Let’s see.

California lawmakers were nearly three months late bringing in a balanced budget this year, and the balance of it rests so precariously on rosy revenue projections and borrowing that some say it is already out of date — just days after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed it.

In recent years, California voters have given this governor authority to spend billions of dollars to begin to cure the deficit budget while doing necessary work on roads and infrastructure. The last payments on the bonds approved by voters in the Schwarzenegger administration will wrap up, in a best-case scenario, in about 2035.

So here comes Proposition 1A, seeking $10 billion for high-speed rail line to connect the Los Angeles metropolitan area to the San Francisco Bay Area via the Central Valley.

High-speed rail between L.A. and the Bay Area is a promising idea. The creation of such a project would reduce pollution and dependence on oil, take pressure off our roads and airports and move us a giant step toward a more sustainable, transit-oriented future.

But a bond deal means paying $1 in debt service for every $1 of rail construction or design work. Approving $10 billion for this project is approving $20 billion in debt to be borne by taxpayers.

Given the current deficit and economic forecast for the state, it is not a good time to go deeper into debt.

Further, it strikes us as unlikely that such a massive, years-long transportation project is going to come in on budget. We simply don’t know the true cost of building, much less running, this railroad.

Locally and nationally, eyes are turning toward rail as a promising part of our future, as well as one of the great economic engines of the American past.

The main question is whether specific rail projects are economically viable. With the state already so far in debt, school and health cuts coming our way and the national economic outlook so uncertain, in our view this project is not.

Vote no on Proposition 1A.