Politics Disad – Jackson-Vanik

GPS—unpopular

GPS unpopular—bipartisan budget cuts

National Coordination Office for Space-Based PNT, 11

(National Coordination Office for Space-Based PNT, the central node within the government for gps-related policy matters, October 2011, “Information for Policymakers from the National Coordination Office

for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT)”, http://www.gps.gov/congress/newsletter/2011/10.pdf)

The Senate Appropriations Committee passed its defense spending bill (H.R. 2219) on September 15, cutting FY 2012 funds from the next-generation GPS space and control segments. The bill would cut $40 million in advance procurement of GPS III satellite components and $24 million for development of the Next Generation Operational Control System (OCX). House and Senate appropriators have recommended deep cuts to DOT’s GPS line item, which pays for civil- unique elements of GPS modernization. The House THUD bill would slash $31.3 million from the $50.3 million account, while the Senate version (S. 1596) proposes a $14.3 million reduction. The House bill would also strip $40.5 million from FAA’s Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS), an enhancement for aviation safety, while the Senate bill would cut $15.5 million. The House bill calls for a $3.5 million decrease of the Nationwide Differential GPS (NDGPS) program, a terrestrial augmentation, but the Senate bill fully funds it. To view all GPS funding bills moving through Congress, visit http://www.pnt.gov/policy/legislation/funding/2012.shtml.

GPS funding unpopular—budget requests

Hasson, 9

(Judi Hasson, journalist, March 18, 2009, Fierce Government IT, “Obama kills funding for GPS backup”, http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/obama-kills-funding-gps-backup/2009-03-18)

President Obama's proposed 2010 budget cuts out funding for a backup to the Global Positioning System. The money had been part of the Department of Homeland Security budget to fund the Long Range Navigation System, or Loran-C, a terrestrial navigation system the Coast Guard operates. Terminating the system would save the government $36 million in fiscal 2010 and $190 million during a five-year period, according to the budget analysis. But critics say the backup is an essential part of the nation's basic infrastructure, and far more than just a directional tool for motorists to avoid getting lost. DHS spokesman Larry Orluskie described Loran-C as an "an antiquated navigation system" no longer required by the armed forces, the transportation sector or the nation's security interests."

HSR Unpopular

HSR controversial—cost

LATimes 6/29

"Congress passes transporation bill, halts student loan rate hike," Richard Simon 6/29/12 www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-congress-passes-transportation-bill-halts-student-loan-rate-hike-20120629,0,7176382.story AD 6/29/12

Separately, the House approved an amendment to an annual spending bill that would prevent federal transportation funds from being spent in the next fiscal year for California’s controversial high-speed rail project. The amendment was sponsored by Rep. Jeff Denham (R-Atwater), who cited the project’s ballooning costs. Three California Democrats - Jim Costa of Fresno, Zoe Lofgren of San Jose and Laura Richardson of Long Beach – issued a statement calling the amendment an "example of how thoughtless partisanship would hurt all of California.’’

Republicans oppose HSR

Ellis, 12

(BY JOHN ELLIS, The Fresno Bee, Monday, Apr 30 2012 05:00 PM, For Valley GOP candidates, high-speed rail is top enemy. http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/special-sections/rail/x1942474111/For-Valley-GOP-candidates-high-speed-rail-is-top-enemy)

For Republican[s] candidates this election season, high-speed rail is Enemy No. 1 -- or had better be. And that's putting some Republicans who once supported the idea in an uncomfortable spot. Take Republican Assembly hopeful Jim Patterson, for example. On Bullard Avenue, just west of Blackstone, a sign for Patterson's 23rd Assembly District campaign proclaims: "Stop the High Speed Rail Boondoggle." But a Republican opponent, Fresno attorney David DeFrank, points out that in the 1990s when Patterson was Fresno's mayor he spoke glowingly of the project. That, Patterson responded, was a different proposal that was to be routed along Highway 99 and paid for with private dollars. Welcome to the 2012 political campaign, where the state's proposed high-speed rail project has become one of the hottest campaign issues for Republicans from city council right up to Congress. "High-speed rail is a good [issue] for Republicans," said Los Angeles-based political analyst Allan Hoffenblum, a longtime Republican strategist and author of the California Target Book, which tracks the state's elections. It is one of those black-and-white proposals, he said, where a Republican can draw a clear distinction with their Democratic Party opponent. Many Democrats -- though not all -- have supported the bullet train plan. Fresno Democrat Jim Costa, for instance, has been a driving force in the project dating back to his days in the Legislature. He's seeking re-election to Congress in the newly created 16th Congressional District. John Hernandez, a Fresno Democrat running in the 21st Congressional District, has made high-speed rail one of his campaign centerpieces. But for Republican hopefuls in the June 5 primary election, being 100 percent against the train has become a litmus test of sorts. Already, two of Costa's three Republican opponents have highlighted their opposition to the high-speed rail project on their campaign websites. In Kern County, discontent with the project has been expressed fairly uniformly by local governments. The city councils of Bakersfield, Wasco and Taft have voted to oppose it, as has the county Board of Supervisors. Meanwhile, despite the project's potential for job creation, Kern's delegation in Sacramento has generally spoken against high-speed rail. Assemblywoman Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield, has co-sponsored a measure to put the bullet train proposal back before voters for an up or down vote. At least one Fresno County supervisorial candidate, Larry Fortune, and one Fresno City Council candidate, Steve Brandau -- both Republicans seeking nonpartisan offices -- have cited opposition to high-speed rail in their campaign material. The most heated exchanges so far seem to be where Republicans are facing other Republicans in partisan races. In the 23rd Assembly District, for instance, the high-speed rail war of words isn't limited to Patterson and DeFrank. Patterson points to a January letter written by Clovis City Councilman Bob Whalen -- who is also seeking the seat -- that urged people to listen to all sides of the high-speed rail argument before reaching a conclusion. Whalen's letter doesn't say he supports the plan. It says, in part, "if you are already a 'no,' don't become an entrenched 'no' (no, regardless of benefit). If you are a 'yes,' don't become an entrenched 'yes' (yes, regardless of the cost)." Patterson said Whalen needs to be unequivocally against the project. "If there's anybody who's been the last person to figure out the boondoggle, I think it's Bob," Patterson said. "He ought to have come out against it long ago." Whalen said he is opposed -- now. He waited for the project's business plan to be released before making his decision. That, he said, was the point of his letter -- wait until all the facts were known. Patterson has done his own about-face. In early 1996, when he was mayor, Patterson said: "If the state is serious about putting high-speed rail along the corridor, support is guaranteed. This is one of the singular matters I've dealt with that's had widespread support." At the time, however, the project was pegged at $15 billion and was a much different project, Patterson said. "By 2000, I was opposed to it and haven't changed my mind since," he said. "The question is, can you recognize a boondoggle when you see it?" It's a similar issue in the 5th Assembly District, where Calaveras County businessman Rico Oller has criticized Madera County Supervisor Frank Bigelow for voting in support of high-speed rail on four different occasions. Bigelow said his view -- and that of his fellow Madera County supervisors -- changed over time as they learned more about the high-speed rail plan, and as the project itself changed. Though the supervisors -- including Bigelow -- initially supported the project, earlier this year they went on record in opposition. "As any good leader would do, you explore all the options," Bigelow said. Jon Fleischman, publisher of the FlashReport, a widely read conservative blog site, said it isn't necessarily an unforgivable sin to change your mind over time on a high-profile issue such as high-speed rail. "You can always flip," he said. "You just can't flip-flop."

High Speed Rail causes political controversy

New York Times, Dec 2011

(http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/h/high_speed_rail_projects/index.html)

While high-speed trains have been zooming commuters across the continents of Europe and Asia for decades, the United States has yet to embrace the idea of the bullet train. President Obama, in his 2011 State of the Union speech, called for a high-speed rail system over the next 25 years. However, Mr. Obama’s proposal to spend $53 billion on high-speed rail over the next six years, part of his budget deal in April, hit a roadblock when Congressional Republicans eliminated money for that plan for the year. The year before, newly elected Republican governors in Florida, Ohio and Wisconsin turned down federal money their Democratic predecessors had won for new rail routes, lest their states have to cover most of the costs for trains that would draw few riders. The cuts will not halt the rail program since unspent money remains that can be used on new projects. But they leave the future of high-speed rail in the United States unclear. So far roughly $10 billion has been approved for high-speed rail, but it has been spread to dozens of projects around the country. If Congress does not approve more money, the net result of all that spending may possibly be better regular train service in many areas, and a small down payment on one bullet train, in California. California plans to build a 520-mile high-speed rail line from Los Angeles to San Francisco. And they are doing it in the face of what might seem like insurmountable political and fiscal obstacles. A state report in November 2011 projected the cost of the bullet train tripling to $98 billion for a project that would not be finished until 2033.

Republicans Dislike spending on public transportation especially high-speed rail

Sledge 12

(Matt, Huffington Post reporter, “Gop Candidates’ Transportation Infrastructure Talk Praises Tolls But Ignores Jobs”, 1/4/12, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/gop-candidates-transportation-infrastructure-jobs_n_1184314.html Accessed:6/25/12

When forced to pick between increasing funding for public transportation or interstates, the Reason poll found, 40 percent of Democrats would go with the former. Only 18 percent of GOP-backers favored public transportation over roads. On high-speed rail, which has become a favorite Republican example of a stimulus boondoggle, GOP voters are very much opposed to government support for the emerging transportation option. Only 21 percent of Republicans support government backing for bullet trains, as opposed to 47 percent of Democrats. So Romney was probably on firm ground on Monday when he told a crowd in Iowa, according to Transportation Nation, that "Amtrak ought to stand on its own feet or its own wheels or whatever you'd say."

Republicans hate funding for high speed rail-prohibited California from receiving funds for it

SF Gate 2/3/12

(San Francisco Gate, home of San Fran Chronicle, “Republicans prohibit funding for high speed rail,” 2/3/12, http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2012/02/03/republicans-prohibit-funding-for-high-speed-rail/ Accessed:6/25/12)

House Republicans late Thursday night adopted an amendment that would prohibit California from receiving any high speed rail money in a huge five-year transportation bill headed to the House floor next week. The $270 billion bill also eliminates bicycle and pedestrian programs and detaches urban mass transit funding from its traditional revenue source. The underlying bill did not include any high speed rail funding to begin with, and indeed would cut Amtrak by 25 percent, so the prohibition serves mainly as a stick in the eye to California’s plan for bullet trains. The action is part of a continuing effort by Republicans to kill the entire project, which was a major element of President Obama’s 2009 stimulus. California’s $100 billion plan for bullet trains running from San Francisco to San Diego already has the stimulus money in hand to get started, but future federal funding on which the project depends is very much at risk if House Republicans maintain control of the chamber, not to mention take the White House. The high speed rail prohibition came as an amendment, approved 31-22, by Rep. Jeff Dunham, R-Turlock, who said he wanted to make sure that all transportation funds for California to go to highways.