Posted on 02/17/2011 9:08:00 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
Florida Governor Rick Scott avoided a costly train wreck this week by hitting the brakes on his state's high-speed rail project. Alas, the White House continues to charge full-speed ahead.
Mr. Scott rejected $2.4 billion of federal money for an 84-mile line from Tampa to Orlando, saying that it would likely end up costing state taxpayers an additional $3 billion when the state's budget deficit this year is $3.6 billion. Then there's the half a billion dollars in operating subsidies that the train would need every decade, which could be more depending on how much the state has inflated ridership projections.
The state has estimated that about 2.4 million people would take the train in its first year, which is about two-thirds of the ridership for Amtrak's Acela, which travels along a far more populated urban corridor. Call us skeptics, but we think most people would prefer to drive from Tampa to Orlando. It's cheaper and only takes half an hour longer.
Rather than allowing Florida to redirect the money to more productive and cost-effective projects like highways and ports, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood plans to redirect Florida's rail money to other states. When new governors in Ohio and Wisconsin killed their rail projects late last year, California scooped up more than half of the cash. New York, California and Washington state have all lined up for a share of Florida's leftovers.
This means taxpayers in fiscally prudent states like Florida could end up having to subsidize these and other states' reckless projects. Or maybe not. House Republicans in Washington are already proposing to cut Mr. Obama's high-speed rail request by billions of dollars. The Senate will try to keep irrational hope alive, but more Governors would be wise to follow Mr. Scott and cut their inevitable railroad losses.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The state and county went ahead and built the bridge. Three years after it was completed, the income for the bridge was barely covering the cost of the salaries of the toll collectors. Someone finally went back and took a good look at the figures used to justify the bridge and found that every resident of the county would have to cross the bridge four times a week in order for the figures to work out.
These programs always cost more than they're supposed to (look at the Big Dig in Massachusetts) and they don't ever bring in the revenue that they're projected to. They're just a "gimme" to the unions and a way for politicians to line their own pockets.
From what I understand, even in Japan, rail is subsidized.
I wouldn’t say the drive takes 30 minutes longer ... consider the amount of time to pass through the security checkpoint that will be mandated (you know it will), and then the whole issue of where to go once you arrive at either end. Endless bus transfers to go hither and yon in the vast metroplex at each end? No one will put up with that after one trip. Rent a car at either end? But you already have a car. No, from origin point to ultimate destination, the car will always be faster for this cross-state path. Unless, of course, the trainiacs cut I-4 back down to one lane to force choo-choo ridership.
The bottom line truth is that if it were needed it would be self sustaining and private industry would already be doing it.
I bet many liberal land developers are upset right now, they were hoping the land in that corridor would have made them a profit.
No profit for you!
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.