Republish
Inflated job numbers prop up bullet train
We love that you want to share our stories with your readers. Hundreds of publications republish our work on a regular basis.
All of the articles at CalMatters are available to republish for free, under the following conditions:
-
- Give prominent credit to our journalists: Credit our authors at the top of the article and any other byline areas of your publication. In the byline, we prefer “By Author Name, CalMatters.” If you’re republishing guest commentary (example) from CalMatters, in the byline, use “By Author Name, Special for CalMatters.”
-
- Credit CalMatters at the top of the story: At the top of the story’s text, include this copy: “This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you are republishing commentary, include this copy instead: “This commentary was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.” If you’re republishing in print, omit the second sentence on newsletter signups.
-
- Do not edit the article, including the headline, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Alameda County” to “Alameda County, California” or “here.”
-
- If you add reporting that would help localize the article, include this copy in your story: “Additional reporting by [Your Publication]” and let us know at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- If you wish to translate the article, please contact us for approval at republish@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations by CalMatters staff or shown as “for CalMatters” may only be republished alongside the stories in which they originally appeared. For any other uses, please contact us for approval at visuals@calmatters.org.
-
- Photos and illustrations from wire services like the Associated Press, Reuters, iStock are not free to republish.
-
- Do not sell our stories, and do not sell ads specifically against our stories. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page surrounded by ads you’ve already sold.
-
- Sharing a CalMatters story on social media? Please mention @CalMatters. We’re on X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and BlueSky.
If you’d like to regularly republish our stories, we have some other options available. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org if you’re interested.
Have other questions or special requests? Or do you have a great story to share about the impact of one of our stories on your audience? We’d love to hear from you. Contact us at republish@calmatters.org.
Inflated job numbers prop up bullet train
Share this:
Whenever politicians spend large sums of taxpayer money on pet projects, they invariably overstate their supposed economic benefits, particularly creating oodles of “good-paying jobs.”
They all do it, using a deceptive assumption that if one worker works one day on the project, it’s counted as a “job.”
Ralph Vartabedian, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times who — thank goodness — specializes in telling us what’s really happening, or not, in the state’s woebegone high-speed rail project, punctures its job creation myth in a recent article.
Vartabedian cites a banner on a bullet train viaduct in Fresno claiming “5,000 jobs and counting” but reveals that while consuming many billions of dollars, the project has employed only about 1,000 construction workers at any one time.
“The boast of 5,000 jobs refers to the number of workers dispatched from union halls,” he wrote. “Each time a worker is sent to a job site, whether for one day or hundreds of days, it counts as a job for the purpose of the banners.
“Rail authority Chief Executive Brian Kelly defended the worker count as a valid measure of progress, saying the authority has been doing it for years.”
In other words, since inflated job numbers have been used for years, Kelly would have us believe it’s a valid practice.
In fact as Vartabedian discovered from analyzing bullet train data, “hourly workers have received about $265 million of the $6.1 billion that has been spent on construction, representing just 4%. Of the total $8.1 billion spent on the project, the labor portion is even smaller, 3%. The $265 million is less than what the rail authority spends every three months.”
The much-inflated job creation claims are important because construction union support has been one of the most important factors in keeping the project alive despite lacking a rational justification.
The original vision, backed by voters, was for a statewide north-south system of high-speed travel, but no one ever came up with a plan for financing such a system, which would cost upwards of $100 billion.
The Fresno structures, dubbed “Stonehenge” by local critics, are part of a very limited stretch in the San Joaquin Valley, financed by some state bonds, a federal grant and a share of proceeds from the state’s auctions of greenhouse gas emission permits. At the moment, it would run from a few miles north of Fresno to a few miles north of Bakersfield.
Gov. Gavin Newsom came close to killing the project after taking office in 2019, only to backtrack under pressure from construction unions.
Newsom then declared that he wants to expand the current project northward a few miles to Merced and southward a few miles to Bakersfield, assuming that someday it could be connected to the Bay Area and Los Angeles. But that also added billions of dollars to the projected costs.
Newsom’s latest budget proposal would appropriate $4.2 billion from remaining voter-approved bonds to advance his version of the project and mentions “potential federal funds” to fill the remaining financial hole — a reference to President Joe Biden’s ambitious infrastructure program.
However, Newsom’s plan doesn’t sit well with some legislative leaders who would prefer improving commuter transit. Some bullet train money has already been shifted to electrifying the Caltrain commuter service on the San Francisco peninsula, and Southern California lawmakers, led by Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, want similar diversions for their region.
The commuter projects would probably use inflated job creation claims as well, but at least they would be serving real needs, rather than a unrealistic pipedream.
Dan WaltersOpinion Columnist
Dan Walters is one of most decorated and widely syndicated columnists in California history, authoring a column four times a week that offers his view and analysis of the state’s political, economic,... More by Dan Walters