Latest news with #CaliforniaHighSpeedRail
Newsweek
27-05-2025
- Business
- Newsweek
How Donald Trump Could Boost US High-Speed Rail
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. President Donald Trump has the chance to cement his legacy by laying the groundwork for a "17,000-mile high-speed rail network" across the United States, according to former Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. Speaking to Newsweek at the U.S. High Speed Rail Association's 2025 annual conference in Washington, D.C., LaHood, who worked in the Obama administration, said he was "heartened by some of the things" Trump has said about high-speed rail, and urged him to "send a signal" by vocally backing one or more proposed high speed rail lines. He said such a move would unlock "private dollars and state dollars" which would help high speed rail "take off much quicker than it is right now." Newsweek has contacted the White House press office for comment. The U.S. High Speed Rail Association (USHSR) is a campaign group, including both industry and labor representatives, that advocates on behalf of the American high speed rail industry. The State of U.S. High Speed Rail Currently, the U.S. doesn't have any functioning high speed rail lines, which the International Union of Railways (UIC) defines as operating at a minimum of 250 kilometers per hour (155 miles per hour) on specially built tracks. This puts the U.S. behind the likes of France, Spain, Japan and China all of which have advanced high speed rail networks, with the latter operating nearly 30,000 miles worth of high-speed rail track, the vast majority of which was built over the past two decades. Two high speed rail lines are currently under construction in the U.S.—California High Speed Rail, which is intended to link Los Angeles to San Francisco, and Brightline West, a project to connect Las Vegas to southern California. However, a plethora of other proposals have been made including plans to link Dallas, Houston, and Fort Worth in Texas, Eugene, Oregon, to Vancouver in Cascadia and Boston, New York and Washington D.C. in the Northeast. President Trump could turbocharge U.S high speed rail by sending "a signal" to attract private funding, according to former Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. President Trump could turbocharge U.S high speed rail by sending "a signal" to attract private funding, according to former Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. Newsweek Illustration/Canva/Associated Press/Getty Former Transportation Secretary LaHood's Hopes There was widespread concern among attendees at the USHSR annual conference that Trump's second term could stymie American high speed rail plans, but LaHood, a Republican who served as Obama's transportation secretary from 2009 to 2013, struck a more optimistic note. LaHood told Newsweek he had been "heartened by some of the things I've heard President Trump say" about high-speed rail, adding he "seems enthused about [the] Las Vegas to Los Angeles" project. This plan, Brightline West, is being built between Las Vegas and Rancho Cucamonga in southern California, but there is also a plan to link it to the Los Angeles to San Francisco line via a "high desert corridor." The former transportation secretary said that a clear signal from Trump in support of one or more high speed rail projects would help to unlock private and state funding. "I think the success of these projects in Europe and Asia is largely due to the national government making investments but then encouraging the private sector," LaHood said. "Once the national government makes a commitment its easier for the private sector then—they know it's going to be a stable project, they know their investment is going to be good." Former Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood speaking at the U.S. High Speed Rail Association's 2025 annual conference in Washington D.C. Former Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood speaking at the U.S. High Speed Rail Association's 2025 annual conference in Washington D.C. James Bickerton/Newsweek He added: "I think if President Trump sent a signal to Texas Central or sent a signal to national government has to be positive and has to make a commitment for dollars in order to then attract the kind of private dollars and state dollars that it takes to make these projects happen. If that kind of commitment were made by national government boom, I think high speed rail would take off much quicker than it is right now." LaHood pointed to the success of Brightline, a privately owned and operated rail line connecting Miami and Orlando that opened in 2023. While it runs at below the high-speed standard, Brightline was the first privately built rail line in the U.S. to begin operations in a century and has seen its passenger number surge since its launch. "If you look at the Brightline project in Florida between Miami and Orlando, now it's not high-speed rail but it is wildly popular," the former transportation secretary said. "They're putting more and more trains on that track every day because people like the idea that they don't have to get on the I-95. "If you build it, they will come, if you build it, it will be successful and I think that will be the case with Brightline West, Las Vegas to LA, and I think it will be true San Francisco to LA. I think they will be wildly popular. I really believe at this point if you build it, they will come and the proof of that is Europe and Asia. Their trains are wildly popular." Trump and High-Speed Rail Trump's positions on high-speed rail have been mixed over the years. In August 2024, the then Republican presidential candidate praised "unbelievably fast" bullet trains that had "no problems" in other countries. "We don't have anything like that in this country, not even close, and it doesn't make sense that we don't. Doesn't make sense," Trump said. Then-U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood testifies before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Capitol Hill February 24, 2010, in Washington, D.C. Then-U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood testifies before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Capitol Hill February 24, 2010, in Washington, D.C. Mark Wilson/GETTY Last month however, Trump's Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy cut $63.9 million in federal funding that was being provided to support the Texas Central proposed high-speed rail line between Dallas and Houston, describing it as "a waste of taxpayer funds." Texas Central insists it was not reliant on the funding and is continuing with its plans. Trump has also been harshly critical of the California High Speed Rail project designed to link Los Angeles to San Francisco claiming it had the "worst overruns that there have ever been in the history of our country." During his first term, Trump slashed $1 billion of funding for the project, which was later restored under President Joe Biden. In February, Duffy said he was launching a review into whether the project "followed through on the commitments it made to receive billions of dollars in federal funding" and if not whether the money should be spent elsewhere. The U.S. High Speed Rail Association paid travel and hotel expenses for Newsweek reporter James Bickerton to attend its 2025 annual conference.
The Independent
23-05-2025
- Automotive
- The Independent
With 160mph trains launching on the East Coast - is America finally on track for a high-speed rail network?
The European Union has 5,316 miles of high-speed rail, China's network exceeds 31,000 miles, while America has a high-speed line mileage of zero. But the high-speed rail revolution may well be underway in the U.S., with some in the industry quietly optimistic that one day the country will have a comprehensive network of high-speed trains. Work has begun on Brightline West, a line costing $12 billion that will run from Las Vegas to an outer suburb of Los Angeles. When it launches in December 2028, it will be the first-ever 186mph train in the States. And California is building a $128 billion, 220mph line that will take passengers from Los Angeles to San Francisco in under three hours when it begins operations sometime between 2031 and 2033. Rick Harnish, the Executive Director of the High Speed Rail Alliance, stresses to The Independent that there is "no doubt" that Brightline West will be a catalyst for other high-speed projects, the definition of "high speed" generally acknowledged as above 150mph. Rick also points to the imminent launch of Amtrak's 160mph Acela trains as a crucial step in the right direction for high-speed rail in America. These trains, due to debut in the next few weeks, will serve the Northeast Corridor, from Washington, D.C. to Boston via New York. Rick explains that because "it's an old corridor that has slowly been rebuilt, there are different speeds in different places". He continues: "Mostly it's 110mph. But there is one short section near Princeton in New Jersey where they can get to 150mph and a short [150mph] section in Connecticut. "The Northeast Corridor has gotten the most significant funding for passenger rail for decades. We would call that regional rail, but it's important." Features on the new Acela trains include onboard café cars, Wi-Fi, in-seat USB ports and plug sockets, winged headrests that Amtrak says "provide more comfort and separation", and seat covers made out of recycled leather. Plus, there's an interactive reservation system that will allow passengers to change their seats using the Amtrak app. As swish as the new Acela trains will be, Rick believes that it's the high-speed projects on dedicated lines that will help "change the way people travel across the country". One major obstacle is that traveling by road or air is embedded from the top down in America. A cultural and political shift will be needed for a high-speed rail network to flourish. Rick says, "The federal government has forced us to focus on moving cars fast, not on building communities that are healthy, productive, and enjoyable places to live." In a blog post, the High Speed Rail Alliance blames "perverse incentive structures and feedback loops" for America's rail system lagging behind Europe and China's. It said: "The industries that profit from building more congested highways and airports fund political campaigns and think tanks devoted to lobbying legislatures for more highways and airports. "Naturally, policymakers are responsive to the people who fund their campaigns and rationalize their policy priorities." A case in point, US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy recently described a proposed high-speed line between Houston and Dallas as a "waste of taxpayers' money". New York-based author Will Doig — who wrote High-Speed Empire, Chinese Expansion, and the Future of Southeast Asia — agrees with the High Speed Rail Alliance, telling The Independent that "political will and government funding are the prime suspects" behind high-speed rail inertia. But he name-checks other factors, too. He continues: "There are other reasons American infrastructure has stalled. For instance, environmental impact assessments have ironically become a tool that any group can use to delay or kill a project they don't like, even if that project would ultimately have a net-benefit for the environment." Does he think Americans can ever be fully converted to rail travel? Will replies: "We know that people will take the train if the infrastructure makes it worth it. We know this because they already do: train travel is commonplace in the Northeast, where rail is often the fastest and most convenient option. "But in most other parts of the U.S, rail is a third-rate option, plagued by delays and slow trains. "Asking Americans to choose that option over flying or driving is unrealistic. "We shouldn't be asking whether Americans will ever convert to train travel, we should be asking whether America will ever provide railways worth converting to. When things work well, people use them."
Epoch Times
08-05-2025
- Business
- Epoch Times
Trump Says Federal Government Won't Fund California's High-Speed Rail Project
President Donald Trump said the federal government will not continue to pay for California's high-speed rail, calling the costly and delayed project 'out of control' during a meeting with Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney on May 6. The president said he told Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy about his decision. 'That train is the worst cost overrun I've ever seen,' Trump told reporters Tuesday. 'It's totally out of control. It's a stupid project that should have never been built. 'I told our new secretary of transportation we're not going to pay for that thing,' he added. Gov. Gavin Newsom's office said ending the project now would be wasteful, Villaseńor said. 'With 50 major structures built, walking away now as we enter the track-laying phase would be reckless—wasting billions already invested and letting job killers cede a generational infrastructure advantage to China,' spokesman Daniel Villaseñor told The Epoch Times in an email. Related Stories 1/9/2025 12/23/2024 Construction is expected to start this year on a 171-mile section of the Central California route from Merced to Bakersfield. This stretch was expected to cost But funding came up short again this year. The High Speed Rail Authority asked lawmakers to provide another $7 billion by June 2026 to begin the first stretch. In February, Trump announced his administration planned to Since its inception, the project has been Crews build the Hanford Viaduct over Highway 198 as part of the California High Speed Rail project in Hanford, Calif., on Feb. 12, 2025. Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images No tracks have been laid, but officials At an event in January, Newsom said his administration remained committed to the project in response to criticisms. 'To the cynics that are filled with cynicism that stand on the sidelines and don't engage, we're here making this work,' Newsom said. 'Finally, we're at the point where we're going to start laying down this track in the next couple years.' The state envisioned the railway to span 463 miles and run from San Francisco to Los Angeles. According to Jamey Matalka, the authority's chief financial officer, about $13.8 billion has been spent on the project so far, of which about 23 percent was federal funding. The prior Trump administration terminated a federal agreement in 2019 to provide nearly $1 billion for the project, saying the authority had failed to make reasonable progress. In 2021, the Biden administration reversed the decision and increased the funding to over $3 billion. Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks in Los Angeles on Sept. 25, 2024. Newsom's spokesman said shutting down the state's high-speed rail project would be wasteful. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times California state Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones criticized the rail project in February. 'Californians cannot afford to continue building this train to nowhere. Defund the high speed rail!' Jones According to an Emerson College The poll included California's registered voters and was conducted Feb. 10 and 11. Emerson College is in Boston.
Yahoo
06-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Gavin Newsom's climate change chicanery
Gavin Newsom doesn't really care about climate change — and I can prove it. Despite his rhetoric, Newsom is loudly backing a massive, state-funded project that will pump millions of tons of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. Of course, I am referring to the colossal boondoggle known as California High Speed Rail — a project so onerous, it's caught the attention of President Trump. To date, more than $11 billion has been spent developing this train, with $3.4 billion coming from carbon fees generated by the state. The segment under construction is 171 miles through the Central Valley. That means thousands of tons of steel and millions of tons of cement — commodities with very large carbon footprints, estimated at 1.4 tons of carbon dioxide per ton of steel and 0.88 tons per ton of concrete. The project's carbon impact doesn't end there. Wiring, plastic, earth-moving equipment and deliveries ramp up the carbon budget even more. All this for a project that may never be completed. The current projected cost is $135 billion, with no identified source for anywhere close to the funds needed to complete it (not to mention that the price keeps going up). The segment under construction is the easiest stretch. The line still must tunnel through mountains to the north and south, including the longest tunnel in the U.S., which, if built, will traverse an active earthquake fault. Newsom's California Air Resources Board has committed 25 percent of its revenue to California High Speed Rail. That money, from carbon permit auctions, is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions putting $3.4 billion toward the rail project thus far. Here is where we see Newsom's insincerity. Instead of pouring billions down high-speed rail's bottomless pit, that $3.4 billion could have gone to real greenhouse emissions reductions that would also help middle- and low-income Californians. For example, climate change warriors have targeted the dreaded gas stove for extinction. Old stoves do leak methane and nitrous oxide (300 times more potent than carbon dioxide). Newsom and the California Air Resources Board could replace 2 million of these malevolent monsters for under $1.4 billion. Old window air conditioners, energy inefficient and leaking potent hydrofluorocarbons, could be replaced with modern Energy Star units. Replacing 3 million of those units would cost up to $1.8 billion. That's $3.2 billion for much more efficient appliances that emit far fewer greenhouse emissions and cost less to operate, yielding financial benefits to low- and middle-income households. And that is paying full retail price; asking consumers to put a bit of their own cash into the till could expand the program significantly. But if California is determined to do something about rail, there is already a passenger rail project ideal for investment: an existing rail route from San Diego to Santa Barbara via Los Angeles. The route is a sometimes single-track, diesel route full of at-grade intersections, making it a slow, polluting train. An upgraded rail line, double-tracked, electrified and grade separated, would efficiently serve over 10 million people in one of the most car-congested parts of the country. And it would require no tunneling, nor significant land purchases. Projected improvements for the corridor could have been completed for less than what has been spent thus far on a high-speed line that currently goes from nowhere to nowhere. But the problem is that upgrading existing infrastructure is relatively boring compared to a brand-new white elephant. Like the rest of the loud California climate change crowd, Newsom is not interested in actually helping people or truly reducing greenhouse emissions. They want big shiny projects with massive contracts, news stories, photo ops and dramatic drone videos. Three million air conditioners get a brief moment in the sun, but interminable megaprojects are the gift that keeps giving (and taking). That's the real priority for the odious Newsom: popularity and power. Newsom's preference for preening and publicity took a dark turn with the January southern California wildfires. Thoroughly uninterested in dull and unremarkable preventive acts — controlled burns, fire breaks, burying electrical lines, allowing new fire-resistant homes to replace old tinderboxes, not to mention ramping up firefighting capacity — the Los Angeles region was primed for catastrophic wildfires, regardless of the extent of climate change. Newsom is not fully at fault, but he and the rest of the California political establishment deserve a solid portion of the blame for the multibillion-dollar catastrophe and its 4.4 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions. Of course, Newsom won't take the blame at all, casting it on oil companies, insurance companies and anyone else who doesn't move in lockstep with his ideology. The bottom line is simple: if there is a climate emergency, individuals, governments, nonprofits and companies should be doing everything they can do now to reduce emissions. Maybe a new air conditioner only cuts emissions a small amount or perhaps switching from diesel fuel to natural gas is not perfect, but in an emergency, you do what you can with what you have. For politicians like Newsom, his words and alarmism say climate emergency, but his actions say it's a big fraud. Keith Naughton is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm, and a former Pennsylvania political campaign consultant. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
06-02-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Gavin Newsom's climate change chicanery
Gavin Newsom doesn't really care about climate change — and I can prove it. Despite his rhetoric, Newsom is loudly backing a massive, state-funded project that will pump millions of tons of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. Of course, I am referring to the colossal boondoggle known as California High Speed Rail — a project so onerous, it's caught the attention of President Trump. To date, more than $11 billion has been spent developing this train, with $3.4 billion coming from carbon fees generated by the state. The segment under construction is 171 miles through the Central Valley. That means thousands of tons of steel and millions of tons of cement — commodities with very large carbon footprints, estimated at 1.4 tons of carbon dioxide per ton of steel and 0.88 tons per ton of concrete. The project's carbon impact doesn't end there. Wiring, plastic, earth-moving equipment and deliveries ramp up the carbon budget even more. All this for a project that may never be completed. The current projected cost is $135 billion, with no identified source for anywhere close to the funds needed to complete it (not to mention that the price keeps going up). The segment under construction is the easiest stretch. The line still must tunnel through mountains to the north and south, including the longest tunnel in the U.S., which, if built, will traverse an active earthquake fault. Newsom's California Air Resources Board has committed 25 percent of its revenue to California High Speed Rail. That money, from carbon permit auctions, is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions putting $3.4 billion toward the rail project thus far. Here is where we see Newsom's insincerity. Instead of pouring billions down high-speed rail's bottomless pit, that $3.4 billion could have gone to real greenhouse emissions reductions that would also help middle- and low-income Californians. For example, climate change warriors have targeted the dreaded gas stove for extinction. Old stoves do leak methane and nitrous oxide (300 times more potent than carbon dioxide). Newsom and the California Air Resources Board could replace 2 million of these malevolent monsters for under $1.4 billion. Old window air conditioners, energy inefficient and leaking potent hydrofluorocarbons, could be replaced with modern Energy Star units. Replacing 3 million of those units would cost up to $1.8 billion. That's $3.2 billion for much more efficient appliances that emit far fewer greenhouse emissions and cost less to operate, yielding financial benefits to low- and middle-income households. And that is paying full retail price; asking consumers to put a bit of their own cash into the till could expand the program significantly. But if California is determined to do something about rail, there is already a passenger rail project ideal for investment: an existing rail route from San Diego to Santa Barbara via Los Angeles. The route is a sometimes single-track, diesel route full of at-grade intersections, making it a slow, polluting train. An upgraded rail line, double-tracked, electrified and grade separated, would efficiently serve over 10 million people in one of the most car-congested parts of the country. And it would require no tunneling, nor significant land purchases. Projected improvements for the corridor could have been completed for less than what has been spent thus far on a high-speed line that currently goes from nowhere to nowhere. But the problem is that upgrading existing infrastructure is relatively boring compared to a brand-new white elephant. Like the rest of the loud California climate change crowd, Newsom is not interested in actually helping people or truly reducing greenhouse emissions. They want big shiny projects with massive contracts, news stories, photo ops and dramatic drone videos. Three million air conditioners get a brief moment in the sun, but interminable megaprojects are the gift that keeps giving (and taking). That's the real priority for the odious Newsom: popularity and power. Newsom's preference for preening and publicity took a dark turn with the January southern California wildfires. Thoroughly uninterested in dull and unremarkable preventive acts — controlled burns, fire breaks, burying electrical lines, allowing new fire-resistant homes to replace old tinderboxes, not to mention ramping up firefighting capacity — the Los Angeles region was primed for catastrophic wildfires, regardless of the extent of climate change. Newsom is not fully at fault, but he and the rest of the California political establishment deserve a solid portion of the blame for the multibillion-dollar catastrophe and its 4.4 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions. Of course, Newsom won't take the blame at all, casting it on oil companies, insurance companies and anyone else who doesn't move in lockstep with his ideology. The bottom line is simple: if there is a climate emergency, individuals, governments, nonprofits and companies should be doing everything they can do now to reduce emissions. Maybe a new air conditioner only cuts emissions a small amount or perhaps switching from diesel fuel to natural gas is not perfect, but in an emergency, you do what you can with what you have. For politicians like Newsom, his words and alarmism say climate emergency, but his actions say it's a big fraud.
