Posted on 01/30/2010 6:32:56 PM PST by Republic11
By Mary Ann Ford | mford@pantagraph.com | Posted: Friday, January 29, 2010 9:00 pm | (10) Comments
Font Size: Default font size Larger font size NORMAL — Not everyone at Friday’s news conference supported spending $8 billion for high-speed rail.
Several people gathered at the Amtrak station held signs and even made negative comments while Sen. Dick Durbin was speaking. They questioned projections of economic growth from high-speed rail spending and the wisdom of spending so much money in the face of mounting state and federal budget deficits.
“I’m really upset,” said Jeff Strange of Bloomington.
While officials say the money will help produce jobs and bring economic development, Strange said similar systems in other countries don’t work and taxpayers end up paying.
In addition, he said, the claim that a $1 billion infusion will produce 20,000 jobs is based on freight rail, not high-speed passenger rail.
Don Tolan of Minonk held a sign that read: “Quit spending my money, my kids’ money, their kids’ money, their kids’ money, their kids’ money.”
“I’m tired of politicians spending money like there’s no limit,” he said. “We’ve doubled our deficit in one year.”
Plane or train?
Laura McNeil of Normal also held a sign, but not to protest high-speed rail.
“I’m bothered by the fact they’re here to promote Amtrak but they didn’t ride the train,” she said.
Gov. Pat Quinn, Durbin and several other officials at the conference flew from Chicago to Alton and then to Normal to talk about the $1.2 billion the state received from the high-speed rail stimulus plan President Barack Obama unveiled Thursday.
McNeil said riding the train would be much cheaper — something the state should be thinking about in the midst of its budget.
“Last year, my kids got $4,000 in MAP grants,” she said, referring to the state’s Monetary Award Program for college students. “This year, they got nothing.”
Quinn and Durbin said using the plane was a matter of scheduling.
“I’m the governor of Illinois,” Quinn said. “I can’t spend all my time on one thing.”
Quinn said besides spreading the message about high-speed rail Friday, he also had to work on the state’s budget.
Not negative comments!!! The indignity of it all.
One important thing that I think that’s being overlooked is the fact that high speed trains can’t run on the same rail as freight. That means they’ll need new rails and new land to put them on. This in turn leads to the need to seize private property.
Who needs high speed rail? Do what dem governor Strickland wants to do in Ohio—ultra low speed rail. He wants $400 million from the feds to build a 256-mile train system from Cleveland, through Columbus, Dayton, to Cincinnati.
The trip is supposed to take 6.5 hours. That’s an average speed of 39 miles per hour. And it’s only supposed to cost $30-40 each way! So what if the trip by car only takes 4 hours? And so what if you will need to rent a car when you get to your destination?
Not negative comments!!! The indignity of it all.
Oops, sorry for the double post.
I think the people on this post get what is wrong with this high speed rail project. Almost every comment is spot on.
I think most Americans get what is wrong as well.
The only ones who think this is a great idea are the Leftists. Even if the thing runs at a loss, which it is guaranteed to do. They like it because they can dictate to you where you can go and how you can get there. They like it because they think it is going to save the earth.
I swear they are all insane. I have heard insanity defined as doing the same thing over and over and getting the same result, but expecting a different one each time.
The libs do it with socialism.
They do it with the military.
They do it with trains.
Damn the ignorant masses. They just don't understand the White Man's Burden. They are too ill mannered and ungrateful to appreciate our rule.
I use mass transit occasionally when it fits MY plans. So, if I want to go into Boston, sometimes I can include mass transit in that journey because it fits MY schedule.
Liberals have this wet dream about Woodstock, VW Busses, windmills and mass transit. It is all inextricably woven into their DNA. They don’t feel complete without any of them. I’m only joking!
Well, maybe not...
That depends on which politician is using the phrase high speed rail. The REALLY high speed rail they have in some places in Europe, Japan, China etc. which has speeds over 250mph needs its own tracks and is very picky about their quality. Here in the Iowa Quad Cities they keep talking about putting in “high speed” rail from Chicago and perhaps extending it to Iowa City or Des Moines if they can fool enough folks on my side of the river. What they are talking about is running passenger trains up to 100-110 mph on the existing freight lines, whenever they’re not slowing down for all the usual excuses. As usual this downstate IL pork failed to make the appropriate federal pork list. So now the IL Rat Governor is talking about funding it out of the (bankrupt) state’s capital fund. It is of course just primary election season hot air and will never happen.
Most people miss the point here. It is not whether the train can go faster than the car on an open road or if it is cheaper than flying. The issue is future capacity. We cannot build expand capacity on most urban interstates or even along many major interstate routes between cities due to land acquisition issues, cost of construction, and environmental issues. Short distance air travel becomes very expensive once oil goes back over $85 per gallon, and air terminal capacity is limited at key points such as O'Hare in Chicago. The issue is not just today but 20 and 40 years from now. It will take to 2050 just to get a basic passenger rail system in place, and that will not get us back to 1955 train service levels. If we don't add rail as an option now, what do we do in 20 years when gas is $8 or $18 a gallon, air travel is back to something for the rich (like 1955) and we have the same capacity in our transportation system?
This high speed rail thing emerged among state departments of transportation as well as the feds during both the Clinton and Bush administrations and has the support of a broad base of transportation officials on a non-partisan level. While the $8 billion in the stimulus may have been a funding windfall for the corridors involved, this administration has done nothing to promote or explain the concept. (Well, Joe Biden did get Obama on to the Northeast Corridor as part of the inauguration, but that hardly counts, does it?)
ALL HIGH SPEED OR SLOW PASSANGER RAIL IS A TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY!!!!
There will be fewer people driving on American roads in 2050. Bank it. All this concern about ‘future capacity’ is just garbage.
Well, I'll be dead by then, so don't bother offering a friendly bet. However, I used to do long range traffic forecasting for a living and I can tell you that without a big drop in population the total volume will be at least 40 percent greater and the level of service very low. Can you cite any major arterials where volumes have gone down in the last 40 years? They certainly have not in the 11 corridors identified by USDOT for this funding category.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.