Jam40jeff: you are correct.

 

Eighth&State: you nailed it! Nothing creates a constituency for good rail service more than an average rail service.

Young adults find 3C train appealing

Friday, October 1, 2010  02:52 AM

Columbus Dispatch Letters to the Editor

 

As a young person and recent transplant to Ohio, I must comment on the proposed passenger-rail plan linking Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. I moved here because of a job opportunity, but I’m currently seeking opportunities to relocate.

 

I’m doing this not because I dislike Ohio, but because Ohio cities are lacking transportation options. I want the ability to live in an urban area and not always have to rely on my car to commute to work or travel to other cities. Unfortunately, Ohio doesn’t accommodate this desire.

 

Full letter at: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2010/10/01/young-adults-find-3c-train-appealing.html?sid=101

 

And this next writer wants faster trains, but at least seems to understand that the 3C is a first step....

 

 

High-speed rail is only way to roll

Friday, October 1, 2010  02:52 AM

 

As an engineer, I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry at the article on raising the average speed of the proposed 3C passenger-rail project in Ohio to 50 mph ( Dispatch article, Saturday).

 

In this age when China, Japan, Europe and even Turkey have high-speed railroad lines that routinely reach average speeds of 100 mph or more, why would anyone think a trip from Cleveland to Columbus to Cincinnati that would take five hours is a great thing, when it should be three hours or less, even with stops?

 

Full letter at:

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2010/10/01/high-speed-rail-is-only-way-to-roll.html?sid=101

 

And this next writer wants fatser trains, but at least seems to understand that the 3C is a first step....

 

 

That's not what I got from his LTE. His stated his belief in his last two sentences.

 

What he doesn't understand is that all transportation evolves. Looking at Ohio passenger rail system is like parents looking at their baby and hoping he will graduate from college someday, but they realize he has a lot of developmental steps to go through along the way.

The political climate is such that people are so angry about spending that they are opposed to it even when it is on something that will be of benefit.

 

I think the source of the spending proposal determines the reaction.  Strickland might need to resort to reverse psychology at this point.

 

And this next writer wants faster trains, but at least seems to understand that the 3C is a first step....

 

 

That's not what I got from his LTE. His stated his belief in his last two sentences.

 

What he doesn't understand is that all transportation evolves. Looking at Ohio passenger rail system is like parents looking at their baby and hoping he will graduate from college someday, but they realize he has a lot of developmental steps to go through along the way.

 

I disagree.  He pretty much says go ahead and build the 3C, but aim higher for the future....which is exactly what the State of Ohio is doing with the preliminary environmental review of the four 110-MPH corridors.

^ He doesn't really take a pro- or anti-3C stance. He just says that 3C, as proposed to run initially, should not be thought of as "a great thing".

OK.  We can compromise and call it "a great start"

I think for many people, it might be helpful to provide a visual description of what the evolutionary process toward high-speed rail might look like in Ohio. Since true high-speed rail (125 mph to 220 mph)can cost north of $20 million per mile, depending on the topography, it takes a huge political lift to get it. It also takes thousands of passengers per hour to make it cost-effective, so there needs to be significant traffic feeders of local, regional and intercity transit plus high-density urban cores. These do not appear overnight. They take decades of evolutionary change to create a culture that's supportive of the level of public investment necessary to fund construction of high-speed rail.

 

Here is my take on what that change could look like...

 

 

 

 

 

Awesome!  I'm glad to see the land use benefits and long term vision being explored as part of this project!  I think too, it may be somewhat realistic (with all the right pieces in place) to push this forward 5-10 years; so a 20-25 year timeframe instead of a 30 year one.  I think (hope) the prospect of a 1:30-2 hour trip from Cincy to Cleveland is one that the state will get behind sooner than later.

Just to clarify, those maps are only my musings, but are consistent with an approach All Aboard Ohio has urged for 30 years. Some is based on what the state has considered, but the long-range elements I've posed here are NOT a state project. Hopefully they will be, but they will depend on input from many sources to engineering and planning only now getting underway.

 

Sadly, all of this could come to an abrupt end in January.

I guess i just haven't seen graphics that demonstrate the long-term benefits and vision of the project; both the rail system itself and the associated land-use benefits. This is an excellent start.  Sometime I think the reason these projects have such a hard time getting traction is that the general public is not provided objective data and graphics to fully comprehend the benefits this will provide. Those of us that are familiar with the project may see this as intuitive, but this is all brand new to folks that are not transportation or land use planning experts.

Can anyone with a subscription to the Enquirer tell me if the new 3C study results were ever published in that paper? I haven't seen it online. Seems like they're just pretending it never happened!

America in the Caboose While the World Barrels Ahead on High Speed Rail

Raymond J. Learsy.Scholar and author, "Over a Barrel: Breaking Oil's Grip on Our Future"

Posted: September 8, 2010 04:31 AM 

 

On Monday President Obama called on Congress to approve $50 billion for highways, landing strips and rail lines to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Specifically, to build or rebuild 150,000 miles of road, to lay and maintain 4,000 miles of rail track and 150 miles of runways.

 

Do we really need to focus on 150,000 miles of roads? They must be popping champagne bottles in the corner offices of the oil industry and at OPEC headquarters. Focusing on getting off the gasoline habit would have been a far wiser commitment.

 

More landing strips, encouraging us to fly, fly, fly, gulping ever greater quantities of fossil fuels? Maybe that's not such a good idea.

 

 

Full op-ed at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymond-j-learsy/america-in-the-caboose-wh_b_708570.html

New report discovers faster initial travel times for Ohio's 3C Rail system

 

Soapbox, 10/5/2010

 

A new report released by the Ohio Rail Development Commission (ORDC) shows that initial speeds for the proposed 3C Rail Corridor could be faster than first thought.  The ORDC worked with Woodside, an industry leading railroad modeling firm, to produce the report and find new travel efficiencies.

 

The report included a draft schedule that showed passenger trains traveling the corridor's entire length, 259 miles, in just over five hours.  The five hour travel time equates to average speeds of 50 miles-per-hour.

 

According to Amtrak, the initial travel speeds are some of the fastest of any recently developed system, and the third fastest since 1980

Ohio Public Radio Report on the increase in projected averag speed for the 3C service:

 

ODOT refutes train criticism with new study

http://www.wksu.org/news/story/26464

 

(Note: there is an on-line comment section after the story.

Just to clarify, those maps are only my musings, but are consistent with an approach All Aboard Ohio has urged for 30 years. Some is based on what the state has considered, but the long-range elements I've posed here are NOT a state project. Hopefully they will be, but they will depend on input from many sources to engineering and planning only now getting underway.

 

I think it is a Columbuscentric mistake that the 2030 light blue line that is ostensibly planned to go from Toledo to Columbus rather than Toledo to Findlay (of Lima, can't tell) to Dayton.  If high speed rail is as transformative as it is billed, Dayton is a perfect test case.  Making Dayton an important transfer point rather than simply a stop between Cincinnati and Columbus seems like you are adding a lot more relative value than if you would have that transfer point in Columbus, which is and always will be powered by Ohio State and the state government.

 

Looking at the map again, I'd say the same thing for Youngstown.  Re-orient the 2040 arc from Columbus to Wheeling (I guess) so that it goes through Canton and then Youngstown instead of rather sparse Central Ohio.  Places like Dayton and Youngstown are suffering from the fact that they aren't the center of many industries anymore, nor are they the locations of top-flight universities.  Make them gateways and nodes between those places (when it makes sense obviously) and you give them a little more chance and do a better job of connecting the hinterland of the harder driving cities.  Youngstown being super accessible to what's happening at Case Western and Carnegie Mellon seems like a better outcome than a slightly more direct connection between Pittsburgh and Columbus.

 

I guess maybe the really tough to see light blue routes will do the same work, but it just strikes me that if there is some discretion it should go toward maximizing the economic effect in this manner.  Obviously there are probably some good arguments for setting it up the way they have.

The above maps were based on the state's Ohio Hub System planning:

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Rail/Programs/passenger/Pages/HighSpeedPassengerRaildefault.aspx

 

Discuss/debate non-3C routes in the Ohio Hub/ORDC/Midwest thread.

 

 

An interesting counter-point on passenger rail development from a Michigan legislator.... contrast with the pronouncements of some Ohio legislators:

 

Guest column – House Speaker Pro Tempore Pam Byrnes, D-Lyndon Township

 

Michigan can't lag behind on high-speed rails

Posted: Oct 4, 2010 at 8:24 PM [Yesterday]

 

A massive national effort is underway to upgrade our transportation infrastructure. While the current federal administration is setting the nationwide vision for rail travel, Michigan is dangerously close to falling out of the equation.

 

Our state has routinely cut funding for Amtrak. Our rail service from Detroit to Chicago takes 5.5 hours, is unreliable and doesn't run frequently enough. We can no longer dodge this critical investment. Unless we want to be left behind, Michigan must show Washington we're truly committed to a comprehensive overhaul of our rail system. We must continue to modernize our rails now to attract federal dollars to make that happen.

 

A comprehensive effort for transit in our state would lay the ground work for Michigan to reap all the benefits high-speed rail travel has to offer: creating construction jobs, connecting businesses and helping them grow, cutting travel time to hubs like Chicago by a couple hours, reducing our dependency on foreign oil and helping new industries locate here.

 

Full op-ed at: http://www.annarbor.com/news/opinion/michigan-cant-lag-behind-on-high-speed-rails/

They might have about $400 million available soon from another state.

They might have about $400 million available soon from another state.

 

Yet another great way to sell Ohioans on the 3C. Beat Michigan!

 

As long as those who are saying "GO (as in leave) BUCK$  " can be overcome.

First, the national issue of Republicans sweeping into statehouses and killing rail got notice in the New York Times today:

Rail Service Expansion Imperiled at State Level

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/us/05rail.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=us

 

"Republicans running for governor in a handful of states could block, or significantly delay, one of President Obama’s signature initiatives: his plan to expand the passenger rail system and to develop the nation’s first bullet-train service."

 

 

Second, in response to natininja's recent comment about boomerang college grads:

 

^ We need to attract college graduates to Ohio. We need to export college graduates from Ohio, 1) so they can be ambassadors of the state, and 2) so they can gain an appreciation of where they grew up in the context of a global perspective.

 

3C will help attract graduates as well as enhance the appreciation of those ambassadors who leave.

 

Boomeranging college grads would be a better goal than "keeping" them.

 

Of course my focus here is those who grew up in Ohio. For those who moved to Ohio for college, it would be nice to keep them around or boomerang them. It's also a good goal to get people who grew up outside Ohio to come for college. 3C can also help in this regard!

 

My main point is: focusing on preventing Ohio's college grads from moving elsewhere is a recipe for an insular culture, which is one of the things Ohio suffers from.

 

One symptom of this insular culture is widespread opposition to the 3C and other rail transit! We desperately need citizens who've experienced life outside Ohio.

 

I am a Cincinnati native who moved to NYC in the last year primarily for a job opportunity, but also to get the full experience of living in a truly diverse and connected urban environment.  I love Cincinnati and am encouraged by the continued pace of development and interest in the urban core.  As such, I intend to return, eventually, and bring with me a wealth of perspective on city life that I could never have gained had I not left.  To specifically relate this to 3C, I travel regularly between NYC and Washington on the Acela as well as venturing around NY and NJ on Metro North, LIRR, and NJ Transit.  This is not to speak of my multiple daily trips on the subway.  Before I left Cincinnati, I knew that I wanted mass transit options in Cincinnati and in Ohio and that I would support initiatives that made sense.  I didn't, however, fully understand what "making sense" meant.  I do now.

 

Retaining college grads in Ohio should be a top priority, but encouraging "boomerang" grads is also part of the equation.

Before I left Cincinnati, I knew that I wanted mass transit options in Cincinnati and in Ohio and that I would support initiatives that made sense. I didn't, however, fully understand what "making sense" meant. I do now.

 

Thanks for your insight. That's a really good way to put it.

Agreed.

 

And here's another Gen Y voice....this one from the University of New Hampshire....a major university served directly by the Amtrak Downeaster. You can almost hear the student writer's impatience with all of the political rhetoric being aimed at passenger rail.  This writer gives me hope.

 

Editorial: High-speed rail: Republican candidates need to get on board

By TNH Editorial Staff

Published: Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Updated: Tuesday, October 5, 2010 01:10

 

Ten times a day, a passenger train stops in Durham. Anyone who has ever taken the Amtrak Downeaster into Boston recognizes the convenience and value of passenger rail. The rest of the country, meanwhile, continues to debate the idea, even when decisions to expand have already been made.

 

An article published yesterday on the New York Times' website details how many of the nation's Republican candidates for governor have voiced their opposition to President Obama's plans to expand passenger rail system, with a particular focus on high-speed lines. These objections, voiced by candidates in Wisconsin, California, Ohio, and Florida, have the potential to completely derail, or at least severely delay, the country's largest proposed rail projects.

 

These are projects that need to move forward, and theirs are objections that don't have much substance.

 

Full editorial at: http://www.tnhonline.com/editorial-high-speed-rail-republican-candidates-need-to-get-on-board-1.1665081

Agreed.

 

And here's another Gen Y voice....this one from the University of New Hampshire....a major university served directly by the Amtrak Downeaster. You can almost hear the student writer's impatience with all of the political rhetoric being aimed at passenger rail. This writer gives me hope.

 

Editorial: High-speed rail: Republican candidates need to get on board

By TNH Editorial Staff

Published: Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Updated: Tuesday, October 5, 2010 01:10

 

Ten times a day, a passenger train stops in Durham. Anyone who has ever taken the Amtrak Downeaster into Boston recognizes the convenience and value of passenger rail. The rest of the country, meanwhile, continues to debate the idea, even when decisions to expand have already been made.

 

An article published yesterday on the New York Times' website details how many of the nation's Republican candidates for governor have voiced their opposition to President Obama's plans to expand passenger rail system, with a particular focus on high-speed lines. These objections, voiced by candidates in Wisconsin, California, Ohio, and Florida, have the potential to completely derail, or at least severely delay, the country's largest proposed rail projects.

 

These are projects that need to move forward, and theirs are objections that don't have much substance.

 

Full editorial at: http://www.tnhonline.com/editorial-high-speed-rail-republican-candidates-need-to-get-on-board-1.1665081

 

I think there are alot of Gen X/Y people who are looking for an identity with a political party that just aren't finding it right now.  They're looking for the socially liberal, economic conservative group that also supports urban development including projects like the 3-C.  Or at least I know that's what I am looking for.

Agreed.

 

And here's another Gen Y voice....this one from the University of New Hampshire....a major university served directly by the Amtrak Downeaster. You can almost hear the student writer's impatience with all of the political rhetoric being aimed at passenger rail. This writer gives me hope.

 

Editorial: High-speed rail: Republican candidates need to get on board

By TNH Editorial Staff

Published: Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Updated: Tuesday, October 5, 2010 01:10

 

Ten times a day, a passenger train stops in Durham. Anyone who has ever taken the Amtrak Downeaster into Boston recognizes the convenience and value of passenger rail. The rest of the country, meanwhile, continues to debate the idea, even when decisions to expand have already been made.

 

An article published yesterday on the New York Times' website details how many of the nation's Republican candidates for governor have voiced their opposition to President Obama's plans to expand passenger rail system, with a particular focus on high-speed lines. These objections, voiced by candidates in Wisconsin, California, Ohio, and Florida, have the potential to completely derail, or at least severely delay, the country's largest proposed rail projects.

 

These are projects that need to move forward, and theirs are objections that don't have much substance.

 

Full editorial at: http://www.tnhonline.com/editorial-high-speed-rail-republican-candidates-need-to-get-on-board-1.1665081

 

I think there are alot of Gen X/Y people who are looking for an identity with a political party that just aren't finding it right now. They're looking for the socially liberal, economic conservative group that also supports urban development including projects like the 3-C. Or at least I know that's what I am looking for.

 

The challenge for young professionals and college age voters is how to drag either party back to the middle of the political spectrum.  The extreme partisanship has (I believe) turned off a lot of moderate voters and independents.

 

What's particularly frustrating is that passenger rail has not really been that much of a partisn issue until the last few months.  If you look at projects and operaing corridors on a state to state basis, they are being done in states that have GOP and Democratic administrations.  How's this for bizarre?....in California, you have Republican Senate candidate Meg Whitman opposing the state's high speed rail plan that is a high-profile project of Repubican Governor Schwarzanegger.

 

Trust me.  I share your puzzlement.

^Write to your President.  All he has to do is retract his glowing endorsement for passenger rail and all these gubernatorial candidates will react accordingly.  A little political reverse psychology.  As long as it can be forever remembered as an Obama initiative, they will not be 'on board.'

 

shs96, I have been looking for that political group since I reached the age of majority and was able to vote.  It doesn't exist.  On this issue, what needs to be done is to convince the 'skeptics' that building a HSR system here in Ohio, or any other state, is indeed the fiscally responsible thing to do.

The challenge for young professionals and college age voters is how to drag either party back to the middle of the political spectrum. The extreme partisanship has (I believe) turned off a lot of moderate voters and independents.

 

What's particularly frustrating is that passenger rail has not really been that much of a partisn issue until the last few months.

^Write to your President. All he has to do is retract his glowing endorsement for passenger rail and all these gubernatorial candidates will react accordingly. A little political reverse psychology. As long as it can be forever remembered as an Obama initiative, they will not be 'on board.'

 

The trouble is exactly this. What used to be bipartisan issues have become bitterly partisan issues. Obama ran on a "post-partisan" platform, so he's attempted to make what initially appeared to be bipartisan issues front and center, so progress could be made. Unfortunately, post-partisanship is not beneficial to the party out of power. Therefore what we could all once agree upon has become fodder for Republicans.

 

The 3C is a perfect representative of this phenomenon. Especially since it was conceived by a Republican administration. And not even one which was considered particularly centrist. What once was considered consistent with conservative principals is now radically socialist.

Martin Gottlieb: Kasich pitch on trains not really about speed

 

By the Dayton Daily News | Wednesday, October 6, 2010, 12:25 PM

2010 ELECTION

 

In the fight about passenger trains in Ohio, the two sides have not only differing views, but different information.

 

Some are on e-mail lists that are put out by opponents. These feature articles and studies with the bad news: about Amtrak’s costs to taxpayers, about bad service high ticket prices or low usage on this or that line, about cost overruns, slow speeds, unmet expectations and scandals.

 

But there are mailing lists on the other side:

 

about train usage being higher than ever, about how young people are moving to places with good train service, about how economic development follows train service, about how speeds are increasing (and plenty of people ride the slower trains anyway), about the huge government subsidies for auto travel that make the subsidies for trains look tiny.

 

As usual in today’s politics, people only feel obliged to know the case for their side. The other side is somebody else’s responsibility. With John Kasich, though, one gets the feeling he isn’t on either mailing list.

 

http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/opinion/entries/2010/10/06/martin_gottlieb_kasich_pitch_o.html?cxtype=feedbot

Thanks. I heard it was in the DDN this morning, so I've been waiting for DDN to post that online!

 

So... Unwanted at any speed?  :x

KJP, has All Aboard Ohio looked into what options will be available should Kasich be elected and follow through on his plans to kill the 3-C?  Is there any legal recourse to stop him from allowing the $400 million to go to another state?

KJP, has All Aboard Ohio looked into what options will be available should Kasich be elected and follow through on his plans to kill the 3-C? Is there any legal recourse to stop him from allowing the $400 million to go to another state?

 

Answers: Yes we have and we'll cross that bridge if we get to it.

 

If not mistaken every one of the cities except for Milwaukee has, is building, or has planned some sort of rail.

 

Milwaukee, too:

 

http://www.transitnow.org/KRM.html

 

http://www.transitnow.org/frame_milw_connector.htm

Milwaukee is planning a streetcar

 

Kasich shouldn't block high-speed rail tracks

 

WHEN the high-speed or medium-speed train pulls out of the station, Ohio won't be on it if Republican John Kasich wins the gubernatorial election. He is adamant that expansion of passenger rail service in the state will go nowhere if he's governor.

Mr. Kasich isn't the only GOP hopeful who vows to derail one of President Obama's signature initiatives to modernize the nation's transportation system. The high-speed rail project envisions development of the country's first bullet train, whisking passengers between major cities and states in much the way high-speed rail has kept other industrialized powers moving.

But Mr. Kasich, like a handful of other Republicans running for governor in other states, is in lockstep with his party - which has habitually resisted all policy objectives sought by the White House. He derides the plan to connect Ohio's largest cities with passenger trains that, he says, won't go fast enough and won't do anything for the state but waste taxpayer dollars.

No doubt Mr. Kasich aims to stand out as the fiscally reasonable candidate in the election. But it makes little fiscal sense for him to dismiss an alternative means of transportation that could pay big dividends in Ohio.

 

 

http://toledoblade.com/article/20101007/COLUMNIST13/10060361/-1/OPINION02

I keep reading that first sentence and it definitely doesn't make sense to me.

i don't see much reason for opposition other than the fact it's proposed by a democrat president.  what if eisenhower was proposing this idea, would republicans still object?

i don't see much reason for opposition other than the fact it's proposed by a democrat president. what if eisenhower was proposing this idea, would republicans still object?

 

Democratic is an adjective, democrat is a noun

i don't see much reason for opposition other than the fact it's proposed by a democrat president. what if eisenhower was proposing this idea, would republicans still object?

 

Democratic is an adjective, democrat is a noun

 

indeed...thanks for the FTFY

i don't see much reason for opposition other than the fact it's proposed by a democrat president. what if eisenhower was proposing this idea, would republicans still object?

 

They might. So might Ohioans in general. Remember that Ohio fought the Interstate system because the state would be responsible for maintaining and operating the portion within its borders.

 

Ohio: where we want nice stuff but don't want to pay for it.

 

  "Ohio fought the Interstate system..."

 

  Ohio loses money on the Interstate / federal gas tax situation. Basicly, the federal gas tax is collected into one fund, and then distributed to the states based a on formula including miles of highways and population. The result of that formula is that Ohio receives about 80% of what Ohio contributes. So, we are subsidizing highways in other states. It would have been better for Ohio to build the same highways with Ohio money instead.

 

 

   

 

The result of that formula is that Ohio receives about 80% of what Ohio contributes. So, we are subsidizing highways in other states.

 

True, Ohio is considered a donor state in terms of the Highway Trust Fund, but its more along the lines of 92-94% rate of return.  That is about as low of a ROR of any state however.

I don't think it matters whether we receive 80% or 90% of the gas taxes paid in Ohio (not all of those taxes are paid by Ohioans anyway).  The Federal Highway Trust Fund has nearly run out twice in the past decade, and was replenished by Congress with general revenues (mostly income tax revenue).  The last time was in 2008.  http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7012263838

 

I think you'd have to add up all the grants and earmarks for Ohio transportation projects and factor in the proportion of Ohio income tax used to replenish the Highway Trust Fund to see whether we're significantly ahead or behind of other states.  I don't think it matters that much. 

 

Ohio has 264,756 lane miles of roadway to maintain, and in view of the current state of our roads and bridges, $3.8B is not keeping up with the required maintenance.  A 20% increase in the budget probably is not going to be sufficient.  We're going to have to figure out a way to maintain fewer lane-miles, increase revenue (convert to toll roads, raise taxes), and increase roadway longevity (and thereby reduce maintenance costs).  Probably a combination of all three. 

 

The 3-C project will improve the rails between Cleveland-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati, which benefits freight and passenger traffic.  Taking heavier freight off the roads will reduce maintenance costs.  Taking passenger cars off the road will reduce congestion and maintenance costs (to a lesser extent).  Providing an alternative mode of transportation increases competition and mobility (particularly for those who cannot drive).  $17M is peanuts in a $3.8B budget. 

 

The state fuel tax, which is charged at a higher rate than the federal fuel tax ($0.28 vs. $0.184), brings in about $1.6B a year, according to ODOT.  So the federal fuel tax brings in less than about $1B.  Assuming we receive less than that from the Feds.  ODOT's budget is about $3.8B, however, including about 60% state funding and 40% federal funding.  So the gas taxes are not fully funding ODOT. 

 

 

Normally, I would post this on the "What Other States are Doing.....thread...but this story relates well to the 3C as this new state-supported corridor in Virginia had many of the same critics and questions....especially regarding the issue of annual subsidies and whether people would ride the train.

 

Note especially the comments of Virginia's Director of Rail & Public Transit...

 

 

Newest train marks 1st birthday

By Rachana Dixit

WSLS-TV

 

Frequently residents will hear trains rolling into Charlottesville’s rail station, but Thursday was a first for guitar playing and a rendition of “Happy Birthday” being sung by officials in honor of the city’s newest Amtrak train.

 

Several gathered at the train station on West Main Street to celebrate the one-year anniversary of the daily Lynchburg-to-Washington Amtrak train, which stops in Charlottesville.

 

http://www2.wsls.com/news/2010/oct/07/newest-train-marks-1st-birthday-ar-549246/

If not mistaken every one of the cities except for Milwaukee has, is building, or has planned some sort of rail.

 

Amtrak's state-funded Hiawatha Corridor from Milwaukee to Chicago-- 7 round trips per day. 

 

 

i don't see much reason for opposition other than the fact it's proposed by a democrat president.

 

Wedge-issue politics because it's an election year.  Look at Mike DeWine.  He was always a reliable pro-Amtrak, pro-rail vote in the US Senate.  He also supported the Ohio Hub plan, which the 3C as currently proposed was always generally considered to be the first step-- the spine of the system.  Now, because he's running against Cordray and the Ohio GOP has been trying to make Cordray look bad because he won't take legal action to stop Strickland from spending the $25 million on the required and necessary planning work, he's suddenly against it.  I generally thought DeWine to be a reasonably moderate, level-headed senator.  But, with sleazy game-playing like this, I have to consider him another useless, establishment politician. 

 

I seem to recall that sometime in the last decade, the Republican National Committee added support for passenger rail in the party platform. I wish I could remember the year, but it 2000 or later.  Anyway, either they forgot, don't care because of the election, or they took it out. 

 

edit:  It has been virtually impossible, so far, to get the media to cover this aspect of the election.  Seems to me that if candidates are being so blatantly dishonest about something that the media has covered as a campaign issue, they should be letting the public know. 

Google 'highway trains' show just how old, slow, misguided Ohio 3C train plan is

 

    * October 11th, 2010 4:01 pm ET

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio - With three weeks remaining until Ohioans go to the polls to either re-hire Ted Strickland, the incumbent Democrat state CEO, or hire John Kasich, his energized Republican rival, two Ohio print newspapers took glaringly opposite sides in the discussion about whether Strickland's proposal to reconstitute passenger rail service after 40 years of quietude is an idea whose day has come again or an idea whose day has long since passed.

 

Even more striking, though, was a news report Monday from Google that shows the future of smart, personal, mobile transportation via a new generation of cars that are technologically literate is really here today.

 

Aggressively pursuing a goal to help prevent traffic accidents, free up people’s time and reduce carbon emissions by fundamentally changing what a car can do without the aide of a human driver, Google engineers have developed technology for cars that can drive themselves.

 

 

http://www.examiner.com/government-in-columbus/google-highway-trains-show-just-how-old-slow-misguided-ohio-3c-train-plan-is

^Yeah, because the computer guided Google cars are going to drive on magical freeways in the sky that cost nothing to build, are maintained by garden gnomes that work in exchange for CO2, use unicorns to graze on the grass on the sides so they don't need mowed, and anytime there's traffic, pixies will fly out of your ass to pick up the car and carry it past the congestion. Oh yeah, and the mobile cone of silence will be up and running soon.

Another goofy piece from the Examiner whose tubular rail writer needs his head examined.

 

BTW, the Milwaukee streetcar died when the county executive now running for Wisconsin governor took the streetcar project's money and gave it to a highway project.

Wedge-issue politics because it's an election year.  Look at Mike DeWine.  He was always a reliable pro-Amtrak, pro-rail vote in the US Senate.  He also supported the Ohio Hub plan, which the 3C as currently proposed was always generally considered to be the first step-- the spine of the system.  Now, because he's running against Cordray and the Ohio GOP has been trying to make Cordray look bad because he won't take legal action to stop Strickland from spending the $25 million on the required and necessary planning work, he's suddenly against it.  I generally thought DeWine to be a reasonably moderate, level-headed senator.  But, with sleazy game-playing like this, I have to consider him another useless, establishment politician. 

Nailed! Republican were opposed to infrastructure spending in the "stimulus plan" because it helped President Obama.

Wedge-issue politics because it's an election year. Look at Mike DeWine. He was always a reliable pro-Amtrak, pro-rail vote in the US Senate. He also supported the Ohio Hub plan, which the 3C as currently proposed was always generally considered to be the first step-- the spine of the system. Now, because he's running against Cordray and the Ohio GOP has been trying to make Cordray look bad because he won't take legal action to stop Strickland from spending the $25 million on the required and necessary planning work, he's suddenly against it. I generally thought DeWine to be a reasonably moderate, level-headed senator. But, with sleazy game-playing like this, I have to consider him another useless, establishment politician.

Nailed! Republican were opposed to infrastructure spending in the "stimulus plan" because it helped President Obama.

 

well the "stimulus plan" is a totally separate discussion, but it's not stimulating anything but CEO pocketbooks - http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010104010/recovery-why-our-ceos-dont-give-hoot

 

but yes, this project is beginning to look more like leverage for politicians than anything to help the people and will probably fall to the wayside again come January, as others have mentioned.

but yes, the opposition to this project is beginning to look more like leverage for politicians than anything to help the people and will probably fall to the wayside again come January, as others have mentioned.

 

FTFY

but yes, the opposition to this project is beginning to look more like leverage for politicians than anything to help the people and will probably fall to the wayside again come January, as others have mentioned.

 

FTFY

 

heh...well i was actually pretty serious in my literal meaning, but you are correct in that it was purely speculation :)