While the Obama Administration has dedicated billions of dollars to projects that promise a national network of high-speed rail corridors by 2030, there are questions about the cost and utility of these projects. With mid-term elections just ahead, some politicians have seized on high-speed rail as emblematic of government spending run amok.
Make no mistake, though: High speed rail is coming. The feds have allocated $8 billion in stimulus funding, and ten states are competing for the $2.3 billion slated for disbursement in fiscal 2010. All told, funding has been earmarked for 13 corridors through 31 states. And despite the noise being made on the campaign trail, there is tremendous support for these projects.
"The public wants these projects," says Andy Kunz, president and CEO of the U.S. High Speed Rail Association. "And there is broad support among members of Congress and the U.S. Conference of Mayors."
The watchdogs at Citizens Against Government Waste argue that support wanes when taxpayers know the costs associated with these projects, some of which have seen their budgets balloon. "Everyone likes new gadgets," says Tom Schatz, president of the watchdog group. "The buyers' remorse comes later, and that's what we're seeing now."
Are we?
At first blush, you'd think so. Schatz cites California as an example. In 2008, voters approved issuing $9.95 billion in state bonds to finance the first phase of a high-speed line that would link Sacramento and San Diego, but polls show more than 50 percent of Californians now oppose the project.
Cost is one of the biggest issues. The price tag in California has swelled from $45 billion to $65 billion. The feds want states chipping in for many of these projects, and that's a big problem in an era of state budget deficits. There are also worries about who will pay for maintenance and operational costs not covered by ticket sales. With states struggling to pay teachers, police officers, and social workers, it's hard to dismiss these concerns, even if the proposed projects eventually deliver the tens of thousands of jobs predicted by rail boosters.
There also are a lot of questions about the need for high-speed rail, especially in Florida, where the train would make the run from Tampa to Orlando in just 30 minutes less than a car. And there is a lot of neighborhood opposition to high-speed rail in California, where residents worry about elevated tracks dividing their neighborhoods and harming their property values.
As mid-term elections approach, high-speed rail has become a political punching bag. At least one candidate in each of the 10 states with gubernatorial races this year opposes high speed rail. In California, for example, Republican candidate Meg Whitman has argued the state can't afford it. In Wisconsin, Republican candidate Scott Walker has made cancelling a high-speed line between Milwaukee and Madison a key campaign issue. He notes that support for the project has fallen from 50 percent to 41 percent and says the $46 million already allocated for the project should go toward roads and bridges instead. His opponent in the primary went even further, suggesting that the rail funds be returned to the feds.
Yet public interest remains strong. A survey in April found 49 percent of people favor high speed rail (.pdf). Respondents were asked their preferred mode of travel between some of the cities in the Obama HSR plan. Yes, 35 percent said they’d drive, but 32 percent said they’d take the train if it were available.
There's also interest in the private sector. Oliver Hauck, CEO of Siemens Mobility USA, wrote in a San Francisco Chronicle op-ed piece that the private sector is eager to invest. System operators in France and Japan are interested in contributing. The New York Times reports China, through a partnership with General Electric, is eager to help finance and build California’s HSR. Japan, Germany, South Korea, Spain and France also have expressed interest, according to the San Jose Mercury News.
And states are lining up for money. The Department of Transportation, which is preparing to disburse another $2.3 billion in high-speed rail funding, received 77 applications from 25 states totaling $8.5 billion. That has many advocates saying high-speed rail will win in the end, and much of the political opposition is simply campaign hot air.
"I don't think public opinion has changed all that much," Kunz says. "The problem is that there isn't anything for the public to see. These projects take years and years to complete, and it's hard to maintain enthusiasm until there's a train to ride."
The trains could be running, in Florida, anyway, as early as 2015. Election year posturing aside, high-speed rail is coming.
UPDATED 3:10 p.m.
*Photo: jpmueller / Flickr. The Amtrak Acela Express rolls through Philadelphia. *
See Also:
- Too Often, The 'Trouble' With High-Speed Rail Is Misinformation ...
- High-Speed Rail As a Conduit of Sprawl
- At Long Last, Clear Messages for High-Speed Rail
- Point: NIMBY Won't Stop California High-Speed Rail
- Counterpoint: The Other Side of California's High-Speed Rail Debate
- Obama Outlines Plan for High-Speed Rail
