91ÊÓƵ

The Obama administration is adding more money to be invested in high-speed rail, but some politicians are doubtful that high-speed rail is the way to go. Their case is not unconvincing.

The additional $8 billion for high-speed rail – added to a pot of $10.5 billion – will be included in President Obama’s budget proposal next week, Vice President Joe Biden .

Republican Govs. John Kasich of Ohio and Scott Walker of Wisconsin , saying it would be better spent on roads and freight trains, and that maintaining the high-speed rail would be too expensive (Oregon, for its part, has received funds before for what will be a Eugene-to-Vancouver, B.C. corridor).

The case against high-speed rail investment is strengthened by what’s going on in China, where the government plans to spend $300 billion, doubling high-speed rail by 2020. But the communist Chinese aren’t casting votes with their bottoms, .

Apparently, high-speed rail is too expensive for migrant workers, a mass of people who would need to use it in order for traffic congestion to clear. And Chinese economists – just like our Mid-Western governors – argue that the money could be better spent on freight transit and other infrastructure.

But the Chinese government seems unfazed by this. Being the Communist Party, government leaders aren’t pressured by reelections. If high-speed rail is a flop, at least in the short term, the projects will support Chinese manufacturing and create jobs initially – political wins – and perhaps get more use as the population gets wealthier, the Economist says.

This long-term modernization strategy is similar to the rationale behind the U.S. investment – not saying the U.S. government is communist or anything.