Newsom slams Trump's $4B cut to California bullet train as ‘illegal'
'Trump wants to hand China the future and abandon the Central Valley. We won't let him,' Newsom said in a statement.
The governor's response came just hours after Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy announced the funding cut, following what he described as a comprehensive compliance review by the Federal Railroad Administration that concluded that the California High-Speed Rail Authority 'cannot meet its obligations under the grant agreement.'
'It's time for this boondoggle to die,' Duffy said in a statement. 'President Trump and I will always fight to ensure your tax dollars only go to projects that accomplish great, big, beautiful things.'
The FRA's review cited numerous issues, including a $7 billion funding gap, missed procurement deadlines and inflated ridership estimates.
Despite 16 years of planning and $15 billion spent, no high-speed rail track has been laid, Duffy said.
'The Railroad we were promised still does not exist, and never will,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'This project was Severely Overpriced, Overregulated, and NEVER DELIVERED.'
Newsom and the CHSRA disputed the administration's findings, arguing that the project is actively progressing, with more than 50 major structures completed and track-laying set to begin.
'Canceling these grants without cause isn't just wrong — it's illegal,' CEO Ian Choudri said in a statement. 'These are legally binding agreements, and the Authority has met every obligation.'
The revocation comes amid broader Republican criticism of the rail project, which was approved by California voters in 2008 and originally promised high-speed service between San Francisco and Los Angeles.
The project's cost has ballooned to more than $135 billion, with current efforts focused on a 119-mile segment from Bakersfield to Merced, projected to begin service by 2033.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
11 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Mayoral Candidate Says New Yorkers Have 'Buyer's Remorse' Over Mamdani
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Independent New York City mayoral candidate Jim Walden said Saturday during an interview appearance on Fox News that people have "buyer's remorse" after voting for Zohran Mamdani in last month's Democratic primary. Socialist democrat Mamdani, who represents New York's 36th Assembly District, scored a decisive victory in the primary, winning 56.4 percent of the vote to give him a 12-percentage point over former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. However, a HarrisX poll that was published this week suggests that some of that support may be slipping. Why It Matters New York's mayoral race is being closely watched as a potential litmus test for the direction of the Democratic Party, which is still struggling to recover after its defeat in last year's election. Mamdani's surprising primary win reflects a growing appetite for left-leaning economic populism and signals a major shift within the party. While some believe his success could act as a potential blueprint for Democrats seeking to reconnect with urban and working-class voters, it has also exposed deep internal divisions, with establishment leaders like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries refusing to unify behind the candidate, wary of alienating moderates. Jim Walden, a partner at Walden Macht & Haran, attends a Helsinki Commission hearing on the impact of doping in international sport, on July 25, 2018, on Capitol Hill in Washington. Jim Walden, a partner at Walden Macht & Haran, attends a Helsinki Commission hearing on the impact of doping in international sport, on July 25, 2018, on Capitol Hill in Washington. Jacquelyn Martin/AP What To Know During a Saturday morning appearance on Fox News, Walden who is currently polling in last place in the New York City general mayoral race with 1 percent, blamed the Democratic Party for Mamdani's success in the primary. "My understanding is that a lot of people have buyer's remorse because the Democrats did a terrible job on opposition research during the primary," he said. The HarrisX poll, released Tuesday, shows Mamdani barely leading the pack of candidates in the race. The poll shows Mamdani, with 26 percent of the vote, in a tie with Cuomo who has 23 percent. Republican mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa has 22 percent and current NYC Mayor Eric Adams, who is running as an independent and who has faced multiple scandals since being in office, sat at 13 percent. In HarrisX's poll, a three-way race without Adams, Cuomo (31 percent) is statistically tied with Mamdani (29 percent) and Sliwa (28 percent). However, in a three-way race without Cuomo, Mamdani leads by 10 points, winning 35 percent to Sliwa's 25 percent and Adams' 19 percent. In head-to-head matchups, Mamdani topples Adams 43 to 36 percent, but trails Cuomo 35 to 50 percent. The poll surveyed 585 registered New York City voters online between July 7–8. The margin of error is ±4.1 percentage points. HarrisX said it conducted the survey before Cuomo announced that he's running as an independent in the general election. Walden addressed the fears that multiple independent candidates could split the vote, allowing Mamdani a clear path to victory. The lawyer said that, when the general election comes, all the independents, aside from the frontrunner, should drop out to allow them to run directly against Mamdani. "We have to put our political ambitions in the backseat for the interests of New Yorkers," he said, adding that Cuomo has signaled support for the plan, while Adams and Sliwa have not. The poll comes as the majority of New York's Democratic leadership has refused to endorse Mamdani, who has run on promises to make buses free and make rent cheaper. His progressive policies have led Republicans, including President Donald Trump, to label him a "communist." However, other recent polls show Mamdani maintaining a decisive lead over Cuomo, Adams and Sliwa. A Data for Progress (DfP) survey, also released this week, showed 40 percent of likely voters would vote for Mamdani if the mayoral election was held on July 15. The poll also showed that 25 percent would vote for Cuomo, 15 percent would vote for Adams, 14 percent would back Sliwa, and 1 percent would vote for Walden. The poll surveyed 756 likely voters between July 1 and 6, with a margin of error of ± 4 percentage points. Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani gets endorsed by the United Teachers Federation in downtown Manhattan on July 9. Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani gets endorsed by the United Teachers Federation in downtown Manhattan on July 9. Kaite Godowski/AP What People Are Saying Jim Walden said during an appearance on Fox News on Saturday, "At the end of the day, I say to New don't have to choose these broken politicians who are either extremists or craven or incompetent. There is a competent change agent in the race and that's what I'm going to be." Curtis Sliwa in an emailed statement sent to Newsweek reacting to the HarrisX poll: "For the first time since 2009, a Republican for NYC mayor is within the margin of error to win. That Republican is me. The momentum is real. I'm running to be the People's Mayor and I'm going to win on November 4th!" Zohran Mamdani posted to X, formerly Twitter, on Monday: "While Andrew Cuomo and Eric Adams trip over each other to win the approval of billionaires in backrooms, our campaign remains focused on working New Yorkers and their clear desire for a different kind of politics." Dritan Nesho, CEO of HarrisX, said about the poll: "These numbers show a volatile race still taking shape. While the progressive base is fueling Mamdani's rise, Cuomo's broad name recognition and moderate appeal make him a formidable general election challenger." Political analyst Craig Agranoff told Newsweek via text message on Wednesday: "Establishment Democrats' reluctance to endorse Mamdani in the NYC mayoral race stems largely from ideological divides within the party. As a self-identified democratic socialist backed by progressive groups like the DSA and figures such as AOC, Mamdani's positions on issues like defunding the police, strong support for Palestinian rights, and aggressive economic reforms put him at odds with the more centrist, pragmatic wing represented by leaders like Jeffries, Schumer, & Hochul." What Happens Next? The general mayoral election will be held on November 4.
USA Today
12 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump: Epstein grand jury records unlikely to satisfy critics
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump acknowledged on July 19 he's unlikely to satisfy the clamor for more information about Jeffrey Epstein. Even if a court fully approves his request to release grand jury testimony about the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender, that probably won't be enough, Trump said on social media. 'Nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request,' the president wrote. 'It will always be more, more, more. MAGA!' More: $10 billion lawsuit. More documents coming. Here's the latest on Trump and Epstein. Trump previously accused the Biden administration of hiding a list of Epstein clients. The Department of Justice teased that more files would be coming out, but then on July 7, Attorney General Pam Bondi said there was no client list and no further disclosure was needed. That led to a wave of backlash from Trump's MAGA base. "No one believes there is not a client list," Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, a close Trump ally, posted on X July 8. On July 18, federal prosecutors asked a federal court in Manhattan to unseal grand jury transcripts in the criminal cases against Epstein and his former associate Ghislaine Maxwell. Epstein's federal sex-trafficking case was still pending when he was found dead in a jail cell in 2019. 'Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval,' Trump wrote on social media. Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who filed legislation to release all the government's Epstein records, wrote in social media post that Trump's move indicates the pressure campaign is 'working.' 'But we want all the files,' Massie added. It could take time for the courts to release any records, and the grand jury documents are just a portion of the unreleased files. 'What about videos, photographs and other recordings?' Democratic Rep. Daniel Goldman, a former prosecutor, wrote on social media in response to Bondi saying she'd seek the release of grand jury testimony. 'What about FBI… (witness interviews)? What about texts and emails?' Contributing: Zac Anderson, Aysha Bagchi, Joey Garrison.
The Hill
12 minutes ago
- The Hill
Will the 2028 Democratic nominee be ‘none of the above'?
Did you hear the one where former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg and California Gov. Gavin Newsom were the leading candidates for the Democratic nomination for president in 2028? Neither have I. Nor have any Democrats I speak with who concern themselves with real-world politics. In a recent poll from a company called Echelon Insights — which describes itself as 'erasing old industry lines that separate the process of conducting research from the tools to act on it' — Harris was leading the Democratic field with 26 percent of the primary vote, followed by Buttigieg at 11 percent, Newsom at 10 percent, Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) at 7 percent and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) at 6 percent. I have spoken with numerous Democrats in or around the business of politics over the last few months. Not one believes that Harris will — or should be — the nominee. Similarly, none believe the other four names topping the poll will be the standard-bearer come November 2028. As has been stated many times in the past, a good lawyer can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. The same holds true for polling. Depending on where you poll and how you shade the questions, a poll can bolster the views and desires of one partisan entity over the other, be they Democrats or Republicans. As for a recent glaring example of such polling flaws — purposeful or innocent — look no further than the truly laughable final Des Moines Register-Mediacom Iowa Poll of the 2024 election season conducted by Selzer and Co. In a state Trump was heavily favored to win, the jaw-dropping poll showed Harris leading Trump 47 percent to 44 percent. Of course, Trump went on to crush Harris in Iowa by 13 points, meaning the poll was a whopping 16 points off. 'How,' curious minds wondered, 'could a legitimate poll be that far off?' Some, including Trump himself, openly speculated whether it had been a tactic to suppress the Republican vote in the state. Trump was rightfully so bothered by the massive and mysterious failure of that poll that he decided to sue pollster J. Ann Selzer, her polling firm, the Des Moines Register newspaper and its parent company Gannett. Although the suit was later dropped, Selzer chose to retire from the polling business. All that is to say that more and more people in the business put little stock in any of these polls. Of course, at some point, some Democrat is going to emerge as the frontrunner and then the eventual nominee. After Trump's decisive victory in 2024, every Democrat I spoke with believed their party would learn from its mistakes and tone-deafness and move back toward the center — back toward once again listening to the voices of working-class and disenfranchised Americans. Not only has the party not done so, but it has doubled and tripled down on 'woke' and 'DEI' rhetoric while still loudly pushing its main 'policy' plank from 2024: 'We hate Trump.' Of course, the 'we hate Trump' strategy did nothing to address the 'bread and butter' issues upending the lives of working-class and disenfranchised Americans in 2024 and it is doing less for them now. And yet, 'rising voices' such as Reps. Ocasio-Cortez and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) still invoke that strategy incessantly in egocentric attempts at gaining attention. Here is a suggestion for Democratic-leaning polling companies. Why not poll the minority, poor and disenfranchised constituents in the districts represented by Ocasio-Cortez and Crockett? Why not ask which 'bread and butter' emergencies either is fixing by appearing on show after show proclaiming their hatred of Trump? How has the 'leadership' of Ocasio-Cortez and Crockett improved the real lives of those constituents? Most Americans want to see those 'bread and butter' issues fixed. They don't live in entrenched and elite bubbles of entitlement. They exist in an often brutally tough world, in which many still must choose which necessity they will have to go without that month. They don't care if you 'hate Trump' or not. They want to feed and protect their children. And yet Democratic leaders still refuse to wrest control back from the far-left wing of their party. Why? Are they truly that afraid and intimidated by what really does amount to a tiny percentage of their base? In the meantime, the 2028 Republican Party bench could not be stronger. Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are all on the list. And guess what? Just as in 2024, all are laser-focused on the 'bread and butter' issues that most affect the quality of life of working-class and disenfranchised Americans. So who will be the Democratic nominee in 2028? As the internal battle for control of that party goes on, my money is still on 'none of the above.'
