logo
Trump administration signals it will slash funds for long-delayed California high-speed rail project

Trump administration signals it will slash funds for long-delayed California high-speed rail project

Minta day ago

LOS ANGELES — The Trump administration signaled Wednesday that it intends to cut off federal funding for a long-delayed California high-speed rail project plagued by multibillion-dollar cost overruns, following the release of a scathing federal report that concluded there is 'no viable path' to complete even a partial section of the line.
Voters first authorized $10 billion in borrowed funds in 2008 to cover about a third of the estimated cost, with a promise the train would be up and running by 2020. Five years beyond that deadline, no tracks have been laid and its estimated price tag has ballooned to over $100 billion.
In a letter to the California High-Speed Rail Authority, which oversees the project, Federal Railroad Administration acting Administrator Drew Feeley wrote that what was envisioned as an 800-mile system connecting the state's major cities has been reduced to a blueprint for 'a 119-mile track to nowhere.'
After a $4 billion federal investment, the California agency 'has conned the taxpayer ... with no viable plan to deliver even that partial segment on time,' Feeley wrote.
State officials defended what's known as the nation's largest infrastructure project and said they remain committed to construction, though it's not clear what funding would replace the federal support if it's withdrawn. Feeley noted the FRA could seek repayment of the federal funds but is not proposing to claw back those dollars at this time.
Carol Dahmen, the state authority's chief of strategic communications, said in a statement that the federal conclusions are misguided and 'do not reflect the substantial progress made to deliver high-speed rail in California.'
Dahmen noted that the majority of the funding for the line has been provided by the state and that Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's budget proposal would extend at least $1 billion a year for 20 years to complete an initial segment of the line.
State officials are focused on a stretch connecting the Central Valley cities of Bakersfield and Merced, which is set to be operating by 2033.
The state agency has about a month to formally respond to the FRA, after which the grants could be terminated.
State Sen. Tony Strickland, a Republican from Huntington Beach who is vice chair of the Transportation Committee, said that 'commonsense has prevailed" and urged the Legislature's dominant Democrats to redirect the funds from the rail line to lowering gas prices or investing in viable construction projects.
'Let's stop wasting California's hard-earned taxpayer dollars,' Strickland said.
There is no known source for the billions of dollars that would be needed to complete the line.
California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO Ian Choudri suggested in April that private investors could step in and fill the funding gap for the project that promised nonstop rail service between San Francisco and Los Angeles in under three hours. At the time, he acknowledged that even if funding is secured, it might take nearly two more decades to complete most of that segment.
President Donald Trump said in May that his administration will not continue to fund the line. 'That train is the worst cost overrun I've ever seen,' Trump told reporters at the time, calling it "totally out of control.'
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Cancelling contracts, making big disclosures: Who loses what in Musk-Trump breakup?
Cancelling contracts, making big disclosures: Who loses what in Musk-Trump breakup?

First Post

time7 minutes ago

  • First Post

Cancelling contracts, making big disclosures: Who loses what in Musk-Trump breakup?

Donald Trump and Elon Musk have called time on their friendship in the most shocking of ways — social media posts were fired off, threats were made, and big bombshells were dropped. In the aftermath of it, Tesla stocks tanked, and the world's richest man's personal net worth declined. Yes, this breakup could be costly for both. Here's how read more The aftermath of Donald Trump and Elon Musk's breakup raises the question: Who has the most to lose? File image/Reuters No one believed that the Donald Trump-Elon Musk friendship would be one that would last forever. But the fact that it ended in the most spectacular of ways and that too so quickly was not anticipated. On Thursday (June 5), America's two most powerful men — one is the US president and the other is the world's richest man — spent time on social media trying to destroy each other's reputations with threats and secrets. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Their spectacular breakup also means the end to perhaps the most powerful of alliances in the US with many pondering who emerges as the bigger loser in this spat. Does Trump have more to lose or will Musk be the one to suffer? A bromance turns nasty It was last July when Elon Musk endorsed Trump for president and became an integral part of his campaign machinery — who can forget Musk manically jumping around at Trump rallies, funding a massive super-PAC on his behalf. Later, when Trump became US president, he returned the favour by appointing Musk to take charge at Department of Government Efficiency (Doge). When Elon Musk attached himself to Trump many began speculating when these two massive egos would, eventually, clash and that their strategic partnership would flame out spectacularly. And crash and burn the relationship did. Since late May, Musk has been vocally critical of Trump's so-called big, beautiful spending bill. 'I was, like, disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not decrease it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,' Musk told the TV programme CBS Sunday Morning. But Trump kept his cool and bid adieu to Musk as he called time on his service to the White House. Once out of government, though, the Tesla chief took his criticism against the bill even further. He called the bill a 'd isgusting abomination ,' threatened to politically retaliate against its supporters, and argued it would increase the debt. Social media posts by US President Donald Trump and Elon Musk are displayed on smartphones. Trump has threatened to revoke government contracts from Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk as a public feud escalates over Musk's criticism of the Trump administration's policies. AFP The US president then shot back on Thursday, while he had a sit down in the Oval Office with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. ' I'm very disappointed because Elon knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anybody sitting here,' Trump said. 'He had no problem with it. All of a sudden, he had a problem.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD He further stated, ' I'll be honest, I think he misses the place. It's sort of Trump derangement syndrome. We have it with others, too. They leave, and they wake up in the morning, and the glamour's gone. The whole world is different, and they become hostile.' Trump then took the fight online, writing in one social media post, 'Elon was 'wearing thin,' I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' And this led Musk to hit back. Musk argued, 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election' and accused Trump of 'such ingratitude.' And that wasn't the end, the feud kept going with Musk levelling a serious allegation, '@realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Consequences of the big, nasty breakup But who shall suffer from this breakup? After all, it was a mutual relationship benefiting both individuals. Many analysts and Trump watchers believe Musk shall be the big loser from this breakup. In fact, as the two bickered on social media, Tesla shares slumped — dropping 14 per cent, wiping out roughly $150 billion in market value in one of the worst days in months. Analysts and pundits believed that the losses were an indication of what might be at stake for Musk. Musk's personal net worth also took a tumble on Thursday — it fell by nearly $34 billion, making him the biggest daily loser on Bloomberg's list of the world's 500 richest people. Trump could even take the fight further with cancelling government contracts with Musk's various companies, including SpaceX and Tesla. In fact, the US president even suggested this while feuding with Musk online. 'The easiest way to save money in our budget, billions and billions of dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump wrote. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD SpaceX headquarters is shown in Hawthorne, California. If the Trump administration pauses government contracts, SpaceX will lose billions of dollars. Reuters According to data available, last year, Musk's companies were promised $3 billion in nearly 100 contracts with 17 government agencies. Additionally, Reuters reported that if Trump did go ahead with this move, about $22 billion of SpaceX's government contracts would be at risk. In addition to hitting his businesses, this feud could also threaten Musk's stay in the US. Musk is not a natural-born American — he was born in Pretoria, South Africa and thanks to his mother, Maye Musk, obtained Canadian citizenship in 1989 when he was 17 years old. This helped him move to North America for his studies and eventually to the United States. It was only in 2002 that he became a naturalised US citizen. Moreover, Musk has already lost his fan base on the liberal side and now with the fight with Trump, he will also lose his Conservative supporters. This will be bad for Musk — personally and from a business standpoint. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD On June 5, Elon Musk and Donald Trump ended their friendship in the most spectacular way. File image/Reuters But many also note that the Trump-Musk feud also has the potential to hurt the US president. How? When Trump was campaigning, Musk emerged as one of his major donors. The SpaceX chief spent more than $250 million to get Trump elected. Now imagine if he used that same financial clout against the US president. Musk could fund campaigns against Republicans, hurting Trump in the long run. Moreover, he could also align with fiscally conservative lawmakers to block Trump's signature tax bill in the Senate. Besides this, Musk could also use the time he has spent with Trump against him. After spending a lot of time closely with the US president, he could use information that the two shared to hurt Trump. He could make big revelations, which have the ability to hurt the US president. For instance, on Thursday, amid the online battle Musk claimed that the US president was part of the Epstein Files STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Musk could also use X against Trump — the X owner has more than 220 million followers compared to the US president's 105.6 million followers. As some note, Musk could use the platform to keep airing his grievances against Trump. In fact, on Thursday, he called for the impeachment of the US president and even asked his followers 'is it time to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80 per cent in the middle?' It's left to be seen if Trump or Musk will win this battle, but for now, we can buckle up and wait for their next steps. With inputs from agencies

US hiring likely slowed to 1,30,000 new jobs last month amid uncertainty over Trumps policies
US hiring likely slowed to 1,30,000 new jobs last month amid uncertainty over Trumps policies

Mint

time11 minutes ago

  • Mint

US hiring likely slowed to 1,30,000 new jobs last month amid uncertainty over Trumps policies

Washington, The American job market likely continued to slow last month, hobbled by worries over President Donald Trump's trade wars, deportations and purges of the federal workforce. The Labour Department's numbers on May hiring Friday are expected to show that businesses, government agencies and nonprofits added 1,30,000 jobs last month. That would be down from 1,77,000 in April but enough to stay ahead of people entering the workforce and keep the unemployment rate at a low 4.2 per cent, according to a survey of forecasters by the data firm FactSet. Mainstream economists expect Trump's policies to take a toll on America's economy, the world's largest. His massive taxes on imports – tariffs – are expected to raise costs for US companies that buy raw materials, equipment and components from overseas and force them to cut back hiring or even lay workers off. Billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency has slashed federal workers and cancelled government contracts. Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration is expected to make it harder for businesses to find enough workers. For the most part, though, any damage has yet to show up in the government's economic data. The US economy and job market have proven surprisingly resilient in recent years. When the inflation fighters at the Federal Reserve raised their benchmark interest rate 11 times in 2022 and 2023, the higher borrowing costs were widely expected to tip the United States into a recession. Instead, the economy kept growing and employers kept hiring. But former Fed economist Claudia Sahm warns that the job market of 2025 isn't nearly as durable as the two or three years ago when immigrants were pouring into the US job market and employers were posting record job openings. 'Any signs of weakness in the data this week would stoke fears of a recession again,' Sahm, now chief economist at New Century Advisors, wrote in a Substack post this week. 'It's too soon to see the full effects of tariffs, DOGE, or other policies on the labour market; softening now would suggest less resilience to those later effects, raising the odds of a recession.' Recent economic reports have sent mixed signals. The Labour Department reported Tuesday that US job openings rose unexpectedly to 7.4 million in April – seemingly a good sign. But the same report showed that layoffs ticked up and the number of Americans quitting their jobs fell, a sign they were less confident they could find something better elsewhere. Surveys by the Institute for Supply Management, a trade group of purchasing managers, found that both American manufacturing and services businesses were contracting last month. And the number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits rose last week to the highest level in eight months. Jobless claims — a proxy for layoffs — still remain low by historical standards, suggesting that employers are reluctant to cut staff despite uncertainty over Trump's policies. They likely remember how hard it was to bring people back from the massive but short-lived layoffs of the 2020 COVID-19 recession as the US economy bounced back with unexpected strength. Still, the job market has clearly decelerated. So far this year, American employers have added an average 1,44,000 jobs a month. That is down from 1,68,000 last year; 2,16,000 in 2023; 3,80,000 in 2022, and a record 6,03,000 in 2021 in the rebound from COVID-19 layoffs. Trump's tariffs — and the erratic way he rolls them out, suspends them and conjures up new ones — have already buffeted the economy. America's gross domestic product — the nation's output of goods and services — fell at a 0.2 per cent annual pace from January through March this year. A surge of imports shaved 5 percentage points off growth during the first quarter as companies rushed to bring in foreign products ahead of Trump's tariffs. Imports plunged by a record 16 per cent in April as Trump's levies took effect. The drop in foreign goods could mean fewer jobs at the warehouses that store them and the trucking companies that haul them around, wrote Michael Madowitz, an economist at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute. NPK NPK This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.

Missed the pharma rebound? Gland Pharma, Cipla among 8 stocks that jumped up to 28% since April
Missed the pharma rebound? Gland Pharma, Cipla among 8 stocks that jumped up to 28% since April

Mint

time13 minutes ago

  • Mint

Missed the pharma rebound? Gland Pharma, Cipla among 8 stocks that jumped up to 28% since April

Pharma stocks have made a big comeback in recent months, with companies such as Granules India, Gland Pharma, Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Natco Pharma, Aurobindo Pharma, and Cipla rebounding sharply from their April lows, emerging as some of the top turnaround champions in the 2025 market recovery. Granules India led the pack with a 28% recovery from its April low of ₹ 422 apiece, now trading at ₹ 533. Gland Pharma followed with a 27.8% rise to ₹ 1,633 apiece. Likewise, shares of Dr. Reddy's Laboratories have gained 26%, while JB Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals, Zydus Lifesciences, Natco Pharma, Aurobindo Pharma, and Cipla have recovered in the range of 11.5% to 23%. The strong recovery in the select counters has boosted the Nifty Pharma index to regain 13% from April lows. The recent rebound in pharma stocks has been driven by a combination of sector-specific tailwinds, improving global trade sentiment, and renewed investor appetite for risk. Additionally, attractive valuations at lower levels have also encouraged value buying, leading to a notable turnaround in several key counters. Notably, investor sentiment toward pharma stocks received a boost after the US government excluded generic drugs from the Most Favored Nation (MFN) Pricing Policy. In mid-May, US President Trump signed Executive Order 14297 to implement the MFN policy, which aimed to lower US prescription drug prices by benchmarking them against the lowest prices in other developed countries. However, the US Department of Health and Human Services later clarified that generics would be exempt from these price cuts, a significant relief for Indian biosimilar and generic drug manufacturers, for whom the US remains a key export market. India exports 54% of its pharmaceutical production, and nearly one-third of this goes to the United States. Of the exports to the US, about 85% comprise formulations, primarily generics, while sales from biosimilars and innovator drugs remain low, according to credit rating agency Crisil. Generic drugs account for 90% of prescription sales volume in the US but represent only 13% of total prescription spending. The agency also noted that generic drug prices in the US are among the lowest globally, even compared to economically comparable countries. Meanwhile, India has proposed a range of measures as part of the ongoing trade negotiations with the US, placing the pharmaceutical sector at the center of the discussions. Mint earlier reported, citing two people familiar with the matter, that India's proposals include the supply of low-cost complex generic medicines at sharply reduced prices, patent reforms to allow earlier entry of generics into the US, increased US-based manufacturing by Indian pharma firms of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and fixed dosage forms (FDFs), and tariff exemptions for life-saving and critical medicines imported into India from the US. The pharmaceutical sector delivered a turnaround performance in the quarter ending March, driven by strong growth in the India business. Companies covered by the domestic brokerage firm Axis Securities reported a growth of 11.5% YoY and 1.6% QoQ in the Q4FY25. Gross margins improved to 66.1%, reflecting a 95 bps increase YoY and a 40 bps rise QoQ. This improvement was supported by the launch of niche products, low single-digit price erosion, a higher contribution from the Indian business in the product mix, and stable raw material prices. On a QoQ basis, the US business stood at $2,240 million, showing 7.7% YoY growth in constant currency (CC) terms, driven by volume growth in the base portfolio and moderate performance from the top drug (gRevlimid). In the domestic market, the Indian Pharmaceutical Market (IPM) recorded 8% YoY growth in Q4FY25. Overall, the brokerage anticipates a strong pipeline in segments such as biosimilars, GLP-1, and peptides over the next three years. Companies with a higher share of chronic portfolios are outperforming the IPM. Disclaimer: The views and recommendations given in this article are those of individual analysts. These do not represent the views of Mint. We advise investors to check with certified experts before taking any investment decisions.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store