Kathleen McCaffrey, Associate Editor
Ideology: Libertarian | Writing from: New York, NY
On Thursday, the day after President Obama’s State of the Union speech, the President and Vice President spoke at an event in Florida. This was the latest component of the three ring rhetorical circus President Obama has spearheaded which will spend more to boost employment, while practicing “curbed” spending amidst a record federal budget deficit. (President Obama has come a long way since he rejected an across-the-board spending freeze when John McCain advanced the idea in ’08. Of course, as Charles Krauthammer articulated,”Instead of reducing the spending, it’s locking in these huge increases that were instituted last year.”) 
Somewhat ironically, it was at the same Tampa, Florida event that Mr. Obama announced $8 billion worth of grants for high-speed rail corridors. The widespread program would have dramatic changes to thirteen rail lines in thirty-one states. My qualms with this are twofold:
- The government cannot run the system it operates now. Amtrak, “which has consumed nearly $24 billion in taxpayer money since 1971, reported a record loss of $944 million. [It used] $20 million last year to tout its Acela service from D.C. to New York. [Although] advertised as high speed, it makes the trip exactly two minutes faster than a private railroad did in 1969, according to the U.S. News & World Report. And that’s on the rare trip without delays. Amtrak loses money on every route it runs except the Metroliner Train from D.C. to New York City and the heavily subsidized Heartland Flyer. Amtrak loses $2 for every ticket dollar it sells.“
- Specifically in Florida, high-speed rail seems unnecessary. There is a high volume of people vacationing and conducting business in Florida, but I don’t see the necessity of creating a fast rail connection in a state that seems to have a sufficient highway infrastructure. (Though, of course, this could serve as an impetus for the government to create more workers who would be at its disposal.) Yet, while Florida has ambitiously proposed a high speed rail system, many of its major cities lack commuter rail lines, which traditionally do not cost as much money to operate! (Or would that just encourage too much private enterprise for the government’s comfort?) Mind you, the Acela line runs in the most densely populated areas of the country, which, in theory should have more traffic and thus more incentive to travel by rail for long distances. Despite these more convincing credentials, the similar and sole high-speed program cannot profit!
Oh well, perhaps this will be the final failed act in Obama’s sore attempt to replicate the European Union. One silver lining of this preposterous proposal is the opportunity it gave for a verbal lashing of Charlie Crist from Marco Rubio, his competition for the Senate Republican nomination. Rubio, an avowed conservative ahead by three points in the pols, denounced the rail plan and accused Crist of being too cozy with the administration. In recent weeks, Rubio has truly harnessed the anti-Obama sentiment and ridden it since August when Crist led Rubio by 29 points.
Money-hemorrhaging proposals from the White House only make campaigning for the GOP in 2010 and 2012 that much easier.
I agree with you – on point #2 especially. Florida doesn’t really need high-speed rail. If there’s anywhere in the US that is in actual need of a system its likely the Boston-Washington corridor. Maybe LA-San Fran.
Kathleen, your first point is 100 percent right. Amtrak is inefficient and any new rail system needs to be able to sustain itself as much as possible. But projects like high speed rail are precisely the kinds of things the government should be investing in: things that actually ARE stimulus. If these corridors work as planned, they will spur economic growth in the areas they serve that will justfiy the expenditure. Instead of a flat out “no more government spending” I’d call for a pragmatic fiscal conservatism instead, one that would ideologically allow great national projects that help meet the needs of growing economic integration among metropolitian areas. Calling projects like this preposterous rejects the great aspirations this country must have if it plans to lead the modern world.
Your second point however, is completely wrong and just like I would never make a normative judgement about somewhere I don’t live I find it inappropriate for you to say that high speed rail in Florida “seems” unnecessary; you couldn’t be more wrong. In fact, Florida’s aspirations of diversifying its economy away from complete reliance on tourism it needs a more efficient way to move people around the state. Florida’s highway system is grossly insufficient for the amount of traffic it handles. In central and south Florida, rush hour lasts from 7 am to 7 pm. Not only does this cause huge traffic jams around the state, but high speed rail would help alleviate some of that traffic which would be good for the environment as well. Your right that highspeed rail should connect cities that have commuter rail. That’s why the Florida legislature passed within the same regulatory framework that allowed us to win the money a provision that allowed for the construction of “Sun Rail”, a commuter rail through central florida and increased funding for Tri-Rail, the commuter rail through south florida. Its interesting to note that the florida legislature, which is overewhelmingly republican, overwhelmingly passed the bill that allowed florida to win this money. Even the republicans who voted against it, who we’re few and far between, didn’t have a problem with the concept, the had a problem with details of the contract between the state and CSX, the company that owned the tracks sun rail is going to operate on.
Charlie Crist may sell out his principles for his own gain, but his own gain has a remarkable way of usually being what’s right for Florida. Marco would sell out Florida before he sold out his principles, and in the end that is why I’m supporting Crist. He would sell his soul to do what’s right by Florida; indeed, he’s done it time and time again. Even Rubio has admitted that he would have taken the stimulus money if he was governor. He just conveniently didn’t have to make a tough decision. So what if Crist hugged Obama? I would expect any governor, regardless of political party, to welcome the President of the United States with open arms: its the office that should be respected. And well, Rubio was for high speed rail before he was against it. The next few months are going to show how much of a “conservative front” Marco Rubio is putting on. He simply doesn’t have the record to back it up.
Maybe I have just been really lucky but I have lived in Florida all my life, I drive to Miami and to Orlando regularly, and I have never been confronted with a traffic jam that has not been caused by a major accident. Don’t think we need a high speed rail.
“Calling projects like this preposterous rejects the great aspirations this country must have if it plans to lead the modern world.” No, calling projects like this preposterous is acknowledging that the government cannot properly run its normal and high speed rail lines and, thus, should not funnel money into a system when they have not been able to sustain their other practices. I’m 110% certain that a private company, that operates on risk and would have a greater profit-incentive, would run things more efficiently without leaving the tax-payer with the bill for their losses. Lead the modern world? I’m fairly certain innovative technology, and not getting from Tampa to Disney faster, will keep us on our A-game. If I read your sentence correctly, I should not make assertions about places I don’t live. I am a tax-paying American – I’m entitled to harbor opinions about where my money goes. Furthermore, my statement about its necessity was an inference from the times I have visited Florida, and from asking relatives – residents of Florida for longer than you have been alive – for their opinion. http://www.mapsofworld.com/usa/thematic-maps/usa-population-map.html this is a map of the US by city population. As you can see, the North East coast is the most dense. They have more money and people, so they are more capable of running a system that is extremely expensive and requires many riders. (But they cant!) Florida is not. The NE cities were also built up in the 19th century, they do not have the best highway infrastructure because of this. Ergo, sufficient rail is integral to shuffling people in and out of cities every day. Florida had the luxury of coming about after the car was popularized, which explains Om’s statement. Of course, population has boomed in the past twenty years, which I’m sure causes traffic at rush hour. Therefore Florida should develop commuter lines to combat their growing population and their commutes into major cities, as I indirectly suggested – if you read my piece properly. High-speed rail would alleviate that? Really? I’m pretty certain that you’re getting commuter rail and high-speed confused. Please clarify how that would happen.
I don’t care if Charlie Crist and Barack Obama hugged. Hence, I didn’t mention that. Crist supported the failure of a stimulus, “opposes offshore drilling” (like fellow RINO, Arnold), and is the paradigm of a big government Republican – the brand of politician that led to the party’s demise in 2006 and 2008. Most of Florida Republicans agree with me, in case my location disqualifies me from observing that too. Rubio, like Christie in NJ, is by no means perfect, but if he is held accountable to his promises, I can only hope he will keep his pledge to contract the spending in Florida. (That is in stark contrast to Crist.)
Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraction_(grammar).
That you can have an opinion about how your money is spent is perfectly fine. That you can make asseritions about a place you don’t live doesn’t necessarily follow from that. Because I have family in South Carolina doesn’t mean that calling them will give me the best opinion about anything going on in South Carolina. I was thoroughly involved in the process of winning Florida’s high speed rail money, and it makes sense for Florida. And again, it was a Republican initiative in the legislature mostly by people supporting Marco Rubio.
But you continue to make the larger right-wing conservative fallacy about the stimulus. Not using the money doesn’t mean it isn’t going to get spent. If the Democrats in Washington are going to spend a trillion dollars, then they’re going to spend a trillion dollars and thats the end of it. It would be irresponsible for any governor in this economic climate not to take stimulus money. I disgreed with the stimulus. But once it passed, I had to accept the reality of the situation and think about moving forward. The public transportation in the Northeast is already quite good. I travel there almost monthly and I’ve never had a problem getting wherever I needed to go on public transportation. So now let’s build up areas of the country whose transportation infrastructures are lacking. Why don’t you find a map of the fastest growing areas of the country. The circles around Florida and Nevada and places like that get quite a bit larger. Unlike the northeast, where people are leaving in droves, growing areas of the country are becoming increasingly unable to handle the growing population with the current infrastructure. Which explains why it took me 45 minutes to go three miles this morning in Miami, without being able to take any public transportation.
Of course Om’s never had a problem driving from Miami to Orlando. I do it all the time. That highway goes through the middle of nowhere. Try commuting between Tampa and Orlando. Without traffic it should take about 45 minutes. Not a bad commute for Florida. The possibilities of growing the Central Florida metropolitan area are endless and new industries in biotechnology and other “new” sciences have taken root around the two cities. Future accessbility to both cities is crucial to their future growth and economic health.
I’m not confusing high speed and commuter rail. Florida’s got plans for both, which is clear in pretty much every news report I’ve read. South Florida already has a commuter rail system, and Central Florida is getting one. Once the second leg of the high speed rail is completed from Orlando to Miami, the state will be in effect completely connected between the commuter and high speed rail systems.
And just because Marco Rubio’s been able to paint Charlie Crist as a “big-government” Republican doesn’t make him one. AGAIN, Marco’s come out and said that he would have taken the stimulus money if he was governor. Marco can make all the decisions he wants when he has no responsiblity to real people. And Charlie has cut spending in Florida, not increased it. Let’s get our facts straight. He might come off as an out of touch, calculating politician, but that doesn’t change his real record. Marco on the other hand….
On the Orlando to Tampa route, The NYT reported it would cost 1.25 billion and only reduce travel time from 90 to 60 minutes. Few Floridians would give up their cars to save 30 minutes.
I agree and think that almost every rational Floridian agrees that Crist was right to take the stimulus money. I am personally torn between the two. I dislike much about Crist, such as him taking a $430,000 “trade mission” to Europe or his insurance reforms that chased almost every respectable insurance company out of Florida, but I agree that he is a shrewd and rational politician that can serve his constituents well. Right now however, I think am too cut off from state news to make an accurate judgement on either Crist or Rubio.
“He would sell his soul to do what’s right by Florida”
I think “he would sell his soul to do what’s best for Charlie Crist” is a more appropriate description. Politicians like Charlie Crist give political pragmatism the bad name it’s come to receive. I wouldn’t vote for him if you put a gun to my head but I admire Rubio’s intellect and reject the notion that his conservative politics disable him from adopting a pragmatic approach to legislating. Crist, on the other hand, comes off as the supremely expedient champion of the status quo. I guess it’s to be expected. The closet has a way of creating political monsters like Charlie Crist.
By “the closet” are you referring to Crist’s supposed homosexual tendencies? Hmmm you might be onto something. But I think you pretty much sum up the dilemma of the average right-of-center voter in Florida. Should I vote for Rubio, the vibrant and principled idealist? Or Crist, the political pragmatist whose main ambition happens to be higher office? It’s a tough choice actually.
Politicians are ambitious. Is that something new? Rubio’s not the principled idealist everyone wants him to be. He’s a calculating poltician just like everyone else, and he’s quite brilliant at it. I’ve watched his eyes light up in person when people suggest he could be President someday. Charlie just doesn’t hide it. Which is more virtuous?