Reid’s Crazy Train

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has once again declined to allow a vote on the Federal Budget. Neither the budget that the President submitted to Congress nor the budget passed by the House nor any other budget will come up for a vote on the Senate floor. This is a major dereliction of duty; however, Reid is busy with more important things. From an editorial in the Washington Post:

The Federal Railroad Administration is considering lending $4.9 billion to a company called Desert Xpress, for the purpose of building a high-speed rail line to Las Vegas from Victorville, Calif., some 81 miles east of downtown Los Angeles.

The brainchild of several wealthy Las Vegas casino moguls, Desert Xpress enjoys the backing of Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and has already secured approvals from the Bureau of Land Management, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Fish and Wildlife Service, among other federal and state agencies. It is pursuing about $1.6 billion in private financing.

All that's left is the Federal Railroad Administration's okay on the loan. According to a recent Associated Press report, the $4.9 billion loan would be three times as much as all previous lending by the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program, a little-known pot of low-interest, long-term credit previously used mainly to upgrade existing lines.

The Desert Xpress would funnel gamblers from all over Southern California and shuttle them and their plastic at high speeds to the Vegas tables. You can well understand why the Fish and Wildlife Service is willing to shell out cash for that.

The WaPo asks the right questions:

If this train is such a good idea, business-wise, how come private banks aren't lining up to finance it? Previous high-speed rail projects around the world have been plagued by poor ridership, requiring government subsidies to continue operation. You might save travel time by taking the train instead of a car — as long as you're content to depend on the train's schedule.

The train's backers project an average round-trip L.A.-Vegas fare as low as $89 in 2017, with luxury amenities available. (We're skeptical; the one-way Acela Express fare from Baltimore to New York, a similar distance, is more than $200.) In any case, you can already fly round-trip for as little as $109, with no drive to Victorville. A bus service called My Party Ride will take you and two dozen friends for $99 each and include burgers and drinks. The train won't help Las Vegans visit Los Angeles, unless they want to ride to Victorville and rent a car for the rest of the trip.

As for jobs, any that the Vegas train creates will come at the expense of alternative uses of the money — upgrading the Northeast Corridor to accommodate higher-speed trains comes to mind — not to mention My Party Ride and other competing businesses, large and small.

Yes. Money is to be shuffled from sensible projects to line the pockets of high rollers who have sense enough not to risk their own money. The post does not speculate on what the real costs of the project would be. You can be all but certain that the five or six billion mentioned above will be no more than the ante. The ride, meanwhile, would cost only a little less than climbing on a plane at your local airport; except that it will cost a lot more, for reasons the WaPo suggests.

This is five kinds of crackers. I have written a number of posts about the ruinous fantasy known as high speed rail. The WaPo backs me up. Washington, like many governments around the world, is hopelessly addicted to this fantasy. It is rare nonetheless to see it so shamelessly combined with crony capitalism.

It's a good thing that Senator Reid is busy with things like this. Otherwise he might find time to address the fiscal future of these United States.

Comments

[duggersd]

Apparently you are not aware that Harry Reid WILL be having a budget debate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drvq2BqDt0I You need to keep yourself better informed.

[Bill Fleming]

There is a budget deal already in effect that was agreed on by both parties and signed into law: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/us/politics/01FISCAL.html?_r=3&hp=&pagewanted=all

It's a done deal. If the GOP in the house doesn't like it, they should come up with a better one. The fact that they didn't isn't Harry Reid's fault. We will now see the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, sequestration, an end to all the ridiculous spending on war, etc. etc. etc. I repeat, that deal has already been cut. Maybe you and DuggerSD missed it, KB?

I don't have much of an opinion of the train deal. It reminds me of the deal Costner was working on to get people from the Rapid City airport to his big new resort in Deadwood.

[Ken Blanchard]

bill: you have no clue what you are talking about. The article you cite is a year old and refers to the continuous series of stop gap deals that Congress is passing in lieu of a budget. The Senate has not passed a budget in over 1,000 days.

[Bill Fleming]

Correct, they passed a law instead. That's even better.

[Bill Fleming]

KB, instead of coming to grips with reality, your party prefers to whine about process. It's becoming painfully transparent as to who is really responsible for the lack of fiscal discipline. The LAST thing we need to do it put you guys back in charge.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/changes_deficit.jpg

[Bill Fleming]

p.s. KB, I notice you've backed off on publishing the poll results lately. What's up with that?
http://pollingreport.com/obama_job1.htm

[Ken Blanchard]

Bill: Yes, I suppose that one should not bother with silly thinks like actually passing a budget as the Budget Act requires. The Senate hasn't passed a budget in almost three years. Do you really think it is whining to point that out? Not a single Democrat has voted for the President's budget. Yes, I do think we know who is responsible for ignoring reality.

And yes, the President's approval ratings have been up lately. I also have blogged yet about the latest jobs report.

[Bill Fleming]

Wes, I think it is whining to point that out. There is a recession and recovery going on. And there have been a series of budget extensions passed to navigate through it. With the congress in gridlock, that's all that can be done, and even that only if the parties put guns to each others heads. Your whining about a budget just sounds silly to me. As if you haven't been following what's really going on.

[Bill Fleming]

"Yes" not "Wes" (good lord, Fleming...)

[duggersd]

Bill, as is usually the case, the way you argue a case is to change the meaning of what is being done. The Senate has not passed a budget. Even that ditz Debbie Wasserman Schulz agrees with the definition normal people use. Instead you use a daffynition so you can claim there is a budget. It does not exist and unless Schulz is wrong, it will not exist because the Reid will not let the Senate vote on one. You and the rest of the liberals appear to prefer to not have to display gonads and actually allow a vote. If they did have the gonads in the Senate, President Obama's budget proposal would get an up or down vote. At least the Republicans actually voted on one in the House. The Democrats in the Senate have adopted Baraaak Baraaak Baraak Obama as a standard bearer.

[Bill Fleming]

DuggerSD, let's leave my nads out of this. I'm saying temporary budgets and laws have been passed to get us through a crisis and that given the political circumstances, that's the best that both parties could come up with. And further, to lay blame on the Democrats and Obama for this political condition is delusional. So grab those nads and take your meds, buddy.
And close the door. Nobody wants to watch you when you do that.

[Ken Blanchard]

Bill: how does it help the economic situation to refuse to pass a budget? The only situation you are interested in is the fate of the Democrats next november and that is what this is about. The Democrats cannot bring themselves to cut spending in any significant way. They are tooth and nail opposed to reforming entitlements in any significant way. Nor can they admit the consequences of their position. That is why the Senate refuses to pass a budget. It cannot possibility face reality.

You are, in fact, utterly opposed to fiscal responsibility. I repeat: we know exactly who is responsible. It is the party that will not come to the table.

[duggersd]

Bill, I did not misplace your "nads". Face it. Reid refuses to bring a budget to the floor because he is AFRAID to. He has not had a budget for three years. The Republicans have offered one. President Obama has offered one. Both have been voted in the House. Instead of defending the defenseless, how about advocating the Senate does its job?

[Bill Fleming]

Not so, Ken. Both you and duggerSD know full well the Senate can't do its job because of the filibuster rule.
But hey, if you want to keep jerking yourselves and each other off over it, by all means, don't let me stop you. ;^)

[Ken Blanchard]

Bill: you have transformed yourself into an ignoramus. You can't seem to tell the difference between a resolution to raise the budget ceiling and a vote to pass a budget. You think the latter, one of the most fundamental responsibilities of government, is a silly distraction. Now you try to excuse the Senate Democrats' failure to produce a budget by blaming it on the filibuster. Apparently you are unaware that budget bills cannot be filibustered and that, even if they could, the Republicans would love to vote on the President's budget. Were the Republicans for some strange reason prepared to filibuster, the Democrats would bring a budget to a vote in a minute. Then they could blame Senate inaction on the other party. If Dugger and I are "jerking off" as you put it, at least we have a grasp of something.

Maybe its the full moon and maybe its mental strain of defending the indefensible, but I hope that the old Bill bill resurfaces soon.

[Bill Fleming]

Not referring to the Budget, KB, just in general. The budget is meaningless. That's why it isn't filibustered and routinely ignored. My point is that there is are real laws in effect mandating sequestration and the vaporization of the Bush tax cuts that need to be dealt with via new laws. And your party is in no mood to bargain it seems.

Wringing your hands over a budget that doesn't mean any thing just seems goofy. But given the mindset of your GOP congressional leaders, it's probably the best thing you can come up with.

All that of course is not to deny that I am an ignoramous.

But then, when has that ever stopped me?