This article shows that the reasons why the USA does not yet have high-speed trains are political and social rather than technological. The nations which successfully pioneered high-speed rail had the financial and organisational means to innovate their train systems. Their railways were publicly owned and run and their governments, facing congested roads and airports, were willing to make substantial long-term investments in rail. Their legislators, bureaucrats, interest groups, and people all saw benefits from developing high-speed rail lines. American railways received no strong consistent US Government support in the 20th century when the US Congress did not very strongly finance Amtrak, the USA's only `quasi-nationalised' railway.A review of some past and continuing American high-speed rail projects offers some ideas about how a network of high-speed rail lines could be developed across the USA. Significant elements of financing will have to come from Federal and State governments and from the private sector. Any high-speed line must also show that it can, as in France, attract many passengers and make a profit. There are three plausible scenarios for coming decades: (1) reducing Federal-backed financial support for Amtrak's high-speed rail programme; (2) finance is provided to allow Amtrak to demonstrate the viability of high-speed railways; and (3) increasing financial support allows the creation of an inter-city, integrated, high-speed rail network. For the covering abstract, see IRRD 896880.
Abstract