PDA

View Full Version : Florida Gov. Rick Scott rejects funding for high-speed rail




FrankRep
02-16-2011, 06:40 PM
http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/stories2011/11aFebruary/amtraklogoandtrain-t.001.jpg


Florida Gov. Rick Scott rejects funding for high-speed rail (http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/02/16/2069844/florida-gov-rick-scott-rejects.html)

Miami Herald
Feb. 16, 2011


Florida Gov. Rick Scott announced Wednesday that he’s rejecting $2.4 billion in federal funding for high-speed rail.

"I’m not comfortable this is a project we should be doing," Scott said at a hastily called news conference in Tallahassee after a phone conversation with U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

Scott said he was not sure high-speed rail would bring taxpayers a return on their investment and he felt money would be better spent on state highway and seaport improvements.

____________

Related Articles:

Obama Administration Proposes $53 Billion for High-Speed Rail (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/tech-mainmenu-30/energy/6320-obama-administration-proposes-53-billion-for-high-speed-rail)

On February 8 Vice President Joe Biden unveiled an Obama administration plan to spend $53 billion over the next six years to develop a high-speed passenger rail system that would link the nation’s larger cities. The proposed spending would be added to the $10.5 billion the administration has already spent on high-speed rail since Obama took office, including $8 billion poured into his 2009 “economic stimulus package.”

Proposed California High-Speed Train Faces Criticism (http://thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/6324-obamas-proposed-high-speed-rail-program-faces-criticism)

President Obama has proposed spending $8 billion for a bullet train program, which will serve as only a down payment for the $53 billion over the next six years.


Federal Mass Transit a Big Flop (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/economy/commentary-mainmenu-43/5068-federal-mass-transit-a-big-flop)
The New American | 03 November 2010

California, with 10.5 billion of federal help, wants to build an 800-mile high-speed rail system from Anaheim to San Francisco. The overall 13 corridor project could easily cost 200 billion. by Bruce Walker

Amtrak and the Railroads (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/history/american/3612-amtrak-and-the-railroads)
The New American | 28 May 2010

Amtrak and its lobbyists at the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP) recently invited us to commemorate the third annual National Train Day on May 8. Supposedly celebrating “America’s love for trains,” the day could not boast a more ironic host than the railroad nobody rides. Worse, Amtrak’s sponsorship was as shameless as Dracula’s funding a fashion show concentrating on décolletage: The government that owns Amtrak has sabotaged, subsidized, and sucked the life from American railroads since the industry’s inception.

daviddee
02-16-2011, 06:50 PM
...

eduardo89
02-16-2011, 06:50 PM
I'm probably the only person on this forum who doesn't really object to HSR...

nobody's_hero
02-16-2011, 06:56 PM
Rail used to be heavily in bed with the government. Now, the Federal highway system (U.S. interstate system) has so heavily subsidized road travel that it doesn't make sense to ride a train. I can get to nearly any interesting destination by finding the nearest exits to points A and B. Had government butted out long ago, we might have a balance, or at least, an environment where the free market could decide whether road or rail travel is more appropriate.

FrankRep
02-16-2011, 06:57 PM
I'm probably the only person on this forum who doesn't really object to HSR...

I'll support a private company building a High Speed Rail; the Government will just screw it up and lose money.

eduardo89
02-16-2011, 07:01 PM
I'll support a private company building a High Speed Rail; the Government will just screw it up and lose money.

I too wish private companies would build HSR in the States, but sadly it's just not feasible when you have to compete with government funded interstates and subsidised airports. As long as the federal and state government are funding those, I'd rather some (lots) of the funds from them being diverted to public-private partnerships to build high speed rail.

There are ways to keep costs down and to force cost overruns onto the private contractor. Have them pay part of it, and have fixed cost contracts. Allow a private company to operate it for a certain amount of year (or until they recoup their costs) at which time it's turned back over to full public ownership (or the contract is extended). The government is going to be paying for interstate transportation for the time being, like it or not. I'd just rather they invested that money into something like HSR...

newbitech
02-16-2011, 07:25 PM
I'll support a private company building a High Speed Rail; the Government will just screw it up and lose money.

the corporations here cannot fill up pro sports stadiums here, they won't be able to fund hsr

Brooklyn Red Leg
02-16-2011, 07:56 PM
I'll support a private company building a High Speed Rail; the Government will just screw it up and lose money.

Indeed. There have been proposals written for bringing high-speed rail to Tampa and how, without government subsidies, it could be done.

low preference guy
02-16-2011, 07:57 PM
the corporations here cannot fill up pro sports stadiums here, they won't be able to fund hsr

if so, then it shouldn't be done.

eduardo89
02-16-2011, 08:05 PM
if so, then it shouldn't be done.

It could be done if there was true competition in the market. The way it is now, private high speed rail (or any rail for that matter) just can't compete with government funded highways and subsidised airports!

daviddee
02-16-2011, 09:27 PM
...