☆ Libertarian president hopefuls on CA HSR: “Cut and run” the only option left
Image by Jack Snell
It's no secret: California High-Speed Rail's expenses balloon, but its completion date keeps getting kicked down the road. Is it time the U.S. gov't throws in their hunk of cash? Opp Now asked registered Libertarian presidential candidates Joshua Smith, Mike ter Maat, Jacob Hornberger, Hugo Valdez-Garcia, and Beau Lindsey for their exclusive takes on a federal HSR bailout.
Joshua Smith, former Libertarian National Committee vice president:
Under Jerry Brown's leadership, California proudly boasted a substantial budget surplus of approximately $30 billion. However, in a stark contrast, under Governor Newsom's tenure, the state is now grappling with a concerning $25 billion deficit. This comes despite his earlier optimistic projection of a $97 billion surplus.
From my vantage point, having lived in California for over three decades, I've witnessed firsthand the detrimental impact of these fiscal policies — some of which even rival New York's notorious tax-and-spend policies. Particularly egregious is the High-Speed Rail (HSR) project. Since its inception in 2008, not a single mile of track has been laid, showcasing gross inefficiency.
I firmly believe that federal bailouts are not the solution. What California truly needs is to open its transportation sector to a consumer-driven competitive market. History has shown that competition consistently yields better results than a government that hasn't lived up to its promises.
Mike ter Maat, former White House economist:
No. The federal government never should have been involved with this project in the first place. If the project could not be justified without government funds—federal or state—it should not have broken ground. Even if it were successfully launched, it would lose money on an ongoing basis. So, the best option at this point, notwithstanding the sunk costs, is to cut and run. Understandably, the good people of California will feel as though they were duped by Congress into initiating a project on the expectation of federal funding. They were. This argues not for continuing the charade, but for staying out of local business altogether.
Jacob Hornberger, former law and economics professor, The Future of Freedom Foundation founder and president:
No. It would be morally wrong to force American citizens to pay for the State of California’s socialist projects.
Hugo Valdez-Garcia, writer, pharmacy customer care:
The State of California is currently having some financial setbacks in maintaining its transportation projects, specifically its High Speed Rail system. With many plans already in place, some of us still question the idea of if the expansion is beneficial or not. I believe the current governor and its affiliates can work together on a set plan and, if needed, re-route funding or shut down unfavorable departments or staff to even the tension.
The question has been asked, would a federal bailout be warranted? From my experience, taxes affect those in different places. I love the idea of getting somewhere far in such a short period of time. If the HSR can have a set plan for reasonable fare, ultimate ride security, and 24-hour service, I don’t see any reason to deny federal funding for this futuristic project.
Beau Lindsey, anonymous candidate:
I believe that any new bailouts by the federal government is not what we need right now as Americans. A bailout would only last a small amount of time. In a couple of years, you will see the same story about the HSR project seeking another bailout from the government. When does it end?
If people in California want their tax dollars to go to this project, let them; if they do not, don't make the people who don't want to pay, pay for this project. In my opinion, it's all about choice. If I am nominated and later elected president of the United States, I will make sure there are no more federal bailouts ever.
This is one of the major reasons I am a Libertarian.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.