High-speed Rail

[Geee]

Human Events:



Where can the new Congress start cutting spending? Here's one obvious answer: high-speed rail. The Obama administration is sending billions of stimulus dollars around the country for rail projects that make no sense and that, if they are ever built, will be a drag on taxpayers indefinitely.

When incoming Govs. Scott Walker of Wisconsin and John Kasich of Ohio cancelled high-speed rail projects, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood refused to let them spend the dollars on other forms of transportation and sent the funds instead to California and other states.

Walker argued that Wisconsin didn't need $810 billion for a 78-mile line between Madison and Milwaukee because there's already a transportation artery -- Interstate 94 -- that enables people to get from one city to the other in a little more than an hour (I once drove that route to have dinner in Milwaukee).


Kasich's rationale? "They tried to give us $400 million to build a high-speed train that goes 39 miles an hour." Train boosters countered that its top speed was 79 miles per hour -- about the same as many drivers on Interstate 71.

High-speed rail may sound like a good idea. It works, and reportedly even makes a profit, in Japan and France. If they can do it, why can't we?

[AceRimmer]

When my sister married my b-i-l, she moved to Daytona, which is a 13 hour drive from where I live. I rode with her to help unload all the stuff and keep her awake after a very long day while b-i-l drove the moving truck behind us.

 

On the way home, I took Amtrak for the first and last time ever. It takes 13 hours, including gas and restroom stops to take I-95 and I-10 to get to my sister's home driving. It took 28 hours for Amtrak to do the same thing...