California's High-Speed Rail Is a Money-Shuffling Boondoggle, and Becerra's Promise to Finish It On Time and On Budget Is Not Credible
Source: https://www.facebook.com/americanspectator/. "Becerra Takes the Gravy Train | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics." November 5, 2026. spectator.org
The Gist
The author says California's bullet train has gone almost two decades with no track laid and no riders, while costs have nearly quadrupled. He argues it mostly works as a way to funnel money to consultants and politicians. So he doesn't believe the incoming governor can deliver it 'on time and on budget,' and he suggests Becerra supports it for the same reasons Newsom does.
Conclusion
California's high-speed rail project is a failed 'gravy train' that exists mainly to move money to consultants and politicians rather than to move people. Governor-elect Becerra's promise to finish it 'on time and on budget' is not credible, and taxpayers have reason to expect more of the same under him.
Premises
- The project has missed every benchmark: launched in 2008, it has no track laid and no passengers nearly two decades later, and its official 2020 completion date has long passed.
- Costs have ballooned from an original $33 billion to $126 billion or more, so 'on budget' is already meaningless.
- Management and oversight are poor, as shown by the CEO's resignation after a report of close to $600,000 in travel expenses unrelated to state business.
- According to City Journal's Rufo and Shrupp, the main beneficiaries are consulting firms that bankrolled the ballot measure and funnel money to politicians, including through costly environmental reviews (e.g., a $119.4 million overhead tube for waterfowl).
- Newsom first called the project too costly, too slow, and lacking oversight, then became its biggest supporter, which suggests political incentives override the project's merits.
- Politicians who keep backing a project that delivers no trains but keeps money flowing are plausibly motivated by that money flow, and this would explain Becerra's continued support.
Assumptions
- The project's failures to date are predictive of how it will go under Becerra.
- Campaign contributions or money flows from contractors explain politicians' support, rather than genuine policy belief.
- The cited cost, schedule, and expense figures and the City Journal claims are accurate and fairly characterized.
- Environmental review costs are wasteful rather than legally required or legitimately necessary.
- A project that has not yet laid track or carried passengers is evidence of fraud or waste rather than ordinary delays in a megaproject.
- Newsom's 2014 skepticism was correct and his later reversal was driven by something other than new information.