Opinion: Bullet train — ‘No capacity for new commitments’

Seventeen years ago, Californians voted for Proposition 1A which authorized about $10 billion through the sale of bonds to finance the construction of a high-speed rail system, connecting San Francisco to Los Angeles. It was a great idea. But apparently it was not a realistic expectation. Of course, that didn’t stop the appointed members of the California High Speed Rail Authority (CAHSRA) from spending the money on some sort of project although it had nothing to do with moving people from our northern Bay Area megalopolis to the sprawling City of Angeles.

Now, 17 years later, there has been no progress made toward an LA/SF rail line, and the estimated cost of the project has increased at least ten-fold. Although the $100-billion figure has been tossed around for a couple of years, it really means nothing. In fact, the most current estimate is $130 billion, and that also is just a number pulled out of the air. Throughout the years, I’ve written 28 columns criticizing the CAHSRA, watching cost overrides occurring with regularity, seeing plans change, listing unexpected problems, and so forth.

Bumbling rail authority

Although the bumbling CAHSRA has been great fodder for a columnist, I’ve had to endure a good deal of embarrassment as I’ve reported on the high-speed-rail systems that have been built in other countries. I guess that’s because I had become so used to thinking of the United States as being first with every innovation from mass-produced cars (Ford Model A, 1903) to skyscrapers (Empire State Building, 1931) to electronic computers (ENIAC at University of Pennsylvania, 1949) that I assumed we’d be first to have a “bullet train.” But, as I started researching the subject, I discovered that Japan has had true high-speed rail since it started operating its Shinkansen system in 1964. Yes, more than 60 years ago, and the country has added to it ever since.