Why Is US High-Speed Rail Taking So Long?
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
High-speed rail has been touted as one of the top priorities by many politicians in the U.S., but despite almost two decades of talk, the country's top projects are barely taking off.
In the past 20 years, in which countries like China have laid more than 25,000 miles of high-speed rail track, the top U.S. projects have barely gotten started, causing the technology's top proponents to ask the big question: What's taking so long?
All Aboard In America
The largest high-speed rail project being worked on is in California, where 500 miles of track are planned to connect San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego. Originally approved by voters in 2008, the project is only ready to start laying track this year, after costs spiraled from $40 billion to as high as $128 billion.
The smaller-scale Texas high-speed rail project, which would connect Dallas with Houston over 240 miles, was first proposed in the 2000s but has yet to break ground, despite partnerships with investors from Japan who have a proven track record with bullet trains.
On their current timelines, neither project is set to become fully operational before 2030, meaning from beginning to end, their planning and construction will take more than two decades, assuming there are no further delays.
Federal And Local Opposition
One of the biggest barriers the projects face is political opposition. Infrastructure projects are costly, take a long time to yield any benefit, and the nature of high-speed rail means that a lot of stakeholders in a variety of locations need to be on board.
In the U.S., that consensus does not exist. The California high-speed rail system has faced repeated attempts from local legislators to shut it down, with many California Republicans fearing that the project is a money pit with no end.
As recently as this February, state legislators have called on Governor Gavin Newsom and President Donald Trump to put a stop to the project, with an open letter condemning high-speed rail reading: "Promised to be completed by 2020 with a price tag of $34 billion, HSRA's projected budget ballooned to over $128 billion.
"Voters were told that more than 20 percent of the project would be privately funded. Instead, taxpayers face the reality of single-handedly funding massively inflated costs for a project that many will never use or see completed. By all metrics, the High-Speed Rail is a colossal failure."
A map of the Houston-Dallas high-speed rail system, designed by Texas Central.
A map of the Houston-Dallas high-speed rail system, designed by Texas Central.
Texas Central
Texas' project faces a similar issue, with the state Legislature having misgivings over the transparency of Texas Central Rail, the company spearheading the Houston-Dallas line.
In April, the state's transportation committee held multiple meetings on the project's finances while the wider Legislature debated whether or not funding should be revoked.
On top of that, the projects have to deal with the position of the federal government, which, for the last eight years, has see-sawed between support and hostility.
During his first administration, Trump branded high-speed rail as a "green disaster" and a "waste" and demanded that California return $3.5 billion in federal funding allocated for its project.
The Biden administration reversed the approach in 2020, only for Trump to then reverse it back this year, cutting off all future federal funding and prompting Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy to initiate a review into whether the project complied with funding requirements.
The impact of the legislative hurdles is being felt at the construction site.
Why Is U.S High-Speed Rail Taking So Long?
Why Is U.S High-Speed Rail Taking So Long?
Newsweek illustration/ Getty Images
"The [California] project has faced many challenges, including right-of-way acquisition, pre-construction activities like third party agreements to relocate utilities in the system's path, various permitting requirements under state and federal law, time consuming and redundant state and federal environmental review processes, legal challenges related to those reviews, and a lack of full project funding which has resulted in costly delays and inefficient delivery," a spokesperson for the California High-Speed Rail Authority told Newsweek.
"The Authority has taken measures to mitigate schedule related to right-of-way acquisition based on lessons learned, including staged delivery process where major construction begins only after right-of-way has been acquired."
The Lay Of The Land
One of the other biggest delays facing U.S. high-speed rail is the very ground it's being built on. Before shovels can even touch the soil, landowners, environmental agencies and local authorities need to be consulted and convinced that the project can go ahead, and for such long-term and complex constructions, that can be a tough sell.
"High-speed rail is extraordinarily complicated to engineer for and severely disrupts the terrain upon which it operates," John Sitilides, a federal affairs adviser to ReRoute the Route, the business and civic coalition opposing the current Texas project model, told Newsweek. "It has a profoundly detrimental effect on the environment and as such often requires a dense and lengthy federal regulatory NEPA review to protect the public.
"Also, private project backers often try to value-engineer the route and project to save money, even when this approach may not result in the best outcome for transportation users, the environment, landowners or the general public. This cheap approach will often receive needed pushback from governing authorities, landowners, and other affected parties in the form of lawsuits and required changes. For example, the original backers of the proposed Texas project chose what they thought was the cheapest route to construct on, even though it did not best serve the public or advance the goal of transporting people efficiently and cost-effectively."
For property owners along the route of any proposed rail network, their relationship with the construction project becomes antagonistic, as legislators are able to prevent private development in areas that the trains might need to pass through. In response, landowners dig in their heels and drag out the process as long as possible.
A map showing California's proposed high-speed rail network from February 2021. The initial operating segment, between Merced and Bakersfield, is expected to begin services between 2030 and 2033.
A map showing California's proposed high-speed rail network from February 2021. The initial operating segment, between Merced and Bakersfield, is expected to begin services between 2030 and 2033.
California High Speed Rail Authority
"High-speed rail destroys property, period," Sitilides said. "The only properties that benefit are terminal sites. Every other property is irreparably harmed by being bisected or severely impacted with no cross access.
"Landowners who receive no benefit resist these takings of their property by inept project planners who have no clear path to financing their project, yet can thwart or prevent the use and development of private lands by landowners along the route for many years, as has occurred in Texas since 2015 with no end in sight.
"Publishing a proposed 'route' harms property values along or adjacent to that route for hundreds of miles, whether in California or in Texas, even if the project ultimately is never built. It is similar to an inverse condemnation or a taking without an actual taking.
"There will be natural resistance from landowners, taxpayers, and the general public in such scenarios that government bureaucrats easily neglect or dismiss, much to their eventual dismay and consternation."
Future Of U.S. High-Speed Rail
Despite the setbacks, the California and Texas projects maintain an optimistic outlook.
"California's high-speed rail program continues to deliver on its promise to build a fully electrified, high-speed rail system between the Bay Area and Los Angeles—creating jobs and economic opportunity, supporting housing affordability, and laying the foundation for a modern, connected transportation network that serves all Californians," a spokesperson for the authority told Newsweek.
Texas' project struck a similar tone when approached by Newsweek, thanking the first Trump administration for its original approval.
A Texas Central spokesperson said: "No other state can match Texas' healthy, 'can-do' business environment—or better understands how to meet the needs of its people. The first Trump Administration gave this project the greenlight and, unfortunately, it got hung up in Biden Administration politics.
"We're proud to once again be moving forward under President Trump," the spokesperson said. "Texas Central is shovel-ready. The project will improve mobility and safety for Texans, create significant new jobs, and accelerate economic growth in the Lone Star State."
For both projects, construction is only just beginning, and the political opposition isn't going anywhere.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
8 minutes ago
- Newsweek
JD Vance Told Volodymyr Zelensky to 'Behave' During Oval Office Meeting
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Vice President JD Vance told Fox News' Laura Ingraham that he greeted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky with a "little icebreaker" during his visit to the White House this week. Vance said on The Ingraham Angle, "President Zelensky walked into the Oval Office, and I was chatting with him, and the president [Trump] and some of the senior Ukrainian delegation. I said, Mr. President, so as long as you behave, I won't say anything. And he just chuckled a little bit, and it was a good little icebreaker." During a February Oval Office meeting, President Trump and Vance abruptly confronted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, culminating in a public shouting match and the cancellation of a signed minerals deal after Zelensky was called "disrespectful" and escorted out of the White House. The meeting—which had initially been intended to formalize U.S. support for Ukraine—collapsed entirely, with lunch and a joint press conference scrapped amid the dramatic fallout. Vance: Zelenskyy walked into the oval office. I was chatting with him… I said Mr. President, so long as you behave, I won't say anything. It was a good little icebreaker — Acyn (@Acyn) August 20, 2025 This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.
CBS News
8 minutes ago
- CBS News
Texas House passes GOP redistricting plan after weeks-long standoff
The Texas House of Representatives gave final passage on Wednesday to House Bill 4, a controversial Republican-backed proposal to redraw the state's congressional maps and potentially add up to five new GOP-leaning districts. Entering Wednesday, the bill needed to pass two votes in the House to advance to the Senate. Each vote passed 88-52. Before the final vote, lawmakers debated a series of amendments offered by Democrats, all of which were rejected by the Republican majority. The bill was the sole item on the agenda for the day's floor session, which began at 10 a.m. The Texas Senate, which approved a similar version of the redistricting legislation earlier this week, is scheduled to take up the House-passed bill when it convenes this Thursday at 7 p.m. If the Senate approves the House version without changes, the legislation could be sent to Gov. Greg Abbott by the end of the week. If not, the two chambers will need to reconcile differences in a conference committee. The vote came after a dramatic standoff earlier this month, when Democratic lawmakers fled the state to break quorum and block action on the redistricting bill. Their absence stalled the Legislature and effectively ended the first special session, delaying the measure for two weeks. Gov. Greg Abbott called a second special session hours after the first adjourned, and Democrats returned to the House chamber on Monday, allowing the legislation to move forward. That evening, HB 4 passed out of the House redistricting committee on a 12-8 party-line vote. To prevent another walkout, House Speaker Dustin Burrows imposed a rule requiring Democratic members to be escorted by Department of Public Safety officers if they wished to leave the Capitol. While most Democrats complied, Rep. Nicole Collier of Fort Worth refused. She was temporarily locked in the House chamber and was later allowed to go to her Capitol office. On Monday, Collier filed a petition in state court alleging she was under "illegal restraint by the government." The court has not yet ruled on the matter. On Tuesday, several other Democrats joined Collier in protest, tearing up their signed escort agreements and spending the night in the Capitol. With the passage of HB 4, Republican leaders dropped the escort requirement. The redistricting plan is expected to give Republicans a significant advantage in the 2026 midterm elections, potentially flipping up to five congressional seats.
NBC News
11 minutes ago
- NBC News
What's next in the battle over redistricting as the Texas House passes new GOP maps
The Republican-controlled state House in Texas has passed new congressional maps that aim to pad the party's majority in Washington by as much as five seats in the midterm elections, a move that comes as battles over redistricting spread across the country. With Texas set to fully enact its new plan as soon as this week, urged on by President Donald Trump, California Democrats are moving quickly to implement a plan carving up their state's maps in retaliation. Meanwhile, top Republicans in states like Indiana, Missouri and Florida continue to talk about tweaking their maps to create more Republican-controlled congressional seats in the 2026 elections. Ohio's redraw, which it must do under state law, could benefit the GOP, too. Governors in Democratic-controlled states are weighing a response too, but in many cases, they're restrained by procedural hurdles or by other practical limitations — some have already stretched their own gerrymandered maps as far as they could go — that could make a tit-for-tat more difficult. It's all expected to come to a head in a matter of weeks, against the backdrop of a race for the congressional majority in Washington that sits on a knife's edge. The final outcome in Texas Lawmakers in the GOP-controlled Texas House passed their map Wednesday, days after Democrats returned from a two-week "quorum break" in which they fled the state to hold up the bill. But they could only delay, not derail, the new Republican maps, which convert three deep-blue districts into deep-red ones and tilt two Democratic-held South Texas districts slightly further toward the GOP, too. State Rep. Todd Hunter, a Republican who represents Corpus Christi and co-sponsored the new map, kicked off the day with some straight talk. 'The underlying goal is this plan is straightforward: Improve Republican political performance,' he told his colleagues, adding that the crux of the changes to the maps center on five districts that 'now trend Republican in political performance.' 'While there's no guarantee of an electorate success, Republicans will now have an opportunity to potentially win those districts,' he added. After a handful of lawmakers remained in the chamber overnight to protest House leadership for requiring Democrats agree to police escorts to ensure they don't attempt to skip town again, Democrats took to the floor to criticize their Republican colleagues over the maps. They questioned whether their Republican colleagues were truly not factoring in the racial compositions of districts, as they claimed, warning Democrats will have "their day in federal court." They also hit out at their scheduling in the special legislative session, which put redistricting on the calendar ahead of voting on relief for the victims of the July floods in the Hill Country. 'This is Donald Trump's map. It clearly and deliberately manufactures five more Republican seats in Congress because Trump himself knows the voters are rejecting his agenda and instead of respecting that rejection, he's changing the rules," said state Rep. John Bucy III of Austin, a Democrat. "Instead of listening to the people he's trying to silence them, and Texas Republicans have been more than willing to help.' California Democrats move to retaliate California's legislature saw an hours-long hearing Tuesday as Democrats there speed toward passing legislation that will call for a fall special election putting redistricting on the ballot. Voters will decide whether to override the state's independent redistricting commission and approve temporary, Democratic-drawn maps for the rest of the decade. Those maps are the political inverse of the ones in Texas — endangering a handful of incumbent Republicans and putting Democrats in position to net up to five seats from California's new map, according to estimates from the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. The hearing turned contentious amid interruptions and partisan clashes between lawmakers. Republicans repeatedly accused Democrats of wasting state resources — a statewide special election would cost significant funds — and for bucking the agreement that empowered the state's independent redistricting panel in the first place. 'California should lead the way — when other states decide to do something else, we shouldn't react to them, we should prove by example that we can do this better. That we create the foundations for the rest of the nation,' said state Assemblyman David Tangipa, a Republican from the Fresno area, said. Steve Bennett, a Democratic state legislator from Ventura, lashed out at Texas Republicans' mid-decade redistricting by comparing it to power grabs by 'autocrats' like Russian President Vladimir Putin. "We prefer the agreement we all had to play by the old rules," he said. "But when autocrats change the rules and the norms that we are using to decide who has power, we can either fight back or we can potentially permanently lose the ability ever to fight back again." Democrats need to get the maps passed through the legislature soon in order to bring the question to the voters this fall, if they want to enact the maps in time for the 2026 midterms. Republicans are seeking to delay that, with a group of lawmakers suing this week, arguing that Democrats haven't given the public the required time to review legislation before voting. Other states weigh jumping into the fray While the spotlight remains on California and Texas, redistricting remains a live ball in other states. Ohio must redraw its lines by law, since the state legislature approved its 2021 map without Democratic support. The timing could work out well for Republicans, who control the legislature there and could stand to gain depending on how the maps are drawn. Two of Ohio's three Democratic House members won re-election last cycle by less than 3 percentage points. In Indiana, the state's Republican members of Congress have in recent days announced their support for a redraw there, where the party already controls seven of the nine congressional seats. Indiana Gov. Mike Braun, a Republican, hasn't said whether he plans to call for a special session of the legislature. But Vice President JD Vance traveled to Indiana earlier this month to meet with the governor as the redistricting debate swirled. In Missouri, Republicans have been cajoling Gov. Mike Kehoe to call a special legislative session for redistricting there, where the GOP controls six of the eight congressional seats. In Florida, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis said this week that people can 'anticipate' a mid-decade redraw because there has been a 'sea change in demography' since the 2020 census. Outside of California, where their efforts are subject to approval from voters, Democrats face a smattering of other challenges if they want to redraw maps in other states. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, who has been vocally supportive of the Texas House Democrats' attempts to delay the redistricting process in their home state, hasn't ruled out a redistricting push in his backyard. But Democrats already hold 14 of the state's 17 congressional districts there. New York Democrats are also interested in redrawing the lines there, but they face logistical hurdles to change the state constitution, which would likely mean no changes until 2028 at the earliest.
