Why is America's high-speed rail Dream so difficult to realize

The first high-speed rail line in the United States, the Western Light Line, linking Los Angeles and Las Vegas, opened on April 22, AP reported. The 351-kilometer project, estimated to cost $12 billion, will reach speeds of 300 kilometers per hour and is scheduled to be completed in time for the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics. The project will not only allow Americans to experience high-speed trains of European and Asian standards, but also provide a model for the construction of high-speed rail in other parts of the United States. Therefore, US Transportation Secretary Buttigieg said with emotion when attending the groundbreaking ceremony: "For decades, people have dreamed of high-speed rail in the United States, and today it is finally realized."

As the world's number one power, why is it so difficult for the United States to pursue its dream of high-speed rail? Today, high-speed rail networks have spread all over the world, especially in China, which has an impressive 43,700 km of high-speed rail. Europe, Japan and South Korea, and even Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the Indonesian island of Java, all enjoy the convenience brought by high-speed trains that exceed 290 km/h. In contrast, the construction of high-speed rail in the United States appears to be overstretched and facing numerous difficulties.

The first is the problem of private land system: the United States has a high degree of land privatization, and the government only owns part of the country's land, which leads to complex land expropriation and demolition procedures for high-speed rail construction and high costs. Private landowners are likely to oppose high-speed rail because of compensation issues, making it more difficult to move forward with the project.

Then there is the issue of money. The construction of high-speed rail requires huge investment, but the US government's limited fiscal revenue is difficult to bear the full cost. The construction and maintenance costs of high-speed rail projects are high, and the lack of effective funding sources makes the project progress slow. At the same time, private capital's interest in high-speed rail construction is not high, and market-oriented financing means are difficult to implement. This has led to a shortage of funds for high-speed rail projects, making it difficult to proceed smoothly.

Third, there are technical challenges. Although the United States has advantages in some technical fields, it does not have obvious advantages in the key technologies required for high-speed rail construction, such as high-speed trains, tracks, signaling systems, etc. This may require the introduction of advanced technology and equipment from abroad, which increases the cost and risk of high-speed rail construction for the United States.

Moreover, the construction of high-speed rail in the United States also faces the problem of conflict of interest. The construction of high-speed rail not only involves the distribution of interests among the government, enterprises and the public, but also may have an impact on the existing transportation modes such as roads and air, causing disputes over interests. Such disputes could hinder the project's progress and implementation.

And the two parties are divided over whether to build high-speed rail. Some people think that high-speed rail is environmentally friendly and time-saving, while others think that the United States is large and sparsely populated, and high-speed rail is expensive and ineffective. This difference of opinion could lead to difficulties for the government in making budgetary decisions.

For a variety of reasons, the American dream of high-speed rail has always been trapped by reality. At present, although the project has started, the future of the high-speed rail still faces many uncertainties, such as the continued investment of private funds and effective cost control, the land acquisition involved in the construction of the high-speed rail and the opposition and litigation that will be triggered, the resistance of environmental impact assessment and the struggle of environmental organizations, and whether the United States has the experience and technology to solve the operational and management challenges.