California's "Train to Nowhere"

Aka "Crazy Train"

You know that reality cannot be denied when the New York Times runs a story about the near impossibility of California finishing its elusive high-speed or “bullet” train.

As Ralph Vartabedian writes:

Now, as the nation embarks on a historic, $1 trillion infrastructure building spree, the tortured effort to build the country’s first high-speed rail system is a case study in how ambitious public works projects can become perilously encumbered by political compromise, unrealistic cost estimates, flawed engineering and a determination to persist on projects that have become, like the crippled financial institutions of 2008, too big to fail.

The story is devastating, even if it underplayed the utter lunacy of thinking that a state that took 24 years, until 2013, to replace the Eastern Span on the Bay Bridge — which had partially collapsed during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, and was deemed highly vulnerable to the wrong earthquake.

Thousands of locals drove over the bridge every day, yet for more than a decade the political class dithered over design issues.

The story cites political squabbling and expensive compromises as factors that make completion seem unlikely.. That is too kind because: It was never going to work.

Boosters hailed the “bullet'“ train as a savvy way to connect Los Angeles to the Bay Area in two hours and 40 minutes. Which might sound nice if you didn’t know that you can fly between the two big cities in half the time.

Former Gov. Jerry Brown and other Democrats saw the train as their legacy — a project for which they would be remembered fondly for years to come. But that will never happen, because it will not be completed. If you want to remember their deeds, think of all the billions they squandered.

The story blames too much politics — but really, when tax money funds a project, it is inherently political. So it better be an essential project.

The story notes how the French national railroad SNCF figured out quickly it would not work:

The company’s recommendations for a direct route out of Los Angeles and a focus on moving people between Los Angeles and San Francisco were cast aside, said Dan McNamara, a career project manager for SNCF.‌

The company‌ ‌pulled out in 2011.

“There were so many things that went wrong,” Mr. McNamara said. “SNCF was very angry. They told the state they were leaving for North Africa, which was less politically dysfunctional. They went to Morocco and helped them build a rail system.”

Morocco’s bullet train started service in 2018.

And of course, there was the infamous decision to start, not in San Francisco or Los Angeles, but in the Central Valley. Which meant the Train to Nowhere also was The Train from Nowhere.

The money quote;

Speaking candidly on the subject for the first time, some of the high-speed rail authority’s past leaders say the project may never work.

May never work? That’s a euphemism. The 2008 bond measure approved by voters teased a cost of $33 billion. In 2022, the price tag was estimated at $133 billion. Does anyone believe that if the project continues, the cost will stop at $133 billion?

California Democrats are coming to realize that they can keep pouring billions into the project, and it still won’t get done.

But there are growing doubts among key Democratic leaders in the Legislature — historically the bullet train’s base of support — and from Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been cautious about committing new state financing. As of now, there is no identified source of funding for the $100 billion it will take to extend the rail project from the Central Valley to its original goals, Los Angeles and San Francisco, in part because lawmakers, no longer convinced of the bullet train’s viability, have pushed to divert additional funding to regional rail projects.

“There is nothing but problems on the project,” the speaker of the State Assembly, Anthony Rendon, complained recently.

It makes more sense to spend those dollars on services, always did.

There were many voices that spoke against this boondoggle early on. Mine was one of them, as you can read here, here and here.

I recap:

There was no need for high-speed rail because planes can and do transport people faster than the “bullet” train and with less public money.

California has a history of blowing infrastructure projects due to dithering and crazy schemes — like putting a pricey bike path on the Bay Bridge. California pols just can’t stick with a good idea. They have to make it worse.

Debra J. Saunders is a senior fellow with the Chapman Center of Citizen Leadership. Contact her at dsaunders@discovery.org.