thats OK, let them keep the money

just reduce further federal transfer payments by a similar amount with 1% compounded interest weekly

Sounds like these folks and AOC went to the same school of finance and learning....

It's a shame we can't call Tony Soprano and get Furio to go out there and 'talk to them'.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:

quote:

Bakersfield to Merced

Even this truncated section has not been built yet, let alone in operation, correct?

There's a number of build sites, pilings have been driven and elevated sections built, however there's no one section that is complete, let alone any rail has been laid.
The below video shows a couple of the sites located at the edge of Fresno running along highway-99

quote:

Originally posted by VBVAGUY:
If I were Trump or Trump's AG, I would give California a choice, give it all back, or we can investigate and if found in favor of the Federal Government, California will pay the full amount plus interest. Please choose. God Bless !!!

Seems to me that they grossly violated a lot of conditions, requirements.

Demanding they pay any of the money back would be a waste of energy. The state is some 2 TRILLION dollars in debt, (that we know of).

I agree the feds should DEMAND a total refund because, it seems to me, that they never actually did a damned thing except waste the money.

"No, you misunderstood us. We said it would be a high Speed Drain. For your money. Sucks it right down! We've got that part working just fine."

Could you imagine if moonbeam had invested in desalination plants up and down the coast? He'd have been a hero for generations and the dam at Hecht-Hetchy could've been removed.

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Could you imagine if moonbeam had invested in desalination plants up and down the coast? He'd have been a hero for generations and the dam at Hecht-Hetchy could've been removed.

Yeah but moonbeam ain't that bright...or thoughtful towards the citizenry...or thinking that far ahead.

Sounds like the basis for an Irwin Allen disaster movie!

Yes, it would be fascinating.

quote:

Originally posted by SigJacket:

quote:

Originally posted by Muddflap:
There's a federal judge in Hawaii that will back up California. After all, they have to get that high speed rail going before all the airplanes are banned or Hawaii is screwed.

I’m not gonna lie, a high speed rail line in a clear underwater tunnel to Hawaii would be a fascinating view.

I remember, a few years ago, when Gov. Rick Scott of Florida, turned down Federal funds for high speed rail project in Florida. He saw the boondogle coming. His critics could not believe, and cited the great idea in CA as an example.

Hmmm

It's official...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/t...eed-rail-11558034243

Trump Administration Revokes $929 Million for California High-Speed Rail
Transportation Department follows through on threat after state scaled back plans for troubled project

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
It's official...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/t...eed-rail-11558034243

Trump Administration Revokes $929 Million for California High-Speed Rail
Transportation Department follows through on threat after state scaled back plans for troubled project

Good!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
It's official...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/t...eed-rail-11558034243

Trump Administration Revokes $929 Million for California High-Speed Rail
Transportation Department follows through on threat after state scaled back plans for troubled project

Will you please paste the text of that link? The site won't let me read the article.

https://www.stripes.com/news/u...ail-project-1.581334

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Thursday followed through with its plan to pull more than $900 million in federal funds from California's beleaguered high-speed rail project.

The U.S. Department of Transportation said California officials "failed to make reasonable progress" and had not met federal requirements for the project. But the decision is also consistent with President Donald Trump's penchant for sparring with leaders of the liberal-leaning state.

After Gov. Gavin Newsom, D, in February proposed reducing the scope of the rail project, Trump tweeted that the project was a "green disaster" that "wasted many billions of dollars."

"They owe the Federal Government three and a half-billion dollars," Trump tweeted.

In addition to revoking the federal government's agreement to contribute $929 million to the project, the administration on Thursday said it "continues to consider all options regarding the return of $2.5 billion" in stimulus funds.

California officials have argued that Trump's move to pull federal funding from the project was payback for the state's opposition to Trump's promised border wall.

In February, Trump tweeted: "California, the state that has wasted billions of dollars on their out of control Fast Train, with no hope of completion, seems in charge" of efforts by a number of states to oppose the wall.

On Thursday, Newsom called the Trump administration's final decision an "illegal and a direct assault on California" and the thousands of workers building the project.

"Just as we have seen from the Trump Administration's attacks on our clean air standards, our immigrant communities and in countless other areas, the Trump Administration is trying to exact political retribution on our state," Newsom said in a statement. "This is California's money, appropriated by Congress, and we will vigorously defend it in court."

In a March 4 letter, Brian Kelly, chief executive of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, had called on the Trump administration to rethink its plan to cancel the more than $900 million, saying the "clawback" of federal funds "would be disastrous policy."

"It's hard to imagine how your agency — or the taxpayers — might benefit from partially constructed assets sitting stranded in the Central Valley of California . . . one of the nation's most economically distressed regions," Kelly wrote. "This infrastructure legacy would forever be a travesty."

Kelly said that far from abandoning a "transformative" vision, Newsom was seeking "a pragmatic approach to using the funding now committed to this project to get high-speed trains on the ground in California as soon as possible." That means first finishing "an early high-speed rail link" between Merced and Bakersfield in the central valley, continuing regional projects in the north and south of the state, and securing environmental clearances for "segments from San Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim," Kelly said.

But on Thursday, a statement from the Federal Railroad Administration said "California has abandoned its original vision of a high-speed passenger rail service connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles, which was essential to its applications for" federal grant funding.

In a letter to California officials, FRA Administrator Ronald Batory wrote that the state had originally proposed an "800-mile, statewide system" with speeds up to 220 miles per hour "connecting the Bay Area, the Central Valley, Sacramento, and Southern California."

Batory said the first phase, as described by California rail officials when they applied for federal funds, was to involve "the construction of approximately 520 miles between San Francisco and Anaheim, connecting two metropolitan regions and more than 25 million people."

Now, it would be between Merced and Bakersfield.

That "dramatically reduced scope . . . is simply not consistent" with what California originally promised, Batory said.

The Trump administration has sent mixed messages on the value of high speed rail, and of rail generally.

In the first weeks of his administration, echoing campaign rhetoric about plans for far-reaching infrastructure spending, Trump seemed to bemoan the fact that America lacked high-speed rail lines.

At a White House meeting with aviation industry executives, Trump noted that China and Japan "have fast trains all over the place. We don't have one. I don't want to compete with your business — but we don't have one fast train."

But Trump's budget proposals have called for cutting funds for rail and transit projects as well as federal backing for Amtrak.

You must subscribe to the WSJ to read the rest of the story.

The original idea was good, linking two large metro areas commonly travelled by car or plan, with a fast train.
A medium fast train would have been excellent, and very popular. Haven driven that route many times, I would gladly take the train for most trips.

However it appears they took the money, put it into the general fund, then offered a tiny rail line between two farm cities in the middle of nowhere. Sort of like paying for a Mercedes and receiving a Yugo.

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
It's official...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/t...eed-rail-11558034243

Trump Administration Revokes $929 Million for California High-Speed Rail
Transportation Department follows through on threat after state scaled back plans for troubled project

Good!!!!

Well, partly good.

quote:

Mr. Batory, in his letter Thursday, said his agency planned to open up the $928.6 million it was stripping from the California project to bids for funding other intercity rail projects around the country.

Now, if he'd said he was putting the money toward the wall.....

IMO, the only way high-speed rail will work in this country is for it to be built as a monorail with above-ground rails supported on pillars built down the center of Interstate highways. That way the right-of-way is already paid for and conflicts with vehicular travel is eliminated. It probably would cut costs in half. And stations would have to be at least 100 miles apart. It would compete with air travel, not road travel.

flashguy

In typical libtard fashion, the leftists point the finger of blame in every direction but the right one. They pissed away billions of our tax dollars on a scam they never intended to finish.

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
IMO, the only way high-speed rail will work in this country is for it to be built as a monorail with above-ground rails supported on pillars built down the center of Interstate highways. That way the right-of-way is already paid for and conflicts with vehicular travel is eliminated. It probably would cut costs in half. And stations would have to be at least 100 miles apart. It would compete with air travel, not road travel.

flashguy

Like what they are working on in Hawaii. But they are have problems not with concept but with project planning and costs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honolulu_Rail_Transit