Our greatest thinkers and leaders compel us to believe in ideas that transcend the world we live in.
President John F. Kennedy foresaw a “New Frontier,” which brought into focus uncharted areas of growth in the world and provided a concrete challenge to the United States: Landing a man on the moon by the end of the ‘60s.
In that same decade, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. told millions that one day race would not determine how an individual is treated in society.
Both these men advocated lofty ideals for reaching new heights by simultaneously looking ahead and back at what made our country great — innovation, adaptability and the innate unwillingness to remain content with the status quo.
Unfortunately, our economic downturn has given politicians short-term memories. Take, for example, Florida Republican Gov. Rick Scott who is forfeiting billions of dollars in government subsidies dedicated to a high-speed rail project in his state.
The perilous story of this ill-conceived failure to break ground on the rail project in Florida tells us much about the current state of thinking from Republican budget stalwarts.
One of the Obama administration’s primary goals for “winning the future” — high speed-rail — was given much support during this year’s State of the Union Address.
Obama used history as a guide when, in unveiling his goal of providing access to high-speed rail to 80 percent of all America within the next quarter century, he stated: “America is the nation that built the transcontinental railroad, brought electricity to rural communities, constructed the Interstate Highway System. The jobs created by these projects didn’t just come from laying down track or pavement. They came from businesses that opened near a town’s new train station or the new off-ramp.”
Such forward thinking is instructive and necessary at a time when, according to the latest New York Times/CBS poll, Americans are more pessimistic about the state of economy than since President Obama’s first two months in office.
So, when Scott told The New York Times, “The truth is that this project would be far too costly to taxpayers, and I believe the risk far outweighs the benefits,” he did little to change such pessimism.
Scott’s comments also do not hold up well against the facts. According to The New York Times, the federal government agreed to cover $2.4 billion of the $2.6 billion in costs for the project. For a state with unemployment rate of 11.1 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2.3 percent higher than the U.S. average), a large investment from the federal government with little attendant costs locally would seem an ideal financial proposition.
Indeed, jobs are needed for people struggling during these tough economic times. Wait, isn’t the Republican party line “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs”?
Whatever, but these seemingly thin arguments, coupled with new budget austerity, are seriously threatening the Obama administration’s short and long-term goals for rail projects.
The budget deal worked out to keep the government running earlier this month included hundreds of millions of dollars of cuts this year, which could halt transportation projects from the Midwest to California.
So, here’s the bottom line: We must ask more of our leaders, especially state legislators who control local funding. Will we create a new infrastructure and the swagger that comes with it? Or, will we instead recoil, cut and pray something magically turns around our future?
Contact Zach at zlevinep@asu.edu
