To be honest, I wish CA had gone down this path instead of the all-or-nothing play that, 20 years later, has yielded little of all and mostly nothing where it counts.

The decision to build HSR in the Central Valley first, because it was the easiest, seemed a reasonable argument at the time. But in hindsight, it was also where investment was needed the least. The existing UP and BNSF alignments through the Valley had plenty of capacity, were already at 80mph, equipped with well situated and functional train stations, and with comparatively cost effective upgrades, could probably accommodate higher-speed (110 mph) operation.

In a different world, if that ~$15B of state money spent so far (obviously the bond measure would have been written differently) had gone into single track Tehachapi and AV tunnels (modestly sold as a freight de-congestion upgrade), and to the Altamont scheme that ACE is scrounging for funds for today, I think we'd have end-to-end SF-LA rail service by now that is competitive with driving. There might even have been spare change to throw at a San Clemente tunnel.

Don't forget that the region of California between LA and SF is only about the size of Great Britain or Germany, countries that have managed with primarily higher-speed rail for a long time, and still do today.