Skip to main content

High Speed Trains for California needs your support (regardless of where you live).  Tired of traffic and automobile pollution?  Tired of more and more freeways being our only transportation answer? For once in a long long long time you can vote (and financially support) an environmentally friendly transportation option.

Live outside CA? Know This: High Speed trains can spread faster than a wildfire across America if they can get a foothold in CA with the passage of proposition 1A.

If passed in November California High Speed Trains will:

  • Create 160,000 construction jobs and 450,000 permanent new jobs - American jobs that can't be outsourced.
  • Take 92 million vehicle trips off of the road every year.
  • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 12 billion pounds a year.
  • Reduce our dependence on foreign oil by up to 12.7 million barrels a year.
  • Increase commerce and tourism throughout the state.
  • Take travelers from the Bay Area to Southern California in 2+ hours, with stops in every major city on the way.
  • Set the standard for fast, safe, and efficient transportation in the 21st century.
  • campaign site, go to: http://www.californiahighspeedtrains... for Maps, Video, Details, Donate....

    ACTBLUE donate at: http://www.actblue.com/...

    California High Speed Rail Blog - The #1 Site for everything you ever wanted to know about High Speed Trains in CA

    Proposition 1A is a $9.95 billion bond measure for an 800-mile High-Speed Train network that will relieve 70 million passenger trips a year that now clog California's highways and airports – WITHOUT RAISING TAXES. STEVEN B. FALK President & CEO – San Francisco Chamber of Commerce link

    California will be the first state in the country to benefit from environmentally preferred High-Speed Trains common today in Europe and Asia.  Proposition 1A will bring California:

    • Electric-powered High-Speed Trains running up to 220 miles an hour on modern track, safely separated from other traffic generally along existing rail corridors.
    • Routes linking downtown stations in SAN DIEGO, LOS ANGELES, FRESNO, SAN JOSE, SAN FRANCISCO and SACRAMENTO, with stops in communities in between.
    • High-Speed Train service to major cities in ORANGE COUNTY, the INLAND EMPIRE, the SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY and the SOUTH BAY.
    • Nearly a billion dollars to beef up commuter rail systems that connect to High-Speed Trains. GARY TOEBBEN President & CEO – Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce link

    Proposition 1A will save time and money.  Travel from Los Angeles to San Francisco in about 2-1/2 hours for about $50 a person. With gasoline prices today, a driver of a 20-miles-per-gallon car would spend about $87 and six hours on such a trip. FRAN FLOREZ Vice Chair  – California High Speed Rail Authority link

    Ten years of study and planning have gone into PREPARING FOR construction, financing and operation of a California bullet train network modeled on popular, reliable and successful systems in Europe and Asia. Their record shows that High-Speed Trains deliver, both in service and economy. STEVEN B. FALK President & CEO – San Francisco Chamber of Commerce link

    Air travelers spend more time on the ground than in the air today. Proposition 1A will create a new transportation choice that improves conditions at our major airports. There's no room for more runways. High-Speed Trains can relieve that demand. GARY TOEBBEN
    President & CEO – Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
    link

    Electric-powered High-Speed Trains will remove over 12 billion pounds of CO2 & greenhouse gases, equal to the pollution of nearly 1 million cars. And High-Speed Trains require one-third the energy of air travel and one-fifth the energy of auto travel.FRAN FLOREZ
    Vice Chair  – California High Speed Rail Authority
    link

    Proposition 1A will protect taxpayer interests.
    • Public oversight and detailed independent review of financing plans.
    • Matching private and federal funding to be identified BEFORE state bond funds are spent.
    • 90% of the bond funds to be spent on system construction, not more studies, plans and engineering activities.
    • Bond financing to be available to every part of the state.
    • The most cost-efficient construction segments to have the highest priority. STEVEN B. FALK President & CEO – San Francisco Chamber of Commerce link

    Vote Yes on Proposition 1A to IMPROVE MOBILITY and inject new vitality into California's economy by creating nearly 160,000 construction-related jobs and 450,000 permanent jobs in related industries like tourism. These are American jobs that cannot be outsourced. GARY TOEBBEN President & CEO – Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce link

    campaign site, go to: http://www.californiahighspeedtrains... for Maps, Video, Details, Donate....

    ACTBLUE donate at: http://www.actblue.com/...

    California High Speed Rail Blog - The #1 Site for everything you ever wanted to know about High Speed Trains in CA

    California's high-speed rail network requires NO TAX INCREASE and is subject to strict fiscal controls and oversight.

    It’s simple and fair – Once completed, THE USERS OF THE SYSTEM PAY FOR THE SYSTEM. That’s why taxpayer watchdog groups support Proposition 1A. JIM EARP Executive Director – California Alliance For Jobs link

    Electric High-Speed Trains will give Californians a real alternative to skyrocketing gasoline prices and dependence on foreign oil while reducing greenhouse gases. Building high-speed rail is cheaper than expanding highways and airports to meet California’s population growth.

    Gridlock, hassles of flying and long-distance auto travel have become very onerous. Proposition 1A will save time. Travel intercity downtown to downtown throughout California on High-Speed Trains faster than automobile or air – AT A CHEAPER COST! BOB BALGENORTH
    President – State Building & Construction Trades Council of California
    link

    California’s transportation system is out-of-date and deteriorating. We need options to poorly maintained roads, jammed runways and congested highways. Californians need what most of the civilized world has – high-speed rail. We’ve fallen so far behind other states and nations that our crumbling infrastructure threatens our economy. LUCY DUNN President – Orange County Business Council link

    campaign site, go to: http://www.californiahighspeedtrains... for Maps, Video, Details, Donate....

    ACTBLUE donate at: http://www.actblue.com/...

    California High Speed Rail Blog - The #1 Site for everything you ever wanted to know about High Speed Trains in CA

    Campaign Logo:

    Originally posted to ca democrat on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 07:45 PM PDT.

    EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
    Your Email has been sent.
    You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

    Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
    Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

    ?

    More Tagging tips:

    A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

    Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

    If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

    Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

    Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

    You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
    Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
    Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
    Rescue this diary, and add a note:
    Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
    Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

    You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

    Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
    Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
    (The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
    (The diary will be removed.)
    Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

    Comment Preferences

    •  tipjar (23+ / 0-)

      yes I am working on this campaign, and yes my heart is really really into seeing this happen.  Support, comments etc appreciated!

      How do you know a Republican is lying? Ask one: If the Republicans can lower gas prices for 60 days before an election, why won't they do it all the time?

      by ca democrat on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 07:47:18 PM PDT

      •  Can you make the logo available as an SVG? (4+ / 0-)

        I don't see any materials for signs and t-shirts on the campaign site.  But if you folks will be so kind as to upload the logo as an SVG (or some other relatively open vector graphics format), then other folks can make that happen for you.

        "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

        by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:16:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Makes me envious of the Prop system (4+ / 0-)

        I hadn't heard of this proposition, but it really sounds fantastic. While I would quibble with numbers (projected cost of trip is comical -- Amtrak charges 3x - 5x that for Acela trips on the East Coast -- on the other hand, if Acela were cheaper, they could fill dozens of train cars every half-hour -- ticket prices need to come down) -- and a few other claims, this is brilliant. I think the public would support projects like this across the country, if it were put to the voters. However, few states have anything like this proposition system, and cowardly elected reps would never approve such a big project.

        I've said for a long time that the US needs high speed rail as part of an integrated transportation infrastructure that includes more subways and especially trolleys. We can beat back the car culture, but only if the alternatives are truly convenient. Taking a train from one city to another is not always a good option if there are no good ways to get around that other city without a car.

        Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

        by FischFry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:17:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Don't be jealous (4+ / 0-)

          The proposition system is why California is so, so fucked up.

          This is just an example of the system working right for a change.  For every good proposition, there's been 10 that have screwed up the state, ruined its finances, and made it more and more ungovernable.

          Be careful what you wish for.

          "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

          by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:19:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  The prop system gave us our budget stalemate... (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Odysseus, KenBee, FischFry, Pris from LA

          By giving us the incredibly stupid 2/3 rule, thereby allowing a small minority of Republicans to hijack the system. Just one bad example...

          I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

          by LeftCoastBreakdown on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:21:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And Prop 13. And term limits (4+ / 0-)

            and all that other garbage.

            "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

            by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:23:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I know, but... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ca democrat, Pris from LA

            This is an example that shows some good can come out of that system, too.

            Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

            by FischFry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:35:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  A dinosaur killing asteroid made mammals possible (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              elfling, KenBee, ca democrat

              Mammals are good.  Cats and dogs are good.

              Not the most discriminant way to get improvement, though.  Our system of propositions and state initiatives in California are pretty similar.

              "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

              by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:45:12 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  IT's amtter of extremes (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                KenBee

                In purely representative gov't nothing of serious consequence gets done because political pressures force any truly dynamic idea to be whittled down to the least offensive common denominator. The only legislation we get is a muddled, middle mush. The Prop system encourages the kind of demagoguery that rarely gets anywhere in a legislative body, but it also can be far more dynamic than a bunch of legislators who are scared to rock the boat -- any boat.

                Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

                by FischFry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:51:46 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oops --- "a matter of extremes" (0+ / 0-)

                  Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

                  by FischFry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:52:32 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  What state are you from? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  KenBee, FischFry

                  The key is making your legislators accountable.  Competitive districts are good.  Clean money laws are good.

                  This is one of the few issues I actually agree with David Broder on.  There's a reason that direct democracy wasn't in the design of the US system under the US Constitution: politics requires choices, it's messy, and reducing major public policy changes to a few paragraphs of deceptive summary to be fought over with hundreds of millions of corporate advertising dollars has damn near destroyed the state.

                  We need a constitutional convention in California, and one of the first thing that needs to happen is a radical trimming back of the initiative process.  It's an abject failure here.

                  "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

                  by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:58:13 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I don't like process. My big problem w/ Gravel (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    KenBee

                    I thought it was comical and dangerous to suggest national referenda. I don't like it any more than you do. I'm just pointing out that the same forces of moderation that keep legislatures from doing too many really stupid things, also keep them from doing anything really courageous and far-sighted. By the way, there are a number of states that have enacted laws similar to Prop 13, making it just as hard for their legislature to raise revenues or propose projects that will require additional gov't funding. Sometimes, even the legislators aren't immune to succumbing to such populist nonsense.

                    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

                    by FischFry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:05:12 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  forces of moderation ain't the problem (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      elfling, FischFry, ca democrat

                      The problem is corporate lobbyists completely dominate many state governments, and have for decades.

                      The system is set up to amplify the power of Organized Money (to use Roosevelt's wonderful term).  If you want to break that, you need to increase transparency in the system, increase accountability in the system, and you want to greatly reduce the amount of money required to play in the system.

                      Initiatives are an enormously expensive way to make policy that allow moneyed interests to hide in relative anonymity, they produce inflexible and often counter-productive "solutions" to complex problems, and they are hugely expensive to either pass or defeat.  We now have a hundred years of experience with them in California.  They are an EPIC FAIL.

                      I can only say it better this way:

                      fierce cat

                      "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

                      by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:14:36 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Prop 13 saving asses (0+ / 0-)

                      in some cali towns it is stabilizing the tax revenues, just as designed, to prevent, among other things, that small towns politicos mess with the tax system to cover stupid decisions ...like development/state water and other decisions that can backfire.
                       As prices go down the p13 tax structure stays more or less put...until the housing prices hit the 197x mark, ugh.
                      LATimes just wrote about it last week.

                      Obama: One Spouse, One House

                      by KenBee on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:20:40 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  "Stabilized"????? (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        ca democrat, BYw

                        That's only because every damn state and local government in California has spent the last 30 years near bankruptcy.

                        If that's your definition of stability, I think we can live without it.  Now that the real estate bubble has been lanced, it's a good time to figure out how to redistribute the tax burden.

                        You did not add that part of that "stability" is in commercial real estate.  Most Californians don't know that much of the Prop 13 "benefits" are going to corporations.  And they'd be scandalized if they did.

                        "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

                        by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:26:08 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Bzzzzt - the third rail (0+ / 0-)

                          here's a good wrangle at Calitics David Lazarus, seems to cover ir.
                          Here's an NPR, ugh, piece:'Prop 13 No Longer Looks Quite So Villainous'
                           And here's from the LA Times talking about the stabilizing effect.
                          Your arguement, and those in the Calitics pc. inlude this:

                          Proposition 13 severely restricted the state's ability to raise property tax rates and is blamed for drastic cuts in some government services.

                          Although officials agree that they are seeing its stabilizing effect, many critics maintain that the measure continues to stymie the state's ability to provide services and fix its aging infrastructure. Without Proposition 13, they argue, governments would be taking in more property tax revenues.

                          and spend it, as if that's always a good thing.
                            You want to spend it, I don't, unless very carefully thought out. So often it's a con. Spend in stupid ways, then not fix the streets, then stage the usual pothole crisis...over and frkn over.
                           Initiatives are thought out, but just not in a way I can evaluate.
                           As to the class issues in Prop 13, if you were to reevaluate/retax the shop I rent for my marginal business, I would have to go belly up. I can't afford to move, I would crash completely.
                           I would say there are many real estate interests feeding these arguments who would love to get the 10% for a new tenant, and the fees generated from the fire sale of my house as I try to escape to some place cheaper, as I couldn't afford higher taxes on my house either.
                           Young people seem really vulnerable to these real estate interest's arguments, I don't blame their frustration, , it's a perfect wedge issue. Us old people are being  subtly accused of living to long and not selling sooner...oh yeah, fairness, right, I forgot.
                           The social costs of this lifetime of Prop 13 seems pretty much overlooked. Allowing more money to go to the usually stupid and incompetant politicians who want to spend it on their corrupt friends? Fuck that noise.
                           Me and me old mother, the old gal down the street, and mine and a few other businesses on my street...all under the bus. And way before you get to properly tax the corporations. Pick your targets better please.
                              Ok, going to hang myself now...not.

                          Obama: One Spouse, One House

                          by KenBee on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:31:04 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

        •  As I understand it (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KenBee, ca democrat, BYw

          Amtrak is already running as many trains as they can in the northeast, and they are full even at current prices. Those tickets are to some extent subsidizing other routes and overhead for the system, since it doesn't make sense to cut prices when you can't fulfill any more demand.

          Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

          by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:51:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Great Diary (10+ / 0-)

      and interesting too.  Imagine if we get Joe "Amtrak" Biden as VP!  People should realize that McCain is an Amtrak and public transportation hater.

      •  G.M. and Ford bankrupt (7+ / 0-)

        We'll see what happens with public transport in 2009. G.M. and Ford came nosing around looking for a $50 billion bailout this quarter but the finance types say they'll be "let go" between 11/4/2008 and 1/20/2009 - bankrupted to clean up their outstanding liabilities and close down the unprofitable big vehicle plants.

         We have so far to go to get to safety and we're beset by a mob of vested interests that simply won't survive peak oil :-(

        •  as if... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ca democrat, Stranded Wind

          heh,
          'let go' in an election year, or any other year, heh.
           We'll see.
           Would totally agree with you if by  'let go' you mean a taxpayer funded reconstruction, sold as the intentional result  a car mfg ability capable of reacting to and leading the way to a bettter and more sensible solution, keeping jobs here, and reelecting who ever is in office. An epic fail Golden Parachute....meant to cover the oil maggots losses as they scramble to pick the carcass and sell their stock. Yeah, let go, heh. Sure, depends...

           After seeing the demise of the British motorcycle industries (50s-70s), and the lurching myopic way detroit has fumbled their next to last opportunity to be relevant,
          (SUVs instead of EV research and production, and don't even begin to try to convince me the Volt is going to save them, heh) undoubtedly they will have at least one more bite at our apple. They are going to come up with worms, but there you go.
           And coincidently break/finish off the auto workers unions as well.

          Obama: One Spouse, One House

          by KenBee on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:48:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  trains good, but high speed? (5+ / 0-)

      High speed is expensive. Get 'em up to 110mph and they do the same job in terms of reducing vehicle trips without requiring totally new right of way, etc.

      Glad to see this here and I'll admit to having not checked the details ... perhaps a San Diego - San Francisco high speed line is the right thing out there.

      •  High speed is necessary (6+ / 0-)

        The competition here is air travel.  110 mph does not make SFO - LAX competitive.  HSR level speeds do.

        "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

        by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:12:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly so - competing w/ business air travel (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ca democrat, Pris from LA

          Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

          by FischFry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:32:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  hahahaha (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KenBee

          As oil prices go up ... airlines come to a complete halt. The competition today might be a flight, but that won't last.

          Dang, another one of those cases where we have to predict more than one quarter into the future to make good decisions. We are so screwed ...

          •  This one's pretty predictable. It's been done (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KenBee

            It's been done in Europe, and it works well.

            To quote Sarah "It's G'd's Will" Palin, it's not rocket science.  The economics of transportation is well understood; you put down major transportation corridors, and it changes where people live, where they work, and all the environmental consequences that follow from these things.

            "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

            by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:01:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  not disagreeing (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KenBee

              Oh, I'm totally in favor of rail expansion, I just think in many places "high speed rail" is the moral equivalent of "the hydrogen economy". Sounds great, constant distraction, never gets built :(

              •  Economics for the "hydrogen economy" won't work (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                KenBee, BYw

                And will likely never work.  It's definitely pie-in-the-sky.  It's like what they used to say about ISDN -- the technology of the future, now and always.

                But there's probably a quarter century of experience with this technology.  The only reason we don't have this here is that the GOP and its allies have dominated our government for 30 years.

                "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

                by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:19:57 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  disagree (0+ / 0-)

                  Rail, yes, electrified? Certainly. But high speed implies lots of new equipment all along the right of way. I'd rather have 110mph trains running that something really fast that just never manages to escape the drawing board.

                  •  Your economics simply do not work (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ca democrat, BYw

                    A train at 110 mph is a vastly different service than one at twice the speed.  And the technology for the faster rail exists, and has existed for years.  We don't need pie in the sky.  We can do very well on technology that is already in use in France or Japan.

                    110 mph is too slow to replace air travel within most of the state.  Again, this is not rocket science -- we can look at the economics from Europe.  You'd end up with a service that served no economically useful role.

                    "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

                    by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:29:57 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  can't afford it (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      KenBee

                      Sorry, but we can just upgrade existing track to handle 110 mph while high speed rail is all new construction ... and as I understand it you won't get freight going on it unless you're using the high speed rolling stock. A wholesale upgrade is an order of magnitude more expensive than an in place upgrade and the assumption that people are still going to go where they want, when they want, at maximum possible speed is likely very faulty.

                      •  There's no capacity (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        KenBee, BYw

                        The rails are basically full as they are between the freight and passenger that is on them now. None of them are rated to 110 mph. Even if they were, it would do you no good, because you'd find yourself stuck behind a 100 car freight train running at 50-60 mph.

                        This is why we don't have any passenger rail routes from Amtrak California (only the 13 hour Coast Starlight run by Amtrak proper) that go from LA to SF. The rails are full, and  freight companies won't yield any slots through the mountain passes.

                        Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

                        by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:49:04 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  High Speed Trains could / will jumpstart (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    BYw

                    CA's tourism industry.  It's an E ticket ride.

                    How do you know a Republican is lying? Ask one: If the Republicans can lower gas prices for 60 days before an election, why won't they do it all the time?

                    by ca democrat on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:01:48 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

      •  Currently we have no viable passenger rail route (7+ / 0-)

        between SF and LA at all. That route is served by a "bus bridge" with a transfer at Bakersfield and a two hour drive to Union Station in downtown LA.

        A new right of way has to be built to serve the route regardless.

        Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

        by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:15:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  If we hurry (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KenBee, ca democrat, Pris from LA

      We can hurry and get a high speed rail line in this country too. But France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Russia, Japan, China, Korea, Argentina and probably Morocco among others, will have theirs before us.

      Under the Repubs, this country is approaching Third World status with kleptocratic rulers, impoverished masses, and decaying infrastructure.

    •  Incorrect numbers (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      decafdyke, johnnygunn, craiger

      Sorry, I'm a huge supporter of the high speed train between LA and SF, but it will not create 450,000 new jobs, nor 160,000 construction jobs, nor will it replace 92 million vehicle trips a year (you state 70 million later in your post). I don't know where you are getting these figures, but they are way, way off. It will be a lovely alternative to flying or driving from southern to northern CA, and a model for other high speed rail networks, but we need to be accurate about what this will bring. Bad numbers are worse then no numbers at all, because they go to credibility.
      Cheers.

      I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

      by LeftCoastBreakdown on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:09:13 PM PDT

      •  based on? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ca democrat

        I have no bias in this argument, but you've provided absolutely no evidence why their numbers are wrong.

        •  The numbers came from the EIR, business plan (0+ / 0-)

          ballot arquement (judically reviewed), amoung others.

          How do you know a Republican is lying? Ask one: If the Republicans can lower gas prices for 60 days before an election, why won't they do it all the time?

          by ca democrat on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:14:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  450,000 jobs created by one rail line? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          johnnygunn, KenBee

          Think about it. The entire film industry employs about 300,000 people. A high speed rail line would make it marginally quicker to get from LA to SF (right now, including the airport, it takes maybe 3-4 hours to fly, 5 hours to drive. This would be a nice thing, sure. But how on earth would this create almost half a million jobs? A single rail line would employ more people then Hollywood? More people then Aerospace in all of California? How?

          I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

          by LeftCoastBreakdown on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:15:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  see the business plan at (0+ / 0-)

            How do you know a Republican is lying? Ask one: If the Republicans can lower gas prices for 60 days before an election, why won't they do it all the time?

            by ca democrat on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:21:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  "As a result of economic growth" (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              johnnygunn, KenBee, FischFry

              That's the language where the 450,000 comes from. That's basically economist-speak for a total WAG. They provide no hard data to support such an outlandish claim. That's really disappointing, that kind of BS supposition.
              Look, people get why this train would be a good thing. There is no reason to BS them like that. The idea that one train could provide more jobs then the entire agriculture industry currently does in California is utterly silly.
              BTW, this is in no way a vetted claim. The High Speed Rail Authority is at this point a taxpayer-funded PR firm trying to get this thing financed.

              I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

              by LeftCoastBreakdown on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:28:33 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  of course it is (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                decafdyke, KenBee, ca democrat

                that is what all of the projects use when they advertise themselves - it's always a multiplied factor based on direct and indirect jobs.

                FYI - LAX claims 363,700 jobs from it's presence
                http://www.lawa.org/...

                •  Which goes to show... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  KenBee

                  That replacing just one air route ain't gonna give us half a million jobs, even with magic maths...

                  I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

                  by LeftCoastBreakdown on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:37:17 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'm not arguing the numbers (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ca democrat

                    I'm just saying that you weren't providing any information about how it was wrong.

                  •  but rail is different (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    raines, ca democrat

                    since there will be intermediate stops -- it will replace the equivalent of multiple air routes.

                    www.beyondmarriage.org

                    by decafdyke on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:40:42 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Kinda. But not really. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      KenBee

                      How many people fly to Bakersfield? No, this is essentially replacing travel from socal airports to nocal airports. Don't get me wrong, I love the train. But it takes, seriously, 45 minutes to fly from Burbank (15 minutes from my house) to Oakland (a short BART trip from the city). I've left my house before and gotten to SF in less then four hours, easily.

                      I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

                      by LeftCoastBreakdown on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:43:04 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  i know. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        ca democrat

                        i used to live in oakland.  but the point these advocates are making, whether you agree/believe them or not, is that the presence of a hispeed rail station would be a huge boon to development in bakersfield.

                        www.beyondmarriage.org

                        by decafdyke on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:52:01 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  If you live in Oakland and you travel to Burbank (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        KenBee, ca democrat, BYw

                        then yes, air travel is very speedy and convenient. A friend drops you off on one end, picks you up quickly at the other, it's all very easy. Did it for years.

                        Now that I live 3 hours from Oakland, it is not speedy and convenient at all. The hassle of making the connections and trying to maneuver parking and shuttle buses and rental cars makes it much longer and much more hassle. The possibility of traffic along my entire route to the airport means I have to allow a great deal of extra time (even in the wee hours) to catch a flight.

                        If I also have to rent a car at the destination airport, the time lost in travel is enormous, and it's almost all wasted time. Every hour you're in a new spot, a new situation, so you can't really sit and work for any of it.

                        By contrast, a train can serve many stops without the passenger having to do anything, and there's an outlet for the laptop. No long security searches.

                        There are a lot of people in the Central Valley these days, and a lot of them are taking the train. For someone from Fresno to go to LA or San Francisco is a day killer. If they could take a speedy train, they'd have a lot more opportunities there.

                        Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

                        by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:12:24 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Nobody flies to Bakersfield if they can help it (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        ca democrat

                        Which is exactly the point. There is a surprisingly large number of people living there these days, and they do a lot of driving. It's uneconomical to fly from there - you're better off driving all the way to Burbank or possibly north to Fresno.

                        Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

                        by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:52:55 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Let's be honest (0+ / 0-)

                          Does anyone even want to go to Bakersfield if they can avoid it?

                          Just sayin' ;-)

                          "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

                          by mbayrob on Mon Sep 08, 2008 at 12:16:48 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  direct employment numbers (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Odysseus, elfling, ca democrat

                    Here is something I found which is interesting.  It is a study on job creation with large projects for smart growth.
                    http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/...

                    They found that on average 8.43 jobs per 1million spent.
                    so in direct jobs a 9.2 billion dollar project would be 83,878.

                    I haven't had a chance to read the report more in depth but typically they use a figure of around 4 for indirect which is 335,514.

                    Plus I'm sure that they add percentages for decreased transport time on highways etc.

                    I'm not saying their right, but using that data it adds up.

                    •  the total project cost is about 40 billion (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      dc 20005, KenBee

                      10 from this bond
                      20 from matching Fed Funds
                      10 from non-gov/private cos

                      How do you know a Republican is lying? Ask one: If the Republicans can lower gas prices for 60 days before an election, why won't they do it all the time?

                      by ca democrat on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:59:14 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  A train route serves more than two end points n/t (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ca democrat, BYw

                    Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

                    by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:03:20 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  I can't speak to the jobs number (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            raines, KenBee, ca democrat, Pris from LA

            but the travel time is 6 hours, if you drive 70+, downtown to downtown (400 miles).

            In practice, the train can be much more efficient because it serves more places than just airports.

            I am using Amtrak California now for my trips to Southern California. Since I live fairly far from the airport, and my destination is also far from the airport, travel involves a transfer to at least one shuttle bus on each end and other delays like waiting for a rental car. By contrast, the train connections (since there are more stops) are very close to my two end points, and the connections are tight, plus during the train trip I can plug my laptop in and work peacefully for much of the journey.

            Amtrak California is supported with our state money, and if you ride it today, you'll find that even in the sorry state it is, the trains are running 80% full. I am confident that high speed rail would be very popular among travelers.

            I am also confident that Southwest Airlines will fight it tooth and nail.

            Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

            by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:25:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Some of your numbers are off, but diarist's too (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KenBee, ca democrat, Pris from LA

            There's no way the SF - LA trip will be priced as low as $55. However, it can still be far more appealing than flying or driving. Despite your numbers, no sane person drives LA-SF in 5 hours. That's over 400 miles -- you're talking about averaging over 80 miles an hour. Ridiculous, especially with traffic. Probably closer to 8 hours, with rest stops and traffic [I've never driven LA-SF, but it takes me close to 5 hours to cover 250 miles on my DC-NY --  even on the rare occasions when I'm really able to sail, close to 80 mph for much of the trip, it's still at least a 4 hour trip]. Then, there's the advantage of coming into the center city, rather than having to find your way to and from outlying airports.

            As for the number of jobs, I don't know how many people it will take to construct the lines -- laying tracks, building overpasses, grading, etc. -- nor how many people would be involved in building these trains (it would be wonderful if there were an American manufacturer up to the task, but I'd be surprised if there is), but then again you have no idea either.

            Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

            by FischFry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:30:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Um, I've done it. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              decafdyke, KenBee, Pris from LA

              Look, the average time is more like six hours, but yeah, I've lead footed L.A. to SF in five hours, running late at night. You hit rush hour in the valley or on the 580 and you are one cooked goose though.
              Then again, I've had my license suspended twice, so don't take my advice!
              The whole point is that I love the idea of the train, but the numbers claimed here are silly. Almost half a million new jobs? Sorry, but saving a couple of hours LA/SF ain't gonna do that. But it's worth building, for the environmental benefits alone.

              I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

              by LeftCoastBreakdown on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:34:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  BTW, NY to DC, not comparable. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Pris from LA

              The tolls alone slow you down, and the Central Valley is, quite literally, a straight shot where you can do 90 all day long, if the cops aren't out, which at 3am they usually aren't. I'm not recommending it though!

              I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

              by LeftCoastBreakdown on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:40:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, the tolls are a plague (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                KenBee, ca democrat

                I'm fairly certain, if you added up the lost  man-hours and the wasted gas, not even to mention the huge sums truck drivers are earning while idling in traffic jams, or the salaries paid to man the tolls, much less the environmental impact of all those traffic jams, the tolls are hugely wasteful. There must be more efficient ways to pay for maintenance -- even better ways to collect user fees.

                Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

                by FischFry on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:44:41 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  hmmm (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KenBee, Pris from LA

              you're probably right that no sane person does it -- but when i was 22, my group of friends did it all the time :)

              www.beyondmarriage.org

              by decafdyke on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:43:01 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  To travel today Amtrak California: $52 (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KenBee, BYw

              My example trip is from Martinez, CA (north east Bay Area) to LAX Union Station.

              $52 each way. Your choice of:

              - the Coast Starlight, rail all the way, no connections

              - a train-bus-train connection that goes through San Jose and connects to the Pacific Surfliner, which also gets you the coast route

              -or the San Joaquin train straight down the Central Valley, with a bus from Bakersfield to LA.

              There's no advance purchase, so you can generally get this fare a day or two before travel.

              In addition, if you're a senior, a child, or a AAA member, there are additional discounts to be had.

              Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

              by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:20:41 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  How many jobs are created by Interstate 5? (0+ / 0-)

            I don't know, but that would be an interesting data point to add.

            Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

            by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:51:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Just one Example (0+ / 0-)

          One place where the math doesn't work out for me is the promise of 2-2.5 hours from the Bay Area to LA -- with stops.

          Now, I'm a private pilot and in a light plane, this is a 2-2.5 hours flight, in a straight line with no stops.  There is no direct route by train due to geography, it will of necessity need to wend its way through a couple of mountain passes and over a couple of steep grades.  Adding in stops anywhere along the way, and I just don't see how the train could realistically maintain a high enough average speed to meet that promise.

          •  typically (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ca democrat, BYw

            the comparisons with air travel include check in time and security, etc.
            a few years ago the Washington Post did a comparison of 3 modes of transit between DC and NY - Driving, Flying, and Acela.
            By the time travel to the airport, checking in, security, boarding etc were incorporated they were all relatively the same.
            That was before 9/11 if I recall correctly.

            •  sure (0+ / 0-)

              When you look at the aggregate door-to-door travel time, the numbers usually don't look anywhere near as good as the air or rail timetable would suggest.  A commercial flight from SF to LA lasts about 50 minutes but airport formalities and ground transfers can easily add three hours to the trip.  So let's say four hours is the practical time to beat.

              I would actually be very happy if I could take a train from SF to LA in four hours.  Especially if we could dispense with the absurdity of airport-style security, although I think rail would likely become a victim of its own success in this respect.  But to say we could do it in 2-2.5 hours, that sort of offends my intuition of what is technically possible.

              I've flown the route many times, and I don't have any stops.  I fly a shorter, straighter course than any train could follow.  It still takes more than two hours.  The train would not be substantially faster than my plane.  Ergo, the train simply can't do what is being advertised, not even in the best case where we neglect all the overhead.

              Not arguing against the merit of the train, just skeptical of the numbers in the brochure.

    •  Unfortunately - (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      exsimo2, KenBee, craiger, Wisteacher

      The California High Speed Train proposal is rife with politicking and is unlikely to come even close to its promise.

      First - the route is 20% longer than it should be because of a roundabout detour to the eastern San Joaquin Valley and then over Tehachapi Pass to Lancaster - rather than over Tejon Pass via the Grapevine.  In order to get a 2 1/2 LA to SF schedule you need to average 150 mph over 375 miles, but 180 mph over 450 miles.  That in a nation that has abandoned high speed train technology for 50 years. Yes, the Grapevine presents technological challenges, but if we could send a rocket to the moon forty years ago, we should be able to figure out how to get a train over Tejon Pass.

      Second - the decision to designate the route via the heavily populated Santa Clara valley and the eastern San Joaquin cities will result in lowered speed and higher costs.  The western San Joaquin route (generally parallel with I-5) would permit the speeds necessary to attain something close to a 2 1/2 hour LA to SF schedule.

      Third - this has been ten years in the making and still nothing has been accomplished on the ground.  The average speeds of the San Joaquins are comparable to train speeds in the 1950s.  State initiatives all across the country have generally never gotten very far - other than to put a few additional slow trains on the Amtrak schedule.  A national initiative similar to the interstate program is essential to achieve something on the scale of intercity high speed trains.

      •  The journey of ten thousand li starts in a step (5+ / 0-)

        I think you're wrong on two essential points:

        1. The key thing to do is to get the first rail line down.  I'm aware that some people are pissed that the current route was picked.  But I suspect that once the first line exists, the political will for additional routes (branches on the main line) will be easier to arrange.  The best was not just the enemy of the good; it was the enemy of doing anything at all.
        1. This does not need to be federal, as long as public funds are available, since the "external economies" are too large for this to be privately financed.  Federal funds or policy is not needed for this.  More to the point: once the project gets started, I suspect it will be easier to get federal funding post-hoc.

        "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

        by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:51:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wrong - (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KenBee

          A project that does not come close to meeting its advertised schedules and runs chronically short of funds is likely to HARM further high speed rail rather than help it.

          •  Harm....that's a plus with some people (0+ / 0-)

            just sayin...a standard retreat/cya  tactic.
             and then there are the developmnt interests that want access to the routes and the selection process so they can buy the RE quicker than people can find out their land is going up.
             People wouldn't do that, right?

            Obama: One Spouse, One House

            by KenBee on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:04:18 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Take a Look - (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KenBee, craiger

              At the proposed route -
              From San Francisco to LA
              (Not to mention from LA to San Diego)

              And the direct routing -

              The excessive distances cannot possibly make competitive travel times possible.

              •  yes, and connect this story (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                johnnygunn

                and the route choices to the story last week (LATimes?) that the state is starting to buy up central valley water rights to send water to socal. (Remember 'Chinatown'?)
                 I have family connections to one of the big water rights 'farmers' and worked for some other water rights speculators, socalled 'farmers', cotten farmers. Those people are white OKee Mafia.
                    Water has been the long term crop of these people, even with their sometimes real agriculture.
                 Land prices for the RR aren't a deal killer, but the development interests are going to parasite this project for sure.
                 Thank for the map.

                Don't 'we' already own the State Water ROW and the Hiway 5 ROW? Why buy a new one.......  And of course, what a better way to set HiSpeed rail back, but to tweak the process to fail, at least be able to claim that.
                 At this point this the deal, do we want to mess with it or support it. As a concept, great, yahoo.
                    As a concept with a built in poisen pill, maybe not.
                 So many crooks, so little time, ......

                 Please keep this issue here at dkos, and it wouldn't be the first time a California initiative was designed to fail, we need to hear more, and thanks.  Trying to be hopeful....

                Obama: One Spouse, One House

                by KenBee on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:35:40 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  On the other hand (0+ / 0-)

                There is already rail on the eastern side, and through the Soledad Canyon area, so that may make certain aspects more simple. There is no rail on the Interstate 5 side, and for that matter, no population there, either.

                Tejon Pass would certainly require a tunnel: it's straight, but the summit is at 4100 feet, with the valley floors on each side at around 1000 feet. And it would be a heck of a long tunnel from Grapevine to Castaic: 40 miles.

                Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

                by elfling on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:39:20 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Technological Requirements - (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  BYw

                  Of high speed rail require separate tracks of significantly higher quality than those currently used by BNSF and UP on the east side.  TGV can operate on current trackage; however, this is only done for short distances because speed is dramatically reduced.  Mixing of freight and passenger trains precludes high speed and is dangerous, as well.

                  TGV technology allows for greater grades than traditional rail - up to 4%.  Thus there is no need for a 40 mile tunnel.  California planners have correctly stated that the future rail lines should cross major faults - such as the San Andreas - at grade.  Thus, a 12-mile tunnel and 3-mile trestle could accomplish an elevation change of 3000 feet.

            •  You Know - (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KenBee

              You are getting a bit miffy, eh?
              Take a look at the time specs in the Prop 1A legislation.

              How in the heck can one expect California to surpass French TGV performance in more difficult terrain and with no prior experience in high speed rail?  The current format, which I would support reluctantly, is likely to be a recipe for poor performance and huge cost overruns.  And, yes, that will harm future high speed rail proposals.

              You say that the first line will allow other branches in the future.  Why not have a first line that has the potential to have a real chance at high speed rather than politically serving every intermediate point on a roundabout wander?  The real possibility of achieving high speed is between Wheeler Ridge and Altamont on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley.

              The current routing via the densely populated Santa Clara Valley, Pacheco Pass, the cities of the eastern San Joaquin Valley, Tehachapi Pass, Lancaster, then the winding Soledad Canyon will be 450-plus miles and with a travel time of three hours, at best - probably closer to four hours.  At four hours you lose competitiveness with air except for locations extremely close to the downtown terminals.

              It's not the better being the enemy of the best.  The first high speed rail route has to be successful.  A Rube Goldberg politically-constructed system is the best way to scuttle high-speed rail for the next generation.  Trust me, I have studied rail for the past 35 years and seen proposals come and go like last summers grasshoppers.

              •  'you ain't talkin to me' (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                johnnygunn

                "Miffy"? heh, I agree with you and was pointing out that there are likely corrupt influences (duh) in a project this size, with so many moneyed interests, and them asking for public money that will obviously benefit private development corporations.  As people point out here, there is some bullshit spun into the claims that it will benefi all of us.That they may try to influence the route is obvious, and that opponents may try to bungle the route is also an obvious tactic.
                 I'm all for Hi speed rail success, and agree with you about the route.
                 There are so many crooks....
                 Good discussion y'all.

                miffy, moi?

                Obama: One Spouse, One House

                by KenBee on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 10:46:07 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Competeing Initiatives (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                johnnygunn, ca democrat, BYw

                also a tried and true tactic...here it wouldn't be
                HiSpeed Rail yes or no
                but
                HiSpeed Rail: Which Route?
                Get celebrities involved..,,can't go wrong.

                Obama: One Spouse, One House

                by KenBee on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 11:02:40 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  You might be forever right (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            KenBee, ca democrat

            since if the project doesn't start sometimes, it will never get done, late or on time.  I'd as soon we took the opportunity to at least try to prove you wrong.

            The US Interstate Highway system, I think you will find, was also late and over budget.  Don't know why you're so worked up about this, but in this case, I'll quote Cromwell for you...

            "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."

            We'll be nicer to you than Cromwell was to the Scotts, but that's only because most of us are Democrats around here.

            "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

            by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:07:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Are there any specific bond issues? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KenBee

          Not that I've got a lot to invest, but I would happily buy bonds to support High Speed Rail projects.

          -7.75 -4.67

          "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

          by Odysseus on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:07:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not sure how this works (0+ / 0-)

            I believe the bonds tend to get sold to institutional buyers, since that's cheaper.  Some of the really wonkey folks around here might know.

            "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

            by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 09:16:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Nice Logo (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ca democrat, Pris from LA

      I've been waiting for materials that can go into campaign offices, etc.

      Have the state Democrats endorsed this yet?

      "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

      by mbayrob on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:11:30 PM PDT

    •  Excellent (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mbayrob, KenBee, ca democrat

      diary on an important proposition.  

      I suggest you cross-post on Calitics.
      http://www.calitics.com/...

      John McCain Opposed Health Insurance For Children

      by hilltopper on Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 08:59:55 PM PDT

    •  I moved to Bakersfield in 1980 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ca democrat

      They were talking about this train back then.

      It is needed, and too long delayed.

      I will vote yes, only because I loved train travel when I was in Europe and would love to have that as an alternative to auto only travel in the Golden State.

      We need it.

      Please vote yes.

    Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

    Click here for the mobile view of the site