A New High-Speed Rail Plan: Bakersfield to Gilroy?

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
One of the things that the COVID era opened my
eyes to is that there's lies, damn lies and statistics,
and it was the way in which research could be
manipulated towards various kinds of predetermined outcomes in the hands

(00:24):
of skillful manipulators who know what they're doing. And a
lot of it has to do with the distinction between
correlation and causation. That just because something happens after another thing,
just because why occurs after X, doesn't mean that X

(00:47):
caused why, and that ambiguity of well, why it's happening
after X? Is it because X caused it? Or are
there other things happening? Is it really possible to know
with one hundred percent certainty why is just something that
is occurring after X, or if X is causing why?

(01:10):
Manipulators and propagandasts can play with that until the cows
come home and you can see how there was all
you know throughout COVID. I think one of the things
I was laughing at was because of Anthony Fauci and
his preference for vaccines versus treatments. Certain kinds of treatments

(01:41):
for COVID like hydroxy chloroquine and things like that had
better reviews in European medical journals and research entities than
they did an American. Why Well, because Anthony Fauci had
a massive degree of influence and sway over federal funding

(02:02):
for medical research. And so it's given me a little
bit more willingness to go out on a limb and say,
I don't know that I believe these statistics. Someone throws

(02:23):
these studies at me, Someone throws these statistics at me.
I don't know that I believe it. I don't think
I do. And one of the areas where people are
willing to throw out statistics and say that it's proven
public it's demonstrated public health that leads to better public
health outcomes. The surveys, studies indicate it. One of these

(02:47):
areas where I'm now I'm becoming more and more convinced
that the books are all cooked and that it's based
on There's so many ways in which the methodology could
be twisted. Is with so called harm reduction strategies for

(03:11):
drug users, where basically the idea is, have your public
health programs for assisting drug users. Don't have it focus
on getting these people to stop doing drugs cold Turkey,
but focus on giving them safer ways of using drugs,

(03:36):
safer ways maybe of using less potent drugs, allow them
to keep using drugs, but allow them to keep using
drugs in ways that are safer and that can maybe
lead to a downturn in other kinds of public health problems.
And the number one example of this is needle exchange programs.

(04:02):
Using dirty needles is a classic way for horrible diseases
to get transmitted from one drug user to another, including
AIDS and so various kinds of it's only like liberal
blue cities that seem to do this, liberal blue cities
that have horrible drug problems. If we want to talk

(04:24):
about correlation and causation here, it's interesting how it's all
really deep blue cities that have these problems and they
put in place these needle exchange programs where they set
up something The City of Fresno has this. Why not
excuse me, not city of Fresno. Fresno County has this program.

(04:48):
If I said City of Fresno, there's a couple of
city council members who would be ready to wring my
neck for saying that they had anything to do with this.
Fresno County has had this county based needle exchange program
for many years, which is so obviously unhelpful that even
Miguel Arius was otherwise a very liberal Fresno City council member.

(05:16):
Miguel Arius is a Fresno City Council member who is
critical of this Fresno County Department of Public Health program.
Arius thinks it's a completely out of line. And I
think the idea of what these needle exchange programs are.

(05:38):
You have druggies, they're using drugs, they're shooting themselves up
with drugs. If they bring in dirty needles, the county
will take the dirty needles, get them off the streets,
and provide clean needles. Well, that's how these programs seem

(06:01):
to start, but it's not how they all seem to
wind up. Now, there's a great piece in National Review
written by Wesley J. Smith, and everyone should look him up.
I love Wesley Smith. Wesley Smith's been writing for National

(06:24):
Review for years and years and years. I remember he
came and spoke in Fresno, it must have been about
twenty plus years ago, and I got to see him
speak about assistant suicide. He's a great writer. He has
always been pressured, especially about the dangers of physician assistant suicide.

(06:45):
And he has this great piece out in National Review.
I retweeted it regarding harm reduction policies. Here's what he writes.
He talks about how his wife, who's a columnist for
the Las Vegas Review Journal, Deborah Saunders, she covered San

(07:06):
Francisco's harm reduction drug policies extensively back when she worked
for the San Francisco Chronicle. It started with needle exchange.
So this was the needle exchange program for the city
of San Francisco. Now Saunders was a Smith's wife. She
initially supported the needle exchange program as a means of
preventing the spread of HIV. The idea was for addicts

(07:29):
to exchange dirty needles, a prime source of HIV transmission,
for clean ones. The rule was no used needle, no
free clean replacement. Unfortunately, the program led to greater drug abuse. Yeah,
So basically the idea was, oh, let's prevent HIV transmission,

(07:49):
but in the same time you're facilitating these guys using drugs. Yeah,
it leads to more drug use. Harm reduction Zelots event
dropped the requirement that it be a needle exchange, so
they just started giving people clean They just started giving

(08:11):
out needles. You didn't have to bring in a dirty
needle for them to give you a clean one. This
resulted in dangerous used needles littering San Francisco's sidewalks and
even children's playgrounds. Saunders noticed the decay and decided to investigate.

(08:31):
This is from her column in twenty nineteen. In twenty fifteen,
I Saunders learned that San Francisco had abandoned the needle
exchange model. Clinics would dispense one new needle in exchange
for each used needle in favor of needle access. That
means free needles. So I walked into a downtown clinic

(08:53):
and walked out with a starter kit of twenty needles
in a paper bag filled with other paraphernalia meant to
make it safer to shoot up. It was that easy,
you see. It had become too much to expect the
city's many junkies to return use needles to get free needles.
It also was too much to expect drug users to
buy their own needles, which had been legalized. Instead, the

(09:20):
Special City, as some call it, put out dropboxes in
the hope that the civic minded would use them. How
did that work out? Just look at the sidewalks. It's
not working now. It should be noted. Back in August,
Fresnoo County voted the Fresno County Board of Supervisors got

(09:43):
rid of the county's needle exchange program. So the needle
exchange program is now housed by a nonprofit entity. It's
not sponsored by the county anymore. The San Joaquin Valley
Free Medical Clinic and Needle Exchange. That nonprofit had been
operating in a no cost lease agreement with the county,

(10:07):
and the Board of Supervisors voted to end the partnership.
Buddy Mendez, Gary Brettefeld, Nathan Magzig voted to stop it.
The program had run up until August on Saturday mornings
from the Bricks Mercer building now, so it basically it

(10:33):
was Buddy Mendez. Buddy Mendez sort of changed his mind
on the program over the course of time. It had
been approved with a three to two vote. Mendez flipped
his vote to abandon the program. And the big source
for this shift in ideas was the City of Fresno,
objecting to it so strenuously. Even Mayor Dyer, who is

(10:59):
usually you know, not a very ideologically charged guy. And
even if someone as liberal as Miguel Arius is objecting
to it, I mean, that's gotta you know, that's gotta
have some weight. But this is this thing they are
Liberals are able to trot out all the time, various
kinds of studies, arguments, whatever, that all well from a

(11:24):
public health perspective, Needle exchange programs help lessen the risk
and lessen the harm, and blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah. And I just don't believe it. I don't
believe it. I don't believe their studies. And I don't
know what. You know, there's a part of me that

(11:44):
is leary of being a zero evidence stubborn pigheaded like
standing standing there in the face of any evidence. But
there's also that. I mean, here's the thing. This comes

(12:04):
a little bit with being a lawyer, you know what,
I think I'm gonna save this for the next segment.
Let me save this for the next segment. Why we
shouldn't buckle at the knees anytime liberals present us with
a stat anytime liberals present us you know, there's studies
that say, blah blah blah, why we shouldn't buckle at

(12:27):
the knees as soon as that is presented to us,
and have maybe not to say we reject all evidence,
but have some confidence that maybe this isn't quite right.
We'll return with that here on the John Girardi Show.
Liberals love to trot out they're experts, quote expert. They
love to trot out their surveys. And one of the

(12:49):
things that the specific topic that's making me can consider
this is basically the whole risk reduction, harm reduction public
health thing. You have more and more of these stories
about how harm reduction policies in San Francisco are not

(13:11):
doing anything to reduce drug use, and they've devolved from
needle exchange programs where you turn in a dirty needle
to get clean needles, to just giving away free needles.
They're not requiring that you turn in dirty needles anymore.
And that was, you know, this idea that facilitating safer

(13:33):
drug use is the way to go as opposed to
stopping drug use. These are two different approaches, and the
left really wants to argue that facilitating safer drug use
is actually the way to go, and they try to
claim that they've got all this empirical data to show

(13:55):
that this is a better the demonstrated public health The
big article in New England Journal of Medicine about it,
That was Smith in National Reviews writing about where this
piece of New England Journal of Medicine. It concludes like this,
harm reduction is evidence based healthcare that is rooted in
public health principles. Evidence based, evidence based, evidence based, meaning

(14:19):
they have surveys and stuff to back it up. There
is no single best form of harm reduction. This model
depends on the availability of an array of services that
meet patients where they are. Undermining harm reduction and cutting
related programs isn't merely a funding decision. It is an
assault on an approach to healthcare that prioritizes evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence, compassion,
and dignity, values that are central to the medical profession.

(14:39):
Blah blah blah. Okay, I just don't believe the evidence.
I don't believe the surveys. I don't believe I don't
believe them. And there's a couple of reasons why. Okay.
First of all, we've seen how evidence can be manipulated,

(15:01):
how the ambiguity between what is correlation versus causation can
be confused and manipulated by skillful users. Secondly, a lot
of the liberals pushing for these harm reduction strategies, it's
clear that they have certain other motives in mind other

(15:23):
than just reducing drug use. Some of these people on
the left are also conveniently or accidentally surprisingly super left
libertarian types who want to legalize drug use more generally,

(15:44):
as well as sort of you know, racial equity intersectionality
enthusiasts who think that arresting people for drug use is
bad well because too many minorities get arrested when you
do that. So they clearly have other motives around lessening

(16:11):
punitive approaches to drug use other than just we want
to help people who are drug addicts. And it's also
this look in lawsuits, witnesses are not allowed to testify
about what they think the ultimate outcome of a case

(16:33):
is supposed to be. If I have a witness in
a murder trial, the witness isn't allowed to go on
the stand and say, yeah, he's guilty. No, the witness
goes on and testifies to what the witness saw take place,
what the witness perceived saw experience take place. I saw

(16:55):
the witness at ten fifty eight, which is two minutes
after the murder happened. The witness was running across the
street holding a gun. That's all the witness is allowed
to say. The witness isn't allowed to talk about the
end conclusion of the case. The witness isn't allowed to say,
your honor, he's guilty. The witness is allowed to say,

(17:16):
I saw him walking away with a gun. That's what
the witness is allowed to say. The exception to that, though,
is so called expert witnesses. An expert witness can deal
with certain kinds of more technical knowledge, look at evidence
in the case, detailing things that require a certain degree

(17:38):
of higher technical knowledge, and an expert witness is able
to give his or her opinion as to the ultimate
outcome of a case. The expert has to be qualified
as having particular education or expertise or experience in a
particular subject matter and can then give their conclusion. Johnson

(18:00):
has cancer. He's suing the XYZ company that he worked
for for putting asbestos in their open asbestos in their walls.
Our expert witness is testifying, yes, the amount of you know,
he's an expert in asbestos and asbestos in construction and
asbestos from a chemical perspective. The expert says, well, they

(18:25):
put in too much asbestos and they were exposing people.
This is how much asbestos they were exposed to. This
is a dangerous level, this is far beyond what is
the norm. Therefore, and the expert can say, yes, I
think that the company acted negligently in this regard. So
in a lawsuit, you bring out an expert witness. Lots

(18:45):
of different kinds of trials might call for an expert
witness to testify about something, and the expert witness is
always an expert. It's someone who's got a degree in something,
who has deep expertise in something. And when one side
presents an expert witness, it's not like the lawyer for

(19:05):
the other side just immediately falls over in the fetal positions. Oh,
they brought in an expert. Their expert says that we
lost I guess I give up. No, the lawyer for
the other side looks through the expert witness's testimony with
a really fine toothed comb and has to even though

(19:27):
the lawyer is not him or herself an expert in something,
the lawyer has to look through the internal logic of
what the expert is saying, the internal logical consistency, compare
it against other things he knows, and poke holes and
what the expert is saying. Maybe the lawyer finds an

(19:47):
expert of his own for the other side to testify
against the other party's expert witness. But you don't buckle
at the knee. I mean, just because a study says
you don't immediately just buckle at the knees and act like, oh,
it's game, set and match. I guess we go home.
They have an expert. No, you have to you as

(20:11):
a lawyer, especially the other side is presenting an expert witness.
That expert witness is obviouslessly saying that their side should prevail.
You get their expert testimony and you go through it
with a fine toothed comb. Usually they produce some kind
of report or something that you can examine prior to

(20:33):
the trial itself. You go through that thing with a
fine toothed comb, and you point out any logical inconsistency,
any internal logical inconsistencies. You look at the methodology they're utilizing.
You maybe you hunt down their citations see if they're blooney.
In this era of AI. Sometimes people will write one

(20:56):
of the problems with AI is it's uh the possibility
that it creates these phantom citations, citations to absolutely nothing.
President Unified School District got in trouble with that where
the Misty hers I guess it was her PR person
presented some report to the teachers Union about nasty quotes
that the teachers' union had apparently made about Misty Hurt

(21:18):
that the teachers Union never made because the AI that
she used to do her job for her instead of
her own brain made up a bunch of quotes. And
there have been there are lawyers who keep getting sanctioned
for producing legal filings with phantom citations to cases that
don't exist. I'm sure there are expert witnesses who have

(21:41):
done similar things as we people continue to try to
use AI as a substitute for actual thinking. So that's
the thing. I'm not gonna buckle at the knees when
the left tries to argue, well, science indicates the blob.
Every researcher researching this is a liberal, every single one everyone,

(22:10):
And I feel like if you're going through the work
of setting up a clinic like that in order to
study it or you're doing that kind of research. Of
course you're ideologically committed to that sort of thing. And
I just feel as though it's a whole area of
research where the outcomes are being motivated by ulterior motives,

(22:32):
stuff that has nothing to do with actually wanting to
help drug abusers. The ambiguity between causation and correlation can
be manipulated. There are people who have other desires, you know,
equity in criminal law enforcement desires, weird libertarian views about
drug use, about drug abuse, you know, lingering resent equity

(22:56):
based resentment about the War on drugs and how it
incarcerated so many black peoplelah blah blah. I think that
is underlying so much of this whole harm reduction thing.
And let's look at the cities that are most crazy
about harm reduction. Oh, they have the most drug use.
Oh look at all these liberals that you know, if
we want to talk about correlation, where now in San Francisco,

(23:20):
you just walk into one of these clinics, You get
a big old bag with twenty nice needles. You're shooting
up with drug starter kit. Anyway, when we return, I
want to talk about a change, a shift in the
high speed rail a proposed change in the high change
in the high speed rails plan, not finishing them, are

(23:41):
said to Bakersfield Line instead Maderra to Gilroy next on
the John Girardi Show, I don't know that I need
to just reiterate again and again and again, going through
our catechism here of why the high speed rail is
a bad idea, Why continuing to spend on this thing

(24:03):
that is, you know, the end is nowhere in sight
for it actually to get constructed, for us ever to
get the money to finish the construction. It's sort of
I feel like the whole left wing apparatus in the
state is just falling into the whole sunk cost fallacy.
We've already expended so much money on this. We have

(24:24):
to see it through. You don't have to necessarily see
it through. We also don't really have any clear conception
of how the rest of the money that's needed, even
just to finish We're said to Baker's Field, how that's
going to come through, especially when there's no chance of
federal any further federal funding coming in for you know,

(24:47):
at least until you know, January of twenty twenty nine.
I mean, god knows, maybe Gavin Newsom gets elected and
all of a sudden the federal spigots open again. However,
and I guess my main problem with it is, even
if it's finished, the Merced to Bakersfield line, I just
don't think anyone's going to ride on it. And it

(25:10):
doesn't it isn't going to demonstrate the viability of a
full blown LA to San Francisco train. And the LA
to San Francisco part is the really tough part. I mean,
we're we're having an incredibly difficult time. We're seventeen years in.
We haven't finished the easiest stretch of the train to
build the easiest, cheapest, flattest stretch of train, let alone

(25:36):
the parts that have to go over or through or
around mountains, or you know, do eminent domain seizures of
incredibly expensive land in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Now,
the high speed Deil project is governed right now by

(25:56):
a twenty twenty two law SB one ninety eight, which
required which sort of reinforced the Newsome era plan for
the high speed rail, the Newsome idea for the high
speed rail. Newsom gets elected in twenty eighteen. He comes
into office in twenty nineteen, and there's this expectation from
a lot of folks. Oh, he's going to give up

(26:17):
on the high speed rail. He doesn't. Critically he doesn't,
but he does sort of limit it. He says, we're
going to focus on mer said to Bakersfield. We finished
merceaid to Bakersfield. That demonstrates the viability of the project
long term. It invites new investment and then we can
finish the full LA to San Francisco. So the state

(26:39):
legislature in twenty twenty two passed this law SB one
ninety eight. This caps the high speed Rail authorities spending.
It limits its ability to spend on anything outside of them,
mer said to Bakersfield. Route It says, you can only
spend five hundred million dollars on any work that is

(27:02):
outside of Merced to Bakersfield. Now, that sounds like a
lot of money for the purposes of the high speed rail,
though it's not enough money. It's not enough money to
do anything substantial. However, the high speed Rail Authority wants
to get rid of this law because they've got a

(27:22):
new idea. So here's a story about it from the
Fresno b They want to build more profitable routes outside
the required merceaid to Bakersfield connection. Here's the story. The
agency first pitched dropping the rule in an August report

(27:42):
that said it makes financial It makes financial sense to
delay rail construction to Merced because they haven't made it
all the way up to Merced yet they're at around
like Madera right now. Instead, they want to connect Madera
to Gilroy. The idea has troubled Merced officials and business owners,

(28:09):
who say they've been spending years planning for a downtown
station that's part of the train's initial segment. Now, the
CEO of the Rail Authority, Ian chowdry He, says the
agency could secure a partnership with private firms by the

(28:31):
middle of next year, but investors are likely to want
to focus on rail segments with greater ridership predictions than
mersaid to Bakersfield. Greater ridership predictions than Mere said to Bakersfield.
If you want innovation and to generate revenues out of
the system, then they the private sector will have creative ideas.

(28:53):
Chowdrey said, SB one ninety eight stands right in the
way of that changing. SB one ninety eight, approved by
the legislature, in twenty two does not mean the train
will skip Merceaid. A Mercaid station is required by the
two thousand and eight bond measure that officially authorized the
project via the California voters approval. It's not yet clear
how the Rail Authority will propose that the legislature changed

(29:14):
the current law. In its August report, the agency said
state lawmakers could quote remove or adjust the spending cap
on work outside the Central Valley. The mayor of Merceaid,
Matthew Serrato, told the Fresno Bee that removing the spending
cap would be quote a hard one for us to support.
Keeping mer said in the early operating segment is one

(29:35):
hundred percent a hill to die on for us, he said.
Over the past year, the Rail Authority has pitched various
changes intended to cut costs and speed up construction, while
battling the Trump administration in court for four billion dollars
it pulled from the project. The agency in September secured
twenty billion dollars from the state's Captain Cap and Invest
program through twenty forty five, which will be doled out

(29:56):
at one billion per year. The state guarantee provide security
to private investors who could use their own money to
build segments of the train in exchange for a percentage
of future revenues. As Chowdre works to get private investors
on board with a financing plan, he said, it doesn't
make sense to tell investors they can only build between
Mercette and Bakersfield. If you tell them, hey, just build

(30:19):
this and don't do more, they're going to simply say, well,
you're kind of just borrowing money at that point, and
you can't go to a bank to do that. CHOWDREI
told the Bee, Okay, now, let me just say this
makes more sense than much of what I've heard from

(30:45):
the rail authority folks up to this point, Merced to
Bakersfield never made sense to me. Never ever, ever, ever,
ever in a million years made sense to me. I
always thought it was is a stupid route. I always thought, well,
whom does this benefit at all? Nobody is going to

(31:08):
take a train from because really what we're talking about
is Fresno. Okay, No one's like, I'm in Merced, I
need to go to Bakersfield. No, if you're in Merced,
you want to go to some intermediate city. You want
to go to Madera or Fresno. And it's also primarily
it's about Fresno and Bakersfield. Someone in Fresno who wants

(31:30):
to go to Bakersfield or Maderra or Mersaid, someone in
Bakersfield who wants to go to Fresno. And for pretty
much all of those scenarios. Given how you know this
bullet train has to stop at these major stops, I

(31:50):
just never thought it was going to have much ridership
because of the ninety nine. Why take the train when
you can just get in your own car and drive
on the ninety nine instead of I mean, just walk
this out practically, if your plan is to take a
train from your you live in Clovis. Let's say, if
your plan is to take a train to Bakersfield, so

(32:13):
you live in Clovis, you gotta get up, you got
to drive. You gotta give yourself about a half hour,
give yourself twenty minutes or something to go downtown to
wherever the station is. Presumably you want to get there
with some time to spare before your train arrives. So
let's say you get there a half hour before, so
you're leaving your home fifty minutes before the train leaves.

(32:37):
Then you get on the train. You take the train
from Fresno to Bakersfield. What do you do when you're
in Bakersfield. You don't have a car, so now you
got to get an uber? Well, and it's also do
you left your car? You either have to drive your
car to the train station in Fresno, leave your car
there in downtown Presdent all day, or you take an
uber to get there, or you need to get a

(32:57):
friend to drop you off and get to Bakersfield. Well,
unless we're whatever you want to do in Bakersfield is
within walking distance of the train station, which it likely isn't.
Bakersfield is a big, spread out California town. You got
to get an uber to go somewhere in Bakersfield, or
a lift or whatever, or you have to have a

(33:17):
buddy pick you up, or you got to rent a car,
I guess. Or you can just get in your car
and drive for two hours rather than get to the
leave your house fifty minutes before the train leaves, get
on the train, ride on the train for an hour.
You haven't you haven't really saved any time, and now

(33:41):
you're in Bakersfield with no car. So I never thought
many people would ride the high speed train given that
practical reality. And it's also I mean, this is the
other problem with the high speed rail is that we
approve the high speed rail project in two thousand and eight. Yeah,
some hybrid cars were on the road, but we didn't

(34:03):
think we'd be living in a world where there's a
lot of car options where the hybrid model is no
different cost wise from the regular model. And now we've
got like Tesla's on the road and more electric car
options that are actual viable as you know, long distance

(34:25):
driving vehicles as opposed to you know that some of
those early electric cars, you know, they only had a
range of like eighty miles or something. They were basically
golf car. I remember my wife's car was in the
shop once and they gave us a loaner car while
they were working on it. It was an electric Fiat. The
thing had a range of It said it had a
range of eighty miles. I remembered driving it to and
from work and it was about a ten mile round trip,

(34:46):
and it said that thirty three percent of the battery
was gone, So I think it was more like it
might have been more like a forty mile range than
an eighty mile range. We're now though, seeing a high
speed rail authority that wanting to change what they're doing
in response to we're gonna have more ridership. And yeah,

(35:10):
I think Madera to Gilroy actually kind of having the
train go Gilroy, Madeira, Fresno, Bakersfield, I think that might
actually make more sense. Plus, I think once once the
train gets to Gilroy, then there is I think there's
it's called cal Train that I think can then get

(35:32):
you from Gilroy to San Jose or something. Then you
can get in the BART system. I mean, it seems
like an incredibly inefficient way, but you're at least beginning
the process of connecting the high speed rail to the
Bay Area, which is kind of the whole point of
this project is to eventually at some point connect LA

(35:55):
to the Bay Area. So I don't hate this move,
I guess, And especially if there's private if there's actual
private investors who want to invest in it, well, okay,
I mean that's I mean, hey, look follow the money.

(36:16):
I guess. I guess I would be supportive of that.
I mean, granted, in general, I think the whole thing
is a boondoggle. I think the whole thing is I mean,
it's on the backs of our taxes. I mean, the
reason that the high speed rail has any kind of
money right now is because Gavin Newsom is shifting like
twenty billion dollars from the Cap and Trade program twenty

(36:36):
billion dollars over twenty years to the high speed rail.
So high speed rail is going to get like a
billion dollars a year from this on the back of
our taxes, in our higher utility rates and our higher
costs for basically everything is paying for this. So I mean,
given that we live in this universe of we're already
paying for this nonsense, I think this makes more sense.

(36:57):
I don't know, may we'll we'll have to. I mean,
in fairness, Gilroy is not exactly a super hot destination.
And again I kinda I don't know how much time
you're saving the Fresno to Gilroy car ride is you
know what is that two two and a half hours?
Are you really saving any time rather than just driving there?

(37:21):
Maybe it's a step in the right direction. When we return,
And actually pretty big announcement for Fresno State Sports that
they're going to be on USA in the future next
on John Girardi Show. So there was some pretty big
Fresden State news. I confess. When it was announced Fresno
State was joining the PAC twelve or the whatever remains
of the PAC twelve, I was a little skeptical, and

(37:43):
I was like, well, is the PAC twelve just gonna
be anything different from the Mountain West? Is it really
going to step up? To announce that PAC twelve is
signing a deal with USSAY the cable network to broadcast
PAC twelve sports, this is actually a step up for
Fresno State USA network rather than what we have now.
It's on like CBS Sports Network is showing all these

(38:05):
Mountain West games. This is a basic cable channel. Fresno
State will be on national television basic cable plans. That's
a huge good thing. That's a real step up for
Fessno State. Way to go. That'll do it, John Garready
show see you next time on Power Talk