So we're going to have a nice 100-mile test track in the Valley that with some minor effort could be connected to BNSF so Amtrak (and maybe some light freight service) could use it while we figure out what and how to do what's next. Or even if. It might be that Amtrak service is all we really need, Mr. Kopp notwithstanding. Those studies, as you note, were not done as they should have been, because the fundamental design criterion - a SF-LA (or Bay Area-LAish) end-to-end travel time of about 2 1/2 hours - was politically and legally determined and any adjustments had to fit within that. Not the way to do transportation planning, for sure, but it happens.

So how do we change that? Obviously, the law needs to be changed to let whatever happens next be reasonable. Do you want to lead the charge on that, or just side with those using the poison pills to obstruct and increase the cost further? Any brilliant ideas there?

As for the environmental studies, yes, they are a full employment plan for consultants, and most will never be used as-is. They have developed and organized some useful information. But in the great scheme of things, by the time a real project can get going for another segment, the data will be stale and more money will have to be spent to freshen and supplement it. IMO it's not a total waste, but probably could have stopped at the Tier 1 (route adoption) level once it became obvious (10 or more years ago) that there was no money to build anything but the test track.