California's High-Speed Rail: A $200 Million-Per-Mile Boondoggle That Still Hasn't Laid a Single Track

#California #HighSpeedRail

Seventeen years. Nearly $15 billion spent. Zero feet of track laid. By any objective measure, California's high-speed rail project stands as perhaps the most egregious example of government mismanagement in American history and that's saying something for a state that specializes in bureaucratic failure.

What voters approved in 2008 seemed ambitious but plausible: a $33 billion bullet train connecting Los Angeles to San Francisco by 2020. Today, those projections look like cruel fiction. The cost has ballooned to over $135 billion for the full routeb. The completion date has been pushed to the 2030s at the earliestand that's only for a truncated Central Valley segment that one critic aptly describes as a "train to nowhere". Meanwhile, the project continues burning through taxpayer money at a staggering rate that deserves closer examination.

How Much Does This Project Spend Per Day?

The numbers are almost too absurd to comprehend. According to recent reporting, the high-speed rail authority has spent approximately $14.7 billion to date. With the project now entering its eighteenth year, that translates to roughly $2.3 million every single day since voters were sold the original dream.

But that's just the historical average. The bleeding is accelerating. The authority needs an additional $7 billion by June 2026 just to keep the lights on. When you consider the actual physical progress or lack thereof the waste becomes even more obscene. One partially completed segment in the Central Valley consists of 22 miles of raised dirt and 11 overpass structures at a cost of $1.4 billion. That's $63 million per mile for what amounts to an earthen berm through farmland.

Perhaps most damning: recent analysis suggests the per-mile cost for the project now approaches $215 million. For context, China builds high-speed rail for a fraction of that cost. Even Brightline's privately funded Florida project which actually operates and carries passengers came in at roughly $25 million per mile .

The Conservative Case Against This Disaster

From a conservative perspective, California's high-speed rail represents everything wrong with progressive governance: breathtaking fiscal irresponsibility, contempt for taxpayers, fealty to union special interests, and a complete disconnect between government promises and government performance.

Let's start with the dishonesty. Voters were told that more than 20 percent of the project would be privately funded. That prediction proved laughably wrong. Taxpayers are on the hook for virtually the entire cost, with 82 percent of funding coming from state coffers. When President Trump rightfully moved to reclaim $4 billion in unspent federal funds, Governor Gavin Newsom responded by suing the federal government rather than acknowledging the project's terminal condition .

Then there's the labor question. Unions have been among the biggest beneficiaries of this fiasco. The rail authority's community benefits agreement mandates that union members receive hiring preference, and workers on site for more than eight days must pay union dues effectively creating a closed shop with state money. This isn't infrastructure building; it's a patronage system disguised as public works.

The Permitting Nightmare

Conservatives have long argued that excessive regulation kills projects before they break ground. High-speed rail provides the ultimate proof. According to a Circulate San Diego study, local governments along the route have imposed arbitrary and costly demands that have added years and hundreds of millions to the project's timeline .

Consider the city of Wasco, population 27,000. A dispute over closing a single street at the rail line resulted in five extra years of delays, 37 contract change orders, and $26 million in additional costs. Madera County imposed conditions that added another $30 million. This is what happens when dozens of local jurisdictions each hold veto power over a project it dies by a thousand cuts.

The "Stonehenge" of the Central Valley

Perhaps the most devastating critique comes from within California itself. Representative Alexandra Macedo, whose district includes part of the Central Valley route, recently toured completed construction and emerged with a damning comparison. She described an incomplete concrete structure as "Stonehenge" a monument to nothing.

"What do we have to show for that $15 billion?" Macedo asked. "Just some flashy videos and graphics to make us believe this is still feasible".

Her frustration echoes that of Central Valley residents who were promised economic transformation but have received only disruption. Meanwhile, Democrats in the legislature are advancing Assembly Bill 1608, which critics say would allow the inspector general to withhold audit reports detailing vulnerabilities in the project. When government starts hiding information from the public paying the bills, you know the situation is dire.

A Tale of Two Approaches

The contrast with Florida couldn't be starker. While California chased federal grants and union approval, Florida rejected Obama-era high-speed rail funding and let the private sector do what government cannot. Brightline now operates 32 daily trains between Miami and Orlando, covering 235 miles in just over three hours . The project cost $6 billion all private money—and is already planning expansion to Tampa. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has been clear: state taxpayers won't fund rail construction .

This is the difference between conservative and progressive governance. One approach trusts markets, private capital, and consumer demand. The other trusts central planners, environmental reviews, and political cronyism. One produced an operating railroad. The other produced 22 miles of dirt and a $200 million-per-mile price tag.

The Path Forward

President Trump's decision to reclaim federal funding was not just justified it was merciful. As Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy put it, "It's time for this boondoggle to die". Continuing to pour money into a project that has demonstrated zero ability to deliver results is the definition of insanity.

Some will argue that we've come too far to stop now that the sunk costs justify additional investment. This is precisely the thinking that traps governments in failing endeavors. When a private company faces a failing project, it cuts its losses and reallocates resources. Only government treats failure as an argument for continued funding.

The 14,000 jobs allegedly created by high-speed rail could have been deployed toward actual infrastructure needs: water storage, road repair, energy production. Instead, they've been wasted on consultants, environmental studies, and litigation defense. A 2025 poll found that 53 percent of California voters have lost confidence in the project, with only 28 percent believing it will ever be completed .

Conclusion

California's high-speed rail was always a fantasy a progressive dream of European-style social democracy crashing into the reality of American governance, environmental litigation, and fiscal limits. Seventeen years and $15 billion later, not a single track carries a single passenger. The project spends millions daily while producing nothing but dirt mounds and broken promises.

Conservatives have been proven right at every turn. We warned that the cost estimates were fiction. We warned that government couldn't manage a project of this scale. We warned that union demands and environmental reviews would strangle progress. And we were right.

The only remaining question is whether California's leadership will finally admit defeat or continue pouring good money after bad. Given the legislative push to hide audit records and the governor's reflexive lawsuits against anyone who questions the project, don't expect accountability anytime soon. In Sacramento, failure is not a reason to stop it's a reason to ask for $7 billion more.