http://www.weeklystandard.com/...800.html</a>

Note that funding is secured for a 120 mile stretch in the Central Valley that will be under construction in 2012. The clock is ticking for anti-HSR advocates to kill the project before construction starts. After it does, it will be a lot harder to obstruct.

One bit of good news that was released recently is that the Central Valley portion has been engineered to be less costly. Aerial structures are being phased out in favor of at-grade construction (note that this still means the line will be grade separated. Roads will go over or under the line or closed entirely).

In any case, the closer the project is to breaking ground, the more intense and numerous the objections against it will get.

 

Originally Posted By plpeters70

<<There is also the possibility that Scott may succeed in widening I-4, effectively paving over the proposed rail right of way.>>

What a depressing thought! The last thing we need in this country is MORE roads! When are we finally going to start thinking about the future in this country? Are we really going to wait until our gas tanks are actually running empty, or will we finally take our heads out of the sand and start planning ahead?

 

Originally Posted By davewasbaloo

It seems to me, if the people of America had the current mindset back in the 19th century, the Transcontinental Railroad would never have been built, nor the Panama Canal in the 20th, and forget the Space Programme. It is really very sad.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

I see nothing wrong with states rejecting these things, just as I see nothing wrong with saying "okay, whatever you say" and plowing the funds into states that want them.

 

Originally Posted By davewasbaloo

Agreed, there is every right to say no to these things, but it seems like the US and UK are really lacking vision right now, you know, the thing that made both nations great. And yet elsewhere in the world, nations are creating amazing projects.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

That's the way it has always been.

Empires rise and fall and get replaced.

 

Originally Posted By davewasbaloo

But often it is down to the attitude of it's people. The isolationism and local focus is going to accelerate the process.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

Not to mention the rampant hatred of fellow Countrymen...that never works out well.

 

Originally Posted By davewasbaloo

Absolutely. We're all in this together approach often achieves far greater outcomes.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

I fear that day will never come again for America.

I remain hopeful, though.

 

Originally Posted By davewasbaloo

I am sure that has been said before too, whether it was during the Civil War, before WWI, during the Great Depression and many times since. The American Adventure inspires because it has always been about innovation and frontier spirit, which is occassionally forgotten (particularly during difficult economic times). I am hopeful for the future, but we have to work together to make the change.

Same thing in the UK, the last years of the Thatcher reign were very dark indeed, I had never known darker. Then we had an amazing time of growth and development for over a decade. At least the Olympics is something to look forward to for us over here. And again, I hope we are able to turf the clowns out in power in a couple of years and then there will be hope again here too.

 

Originally Posted By TP2000

davewasbaloo<< "It seems to me, if the people of America had the current mindset back in the 19th century, the Transcontinental Railroad would never have been built, nor the Panama Canal in the 20th, and forget the Space Programme. It is really very sad.">>

Those three examples you cited seem to me to be very, very different from a government funded and subsidized train from one mid sized city to the other. High speed rail is a not-for-profit business around the world, with the exception of the Tokyo-Osaka line and the Paris-Lyon line.

The Transcontinental Railroad was built and funded and owned and operated by the privately-held Southern Pacific and Union Pacific railroads. The Santa Fe and Great Northern railroads also built their own transcontinental routes south and north of the original route soon after. Why? Because there was huge profit to be made by doing so. It was a smart business decision first and foremost, not something solely meant to boost national morale or to beat the Canadians.

The Panama Canal was built by the Army Corps of Engineers, after the French failed miserably at it. But the goal there for the US, like the French, was both profit and military advantage. The canal was a success at both right off the bat, cutting the sea voyage in less than half and being able to charge huge tolls that quickly began piling up for the US Treasury. (Until Carter gave it back to the Panamanians in 1977, passing up the opportunity to gain more money for the US in the process)

The one example you cited that could be considered the most like high speed rail, only because there was little to no profit motive involved, was the Space Program of the 1960's. But the goal there was really to beat the Soviets to the moon, and gain a strategic hold of space in the event it became a military theater. The Space Race is a direct product of the Cold War, and the inherent fear we all had that the Soviets would beat us and possibly use space to invade and destroy us. Smart scientists took advantage of the situation to get some amazing research and discoveries in at the same time (which the government used as happy-shiny marketing for voter approval), but the thing got the huge funding it did for more than a decade really because the goal was to beat the godless Communists of the evil Soviet Union. It worked, and we won.

The goal of high-speed rail is not quite as lofty as some of the big projects of the past, nor does it really inspire many folks who are perfectly happy to drive to Tampa themselves. There is no real profit in high speed rail, and Floridians generally only worry about displaying their superiority on the University of Florida football field when Georgia or Tennessee is on the schedule.