High-speed rail has come to America. Or has it?

Editor's note: Sign up for Unlocking the World, CNN Travel’s weekly newsletter. Get news about destinations, plus the latest in aviation, food and drink, and where to stay.

(CNN) — America’s fastest train has arrived. ‘NextGen Acela’ made its public debut on August 27, delivering modern design, more seats and an enhanced passenger experience. Hailed as a leap forward for high-speed rail in America, it is, in truth, more of a half-step.

The new trains — siblings to France’s iconic TGVs — can reach 160 miles per hour. But on American tracks that’s rarely possible. For now, passengers will only experience a few short bursts at top speed, which is still far short of what is standard in Europe and Asia.

Still, the new trains are expected to be a welcome improvement for travelers on the busy Northeast Corridor, even if the broader prospects for high-speed rail in the United States remain dim.

Decades of underinvestment have left the country with congested highways, crumbling bridges, crowded airports — and a disjointed passenger rail network that is underfunded and unreliable.

Globally, more than 40,000 miles of modern high-speed railway are now in operation, used to make three billion passenger journeys per year, according to the International Union of Railways. Another 12,400 miles of track is under construction, while China alone has opened 1,200 miles this year.

The United States, by contrast, is pulling back.

Hopes of a rail revolution that three years ago was poised to transform connectivity between major cities seem to have faltered. Only three truly high-speed rail projects are in development — and two of these have recently had government funding withdrawn.

Railway California

Part of the problem is structural. The country has become a difficult place to build large-scale infrastructure. Land, materials and labor are costly. Experienced engineers are retiring faster than they can be replaced. Environmental reviews and permitting can stretch on for years. Land ownership is fiercely protected, making right-of-way acquisition expensive and contentious.

Perhaps most consequentially, the nation remains deeply devoted to the car. Layered onto all of this is a political system in which priorities flip every few years, undermining the long-term planning and financing that such megaprojects demand.

The most ambitious project, California High-Speed Rail, was meant to connect San Francisco and Los Angeles across up to 500 miles of track in under three hours, with possible future extensions north to Sacramento and south to San Diego.

In July, that vision suffered a major setback when the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) pulled $4 billion in funding allocated by the Biden administration, saying the project had breached multiple commitments.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy pointed to missed deadlines, including a pledge to have the first 170 miles in operation by 2033. Failing to meet self-imposed goals along the way means that won’t happen, he said.

“After 16 years and roughly $15 billion spent, not one high-speed track has been laid,” he said, commenting on a June government report on the project. “This report exposes a cold, hard truth: California High Speed Rail Authority has no viable path to complete this project on time or on budget.”

The report said the project had lost control of contractors and finances, failed to procure trains on schedule, lacked funding for electrification and had “no credible plan” to close a $7-billion funding gap needed to finish the initial 170-mile Central Valley segment.

Duffy has also instructed regulators to review other grants with the aim of clawing back additional federal funds. Just a day before Amtrak unveiled its new Acela trains, his department withdrew another $175 million earmarked for California rail projects.

“The waste ends here,” Duffy said. “As of today, the American people are done investing in California’s failed experiment. Instead, my Department will focus on making travel great again by investing in well-managed projects that can make projects like high-speed rail a reality.”

State officials insist the project is far from over. The California High Speed Rail Authority has sued the Trump administration, calling the funding cuts “petty, political retribution” driven by the president’s “personal animus towards California and the high-speed project, not by facts on the ground.” Its chief executive, Ian Choudri, has accused the FRA of distorting data.

Meanwhile, construction is progressing on the first 160-mile stretch between Merced and Bakersfield. The CHSRA says 70 miles of trackbed and more than 50 bridges and overpasses are complete, with tracklaying about to begin. Only last week, however, questions were raised over whether that initial stretch should divert from Merced to Gilroy, roughly 60 miles west, to save money.

The obstacles remain daunting. Of the $36.3 billion needed for the Central Valley section, just $28.2 billion has been secured, with another $1 billion a year expected to come from state emissions taxes.

Even when completed, the initial line will only connect secondary cities, limiting its appeal until it reaches San Francisco and Los Angeles. A later phase could extend tracks to reach Sacramento and San Diego taking the total system to 776 miles, although this is still in the early stages of planning.

The entire project could cost up to $135 billion depending on its final extent and the route it takes. Phase one, of which the Merced-Bakersfield section forms the core, will connect six of California’s 10 largest cities — San Francisco, San Jose, Fresno, Bakersfield, Los Angeles and Anaheim.

Supporters argue the payoff would be substantial.

A completed network would carry the equivalent capacity of 4,200 miles of new highway lanes, 91 additional airport gates and two new runways — infrastructure that would likely cost far more.

With California’s population expected to exceed 45 million by 2050, backers see high-speed rail as the most efficient solution to prevent the state from grinding to a halt. A recent poll found two-thirds of Californians still support the project, but each new legal skirmish and delay adds to the cost of what is already one of the most expensive railway projects in history.

Texas hold ups

California isn’t the only state to get its federal high-speed railway funding slashed. The Texas Central Railway, a privately funded plan to link Dallas and Houston in 90 minutes with Japanese-built Shinkansen trains, was greenlit by the first Trump administration.

But land acquisition and political opposition have stalled progress. The federal government has now withdrawn $64 million in funding, with Secretary Duffy calling the project “a waste of taxpayer funds.”

Backers say the project is “ready to go,” with station sites and a quarter of land needed along the route already acquired, but without billions in fresh investment, construction cannot begin.

It’s all politics

Transportation policy, like much else in Washington, has become sharply partisan. President Biden, nicknamed “Amtrak Joe” for his love of commuting by train, secured $170 billion for rail improvements in his 2021 infrastructure law. Much of that money is flowing into the Northeast Corridor to repair ageing tunnels and bridges, with some funds set aside to restore services to cities long abandoned by passenger rail.

The Trump administration has taken a different approach, demanding that Amtrak focus on improving on-time performance before expanding. Only 72% of trains arrived on time in early 2025. One long-distance route between Virginia to Florida had just a 34% on-time arrival rate. Freight trains, which have priority on shared tracks, are a persistent obstacle.

Even with the billions promised by Biden, the United States remains far behind other countries. China will have 31,000 miles of high-speed rail by the end of this year, all built since 2008, with plans for more than 43,000 miles by 2035.

Bright out west

The lone bright spot for high-speed rail in the United States may be taking shape in the Mojave Desert. Brightline West, a privately owned 218-mile line linking Rancho Cucamonga, east of Los Angeles, with Las Vegas has begun early construction and is expected to ramp up in late 2025. The future sibling to Brightline — the privately owned and operated Miami-Orlando railroad, which has operated successfully in Florida since its 2018 debut, although at a maximum 125mph it is not true high-speed rail — Brightline West was first mooted in 2018.

The $10.4 billion project secured a $3-billion federal grant in October 2024, making it the only high-speed rail venture in the country to retain its federal support.

The line will run along the Interstate 15 corridor, slicing through the San Bernardino Mountains and across the desert. Once complete, it promises to cut journey times to just over an hour — a vast improvement on the four-plus hours by car or bus. It will also mark the return of passenger trains to Las Vegas for the first time in three decades; Amtrak cancelled its Desert Wind route in 1997.

Yet timing remains uncertain. Originally scheduled to open in 2027, the line is now projected for 2028 or early 2029. Brightline hopes to capture around 12 million of the roughly 50 million annual one-way trips between Las Vegas and LA, 85% of which are made by road.

The trains themselves — 10 Siemens-built electric sets from the Velaro family, the same used by Eurostar and Germany’s Deutsche Bahn — are designed to reach 217 miles per hour, placing them firmly in the international high-speed category.

If Brightline West succeeds, it could serve as a template for future privately financed high-speed rail projects elsewhere in the country. Together with California’s ambitions, should they come to fruition, the line could show that high-speed rail is not only feasible but transformative for American intercity travel.

For now, though, such examples remain the exception. With few credible projects elsewhere, and with legal and political battles still hampering California, the outlook isn’t good.

Which is why — despite its relatively low average speeds and its reliance on ageing tracks — even the modest debut of Amtrak’s new Acela is being greeted by rail advocates as a small but welcome victory.

The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2025 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

Report a Typo