California's High-Speed Train Proposal

Reviewing the high-speed rail proposal for the state of California, one can only wonder if President Obama is, as the song goes, " riding that train, high on...". Following his State of the Union speech, the President made a trip to Florida to tout the plan there to develop a high-speed rail system and it was promoted in the media that same day by the Florida Governor. However, the Florida plan and the California plan are two entirely different systems.

For basics, the length of Florida is 350 miles and the length of California is 770 miles. According to the floridahighspeed rail.org website, the projected cost for two segments, Tampa to Orlando and Orlando to Miami, will total $11.5 billion. The California estimated cost will be $43 billion, and will run from Sacramento to San Diego. Currently, a grant of $2.5 billion has been awarded the state of California to develop four segments, some of which are already serviced by any number of "slower" commuter trains. The grant represents just five percent of the total cost, the rest of the financing to come from further government grants, bonds and the private sector.

Anyone who has ridden the slower trains along these routes has to call into question the logic behind placing a faster service where one may simply not be needed. In addition, there are any number of problems involving scheduling with the number of other trains already operating between these same destinations. For instance, the trains between Los Angeles and San Diego are numerous and dependable, stopping at any number of stations along the way, very modern already and extremely adequate for the demand along the route. Needless to say they are on time as well.

The European comparison does not hold up. Trains along the Frankfurt to Paris route, for instance, are fast, dependable and certainly serve the public where a need for transportation is necessary with no other real practical means available. The same holds true for trains running through the south of France and all over Italy. There are alternative means of transportation along the Sacramento to San Diego corridor that have no real comparison to European automobile corridors, except possibly Italy's autostrade.

The bottom line is passenger cost. The California High Speed Rail Authority's costs for alternative means along the same route are not accurate. It quotes an airline flight near $200 and this is far higher than what can be obtained by any number of air carriers operating from Fresno to Los Angeles. The high-speed train cost would be less than $40, however, one can almost pay that for a ticket from Sacramento to Los Angeles on a slow train, adding on 250 miles to the segment.

There is no practicality at all in this program, the initial grant of $2.5 billion is certainly a welcome boost to the California economy but the money could be put to better use. President Obama needs to spend his next vacation riding the California trains and get a real understanding of just how adequate the system is, then propose the money be spent on the freeway system.