"We are also ignoring and underfunding high speed rail which is one of the best ways to move citizens and improve congestion on our highways"

The statement is a pointed critique of U.S. transportation priorities, arguing that policymakers have shortchanged a proven, high-capacity alternative to car-centric mobility. By highlighting high-speed rail as “one of the best ways to move citizens,” it elevates rail’s core advantage: moving large numbers of people quickly, reliably, and safely in dense corridors where highways are saturated and adding lanes offers diminishing returns due to induced demand. The claim about improving highway congestion rests on modal shift, when frequent, fast trains become the default choice for trips of roughly 100 to 500 miles, a meaningful share of drivers and short-haul flyers switch, easing pressure on roads and airports.

Global experience underpins this view. Japan’s Shinkansen, France’s TGV, and China’s vast network have demonstrated consistent gains in punctuality, capacity, and regional connectivity, along with documented shifts from cars and planes to rail. Electrified high-speed trains typically deliver lower per-passenger emissions, supporting climate goals and improving air quality. They also enhance equity by providing high-quality mobility for people who cannot or prefer not to drive, and they reduce exposure to road fatalities.

Calling out “ignoring and underfunding” suggests not just a budget gap but a structural bias: fragmented U.S. governance, short political time horizons, and a highway-focused funding system diminish the feasibility of long-horizon rail projects. Cost control challenges, local opposition, and inconsistent standards compound the problem. Yet the argument insists that these obstacles reflect choices, not inevitabilities, and that strategic investment would unlock substantial public benefits: dependable travel times, expanded labor markets, station-area development, and economic resilience.

The view does not claim rail is a universal fix; it works best when integrated with regional transit, smart land use, and strong project delivery practices. Still, the message is clear: congestion relief and citizen mobility require rebalancing toward high-speed rail as a complementary backbone to highways, turning underinvestment into a deliberate, future-focused commitment.