And this is why I continue to admire Paula Dockery.
Via the Times:
---
"Politics should have no place in the future of Florida's transportation, as evidenced by this letter of bipartisan support," said the letter, signed by 26 members of the Republican-controlled Florida Senate.
"This project would create real jobs, cleaner and smarter transportation and true economic development for Floridians," said the letter written to LaHood.
The letter was partly authored by one of Scott's first Senate backers, Republican Paula Dockery of Lakeland, who argued that the newly created Florida Rail Enterprise could act independently of Scott because the state's share of the rail money — $300 million — was already approved last year by a previous governor, Charlie Crist.
---
A huge bulk of Florida lawmakers, real ones who know and care about how government works, is rightfully rebuking Scott's insane rejection of high-speed rail money. The bad thing is this money is now likely to land in the hands of a corporation with little oversight.
But I guess reducing government and corporate responsibility is another of Gov. Voldemort's main missions.
P.S. Paula, I still think you are cool, but are you regretting this whole Scott bandwagon thing yet?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sorry to split the comment thread, but it's your fault for posting a new entry, Jake.
ReplyDeleteFrom the article you provided, http://www.tampabay.com/news/transportation/masstransit/gov-rick-scott-says-he-will-reject-24-billion-for-high-speed-rail/1152141, it looks like the entire $2.4 b was earmarked for Orlando to Tampa - $1.25 b for the rail itself, $800 m for the trains, and $350 m for ... ? Maybe that's discretionary in the sense that it could be spent on local transportation improvements, but it doesn't seem that way from the article. Anyway, if you say it's reasonable that it costs upwards of $2 b to build the rail, you have a better feel for that than I do. But recognize that the feds putting up money for HSR doesn't free up money for local transportation, because we weren't going to pay for HSR in the first place. It does make the return on local transportation potentially higher, though.
You're saying that you think that Scott is rejecting the money because it's a high profile project supported by the Obama administration, right? I'm saying that if Scott thinks there's a strong argument against the proposed HSR project, then he is doing an acceptable thing by rejecting federal funds which he feels would be wasted. Admittedly, him saying it would cost the state $3 b means he's not merely taking a principled stand against govt waste, but it doesn't mean he's not, either. I do concede that if that figure is significantly higher than other estimates, it takes on a political tone. (It now looks to me like Nelson's $280 m is based on what's already been approved, not on assumptions of cost in excess of what the feds are putting up, so that figure becomes irrelevant except to the extent that it's probably part of Scott's $3 b.) If it turns out that you're right, then I 100% agree with you that it's irresponsible of him. But I'm not ready to condemn him for "playing politics" just yet - it's still pretty early in his term. The only way we'll ever really have an idea about his motivation is to watch for a pattern. Unless a Republican wins in 2012 and reproposes HSR, I suppose.
It should not be forgotten that the voters of Florida previously voted in favor of high-speed rail. It was in our state constitution fairly recently. The only part that ever made voters change their minds was the price tag, and that becomes irrelevant when the feds chip in $2B+ to the effort.
ReplyDeleteIf Scott is rejecting this because he thinks the project is unworthy of the federal dollars then A) that's not his call, and B) he is ignoring the fact Floridians support the concept of high-speed rail. There is a reason why a veto-proof majority of state Senators (including 26 Republicans, a majority of that caucus) wrote this letter rebuking Scott.
Scott isn't just playing politics. He's playing God.
First of all, HSR never had any business being in the state constitution. Neither did/do pregnant pigs, definitions of marriage, licensing of doctors, etc. Constitutions are for defining the structure of government and its relationship to the people. They should not be used by special interests to short circuit the legislative process and appeal to people who don't have the knowledge to make an intelligent decision. That's why we have a republic instead of straight democracy - we're supposed to *elect* people who don't have the knowledge to make an intelligent decision. That's one of my pet peeves.
ReplyDeleteYou don't think "playing God" is a little overdramatic? I mean, apparently it is his call, at least judging by the Obama administration's reaction to his rejection of the money. It seems like the legislature is working to get around that, which is fine - that's part of the process, too.
And if we're talking about mandates from the people, the amendment only passed in 2000 with 52.6% of the vote. That's not exactly an overwhelming majority. It was repealed in 2004 with 63.7% of the vote. I think it's safe to assume that most of the 2 million people who voted no in 2000 also voted to repeal in 2004. The price tag may have strengthened their convictions, but it didn't change their minds.
I think that in describing the rejection as insane, you are insulting the millions of intelligent Floridians who think that this project would ultimately be a giant boondoggle and a drain on Florida's taxpayers - plus have you ever seen any government-sponsored construction project that wasn't plagued with huge cost overruns ?
ReplyDeleteYes, Bruno, I have. And with most transportation infrastructure, there are penalties to contractors if they run over budget or over time.
ReplyDeleteI think rejecting this money is an insult to the millions of Floridians who consistently supported high-speed rail. I also think that the Senators who get elected by the same voters can see that.
This choice by Scott was wrong. It was politically-based. It flies in the face of his own promise to create jobs (he has done nothing since arriving but try to defund jobs). This was an insane decision on his part. Do intelligent people oppose rail? Yes. But are they the governor? Are they tasked with balancing all elements into a decision? They are not.
It is Rick Scott who I call insane. And deflecting criticism of his policies as an attack on "millions of intelligent voters" is a red herring.