I was talking with a friend earlier about how people jumped on Obama's high speed rail proposal as an expensive, tax-wasting, federal "boondoggle." A lot of states turned down the funds to build it. I was just wondering if the interstate highway system faced any of the same criticisms at the time. Was the plan controversial at all? If so, who were the prominent opponents of the system and what were their arguments?
Yes, it was a three-year-long slog to get an acceptable bill put together and through Congress. Truckers and motorist organizations opposed the higher gas and tire taxes. Some in the Eisenhower Administration thought a more limited national system could eventually be paid for entirely through tolls, as had already been done for the various state turnpikes.
Opposition to the highways themselves wasn't great, particularly as they promised dramatic improvements in safety and commerce—and because the first segments built were cross-country stretches through rural land. A decade later, building the links through center cities would present problems, but those weren't foremost in people's minds in the mid 1950s.
As for the fiscal aspects, it's important to remember that the Interstate Highway Act paid 90 percent of the new roads, and that it was funded entirely by motorists themselves through increased fuel taxes going into the Highway Trust Fund. In contrast, high speed rail programs would never pay off their capital costs, and only extreme optimists thought they would ever cover their operating costs.
The details of the political battles can be read in Mark Rose's book Interstate: Express Highway Politics, 1939-1989. A more lively history of the broader subject is Earl Swift's The Big Roads.