The Midwest High-Speed Rail Association (MHSRA, as distinguished from the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative or MRRI) has a web page that supposedly separates facts from fiction. In fact, this page plays fast and loose with the facts. Since many of the “fictions” that the group supposedly exposes are from the Antiplanner, I’ll take this opportunity to respond.
As you read through the MHSRA’s supposed list of fictions, keep in mind that the reports the MHSRA is reviewing were written in response to Obama’s and MRRI’s plan to boost the speed of Midwestern and other passenger trains on existing freight lines to 110 mph. The MHSRA wants to build brand-new tracks that will allow much higher speed passenger trains. Without making the distinction, it often conflates these two proposals, responding to criticisms of 110-mph trains by arguing that the criticism is wrong when applied to 150-mph or faster trains. In fact, proposals for 150-mph or faster trains have their own flaws that the MHSRA conveniently ignores because they were rarely mentioned in reviews of 110-mph rail proposals.
Supposed fact: Critics of high-speed rail are “advocates for the status quo,” meaning “gridlock, high fuel costs and severe pollution.” Reality: The critics cited by the MHSRA (Cato, Heritage, and Reason) all support devolution of federal transportation programs to the states, an end to all transportation subsidies, and cost-effective means of enabling mobility while protecting the environment. This is hardly the status quo and is arguably further from the status quo than advocates of high-speed rail.
