In case you needed any further evidence that right-wing opposition to high speed rail is purely ideological and not practical, there’s Florida governor Rick Scott, who announced this morning he is killing the state’s HSR project:
My decision to reject the project comes down to three main economic realities:
First – capital cost overruns from the project could put Florida taxpayers on the hook for an additional $3 billion.
Second – ridership and revenue projections are historically overly-optimistic and would likely result in ongoing subsidies that state taxpayers would have to incur. (from $300 million – $575 million over 10 years) – Note: The state subsidizes Tri-Rail $34.6 million a year while passenger revenues covers only $10.4 million of the $64 million annual operating budget.
Finally – if the project becomes too costly for taxpayers and is shut down, the state would have to return the $2.4 billion in federal funds to D.C.
The truth is that this project would be far too costly to taxpayers and I believe the risk far outweighs the benefits.
As you can see, it’s just a bunch of the usual anti-rail talking points put together to justify his ideological stance against rail. Nowhere is it acknowledged that private companies had promised to pay the cost overruns. Nowhere is it acknowledged that HSR systems around the world attract high ridership. Nowhere is the risk of high gas prices considered. Instead Gov. Scott basically says “nobody rides trains in America, so I’m going to protect my oil company buddies and kill this fully-funded project.
Yonah Freemark at The Transport Politic offers his take:
The Governor apparently has no trust in the private companies he claims to laud, failing to give them a chance to demonstrate their interest in the project. He apparently has no interest in offering his citizens the opportunity to pioneer a mode of transportation that has been repeatedly scuttled, in Florida and elsewhere, by the distinctively American ability to ignore the potential benefits of intercity rail.
This reckless decision will cost Floridians dearly – when they do get around to building an HSR system down the road, it will cost much more than it would have now. Of course, this is the second time in 10 years that a right-wing governor has killed a Florida HSR project, as Jeb Bush did the same in the early 2000s.
So what does this mean for California? More money, obviously, probably enough to get to Bakersfield. It won’t be easy, though, as Congressional Republicans will try to block any redirection of Florida’s HSR money to other states. This will may also reinforce Rep. John Mica’s view that all HSR money should go to the Northeast Corridor, which is a very bad idea. Just because some foolish governors in a few states prefer to appease their ideological followers and their oil company donors shouldn’t mean California, which is not afraid of the 21st century, should suffer as a result.
UPDATE by Brian: Our Senators have now officially asked for that money. Find their letter over the flip.
February 16, 2011
The Honorable Ray LaHood
Secretary
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Secretary LaHood,
We are writing to express California’s continued commitment to the President’s high-speed rail initiative and to ask that the $2.4 billion in Federal grants recently returned be redirected to our high-speed rail initiative. We believe this is an opportunity for the Administration to further its investment in the project that demonstrates the greatest potential for success. Awarding these funds to California will advance the President’s goals for high-speed rail, as expressed in the State of the Union.
California is leading the Nation in the development of high-speed rail. As you know, voters in our state have committed over $9 billion in bonds to high-speed rail – a unique level of public support that demonstrates that our state is a reliable, long term partner in this initiative. Combined with Federal grants, we have over $5.5 billion in funds allocated for construction that will begin in 2012. Californians know that these additional federal funds represent over 80,000 new manufacturing, construction, and technology jobs in our state. We are eager to expand our partnership with the Department of Transportation and get to work.
It is now clear that California will lead the way in demonstrating the viability of high speed rail to the rest of the country. We are ready to do so and look forward to working with the Department of Transportation to see the high-speed rail is a success in California, and the entire nation.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein Barbara Boxer
United States Senator United States Senator
I support HSR–it represents (in my mind) the future of intrastate travel. But I shiver at the thought of what it will ultimately cost both from a capital standpoint and an operational standpoint.
All transit that I know of has some sort of taxpayer-funded operational support. BART, for example, has some sales tax and parcel tax support. MUNI does very well in the farebox, but still needs help. LA MTA gets over $2 B a year in taxpayer subsidy. Given LA’s alternative of dumping 1.4 million riders on the freeways every day makes it a pretty good deal.
Is HSR going to need a taxpayer subsidy? I think the answer is ‘no’, because HSR is going to compete with air travel, not train travel. I suspect they will be very competitive from a security, speed, safety and convenience standpoint. From a price standpoint? Too soon to tell.
But there are still some very big unanswered questions about HSR. How much is it really going to cost and how long will it take to complete enough of the system to make it financially viable? (Bakersfield to Barstow doesn’t cut it). Will taxpayers ultimately need to subsidize it’s operations? Where will that money come from?
I think that countries that have installed HSR have had good experience with it and that is will work in California. But I don’t think the skeptics are crazy. And I know that I am WAY too far away from Florida to say that HSR will work there.
Anyway, if they don’t take the money and it makes capitalizing our system easier–all I have to say is “thanks”.