On the recordJune 9, 2015
As you have heard, this project is $70 billion over budget. It has a shortfall of $87 billion. If my colleagues in California, if the minority party of this body would like to continue on with this project, then where is the $87 billion? I don't see a proposal from them, nor do I see a proposal from the Governor for $87 billion. We have priorities in the State. As you may know, we are going through a big drought in California. We would love to create the jobs. Let's utilize the billions of dollars that would be spent on high-speed rail over the next several decades on water projects that would actually help our infrastructure, our agriculture, as well as people throughout California. There is a good way to spend taxpayer dollars. This is not it. We cannot afford to leave the next generation with an $87 billion hole that will continue to not only put California in further debt, but will continue to show that our priorities are misguided. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Denham). The amendment was agreed to. Amendment Offered by Mr. Peters
