Rick Scott likes High-Speed Rail now

[CommuterBob]

https://www.tampabay.com/florida-po...ent-company-bidding-on-tampa-high-speed-rail/

In 2011, Rick Scott canceled the Orlando to Tampa high-speed rail project that was to be 90% funded by the Federal government and had private companies clamoring to build it and cover the remaining 10%. He said the state had too much risk and therefore was justified in cancelling the project.

Now seven years later, Brightline submits a unsolicited proposal to revive the Orlando to Tampa leg of high-speed rail and guess who's a multi-million dollar investor in its parent company? Yup. Rick Scott. Oh, there's a bit of separation - supposedly he's invested in a branch of the company that doesn't have a direct connection to Brightline, but come on. This is graft.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Lol! What a pathetic political hitjob here. He’s invested in a part of the company that has nothing to do with the rail company, yet somehow he master minded all of this back in 2011?

I also like how they make it sound like he cancelled a sure thing in 2011. Go ask California how their HSR is going with their gift from Daddy Obama. It’s a disaster. Scott was 100% right to not put the state on the hook for that project.

I expect nothing less than the rag TB Times

 

[NinjaKnight]

Its not like Scott has a history of abusing his powers for personal gain, I'm sure its just another happy coincidence, like his wife and the drug testing debacle.

Goddamn GOP, disgusting bunch of hypocrites.

 

[CommuterBob]

It's not a hitjob if it's true. This project has been shady from the outset. It's financial model is questionable, they don't have funding secured, they can't stop killing people in SFL on the segment that is open, and there's a lot of bad faith involved all around. Honestly, I'm not sure why this project is moving forward in any capacity. It's a money-loser, so where are the investment gains coming from for investors? It's a safety risk, so why is it still being pushed forward by agencies?

 

[UCFWayne]

ive never been a big fan of scott. he shouldve been put in jail for the medicare stuff he did years ago. that said, he did an amazing job before and after the hurricane last year. not surprised that he is continuing to do shady stuff like this again.

 

[UCFKnight85]

It's not a hitjob if it's true. This project has been shady from the outset. It's financial model is questionable, they don't have funding secured, they can't stop killing people in SFL on the segment that is open, and there's a lot of bad faith involved all around. Honestly, I'm not sure why this project is moving forward in any capacity. It's a money-loser, so where are the investment gains coming from for investors? It's a safety risk, so why is it still being pushed forward by agencies?

Every single thing you just said is exactly true, or worse, out in CA with their HSR. However unlike CA, us taxpayers are not on the hook for generations to plow more money into the project when it continues to fail.

This is a petty reporter taking something unrelated (Scott investing in a part of the company that doesn't even deal with rail) and trying to make a story of it.

 

[sk8knight]

Every single thing you just said is exactly true, or worse, out in CA with their HSR. However unlike CA, us taxpayers are not on the hook for generations to plow more money into the project when it continues to fail.

This is a petty reporter taking something unrelated (Scott investing in a part of the company that doesn't even deal with rail) and trying to make a story of it.

Taxpayers not being on the hook is the important part and is the right decision. If Scott then used his position and information to profit, then let’s get him for that. But until there is actual evidence that the two are connected, connecting the two as some master plan is just another democrat conspiracy theory. Not surprising that it comes at election time.

 

[CommuterBob]

Every single thing you just said is exactly true, or worse, out in CA with their HSR. However unlike CA, us taxpayers are not on the hook for generations to plow more money into the project when it continues to fail.

This is a petty reporter taking something unrelated (Scott investing in a part of the company that doesn't even deal with rail) and trying to make a story of it.

Scott authorized hundreds of millions of state dollars to help Brightline already and they've issued hundreds of millions of tax-free bonds and are trying to get billions more issued to complete the Orlando connection - and no clue yet as to how they're funding the Tampa connection. To say it's not taxpayer-funded is a lie.

 

[bqknight]

Lol! What a pathetic political hitjob here. He’s invested in a part of the company that has nothing to do with the rail company, yet somehow he master minded all of this back in 2011?

I also like how they make it sound like he cancelled a sure thing in 2011. Go ask California how their HSR is going with their gift from Daddy Obama. It’s a disaster. Scott was 100% right to not put the state on the hook for that project.

I expect nothing less than the rag TB Times

I legit think you are the most partisan one on this board.

 

[NinjaKnight]

I legit think you are the most partisan one on this board.

It's not even remotely a contest.

 

[The Branch]

That Orlando Sentinel article was a hit piece for sure. Don't know enough about the Brightline bonds and those things ... but I read that whole article and thought .... wtf? How can a reasonable person even think this makes sense.

Rick Scott's investements are in a blind trust. Believe what you want, that is how all Governors, etc. do it. Not just Republicans. His wife is invested in the parent company and they are stating in the article it has nothing to do with that rail system ... and the Sentinel can't even refute that argument? If the Sentinel can't refute that argument, why did they proceed with the article and make it seem as if he is profiting off of it?

This is EXACTLY what I hate about the media these days. I'm not totally on the Trump train with my disdain for the media, but the older I get, the more I realize that a great majority of the supposedly unbiased media just want to write hit pieces that get the most clicks. For a non-political version of that, see Bianchi.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I legit think you are the most partisan one on this board.

I thought you left the board?

 

[CommuterBob]

Have any of you ever worked for a company with several divisions? You don't think cash flows from well-performing divisions to cover poorly-performing divisions? Like that's not even possible? Like projects in one division couldn't possibly impact the thought processes in other divisions? So what if he invested in a different division? There's a connection there. Whether or not it's nefarious isn't known, but it's not beyond the pale to suggest it could be.

 

[The Branch]

Have any of you ever worked for a company with several divisions? You don't think cash flows from well-performing divisions to cover poorly-performing divisions? Like that's not even possible? Like projects in one division couldn't possibly impact the thought processes in other divisions? So what if he invested in a different division? There's a connection there. Whether or not it's nefarious isn't known, but it's not beyond the pale to suggest it could be.

Ok ... I will buy your argument. The Sentinel should have NEVER EVER posted that hit piece until they researched that. That is my problem.

This piece didn't need to be published yesterday. They had their side and they had Rick Scott's side. It's lazy journalism to not at least do some partial research to figure it out. They just ran it anyway and made it look like Rick Scott is going to make billions off the deal.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Have any of you ever worked for a company with several divisions? You don't think cash flows from well-performing divisions to cover poorly-performing divisions? Like that's not even possible? Like projects in one division couldn't possibly impact the thought processes in other divisions? So what if he invested in a different division? There's a connection there. Whether or not it's nefarious isn't known, but it's not beyond the pale to suggest it could be.

So basically you and the Times have on idea if this amounts to anything at all, but are running with the angle that Scott and this company are in cahoots and this investment is proof.

Got it.

 

[CommuterBob]

So basically you and the Times have on idea if this amounts to anything at all, but are running with the angle that Scott and this company are in cahoots and this investment is proof.

Got it.

Yup. There's a lot of smoke here. Could be some fire.

 

[The Branch]

Yup. There's a lot of smoke here. Could be some fire.

Would it be that difficult for the Orlando Sentinel to take Rick Scott's answer to their question and run it through their business people and then do some research as to whether it holds water or not?

If Rick Scott's wife stands to make a bunch of money on a project that Rick Scott is using his office to get started, then I agree with your stance.

 

[CommuterBob]

Would it be that difficult for the Orlando Sentinel to take Rick Scott's answer to their question and run it through their business people and then do some research as to whether it holds water or not?

If Rick Scott's wife stands to make a bunch of money on a project that Rick Scott is using his office to get started, then I agree with your stance.

Do we have to wait for her to make money on it? And if she loses money, it's ok? I'm not sure why the wait and see approach here. FDOT still has to give approval for the plans for the Orlando segment and is currently evaluating the proposals for the Tampa segment. Wouldn't his financial interest in the company constitute a conflict of interest considering his administration is considering a proposal during a procurement phase of a project that stands to grant a company hundreds of millions of dollars in state assets (cash and property) if awarded?

 

[sk8knight]

Do we have to wait for her to make money on it? And if she loses money, it's ok? I'm not sure why the wait and see approach here. FDOT still has to give approval for the plans for the Orlando segment and is currently evaluating the proposals for the Tampa segment. Wouldn't his financial interest in the company constitute a conflict of interest considering his administration is considering a proposal during a procurement phase of a project that stands to grant a company hundreds of millions of dollars in state assets (cash and property) if awarded?

It should constitute a conflict of interest. However, just because there is a conflict of interest doesn't automatically disqualify that vendor. They should have reported the conflict and enacted process safeguards to isolate the decision-making from anyone with a conflict.

You know, similar to the State Department and Hillary with respect to donors to the Clinton Foundation (i.e. Uranium One, etc.)

 

[The Branch]

Do we have to wait for her to make money on it? And if she loses money, it's ok? I'm not sure why the wait and see approach here. FDOT still has to give approval for the plans for the Orlando segment and is currently evaluating the proposals for the Tampa segment. Wouldn't his financial interest in the company constitute a conflict of interest considering his administration is considering a proposal during a procurement phase of a project that stands to grant a company hundreds of millions of dollars in state assets (cash and property) if awarded?

I didn't say to wait to see if they made or lost money. I said do just a little bit of research as to what Rick Scott said about the investment is true. Don't just assume that they stand to make billions off the deal and publish a huge piece on it.