There are some initiatives to build high-speed rail in the United States, with lots of significant hurdles to overcome. In a country with a free market economy and loads of private property, it is much harder to lay down tracks across long distances to create sustainable high-speed lines. For example, let’s take a look at the high-speed rail under construction in California between Los Angeles and San Francisco, which would not only cut travel time in half but also significantly reduce auto emissions from Southern to Northern California. However, this comes at a ridiculously high cost. While the initial estimate and funding plan was a project cost between 20.6 and 23.0 billion dollars, the new estimate stands between 69.01 billion and 99.9 billion dollars. This high cost disincentivizes federal and public funding for the project. Like I said earlier, we are creatures of habit and seeing numbers like that can produce very high levels of public resentment towards high-speed rail projects. If you’re a state or federal official under the influence of both big oil and your voters, these costs outweigh the improvement that the high-speed rail brings. This is one of the reasons the Trump administration cut funding for the project in 2019. Luckily, Biden restored much of this funding in 2021.
Heading back over to the east coast, I’m going to talk about the northeast corridor between Washington, New York City and Boston. This is another area where projects are already underway, but major issues exist. The premium high-speed Acela train operated by Amtrak still only speeds up 21 minutes faster than trains that ran back in 1952, a fact that is hard to take in, but true. This is because the trains can only speed up on certain stretches of the track because of conflict with regional lines and other delays. I’d also like to focus on the word “premium.” While these lines are somewhat successful in that they return to fast travel times that we haven’t seen since World War II, middle-class and low-income workers needing affordable travel within the corridor will still be forced to take slow regional trains because of costs between 23 percent and 90 percent higher than normal coach costs. The same issue exists with private property rights and Not In My Backyard Syndrome (NIMBY) when Amtrak looks to expand train lines. In a country that was on the frontier of railroad work over 100 years ago, it should not require private corporations and high costs per ticket to build a high-speed rail system that only functions at speeds exceeding 100 miles per hour on small segments of travel.
No matter what path the government takes, it is true that creating high-speed rail will come with lots of costs to both the taxpayer and neighborhoods. This is especially true for trains that use newly built tracks. It is also true that the United States is a country with difficult topography to construct rail around. However, I strongly believe that the benefits of high-speed rail outweigh these costs. I believe that this is especially true for the northeast corridor and New York state, where existing rail built in the original railroad boom can be improved to support these new trains. High-speed rail will create jobs, both through the construction of the train line and the commerce it fosters in communities along the line. Additionally, this will reduce traffic and road blockage on interstates throughout the state by reducing the amount of people on the roads. It also will reduce our country’s economic dependence on foreign oil, as trains are much more efficient than automobiles and could even become mostly powered by green energy in the future without a high cost for the individual consumer. These are just a few of the many benefits to Binghamton and upstate communities that will come with introducing a high-speed rail system connecting New York City with Buffalo and Toronto.
New York is the perfect place for the expansion of high-speed rail. With a state population with high demand for lower costing transportation compared to cars and airplanes, both within the New York City metropolitan area and connecting residents to other major cities on the East Coast and around the country, we are a focal point for new projects. Ideally, the state wouldn’t just create one line, such as the Amtrak Acela train, but high-speed rail lines that connect New York to Montreal, Toronto, Chicago and other cities on this side of the Mississippi. While the costs would be huge, I believe that the government should bite the bullet and work together with other states and even some private companies to fund a high-speed highway rail system starting in New York and expanding outward on the East Coast. Not only will the rail line benefit communities with stops on the line, such as Binghamton and other upstate towns which used to have large industrial economies, but it will also likely lead to reductions in future costs for the damage to infrastructure caused by climate change. Binghamton used to be a classic midsize Appalachian industrial city with much more labor external to the university itself. By introducing large public transportation networks to towns like ours, we could create a new highly-skilled labor force to boost housing, commercial properties and opportunities for both residents and students.
Sometimes, financial sacrifice is needed to benefit the people as a whole. When it comes to high-speed rail, the looming high costs aren’t so looming when you realize the inequity of monetary distribution that already exists in this country. Introducing policies such as new progressive state and federal taxes, along with accepting a little less money from the fossil fuel, car and airline industries, can go a long way. New York and the United States as a whole implemented first-in-the-world public transportation projects that changed society a long time ago. It’s time for us to be the leaders again.
Sean Reichbach is a sophomore double-majoring in economics and philosophy, politics and law.