That’s the message the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s leadership team is sending to Washington about the massive $68 billion project set to break ground this year.

The planned statewide system is short about $60 billion, some of which will undoubtedly need to come from Congress. But CEO Jeff Morales and Chairman Dan Richard — in Washington last week for meetings during the U.S. Conference of Mayors — told POLITICO they didn’t come to the capital with hat in hand.

“We don’t need new federal money for about two more years,” Morales said during an interview at the Capital Hilton. “We’re not here asking for a new round of funding right now. Having said that, we do need — over the long run — some form of ongoing stable federal support.”

But does the authority need a Democratic takeover of the House and another speakership from noted rail booster and current Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to make the eventual connection of Los Angeles and San Francisco a reality? Richard says no, and he is bullish Republicans will eventually come around to the project’s economics.

“We have a Republican majority in the House of Representatives. But we have a program and a story to tell that is very consistent with the policy, principles that they care about,” he said.

The $6 billion, 130-mile initial segment in the Central Valley will begin construction this summer, a huge milestone in a decades-long effort to bring the fast trains enjoyed all over the world to the United States. It is an effort with strong backing from the Obama administration to the tune of $3.3 billion, and from California taxpayers, who are pitching in $2.7 billion after a dramatic vote in the state Legislature last summer cemented the project’s future. A further $2 billion is going to urban rail connections in the state.

Among the big questions that will hang over Richard, Morales and the entire project for years: Where is the other $60 billion going to come from?

The answer is “we don’t know,” Richard said, emphasizing that step-by-step funding is the only viable path to such a large number. And California is taking precautions to make sure that even the Central Valley segment will be useful immediately for the Amtrak system in the state, an effort to avoid the “train to nowhere” moniker still popular among opponents.

“There have only been a few multigenerational transportation projects in history. And no one knew at the outset where those dollars were coming from,” Richard said. “There’s nothing unique about us not being able to identify every penny at this point.”

The project’s leaders are still strategizing long term. They see the private sector eventually being able to fund perhaps as much as $20 billion, money that will start to reveal itself in five years when trains are gliding across the brand-new rail segment in the Fresno region and producing revenues.

“This project will throw off operating cash surpluses. Well, that then makes it very attractive for a private-sector operator to be able to come in and bid for the right to be able to operate” the system, Richard said.

From there, the state will try to finance subsequent pieces of the network, which could mean using the right of way to run fiber optic cable, charging for parking service, selling advertisements and leasing land for solar and other energy production. The idea perpetuated by opponents that the entire project will rely on the feds and California taxpayers’ wallets is off base, said Richard, a former board member for Bay Area Rapid Transit.

“BART was built as a government program, entirely with government grants, run entirely with public employees. That is not the business model for high-speed rail,” he said. “Our business plan counts on the innovation of the private sector coming in. They are the ones that are going to put up the train sets, collect the fares and operate and maintain the system.”

And when the train needs more federal funds in 2015, the authority’s political apparatus isn’t going to Washington or Sacramento looking for a lump sum to complete the entire 800-mile system.

“We’re not looking for 20, 30, 40, 50 billion dollars from anybody at any one time. We’re looking for much more discrete amounts of money,” Morales said.

Newly installed House railroads subcommittee Chairman Jeff Denham (R-Calif.) isn’t so sure. He said his “frustration” with the state’s effort comes from lack of transparency about where the many billions still needed will come from.

“They’re looking at anywhere from 40 to 70 billion dollars from the federal government. If that is the amount of funding that they need, how is this president going to come up with that money?” Denham told reporters Tuesday. He said to count on committee hearings probing the project as well.

Morales also noted that two Republican mayors, Ashley Swearengin of Fresno and Jim Ledford of Palmdale, are among the strongest supporters of the project. They want the construction jobs that will come with the massive new undertaking, and they also pine for the new development, downtown revitalization and commerce the rails promise to bring. The hope is that a similar sentiment eventually settles on Republicans in Congress.

“This can only be looked at as a true public-private partnership. That’s our approach, that’s our philosophy,” Richard said. “We think that’s attractive to the leadership in the House.”

The lower chamber isn’t there yet. House Republican Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who is No. 3 in the majority’s leadership, and Denham are together pushing an amendment to the next spending bill to cut off further federal funds from going to California’s burgeoning rail system. And though it’s going to take a serious blow of litigation or legislation to halt the project now, the two penned a recent op-ed in The Sacramento Bee that suggests it’s still imperative to “cut our losses” on the project.

Denham is making moves to cut costs and construction time on the rail line while simultaneously plotting its demise. The former will include pushing waivers of some environmental regulations; the latter, forcing the issue on prohibiting federal funding.

“High-speed rail has a future in our nation. As we continue to plan and grow, high-speed rail has to be part of the solution,” Denham said. On the other hand, he “will continue to offer that amendment and push it forward in any transportation bill as long as they continue to hide their business plan from the public.”

Adam Snider contributed to this report.