Before the election, the cost of the project was estimated at $33 billion for the Los Angeles/Anaheim to San Francisco portion, and an additional $7 billion for the spurs to San Diego and Sacramento. Voters narrowly passed a $9.95 billion bond in 2008, and the federal government and private investors were supposed to cover the remaining $30 billion. We were promised that a one-way fare between Los Angeles and San Francisco would cost about $55, making it cheaper than flying.
After the election, costs rose to $43 billion for just the Los Angeles-San Francisco phase (chances are the San Diego and Sacramento lines will never be built) and ticket price estimates nearly doubled to $105. Yet none of this seems to bother the California High-Speed Rail Authority or cause it to re-evaluate the feasibility of the project.
Ridership estimates are projected as high as 117 million passengers a year. To put this in perspective, consider that Amtrak’s Acela Express service, which serves the larger, denser Washington, D.C.-New York-Boston corridor at speeds up to 150 mph, counts just 3 million passengers per year. In fact, the entire Amtrak system, which includes more than 500 destinations and 21,000 miles of track in 46 states, serves only 27 million passengers a year...
California continues to run deficits of $20 billion to $25 billion each year and must address hundreds of billions of dollars in unfunded pension liabilities in years to come. The state is facing severe service cuts and significant tax increases (again), yet it persists in pouring in billions upon billions of dollars to subsidize the train travel of a tiny percentage of the population.
I'm on the hook for this lemon. Those are my tax dollars that are going to be poured into this bottomless money pit.
9 comments:
I think at this point, it's hard to cancel because of political blowback. Coward legislators don't want to face an enraged populous, demanding answers why billions have already been spent for nothing, if the project is cancelled.
Better (from a politician's view) to keep it going, suck off the money tit and use rail to dole out favors for their friends.
Well, you could move! That would solve your tax dollars paying for the boondoggle. Rumour has it that's what others are doing.
True enough, *or* I could continue to press my state legislators to stop this waste of money while also getting word out to others.
In Ohio, we got lucky. Ours was going to run from Cleveland to Cincinnati, but our new governor Kasich stopped that. It would have been slower than driving the freeway.
"Those are my tax dollars..."
And mine! Stop it now, cancel selling additional bonds and pay off the ones already sold to cut losses.
If it's a feasible idea then let a private train company install one and run it for profit.
Just say "NO!" to government spending...
"I could continue to press my state legislators to stop this waste of money while also getting word out to others."
Ha! That's a good one! You might as well put your forehead against the State Capitol and try to move it; you'd probably have more success than trying to get California legislators to stop wasting money.
i have to agree with james.....you'll get nowhere as long as politicians get paid by private investors to think certain ways
$105 per ticket? That is funny. You might want to read this item from City Journal:
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_4_snd-bus-market.html
The money quote is "Amtrak, the government-owned passenger-train company, currently charges anywhere from $106 to $225 for a daytime one-way ticket from New York to Washington."
I think $205 is a lot more likely then $105 and $105 is an unsustainable price as Amtrak also proves since it required, in 2010, a subsidy of $1.6 billion.
Strangely enough, conservative Rick Perry of Texas was supporting the TransTexas Corridor-a type of mega superhighway that would divert away from major cities the thought being that it would alleviate traffic issues on I35. This was shot down due to imminent domain issues. The other big ticket item was the Golden Triangle Highspeed Train between Dallas, Houston and Austin (sorry San Antonio...) The cost would be prohibitive. Plus it makes little sense to waste two and a half hours traveling by train when for the same price you can get to almost any place in the five state region for less and in less time via Southwest. So those measures died. I would personally love to see a more coherent passenger railway system. But right now, it doesn't make sense economically, politically or in terms of green issues.
Post a Comment