Once stopped in its development in favor to road and air means, train, and notably its high-speed version, became a renewed trend in mass transportation in the U.S. Although being studied since a few years, the recent economical crisis and ecological awareness have probably accelerated political will and support. One of the most advanced projects is a link between Tampa and Orlando then Miami, in Florida. The question about its cost and means of funding have generated controversial opinions, mostly since it has appeared that federal implication is tied to subsequent conditions of regional improvement in connecting infrastructure. Its justification also has provoked criticism about promoters' expectations. Therefore, should it be funded in this configuration? Let's attempt to sum up arguments from both sides after recalling historical facts.

If the Tampa-Orlando project has rapidly gained momentum, it is the result of years of planning and recent, conscious political decisions. This long-time wanted project has encountered diverse fortunes, culminating in a a ballot initiative back in 2000 and a voters' denial in 2004. While an expanded and improved passenger train service has been considered primordial since 1990, it has lacked until recently political related decisions and support. "Recognizing the need for a more rational transport policy fourteen years ago, Florida's legislature laid the groundwork for America's first high speed rail system. A public-private partnership was decided on to provide financing. Florida Overland Express (FOX) and the Florida Department of Transportation went ahead with the project, and completion was scheduled for 2006" (Trainweb.org, 2001). Then newly elected governor, Jeb Busch decided to kill high-speed rail in 1999, evoking considerations of financial risks too heavy for the State, low population densities and local transit scarcity. As the necessity of a balanced transportation in Florida and on the East Coast remained in