It would be hard to find a bigger cheerleader for high-speed rail than Gov. Martin O’Malley. He’s pursued federal funding for high-speed rail that other states have rejected and has strongly backed President Obama’s high-speed rail initiative. His opinion: “We’re not somehow being clever by failing to invest in high-speed rail, while they use our money to build it in China.” In fact, though, we are being clever – no, let’s say downright brilliant – by failing to invest in high-speed rail, as the increasing problems of China’s system are showing.

There was one story and one opinion piece in this Sunday’s Washington Post that talked about the issues plaguing China’s high-speed rail system. The news story was entitled “Are China’s High Speed Trains Headed off the Rails?” The answer seems to be “yes”:

… the shining new emblem of China’s modernization looks more like an example of many of the country’s interlinking problems: top-level corruption, concerns about construction quality and a lack of public input into the planning of large-scale projects.

Questions have also arisen about whether costs and public needs are too often overlooked as the leadership pursues grandiose projects, which some critics say are for vanity or to engender national pride but which are also seen as an effort to pump up growth through massive public works spending.

The Finance Ministry said last week that the Railways Ministry continued to lose money in the first quarter of this year. The ministry’s debt stands at $276 billion, almost all borrowed from Chinese banks.

The opinion piece, entitled “China’s Train Wreck,” expands on the reasons for these problems:

Rather than demonstrating the advantages of centrally planned long-term investment, as its foreign admirers sometimes suggested, China’s bullet-train experience shows what can go wrong when an unelected elite, influenced by corrupt opportunists, gives orders that all must follow — without the robust public discussion we would have in the states.

The fact is that China’s train wreck was eminently foreseeable. High-speed rail is a capital-intensive undertaking that requires huge borrowing upfront to finance tracks, locomotives and cars, followed by years in which ticket revenue covers debt service — if all goes well. “Any . . . shortfall in ridership or yield, can quickly create financial stress,” warns a 2010 World Bank staff report.

Such “shortfalls” are all too common. Japan’s bullet trains needed a bailout in 1987. Taiwan’s line opened in 2007 and needed a government rescue in 2009. In France, only the Paris-Lyon high-speed line is in the black.

Some may be tempted to say China’s problems are because of its authoritarian regime and the corruption endemic in its system. Those things certainly don’t help. But the real problem is mentioned in both these pieces: costs are higher than expected and ticket prices are too expensive.

These issues are the same ones that make high-speed rail a bad fit for our country. As I’ve discussed before on this blog, high-speed rail just doesn’t make sense for the U.S.  

Those supporting high-speed rail often point to other nations, like Governor O’Malley did with China, to justify spending our tax dollars on rail boondoggles. Will China’s failures cause them to re-evaluate their support? It’s doubtful, since the facts have always been quite clear that high-speed rail is a high-cost system that will have low ridership.

I could speculate on why people are so enamored with high-speed rail in spite of its proven failures, but I won’t. I’ll just point out that whenever you hear a politician extolling high-speed rail, watch your wallet. If these systems are built in the United States, it’s going to be the taxpayers (not those who ride them) who end up paying a hefty price.