In a bicameral system, when one chamber proposes to spend two billion on some line item and the other proposes to spend zero, what do you expect the inter-cameral conference to propose?
Good guess, but when it comes to high-speed rail in the recent US “stimulus” bill, that answer is a bit off.
The final bill authorized $8b.
In case that was too subtle, let me make it a bit more clear:
THE STIMULUS LEGISLATION AUTHORIZES EIGHT BILLION DOLLARS FOR HIGH SPEED RAIL!!!
We can thank the third, uni-personal, legislative chamber for this: It was something Obama wanted. (Thanks, Barack!)
See National Corridors Initiative for details (including chamber comparisons on other rail and transit items, and a nifty map of approved corridors).
A tip of the engineer’s (or, rather, the Superintendent’s) cap to Sephen Karlson, whose post on rail in the stimulus has many other good links on this topic).
Combined with California voters’ passage of Prop 1A in November, this makes modern train service more real than it has been in a long time.
(I know eight billion is not really all that much. But you have to start somewhere!)
Finally, to those who would cry ‘pork’ upon knowing of spending on this, or other “pet,” projects advocated by specific lawmakers for their regions, the Washington Post notes that a spokesman for Sen. Harry Reid (who wants a maglev train between Las Vegas and Anaheim or Los Angeles) claims that the transportation secretary “will have complete flexibility as to which program he uses to allocate the funds.” While the delegation of such authority to the transportation department does not guarantee the use of technical (merit) rather than political criteria, it makes it much more likely. In any case, if the bill does not allocate money to specific projects, or require congress or the executive to do so, it is not pork. At least not at this stage.