More seriously, I am unsure how much of the previous HSR proposals need to be taken into account. There's been a lot of proposals for building high-speed rail, the bulk of them pre-reset, but construction of HSR lines probably would not have been repealed during the reset as most of our other laws were because, well, it's infrastructure.
On that note, even excluding the pre-reset HSR construction we already have three major expansions of the West Coast HSR system thanks to Truman's, YE's, and OBD's efforts (
here,
here, and
here) plus a map of what the whole thing currently looks like (since IIRC OBD's bill didn't establish any new lines)
here. That would seem to limit a lot of what can be done with the West Coast line.
Furthermore, while not actually identical to the High-Speed Rail Commission proposed in
a 2018 federal bill, the National Rail Authority in this bill does tread on its toes with regard to development of rail routes.
And finally, Fhtagn vetoed that bill and gave her reasoning
here, for anyone who would like to read it:
1. Nothing seems to have been brought forward to provide any evidence that a high speed light rail system as large as being planned would actually be a profitable venture. While I do applaud the appeal for a much cleaner mode of transportation and don't deny the environmental bits, it does little good if it's something that won't generate enough public interest to make it worth operating. I can support the idea of limiting rail systems to major metro areas, but at this time have seen no evidence to change my mind that having it span the distances that are planned are a good idea.
2. Concerns were raised about the use of eminent domain to obtain the land needed, or cutting through land that may result in disastrous environmental impacts at some point down the road. And while I appreciate that those concerns weren't completely ignored, I did not find the answer of "we can find ways with enough time and investment". And that's great, but I would prefer something actually in the bill to ensure that we will not resort to those things.
3. It was brought to my attention from the Senate debate the concern that train use is declining as a result of existing lines not being repaired and commuters becoming frustrated that their existing mode of transportation is being neglected while politicians campaign on new lines. I find this to be very concerning that it was not truly addressed and much like my previous point, would have preferred that the bill actually contain something that addresses the repair of existing rail lines.
