As Todd reported yesterday, Congress sent $18 billion in spending for the Department of Transportation to President Obama for a signature Thursday, boosting funds overall — but zeroing out high speed rail.
In a tersely worded statement, the White House said today:
“On Friday, November 18, 2011, the President signed into law_:
H.R. 2112, the “Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012,” provides FY 2012 full-year appropriations through September 30, 2012, for the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services’, Food and Drug Administration, Housing and Urban Development, Justice, Transportation; the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, and other small agencies. In addition, it provides for continuing FY 2012 appropriations through December 16, 2011, for the remaining projects and activities of the Federal Government.”
From Todd’s post yesterday:
“But the big loser was high-speed rail. Republicans succeeded in their mission to zero out funding for the Obama Administration favorite. Senate Democrats had tried to include a $100 million “placeholder” to keep at least a bit of cash flowing, but it was removed during House-Senate negotiations.”
Was it just ten months ago that the President was promising to connect 80 percent of Americans to High Speed Rail by 2036?
Is this the same bill that also had language in it restricting cyclists to off-road paths or is that a different bill?
Michele, we’re not sure what you’re referring to. Perhaps you’re thinking of Transportation Enhancements? That’s a debate in the larger transportation reauthorization discussion, ongoing.
HSR has been stopped but, sadly, I think only temporarily. I have heard rumors of one or two HSR lines that are “self-supporting” but no facts. This means that once you put it in, it will be a constant and ongoing drain on the federal budget unless they drop it off on the states as another unfunded mandate.
Let’s talk about your definition of HSR. Internationally, it is generally defined as 250KPH (155MPH for the metrically challenged)or higher. Here they are defining it as anything over 80MPH. Not quite the same image is it?
Operationally? Today’s premier routes are owned and operated by private companies and have no capacity for these HSR trains. If the federal government mandates the routes, the impact will ripple all the way to the cash register for everybody.
Environmentally? HSR trains are electrically powered. Where do you think that electricity comes from? It comes from our already overtaxed electricity generation plants, most of which are coal. Further, although the number of generating plants has increased, the net generating capacity has declined. The last nuclear generating plant was built in 1974.
The bottom line is that HSR is a BAD idea. Don’t drink the kool-aid.
@Michelle, the bill Obama signed is a continuing appropriation, which is how the Federal government has operated (in fits in starts) for all of Fiscal 2011. MAP-21 (S.1813) has the bike ban language. That’s still winding it’s way through the Senate.
@Andrea, for more of what Michelle asks about, read this.
Hopefully the HSR “bullet train” ideas will die as conventional rail is rediscovered. The public wants economical service with speeds of 90 MPH or less (with the exception of the Northeast Corridor) such as available in North Carolina , Illinois, California , and Wisconsin to name a few. Trains in those states were saved through this legislation .
These corridor trains have proven themselves as when additional frequencies are added , ridership increases. These trains also make the National Amtrak system more cost effective as the long distance trains not only often provide additional frequencies but also the operating costs are shared.