LA Times Covers For Calif’s High-Speed Train Debacle

On Oct. 29, the Los Angeles Times published its version of what’s wrong with plans for a high-speed rail system from Northern to Southern California. Was the story about rising cost estimates and unrealistically high ridership estimates?

Of course it wasn’t! This is the Los Angeles Times, which is not devoted to facts, but rather its higher goal of indoctrinating the public in the proper way of thinking. That ideology proclaims big government (in the hands of the left) is good, raising taxes is good, and corporations and conservatives are bad for opposing the first two.

The LA Times story was about how a big bad company, Union Pacific was attacking the bullet train project, already under fire from a giant corporate farm. If you didn’t know Union Pacific was bad, the LA Times writers clue you in by mentioning that the evil Dick Cheney once served on its board — more than 11 years ago.

The story includes the requisite source stating the LAT’s party line:

“Richard Tolmach, co-founder of the California Rail Foundation, called Union Pacific “dangerous” in its influence. The company’s objections are coming “after they warned the California High Speed Rail Authority not to make any plans involving their right of way,” he said. “Politically, they could be a problem for members of Congress from the Central Valley who support the project.”

By focusing on the big bad company that once had Darth Cheney on its board, the reporters don’t have to get into the real reasons the high-speed rail plan is on the rocks, which I alluded to at the beginning. There’s not nearly enough money to build the train, the expected private sector involvement hasn’t materialized, and the projections of profit are fanciful.

California voters approved spending $1 billion $10 billion (typo fixed- thank commenter themarshallplan) on the train in a 2008 bond measure, but private investment was always supposed to supply the bulk of the money. And the private sector hasn’t done so.

The reporters also minimized the cost by clinging to an outdated official estimate that the system would cost a mere $43 billion. They ignored more recent estimates that the cost could be $60 billion or more. From the Aug. 9 San Jose Mercury News:

For the second time since voters approved California’s massive bullet train project, the state on Tuesday raised the total price tag for the first stretch by several billion dollars — and now the cost for the entire rail line is on pace to skyrocket to an eye-popping $60 billion to $80 billion or even more.

Since the LA Times story was published on Oct. 29, one would think its crack journalists would have had time to work the new estimate into their story. But that would hurt the story’s premise that it’s evil corporations and not skyrocketing costs that endanger the project.

As you probably know, we have a new estimate of the cost, $98.5 billion. Let’s call it $100 billion –the cost will certainly rise to that level and beyond. The cost of  larger public works projects always keeps escalating.  If we go ahead with this increasingly obvious folly, we could end up like these folks.

The Los Angeles Times has to report the new number, but its reporters concealed the main reasons. The LA Times party line emphasizes the extra cost of delaying the project. But at least it dropped the ridiculous facade that big bad business was the project’s main obstacle.

Buried in the LAT story is a reference to the higher cost the Mercury News and other outlets reported:

 In August, the authority released two planning documents that signaled even higher costs. The cost of building only the first two segments in the Central Valley had jumped in price by as much as 100%, not including future inflation.

Note that this passage doesn’t actually give any numbers, although they were available. A casual reader could be led to believe that most of the higher cost is due to extending the project’s completion date, not to cost overruns.

Scare up some politically convenient demons, rely on old estimates as long as possible and bury the real reason for the cost increase. This is not just mere bad journalism. This is classic LA Times spin, all the way. And it’s yet another reason to distrust the LA Times on anything involving politics.

Continuing the LAT spin, a new story now states the obvious: The project’s high cost is its main obstacle. But the headline still tries to minimize the sticker shock: it rounds down the $98.5 billion cost to $98 billion, instead of rounding up starting at .5, as is customary. Now if the project were something the LA Times opposed . . .

The story contains another example of a half-truth: It states that the bullet train is supposed to go 220 miles per hour, and that the cost will be lowered by using existing tracks part of the way. But it fails to note that on the existing tracks the train won’t be able to reach its maximum speed.

I like trains, and use then when practical. And a statewide high-speed rail network that worked as advertised would be very attractive to me. But California, the Empty-Pockets State, with overcrowded prisons, broke cities and school systems, doesn’t have anywhere near $100 billion for this project.

All the fanciful talk of reviving the state’s economy, building up its infrastructure to become more competitive, amounts to nothing if the project isn’t paid for. The private sector isn’t interested in putting in the money needed because it doesn’t see profits. And the near-bankrupt  public sector doesn’t have the money.

For those who think the best way of getting out of a debt-caused economic slowdown is to spend even more money we don’t have, I offer you China’s ghost cities no one can afford to live in. For $100 billion, California would build ghost trains no one can afford to ride in.

Let’s tear up the tracks on this boondoggle.

—————————————————————————–

 

(DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in this article are mine and not necessarily those of my employer, the North County Times).