If you live in a flyover state, you can't believe how bad California has gotten

Not the climate or topography, of course.  It's the corrupt morons running the place.

In 1996, the California legislature--totally dominated by Democrats--created a new taxpayer-funded graft-pot called the "High Speed Rail Authority," cuz the Dems were, like, *totally* slobbering over the fact that *Europe* had high-speed rail, so...duh Kool Kidz jus' HAD to have it too, eh?

So duh "Authoritay" spent a few tens of millions on "consultants" to find the best place to put the faaabulous "high-speed rail" line.  And in 2008 they unveiled The Proposal.

And later that year state voters--uniformly Democrat and dumber than rocks--passed a $33 Billion bond issue to build...an 800-mile rail line between Sacramento and San Diego.

Got it?  Keep those numbers in mind, cuz dey gon' pop up latah.

The consultants said it would take ten years to complete.  For comparison, the first transcontinental railroad, crossing some really tough mountain terrain, took six years to build, with only hand tools.

So...800 miles.  You can fly that in a bit under two hours.  But flyin' burns carbon-containing fuelz dat beez makin' dat awful Global Worming!  Besides, all the Kool Kidz in Europe haz high-speed rail.  We're "kool," right?  So we need this!

So dis' way bettah den flyin'!  An' only cost $33 BILLION!  What a bargain!  Besides, we gon' get duh moneez frum duh Democrats in duh Con-gress, so almos' gon' be FREE!

Besides, makes lotsa jobs, get lotsa campaign contributions!

Now, fifteen years later, the project has yet to operate a single train, yet has burned through about $10 BILLION.  And because of the skyrocketing cost--bloated by innumerable bits of graft--the original 800-mile route has had to be scaled back a bit.

And by "a bit" we mean from the 800 miles in the first, glowing Proposal down to...uh...180 miles, between Bakersfield and Merced.  Even that line is only half finished, and the hotshots running this scam estimate that even that greatly-reduced length will end up costing a staggering $130 BILLION.

But the rail authority also has Good News: they now estimate that this much shorter 180-mile route will be completed a year or so after 2030.

And by "a year or so after 2030" they mean up to never, as past estimates of both time and cost have been wildly wrong and perhaps deliberately misleading.

One unforeseen consequence of drastically cutting the route from the original length is that the brain trusts at the Rail Authoritay have been forced to admit there won't be nearly as many passengers between Bakersfield and Merced as they'd originally predicted.  Meaning that even if it's finished, it won't even begin to cover its operating costs.

This is what passes for competence in Cali today.  Let's see what else is failing:

Nine years ago, with a severe drought and water rationing, the Democrat grifters in the legislature passed another "bond project"--this time for $7.5 billion for "new water projects and initiatives."

$2.7 billion of that was to build new dams and reservoirs. The current water storage system hadn't been enlarged since the early 1980s, when the state had 15 million fewer residents.

So how has that project worked?  So far not a single dam or new reservoir has been built. So how much of the authorized $7.5 billion has been spent, and on what?  Good luck finding out.

In 2017 a $15 billion bond measure was passed to completely remodel Los Angeles International Airport.

Turns out the brain trust/grifters who originally pushed that project may have underestimated a bit: Now the projected cost has *doubled*--now estimated at $30 billion.

In 2002, California began construction to replace about half of the Bay Bridge that links San Francisco to Oakland.  The grifters in charge said it would cost $250 million and take five years.

The job ended up costing cost $6.5 billion—a 2,500 percent increase over the initial proposal.  And took 11 years instead of five.

It's worth noting that in 1933, when construction began on the entire bridge, the job was completed in just over three years.

The list of similar delayed, canceled, and obscenely over-budget project is endless.  The question is, why?  How could the Americans of 1933 have built the entire Bay Bridge in barely over one-fourth of the time it takes us to replace half of the length today?

Lots of factors, but we can learn much by looking at the pattern, which is always the same:  the pushers deliberately lowball the estimated cost and completion time, to persuade voter to approve the grift.  Then after billions have been spent, with little result, the grifters wail "It wuzn't our fault!  It was...um...inflation!  Yeah, dat's it!  Wait..."Global Warming!"  Yeah, dat's it!

Wait...It was Donald Trump!  See, if Trump hadn't said so many negative things about the project we would have had it finished and running by now!   Yeh, dat's it!

For decades California has been totally controlled by Democrats, who fill every elected state-wide office.  Not one Republican holds a state-wide office.  Progressive Democrats have totally controlled both houses of the legislature for decades.

The result is that the Democrats have no worries about getting caught if they take kickbacks from public projects.  No one can tell the state government "no."  

Thus when the state's wacko extremists have goofy demands, state pols quickly agree to them even if they're clearly insane.
 
For example: dams provide clean hydroelectric power, store water and prevent floods.  But the "watermelons" (green on the outside, red inside) wail that filling valleys with lakes destroys scenic nature.  Thus they demanded the state remove four dams on the Klamath River.

And the state legislature--always scared to buck the eco-fakes--obeyed, and the state is now blowing up these dams.  Ironically, hundreds of millions of dollars of the cost of destroying the dams is being paid by bond money voters had approved for...wait for it... building new reservoirs.

Seriously.  You can't make this stuff up.

Eco-freaks demand that the state allow forests to return to their “natural state”--with dense brush, tall summer grasses and fallen trees left in place.  The result is millions of tons of dry kindling, making forest fires far more destructive.  And no one in government says "Don't do that."

California is providing a valuable lesson for the nation in the disasters of one-party rule.  Yet voters never connect the dots and vote the grifters out.

And now the glib, corrupt governor of that state may well run for president next year.  If he does, chances are good he'll win, bringing his state's policies to national reality.