FL governor's rejection, & some other comments.

Now that the FL governor has wrongheadedly chosen to reject the funds for his states' high speed rail project, this blogger thinks that it may have been smarter to allocate the $ 8 billion to Amtrak and other established commuter rail agencies with the conditions that:

1. the funds are to be used for infrastructure, and

2. the projects selected had the engineering & regulatory work ( EIS, et al. ) completed prior to consideration for the award. The approved projects were to have been even more ready to go, and not necessarily a "green field," " 'Cold Iron,' " absolute start. Certainly some agencies out there have some projects that are just waiting for the funds, ready to get underway (kind of like WI, except for the fact that the current governor rejected those funds, too).

The funds could have been allocated according to the relative size of the respective rail agencies. Amtrak would have received about $ 4 billion, because of the sheer size and scope of the NRPC's operations.

Projects to avoid would include, but are not limited to, (for example) HSR through Kansas, connecting to Ft. Worth.

Also, for the future, we must distinguish between Improved Intercity, or Incrementally Improved existing Service, and high speed rail. I would suggest re-defining the US definition of HSR to that of a maximum speed of at least 125 mph. We also must make sure that any future projects increase the average speed, to be at least as fast as driving -- because many passengers out there will automatically compare the travel time aboard train to the time spent driving. When incremental service improvements are labeled as "high speed rail," most members of the general public see through this, and it gives the opponents more ammunition to oppose improvements in rail service overall.

I also think the President damaged his high speed rail efforts by concentrating a lot on health care, and other aspects of the 2009 "Stimulus" bill, when he should have directed his political capital towards renewing the Transportation Bills. He could have included and sort of improved rail service in any proposed Transportation bills.

Other politicians consumed political capital and time by calling jobs efforts "shovel-ready," when there were no such things. This blogger also fears that, by making rail service improvements such a high profile item in his administration, the President has turned them into targets for the opposition. This will serve to energize rail opponents to spread even more of their misstatements, misattributions, and falsehoods.

I would give the recent efforts an "A" for intent, but a "D," possibly even a failing, grade for execution.