In 12 Years, This $40 Billion High-Speed Rail Line in Texas Has Not Laid a Single Foot of Track
The budget for the project has quadrupled, and private property owners have opposed the use of eminent domain along the proposed 240-mile route.

The decade-plus battle to bring high-speed rail to Texas could soon be over. On Tuesday, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy delivered a blow to the project, known as Texas Central Railway, by rescinding a $63.9 million federal grant. Duffy called the project "a waste of taxpayer funds."
The Texas Central Railway was unveiled in 2013 as a fully privately funded high-speed rail project connecting Dallas and Houston. Originally estimated to cost $10 billion, the project would be able to shuttle passengers between the state's two largest cities in 90 minutes (versus nearly four hours in a car).
Like other high-speed rail projects before it, Texas Central has run into project delays and cost overruns. By 2019, the project's investors updated their original cost estimates to $20 billion. In 2020, project estimates were updated again to $30 billion. A 2023 analysis by Baruch Feigenbaum, senior managing director of transportation policy at Reason Foundation (the nonprofit that publishes Reason), estimates that the project's operating and construction costs will be at least $41.6 billion.
In September 2024, the Biden administration awarded Amtrak a $64 million grant to move the project forward. Despite this federal support, Japanese investors backed out of the project after claiming to have lost $272 million.
Kleinheinz Capital Partners, an investment firm headed by Fort Worth businessman John Kleinheinz, "bought its Japanese investors out of the project in January," reports The Texas Tribune, to become the rail line's controlling interest. Andy Jent, a representative of Texas Central, told the Tribune that the project had acquired 25 percent of the land it needed to build the route.
Despite Tuesday's announcement from the Transportation Department, which also directed Amtrak to rescind project leadership, the project appears ready to forge ahead. "We agree with Secretary Duffy that this project should be led by the private sector, and we will be proud to take it forward," Kleinheinz Capital said in a statement.
"Our interpretation of what the Department of Transportation released a couple of days ago is that number one, they don't want Amtrak leading this project," Jent told the Texas House of Representatives' Transportation Committee on Thursday. "We also don't believe that that's in the best interest of the state of Texas or in the best interest of this project."
Despite the optimism, the project faces a long route to completion.
The rail line has yet to lay a single foot of track or acquire the necessary permits to begin construction. In 2020, the Federal Railroad Administration issued a final environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act, which did "not grant any kind of construction approval or permit. Neither does this final rule, by itself, grant any permission or authority" for the company to operate. "The publication of this final rule is the beginning for [Texas Central Railroad], not the end, of its continuous obligation to demonstrate compliance with the regulation."
As of January 2024, the project had not received the necessary permits from the federal Surface Transportation Board to begin construction. The city of Houston has not approved a terminal site for the train, but Dallas has spent $1.5 million on an economic feasibility study for the project, Dallas City Council member Omar Narvaez told KERA News.
The project has also faced opposition from the state government. In 2017, Texas lawmakers passed a law prohibiting the Texas legislature from appropriating funds "related to the planning, facility construction or maintenance, security, or operation of a high-speed rail project operated by a private entity."
In June 2022, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that Texas Central could use eminent domain for the rail line, which has been met with staunch opposition from Texas landowners. This legislative session, state Rep. Brian Harrison (R–Waxahachie) introduced a bill that would prevent a private entity that operates high-speed rail from using eminent domain. Lawmakers are also considering a bill sponsored by Rep. Cody Harris (R–Palestine), which would make it impossible for state funds to be used to pay for the alteration of roadway because of high-speed rail construction.
Jent told lawmakers on Thursday that he still considers the project alive, but Kleinheinz is not, at this time, "proposing construction of the project." Once the developers give the green light, Jent expects that it will take six months to finalize project planning. During that time, Texas Central would secure more financing and submit a final permit to the Surface Transportation Board. Jent expects it would then take 80–86 months to complete construction of the project.
This estimation is a bit ambitious, Feigenbaum tells Reason. With the project's cost ballooning from $10 billion to over $40 billion, "I don't see how they're going to come up with" the funding that's needed for the rail line, he says. In his testimony to lawmakers, Jent said that he expects the Japan Bank for International Cooperation to "provide some form of financing" in the future (although the bank is not funding the project right now).
Feigenbaum says the project, which was essentially dormant before, will likely become dormant again.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
This kind of lying is all too common. I'll fix it for you.
These numbers always assume the passengers live at the departing station and have no need to get there from a separate home, and conduct all their business at the arriving station. They have no luggage, brief cases, or shopping bags to bring with them in either direction. They enjoy sharing their travel time with strangers and having to listen to their conversations, music, and TikTok videos.
They always seem to put the train stations deep in inner cities where driving through city traffic to the station takes a large percentage of the time to just drive to your destination.
Then there either isn't enough parking in the downtown or it is expensive or they don't allow overnight parking or there is zero parking security and your car and/or windows won't be intact when you get back.
Great for a handful of rich snobs who can afford to live downtown in a high rise.
Rich snobs don’t ride trains . They want you to ride trains.
Bingo. They take a limo to the airport and drive right up to the charter jet.
Correct. Socialist policies are never for the socialist.
They didn't put the train stations deep in inner cities. In most cases, the stations (excluding metro area commuter train stations) were built at/near the center of the developing town or wherever the railroad came closest to the center of town (mostly prior to 1900) when the station itself was probably one of the major buildings making up that town. Then the town grew into a city, then the "white flight" of the 1970s turned many "city center" areas into "inner cities".
Several years ago the 3 counties in SE Michigan voted down a proposal to build rail into downtown Detroit. The amount of time it would take me just to drive to the nearest proposed station would have been half an hour. It takes me an hour to drive into Detroit.
I'm surprised Gov. Whitless didn't revive the project.
Not sure how they do it Texas, but in Florida we call Uber, we don't look for a taxi. And the vast majority of the traffic on Sunrail is business, where "luggage" is a briefcase or backpack.
But that still adds to the door-to-door travel time.
Yes, but it makes a large portion of the travel time a lot more stress-free.
In my world, English is flexible enough that taxi encompasses both Uber and Lyft, and the old fashioned cabs. You don't have Lyft in Florida? Pffft. A taxi desert. Wait until the lefties find out and try to nationalize Uber.
Better to get rid of the left.
Longtobefree it would be less stressful to have the uber that picks you up just drop you off on where you're going.
You know who lives at train stations?
In Orlando, security guards.
George Carlin? Ringo Starr? Alec Baldwin?
I feel like we've already answered this one.
Well, train, train
Train me on out of this town
Train, Train
Lord, take me on out of this town
Well, that woman I'm in love with
Lord, she's Memphis bound.
Gary Coleman?
I have no problem traveling with strangers and I like the fact that I can read rather than spend my time driving. You are correct that stations are often inner city because that is where people want to go. What planners need to do is have convenient parking with fast shuttles to the stations. Modern airports often have this type of parking.
People love the inner city! That explains all the empty buildings.
Parking like that in inner cities? How expensive is that, and how secure?
Some cities put the airport parking quite a ways from the airport and then force you to ride the same train to get to the airport everyone else has to ride. Then they add huge taxi and Uber gate fees to discourage using those methods.
Or they build a nice, new light rail line, but stop it a mile or two from the airport, like San Jose, California.
Or they build a nice monorail to all the major hotels, except it doesn't go to the airport either, like Las Vegas. I assume that was done at the request of the taxi cab companies who bought off the city council, only to get kicked to the curb when Uber and Lyft replaced them.
I cannot speak for every airport in the country. I do know that Chicago, Atlanta, and Seattle have light rail connections to downtown.
So does Spokane. But despite local democrat efforts, downtown Spokane isn’t too scuzzy. Although we do have street graffiti downtown that the idiots in city government now claim is a ‘pride mural’ and will arrest people for scuffing it. Reason reported on this before they started shittimg their pants 24/7 about tariffs.
https://reason.com/2024/06/12/it-is-illiberal-to-charge-teens-with-felonies-for-vandalizing-a-pride-crosswalk/
That goes along with the "Four hour rule". If you can drive there in less than four hours, then it's faster to drive.
Yeah, my 4-hour rule became more like 6 hours, and even up to 8 hours, even for business travel.
People driving from town to town still have to deal with traffic within the city at either end of the highway travel. Going by HSR would be more comparable to taking a commuter flight, except likely with fewer fees connected to baggage and likely less processing/security delays at either end of the trip; ground transport infrastructure at either end will vary widely depending on the city.
Having lived in both urban (L.A. metro, multiple areas) and rural (10 miles from Bozeman, MT when the poplulation of Gallatin County was only around 30-35k) areas in my life, I'd suspect that most heavy "shopping trips" into either Dallas or Houston would be people coming on from the outlying areas and smaller towns; other than maybe a small number of local businesses, there's probably not much that anyone could purchase in Houston or Dallas which can't be found in the other city as well.
You think high speed rail will have fewer security delays?
The thing is, over the past 10 years, several luxury bus lines have established routes between Houston and the surrounding cities (Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, and New Orleans, all 3-5 hours drive). They are consistently full.
However, there doesn't seem to be a market for a full consistent train for all the reasons you mentioned.
I used to ride both buses and commuter trains back in the day.
My biggest fear - bar none - was missing the last one back to my car at the park'n'ride a couple blocks from my stop. Because then you were screwed.
The reason this kind of thing will never gain traction is because it makes freedom of movement beholden to government schedules. And government failures. (The commuter train loved to break down on at least a twice a month basis.)
They also make ridiculous comparisons. Like, the Shinkansen. Works brilliantly in Japan. But Japan ain't America. Japan is tiny, and its rails serve massive metropolis'. America is more spread out and nobody lives within walking distance of the rail station. It's called The Last Mile. All the benefits of high-speed rail are offset by it.
A trip from Dallas to Houston isn't the same as a trip from Tokyo to Kyoto. But the "more the plans fail the more the planners plan" types refuse to admit this simple fact.
This is a huge point. I tried the Tri-rail to get to and from the Airport in south Florida a couple of times. It was touted as the easy and quick way, skipping traffic and parking.
The first couple of times we're OK, even though it didn't really save any appreciable time. It did save a pile of cash on parking at the airport.
Then I had a later flight. I missed the 10am train. In the early morning the were every 15 minutes. But later, every couple of hours. So I got to the platform just as a train was pulling out. After waiting around for almost an hour, I found out that the schedule is only during rush hour.
So I jump in the car, pay premium parking.
The next time I tried it my return flight was delayed and getting back to my car at the park and ride was an adventure taking hours.
Screw that.
“In 12 Years, This $40 Billion High-Speed Rail Line in Texas Has Not Laid a Single Foot of Track”
It’s amazing how hard it is for these choo choo projects to move forward when you can’t just steal peoples land to do it.
Plus, there are always endless lawsuits from democrat climate extremists. That’s one of the things that strangled California’s high speed rail project.
so the government got out, and the private firm doesn't want to continue construction, and (R) fights the eminent domain grabs ... triple-plus good?
Now do Moonbeam's choo choo.
It looks great in Power Point.
Meanwhile, those hicks in Florida just went ahead and run a faster, but not "high speed" train between Orlando and Miami.
The funny thing about the bright line train in Florida is that they don’t allow you to take firearms with you.
They even have metal detectors.
So even though I go to Miami once every month and would love to take the high speed rail, I don’t use it because they won’t let me bring my gun with me
Well, that is because the Orlando terminal is in the airport.
Simplifies the parking situation, but has drawbacks.
And my understanding is that it's like much of the Metra situation in and around Chicago suburbs where the 100 ton missile travelling along a fixed path at regular intervals is orders of magnitude more deadly than 'guns that could go off at any place or any time'.
For those outside of Florida, it turns out you can build passenger rail without government funds.
Brightline (reporting mark BLFX) is an intercity rail route in the United States that runs between Miami and Orlando, Florida. Part of the route runs on track owned and shared by the Florida East Coast Railway.
Brightline is the only privately owned and operated intercity passenger railroad in the United States.
Gory details:
https://www.gobrightline.com/
Brightline has had more than it's fair share of government funds thrown it's way.
Unfortunately, they can't go full speed because it kills too many people.
Thing is damned quiet, even at 70mph. After a crapton of fatalities, they cut the speed down to normal traffic speeds.
Also, it ain't cheap. Costs more than driving, way more if you are more than 1 person.
Despite democrat efforts, privately owned passenger cars are frequently the least expensive option.
Why would anyone want to get to Houston or Dallas quickly?
'in' and 'out' are two sides of the same coin.
To enjoy their masochism.
Anybody advocating for rail travel is simply trying to steal your money.
100% of them.
Since 1863.
Taking the train from New York to Philadelphia is faster and less expensive than driving. Enjoy your gas guzzler while sitting in stop and go traffic.
My car is not going to go on strike nor will a psycho fuck a corpse in my car. The odds of me being set on fire are also massively lower.
And I don't have pay higher taxes to continue paying for a boondoggle nobody chooses to ride on.
Must suck being on the wrong side of everything.
“nor will a psycho fuck a corpse in my car”
Are you accounting for SQRLSY?
Do dreams of privately-funded trains provide liberals with the same masturbation fantasies as publicly-funded trains?
No. They hate private rail lines. They also hate private roads.
And private schools. And private security. It's almost like the public employee unions funding all of their candidates are their main constituency.
Marxists despise private property in the hands of anyone other than themselves.
Duffy called the project "a waste of taxpayer funds."
I call it embezzlement of taxpayers' funds.
Headline seems intent on creating the idea that $40B has been spent on 0 feet of track.
headline also picks on Texas when California should be target
Yes. California spent the money. It seems Texas is dithering about it.
"Well, sir, there's nothing on earth
Like a genuine, bona fide
Electrified, six-car monorail!"
Monorail!
Hypocrites in Texas are totally okay with a pipeline company taking your property but not a railroad company.
Pipelines are useful. They are not net drains on the public purse.
Railroads are very much the opposite.
Also, once a pipeline is installed, it's not a continuous nuisance. It's just there. Under your property. A train runs over your property at regular intervals. Noisily. Dangerously. You don't get that land back in any way.
So one must ask...where did all the money go? $40 billion??!! WTF!
Biden's high speed internet....$50 billion up in smoke.
California's $50 billion....gone like a mirage.
This sounds like a job for the MuskMan and his team of detectives.
Don't tell me it's only money. This all ended up somewhere and it cost the America taxpayers plenty.
How many more times before the Second American Revolution?
Not sure what the author's point is with the misleading headline.
>as a fully privately funded high-speed rail project connecting Dallas and Houston.
OK, so it's not to rely on public money.
>, by rescinding a $63.9 million federal grant. Duffy called the project "a waste of taxpayer funds."
OK, good, Now federal money isn't funding it.
As for the rest, it seems that other than Dallas spending some money on a feasibility study for a station, the entire burdon so far has been borne by private speculators. Which is no skin off my nose, let some dumb investors take in the shorts, or let them run a successful rail line after they figure out how to raise the billions and buy the land.
But the headline makes it sound like California's train from "Los Angeles" to "San Francisco" (which really will only run from Bakersfield to Fresno -- or as I often say from where nobody wants to be to where nobody wants to go) which has spent copious taxpayer dollars on absolutely nothing. This Texas mess is nowhere near. It's their money to waste. They never spent 40 billion, and even the quarter billion they lost so far was private funds, right?
Reason is fucking Buzzfeed now. It's a clickbait joke of a website.
Sounds about even with California's "high speed" rail progress.
Meanwhile, Mexico is showing them both how it's done:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tren_Maya
They built a 1,000 mile reasonably high speed train from scratch in 5 years. It only hits 43 mph, but that's not much lower than a lot of areas on the proposed California "bullet" train.
And if you can go 1,000 miles in 24 hours, that's still a lot faster than 1,000 miles in 24 years.
Well, if Texas and California can't build intrastate lines, the obvious answer is to build an interstate line between Dallas and Los Angeles. Think of the boondoggle opportunity to waste even more money! They could drive the golden spike somewhere around Truth or Consequences, New Mexico -- how appropriate.
When you see this much money being thrown around with some vague promises of "high tech" better watch out.
The billions that somehow disappeared into the ether or the off shore bank accounts of those involved need to be clawed back.
Some prosecutions need to commence.