As I said, if there is a revenue surplus (big "if"), that money should go towards improving the service, not padding the trust funds of some CEO's children.

 

I can agree with that.  But the rail line appears unlikely to happen on the grounds that it cannot operate at a profit (without a subsidy).  I'm not aware of ANY rail lines that operate at a profit (without a government subsidy), so I also agree that that is a very big "IF."  So big as to be virtually impossible in the current situation.  I guess that's what led me to have trouble understanding what you wrote.

 

 

Since we subsidize highway travel and air travel, why shouldn't we subsidize train travel?  Competition between the different modes of travel would keep overall costs down, right?  Why don't we use our transportation budget, whatever it is, and split the subsidies more equitably?  I don't understand that.

 

If we remove the subsidies for 3C's competitors (highways and airlines), could the 3C be profitable?  The airlines have to pay into a fund to support the air traffic control system, and pay for the terminals and runways.  The highways have to be self-supporting via gas taxes and advertising and tolls.  Also someone has to pay taxes on the land the roads occupy, just like the railroads do.  Removing those subsidies would reduce our taxes (hooray!), but the cost to drive or fly will be much higher.  In that situation, I think the 3C would be profitable.  Another very big IF that probably will not occur.

 

^There are numerous posts on this forum claiming that highways as they are today do not support themselves. They are subsidized not only with gas tax revenues but with other public funds as well.

 

If we did not subsidize highways, they would deterioate for lack of maintenance and then, yes, passenger railroads could operate at a profit.

 

I am convinced that if we could turn back the clock to 1950 and proceed to upgrade railroads INSTEAD of constructing the interstates, that the United States would have an effective passenger rail system comparable to Europe's by this time, although Europe's geography favors rail a little better than ours does.

 

But of course, we can't turn back the clock. Given that we already have the interstates, are choices are limited. As I see it, our choices are:

 

Abandon the interstates and build rail.

Maintain the interstates and don't build rail.

 

Maintaining the interstates AND building rail is not a real option. We can't afford to maintain two primary systems, and there is no support for it. Plus, highways and rail are not very compatible. Highways require lots of land for parking. Rail requires tight urban environments without parking. For whatever reason, the United States chose to invest in highways instead of rail, and it is very, very hard to reverse that decision.

 

That doesn't mean that rail can't work in some places.

 

We absolutely can and should have both systems.  Europe has a lot of railroads, but there is no lack of highways either.  What we can't afford to do is build a whole bunch of whiz-bang brand new high-speed bullet lines on brand new alignments.  We have a lot of underutilized and abandoned rail out there that should be put back to good use.  It won't take a bunch of land grabbing, and it uses existing technology.  We also can't afford to keep widening our highways for increasing passenger traffic, and rebuilding them more frequently due to heavier truck traffic.  Having both highway and rail infrastructure in place allows them both to serve their best use while preventing the other from becoming overburdened.  The way to look at 3-C is as an alternative to widening I-71, which I guarantee would cost a lot more than $400 million dollars. 

^Exactly.  Western European countries have gleaming highway systems that are generally much better by every performance measure than US highways: better condition, higher speeds, less congested and more technologically advanced toll collection.  Any idea that Europe has made a binary choice of rail instead of highway is simply not true.  The flip side is that European highways are often tolled at what we would consider extremely high rates and that's on top of extremely high gas taxes.  The benefit is that when you want to use the highway, it's uncongested, fast and in immaculate shape.

Abandon the interstates and build rail.

Maintain the interstates and don't build rail.

 

Maintaining the interstates AND building rail is not a real option. We can't afford to maintain two primary systems, and there is no support for it. Plus, highways and rail are not very compatible. Highways require lots of land for parking. Rail requires tight urban environments without parking. For whatever reason, the United States chose to invest in highways instead of rail, and it is very, very hard to reverse that decision.

 

^There is no there right there.  You've made a bunch of assertions.

 

With the exception of barreling highways directly into downtown areas, U.S. highway building was probably better than that in Europe.  Most post-war European systems nationalized their railways- this naturally led to using rail as the primary means to move people around.  Since the U.S. didn't nationalize their railways, our rail is being used for freight far more efficiently than in Europe.  That's one of the reasons 3C is such a good investment- because it is both a freight system investment and a passenger rail investment in an area dense enough to take advantage of the investment, even though there is plenty of underutilized property within that area.

 

I looked up a comparison between the United States and Germany from the CIA world factbook.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

 

United States

Population 310,232,863

Airports with paved runways  5194 (0.000017 per person)

Railways 226,427 km (0.0007 per person)

Total Paved Roadways 4,374,784 km (0.014 per person)

Expressways 75,238 km (0.0002 per person)

 

Germany

Population 82,282,988

Airports with paved runways 330 (0.0000040 per person)

Railways 41,896 km (0.00051 per person)

Total Paved roadways 644,480 km (0.0078 per person)

Expressways 12,645 km (0.00015 per person)

 

On a per-capita basis, the U.S. exceeds Germany on all counts: the U.S. has about 4 times the number of airports with paved runways, a little bit more length of railroads, about twice the length of total paved roads, and about 30% more length of expressways than Germany.

 

In the U.S., the ratio of roads to railroads is 19.3 to 1.

In Germany, the ratio of roads to railroads is 15.4 to 1.

That's a significant difference, but much closer than expected.

 

 

 

We are veering into the realm of transportation policy here folks and there are threads for that.  Let's not get too far afield from the topic of the 3C.  Just sayin'.

Eighth and State, have you driven through Europe? It's not that different from the US; there are highways everywhere. The idea that Europeans have chosen rail over highways is pretty silly. They simply have both. And they use both.

 

StrapHanger, SW Europe has lots of the toll roads of which you speak. NW Europe hardly has any, if there are any. I've never seen a toll road in Denmark, Germany, or Benelux. Not sure about UK/Ireland (or Norway for that matter). Austria (and I think Switzerland) has stickers which you purchase for your windshield (like parks might have here) instead of the toll booths found in, e.g. France and Spain. Speed cameras also serve the purpose of checking if you have the proper sticker.

 

jjacucyk's assertion that 3C is a cheaper alternative to expanding 71 is pretty spot-on. The services are very much complementary.

^Ah, thanks.  I was indeed extrapolating from my experiences in Italy, France and Spain. I appreciate the correction re. northern Europe.  In any case, they all have very high quality expressway systems, even if VMT per capita is lower.

Though it has to do with high-speed rail, an interesting take on private investment that could have implications for passenger rail development in the U.S....including the 3C...

 

British Deal Shows Private Investment Demand for High-Speed Rail

December 1, 2010

 

by Mark Reutter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PPI Fellow Mark Reutter is the former editor of Railroad History and author of Making Steel: Sparrows Point and the Rise and Ruin of American Industrial Might (2005, rev. ed.).

 

 

This week, the British government will formalize an agreement with two Canadian pension funds with enormous implications for passenger train development in the United States. In return for the right to operate a high-speed rail line linking London with the Channel Tunnel for 30 years, the Ontario teachers and municipal employee pension funds have agreed to pay the UK government $3.4 billion.

 

The sale not only represents a big vote of market confidence in the future of high-speed rail, but points to a route for building and operating new train lines in the U.S.

 

Full story at: http://www.progressivefix.com/british-deal-shows-private-investment-demand-for-high-speed-rail

A great article about reation to Governor-Elect Kasich's characterization of passenger rail advocates as a "cult"...

 

 

Kasich: Passenger rail proponents a ‘train cult’Business First - by Jeff Bell

Date: Thursday, December 2, 2010, 11:24am EST ...

Jeff Bell

Reporter

Email: [email protected]

 

Like him or not, you have to admit John Kasich is quick with a quip.

 

A prime example came Tuesday when the governor-elect said proponents of passenger rail service in Ohio are part of a “train cult” – a term he made up on the spot according to one of his press aides.

 

It was one of the off-the-cuff comments made during a press conference to announce the decision to make Newark resident Jerry Wray the director of the Ohio Department of Transportation when Kasich takes office in January.

..

 

Read more: http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/blog/2010/12/kasich-passenger-rail-proponents-a.html

He's our Nero.

On a per-capita basis, the U.S. exceeds Germany on all counts: the U.S. has about 4 times the number of airports with paved runways, a little bit more length of railroads, about twice the length of total paved roads, and about 30% more length of expressways than Germany.

 

In the U.S., the ratio of roads to railroads is 19.3 to 1.

In Germany, the ratio of roads to railroads is 15.4 to 1.

That's a significant difference, but much closer than expected.

 

While we have a comparable amount of track, we don't have a comparable amount of passenger trains.  We also have a lot more open space per capita between the Mississippi and the Rockies.

"Eighth and State, have you driven through Europe?"

 

Never have. I took the train.    :-)

 

 

the governor-elect said proponents of passenger rail service in Ohio are part of a “train cult” –

 

 

So what "cult" is Kasich a part of? Is he resorting to labeling that sets this "us versus them" tone again?

the governor-elect said proponents of passenger rail service in Ohio are part of a “train cult” –

 

So what "cult" is Kasich a part of? Is he resorting to labeling that sets this "us versus them" tone again?

 

Kasich's mouth is going to come back to haunt him.

Kasich 'not optimistic' Ohio will get to repurpose 3-C rail money

By Malia Rulon • Enquirer Washington Bureau • December 2, 2010

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101202/NEWS0108/12030345/Kasich-not-optimistic-Ohio-will-get-to-repurpose-3-C-rail-money

 

On the plus side, Kasich said he was confident that the state would get the $400 million Race to the Top grant that the state won under outgoing Gov. Ted Strickland. Kasich has said he wants to make changes to the state's education system, and some have voiced concern that his changes would jeopardize the money.

 

 

Race to the Top Grant???????  For education? Did we get another 400 or is this what he wants to spend it on this week?

^ Don't you remember when we won the school money because NJ screwed up? It was in the news cycle for a good week or two, largely due to the Christie administration's blunder.

Ah, Thanks

Blogger points out the 3C hypocrisy of the Governor-elect....

 

On first trip to D.C., Governor-elect Kasich breaks out the tin cup

 

Full op-ed at http://www.plunderbund.com/2010/12/02/on-first-trip-to-d-c-governor-elect-kasich-breaks-out-the-tin-cup/

Gov.-elect John Kasich concedes defeat to President Obama

03 December 2010

 

Ohio Governor John Kasich seems to have conceded defeat in his bid to have the Obama administration grant his state the ability to appropriate billions in federal funding to different projects.

 

Following a meeting with President Obama, Mr. Kasich Kasich acknowledged that he does not expect the administration to allow Ohio to divert $400 million in passenger rail money to rebuild freight rail lines in the state.

 

The Republican, who is slated to replace outgoing Democratic Governor Ted Strickland later this year, said he did not anticipate an agreement. Mr. Kasich said the president made it clear that his administration wanted the money used for rail.

 

Read More...

Forget about that fast track to Ohio

Sunday, December 05, 2010

By Brian O'Neill, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 

This was a good year to run against trains.

 

New Republican governors of Wisconsin and Ohio both vowed to kill the high-speed rail projects in their states.

 

The rail advocacy group, All Aboard Ohio, may have to change its name to Everybody Off Ohio. The state will have to give back its $400 million federal rail grant if Gov.-elect John Kasich (a McKees Rocks native) is true to his word in running the Cincinnati-Columbus-Cleveland train off its still-hypothetical rails.

 

 

Read more: http://postgazette.com/pg/10339/1108086-155.stm?cmpid=bcpanel2#ixzz17FWt1em0

 

Kasich over the top with rail opposition

Sunday, December 5, 2010  02:59 AM

Letter to the Editor (Columbus Dispatch)

 

As someone who has grown up riding sleek Acela and Metroliner trains from Boston to Washington and used clean and energy-efficient mass-transit commuter-rail lines in and around East Coast cities to visit family, I am shocked to be identified by Gov.-elect John Kasich as one of those people who have a “train-cult mentality” ( Dispatch article, Nov. 21).

 

Full letter at: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2010/12/05/kasich-over-the-top-with-rail-opposition.html?sid=101

Kasich paraphrases Bible in his oft-repeated quote

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2010  06:26 AM

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

When Gov.-elect John Kasich was in Washington last week, he pressed the Obama administration to provide states with more flexibility to tailor federal programs to the needs of their own states. "Let our people go," the Ohio Republican kept saying to reporters and in TV interviews.

 

-----------

MORE: http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/12/05/copy/dc2.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

 

What he really meant was:

"Let my people go -- as long as they can go only by car."

Editorial: Can 3C be saved?

By the Dayton Daily News | Sunday, December 5, 2010, 12:50 AM

 

A year ago, Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, signed a letter to the federal government supporting Ohio’s application for $400 million in federal money to build the 3C passenger rail line. The line would link Cleveland and Cincinnati via Columbus and Dayton. Rep. Mike Turner, R-Centerville, also signed, as did 10 other legislators, mostly Democrats. “There is clearly a pent-up demand for passenger rail in Ohio,” the letter said. It noted that the 3C route is the “densest corridor in the country without passenger rail service.” It also noted that economic development springs up around rail stations. And it said “passenger rail will succeed in Ohio.”

 

Now, however, Sen. Voinovich has submitted a bill that would allow Ohio’s money to be taken out of the rail program and used for other transportation projects. He says he has now concluded that Ohio can’t afford 3C.

 

Full editorial at: http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/opinion/entries/2010/12/05/editorial_can_3c_be_saved.html?cxtype=feedbot

Is there any purpose in writing tot eh Feds to encourage them to NOT allow this to be used in any other way and to deny any requests to do so? If this could be the case, wouldn't that cause Kasich to be very cautious in giving the money away?...Because essentially he would look very foolish in doing so, even to his own party, no?

^He'd just spin it to say that the big bad federal government won't let Ohio what it wants with it's money and that he had no choice but to give the money back or risk sending Ohio's deficit through the stratosphere.

 

In this political climate people might actually buy it too.

Transit News

10/28/2010

Contact:

Mantill Williams

(202)496-4869

[email protected]

or

Virginia Miller

(202)496-4816

[email protected]

 

Nearly Two-Thirds of U.S. Travelers Will Use High-Speed Rail

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Announces $2.5 Billion Grants for High-Speed Rail  

 

Today U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced the distribution of $2.5 billion for high-speed rail projects nationwide, and the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) released the results of a large travel survey which shows that nearly two-thirds of adults (62 percent) said they would definitely or probably use high-speed rail service for leisure or business travel if it were an option.  The survey, among 24, 711 adults, was conducted for APTA by Synovate. 

 

“In most political circles, garnering nearly two-thirds support for a forward-thinking vision like high-speed rail would be considered a landslide,” said APTA President William Millar.  “We strongly support the government’s commitment to implementing high-speed rail.  It will provide more options for travelers, as well as create jobs and be a strong boost for the local economy.”

 

APTA proposes that Congress invest $50 billion over the next six years in high-speed rail.  The association says the investment during that time frame, along with $123 billion in public transportation investment, will help support and create 6.2 million jobs.

 

Convenience and saving money were key factors for whether travelers would choose high-speed rail service over other modes of transportation.  When asked how important various factors would be in choosing high-speed rail service, survey respondents ranked the top four as follows: (91%) shorter travel times compared to driving to my destination; (91%) less expensive than flying to my destination; (89%) less expensive than driving to my destination; and (85%) integration with local public transit so I can avoid use of rental cars, cabs and parking fees. 

 

Other factors the survey respondents ranked as important in choosing high-speed rail as a mode of travel: (80%) shorter travel times compared to flying to my destination; (79%) the experience traveling by train; (78%) opportunities during my leisure or business trip to visit another city that is linked to my destination by high-speed rail; and (75%) environmental concerns.

 

Synovate, a leading market research firm, conducted the travel survey for APTA among 24,711 U.S. adults in late spring.  Twenty-seven percent of the respondents said that they were not sure if they would use high-speed rail service while 11 percent said that they would definitely or probably not use the service.   

 

 

# # #

 

The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) is a nonprofit international association of more than 1,500 public and private member organizations, engaged in the areas of bus, paratransit, light rail, commuter rail, subways, waterborne passenger services, and high-speed rail. This includes: transit systems; planning, design, construction, and finance firms; product and service providers; academic institutions; transit associations and state departments of transportation. More than 90 percent of the people using public transportation in the United States and Canada are served by APTA member systems.

Synovate is a leading global market research firm. Synovate’s Travel & Leisure practice provides research expertise and client service to the travel, tourism, transportation, hospitality, and cruise industries. More information on Synovate is available at www.synovate.com.

First, it was Kasich stopping the 3C....and now...

 

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/stahler/index.html

My Train Of Thought This Morning!

 

 

 

I looked out the window this morning at the arrival of glorious winter and just shook my head and thought.. "Wow....we sooooo need to expand rail options in this state as there are so many reasons WHY it needs to happen"

 

 

Indeed, this is the kind of day I would definitely choose to leave a car at home and hop on a train and not have to worry about all the expenses associated with car ownership, as well as the dangers of driving in this kind of weather....all because of the dogmatic auto-driven ideology of a few people with the charge of this local yocal agenda now running our state!  So many people, so few transportation alternatives makes Ohio look like a joke!

 

Sorry, but it pisses me off that so many of us are forced to be a part of something (driving)  we'd like to greatly reduce. And Kasich wants to bring jobs and keep people in Ohio? The dude needs to get a clue. More statewide fight seems to go up for getting casinos going that are arguably party to contributing to social dysfunction.... than all of the OBVIOUS socially, environmentally, and economic redeeming fruits that can blossom from rail! 

 

Absolutely, pathetically, and utterly ridiculous!

 

Off I go into the white blue yonder. Thanks a lot Kasich and any others who are too blind, arrogant, vindictive, or self righteous to see the light!

 

 

P.S. I love winter, but just not driving when it gets severe and I don't think a transportation mono-culture should cease the day because of it.

For Immediate Release:                                            Contact: Amanda Wurst

Tuesday, December 7, 2010                                        614 644-0957/614 832-7512

                                                                                    [email protected]

 

 

Governor Responds to the Governor-Elect’s Request to Halt Study of Passenger Rail Restoration

 

Columbus, OH – Ohio Governor Ted Strickland today responded to Governor-Elect John Kasich’s letter regarding the 3C&D project that would restore passenger rail connections between Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus and Cleveland. 

 

“Developing passenger rail will lead to the creation of thousands of jobs for Ohioans, revitalize our cities, and help keep talented young people from leaving our state,” Strickland said.  "Our nation and our state are slowly recovering from a dark economic chapter.  Many Ohioans are still out of work – we badly need new jobs in Ohio and cannot afford to squander significant job creation opportunities.  I urge you not to begin your administration by foregoing significant near- and long-term employment opportunities for struggling Ohioans."

 

The complete letter can be downloaded at: http://www.governor.ohio.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=wzqMm3Q3CwU%3d&tabid=1820

^ That's how those cult leaders get you. They make sensible arguments and provide information. Try to make you feel stupid for disagreeing with them.  :-)

 

It's a good letter, I wonder what the chances are that anyone at Kasich's offices even reads half of it.

^My guess would be 0... though it seems as though there's more than a chance that Kasich will change his stance. 

Nice commentary, EC.  I'm planning on a Columbus run for a day trip this weekend but this snow is really a pain. 

 

It's one of those things where I don't really have to go out there (was planning on stopping by and seeing a few clients for informal pleasantries, maybe hit up Easton and High St afterwards), but not if it's snowing.

 

Now if there were a train, then me and my kindle would be on it in a heartbeat. 

"Without strong cities, we cannot have strong suburbs"

 

Preach, Ted!

 

^ That's how those cult leaders get you. They make sensible arguments and provide information. Try to make you feel stupid for disagreeing with them.  :-)

 

It's a good letter, I wonder what the chances are that anyone at Kasich's offices even reads half of it.

 

He won't read it.  But he will likely send Strickland an email inviting him to submit his resume and join Team Kasich.

 

Noozer, I don't see anything wrong with you posting the entire letter.  It is not on an ad-supported website and is a public document.  It would not violate UO's fair use policy.

"Without strong cities, we cannot have strong suburbs"

 

Preach, Ted!

 

I wish the property values in Cleveland compared to the suburbs would support that!

"Without strong cities, we cannot have strong suburbs"

 

Preach, Ted!

 

I wish the property values in Cleveland compared to the suburbs would support that!

 

On a comparitive scale, they do!  The closer the suburb is to the core, the lower the home values (at least per square foot).  Strong cities typically have the opposite effect.

"Without strong cities, we cannot have strong suburbs"

 

Preach, Ted!

 

I wish the property values in Cleveland compared to the suburbs would support that!

 

A fair criticism, but there are more sources of strength than real estate values, and I don't just mean intangible buzzwords like "sense of community."  In fact, lower real estate value on the commercial side, within reason, can actually be an asset when a city looks to attract businesses that require a larger footprint.  Likewise, it is actually quite possible to have a business that generates substantial net income and cash flow on land that is not itself particularly valuable--and that can even spread beyond such a business itself if the business is of a type that is unpleasant to live near.

 

That said, I will concede that Cleveland (and Cincinnati and Dayton, and even Columbus) have a lot of such low-value land (commercial and residential alike), and quite a lot of it is not used for high-cash flow but low-land value businesses.  Nevertheless, there is still a great deal of economic activity in the cities that ultimately involves paychecks being taken home to the suburbs.

 

The question is what effect the 3C would have on that dynamic.  Supporters hope that it would bring both (a) more businesses downtown that are both high-cash flow *and* high-land value, and (b) more high-value residential into the cities.  To get more suburbs on board, one would also have to add a case that the business development would continue to filter cash out into the bedroom communities, hopefully at least equal, in the aggregate, to the $17 million per year that would come from taxpayer pockets.  I'm somewhat skeptical because the greatest "bang for the buck" in terms of economic development tends to come from the short lines--not even commuter light rail, but local streetcars that are primarily people circulators and that might have some commuter potential as last mile transportation as part of a future metro-area and then regional rail network.  However, $17 million per year is a fairly low bar to clear, so I'm open to the argument that 3C would be economically beneficial even without connections to last-mile transportation (other than taxis and buses).

Don't forget in your calculations that a large portion of the improvements from the 3-C project will also benefit freight railroad.  That won't show up as an economic benefit under (a) or (b), but it should be considered.

I was under the impression that many freight rail companies had actually expressed lukewarm (at best) sentiments about 3C due to concerns about the disruption of current freight train schedules due to the need to share tracks.

^I had not heard that.  My understanding is that a significant amount of 3C money would go towards improving/upgrading the freight lines so that the schedules could be maintained or even improved.

"Without strong cities, we cannot have strong suburbs"

 

Preach, Ted!

 

I wish the property values in Cleveland compared to the suburbs would support that!

 

On a comparitive scale, they do! The closer the suburb is to the core, the lower the home values (at least per square foot). Strong cities typically have the opposite effect.

 

The land is also way more expensive near the core (per square foot) than in the suburbs.  You can't compare the price of an 8,000 sq ft home on 5 acres with a 1,200 sq ft row home with no yard without taking square footage into account.

I was under the impression that many freight rail companies had actually expressed lukewarm (at best) sentiments about 3C due to concerns about the disruption of current freight train schedules due to the need to share tracks.

 

The freight railroads won't publically commit to an open show of support until they have negotiated and signed access agreements with the State of Ohio.  Unfortunately, that was one of the next steps in the process before Governor-elect "Get on the bus or get run over by it" announced he would halt tyhe project as of the day of his taking the oath of office.

 

But if you look at Illinois, where agreements were recently reached with the freight railroads, they are publically stating they support that state's higher-speed passenger rail corridors, because the infrastructure upgrades also benefit the flow of freight.

Strickland: Kasich's passenger rail plan 'tragic,' 'wrong for Ohio'Tuesday, December 7, 2010  04:20 PM

By Joe Hallett

The Columbus Dispatch

 

Gov. Ted Strickland today called his successor's plan to kill a passenger rail system linking four Ohio cities "tragic," contending that Republican John Kasich is passing up a unique opportunity to create jobs and enhance Ohio's transportation options.

 

Kasich's decision to refuse $400 million in federal stimulus funds to develop the rail system "is a sad decision for me because I think it's wrong for Ohio," Strickland told reporters after a speech at the Statehouse.

 

"This is a one time opportunity for Ohio to establish vital infrastructure in rail service while improving the freight system," Strickland said. "If this money is returned, it will never be available to Ohio in the future and, as I've said, I believe developing a passenger rail system will bypass our state."

 

Read more at: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/12/07/strickland-kasichs-passenger-rail-decision-wrong-for-ohio.html?sid=101

 

  CSX has published a policy that says that CSX does not favor passenger trains and freight trains on the same right of way. CSX says that they prefer passenger trains and freight trains on completely separate rights of way.

 

  Passenger trains are light and fast, and require a high degree of track maintenance because accidents at high speed are unforgiving. Freight trains are heavy and slow and wear the track out but can also tolerate a track that is not in perfect alignment.

 

    A passenger train travelling at 120 mph travels 2 miles in one minute, or 20 miles in 10 minutes. In order to preserve a 10-minute operating headway, the next 20 miles of track in front of a passenger train must be clear. That is an awful lot of track that can't be used by freight trains!

I keep thinking back to the days of when the C&O would run trains along what is today's CSX Northern Sub from Columbus south to Portsmouth in excess of 100 MPH easy. We can't get trains past 45 on that anymore.

Kasich needs lesson in history of high-speed rail service.

Letter to the Editor

Canton Repository

Posted Dec 07, 2010 @ 12:00 PM

   

Recently Gov.-elect John Kasich held a press conference to showcase his appointee to head the Ohio Department of Transportation.

 

When asked about the Ohio 3C Corridor, a plan that would give passenger rail service to the citizens of Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati, he said: “So there’s a train cult. ... Part of the feeling in favor of these things are contracts, engineering contracts, construction contracts, snout in the trough. We’re not going to run some program that some train cult wants to support.”

 

It has been abundantly clear from the start of the campaign that Kasich is anti-rail. What is made clear by this statement is that Kasich is in desperate need of a history lesson.

 

Full letter at: http://www.cantonrep.com/opinion/letters/x1817615744/Kasich-needs-lesson-in-history-of-high-speed-rail-service

 

And Politifact finds Kasich's statements to be half-truths...

 

Ohio Gov.-elect John Kasich rejects passenger train he says will travel an average speed of 39 mph

 

Gov.-elect John Kasich rarely minces words when it comes to the proposed Cleveland-to-Cincinnati passenger train, declaring the idea "dead" under his watch while deriding the locomotives "high speed" moniker.

 

The train, supported by outgoing Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland, would operate four times a day, making six stops (including Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati) over its 258-mile trek across Ohio. And it comes with a $400 million check from the federal government, enough to get the train up and running by late 2012, supporters say.

 

The rail plan Kasich says prefers -- one to get Ohio’s economy moving forward -- is to get more freight trains to ship goods made in Ohio to out-of-state places. He calls the passenger train a "money pit" because it is estimated it will cost the state about $17 million annually to maintain and operate it, with no guarantee enough Ohioans will buy tickets to eat up those expenses.

 

Full story at: http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2010/dec/08/john-kasich/ohio-gov-elect-john-kasich-rejects-passenger-train/

I've been thinking about how much economic benefit 3C would have and decided to figure out the numbers from just the job creation alone.

 

Assumptions:

The median income in Ohio is around $40k. 

www.taxfoundation.org has our state/local tax burden at around 10%. 

3C is estimated to create 8,000 new jobs. 

3C operating cost is estimated to be $17m per year.

 

Each new job costs the state of Ohio $2,125 per year (17m/8k).

1 job at the median income pulls in $4k in taxes at the state+local levels (10% of $40k)

State+local taxes from the 3C would be $32m per year ($4k in taxes x 8,000 jobs).

 

This doesn't factor in any other costs savings or possible revenue streams.

 

With a state income tax rate of around 3% the state gets back half of the cost of the job from income tax alone. 

Kasich wants us to give him ideas on how to fix ohio

you can also report government waste

 

lets tell him

 

http://www.fixohionow.com/node/add/ideas

Random true stories I thought I'd share of why Ohio needs this:

 

I have a boss in Chicago with a son at Case on a football scholarship.  He is considering pulling him out.  The reason is that Grandpa wants to see his grandson play football.  He can't sit in a car for 6 hours for medical reasons, and won't deal with flying.  Amtrak time tables make that option unfeasible.  My boss will not put Grandpa on a bus...hence no greyhound or Megabus, which I don't blame him...I wouldn't put my parents on either one either.  With 3C and Cleveland as transfer point, I'm sure we'd get better Amtrak service and reasonable time tables.  The son loves Cleveland and Case and does not want to leave...btw.

 

My father just had a big party for his 80th Birthday in Akron.  His best friend from college lives in Columbus and could not make it to the party.  He can't drive for eyesight reasons...and he is 80.  Had a train been an option, he would have been there.  3C to CVNR possibly.  My mother offered to drive to Columbus and get him...but that is just crazy.  My father doesn't like to fly anymore either, and since he fell asleep at the wheel and flipped his car, he doesn't like to drive long distance anymore.....which means anything over an hour.

 

I have a friend in Chicago that cannot get his elderly mother to visit from Youngstown.  She has back problems and can't sit in a car for long periods....not even the 2 hours to CLE, CAK or PIT airports.  Megabus is not even an option because it doesn't go to Ytown.  Ytown airport is not operating commercial flights.  Amtrak doesn't serve Ytown anymore.

 

There must be tons of other stories just like these.  How many kids don't go to Ohio State because of transportation issues?  How many colleges in Ohio don't allow Freshman and Sophmores to have a car on Campus?  How many other older Ohioans can no longer get around thier own State by themselves?  Ohio needs better choices.  This is so frustrating!!

 

  Niko, there a flaw in your argument that also leads to a reason why the Republicans and Kasich don't favor rail.

 

  "3C is estimated to create 8,000 new jobs."

 

    I realize that this has been widely reported and you are just repeating it. The key word is "new." The question is whether or not the jobs needed to support the 3-C are truely new jobs or just displaced from somewhere else.

 

    If the 3-C really reduces the need for driving as proponents claim, then it will also reduce the need to manufacture, maintain, and fuel automobiles. That is, if 40,000 riders a day, or whatever the number is, take the train instead of driving, then an equivalent number of automobiles must be taken off the road. Fewer miles driven equates to fewer cars manufactured, fewer automobiles repaired, fewer tires sold and installed, fewer fuel stops with associated food purchases, and so on.

 

    So, the 3-C proponents can claim that the 3-C will reduce the need for driving, assuming that total passenger miles including both the 3-C and highways remain about constant.  They can also claim that the 3-C will provide 8000 new jobs related to the passenger railroad; but they shouldn't make both claims at the same time.

 

    This brings up the "made work" problem. Republicans in general are not in favor of "making work" for the purpose of keeping people employed. They believe that the private sector should keep people employed, not government. They see 8000 new government jobs as a disadvantage, not a benefit. I realize that not all of those 8000 jobs will be government employees, but if they are contractors for the government, then they might as well be.

 

    In my humble opinion, the proponents have their best chance of selling the 3-C by promoting improved mobility, not by promoting creation of jobs or reduction of the need for driving.