Governor Scott on his High-Speed Rail Decision

This is a release from the Governor's Office:

As you may know last Wednesday, I informed U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood of the state’s decision to reject President Obama’s costly Tampa to Orlando high-speed rail project. Here are the facts about the project, and I ask you take action today to support this decision by sharing the facts [].

My decision to reject the project comes down to three main economic realities:

1. Capital cost overruns from the project could put Florida taxpayers on the hook for an additional $3 billion.

2. Ridership and revenue projections are historically overly-optimistic and would likely result in ongoing subsidies that state taxpayers would have to incur, which could cost from $300 million – $575 million over 10 years.

3. If the project becomes too costly for taxpayers and is shut down, the state would have to return the $2.4 billion in federal funds to D.C.

The truth is that this project would be far too costly to taxpayers and I believe the risk far outweighs the benefits. It is my duty to make sound investments in areas where we will experience a positive return for the shareholders – Florida’s taxpayers.

Let's get to work,

Governor Rick Scott

I agree with the Governor. The ridership numbers are wildly optimistic, as they always are in these instances, and the impetus behind high-speed rail doesn't fit with an American mindset -- no matter how much our supposed betters wishes this fact wasn't so obviously correct.

Then there's that other component; President Obama's expansion of spending obligations that unnecessarily increases the federal government's involvement in our daily life and the life of our progeny.

Comments

[guest]

I suspect that in time, Florida will have a high speed rail system. It must, in order to compete economically.

Consider this:
Is the Proposed Trans Global Highway a solution for future population concerns and global warming?

One excellent solution to future population concerns as well as alleviating many of the effects of potential global warming is the Frank Didik proposal for the construction of the "Trans Global Highway". The Didik proposed Trans Global Highway would create a world wide network of standardized roads, railroads, water pipe lines, oil and gas pipelines, electrical and communication cables. The result of this remarkable, far sighted project will be global unity through far better distribution of resources, including heretofore difficult to obtain or unaccessible raw materials, fresh water, finished products and lower global transportation costs.

With greatly expanded global fresh water distribution, arid lands could be cultivated resulting in a huge abundance of global food supplies. The most conservative estimate is that with the construction of the Trans Global Highway, the planet will be able to feed several billion more people, using presently available modern farming technologies. With the present global population of just under 7 billion people and at the United Nations projection of population increase, the world will produce enough food surpluses to feed the expected increased population for several hundred years.

Thomas Robert Malthus's famous dire food shortage predictions of 1798 and his subsequent books, over the next 30 years, failed to take into consideration modern advances in farming, transportation, food storage and food abundance. Further information on the proposed Trans Global Highway can be found at www.TransGlobalHighway.com .

[RattlerGator]

I suspect you're wrong; Florida will not have high speed rail. Instapundit cited Joel Kotkin thusly just the other day:

* * * * *

“The ongoing Census reveals the continuing evolution of America’s cities from small urban cores to dispersed, multi-polar regions that includes the city’s surrounding areas and suburbs. This is not exactly what most urban pundits, and journalists covering cities, would like to see, but the reality is there for anyone who reads the numbers.” This is why most mass-transit plans are stuck in the 20th Century, presupposing that everyone commutes to jobs downtown. Nowadays they tend to travel around the edges. I wrote a piece on this subject a while back, inspired by Robert Breugmann’s excellent book, Sprawl: A Compact History.

* * * * *

Central planners keep trying to force this nonsense on Americans and Americans keep saying hell no.

Time to get a clue, my friend.