Advertise Here
Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.
Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.
Our latest headlines
- Today’s California College Students: Indentured Servants?
- California Must Find the Funds to Feed Students
- PPIC Prop 8 Poll: Republicans and Evangelicals Motivated to Win
- Two Views on the Failure of the Campaign to Defeat Prop 8 and Optimism for Building a Structure for Victory in 2010
- Democrats Propose Majority Vote for California State Budget, Speaker Creates Accountability Committee
- Congressional Candidate Charlie Brown Concedes, Thanks Supporters, and Reflects on What Was Accomplished
- Looking Beyond Funding In Education Reform
About Us
The California Progress Report is published by Frank D. Russo, a longtime observer of and participant in California politics.
About Frank Russo.
About California Progress Report.
Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column? Contact Frank here.
Sponsors
Books
Schwarzenegger Supports Prop 1—California High Speed Rail
By Robert Cruickshank
California High Speed Rail Blog
“Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has placed his support behind a costly high-speed rail system in California.
“Schwarzenegger told NBC11 he wants California to lead the way in transporting commuters across the state at near-record speeds while reducing global warming at the same time....
“On the very spot where the Transcontinental Railroad was established nearly 140 years ago, Schwarzenegger told Luery that a less-than-three-hour trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles represents the type of progress that can take place in the Golden State.
"I think we need high speed rail," Schwarzenegger said. "If you think right now our trains in America are running the same speed as 100 years ago. That's not progress. I think we can do much better than that."
Arnold has been playing footsie with high speed rail for a while now. He tried to gut the funding for the Authority last year, only to then publish an op-ed in the Fresno Bee expressing support for the project. His support appeared to be dependent on HSR providing public-private partnerships, which AB 3034 would help produce.
His approval rating has been dropping, but he still remains the dominant political figure in the state, and his support for Prop 1 is certainly more welcome than opposition. Whether Arnold will campaign for Prop 1 around the state remains to be seen, and it would certainly do much to both prove the depth of his commitment to the project and to build a stronger consensus for Prop 1 across party lines.
Of course, Arnold's longtime Republican rival and dedicated train hater Tom McClintock was quick to attack high speed rail:
"It just doesn't pencil out," said state Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks. "It's $40 billion just in construction. That's more than $1,000 for every man, woman and child in this state -- all for a train that will go from L.A. to San Francisco in about two hours longer than it takes to fly there."
“McClintock called the system a boondoggle and said that the money would be better spent improving California's highways.”
$1,000, perhaps, but that is spread out over 30 years - which is $33 a year, or 64¢ per week. I might be able to dig that out of my couch cushions. In the life of the HSR project most Californians will recognize well beyond $1000 in savings at the pump and at the ticket counter.
It's also no surprise McClintock raises the old "airplanes are faster" claim. In fact, if you include travel time to the airport, and the wait in the terminal (including security) a flight from LA to SF will take roughly the same amount of time as the high speed train - just over two and a half hours. What's more, HSR offers a far more convenient form of travel - business travelers can conduct cell phone conversations, perhaps use WiFi or even videoconferencing, instead of being crammed into a plane where cell phones and WiFi are verboten.
McClintock also shows his total ignorance of the airline crisis which will make air travel within this state more expensive and less frequent. For most Californians, HSR and feeder rail lines will become the primary method they use to get around the state.
Instead McClintock wants to shackle Californians to soaring oil prices. I mean really, $40 billion in highway expansion? Not only will that not buy you very many new freeway lanes, but it would be doubling down on California's reliance on oil. The McClintock solution to high gas prices simply doesn't exist - he thinks we should just pay it and continue driving as if everything's normal.
Thankfully not all Republicans agree - Curt Pringle, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and others recognize the value of HSR. With their support voters will too.
Robert Cruickshank is a historian, activist, and teacher living in Monterey. He is a contributing editor at Calitics.com and works for the Courage Campaign, in addition to teaching political science at Monterey Peninsula College. Currently he is completing his Ph.D. dissertation in US history, on progressive politics in San Francisco in the 1960s and 1970s. A native Californian, he was raised in Orange County and educated at UC Berkeley. This article originally appeared on the California High Speed Rail Blog http://cahsr.blogspot.com/ which he publishes.
Comments
Though I would never consider myself anything near a Republican, I also suspect the high speed rail project to be a boondoggle project. The bond measure would act as a regressive sales tax, inequitably affecting lower-income, communities of color who are already struggling within urban areas. Furthermore, as Los Angeles' light rail construction has illustrated, these expensive rail projects often hurt bus systems, which often serve lower-income communities, have greater versatility within the urban area, and make more financial sense.
Who are we trying to benefit with these expensive high speed rail projects? Rich company executives? How many trips out of all trips within California are seriously between SF and LA and what are the demographics of those trip-takers? Surely, not the lower-income populations within our cities.
I agree with the sentiments against expanding freeways and with reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But there must be more sensible ways to create win-win solutions for the all cross section of society.
Posted by: Dan at July 11, 2008 12:23 PM
Dan, you are an idiot. Or should I say Martin Engel!!
Posted by: Bob at July 11, 2008 01:27 PM
Nice attempt to marginalize Dan's comments there "Bob" by calling him an "idiot" just because he raises valid concerns/points on the issue at hand. Where is your tolerance?
The HSR website cannot even respond to email questions posed in it's own website. You think this state created entity is then capable of wisely spending an additional $10 billion in state tax dollars and EVEN MORE tax dollars with Federal matching funds?
Comrade Cruickshank's world doesn't seem to think HSR will have the security problems that airlines are currently experiencing. But HSR would be a very lucritive target for a terrorist: Blowing up a train packed with pax (ala Madrid) has been done. So passsengers will be screened by TSA just like the airlines.
A train going 200MPH with an over 400 miles of exposed rails/right of way for terrorists to mess with? That can make for a spectacular terrorist "message" just like any airplane would.
Who is paying for the alleged HSR "feeder lines" mentioned here? It isn't in the Bond measure... Once again, the REAL COST TO TAXPAYERS is not being brought out in the open so a few "green minded" folks can feel good about themselves at the expense of others.
Posted by: Jay Gould at July 11, 2008 05:03 PM
I think that commuter and intercity rail needs to be fixed before/during the construction of HSR. For clarification, feeder lines are not new lines, but trains which would connect with the HSR. Oh, and whoever said buses are a viable transportation option, WTF? I know poor people who ride buses, they HATE it and complain about it all day long and get mugged on them. Rail is for everyone, or at least we can make it that way with proper funding. I know people who will NEVER ride the bus but are willing to ride a train. Fix commuter rail, make it efficient, make it fast, make stations closer to housing (or viceversa), and make it a competitive trans. alternative to the car, which we cans still support. Not anti-car, but pro-rail.
Posted by: JPR at July 12, 2008 02:49 PM
$40 billion could be used to build a lot of new roads. Getting our highways up to capacity will be the equivalent of taking half the cars off the road as far as NOX emissions, and 5/6 of the cars off the road as far as CO2 emissions. The solution to our oil problems isn't to stop building roads and cause gridlock. That's just silly. Better rail is the future, but in the meantime, we shouldn't be cutting off our nose to spite our face in doing nothing about the gridlock
Posted by: Ben at July 12, 2008 05:15 PM
High Speed Rail is a great idea. It will be worth it for generations to come connecting two of the biggest metropolitan areas of the country together with world class transportation. But we shouldn't stop there. Just like Cal-Train connects the South Bay communities with SF, we desperately need a rail system in the 101 corridor from Marin to Santa Rosa. Think of the posibillity of connecting with the Bart Network, and Northern/Southern California HSR. Millions of people could effectively commute the length of the state without ever stepping foot in an automobile. That's REAL progress.
Posted by: ornette at July 12, 2008 08:57 PM
HSR has been around for over 30 years! Look around the world and you will see HSR going in everywhere from China to Turkey and from India to Spain and Russia. There is HSR all over Europe and Japan. In 30 years, I have not seen any reports of ANYONE removing any HSR system but rather expanding and exporting them. In Europe over 80% of travel under 280 miles is by HSR. But HSR in the United States must contend with the Oil Lobby, The Airlines and The Automobile Industry with all their power to misinform. They stand to loose billions. HSR and electrified light rail gets transportation off the oil grid and on to the electrical grid where you have many options none of which is dependant on oil. Electric trains don't care if their electricity comes from wind, water, nuclear or something new that we have not even thought of yet! In addition, once built, HSR can easily increase capacity by simply adding train sets. It is a great long term investment that will cost more to build the longer we put it off!
Posted by: Geoff at August 7, 2008 06:06 PM
HSR has been around for over 30 years! Look around the world and you will see HSR going in everywhere from China to Turkey and from India to Spain and Russia. There is HSR all over Europe and Japan. In 30 years, I have not seen any reports of ANYONE removing any HSR system but rather expanding and exporting them. In Europe over 80% of travel under 280 miles is by HSR. But HSR in the United States must contend with the Oil Lobby, The Airlines and The Automobile Industry with all their power to misinform. They stand to loose billions. HSR and electrified light rail gets transportation off the oil grid and on to the electrical grid where you have many options none of which is dependant on oil. Electric trains don't care if their electricity comes from wind, water, nuclear or something new that we have not even thought of yet! In addition, once built, HSR can easily increase capacity by simply adding train sets. It is a great long term investment that will cost more to build the longer we put it off!
Posted by: Geoff at August 7, 2008 06:07 PM
Post a comment
Get Email Updates
Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.
© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.
RSS 