This is the best commentary on the dilemma of California's attempts to implement an effective High-Speed-Rail system I have seen yet. It addresses the theoretical problem of offering HSR to anyone but the end-to-end users: The more stops you have, the slower--and more meaningless--it becomes. The solution is putting more rail systems into place to feed the HSR. What is necessary, but also very cost-increasing, is to have parallel--yes, I said parallel--rail systems that operate at non-express velocities and stop more frequently, also connecting to light rail and other local rail systems that cover the right-angle periphery of the HSR. When rights-of-way are acquired, they should be wide enough to cover the width requirements to have both a high-speed and medium speed system jointly occupying the ROW on separate tracks. The medium speed system can diverge away in places to accomodate a closeby LRT connection or urban center not covered by HSR and reconverge to an adjacent alignment. With a parallel medium-speed system, you may have to use the MSR to go forward or even backward a few stations to get to your desired stop. With efficient transfer between LRT and the MSR, this still makes for what one could call rapid transit. Good planning on the parts of county governments to re-explore and develop LRT-based interurban systems for feeding the HSR for their respective counties would make rail travel a rational alternative to the automobile once again. In addition, transportation planners need to come to grips with the reality that Interste freight traffic by truck makes no economic sense in today's inflated fuel-cost world. In addition to passenger rail systems, smaller, more localized intermodal facilities need to be considered by local governments to minmize the need for truck traffic on city streets, as well as the overcrowded Interstates. Trucking should become more transfer oriented, operating many local trips from railhead to customer, in preference over the long distance interstate mode. A truck uses 6 times the fuel to move a ton of freight a mile on a flat grade than a rail system. The large rail companies have shown that they have very little interest in local freight, which has given rise to increasing truck traffic on city streets by virtue of increased abandonments of branch and industrial trackage. All of these factors contribute to the collective level of traffic congestion. If the local governments don't pick up the slack by protecting rail corridors, even if abandoned, for both transit and local freight operations, we are going to be looking at a mighty ugly and costly automotive transportation future, if you don't think we are there already.