Transcripts For CSPAN Q A 20140115 : vimarsana.com

Their budget and they have no private investor, the question still remains, what obligation do you have to go back to the california taxpayer . Youre obligating the california taxpayer for nearly 10 billion and you are not fulfilling the prop 1a guarantee that they voted on. So at a certain point, i believe that we have to force the California High Speed Rail Authority to go back to the voters and seek approval. Change your plan, go back to the voters and let the voters decide. Mr. Lamalfa indeed. In 2012 there was legislation at the time in california to place that back in front of the voters. Give people the option now that they have more information, to say do they really want to go through this, with californias other issues. You mentioned, mr. Denham, the challenges weve had with water supply. Even our governor has seen that huge s huge priority, a problem for california in 2014. And yet we have a very difficult time allocating a few billion dollars to enhance our water storage in california. Instead are faced with this. What would that mean for jobs in the valley if were able to turn the water turn the tap back on . To agriculture . At a fraction of the price of high speed rail. I yield to my friend. Mr. Denham it would be a fraction of the price. Tens of thousands of jobs that will be lost by seeing farm land that goes by without being planted this year. We have a huge drought. There are huge issues. And what everybody is trying to say is a high speed rail, keep in mind, this initial segment, this initial operating segment which has ads 20 billion funding gap which has a 20 billion funding gap is not going to be electrified. It will will not be it will not be high speed. By their numbers and plan, this is another set of track that will not be electrified, that will run as is being run today. With a 20 billion gap. So even if you came up with the entire 32 billion of this initially segment, we are still initial segment, we are still stuck in the same situation we are, were just that much further in the hole. I know some of my colleagues would say, well, just spend the money as quick as you can. Lets just spend some of it and like other projects, once youve started it, some day the money will come. I dont think we can deal with that type of pie in the sky rhetoric. I believe week of got to have a full funding plan that makes sense. One that has a private investor that was promised to us. You know, weve heard several times that if you just write the legislation, well have a private investor. If you just put it on the ballot and approve it by the legislature, before it actually goes to the voters, we will have private investors that will sign onto this. Then it was right after the ballot passed, we have nearly 10 billion committed to by the taxpayers, for sure were going to have a private investor now. Five years later, after the federal government has come up with several billion dollars, after the voters are now on the hook for 10 billion, and still today there is no private investor. Youd be a fool to invest in this. This isnt floridas project. This isnt texas project. This is a project with a huge funding gap thats still not going to be electrified. By their plan. I yield back. Mr. Lamalfa indeed. When we looked at the project in totality here, what ended up being 100 billion to be legal under proposition 1a, to have a true high speed rail, which is required to go from San Francisco to l. A. At a high speed, two hours and 40 minutes, 100 billion project was revised now down to a 68 billion project which does not include high speed all the way to San Francisco and the north. It would stop at san jose area and then youre required to use local transportation, local light rail, what have you, to get all the way up to San Francisco. At the southern end you have, in l. A. County, it doesnt go to Downtown Los Angeles under the new plan, it would stop somewhere on the north remote l. A. County portion. So it isnt truly high speed rail anymore. As you mentioned too, on that, if they fake the take the palmdale route, they probably cant even sustain the speeds. Its illegal in that count. It cant make the two hour and 40minute ride. You have three different segments. If you have to buy three different tickets, i dont know how the customers are being suited by three different stops like that as well. We were told back in the day that the price of the ticket would somehow be tied to 85 of what an Airline Ticket was. To go from north to south or south to north. Nd a real estimate, if this is selfsustaining, would be triple of that. The impacts of that, again, california agricultureally, with water supply, is struggling this year. And so for the fraction of the amount money it would take to bolster californias storage, were going to spend perhaps what would have been 100 billion and the revised number, 68 billion, to do an illegal prop 1a version from south san jose to north los angeles. Thats a 55 billion gap on the entire project right there. We can only point to 13 billion worth of funding. The 9. 9 billion from the bond, which bonds have consequences. They have to be paid back, an already financially strapped state. As well the 3. 5 billion or so thats promised from the federal government under the 2009 stimulus has strings too. It has an expiration period. Please embellish on that a little bit, because we know theres some very important deadlines coming on that as well if we can. Mr. Denham there are important deadlines and again this is part of the antideficiency act that says that the 50 50 match now is coming due for the state. So april 1, 180 million is due. The question is for the governor, where is that money going to come from . We cant just continue to change the deadline. And the question to the administration is, are you going to continue to allow california not to guarantee its matching funds . I mean, it is going against the antideficiency act, the reason that is put into law. Mr. Lamalfa california just passed a recent tax known as prop 30 last year, of 2012, that was going to pay for a whole lot of things. Go for a lot of different measures, with perhaps schools, other infrastructure, we had talked about cap and trade. Weve also we can even point to truck fees. Theyre all now trying to be shifted toward high speed rail, instead of other priorities. I wonder if thats what the voters intentions were on prop 30 or on their truck fees or weight fees, etc. So, i think theres been a lot of deception around this again on the cost, on ridership. As i mentioned a minute ago, if its been revised down to a 68 billion plan, we can only point to, for sure, approximately 13 billion from fed stimulus and the state bond, where does the other 55 billion go to build what is really an illegal plan . Wheres it going to come from . Mr. Denham, you mentioned we havent seen the private sector money. From anyone. Yet you can point to recently a proposal came out for an east coast plan to build a magnetic levitation train that would link east coast urban centers and theres already interested investors from japan on that. With much more modern technology. You can say that rail, this really isnt new technology because its wheels still running on a steel rail. And in california, which was supposed to lead the way in technology and innovation, were really not leading on this at all. What do you see as far as the problems with that bigger funding gap and then bringing it back to whats that going to do for our economy . Mr. Denham well, certainly were falling way behind the rest of the world. Other technologies are starting to flourish in other parts of the world. Yet here this project will take at least 30 years, but more likely 50 years to 60 years based on where theyre currently standing on the project. So something that will be far Outdated Technology if it ever gets completed. But the real question is, where is the commitment . This president certainly could look for or come up with other money. He could propose other money to fulfill this project. Not even democrats will support that. Thats not a republican issue. This is an issue across the nation saying, why would we come up with money when were starved across the nation to throw at a project in california that is being mismanaged . And i think that there are real questions there. Not only for the administration but private investors, that are not willing to sink money into a failing project. They dont know what theyre on the hook for. They dont know how long of a commute this will be or what the ridership numbers will ever be. Even by this entire plan, there are too many stops, whether you talk to the Rail Authority or whether you talk to investors around the world, with that many stops and those locations, will you never get to the 220mileperhour speed, youll never get to two hours and 40 minutes. This thing is full of holes. Makes no sense for voters. An voters should have a say so on whether or not theyre going to commit any money, initial money, or any further money as we move forward. This is about our future. Not yours and mine, but our kids, our grandkids and the type of debt that we saddle them with. And at a certain point i think that not only californians but american its need to wake up americans needs to wake up and say whether or not this is a project that deserves an investment. And can we do things smarter . Can we do things like florida and texas . And i dont think florida and texas are going to be alone. I think there will be other states that step up and find ways to do high speed rail. Find ways to make a commonsense solution in their states. But in this state, this project is flawed. Its initially flawed by 20 billion, but certainly by more than 55 billion if we decide to move forward. At a certain point you have to ask, how much is enough . I would say that now is enough. Mr. Lamalfa thank you. Indeed, when the stimulus money first started coming available, there were other states that applied for high speed rail money, such as florida, ohio and wisconsin, i believe, that had after they looked air at their numbers, ran after they looked at their numbers, ran the figures on projects that were available for that stimulus money. They turned that money back and went back into this pool. Of course california said it wants it, but interesting, it would have been a much smaller portion had california been sharing with those other states, of what federal money would have come to the states. So the other ones said, weve looked at the numbers and were turning that money back in. So i think we ought to apply some of the same logic as the other states looked at when they had federal money available, eligible funds that they indeed turned back. So i really appreciate your leadership on this, congressman denham, on this, and we will be doing a lot more to make sure that this is held accountable to the public here and look forward to your hearing tomorrow on this matter. So thank you. Mr. Denham thank you. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Lamalfa were also joined by a colleague from the lower san what queen valley area of the joaquin valley area of the state, this issue is very important, very key to his issue as well, on the impact of the rail route, as well as the economy, as well as what it means for the taxpayers of the state and of the entire country. Indeed this has an effect on National Taxpayers in the budget as well. There are people in the other 49 states looking at whats going on here saying, why is our federal money going into something that cant possibly work out . And so i know were all willing to help people in other states with sensible Infrastructure Projects, thats the way it works in this country, with our interstate system that president ines hour had the vision for back eisenhower had the vision for back in the day. You can actually point to positive results and something that works longterm. And other Infrastructure Projects that were invested in. But this one here, the numbers just dont run. So my colleague from the valley, hes got very great concerns, has been very strong in leading in his area too as well on what are the impacts going to be, what are the costs, and so id like to recognize the congressman. Thank you. Mr. Valadao i thank the gentleman from Northern California for the opportunity to speak here today. Where do you start with Something Like this . I grew up a dairy farmer in kings county and continue to be a dairy farmer in kings county to this day. Ive spent my first two years in elected office in the California State Legislature on a Budget Committee and watched as this project moved along. And right before election, when this was passed back in 2008 and up until my election in 2010, the project didnt seem that bad. It seemed like something that was just voted on and put on the shelf and they would continue to build on it. Then at the last minute, some money showed up and it basically put this project in high gear. And the project wasnt ready for it. And like the congressman from the northern part of the valley mentioned earlier, theres no real plan. When you show up at the last minute and say, here, heres some money, Start Building right away, as if its shovelready, you set this project up for a really, really tough time. What were facing today, we see a train system being built, high speed light rail. 40 years ago, rail with wheels was the technology. Now its not. To see a project starting today with technology thats already 40 years old that probably wont be running for another 30 years, i think were setting ourselves up for failure. When you look at what else has been going on with this project as far as what the opportunities are, when you look at my district specifically, californias district 21, youve got communities that rely on a system weve got today, amtrak, which amtrak doesnt pay its bills but it gets people from a to b and serves its purpose. Youve got a system there where people who live in though communities are able to get to the doctor in fresno or in bakersfield or get to work. But a small commuter train that gets them where they need to be for a relatively small cost, but what weve got there, a track that will pass from hanniford, if it ever gets built, but for sure from fresno to bakersfield. It leaves the people in california 21 out to dry. When you see a project that was supposed to help those less fortunate and those who need the most, youve got a project thats going to hurt them and put potentially at risk the amtrak theyve got today, their mode of transportation. Because this project lacks so much money, thats why it puts us in that position. Weve got a system in place thats built on someone elses train tracks, on burlington northerns tracks in my area, im sure on other companies tracks in other parts of the state, but if it moves forward and runs out of money, part of the plan is to move amtrak over there. What happens to the stations in my district . Thats one issue i see. In california 21, like mentioned earlier and a good portion of the valley, we face a water shortage, a drought. Some of that is natural but a lot of that is regulatory. And weve also got a severe lack of infrastructure to deliver water. Eve got temperance flat and other infrastructure that needs to be built. It would benefit not just california but the whole state in general. When you look at a project like the high speed rail, if it was going to go forward, youd have a high speed rail most people couldnt afford to ride. If you build Water Infrastructure youve got water to grow a product, water to feed families, water for our communities. Once you have that, you start to grow crops york start to produce products, you start to improve an economy and produce a product you can sell and bring dollars back to the community. That in my opinion makes more sense. In education, california struggled with funding for education for years. Weve seen plenty of programs that were cut out, cut back, just flat out gotten rid of. If youve got a project like high speed rail spending money when theyre not prepared for it, when you should be invested in the future, making sure our kids have the best opportunity, the best foundation, bring to improve our economy, to be good, productive members of our society and to make a real difference, i think education should be our first priority. You look at everything that we could be spending money on, right now in california, weve been letting prisoners out of prison because we dont have money to build facilities for them, we dont have enough money to keep some of the Community Correctional facilities open. Theres a lot going on there and we have to be spending money on a project like this when we should be focusing on something to keep our community safe. Those are all things we should be paying attention to that were not because of this project. Theyre in haurry to build this project right now because they say it creates jobs but like was alluded earlier, those numbers were all bogus. They were pushed up. They werent honest numbers. Were starting to see this project that will put our children and grandchildren into debt for a long time for a small amount of jobs that we really account account for. Cant assure are going to be our own community joshes will come from our own district. This is something thats had me concerned my whole time in the legislature. Its something i talked about for a long time and its something that im going to continue to fight. It needs to be talked about and pushed out there. The more people that get involved, you take groups like my kings county group of residents who have sthide state and sthide federal government over this project. When they first got involved, they looked at this project and said this is going to affect our families and our homes, lets fight it. Once they started getting into the details to see where the funding was coming from or lack of funding or how the plan was being pushed forward and the am of deceit that go into the project to get it rammed down our throats, they decided to keep fighting it no matter what. Even though it was moved off their property to another part of town they thought, or the High Speed Rail Authority thought people would back off because it doesnt affect them personally but once they knew what was in this project, theres no way we can let this fight go. So the group actually group. The group actually grew. Now that the group was affected by the new alignment, the old guys came network new guys joined together, and the group grew. Now they moved the alignment back. The first group is continuing to fight and the second group is as well. Its just amazing how the more you get to know about this project, and how its being pushed and how its being run, the more you want to fight it. The more you want to shut this thing down. And so just to close, california high speed rail comes at a tremendous cost to taxpayers while delivering no benefit to my constituents. This project will destroy homes an businesses throughout californias 21st Congressional District and dwirt precious tax dollars away from water infrastuckture, Public Safety and education. I will continue to uphold my promise to my constituents and do whatever i have in my power to stop this project as fast as possible. Yield back. Thank you, mr. Valadao. I have one comment, one question, a commission, a board in california recently moved, a threeperson board, to authorize the Rail Authority to start condemning property under Eminent Domain and of course theres going to be a lot of resistance. Kings county san area thats like a hotbed of resist toons this project here. The eminent do main procedures are not always easy or cheap to get through a court process. So theyve already moved to condemn two pieces of property, i believe, in Fresno County and i believe theres 380 that may have to go through this process. How do your constituents feel about the forced taking of land and an alignment that doesnt make a lot of sense and some of the infrastructure that may be lost in the communities . Mr. Valadao over the years, theres been a lot of things built in the valley, freeways and other things that need to be built for the goofed the state. Farmers and constituents in general, if they understand why its being taken and it makes sense for the state, usually its an easy deal. But once they get involved in the details of this project and start to see how theyre being treated themselves, how the project is going to end up looking, because its pretty apparent what the lack of funding and with the rest of the federal government looking at this project and understanding this its pretty much ruined buzz of the management, theyre not happy. Theyre fighting this thing tooth and nail. When it comes down to their own personal property, theyre offended with some of the prices and some of the numbers theyve been seeing. If they own the property or their families owned it, if its a generational thing or just in general as an eyesore that will be running alongside their homes, affecting how they drive to work or how they move around the district in general. But its just offensive to many of them, depending on the different route or how you want to approach it. Indeed, let me ask you too, how easy is it to relocate a rendering plant . The endering plant is a facility mr. Lamalfa a rendering plant is a facility that processes dead animals. One of those is in your district. Mr. Valadao weve got a rendering plant thats rite in the middle of the alignment. The alignment move ops a weekly basis so youre never realy sure but the alignment plant has been in the alignment twice now, the first time and were back in again. As far as permitting for a new rendering plant, back in 2006 in the heat wave, we struggled in the Central Valley to handle all the amount of animals that were needing to be processed at that time and permitting for a new facility was nearly impossible and we were never able to upgrade or expand the facilities. So to build a new one today is nearly impossible. Mr. Lamalfa is the High Speed Rail Authority out there guaranteing to help or see through as part of the environmental documents to help make sure this is replaced or other infrastructure theres dairies in line there, again new york california, securing permit for a new dairy has become nearly an impossibility as my colleague in the dairy business would probably report, and so theres a lot of people weighing in on that, relocating the dairy, these are facilities, lands, that have been in generations of families. So is anything being taken into account on the authority helping with these processes as part of their impact theyre having . Mr. Valadao weve gotten no guarantee on that. Some of the things that might be affected, someone with a restaurant, that the high speed rail is going to come through, they pay them a value but dont take into account loss. Or a home. Prices have come down. Its a chance to come in and offer market price which would leave that person homeless and in debt. Theres a lot of situations. We have farmers with longterm leases on property who do not own the property but own the permanent crop on top of that high speed rail hasnt taken into account the voofl the crop on top. People will invest 1,000 will invest 10,000 or 15,000 an acher to put trees on it and if theyre only considering the land and not whats on the land that will be a bad deal. One of the biggest economic drivers in the valley and in california, we export a lot of ag products that brings dollars in. That will have an impact on our economy as well. Mr. Lamalfa were both from longtime farming families, and when you are a farmer, anybody in a Small Business that might be multigenerational, but especially on the land, you develop a bond, a love of the land, that you dont really put a price on. I think most farmers, theyll farm until they cant farm anymore either due to age or regulations taking it away from them, whatever. How do you put a price on, in my family, were raising the fifth generation, you and your neighbors have multigenerations as well. How do you put a market price on your legacy . You know. Somebody coming in from sacramento or washington or whatever saying we think its worth that. It might be worth infinitely more amount to you, your family and the generations behind you. How do you quantify that . Mr. Valadao you cant. When its a project necessary for the benefit of the country, benefit of the state, one that makes sense with a good plan behind it, its a little easier to swallow but when you see this project in general and how big a disaster its been and how Little Information has been given out to the public, how they plan on moving forward, if people will be able to afford to ride this thing it makes it that much worse because this is important. When you look at how hard some people have worked to build their homes, to build their farms, to build their companies, weve got restaurants, weve got a little bit of everything being affected by this you see their blood, sweat, an tears and cant put a price on that mr. Lamalfa Eminent Domain is something the government should use only reluctantly, only when theres no other option available. My farm has been affected by that as well, with the large towers, the power line, that move from hydroelectric projects in the northeast of the state down to San Francisco bay area. So you know, its something that affects our fields. But its part of the greater good, our tractors have to drive around those now and figure out how to keep Straight Lines when you have those towers, and you have ag aircraft trying to drop seed or fertilizer, things like that we get some strange streaks in our fields because of that infrastructure but its porn. We want folks in the bay area to have that. And so Eminent Domain isnt always very fair. What im seeing here is that the promises made by there isnt any promises made by the High Speed Rail Authority to truly keep people whole on this and give them options. As you mentioned, the alignment changes frequently. Were not even sure if they have a full 520mile alignment decided yet. They could have gone for a more lowimpact route, perhaps putting it down the middle of interstate 5 or next to it, using parts of 99 perhaps. Mr. Valadao or fill in gaps where amtrak doesnt serve. If you want to go from bakersfield to l. A. , you get on a bus, theres no connection there. That would have been a great place to start the project. Thats one of the arguments we have. When off project this size and such a small percentage of the money that is needed to build the project, you can see the failure coming. But you have to make sure that whatever resources are spent, are spent in a way that benefits the overall majority of the people and right now, if youre riding amtrak from fresno to l. A. And get off at bakersfield and get on that grey hound bus and ride over the hill, im sure grey hound does a great job, to build a rail and build it up to todays standards and put something in place to build on in the future. That makes sense. Mr. Lamalfa you can make an argument that the first places you should look are the urban areas where you could have potential ridership on the east coast, a lot of ridership between washington, d. C. And up to boston. I dont know about the financial viability of that but at least you can make a case there. Here, you know, as was reported just a couple of years ago, they wanted to start in the valley because as was coded, they had the least amount of resistance to the rail starting in the rural valley as opposed to the south bay area, palo alto and other places that people were feverishly opposed to what that would do, what that infrastructure tends to bring to high value communities like that as well. The promise lies in the Central Valley for us in what we do well already. My portion in northern sacramento valuey, san qua queen valley, these are with a queen valuey, these are strong joaquin valuey, these are strong agricultural areas. How far could we go to do one or two water storage projects and what would that mean for especially communities like you have down there that have seen huge Economic Impact with the cutoff of water due to the delta smelt and those other problems . What would that mean in real jobs for the people that have the skills and the education level that likely arent going to be working on a highspeed rail project that are have a strong background in agriculture . Mr. Denham mr. Valadao what we look at a company that wants to invest in the valley, if theyre in agriculture, obviously theyre attractive to the area for those reasons. But if theyre looking for an affordable place that makes sense between l. A. And San Francisco because of access to larger population, they look at the Central Valley. But they also want to make sure that theyre secure there. If you want to build a company, you want to make sure its in a great place for your employees and the focus should be right now making sure that people have Affordable Energy to live there, because obviously it gets hot in the summer. And the water situation, are you going to move your family into an area where the water isnt safe to drink . Which is commonplace in some of those communities that weve been fighting for funding for some of the Water Treatment facilities that are so necessary. And then when you get into the infrastructure itself, if youre going to build a plant or anything or a processing facility for the type of commodities we grow, water is a necessariesity. It starts from growing the crop to cleaning the crop to making sure that the facilities are up to code and that weve got some treatment in place, that we have the product that we can sell and bring dollars to you are communities and thats how you to our communities and thats how you create jobs. Thats what we should be focusing on and investing our limited resources on today. Obviously weve been making tough decisions in the last few months over spending and budgets and Everything Else weve got going on, not just on the National Level but at the state level theres going to be tough decisions as well. Those decisions should be based on priorities and those priorities should be making sure that we have the resources and resources today mean water. Water is the number one priority and thats where it should be focused at. Mr. Lamalfa i think everybody in california in the midst of this drought would probably find agreement with. That our own governor was underlining that in a speech the other day. Yet still wedded to this highspeed rail project which the fund something highly questionable. Indeed a judge handed down a decision the other day ordering california not to spend any of the state bond money because it wouldnt be legal to do so under the lack of a plan they have. So, we both served in the state legislature and is californias financial situation such that it can get out there on its own somehow with new funding, if the federal money falls short or no private investment comes out, where will it come from . Mr. Valadao weve got a lot of priorities here in washington, d. C. And the different members from different parts of the state are not looking at californias highspeed rail project the way its being rolled out today and thinking thats a good place to invest the resources that the taxpayers in their district want to see them spend the money on. So its not going to be an easy lift. And as this project seems to move forward, and the press gets worse and worse and when youve got judges involved saying theyre not following the letter of the law, what was asked of the voters where they voted for it, it just makes it that much harder to come up with the rest of the money theyre going to need to finish this project. To get it started, just to build a big burm with some metal on top to hopefully throw some olderstyle amtrak tiles on top, doesnt make a lot of sense, especially when youre going to cut off communities that need what we have in place today and not put that in jeopardy. Mr. Lamalfa what doesnt get talked about much are different impacts like the highspeed rail in order to sustain a high speed. Youve got to build it very long, elliptical form in order to make turns with a train going 220 miles per hour. And so that doesnt its kind of like the angled towers running at angled lines on my property that we farm. It doesnt fit in real well with the grid thats set up on Straight Lines and squares like that. So when an ellipticalshaped rail comes through your community, through agricultural zones, as well as high speed highspeed rail, having to cut off all the crossings, can you build enough overpasses to not have stop the flow of traffic, whether its cars or trucks or even a farmer on a tractor who now may have to drive his tractor instead of just across, six miles down the road and back up to get around . I mean, theres a lot of impacts that are really not meeting the eye here, when you line them out. Mr. Valadao like i mentioned earlier, when this project was started, it was started as a longterm project. But then 3 billion showed up from the federal government and the project managers basically said, put this thing in high gear, start breaking ground. If youve got a project of this size that affects so many people in so many different community, how they travel around their homes to work, around their farms, around their businesses, transporting products between warehouses and processing facilities, theres so much going on and youve got this project now thats going to disrupt all of that, just because theyve got a time line that theyve got to spend. And the time line is really on a small portion of it would. Err talking a were talking a couple per couple percentage of the total cost of the total project. Thats probably one of the worst things thats happened in this project since its inception. It could have been something great. It could have been a project could have made a big difference, if it was given the time to be designed and planned in a way that benefited the state, didnt burden the state with debt forever, and actually helped the constituents of that state. So its too bad that this project has gone down the path it has. But again were going to try to stop this thing so that this doesnt happen and doesnt affect our communities. Mr. Lamalfa indeed it does appear that theyre hellbent on spending that approximately 3. 5 billion that has federal deadlines on it in order to get the project started and then at that point, well, were invested in the project, we cant stop now. Even though the judge ruled its illegal to spend the state dollars because its not fulfilling the plan. So, indeed, big impact on the valley and on taxpayers. So, mr. Valadao, really appreciate your time and your leadership on this here tonight and lets keep putting the message out that theres better ways, most anything might be better, than investing in this at this point. So i thank you for your help here tonight. Mr. Valadao thank you and i yield back. Mr. Lamalfa so indeed, the investors that were supposed to come in, private investments for what had been billed to voters as a 33 billion project, up to 45 billion if you built the san diego and sacramento link, theyve not materialized. And when you see that the price for a time went up to 98. 5 billion, hence why i ran in California Senate bill 985, it scared everybody away from this. You see, in a baltimore to washington proposal, to do a maglev project here locally, that has outside investors that want to come in on it, nobodys touching californias highspeed rail. So, in the absence of this outside investment, california has moved in many different ways to try and find other pots of money. The governor plans on diverting truck weight fees that are collected from commercial truckers away from repairing californias aging roads. Just try and drive in the righthand lane of any freeway. I get to enjoy interstate 5 a lot. And see what the condition of that road is. Some areas have been repaired, trans had a pretty good year last year, other areas are still pretty rough. Boy, the pot holes in sacramento are pretty bad. Yet were seeing the effort by the state to shift funding away from repairing roads that everybody uses, versus a project that maybe few can afford to actually use. My colleagues from the valley here would probably tell you thats not going to be a lot of people who jump on highspeed rail to ride from bakersfield to fresno because it doesnt make any sense for them. The promise of a lowcost ticket being 85 initially of an Airline Ticket from l. A. To San Francisco or vice versa, how can that be met without having the tickets subsidized at these costs . 85 we were told, 90 . It was revised later, maybe 120 when we had a hearing about it. Try 300, if its not going to be underwritten by the taxpayers. For ridership on this. How many people are going to spend 300 on that trip . Other than those who might do it for the novelty of the train ride from north to south or south to north. We saw pie in the sky numbers on what the amount of ridership would be. Numbers at one time were greater than the entirety of amtrak across the 48 continental states. Theyve had to revise them down to some other vague number. Theres not a lot of trust in anything thats been put forward by the california highspeed Rail Authority on costs, on ridership, on impact, promises made or not made to those that are impacted in the line of many different proposals of where the route is. Yet theyre still trying to move forward and start condemning peoples property at who knows what price of reimbursements. In order to spend as quickly as they can this 3plusbillion of federal stimulus money. Put in place almost five years ago. Its really looking more like a fraudulent enterprise from what the voters saw in 2008 to now. Indeed, polling out there shows that now that people have heard about in the last couple of years, of what it really means, and the other choices they have to make, on schools, water, on their actual highways, they have a whole lot different opinion on it. A lot of editorial pages around the state are saying at the very least, if youre not going to stop it, you should put it back on the ballot. I attempted that in 2012. The mood wasnt there in the state legislature to do that. My colleague, former colleague there that i served with, assemblyman jeff garell from the Santa Barbara area, hes putting forward legislation to put it back on the ballot and revote the rail. So i hope that catches fire and that the legislature will look at this project and decide, you know, maybe that would be worth a vote of the people of california. To decide if this is still a priority, at these prices. So, assemblyman garell got a pretty big task to put that in front of the legislature and achieve the votes. But interesting, still talking state politics here, the state senate, to put forward the first segment of funding in late 2012, they received the bare majority of votes to fund that. Our California State Senate is 40 members. It got a vote of 2119. All republicans voted no. And four of the democrats who up to that point had been pretty favorable on highspeed rail. It barely got out of the state senate floor. I think thats saying a lot. That the opinions have changed. Certainly amongst the voters, we have to put the state legislature in a figurative headlock to get them to think about it. I hope the assemblyman is successful in this measure because it would be proper to put this back in front of the voters and ask them again, would you rather have this or water projects, highway projects, school projects, any number of things that could be done to help move california forward instead of this boonedoingle that has no way of pie boondoggle that has no way of paying for itself or sustaining itself. So we see that, again, with the court handsing down a ruling handing down a ruling that the plan has diverged so far from what was initially voted on and approved by the voters, that its now illegal. Why should State Government be doing things that are illegal . Because theyre right now in such a hurry to get the money spent, the federal money. If the federal money was to stop , the state money also has they both have to have a match with each other. If theres not the match happening, then theres giant legal problems. As congressman denham mentioned a while ago. Whats the payback procedure of federal if federal money is misspent, improperly spent . Does california have the capacity to do that, if it doesnt meet its timelines, doesnt meet the goal, doesnt meet the tenants laid out, of it being a true highspeed rail system, all the way from San Francisco to los angeles, which so far that plan is not. You have to ride three different train types to accomplish that under this current plan. Now we know the folks in the bay area and parts of los angeles are interested in seeing some of their tracks electry fied, as beneficiaries of some of the money coming from this. I get that, i understand that, it would be a benefit for them. Some upgrades in their local infrastructure. I dont know why you couldnt support that separately from this. If it helps to have cal train in the bay area electrified, that should be a separate question a separate set of funding. Because right now this is illegal. The people in the bay area want to be part of an illegal project like this and maybe perhaps lose the funding theyre depending on to electrify and upgrade their system. I dont think so. Thats a lot of money when it gets around to doing that. Above whats going on in the valley with the condemnation of the land and building in an area where they said theyd have the least amount of resistance to the prompt, let alone the bay area and parts of l. A. County. Its very problematic. Its really time, as i proposed back in my state senate day, slow down the project and get some real numbers on it. Thats my first bill in the state senate, s. B. 22, no spending, no doing anything, until we have a fully vetted and thought out plan. I mean, honestly this reminds me of obamacare. Ive been calling this around my neighbors obamacare jr. Because its so poorly thought out and the plan for funding it looks largely the same pie in the sky. Investors wont touch it. Frolvet, are they going to come in and bridge the gap of the other 55 billion thats missing, if we believe a 68 billion plan, let alone inflation and projects that might drive toyota 150 billion. All for what . What could really be seen as an outdated tech knoll and something a lot of people cant afford to access nor even makes sense for them to use in short segments within the valley. Yes, it may make sense, possibly if you had a fast train going from San Francisco to l. A. And complete that. But one of the things brought up is that in order for the project to be technically legal, they would only have to send one train per day in each direction at full nonstop length. They would have other trains perhaps that are making these stops, stopping at every little burg along the way. Thats not high speed rail. Thats glorified amtrak. Glorified local commuters. Thats not the intent of voter or voters or anybody on this measure or for that funding which is scarce money these days. In california and the huge problems we have in trying to get a budget done and move eventually toward balance in our federal budget. It isnt a priority that with we should be doing. So mr. Speaker, i just want to te that again, congressman denham will be having a hearing tomorrow in his transportation and infrastructure subcommittee at 10 00 a. M. Washington time develop manager on this situation. Id invite you to participate or watch that and expose what really needs to happen with federal funding as well as maybe perhaps the people of california have an opportunity to weigh in on assemblyman gerrells proposal to have this pack on the ballot and maybe shift our scarce funds to other things. With that, mr. Speaker, i thank you for the time here tonight and i yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman yields back. The jevt from california have a motion . Mr. Lamalfa i move that the house do adjourn for the night. The speaker pro tempore the question is on the motion to adjourn. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. Motion is adopted. Accordingly the house stands adjourned until everything from preventing the post office from discontinuing saturday mail. To preventing the Export Import Bank from blocking funds, an important priority for House Committee chairman hal rogers. The other things not in the bill, theres no provision blocking all funding for obamacare, thats the issue that shut down the government for 16 days in october. However, conservatives can point to the fact that 1 billion has been taken out of the obamacare Prevention Fund which theyve derided as a slush fund that heath and health and Human Services secretary sebelius can dip into to bolster obamacare funding. And theres no new funding for obamacare. 2014 an important year for u. S. Efforts in afghanistan. How does the omnibus handle war funding . Its at 92 billion on the high end, thats what the house was seeking. This will help the pentagon deal with what is a funding cut, about 20 billion in base fund regular ducks from what the house had sought. This is a pretty strong number. Aid to the Afghan Government is limited, there are policy provisions which would require bilateral Security Agreement in order for full funding for the Afghan Government. In addition in that section, theres new limitations on aid to egypt as well which saw a coup and its Funding Limited by the administration and now it will have to meet certain democracy objectives to receive its full military support as well. Hypoyou reported on some language reverting back to some benefits that were taken away, military benefits. Tell us about that. Goip it cut about 85 billion in spending in order to boost spending in the near term on the discretionary side. How they got to that cut involved a cut to military pentagons of about 6 billion. This is a cost of living adjustment for military retirees and its proven quite controversial even among deficit hawks on the republican side and theres a big effort in the senate by democrats and republicans to reverse that. This pill has not completely reversed the cut, instead, it addresses how it affects disabled veterans and survivors of members of the military who have been coirled died while in service. This would exempt them from the cut. Thats part of this deal. Hypoafter the politics of getting this through the house and senate you tweeted that Republican Leaders in the house are starting to sell the 1 trillion omnibus to the rank and file. How are they doing that . Goip there was talk about it in this mornings Conference Meeting among house republicans. They were pointing out that this is bringing discretionary funding back to the year of the Bush Administration before the obama stimulus. Its a lower number than in the first paul ryan budget and theyre emphasizing that there are a lot of conservative principles, including on obamacare, that are in here and worth going for. A lot of members have just started to review the bill, its 1,582 pages, it dropped at 8 00 p. M. Last night. When i was talking to them, they were still reviewing it and some had concerns. Representative jason chaffetz, a true conservative, is concerned about a land provision, payment in lue of taxes that relates to Rural Communities and payments to lowal government. People are bringing up individual pieces of the bill that theyre worried about, talking to leaders about how that might be addressed and other legislative vehicles. Theres a real conversation going on. Hypoon the democratic side with the administration host on the democratic side with the administration, does it make it easy for democrats to favor the bill . Guest i think therell be a strong House Democratic vote. Steny hoyer, the minority whip who opposed the budget deal because it didnt do enough to create a grand bargain to deal with deficit, has said hell support this measure. I think theres going to be a strong vote. Were talking to members and seing if they have concerns. There are cuts to, you know, National Institutes of Health Funding and certain programs, especially in the Education Department that may deter some especially liberal members from voting for it. Host read more from erik wasson at thehill. Com. Thanks for the update. In a few moments president obamas Advisory Group tells congress that the program hasnt had a sig can effect on stopping terrorism. In a little more than two hours, a forum on raising the minimum wage hosted by the Economic Policy institute. After that, its a Heritage Foundation discussion of the economy. I think i had little antennas that went up and told me when somebody had their own agenda and not ronnies. And id tell him. He didnt always agree with me but id tell him. It usually worked out. Watch our program on first Lady Nancy Reagan at our website on cspan. Org firstladies or see it saturday on cspan. And our series continues live on monday as we look at first lady barbara bush. President obamas Advisory Group, assigned to review the n. S. A. s Data Collection programs, has determined the programs didnt have a significant effect on stopping terrorism. Members of the group didnt call for ending the program but recommended taking certain information out of the n. S. A. s control. They testified before the Senate Judiciary committee for little more than two hours. Senator grassley is going to be joining us. We have a roll call vote expected soon but i want to get this started and then we can, when the oo when the vote occurs at some point, we can recess far few minutes while we go and vote. But whats important about this hearing, were going to hear from the president s review group on intelligence and communications technologies. I was talking briefly with them in the back and i know this is the first time theyve appeared together publicly since the groundbreaking report was released last month and i thank them as i know the president has and others have for taking the time, a lot of time and ffort, to prepare this report. And i know it will be reflective of what the president will say later this week. The report addresses some of the weightest issues that will weightiest issues that will affect us in the coming years. We know that more and more data will be created by all of us as each day passes. The questions are obvious. When should the government be allowed to collect and use that data . When does the collection of data improve our National Security . And what will the answers to these questions mean for privacy and Free Expression in the 21st century. All three branches of government are grappling with whether to let the n. S. A. s dragnet collection of americas domestic phone records to continue. Were finally doing so with full Public Participation in that debate. I think americans across the political spectrum want us to have this debate. And want to have a clear understanding of what is going of where its going so were trying to get as much as we can into a public debate and have a clear understanding of what is going on. We are trying to get as much as we can into a public hearing. All of us on this committee have had access, as have the five witnesses, to classified matters. We try to go into as much as we can in open session. Anyher we conduct intelligence activity, the ports is the assessment of its value. It is important, especially with the phone Collection Program done under section 215 of the patriot act. It is you not it is not uniquely valuable enough t