TPT March 2012

G lobal M arketplace

and spare the environment millions of tons of carbon emissions and travellers untold hours wasted in traffic or in airport terminals waiting out delays.” As summarised by Michael A Fletcher of the Washington Post , President Barack Obama’s vision for 21 st -Century train travel would seem unobjectionable. In fact, objections have come thick and fast. The “train to nowhere,” in California, came under attack as soon as the first leg of the futuristic high-speed rail network was announced; as did the presidential plan for an advance as transformative as the interstate highway system inaugurated by President Dwight D Eisenhower in 1956. Mr Obama set a goal of providing 80% of Americans access to high-speed rail within 25 years. But his ambitions have been curbed by high costs, obstinate opponents, and a public that has grown sceptical of government’s ability to do big things. “Virtually none of the projects has gotten off the ground,” wrote Mr Fletcher. “And the one that has is in trouble.” (“Plans for High- Speed Rail Are Slowing Down,” 15 January.) So far, the Democratic president has wagered more than $10bn in federal money on high-speed rail, only to see the effort scaled back, time after time. Republican governors in Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio refused billions of dollars from Washington, denouncing the offers as economically unfeasible notions of Big Government. In those three states, some less demanding transportation goals were achieved: a 30-minute reduction (to five hours) in the 285-mile trip between Chicago and Detroit. But such improvements fall well short of the promise of high-speed rail. › Now the only pending true high-speed rail project in the US is stymied even in a Democratic stronghold known for innovation: California. Mr Fletcher noted that few places would benefit more from fast trains. From San Francisco to Los Angeles – the country’s busiest air route – the skies are so congested that 25% of flights between the two cities are at least one hour late. With the state’s population projected to grow by 50% over the next four decades, the situation can only worsen. But an early reaction against the proposed route of the bullet train quickly hardened into controversy among the California High- Speed Rail Authority, the watchdog group Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design, farmers, environmentalists, city planners, and elected officials at the state and federal levels. The number of partisans grows even as prospects for resolution shrink. Imparting a degree of urgency is the 2017 deadline for spending $3.5bn in federal stimulus money earmarked for the project. Meanwhile, the estimated cost of the rail network has tripled from earlier estimates to nearly $100bn. The completion date for the 800- mile system has been pushed from 2020 to 2033, and, the Post reported, a recent poll indicates that public sentiment in California has turned against the whole idea. › In an 18 January “State of the State” speech in which he asserted that government should pursue ambitious ventures even in difficult economic times, Gov Jerry Brown of California reaffirmed

138

www.read-tpt.com

M arch 2012