High-speed rail networks are fast train systems that connect major cities, providing a quick and efficient alternative to car and air travel. Proponents argue that it can reduce travel times, lower carbon emissions, and stimulate economic growth through improved connectivity. Opponents argue that it requires significant investment, may not attract enough users, and funds could be better used elsewhere.
74% Yes |
26% No |
74% Yes |
26% No |
See how support for each position on “High Speed Rail” has changed over time for 47.9k America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “High Speed Rail” has changed over time for 47.9k America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from America users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9L4Z23B 2mos2MO
Yes, the federal government should issue grants and PABs for states with projects on designated high speed corridors (186+ MPH MAS, 155 MPH Average Speed) and higher speed corridors (110-125 MPH MAS, 90-110 MPH Average Speed). States should utilize P3s to help increase efficiency of project development
@9N8XVGK2mos2MO
Yes, but only in areas where such a development is economically beneficial, such as the northeast corridor.
@9NNC8HX2mos2MO
Yes, if they get rid of other public transportation as a way to replace it and truly make its impact effective
@9R9ZKVV5 days5D
Yes, but only if contracts aren't cost plus and local officials aren't allowed to change the contract afterward.
@9R9WXNN5 days5D
Yes but on the condition that if there is proof of mismanagement of funds the company must repay all subsided amounts.
@9R9Q4XV5 days5D
yes if there’s statistics saying that it will be good for the environment and that it will be economically successful.
Stay up-to-date on the most recent “High Speed Rail” news articles, updated frequently.
Join in on the most popular conversations.
