California state Sen. John Moorlach has proposed building a U.S. version of Germany's unrestricted Autobahn from just north of Los Angeles to Stockton. His bill, SB-319, wouldn't need a new highway; it would add two lanes in each direction to I-5 and Highway 99. That's eight lanes in total on the two major north-south corridors in the Golden State. In any of those lanes, Moorlach said drivers could cover the distance between cities in about 2.5 hours at 100 mph.

The Republican representative of Costa Mesa said he got the idea for his bill before Gov. Gavin Newsom made recent comments seen as closing the door on California's high-speed rail project. The state broke ground on what was to be a revolutionary (for the U.S.) bullet train in 2008. Trains hitting a top speed of 220 miles per hour were meant to get passengers from L.A. to San Francisco in three hours, for half the price of a plane ticket.

Back then, projections figured a $68 billion cost and completion by 2029. By 2018, an internal audit suspected the cost was already $13 billion over budget and four years behind schedule. Earlier this month, the Los Angeles Timesput the arrears at $44 billion over budget and 13 years behind schedule. That's why Newsom, in his first State of the State speech, proposed a much smaller rail project.

Moorlach said, "We are waiting decades for high speed rail to get finished. Why can't we build 300 miles of four-lane concrete in five years at a fraction of the cost, so people aren't backed up behind trucks to get to San Francisco on the 5?" To those worried about speed-related deaths, he countered with World Health Organization stats that put traffic deaths per 100,000 people at 4.1 in Germany, 12.4 in the U.S.

Moorlach said he'd have no issue doing the drive himself in his 1996 Chevrolet Impala SS. And one thing he gets completely right: "On a clear day everyone is going 80 mph." At least. Moorlach didn't put a price tag on the project, but an outside estimate came in at $3 billion, using money from the state's cap-and-trade program.

Living in SoCal, I say there are so many enormous hurdles to laying down a safe, workable Autobahn that it would be easier to get the rail project done on time and on budget. First, the cost estimate seems quite low, based on the costs we've seen advertised on road improvement projects around the country. Germany's Autobahn is anywhere from 27 to 35 inches thick, compared to U.S. highways that are 11 inches thick, with a service life twice as long. And Germany is a fiend about highway maintenance. In California, we've seen highway improvement projects on I-5 start crumbling before the project is finished.

Germans also have a strict, lengthy licensing system, know how to drive at high speeds, have excellent lane discipline, don't pass on the right, and have their cars regularly and rigorously inspected. None of which is true for California. And good luck getting the California Highway Patrol on board.

It's no surprise, then, that the few people who would comment on the bill had anything good to say. An ex-Democratic senator remarked, "It would make more sense to invest in increased maintenance on Highway 99 and I-5, which suffer from significant deterioration due to extraordinary use, particularly from heavy-duty vehicles." And the Coalition for Clean air disparaged Moorlach's contention that speeding vehicles would emit less pollution than gridlocked cars on the highway, saying, "Emission goes up at high speeds ... and that would increase emissions coming from transportation ... the only sector where emissions are increasing in California."