You're watching...
Former California Assemblyman Chuck DeVore discusses why California can’t afford a high-speed rail line.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Yeah California -- -- says it's high speed rail project will cost about thirty billion dollars less than originally expected.
Well now the state says it will only cost 69 billion dollars worth it perhaps -- -- California State assemblyman chuck DeVore is in Texas.
-- you -- one of the first people awoke against this project in California that was before you up stakes and went off to Texas and these -- from California.
But yeah I believe you were.
One of the first people to cast of when you California's -- -- some of -- you voted one of the first votes against.
This north south bullet -- in California right.
Yes so not only that I was one of the six people who signed the official ballot argument against the high speed rail trying to convince California voters.
Not to borrow ten billion dollars as a down payment for what was then a 33 point six billion dollar train to nowhere.
It trained that do would have cost 1000 dollars about for every man woman and child instead of California.
We've seen those estimates -- -- 3000 dollars per capita another back to 2000 dollars per capita.
Does declare -- talking about the trend line that would run far north south's that this is not the -- trying this is north South San Francisco to Los Angeles -- supposed to be right.
Right this doesn't help -- he GSA employees get to Vegas if this is a north south route and what they've done.
To reduce the cost is they've cut about a hundred miles of track.
So now goes from I believe Madeira.
To the San Fernando Valley so it doesn't even go from Los Angeles.
To San Francisco so -- no longer can even compete with Southwest Airlines like it was going to regionally at the end of the day.
I can't believe that this line will actually get built because it cannot be painful and you say.
Well the whole trick is to actually get a little bit of track built so that the bureaucrats -- than fully invested in it and governor Jerry Brown's plan.
Is to use the global warming greenhouse fees that are generated from.
Oh AB 32 that global greenhouse solutions act -- California passed back in 2006.
He wants to use those fees to fund this train.
And that's why senator -- mall -- from northern California.
Wants to put this issue back before the California voters to let them vote again and maybe turn it down this time.
-- you've got thirty seconds tell me why you jumped ship left California went to Texas -- you -- very successful going California.
Well I was in the state legislature for six years I was on the revenue and taxation committee the Budget Committee maybe it's because I know too much.
You've got a state that has unsustainable.
Levels of spending.
The state of California spends about 46%.
More of its economy on state and local government than does the state of Texas where I live now.
And now I'm working for the Texas public policy foundation as a fiscal policy analyst Natalia.
Stewart the difference between Texas and California is like the difference between.
The way America used to be in the way it could be in the way President Obama is trying to take America if you want to see America's future.
Look at California.
That's America's future.
-- -- that was a mass intake of -- around this table when you said that -- of all -- thanks so much -- visiting us -- the line -- he was run out of town and high speed -- with regular run -- to our -- -- very very -- acceptable promises -- employees -- stuff will do.
