HB 28-02 High Speed Rail Act (Passed)

[SevenEleven]

AN ACT
To improve transport and connectivity across our nation.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,

Section I. Title

i. The long title of this bill shall be the "Expansion of High Speed Rail and Mass Transit Act." It may be cited as the "High Speed Rail Act."

Section II. Definitions
i. High speed rail is defined as a railroad capable of supporting trains in excess of 120 mph.

Section III. Construction of High Speed Rail Arteries
i. A high speed railway shall be constructed along the western coast.
     a. The Department of Transportation should negotiate possible connections through Canada and Mexico.
ii. A high speed railway shall be constructed along the eastern coast.


Section IV. Creation of National Rail Authority
i. The National Rail Authority is hereby established under the Department of Transportation and tasked with the responsibility of overseeing construction, rail route development, and consumer-end transit program implementation.
ii. The National Rail Authority shall consist of members appointed by the President of Atlasia.
iii. The layout of the seaboard routes and placement of cross-country rail routes shall be the responsibility of the National Rail Authority.
iv. Congress shall retain the ability to legislate new routes or override the decisions of the National Rail Authority if necessary.

Section V. Appropriations
i. $80 billion shall be appropriated for the construction of new rail and adaptation of old rail for the creation of the seaboard routes.
ii. $250 million shall be appropriated for surveying and planning of cross-country rail routes.
iii. $3 billion shall be appropriated for the construction of connecting routes to off-route cities.
iv. $150 billion shall be released for construction of new rail and adaptation of old rail for the creation of cross country routes pending a finalized route plan from the National Rail Authority.
v. $8 billion shall be released for the construction of connecting routes to off-route cities pending a finalized route plan from the National Rail Authority.

Sponsor: SevenEleven
Status: Final Vote

[SevenEleven]

So...this is a rather ambitious bill. The goal is to create an enhanced transportation grid that will bring our nation closer than it's ever been before. There are probably some tweaks we will have to make so input is welcomed and appreciated.

The goal here is to reduce emissions while at the same time expanding what's possible for working people. A shorter commute. A house in the suburbs etc. A sufficient transit program enables our communities to be much stronger and more stable.

[Left Wing]

I just would like to say, this should put all of the dispersions that have been cast on Labor about them not supporting public transportation to reset. It’s time we pass a version of this bill that is efficient and doesn’t contain the pork barrel spending that was rammed into it last time.

[OBD]

This bill looks solid with last round's unfortunate pork barrel additions removed. A little costly, but if budgetary needs require it we can punt funding on this for a fiscal year.

However, I remain concerned about the 'canon' status of high-speed rail in this universe as Fremont and Lincoln, and perhaps the South, have already passed relevant legislation (though there are issues of underfunding and if the routes were finished by this time). A GM or Comptroller ruling on this would be nice - my comments on the bill are under the assumption that no HSR currently exists in Atlasia.

[Joseph Cao]

Attrib. Nate Beeler, The Washington Examiner, 2008

[Joseph Cao]

More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.

On that note, even excluding the pre-reset HSR construction we already have three major expansions of the West Coast HSR system thanks to Truman's, YE's, and OBD's efforts (here, here, and here) plus a map of what the whole thing currently looks like (since IIRC OBD's bill didn't establish any new lines) here. That would seem to limit a lot of what can be done with the West Coast line.

Furthermore, while not actually identical to the High-Speed Rail Commission proposed in a 2018 federal bill, the National Rail Authority in this bill does tread on its toes with regard to development of rail routes.

And finally, Fhtagn vetoed that bill and gave her reasoning here, for anyone who would like to read it:

1. Nothing seems to have been brought forward to provide any evidence that a high speed light rail system as large as being planned would actually be a profitable venture. While I do applaud the appeal for a much cleaner mode of transportation and don't deny the environmental bits, it does little good if it's something that won't generate enough public interest to make it worth operating. I can support the idea of limiting rail systems to major metro areas, but at this time have seen no evidence to change my mind that having it span the distances that are planned are a good idea.

2. Concerns were raised about the use of eminent domain to obtain the land needed, or cutting through land that may result in disastrous environmental impacts at some point down the road. And while I appreciate that those concerns weren't completely ignored, I did not find the answer of "we can find ways with enough time and investment". And that's great, but I would prefer something actually in the bill to ensure that we will not resort to those things.

3. It was brought to my attention from the Senate debate the concern that train use is declining as a result of existing lines not being repaired and commuters becoming frustrated that their existing mode of transportation is being neglected while politicians campaign on new lines. I find this to be very concerning that it was not truly addressed and much like my previous point, would have preferred that the bill actually contain something that addresses the repair of existing rail lines.

[Rep Jessica]

The future is hyperloops. I am scared of heights but I'd love to move from point a to point b as fast as a plane. I have a bill on the docket that will build one of these.

I don't oppose high speed trains. Not everyone wants to drive and not everyone wants to be 30,000 feet above the surface either. Trains are enjoyable as you get to see things.

[SevenEleven]

More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.

I was under the impression that this "reset" basically meant nothing from before actually happened. Could someone clarify this?

[Saint Milei]

This always seems like a good idea until you factor cost. Where is the rail going to be? Above us? In between roads? Businesses? Neighborhoods? Furthermore, have we even done polling on the popularity of this?

[SevenEleven]

I move for a final vote.

[Joseph Cao]

Objection.

Has there been a specific justification for the proposed west coast line? I was under the impression that FrémontRail has had that part of the country pretty well covered.

[SevenEleven]

Objection.

Has there been a specific justification for the proposed west coast line? I was under the impression that FrémontRail has had that part of the country pretty well covered.

Objection noted, motion rescinded.

[OBD]

However, I remain concerned about the 'canon' status of high-speed rail in this universe as Fremont and Lincoln, and perhaps the South, have already passed relevant legislation (though there are issues of underfunding and if the routes were finished by this time). A GM or Comptroller ruling on this would be nice - my comments on the bill are under the assumption that no HSR currently exists in Atlasia.

Bumping this comment. If Fremontrail is already complete then this might be a moot point, but otherwise it's a worthy part of the bill.

[SevenEleven]

However, I remain concerned about the 'canon' status of high-speed rail in this universe as Fremont and Lincoln, and perhaps the South, have already passed relevant legislation (though there are issues of underfunding and if the routes were finished by this time). A GM or Comptroller ruling on this would be nice - my comments on the bill are under the assumption that no HSR currently exists in Atlasia.

Bumping this comment. If Fremontrail is already complete then this might be a moot point, but otherwise it's a worthy part of the bill.

I've contacted the GM so I hope to hear back soon.

[Lumine]

Can confirm I have been contacted, will try to give a thorough answer as soon as possible. Having said that, only the post-reset High Speed Rail efforts are to be considered, for obvious reasons.

[Poirot]

In Lincoln I know there was LincolnRail in 2017:
https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=273498.0

And recently
https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=420093.0

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Can confirm I have been contacted, will try to give a thorough answer as soon as possible. Having said that, only the post-reset High Speed Rail efforts are to be considered, for obvious reasons.

If you're working post-reset then the California HSR was approved by voters in 2008 with a $9 billion bond and construction (finally) started in 2015, over a year before reset.

[SevenEleven]

Can confirm I have been contacted, will try to give a thorough answer as soon as possible. Having said that, only the post-reset High Speed Rail efforts are to be considered, for obvious reasons.

If you're working post-reset then the California HSR was approved by voters in 2008 with a $9 billion bond and construction (finally) started in 2015, over a year before reset.

Can confirm there has been little progress even to this day.

[Mike Thick]

More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.

I was under the impression that this "reset" basically meant nothing from before actually happened. Could someone clarify this?

Late to the party on this one, but the reset basically waved a magic wand and changed everything in the world to how it was IRL at the time of the new Constitution's adoption.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Can confirm I have been contacted, will try to give a thorough answer as soon as possible. Having said that, only the post-reset High Speed Rail efforts are to be considered, for obvious reasons.

If you're working post-reset then the California HSR was approved by voters in 2008 with a $9 billion bond and construction (finally) started in 2015, over a year before reset.

Can confirm there has been little progress even to this day.

The almost comical $100 Billion dollar price tag for the full project is emblematic of how poor an investment HSR is given America's ludicrous construction costs.
(If we really wanted to improve transport between LA and SF the far more cost-effective solution would be rebuilding SFO airport so it can handle parallel landings in fog and rebuilding LAX's northern runways to handle parallel ops, but of course that's far less glamorous than a big fancy train)

[AustralianSwingVoter]

More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.

I was under the impression that this "reset" basically meant nothing from before actually happened. Could someone clarify this?

Late to the party on this one, but the reset basically waved a magic wand and changed everything in the world to how it was IRL at the time of the new Constitution's adoption.

In which case the state of California is already spending $80-$100 Billion on the full SF-LA high speed line as was intended until Newsom pulled the plug in 2019, post-reset.

[SevenEleven]

Can confirm I have been contacted, will try to give a thorough answer as soon as possible. Having said that, only the post-reset High Speed Rail efforts are to be considered, for obvious reasons.

If you're working post-reset then the California HSR was approved by voters in 2008 with a $9 billion bond and construction (finally) started in 2015, over a year before reset.

Can confirm there has been little progress even to this day.

The almost comical $100 Billion dollar price tag for the full project is emblematic of how poor an investment HSR is given America's ludicrous construction costs.
(If we really wanted to improve transport between LA and SF the far more cost-effective solution would be rebuilding SFO airport so it can handle parallel landings in fog and rebuilding LAX's northern runways to handle parallel ops, but of course that's far less glamorous than a big fancy train)

California's construction costs =/= America's construction costs.

More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.

I was under the impression that this "reset" basically meant nothing from before actually happened. Could someone clarify this?

Late to the party on this one, but the reset basically waved a magic wand and changed everything in the world to how it was IRL at the time of the new Constitution's adoption.

In which case the state of California is already spending $80-$100 Billion on the full SF-LA high speed line as was intended until Newsom pulled the plug in 2019, post-reset.

I don't think anything Newsom has done matters here.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Can confirm I have been contacted, will try to give a thorough answer as soon as possible. Having said that, only the post-reset High Speed Rail efforts are to be considered, for obvious reasons.

If you're working post-reset then the California HSR was approved by voters in 2008 with a $9 billion bond and construction (finally) started in 2015, over a year before reset.

Can confirm there has been little progress even to this day.

The almost comical $100 Billion dollar price tag for the full project is emblematic of how poor an investment HSR is given America's ludicrous construction costs.
(If we really wanted to improve transport between LA and SF the far more cost-effective solution would be rebuilding SFO airport so it can handle parallel landings in fog and rebuilding LAX's northern runways to handle parallel ops, but of course that's far less glamorous than a big fancy train)

California's construction costs =/= America's construction costs.

Like New York they're double the already ludicrously high American construction costs. Meanwhile places like Spain and Mexico are building incredible feats of engineering on the cheap thanks to their low labor costs and minimal red tape.

More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.

I was under the impression that this "reset" basically meant nothing from before actually happened. Could someone clarify this?

Late to the party on this one, but the reset basically waved a magic wand and changed everything in the world to how it was IRL at the time of the new Constitution's adoption.

In which case the state of California is already spending $80-$100 Billion on the full SF-LA high speed line as was intended until Newsom pulled the plug in 2019, post-reset.

I don't think anything Newsom has done matters here.

Everything Newsom did before the 2016 is canon, while everything he did after the 2016 didn't happen unless the GM says otherwise.

[SevenEleven]

Can confirm I have been contacted, will try to give a thorough answer as soon as possible. Having said that, only the post-reset High Speed Rail efforts are to be considered, for obvious reasons.

If you're working post-reset then the California HSR was approved by voters in 2008 with a $9 billion bond and construction (finally) started in 2015, over a year before reset.

Can confirm there has been little progress even to this day.

The almost comical $100 Billion dollar price tag for the full project is emblematic of how poor an investment HSR is given America's ludicrous construction costs.
(If we really wanted to improve transport between LA and SF the far more cost-effective solution would be rebuilding SFO airport so it can handle parallel landings in fog and rebuilding LAX's northern runways to handle parallel ops, but of course that's far less glamorous than a big fancy train)

California's construction costs =/= America's construction costs.

Like New York they're double the already ludicrously high American construction costs. Meanwhile places like Spain and Mexico are building incredible feats of engineering on the cheap thanks to their low labor costs and minimal red tape.

Forgive us for paying more than Spain and Mexico. 😂😂😂

More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.

I was under the impression that this "reset" basically meant nothing from before actually happened. Could someone clarify this?

Late to the party on this one, but the reset basically waved a magic wand and changed everything in the world to how it was IRL at the time of the new Constitution's adoption.

In which case the state of California is already spending $80-$100 Billion on the full SF-LA high speed line as was intended until Newsom pulled the plug in 2019, post-reset.

I don't think anything Newsom has done matters here.

Everything Newsom did before the 2016 is canon, while everything he did after the 2016 didn't happen unless the GM says otherwise.

Newsom took office in 2019...

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Can confirm I have been contacted, will try to give a thorough answer as soon as possible. Having said that, only the post-reset High Speed Rail efforts are to be considered, for obvious reasons.

If you're working post-reset then the California HSR was approved by voters in 2008 with a $9 billion bond and construction (finally) started in 2015, over a year before reset.

Can confirm there has been little progress even to this day.

The almost comical $100 Billion dollar price tag for the full project is emblematic of how poor an investment HSR is given America's ludicrous construction costs.
(If we really wanted to improve transport between LA and SF the far more cost-effective solution would be rebuilding SFO airport so it can handle parallel landings in fog and rebuilding LAX's northern runways to handle parallel ops, but of course that's far less glamorous than a big fancy train)

California's construction costs =/= America's construction costs.

Like New York they're double the already ludicrously high American construction costs. Meanwhile places like Spain and Mexico are building incredible feats of engineering on the cheap thanks to their low labor costs and minimal red tape.

Forgive us for paying more than Spain and Mexico. 😂😂😂

Quite.

More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.

I was under the impression that this "reset" basically meant nothing from before actually happened. Could someone clarify this?

Late to the party on this one, but the reset basically waved a magic wand and changed everything in the world to how it was IRL at the time of the new Constitution's adoption.

In which case the state of California is already spending $80-$100 Billion on the full SF-LA high speed line as was intended until Newsom pulled the plug in 2019, post-reset.

I don't think anything Newsom has done matters here.

Everything Newsom did before the 2016 is canon, while everything he did after the 2016 didn't happen unless the GM says otherwise.

Newsom took office in 2019...

Apologies, I meant the actions of Gerry Brown re HSR which would still be canon but Newsom's subsequent indefinite postponement would not have happened.