Tech | April 16, 2009 | 95 comments

Obama Unveils High-Speed Rail Plan

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/us/politics/17train.html

Image
digitrash
President Obama today put federal support behind a national high-speed rail plan than has been years in the making. Initial funding of $8 billion was included for high-speed rail projects in his stimulus package — to be spent over two years — and an additional $1 billion a year is being budgeted over the next five years.

According to the New York Times, the stimulus money has yet to be allocated to specific projects, but the key projects identified so far include:

- a northern New England line;
- an Empire line running east to west in New York State;
- a Keystone corridor running laterally through Pennsylvania;
- a southeast network connecting the District of Columbia to Florida and the Gulf Coast;
- a Gulf Coast line extending from eastern Texas to western Alabama;
- a corridor in central and southern Florida;
- a Texas-to-Oklahoma line;
- a California corridor from San Francisco to Los Angeles (already approved by CA voters)
- and a corridor in the Pacific Northwest.
  1. groups:
    Community,   Tech,   Learn,   Picked for Current Tonight,   2 more
  2. tags:
    News,  Tech,  Current Radio News,  infrastructure,  8 more
  3.     
    |

95 comments // Obama Unveils High-Speed Rail Plan

  • 23485768934756
  • redking555
    • 0
      redking555  

    • yeah this sure as shit is never happening in my lifetime

      I'll be damn surprised to see one foot of rail laid out before i turn 65 in 52 years

    • 3 years ago
  • mandroid
    • 0
      mandroid  

    • this is great idea. It looks like there are huge holes in the lines though how about Sac to Eugene and connect the whole west coast?

    • 3 years ago
  • dreamsenvoy
  • RCS
    • 0
      RCS  

    • Great post, DigiTrash. These high-speed rail lines are a terrific idea; there just needs to be more money spent on them than is being appropriated here.

    • 3 years ago
  • drewsuf721
    • 0
      drewsuf721  

    • I'm feeling the love for east coast. Check it, we got regional through Rhisland, Boston, Hartford, New York, even can bring me up to Auburn, ME (half hour from my island). I'm getting the full membership.

    • 3 years ago
  • crowgirl
    • 0
      crowgirl  
    • Image

    • I think this is a great idea but we need to fix Amtrak first. I linked to a map of their routes. The article doesn't show existing Amtrak routes at all, which it should show in a different color. High-speed rail obviously is going to take a while to build, and doesn't go everywhere. Amtrak is pretty broken right now, but at least there is some infrastructure in place.

    • 3 years ago
  • rocktilirot
  • mykuh
    • 0
      mykuh  

    • I wish this went from Nashville to Anywhere. That would rock. Maybe a route from Nashville will be in the works later. But I am all for a rail. It would seriously rock my socks off.

    • 3 years ago
  • asherp
    • 0
      asherp  

    • I'm really happy about this. I hope that the light rail system proposed is just the beginning.

      I want to see super fast trains going underground in tunnels.

      If you cut through the curvature of the earth, and went at 400mph, You could get from NYC to LA in 3 hours.

    • 3 years ago
  • Get_Cape
  • shanklinmike
    • 0
      shanklinmike  
    • Image

    • If this project were actually efficient, that market would've already picked it up by now. This will be oversubsidized and the people will have no clue the true costs in the end. It's just another big government/big business lobbyist group pushing for more money and more of your freedoms through oligopolization. How people can support anti-minority minimum wage laws, continue debt slavery for future generations, and continually believe the WWF drama bureaucrats we call politicians is simply mind boggling. This project needs to be done by entrepreneurs, not bureaucrats! If it is truly efficient, the market will do this. In the end this will be about as efficient as Amtrak, which has led to more draining of our private sector than most people realize. The Amtrak Reform Council is a joke and so are almost all other bureaucratic positions. Politics needs to be reduced, not increased! It's time people stand up for their grandchildren's liberties instead of becoming a debt slave to bureaucrats and politicians that care more about their careers than you. The republicans and democrats are both guilty and the republicans have nothing to do with free market capitalism. They are just as bad spenders as the rest of them, even worse actually!

    • 3 years ago
  • ASBausch
  • bekah_1984
    • 0
      bekah_1984  

    • This is actually something Obama is doing that is very necessary. We are so far behind in transportation compared to other countries. Trains have become obsolete for personal travel, but high speed magnetic or electric railways are what we have needed badly in this country for a while now. It would make traveling from Northern Ohio to Atlanta for family visits so much easier and less time consuming.

    • 3 years ago
  • shanklinmike
    • 0
      shanklinmike  

    • Another pet project that will be oversubsidized while hiding the costs from the taxpayers and draining the productive part of the economy. It is a shame that people don't understand how monopolies are a bad thing. Just another special interest/lobbyist big corporate welfare project....but what did you expect....for the republicans and democrats that are now in power? They are all out for their own careers, their families come before yours! Had we had liberty economics hardly none of our problems that we have today would exist!

    • 3 years ago
  • banditalamode
  • cztheday
    • 0
      cztheday  

    • There is no way of knowing, of course, what transportation will look like in a hundred years, but at least from the perspective of 2009 I can't imagine how this infrastructure investment could be perceived as a bad investment. Barring some kind of national tragedy (nuclear war or accident, pandemic, natural disaster, etc), the population in just about all of these areas will continue to grow. The system will undoubtedly need upgrades -- just like the highway system and the air transportation system (e.g, larger and better equipped airports and runways) -- and hopefully the energy use will become increasingly efficient as technology evolves. But even the introduction of new modes of transportation are unlikely to completely SUPPLANT this rail system. Someday, it may be relegated to providing transportation to the budget-minded. But they need to get from place-to-place too.

      We found out on 9/11 just how important it is to have redundant transportation systems. I was attending a conference about 1200 miles from home that morning. My flight home had been cancelled and there were no more cars to rent. Not only would rail have been fine -- it is also one of the most pleasant ways to travel. I would rather spend a full day relaxing and working on a train than three hours in one of those "elevators with wings" that charge you $2,000 for the privilege of cramming you between two sumo wrestlers and losing your luggage every third flight.

      Oh, and as to the guy who commented that Obama is only good at giving speeches and giving away money, I would add at least ONE more quality. He is good at beating the holy dog shit out of Republicans in state and national elections. Admittedly, that skill is becominging increasingly common, but he is part of the reason for that as well...

    • 3 years ago
  • banditalamode
  • islek
    • 0
      islek  

    • Yes yes yes yes YES! I've been hoping for this for a long time. An electric-powered light rail system will be much less harmful to the environment as well... as long as we stop powering electricity with coal.

    • 3 years ago
  • Wesnology61
  • manny0409
  • Lonzo
    • 0
      Lonzo  

    • Seriously!!! Why is everyone praising this waste of taxpayer money?? This is probably the dumbest use of stimulus money. Why don't they use the money to help the Airline Infrastructure which is miles ahead of any kind of Train system. Or... spend the money on shoring up our Highway system. We are not Europe and our are Infrastructure is not anything like theirs. Personally, I would rather spend 250 $$ to fly from Chicago to Miami in 3 hours then pay (who knows how much.. 500 $$) to take a train that would take 3 times as long.

    • 3 years ago
  • AngloZombie
  • jrich117
    • 0
      jrich117  

    • I've got to agree that this is a great idea. Another of mass transportation would be great for reducing emissions. I imagine that it will be an electric system, which would also be great. I do however agree with someone else's statement that it would be outdated within the next hundred years, but that's no reason not to proceed. I mean, if the pioneers of aviation had that kind of outlook, where would we be today with aircraft?
      I also do not understand why there cannot be a few coast-to-coast lines. I think there would be a lot of interest in that from consumers wanting to see the country without having to make the long drive.

    • 3 years ago
  • sidedish
  • Robroy1
  • jdabbott51
    • 0
      jdabbott51  

    • Hey why aren't they going through New Mexico? Oh wait! That's right! My state is so cool we just built our own railway are currently working with Colorado to make connections. Oh wait, did we just repeal the death penalty too?

    • 3 years ago
  • ddhboy
    • 0
      ddhboy  

    • Great, but it seems kind of gimp that there isn't a connection between Jacksonville and Orlando. Like If I can take a single train all the way down to Floridia, why do I have to get off and travel a few miles to get on another train in Orlando to Miami.

      I'm sure a bunch of these questions will be raised in congress though and cause it to be held up for years, eventually including a few waterparks

    • 3 years ago
  • Eat_Disco
    • 0
      Eat_Disco  

    • Tans-continental railroad take 2. Ha! I love this new-new deal thing he's got going. I only hope we can leave out the WWII part...

    • 3 years ago
  • samnelson
    • 0
      samnelson  

    • this is really exciting, and a great thing to throw our shiny new stimulus fakemoney at.
      I just wish it went thru denver, across the whole country. i wanna see one 2,000 miles long.
      oh well, who is john galt?

    • 3 years ago
  • murphinador
    • 0
      murphinador  

    • we should have been focusing on trains a long time ago. This is such great news, finally a little progress. Plus Little Rock's included!! HELL YAH....but it's only to Texas.....Why no southern trans-continental?

    • 3 years ago
  • Humdrum
    • 0
      Humdrum  

    • Bout f-ing time. This is exactly where long-distance, cross-country travel belongs - on the train tracks. Not in private motor vehicles.

      Also, it'd be sooooo bad ass to just drive from Austin to Houston, and then take a train from Houston all the way home to Atlanta (that is how that map works, no?).
      Going from Atlanta straight up to New York would be beyond phat as well. It'll be a great day when we have a full on east-west, north-south connection via train in this country, if you ask me.

    • 3 years ago
  • ScorpioGee
    • 0
      ScorpioGee  
    • Humdrum:

      I know the plans is in the infancy stage...

      But I would like to see speed rail in Charleston, SC. Do you know how long it takes for me to visit family down there. Almost a day in a half if we're not huffing it. And taking a plane is out of the question. It's nearly 800 bucks round way per person. Not including tax. :(

      But YAY on speedrail! Now only if the NJ transit could get some of that speedrail/stimulus money.

    • 3 years ago
  • fonzo
  • Anacrusis
  • avicularia
  • TheEmpireGuy
  • JimboTheHippo
  • TheEmpireGuy
    • 0
      TheEmpireGuy  
    • TheEmpireGuy:

      Note the pack of railroad tracks in the midst of the Superhighway picture above.

      This railroad won't just be used for transport of persons, but for trade as well. Considering that a high speed railroad would be more efficiency for trade between states and to countries on our borders.

      You see, the construction of a Superhighway between Canada, U.S., and Mexico would destroy our national borders and we would no longer be our own sovereign country. We would effectively become The North American Union, same as the European Union. That would lead to the destruction of our currency, as the European Union did with the Euro. Some say this new currency would be called the Amero, but I believe that name has been scrapped.

    • 3 years ago
  • murphinador
  • Ayahuasca2012
    • 0
      Ayahuasca2012  
    • TheEmpireGuy:

      Um... if this was the Super Highway wouldn't they be dropping a shit ton more money into it? Not to mention... wouldn't it actually be a Highway that actually went from Mexico to Canada through the Texas area straight up?

      We probably managed to dodge that bullet when McSame didn't get elected...

    • 3 years ago
  • RedRussia60
    • 0
      RedRussia60  
    • TheEmpireGuy:

      there are already super highways(bridges) from Canada to the states using a massive amount of Trucks. I don't see how NAFTA is going to turn into the American Union, though having one currency would save business and consumers a ton of money. Canada and the United States are unlikely to ever join because Canada is a ton more socialist than the United States. Basically put this way, you can be poor in Canada and have a some what of a decent life, if your poor in the States your shit, the states is a paradise for those who have coin and a living hell for those that don't. #2 Canada and the US merging would mean the loss of the imperial system(metric is a lot simpler to learn and use) and the US wouldn't want to spend the billions it would cost to change all there signs over to.

    • 3 years ago
  • banditalamode
  • TheEmpireGuy
  • JimboTheHippo
  • cerealforeal
  • asherp
  • Noire
  • bobby77
    • 0
      bobby77  

    • I like this idea. san antonio, austin and dallas are connected, but why isn't houston connected with the other Texas cities?

    • 3 years ago
  • NFUSA
  • astropuff
  • jubal
  • nursediesel
  • PatBoberg
  • blaino
    • 0
      blaino  

    • $8billion!?

      No where near enough to even get this plan on its feet. But he could sure blow half a trillion on that stupid war in the middle east.

    • 3 years ago
  • Ayahuasca2012
    • 0
      Ayahuasca2012  
    • blaino:

      Oh you mean the one that Bush started and just forgot about?

      When will you people start laying blame where it's due? From now on all wars should have reference to the person who started it i.e., Bush's Iraq War: Over 1 million served! or Bush's War in Afghanistan: Oops, totally forgot about that one! Just so the fuckers can't try and pass the buck.

      Do us a favor and don't breed...

      Edit: Maybe I misunderstood you and if I did sorry for jumping all over you... just always on edge with all the fucktards on Current as of late. Either way... it's not Obamas war which was all I was trying to say.

    • 3 years ago
  • blaino
    • 0
      blaino  
    • blaino:

      No its not obamas war and I dont like bush any more than I like obama. I dont think that spending $537+billion on this stupid war is the best thing for our country. We are in the middle a recession $537+billion dollars could go to a lot of good in rebuilding our economy and our infrastructure.

      I think we have to weigh our priorities, and rebuilding america would rank higher than wage some stupid profit war.

    • 3 years ago
  • dold
    • 0
      dold  

    • A west coast rail that would have run from southern California to Vancouver B.C. was attempted in the 50's. However, California decided to dump all there money into roads for more cars. Clearly that was the way to go.

    • 3 years ago
  • middle_east
  • Birdieball
  • shibumi0202
    • 0
      shibumi0202  

    • It is about time! Not all of us like to fly. I would like to see a line from Detroit to NYC so I could easily see my son more often. I am so glad to see this plan start. Awesome!

    • 3 years ago
  • sk8bs55
    • 0
      sk8bs55  

    • genius! you know what this means? less dependence on foreign oil and upward mobility! and bringing the nation together.

    • 3 years ago
  • devo64
    • 0
      devo64  

    • $8 Billion for the nations transit isn't really that much. Seattle's light rail system costs $179 million per mile. That's one city alone.

    • 3 years ago
  • cztheday
    • 0
      cztheday  
    • devo64:

      Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Spending $8 billion on rail construction in a single STATE would get us pretty good coverage. But it's hard for me to imagine doing much on a nationwide basis for less than $50 billion.

    • 3 years ago
  • kellyjean
  • unclematt
    • 0
      unclematt  

    • Lets get to work! I can't wait! The automobile has ruled this country long enough! We Americans think our cars represent our "freedom", but in reality we aren't really free in our cars at all. The cops can pull you over for ANYTHING. Car crashes kill an average of 40,000 people a year. The pollution emitted by cars contribute to athsma and a multitude of other ailments. Tire particles, atnifreeze, gasoline, oil, the list of nasty car crap goes on and on. The demise of GM is a sign. Lets hire the GM employees to re-build the rail system that GM destroyed in the 50s & 60s.
      Lets get to work!

    • 3 years ago
  • Get_Cape
  • GoliathandDavid
  • philomar
  • RCS
  • NickerBocker09
    • 0
      NickerBocker09  

    • I think the main reason there isnt a high speed rail though Wyoming, New Mexico, and that area is because of the low population and their likelihood of using the rail system would be minimal. Plus there is the terrain issue. If you notice on the east coast the rail system doesn't really cut through the Appalachian.

      Im very happy about this though, because we need to get off of cars and air travel. Europe has done well with rails for centuries and it took us this long, but at least we are finally doing it.

      Quick question though. Why doesnt Detroit or Buffalo connect to Toronto seeing as how Montreal and Vancouver are connected? Im not familiar with that area so maybe its already easy enough to get to Toronto but Im just curious.

    • 3 years ago
  • opekktur
    • 0
      opekktur  
    • NickerBocker09:

      The drive from Toronto to Detroit is about four to five hours. It must be something else other than accessibility, because to get from Vancouver to Seattle is almost half that distance. With $9 billion invested, I assume there must be a really good reason.

      Being Canadian though, I'm just glad Canada is involved in SOME capacity :)

    • 3 years ago
  • Sam_the_Wizer
  • digitrash
  • seanalyn
    • 0
      seanalyn  

    • I think this is a big step and I hope it actually comes to life. This is not only good for the earth but good for the economy as it will provide new jobs and allow people to commute and travel for less.

      One of my favorite things about Japan is the high speed rail system over there...nothing like traveling what would take over 2 hours by car in 30 minutes!

    • 3 years ago
  • vistapoint
  • ImpeachMe
  • Snuff99
  • neonbunny
  • ryanking
  • Jaimey
  • advertisehere
    • 0
      advertisehere  
    • ImpeachMe:

      I think the idea is for rail to be an alternative to short distance flights that's just as fast and much cheaper.
      To build a cross country line would cost a shitload more and a cross country trip would be prohibitively long.
      This is probably less of an issue in Europe since most of the countries are smaller than Texas.

    • 3 years ago
  • rachelmaechel
  • Gozy
  • MissAmanda
    • 0
      MissAmanda  
    • ImpeachMe:

      i dont see the point of the high speed trains if they dont' go long distances, really.

      the eurail system in europe is a godsend, and cheap as hell.

      i can take the fung wa for $30 from boston to NYC, and it's not that long of a trip...i dont see why all this money is being put into trains with these types of routes.

    • 2 years ago
  • rickm8
  • nate777
  • seanalyn
  • philomar
  • AutifK
    • 0
      AutifK  
    • rickm8:

      It's important to realize that building the national rails is not necessarily about addressing the issue of 'making it' (whatever that means). It's about addressing the issues of saving time by not being held up in traffic and being more considerate about the environment by having less cars on the streets and freeways.

    • 3 years ago
  • vladrath
    • 0
      vladrath  

    • Doesn't it seem like they are giving this almost no money at all for something that the people of this country could really use. When they just give away hundreds of billions to the banks over night.

      If we poured money into a high speed rail jobs would be created lots and lots of them, they may not all be permenant but it would be a new industry which could compete against air travel.

    • 3 years ago
  • RedRussia60
    • 0
      RedRussia60  
    • vladrath:

      were the natives not making it with hunting and not agriculture? Were people just making it without trains and other forms of automotive? Were woman not just making it being a subservient house wives? car/trucks/vans ect... are expensive and create huge amounts of pollution as well as wasting huge amounts of land for roads, and being one of the leading causes of death to both pedestrians and passengers. Trains are safer, cost less per person and create a lot less pollution than cars. With the future comes change, don't be scared of it or fight it, embrace how it will make everyone standard of living better than it is now. :)

    • 3 years ago
  • TopScruffy
  • masterzip
    • 0
      masterzip  

    • I live in Calif. and a high speed rail system has been discussed by politicians since the 1970's, the main reason that it has never been built is because the state is built around the car, and it would require politicians to agree on something. Take for example the replacement of the Oakland Bay Bridge, it was supposed to cost under $1billion,..now I think it is supposed to cost over $6 billion,..and the worst part is that this bridge was declared unsafe in 1989, and the new bridge will not be completed until 2013(scheduled complete date) The biggest hold up and time delays on this project were all political,..every politician wanted to put their stamp on it which delayed construction even starting for years. Contractors will game the state to keep paying through the nose. I can't wait to see what mess California could create w/ a bullet train,...Sure!!! it is needed, and I will ride it too when it is finished,...most likely in 2099 when it will be seriously outdated by some other means of transportation....

    • 3 years ago
  • RaceBannon
more from Tech:
from the community

top videos