Congressman Jeff Denham plays a critical role in Congress, with oversight of the California high-speed rail project, as he points out in this opinion piece. Being a newly elected Congressman, Denham is also among the more Conservative members and a deficit hawk. Furthermore, he has been an outspoken critic of the HSR project in California due to its pervasive and persistent mismanagement.
With all these credentials, I would have thought that he is not only totally opposed to the California rail project, but he also would consider the entire Obama high-speed rail program ill conceived and highly eligible for termination. And say so.
It turns out that this is not entirely the case. At the time of the passage of the bond issue, Denham may not have known all the background facts behind the rail authority's TV-like advertising language ("Builds Stronger Bodies Twelve Ways!"). So, he says here:
". . . the HSR seemed like a plausible idea as presented to voters. . ." It wasn't. But, that was then.
Subsequently, he discovered how the voters were presented with a highly mis-leading bond issue ballot. They were told total cost = $33 billion. Ticket costs = $55. Annual passengers = 117 million. None of that is now true. Although the flagrant fallacies were pointed out by a few of us well before the elections, that went unheard. Fortunately, Congressman Denham now gets it.
However, Denham says, "We want a plan that includes adequate cost controls, the transparency valley farmers deserve and the oversight taxpayers deserve." This sounds like the same rhetoric we've been hearing from Democratic State Senator Joe Simitian for two years or more. Do it right, he and Senator Lowenthal have been saying. And, that's what Jeff Deham also seems to be believe.
But, it's not as simple as that. Not satisfied with the rail authorities strategies and plans, nor their performance promises, Denham is co-sponsor of new legislation that will take funding out of the California HSR package, and put it into highway construction.
In the meantime, state leaders should have the option to use funds already allocated to California on a project that will put people to work immediately. At a time of record unemployment in the valley, we need options. This is why I signed on to the San Joaquin Valley Transportation Enhancement Act of 2011 (H.R. 761).
First, that seems implausible. Didn't Ray LaHood deprive Wisconsin and Florida of that option? No HSR in their states; no HSR dollars for any other purpose. The funds earmarked for the CHSRA are from a dedicated ARRA stimulus package of $8 billion, of which California was awarded over $2 billion. Those funds aren't fungible; they can't just be transferred from one pair of pants - rail, to another - highways.
Therefore, this proposed legislation, HSR761 will take those already awarded funds and shift them to expanding highway 99, which also runs through the Central Valley. I doubt if that legislation will get all the way through the pipeline.
Although the justification is to do what the ARRA stimulus funds are intended for -- immediate employment -- there's more to this story and I don't know what that is. It's most likely that this is an effort to save those earmarked dollars for Denham's district, like pork, and create some government construction jobs, and at the same time, inhibit HSR from coming in the Valley and doing so much harm.
I don't know whether highway #99 needs expansion. Perhaps it does. All this should be looked at through an overview perspective before, not after vast sums are committed inappropriately. There is yet no state-wide context, strategy or policy for the entire state's transportation needs into the future.
While a jobs bill may indeed be a good idea, does not mean that any job will do, regardless of the value/benefits of a single project. Is it the best use of those dollars? We don't know.
We are now watching most carefully what goes on in Congress regarding high-speed rail. Mr. Denham has a major role to play and I hope that it's not frittered away with moving chess men around the board merely for the sake of the money.
Yet, although a Republican determined to reduce the national deficit, he does not want to relinquish the funds intended for the Central Valley. That may be one move too many on the political chess board.
====================================
Tuesday, Mar. 15, 2011
Create jobs now or sit on funds for derailed vision
By Jeff Denham
Congressman Jeff Denham, R-Atwater
Over the years, many proposals have been offered to bring High Speed Rail (HSR) to California. As a state senator, I supported the concept of HSR in California, and still do now, as a congressman, but since its inception, the plan has been severely mismanaged and proven to be another example of runaway government spending with no results.
In 2008, voters were presented with a $33 billion plan reaching all major population centers in California that would operate without a subsidy, follow existing transportation corridors and create thousands of jobs.
Voters agreed and authorized $9.95 billion in bonds to fund a third of the plan. The other two-thirds would come from the federal government and private investors.
While expensive, the HSR seemed like a plausible idea as presented to voters, filled with notions of job creation, air pollution reduction, relief from traffic congestion, and a route backed by community support not political maneuvering.
Unfortunately, the current plan has been developed behind closed doors, with costs doubling to $65 billion, according to independent experts; missed deadlines, confusion and no clear blueprint other than glossy maps with little specificity.
The California High Speed Rail Authority originally projected ridership of 96.5 million intercity riders by 2030. Independent groups now estimate 31.1 million intercity riders by 2030 - nearly 60 percent below what was presented to voters. Due to uncertainty over costs and ridership forecasts, private equity firms say they will not invest without a revenue guarantee. Without securing private investment, the HSR project in California is not feasible.
I am working with the chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to provide aggressive oversight of California's HSR plan.
We want a plan that includes adequate cost controls, the transparency valley farmers deserve and the oversight taxpayers deserve. If necessary, I will request hearings on the project in Washington, D.C., and the valley.
In the meantime, state leaders should have the option to use funds already allocated to California on a project that will put people to work immediately. At a time of record unemployment in the valley, we need options. This is why I signed on to the San Joaquin Valley Transportation Enhancement Act of 2011 (H.R. 761).
It allows California to redirect HSR funding to construct long overdue and urgently needed roadway improvements along Highway 99. This would provide sufficient funding to establish a six-lane freeway from Sacramento to Bakersfield while vastly improving the heavily congested corridor's safety and improving air quality. Unlike HSR, which has at least two years before one shovel of dirt would be turned, the improvements to Highway 99 are shovel ready and would put people back to work immediately.
With increased congressional oversight, my hope is that HSR is in California's future, but right now, no plan has been presented that pencils out. Until a feasible plan with concrete funding is created, California leaders should have the choice to allocate the funds to Highway 99 and get people back to work immediately.
Denham, a Republican who lives in Atwater, represents the 19th Congressional District.
