Dream on: the high-speed rail illusion

Print More
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
High-Speed Rail Empire Corridor Program (NYSDOT photo)

In the 1989 movie “Field of Dreams,” Iowa farmer Ray Kinsella (played by Kevin Costner) is walking through his cornfield one evening when he hears a disembodied voice whispering a cryptic message—which Ray interprets as a command to turn part of his field into a baseball diamond.

E.J. McMahon

The movie’s plot (featuring time travel, the ghosts of famous ballplayers, and a spectral portal in centerfield) makes little sense even as fantasy. Suffice to say it ends happily—all because Ray obeyed that disembodied voice. Oscar nominations aside, the film produced an enduring cultural catchphrase: “If you build it, he will come.”

Starting around the same time “Field of Dreams” was released, leading politicians in New York began to promote a fantasy of their own, propelled by their embrace of a similarly insistent message: “If we build it, they will come.”

In this case, “it” isn’t a ballfield (the state already has spent plenty on stadiums) but a multibillion-dollar high-speed rail line linking Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse and Albany, and ultimately connecting with Toronto to the north and New York City to the south.

The dream took root in the early 1990s with Gov. Mario Cuomo, who proposed a super high-speed magnetic levitation train from New York City to Boston, plus an upgrade of Amtrak service from Buffalo to Manhattan’s Penn Station. “Maglev” fell by the wayside, but Cuomo’s Republican successor, George Pataki, had high-speed rail visions of his own, focused on advocating improved rail service in the Albany-New York City segment of Amtrak’s Empire Service.  

Most recently, Gov. Andrew Cuomo resurrected the high-speed rail dream in advance of his 2020 State of the State message, announcing that he would form “a panel of engineers to reexamine past high-speed rail plans, question and rethink every assumption and method, and recommend a new plan for how to build faster, greener, more reliable high-speed rail in New York.”

The second Gov. Cuomo’s rail panel was derailed by the pandemic, and Gov. Kathy Hochul hasn’t yet gotten around to unveilingher own high-speed rail agenda. If she needs a push, she’s likely to get one from state Sen. Jeremy Cooney, D-Rochester, who now chairs the Senate Transportation Committee. Like his former boss, the late Rep. Louise Slaughter, Cooney views higher-speed rail as a top priority for upstate, with “the potential to create the modern-day ‘Erie Canal Effect.’”

Cooney and the other rail advocates are grounded in one undeniable reality: Amtrak’s east-west Empire Service between Albany and Niagara Falls is not particularly reliable and has a poor on-time performance record. It isn’t exactly brisk even when it is on time; the fastest scheduled train between Albany and Buffalo takes five hours and 11 minutes. At 289 road miles, that’s an average speed of 56 miles per hour, nearly an hour longer than it usually takes to cover the same distance by car on the Thruway. On-time performance in 2023 was 74 percent, a “fail” even when measured by Amtrak’s 80 percent minimum standard. (The Empire Service from Albany to New York City was somewhat better at 85 percent.)

The reason for this sluggishness is well-known: Amtrak’s upstate east-west service runs along right-of-way first developed well over a century ago by the New York Central Railroad and now owned and maintained by CSX Corp., a freight carrier that naturally gives priority to its own scheduled traffic. The rail beds, bridges, switches and grade crossings used by Amtrak are designed to accommodate CSX’s longer, heavier, and slower-moving trains.

The High Speed Rail Empire Corridor Program grew out of a state Senate High Speed Rail Task Force report released in 2006. In its 2014 Draft Environmental Impact Statement, the state Department of Transportation rejected two “very high speed” options for improving upstate rail service. With maximum speeds of 160 mph and 220 mph, DOT cited “their extremely high cost—nearly triple the next most costly alternative—the likelihood of significant community and environmental impacts, and significant engineering design difficulties necessary to create a sufficiently straight track alignment to permit those speeds.”

The 2023 Final Environmental Impact Statement tagged the “90B” rail improvement alternative as “preferred.” This would add two tracks to the existing right-of-way, increasing train speeds to an average of 61 mph and a peak of 90 mph, at a cost of nearly $6 billion. While the increase in average speed is small, DOT’s report predicted that “on time performance” would rise to 95 percent by 2035.

Cooney, however, favors the far more ambitious and expensive “125” option—one that would boost express train speeds to an average of 77 mph and a peak of 125 mph, with an estimated price tag of $14 billion.

The senator’s higher-speed rail optimism was influenced by what he saw earlier this year when he took a ride on Brightline East, a privately owned and operated train service in Florida connecting Miami and Orlando. Cooney seems to think a similar public-private deal could be orchestrated in New York, shielding taxpayers from some of the financial risk—but he’s ignoring crucial differences between the situation here and in the Sunshine State.

Starting with a favorable state contract to take over a more lightly used freight right-of-way and a former passenger line, what appealed to Brightline’s private investors was the opportunity to tap Florida’s already enormous potential market of train passengers. Greater Orlando alone attracts 75 million tourists a year and is roughly equal in population to Buffalo, Rochester and Syracuse areas combined—and the Miami area is more than twice the size of Orlando. Small wonder that Brightline attracted more than 2 million passengers in the first year after the full stretch of the line opened in 2022.

Brightline’s 235-mile length takes three hours and 30 minutes, for an average speed of 67 mph—just 10 percent faster than the New York “90B” option that Cooney rejects.

A more relevant example—which Cooney understandably avoids mentioning—is the state of California’s ongoing high-speed rail project. Small wonder: called a “multibillion-dollar nightmare” by the New York Times in 2022, it’s become one of the biggest public-sector boondoggles the nation has ever seen, with a projected cost that now approaches $130 billion, nearly four times the original $33 billion estimate, and a first-stage completion date that keeps moving further into the 2030s.

The Empire Service now carries 1.7 million passengers a year, less than one-third of them on the segment west of Albany. The state’s high-speed rail impact statement projects the “125” option favored by Cooney would attract a whopping 2.7 million more. That number, like other ridership estimates, appears to have been pulled out of thin air—perhaps inspired by a disembodied voice whispering: “If we build it, they will come.”

Livingston Ave Bridge (NYS DOT photo)

In fact, New York has already spent well over $300 million on station improvements and rail upgrades along the Empire Service over the past 15 years, generating real if modest gains in ridership and efficiency. Just starting is New York’s biggest intercity passenger rail improvement yet: replacement of the old Livingston Avenue bridge over the Hudson River at Albany, a crucial link in the east-west route, whose projected cost has ballooned from $400 million to $640 million since 2022. Experience suggests we’ll be lucky if it only costs that much.

Before embracing the high-speed rail dream, Cooney and other officials need to pay more attention to the condition of the critical transportation arteries that most New Yorkers and their economy already depend on. DOT reports that as of 2021, 75 percent of New York bridges comprising part of the National Highway System were rated in fair or poor condition. Just over half of the state’s NHS pavement and 81 percent of non-NHS pavement is in similar condition.

Construction industry leaders say the state’s investments in bridge repair and pavement renewal have fallen sharply in real terms, while nearly 40 percent of DOT capital spending has been steered away from repair and maintenance to multibillion-dollar mega projects for new thoroughfares, such as replacement of the I-81 viaduct in Syracuse.

Reminding politicians of the need to maintain basic infrastructure is the equivalent of telling a dreamy farmer he’d be better off harvesting his corn than building a baseball diamond for a bunch of ghosts. But that’s how real life works. 

E.J. McMahon is adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute

The Beacon welcomes comments and letters from readers who adhere to our comment policy including use of their full, real nameSee “Leave a Reply” below to discuss on this post. Comments of a general nature may be submitted to the Letters page by emailing  [email protected]

10 thoughts on “Dream on: the high-speed rail illusion

  1. One final comment I forgot to mention – the author presents improving our internal infrastructure vs building fast passenger rail as an “either/or” equation. We can do both. It’s not like we have to choose one over the other. We just need to reallocate resources appropriately. Of course at this point relying on any federal aid for… well anything – is unlikely at best. The current administration will do it’s best to punish NYS for being a “blue” state and not following him loyally. Because that’s the way they roll.

  2. I would like to offer some thoughts to the “field of dreams” objection. I commend the author for his conservative approach but his point is only part of the equation. With 30 years’ experience in the transportation industry I would like to think I can speak on this point and I will approach it from the point of view of history.
    Long before the Mayflower, Henry Hudson, or the colonies, Native American tribes that lived in the area now defined largely as New York State formed a powerful confederacy called the Iroquois Nation. I believe this was possible because the Mohawk River Valley offered a major break through the Appalachian Range of Mountains. Many years later that route between the mountains offered interested pioneers access to the rich land of Western New York and beyond. Those pioneers sent what products they could to coastal markets, but the journey was slow and costly.
    An idea arose and, although mocked as a useless ditch, the Erie Canal was built through that same area. The speed of product delivery to markets increased significantly and the cost of shipping went down. While there is no denying that there was a significant cost to build that canal, the resulting economic benefit for Western New York businesses was significant. Soon the railroads followed that same route with similar results.
    New York City was, and still is, a major market for Western New York. Any improvement in that corridor will be good for Rochester’s economy. High speed rail is not some mythical wish for a busy consumer. It is a technology used with great success all over the World. The idea should not be discarded. However, there is so much more that can and should be done in the meantime to improve the efficiency of the current system. The city-center to city-center nature of rail travel, the ability to remain productive while enroute, the quickness of the trip (when not hemmed-in by CSX freight trains) are positive factors for rail travel.
    Yes, New York State’s population has been draining for quite some time. However, I am a firm believer that “The North shall rise again.” Parts of our Country more and more frequently experience the effects of climate change as the environment heats up. Meanwhile what would seem to be an endless supply of water from the Great Lakes will, I believe, draw the population back to the Northeast. Our infrastructure needs to be the best it can be when the population tide turns.

  3. The Empire State Passengers Association, a statewide passenger rail advocacy organization for faster, more frequent and more reliable Amtrak service in New York and neighboring states and provinces, supports the 90B Plan. It would shave an hour off of the trip between Albany and Buffalo and add 4 additional Niagara Falls to NYC trips, bringing the total to 7 to the Falls and 8 to Buffalo Depew. With the increased reliability and additional frequencies, the 90B Plan would be of significant benefit to the access restricted cities and town so upstate New York.

    Mr. McMahon and so many others continue to miss the point that public infrastructure, whether it is highways and bridges or subways and commuter railroads, requires significant annual investment just to maintain the assets in a State of Good Repair. NYS, and most states, are failing in this regards. NYS’s investment is the replacement of the 1902 era Livingston Avenue Bridge and other Hudson Valley investments in Amtrak are barely keeping the network there in a State of Good Repair.

    Amtrak’s upstate ridership is already exceeding the estimates in the 90B EIS. The State is beginning the process of updating the ridership projections and other elements of the Plan in order to qualify for additional federal assistance for construction projects. What’s missing is a will at the State level to move forward on implementation. ESPA hopes that Senator Cooney will help push the Administration towards greater action for faster and more frequent trains upstate.

  4. The article discusses the perennial push for high-speed rail in New York, noting the challenges, costs, and past failures in trying to bring such a dream to fruition. While the vision for improved rail service is ambitious, it also overlooks a looming reality: the state’s population and infrastructure needs are on the brink of transformation due to climate migration. This brings to light an opportunity not just for rail improvements but for reshaping the region’s future as an attractive destination.

    New York’s population is not going to remain static. With climate change driving extreme weather events like hurricanes, floods, and wildfires, people will increasingly seek out more stable, affordable, and resilient places to live. Our region, with its access to some of the richest freshwater sources in the world, offers a unique appeal to those fleeing regions more vulnerable to climate catastrophes. The rising threat of droughts, tornadoes, and other environmental risks in parts of the country will undoubtedly lead to more people looking to relocate—especially to areas that promise security, affordability, and access to natural resources.

    The affordability of upstate New York, with its relative low cost of living, further strengthens its position as an ideal place for climate migrants. As more people realize the unsustainable nature of living in places prone to extreme weather or escalating costs, the demand for relocation to our region will grow. Thus, while high-speed rail is a worthy project in many respects, it’s not just about improving transit for those already here—it’s about preparing for the influx of people from other states and even other countries who will seek refuge in our area in the coming decades.

    The idea that “if we build it, they will come” might be more than just a dream if we start building for this future reality. Investing in infrastructure, from rail to housing, to better support our region’s increasing population, will ensure that New York is ready to meet the demands of this next wave of migration. The conversation should not just be about improving transportation but about preparing for a future where the state’s resources are seen as vital to the survival and prosperity of many more people than we currently serve.

  5. Former governor George Pataki is on the Board of Advisors for The Northeast Maglev (TNEM) project, to provide Japanese-backed high-speed (i.e., 311 mph) passenger service between Boston and Washington D.C. The technology is based on American invented first-generation superconducting maglev (SCM), patented in the late 1960s by the late Drs. James Powell and Gordon Danby. They later invented second-generation SCM, an operationally superior and more cost-effective system that would move both freight and passengers across the continent on the same elevated monorail guideway at an estimated cruising speed of 325 mph. Freight is where the profits are for rail. Powell and Danby also envisioned the use of maglev to make Stewart Airport the fourth metropolitan airport for New York City. A legacy team holding the patents and intellectual property for the technology (known as Maglev 2000) has been unable to obtain the funding needed to move it forward. I suggest its examination by the Rochester Beacon.

    • I am impressed with Mr. Genadio’s memory of my longtime friends colleagues, the late Drs. James Powell and Gordon Danby, two Brookhaven National Lab scientists who were roommates as young men, who applied their remarkable understanding of superconducting magnets to what should be the next mode of transport in the World. Senator Pat Moynihan of NY recognized Powell and Danby’s remarkable transport invention in the late 1980s and he invited Powell and Danby to testify before the Transportation Committee, I was a staff member of the Chairman of the Appropriations Commitee and was invited to the hearing and was totally captivated by the energy efficiency of the SCMaglev transport and with Senator Moynihan’s cost savings idea, to use the existing rights-of-way of the Interstate Highway System that was just completing but was turning into a very expensive system to maintain. This idea and the capability of the new Powell and Danby system to carry both freight trucks as well as passengers and operate on elevated monorail guideway and on inexpensively adapted conventional rail for accessing our densely built city rail stations was the greatest public works invention, I had ever heard. And I was a Navy logistician and Energy R&D program director before I joined the Senate Staff. I strongly believe that the next round of transport investment should be to demonstrate and test this system to certify it as the next U.S. and world transport system. I promise it will compete well because the return of investment in this system is stunning. Fortunately, it can be deployed on the existing guideway structures being built for HSR as well as the elevated viaduct design built with prefabricated components. More about this system at the Interstate Maglev Project at http://www.magneticglide.com.

  6. Mr. McMahon interestingly has little to say on the massive funding NY wastes on funding cars and trucks while objecting to spending much on rail— typical car- biased stuff.

  7. Bravo! We need to find a way to communicate and celebrate investments in maintenance and the results of those investments. Until we can do that, it will be difficult to move both politicians and the people who vote for them away from the glitter of pipe dreams.

  8. This anti-train piece leaves out quite a few realities. Trains are vastly superior to driving because you can move around, work, enjoy a beverage and the scenery. In my dozens of trips between Roc and NYC in recent years they have rarely been late and the stats include those years when CSX freight took precedence which is not the case now- it never was legal, just not enforced. And even the slow Amtrak train is far more energy efficient than cars or buses. And now in NYC Amtrak has the beautiful Moynihan train station rather than dingy Penn. Btw, having a car in Manhattan is a nightmare and the train deposits you right in the center of the island. And Amtrak is having a boom time these days for all these reasons. Stats do not tell the whole story.

  9. While much of what is stated here is true, be aware that in other countries, with similar challenging environmental conditions, high speed rail not only is active and feasible but well booked. And part of that is the quality of the experience and the collaboration of government and private industry to cooperate and provide excellent service, fast speeds and a high level of safety. Anyone who has ridden the Amtrak train across the US as I have from Rochester to San Francisco and back knows that level of maintenance and service is sadly lacking here, as is on time arrivals. On the other hand it’s literally TV News if a train is more than 10 minutes late in Japan. You can spend weeks in Japan without ever riding in a car. You can move between cities with ease, and the ride is comfortable, safe and incredibly fast. Similar experiences can be had in other asian countries, and in Europe. We CAN do it here. We just lack the will and continue to listen to naysayers and those that put freight before people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *