With more drivers on the roads every day in South Florida, state transportation planners face a daunting challenge to alleviate road congestion while efficiently moving thousands of drivers. When Florida lawmakers introduced Florida High Speed Rail, a proposed project with initial service between Orlando and Tampa with possible extended service through South Florida, the federal government placed Florida on its list of ten high speed rail corridors eligible for federal funding under its economic stimulus package. In February 2011, Governor Rick Scott formally announced that the state would reject federal funds to construct the project, citing the cost to Florida taxpayers to provide revenue. The U.S. Transportation Secretary subsequently redirected the funds to 22 projects in 15 other states.
In California, lawmakers are engaging in a familiar argument over a proposed high speed rail project. California plans to use $3.3 billion in federal funds and $2.7 billion in state money to construct a high speed rail line between Merced and Fresno with a completion deadline of 2017. The project is not without detractors: opponents allege the project comes with a hefty price tag and will do little to alleviate roadway congestion on state highways. If officials do not commit to the project before September 30, the federal funding may be forfeited.
Whether or not California meets its deadline to commit to its high speed rail project may determine the success of high speed rail in areas of the country outside of the Northeast, including Florida. With five major cities within five hours travel time, the Northeast has great demand for and success with its railways. Unlike the Northeast, Florida and California are not as densely packed, and do not have a cluster of major cities within 90 miles of each other. While it is not wholly indicative of the path that Florida will travel, the success or failure of the California rail will provide ample fuel for the advocates and opponents of Florida rail travel.
Author(s): Brooke P. Dolara