


Cities on the San Francisco Peninsula are ready to block the super train that will shoot through residential areas. Congress, now in Republican hands, may yank promised money. A string of reports suggests the project's management is overwhelmed by the task.

But it's no time to walk away from the vast concept, planned for 800 miles between San Francisco and Los Angeles, with future lines to Sacramento and San Diego. The estimated cost of $43 billion is almost half the state's annual budget.

But it's worth remembering how we got here. A growing state is clogged with airport and freeway traffic. Any hope of curbing smog and controlling climate change rests on getting people out of cars and airplanes and onto transit, such as super trains shooting between 26 stations aligned in California's core. Jobs, construction work and development add to the appeal of high-speed rail.

With expectations so high in a down economy, it wasn't a surprise that the rail authority's first building project provoked an uproar. With a year-end deadline to collect federal money, the seven members voted to build the first 65 miles of track in the Central Valley from a hamlet near Madera to Corcoran.

The stretch, which won't offer passenger service for now, will cost $4.15 billion and start in two years. It was immediately dubbed "the train to nowhere" by mayors and a congressman representing a rival stretch that wanted to be first.

Running the first rails through farmville may sound pointless. But it loops in Fresno, the region's biggest population center, and in a pinch can be used by Amtrak, which can operate its trains at higher speeds. There's also a bigger message: High-speed rail is getting under way.

In the Bay Area, serious challenges remain. The existing Peninsula commute-line corridor, which high-speed rail wants to borrow, runs right through a string of bedroom communities. These cities have mobilized to ask that the new rails be put underground to muffle the disturbance the super trains may cause.

The largest problem may be money. The incoming chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., has signaled that bullet train money would be better spent in the country's Northeast where ridership is already heavy and distances shorter than in far-flung California.

So many challenges, nearly all at once, can immobilize policymakers worried about making fateful choices. But in this case, the goal should be clear: California wants high-speed rail, and it's time to get rolling.