Secretary LaHood at Detroit Amtrak Depot 2:30 PM today

[mikeg19]

So they are going to give California 220mph train technology, the east coast is bumping up trains to 140, and we are getting 100mph trains that aren't going to be non-stop to Chicago? All of this in the name of saving 30 minutes? Seems like a huge waste of $200 million dollars. Set up a HIGH SPEED rail network [[220mph) directly to Chicago and get me there in 2 hours with 1 stop or no stops and I'll use it. 30 minutes isn't going to make me take the train. Cut that trip from the 5-6 hours in a car to 2-2.5 on the train, and I bet a Hell of a lot of people would use that.

[EL Jimbo]

So they are going to give California 220mph train technology, the east coast is bumping up trains to 140, and we are getting 100mph trains that aren't going to be non-stop to Chicago? All of this in the name of saving 30 minutes? Seems like a huge waste of $200 million dollars. Set up a HIGH SPEED rail network [[220mph) directly to Chicago and get me there in 2 hours with 1 stop or no stops and I'll use it. 30 minutes isn't going to make me take the train. Cut that trip from the 5-6 hours in a car to 2-2.5 on the train, and I bet a Hell of a lot of people would use that.

OK. Either you are or listen to Mike Valenti because that is almost verbatim what he said on his radio show today. You do realize that to do a true high speed rail between here and Chicago, we would need probably 10 times that $200 million number just to build it and even that is probably a low number.

[ghettopalmetto]

So they are going to give California 220mph train technology, the east coast is bumping up trains to 140, and we are getting 100mph trains that aren't going to be non-stop to Chicago? All of this in the name of saving 30 minutes? Seems like a huge waste of $200 million dollars. Set up a HIGH SPEED rail network [[220mph) directly to Chicago and get me there in 2 hours with 1 stop or no stops and I'll use it. 30 minutes isn't going to make me take the train. Cut that trip from the 5-6 hours in a car to 2-2.5 on the train, and I bet a Hell of a lot of people would use that.

No place, and I mean NO place in the world has gone from "virtually zero" rail service to 220 mph high speed rail. France spent decades, dating back to the 1960s, upgrading its rail system before embarking on TGV. California is getting 220 mph service because it *planned* for it, and they too have spent decades establishing a strong [[state-funded) passenger rail network [[California intercity service is the second-busiest rail corridor in the United States).

Even still, even a high speed rail network requires a strong lower-speed regional system to distribute passengers from the "hub" stations to the smaller cities. We don't even have that. Outside of the northeast, our passenger rail system would be an embarrassment to a former Soviet bloc nation.

Just the same as you don't go from horse-and-buggy-on-dirt-roads to interstate highways, you need to have incremental improvements first to develop rail ridership that will justify investment in true high speed rail.