Pass on Rail Debt for Now

The cost of a high-speed passenger train system linking California’s major cities has jumped from an estimated $25 billion to as much as $37 billion. But a report containing that figure makes a strong case for building the system. Think of going from Los Angeles to San Francisco at more than 200 miles an hour, in 2 hours and 25 minutes, in comfort. By 2020, as many as 68 million passengers would use the system, according to a draft environmental impact report prepared for the California High-Speed Rail Commission.

The report says it would cost twice the amount of the rail figure to build highways and airport facilities to meet passenger demand over the same period of time. And rail delivers other benefits. Downtown to downtown -- no airport hassles. Weather delays rarely occur. In a train with roomy seats and tables, power outlets and no cellphone bans, passengers can do real work as they travel.

This is no pipe dream. Such rail networks in Europe and Japan are popular and heavily used. The Legislature has put a proposed $10-billion bond issue on the Nov. 2 election ballot to begin work. The federal government is expected to provide matching funds.

Unfortunately, this year is not the time to ask California voters to approve more massive debt. Right now they face Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s $15-billion debt bond issue on the March 2 primary ballot along with a $12.3-billion bond issue to build schools. Even if they go along with those measures, it’s questionable whether they would be willing to add another $10 billion to the state’s growing debt just seven months later.

Schwarzenegger and others have suggested that the Legislature postpone the bond issue for two years, to a time when, presumably, the state’s economy is bouncing back and the state’s fiscal health is out of intensive care. It’s imprudent for the state to load up more debt than it can comfortably finance out of the annual state budget.

The bond issue would stand a much better chance in November 2006. A high-speed rail network is important to the future of transportation in California. It should not be jeopardized by rushing into a vote that could kill it for years to come.