WASHINGTON — Most registered voters in California continue to support the state’s high speed rail project, despite delays and increased cost, according to a poll released earlier this month.
The survey conducted by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and the Los Angeles times found 56% of voters continue to support the project, even if it is only operating in the state’s Central Valley by 2030 and does not reach the San Francisco Bay Area until 2033.
Support varies widely by political party affiliation, with 73% of Democrats in support and 18% against; 54% of independent voters in favor and 37% opposed, and 66% percent of Republicans opposed with 25% in favor.
“This poll confirms what we’ve believed for a long-time – that the great majority of Californians want electrified high-speed rail to help them alleviate congestion, avoid high gas prices, and address the climate crisis,” Ray LaHood, former U.S. Transportation Secretary and co-chair of the U.S. High-Speed Rail Coalition, said in a press release.
Gov. Gavin Newsom has submitted a $4.2 billion budget request to fund ongoing construction work in the Central Valley and advance additional contracts for the project. That money represents the remaining funding from the ballot initiative approved by voters in 2008.
Most recent estimates place the cost of completing the project at $105 billion, up from an original estimate of $42 billion.
Full results of the poll, which addressed a number of issues in the state, are available here.
The interstates weren’t built overnight either the last portion wasn’t completed until 1992 final cost $128 Billion (1992 $$$). No transportation option will reach its potential as long as driving is such a bargain. If federal & state gas taxes had been increased to match inflation & rising construction costs to maintain the hwy system as it was intended you’d be paying a lot more than what you’re griping about now. Instead Congress has been tapping the Treasury to make up for the shortfall & the bulk of the Infrastructure funding is going to hwys thus adding to the deficit.
Yep, a lot to dive into and as a Cali resident now into double digit years got a couple two cents to offer from my perspective for whatever is worth. The big failures are obvious from how it came about a whole separate agency utterly relied on high price consultancy and engineering firms cashing to no experience in real estate to completely unprepared to massive amount of litigation to woefully inadequate preliminary estimates. All these items took away any benefit of being able to build more mile cheaper and quicker going with Central Valley approach.
..
However, Cali is huge on roads, a lot of freeways and building even more is hugely expensive. Just come to my neck of woods with 10 lane freeways already using all the right of way. Cali is already trying to take Hwy 99 in valley to 3 & 4 lanes in each direction at steep cost through central valley cities & could easily add another lane or two to I-5 each direction. So in my mind Cali needs another transportation option and it does make a lot of sense to get you something between auto and airplane. That is right of way separated from freight requiring a fair share of structures, bridges and at some point tunnels. CaHSR has finally got through a lot of litigation and hammering out a fair share of the environmental requirements.
..
I’m all for some of the state budget surplus to speed up construction, get a tunnel going to get into Bay Area. Certainly more willing to see my tax dollars go to an infrastructure project than another stimulus check, cash payout to buy off voters. Its time to push CaHSR into San Jose tying Caltrains/Capital Corridor/Amtrak w BART extension & Google’s forthcoming massive San Jose investment.
..
The other item of note, Brightline is about to kick start to Las Vegas with a legit project to extend further west to Palmdale. The extension doesn’t seem significant at first glance but you might have some meaningful connections with CaHSR and LA Metrolink at that point
The California High Speed Rail Project suffers from being over built with too many bridges and structures to serve the center of the small cities along its path. In France smaller cities are served by TGV stations located in adjacent rural areas in order to save construction costs. If you look at the Rail Authority website they show extensive and expensive bridges and structures that would not be needed if the railroad was constructed in adjacent empty rural areas. Even with larger cities the TGV in France is not built to the station but ends a few miles from the station and uses the regular tracks to reach stations. California High Speed Rail is being built like the Shinkansen in Japan with costly and slow construction. In Japan the reason why the Shinkansen is separate from regular rail as the Shinkansen is standard gauge and the regular rail is narrow gauge.
But the Italian model is worth studying, sounds like a lot of the same issues that go on in California plus the notorious business practices they are known for.
250 km per hour gets you anywhere city centre to city centre on Trenitalia.
What is even more interesting is the success of Italy’s high-speed rail networks since 2008 has been cited as one of the main reasons that flag carrier airline Alitalia (which was very focused on domestic flights) went bankrupt and ceased operations in October 2021, as high-speed train travel became faster, cheaper and more efficient.
And for our freight railways that are bogged down with land barges, In November 2018 Italy launched the first high-speed freight rail in the world carrying freight between Caserta and Bologna in 3 hours and 30 minutes, at an average speed of 180 km/h (110 mph).
I know they are dealing with a lot smaller country but it just shows what can be done if indeed the desire to change is there.
I have to agree with James point. I would also add that I would have asked follow-up questions to indicate at what point both financially and time-wise support would start going away if the cost continues to go up significantly or the time to complete the entire project continues on way beyond what the current estimates.
The US is not a 3rd world country when it comes to transportation because we don’t have high-speed rail. The real problems facing us right now are getting the freight carriers away from the Hedge funds dictating their operations plus a new approach to seeking new business, and returning the airlines back to where they were service-wise before Covid.
Have to agree with polling Steve. My experience with all polls is the questions can be worded to give the result the people paying for the poll want, especially if politicians are involved.
We North Americans are far from third world. One of our biggest problems we seem to face is definitely GREED by Hedge funds, just looking to the next quarters results, not sustainability or longevity. And it’s not just in rail.
It’s good for America. We need to stop looking like a third world country when it comes to public transportation. Rest of the world zipping by while Americans slog along in endless vehicle traffic.
You know Mark, in my opinion if more people were to get to Europe or any other country with HSR, they would quickly see the benefits. The motorways between cities are always congested and flying short distances is just a waste of time. And forget about parking.
Been on several but travelled the most in Scotland it is amazing how they run trains, packed, between Glasgow and Edinburgh 84 times a day each way on work days and that’s only between 6AM and midnight.
They fully electrified this route a few years back to accomplish this since the accel / decel is so rapid.
So in California which I have also driven in this will only help.
When I worked in central London, a co-worker commuted from Leicester daily by train. About 2 hours each way, which I thought was madness. Having been a transit user much of my US life, that seemed a little excessive. So I asked him why? And with that British humor he said “have you met my wife?”
Well if there was ever a reason for a long commute……..
You just can’t beat British humour
As with all polls, the devil is in the question(s). The poll didn’t ask if people would ride the train at what price point and if their opinion on the project would change if their taxes were raised a certain amount to pay for the additional cost.
Hey Charles,
In reference to your skepticism about reaching the Bay Area by 2033…you do realize that electrification of the Cal Trans line from San Jose north to SF is pretty much done with new equipment undergoing testing now? Riders in that area are about to experience the benefits of CA’s investment.
CA high speed rail and the eastside LIRR GCT access project show that when there is sufficient will, America can still undertake a major infrastructure project.
I wish I could share your optimism. The NYCTA Second Avenue Subway took 60 years for a mile or so. We’re only inching toward Amtrak’s Gateway Tunnels and Baltimore Tunnels. We’ve gotten nowhere on CalTrains Bakersfield to LA Basin — there isn’t even an alignment, something which must be nailed down several years before construction starts.
Just this week, Biden, or the Easter Bunny, whoever is running this country, took two measures which will greatly add to the time and the cost of any infrastructure project: (1) Requiring domestic steel and (2) Reinstating slo-mo environmental process.
Charles, you will recall Trump liked the project, but stipulated the motive power had to be gas or diesel.
Do I recall? No and no.
What I do recall is that Trump attempted to get a refund from Sacramento for federal funds spent on a project seemingly going nowhere. The project was for Bay Area to LA Basin, whereas the only signs of life were in the Central Valley.
Except get a safety fence put up in Del Mar. Just saying.
I would hype Brightline’s accomplishment with private money except, by the time it is done there might not be a Disneyworld to go to with the way its going.
Yes, the poll shows that once a project is started there’s no point not finishing it, no matter how lame. With all the work done so far (and all the money so far sunk into it) in the Central Valley, of course voters would want to put it over the top. Why not?.
Also the phrasing of the question assumes the project will reach the Bay Area in 2033 … which is unproven so this makes it a push poll.
Finally, did we mention when the train will reach the LA Basin? When will that be, 2093? Or 3093?