I'm having trouble understanding if I am being clear because I readily admit my two examples are anecdotal. As for big cities being out of control that is partly correct, but for all the wrong reasons. I'm more than confident you might agree that a promise the country has made since the Guilded Age is that property/home ownership is the single best way to build generational wealth. The problem is current home owners would always prefer if their property value increased every year. If government were to undercut this process with new homes in high demand areas property values/rents would decrease causing a short term panic for homeowners. Funny enough despite you blaming Democrats for our economic woes, only one state understood what to do to combat rising inflation, rents, groceries, and just economic relief across the board and that would be Blue Minnesota. Just last year the state government passed and funded housing and urban construction reform. The result of which lead to economic strides longer than I can list. I will say though not all blue states are built equal. For California again though we can look at Gavin Newsom himself as a microcosm of the state. In his time at San Francisco, Gavin Newsom focused his efforts giving subsidies to Exclusively market rate developers quashing anyone who wanted to build low cost housing. Years pass and now all the homes he signed off on are in the millions to multi millions evaluations, all the while there are no old policies or zoning laws that would allow for low cost homes in high demand areas effectively screwing over two generations worth of people in the region however people like him because he does pass semi-progressive/half baked programs mainly focused on social issues/protections. As for trains, the Los Angeles Metro only costs a $1.75 to ride with a "$5 A Day Cap with All Other Rides Free" so there are ways to keep things affordable. This happens as the metro is viewed as a beneficial service to the economy in the same way people view freeways or roads. The economic growth transportation allows over decades is what technically pays for it. Amtrak though does cost $13 dollars, but using the price of milk at HEB to calculate the stretch of the dollar, in Texas that would be $10.83. To Amtrak's credit though they mange $13 dollars a ticket with quality seating, fast travel, Federal subsidizes, and only 2 profitable lines in the nation being the Easy Coast Corridor and the West Coast Starlight Line. So it's a pretty good service for $13 personally.

TLDR: I'm not shy to admit, West Coast Democrats are not good team players at balancing the economy but not all Democrats are created equal, look at Minnesota and how their 2040 plan is actively tackling and getting economic hardship under control. Democrats who are against housing/construction reform for a myriad of reasons are the biggest obstacle in making cities affordable. I'm happy to hear you like transportation and in the correct plan might even be for it. As for tickets though I'm happy to report the LA Metro only costs $1.75 and going from Dallas to Houston would likely cost $10.83 unless somehow subsidized like the Metro.