On another note, it is telling that the Cincinnati Streetcar made it into a federal bill. So many transit projects in Cincinnati history were studied, showcased in the Enquirer, mentioned on WLW, and then never made it past the concept stage. Back in 2007, I never dreamed that we would be still talking about the streetcar in 2012. I thought it would attract the attention of the planner-types, discussed on UO, and then be added to the shelf of projects that never made it, next to the Kingsport Corridor, etc. 

 

Well, there's still no guarantee that it will be built, but it has attracted more attention than any other transit concept probably since the Cincinnati Subway. It is being taken seriously.

I haven't met one single person outside of UO who was in favor of the streetcar. I've met many, many people strictly opposed to it. I realize that this board has some very strong supporters, but I have to wonder if those supporters even realize how much disdain for this project exists outside of the core. Clearly, Chabot is trying to stay on the winning side.

Almost everyone I know who lives in Cincinnati is pro-streetcar. Many suburbanites I know are also pro-streetcar. I have suburban relatives who are against it.

I think you underestimate support outside of the west side.

Count me in the suburbanite supporter group.  And most people in my network see why it makes sense and how it will benefit.

Most of my family and extended family are Republicans who live in Northern Kentucky and rarely venture into downtown or OTR, but they still support the streetcar and rail transit in general.

I think you underestimate support outside of the west side.

 

I will admit that the west side tends to oppose the streetcar, but opposition certainly isn't limited to the west side. Ironically, the west side is tied to downtown more so than the rest of the metro.

 

Count me in the suburbanite supporter group.  And most people in my network see why it makes sense and how it will benefit.

 

I think that whether it makes sense and how it will benefit or not doesn't even matter anymore. The Cincinnati Streetcar project has devolved into a grudge matchbetween personalities and battle between ideologies. Why would Chabot oppose federal spening on the streetcar? After all, $1,000,000 of federal money only costs Cincinnati $1000 (based on the proportion of Cincinnat's population to the nations population). Because "the Federal Government is too big and spends too much." - Ronald Reagan

 

Actually, it was a pretty bold move by Chabot. I wonder if it will pay off for him.

 

Back around 1995, Chabot was County Commissioner for Hamilton County. When he was elected to the House of Representatives, Bob Bedinghaus was appointed commissioner to finish Chabot's term. (Typical Republican machine at that time.) Bob Bedinghaus boldly spearheaded the stadium campaign, which resulted both in two new stadiums, and Bob Bedinghaus losing the county commissioner's seat for the the Republicans for the first time in about 40 years. How can the electorate approve the stadiums by a vote of 60% to 40%, (or whatever it was,) and then soundly defeat the one responsible for it? This just shows how bizarre politics can be.

 

The reason why I brought this up is because one of the personalities on WLW asked Chabot what he thought about the stadiums. Chabot replied "That's a local issue," and refused to comment on it. So, one day he was County Commissioner, and shortly thereafter he refused to even comment on the biggest project in Hamilton County history. The fact that he took a stand on the streetcar at the very least shows that the streetcar is an important issue to him, but I don't know why. Maybe he's trying to get Mallory or one of the other politicians on the streetcar side to fail, sort of like the Republicans seem to be trying to get Obama to fail? 

 

"All politics is local." - Tip O'Neal, former Speaker of the House of Representatives

 

 

 

On the TOAST website, Mark Miller made the following claim:

 

Early this year, Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory made a pilgrimage to Representative Chabot, and informed him that he needs additional federal funding for the current leg of the Streetcar, and for future extensions of the same (i.e., up the Vine Street hill to Clifton and beyond).  Representative Chabot, as reported by his staff, laughed, and said that of course he would not be supportive of either request, as he opposed the Streetcar funding.

 

I don't believe this for a moment. Mark Mallory is one of the most politically savvy individuals in the region. I cannot believe that Mayor Mallory would go hat in hand to Chabot seeking his support for Streetcar funding. Frankly the story lacks credibility, particularly considering it's source is pathological liar Mark Miller.

 

Miller further claims in that post that TOAST will sue to stop funds from the sale of the Blue Ash Airport from being used for the Streetcar. I have to believe that Mallory and the City Solicitor have prepared for this very predictable development and have a plan prepared. At this point the battle to stop the streetcar by Finney, who doesn't even live in the City, is entirely personal and has nothing to do with so-called 'fiscal conservatism'. It's all about Finney's massive ego-and Mark Miller's lack of sanity.

 

Ironically, the west side is tied to downtown more so than the rest of the metro.

 

Which west side are you talking about? The west side of Mount Adams?

 

Cincinnati's west side is by far the most isolated and insular part of the city. Geographically, it's separated from downtown by Mill Creek and the massive rail yards that are spanned by a few viaducts that are longer than the Ohio River bridges into Kentucky. (And Northern Kentucky at least has a couple of expressways that connect it to the urban core; most of the west side doesn't even have that until you make your way up to I-74.) It's separated from the rest of the metro area by the river, hilly topography, I-74, and Mount Airy Forest.

 

Culturally, the west side is Cincinnati's counterpart to South Boston, Chicago's Bridgeport neighborhood, or a small town in West Virginia. Just try standing between two strangers at a party who just discovered they both went to Elder High School.

Ironically, the west side is tied to downtown more so than the rest of the metro.

 

Which west side are you talking about? The west side of Mount Adams?

 

Cincinnati's west side is by far the most isolated and insular part of the city. Geographically, it's separated from downtown by Mill Creek and the massive rail yards that are spanned by a few viaducts that are longer than the Ohio River bridges into Kentucky. (And Northern Kentucky at least has a couple of expressways that connect it to the urban core; most of the west side doesn't even have that until you make your way up to I-74.) It's separated from the rest of the metro area by the river, hilly topography, I-74, and Mount Airy Forest.

 

Culturally, the west side is Cincinnati's counterpart to South Boston, Chicago's Bridgeport neighborhood, or a small town in West Virginia. Just try standing between two strangers at a party who just discovered they both went to Elder High School.

 

:clap:

Chabot is being slaughtered in this poll.

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/28/u-s-house-bars-federal-money-for-streetcar/

 

It funny how that story is getting buried(hard to find) where as other stories about the streetcars stays in front(easy to find) for days.

On the TOAST website, Mark Miller made the following claim:

Early this year, Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory made a pilgrimage to Representative Chabot, and informed him that he needs additional federal funding for the current leg of the Streetcar, and for future extensions of the same (i.e., up the Vine Street hill to Clifton and beyond).  Representative Chabot, as reported by his staff, laughed, and said that of course he would not be supportive of either request, as he opposed the Streetcar funding.

 

I don't believe this for a moment. Mark Mallory is one of the most politically savvy individuals in the region. I cannot believe that Mayor Mallory would go hat in hand to Chabot seeking his support for Streetcar funding. Frankly the story lacks credibility, particularly considering it's source is pathological liar Mark Miller.

I'd assume Mallory did address the congressman since he ~cough cough~ represents the city.

that being said, I love the religious wording COA T continually uses to somehow make all their BS into some kind of religious epic.

I think it would be wise for everyone to email Brown & any other senator they like regarding the Cincinnati anti-streetcar amendment to make sure it doesn't make it into theconferenced bill.

Chabot is being slaughtered in this poll.

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/28/u-s-house-bars-federal-money-for-streetcar/

 

It funny how that story is getting buried(hard to find) where as other stories about the streetcars stays in front(easy to find) for days.

 

This is very often the case. It's pathetic

^ You got your wish for suburbanites to be heard.

^ I hate to break it to you, but that's how the game is played.

 

Politics is absolutely dirty, and not necessarily rational. Cost-benefit studies and the like may not even matter. On the surface, Chabot's actions seem absolutely idiotic, because they exclude Cincinnati from receiving funds. The same goes for Kasich's refusal of 3-C funds. Yet, I'm sure they had a reason for their actions.

 

I haven't met one single person outside of UO who was in favor of the streetcar. I've met many, many people strictly opposed to it. I realize that this board has some very strong supporters, but I have to wonder if those supporters even realize how much disdain for this project exists outside of the core. Clearly, Chabot is trying to stay on the winning side.

 

"Politics makes me sick" - William Howard Taft

 

 

 

 

 

Seriously?  You haven't met a single person outside this board in favor of it?  You must not meet many people. 

I think it would be wise for everyone to email Brown & any other senator they like regarding the Cincinnati anti-streetcar amendment to make sure it doesn't make it into theconferenced bill.

 

I would also advise people to start using "anti rail" amendment or something along those lines so people understand it is not about the streetcar

I haven't met one single person outside of UO who was in favor of the streetcar.

I think my brain just exploded.

 

8th, it doesn't matter now if you support the streetcar or not.  Just like the two initiatives voted down, this amendment could effect all rail and many other things. 

Just to be clear, Chabot insterted this amendment into the THUD appropriations bill that passed the House but has yet to pass the Senate or go through conference, not the transportation authorization conference report that passed yesterday and is on its way to the President.  These are two distinctly different bills.

 

I'm seeing conflicting reports from people here thinking that this has been passed by both chambers and will be signed into law shortly (if it hasn't been already).  That's not true from every report I've read (and the press release on Chabot's website).  As others have said, turn your attention to Senator Brown to ensure that this doesn't get into a Senate THUD appropriations bill.

^ I am hoping you are correct, because others had me believing it was in the bill passed yesterday!

Cincinnati's west side is by far the most isolated and insular part of the city.

 

I agree with you on that. Still, there are a lot of west-siders who work in Cincinnati, including lots of City of Cincinnati employees. The Cincinnati Police Department has a high number of west-siders.  You don't need to take I-75 or I-71 to get from the West Side to Downtown. Westwood is Cincinnati's largest neighborhood by population. West Siders traditionally have a high voter turnout, and West-Siders participate in government. Chabot is a West-Sider; besides being County Commissioner, he was once a Green Township trustee. West-Siders support him. After all, he shows up at Elder High School football games.

 

Just 5 days before the presidential election between Bush and Gore, Vice President Cheney was campaigning in the West Side. It is politically important.

 

 

8th, it doesn't matter now if you support the streetcar or not.  Just like the two initiatives voted down, this amendment could effect all rail and many other things. 

 

It only effects all rail to the extent that federal funding is involved. I have been saying all along that the streetcar project is risky for the very reason that it depends on funding sources that may not materialize.

 

Just wondering, is there any precedent for a transportation bill, or any other federal bill for that matter, that excludes funding for a certain geographical area? It's sort of like a reverse earmark.

^ I am hoping you are correct, because others had me believing it was in the bill passed yesterday!

 

I am.  The amendment is listed as passed under the THUD appropriations, and the conference report for the authorization bill was voted on without amendments to ensure that it mirrored the Senate passed bill.  Getting a bit into the legislative weeds, but Chabot's actions haven't done anything just yet, and I doubt they'll ever actually become law.  Doesn't mean Sherrod Brown shouldn't hear from us though!

 

In other good news today, I've been told the Enquirer ran my LTE about Chabot's amendment in the paper today (not online though)

I hope you're right. Somebody please post a link to the final bill once it's signed and available online, and we'll be able to see for ourselves what's in it and what isn't.

That pro-streetcar editorial in the Enquirer seemed pretty confident that it wouldn't become law.

I hope you're right. Somebody please post a link to the final bill once it's signed and available online, and we'll be able to see for ourselves what's in it and what isn't.

 

Here's the Senate/House conferenced authorization bill (which is a pretty darn bad bill, btw...but that's another topic for another thread):

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:3:./temp/~bdH1CL::

 

Here's the THUD Appropriations bill.  Search amendments for "Chabot" and you'll find it:

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:5:./temp/~bd4a7L::|/home/LegislativeData.php|

 

As you can see, the first has been presented to the president for his signature while the second was passed by the House and sent to the Senate.

better in the paper than online. online, you'd probably be read by more people getting in a first comment on a popular article. in the paper is a whole different audience.

This is pretty broad. And don't think of "fixed guideway" as it relates to vehicles but moreso as it relates to right of way. Is access to it limited or controlled in any way? If it is, it could be considered a "fixed guideway".....

 

http://www.thecre.com/fedlaw/legal28/49uscc53.htm

 

"fixed guideway" means a mass transportation facility--

 

(A) using and occupying a separate right of way or rail for the exclusive use of mass transportation and other high occupancy vehicles; or

 

(B) using a fixed catenary system and a right of way usable by other forms of transportation.

I think it could backfire on Chabot if the city raises hell about it applying to a light rail line suburbanites favor and bus lanes/BRT.

Links are imbedded in the source PR at:

 

http://allaboardohio.org/2012/06/28/cincy-streetcar-attack-could-block-highway-railroad-bus-ferryboat-projects/

 

Cincinnati streetcar attack could block highway, railroad, bus, ferryboat projects

 

** CORRECTED AND UPDATED June 30 **

 

Contact:

Ken Prendergast, All Aboard Ohio, 216-288-4883

Jack Shaner, Ohio Environmental Council, 614-446-1693

 

A Cincinnati congressman today hailed an over-reach of the federal government’s power as he attempts to snuff out federal funding for the Cincinnati Streetcar project.

 

U.S. Rep. Steve Chabot (R-1, Cincinnati) and many of his House of Representatives colleagues flexed their federal muscle to bully the locally-driven, urban economic development project. By voice vote, the House voted June 27 to adopt Rep. Chabot’s measure to prohibit the use of any new federal surface transportation funds for a Cincinnati streetcar.

 

The amendment to House Resolution 5972 (the 2013 appropriations bill funding the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies) says: “None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to design, construct, or operate a fixed guideway project located in Cincinnati, Ohio.”

 

According to the US Code, a  “fixed guideway” is an exclusive or controlled right-of-way used in whole or in part for transportation . It is a mass transportation facility–

 

(A) using and occupying a separate right of way or rail for the exclusive use of mass transportation and other high occupancy vehicles; or

 

(B) using a fixed catenary system (of overhead electric wires) and a right of way usable by other forms of transportation.

 

According to the Federal Transit Administration, the term includes more than just railroads, streetcars or other rail transit, but high-occupancy vehicle lanes on highways, trolleybuses, buses on dedicated rights of way, and even ferry boats.

 

The amendment is now part of HR5972. It will go to the Senate where, with your input to Ohio’s two senators, it will hopefully be removed. Then the House and Senate will need to resolve the Chabot amendment and other differences between the two chambers’ versions of the bill.

 

Rep. Chabot wants to stymie the $95 million streetcar project, even though construction is underway and even though Cincinnati voters have twice given it their approval to proceed. Cincinnati voters in 2009 and 2011 voted to reject a pair of ballot issues that threatened to mico-manage the actions of local elected officials and effectively kill the streetcar.

 

Local officials also competed for and won a federal urban circulator grant in competition with other cities through a fair and professional administrative-level evaluation and exercise of due process. That grant will not be affected by the Chabot amendment.

 

Streetcar advocates are urging Cincinnati’s citizens and others to contact U.S. Senators Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and urge them to work to reject the amendment to HR5972. Constituents also are encouraged to contact Rep. Chabot to ask why he, an alleged proponent of reducing the influence of government in people’s lives, would take such a contradictory action.

 

“The Chabot amendment will not stop the streetcar,” said Ken Prendergast, executive director of All Aboard Ohio. “It’s an election-year move to score rhetorical points with the far-right while undermining his district’s economic competitiveness. The amendment would relinquish federal funds to other cities and states that do not have such burdensome federal governmental restrictions on their transportation systems. This does not free up federal funds for worthwhile yet heavily subsidized highway projects in the region which are not eligible for the same pots of federal money as the Cincinnati Streetcar.”

 

“This streetcar is a magnet that will bring people, investment and improved transportation infrastructure back to Cincinnati’s urban core—all while growing jobs, saving energy and cutting pollution,” said Jack Shaner, deputy director for the Ohio Environmental Council. “At the same moment that Cincinnati’s leadership wants to move the city forward, its congressman wants to hold it back. It’s a real shame that some of our nation’s leaders want to reach out and derail progress in Cincinnati, Ohio.”

 

A similar over-reach of the federal government’s power was attempted in Houston in the 1990s by then-U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas). (DeLay later was imprisoned for offenses unrelated to transportation issues.) At the urging of wealthy interests, DeLay twice blocked federal funds from being spent on that city’s planned light-rail system. Relying on local funding, the City of Houston eventually persevered, building the first 7.5-mile leg of a successful rail system which today carries nearly 40,000 riders per weekday—far above projections. Today, 15 miles of additional rail lines are under construction and another 16 miles are in advanced planning using federal funds (SOURCE).

 

All Aboard Ohio and the Ohio Environmental Council encourage Cincinnati’s courageous Mayor Mark Mallory, supporters on the Cincinnati City Council, and Cincinnati’s thousands of streetcar supporters to keep fighting.

 

Compact, mixed-use, mixed-income neighborhoods improve access to jobs, shopping, education and health care and reduce driving, pollution and poverty. And fixed-guideway transit like the Cincinnati Streetcar can influence land use density and placemaking decisions by providing real estate developers with the confidence of where to invest for the long term. This may explain why the streetcar project has been the subject of venomous opposition, as the project promises to help rejuvenate Cincinnati’s urban core while eroding the anti-urban, exclusionary status quo in which regressive voices are so deeply invested.

 

END

Wait would metro lose funding for 2 years??????? They run on the shoulders on I-71 and it was going to be expanded.. Although outside of Cincinnati but Metro is based in Cincinnati. The funds flow through Cincinnati.

I hope you're right. Somebody please post a link to the final bill once it's signed and available online, and we'll be able to see for ourselves what's in it and what isn't.

 

Here's the Senate/House conferenced authorization bill (which is a pretty darn bad bill, btw...but that's another topic for another thread):

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:3:./temp/~bdH1CL::

 

Here's the THUD Appropriations bill.  Search amendments for "Chabot" and you'll find it:

 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:5:./temp/~bd4a7L::|/home/LegislativeData.php|

 

As you can see, the first has been presented to the president for his signature while the second was passed by the House and sent to the Senate.

 

The first link doesn't work. I think Obama is expected to sign the bill sometime today, but I can't find much about it online.

Looks like I was confused about which congressional bill has Chabot's amendment. The surface transportation bill, which contains America Fast Forward and the reduction in student loan interest rates, has been passed by both houses and is expected to be signed by Obama very soon. The THUD appropriations bill contains Chabot's anti-rail amendment, and hasn't yet been reconciled with the Senate version. So now is the time to lean on Sen. Sherrod Brown and make sure that amendment never makes it into the final version. I was thinking Chabot's amendment was to the surface transportation bill, not a separate bill.

 

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong... This whole sausage-making process isn't my area of expertise.

Looks like I was confused about which congressional bill has Chabot's amendment. The surface transportation bill, which contains America Fast Forward and the reduction in student loan interest rates, has been passed by both houses and is expected to be signed by Obama very soon. The THUD appropriations bill contains Chabot's anti-rail amendment, and hasn't yet been reconciled with the Senate version. So now is the time to lean on Sen. Sherrod Brown and make sure that amendment never makes it into the final version. I was thinking Chabot's amendment was to the surface transportation bill, not a separate bill.

 

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong... This while sausage-making process isn't my area of expertise.

 

This is correct.  The authorization vs. appropriation processes can get kind of messy and confusing, especially when they're happening simultaneously.

Based on COAST's gloating, it appears I wasn't the only one confused about which bill had Chabot's amendment. Hopefully sanity will prevail in the Senate, and this will all be much ado about nothing.

 

If nothing else, this highlights the need for transit advocates to be engaged at all levels of government, not just at the municipal level.

On Twitter and the Toast blog just now,  Broke unemployed Toast treasurer Mark Miller is crying HARD about the $10 tax increase again, and he is proclaiming that the Streetcar is dead. And in the grandest of ironies says that streetcar supporters "can't let it go". This from the OCD freaks trying to overturn the results of two elections.

On Twitter and the Toast blog just now,  Broke unemployed Toast treasurer Mark Miller is crying HARD about the $10 tax increase again, and he is proclaiming that the Streetcar is dead. And in the grandest of ironies says that streetcar supporters "can't let it go". This from the OCD freaks trying to overturn the results of two elections.

 

He tweeted me this

 

COAST ‏@GOCOAST

@513FacePalmNews Well, we celebrated nothing, & predicted nothing; just listed facts as we know them. They ain't pretty for @mayorMallory

 

 

Taken from their blog today:

 

 

 

Fourth, thanks to Congressman Chabot, the pipe dream of further Federal funding for the Streetcar is now completely off the table.

 

When they do kill it, they will have some 'splaining to do about the $25 million + they have pissed down a rathole on this rail dream of Mayor Mallory and a few dozen trollyites who can't seem to let it go.  We hope you are proud of yourselves.

 

They are even misinforming their misinformation now

He doesn't care. He just wants to get you talking to/about him. And if he can get a rise out of you, that's a bonus. He cares nothing for facts or truth. To him, willful ignorance is a tool, a virtue, and a point of pride.

^ These guys have a Cops and Robbers mentality.

This is correct.  The authorization vs. appropriation processes can get kind of messy and confusing, especially when they're happening simultaneously.

 

Very true. I can't remember the last time I've seen a transportation authorization (aka framework) vote and an appropriations (aka budget) vote occurring at the same time. BTW, normally transportation authorizations are for six years, but since Congress has not been able to decide how to shore up the highway trust fund with more user revenues, they passed a two-year authorization that takes $15 billion from the general treasury (aka deficit-finances it and raises the accumulating highway subsidy since 2008 to $50 billion -- all deficit financed!) to sustain the highway trust fund (a federal governmental "bank" that has financed roads since 1956 instead of using the private financial markets as railroads do and as transit once did). Anyway.....

 

So here's the simple way to understand what is going on with the Chabot amendment:

 

> The two-year funding authorization (aka framework) does NOT have Chabot's amendment in it. This bill was passed by both houses and signed into law by the president. It had to be signed into law before July 1. Done.

 

> The ONE-year funding appropriation (aka budget) for federal fiscal year 2013 (runs from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30) has passed the House (where such bills originate) WITH Chabot's amendment in it. It has NOT passed the Senate. This bill does not have to be signed into law until Oct. 1, 2012. Still in play.

 

If you do not like Chabot's "inverted earmark" that takes a broad, shotgun approach at blocking multi-modal transportation funding from Cincinnati in federal fiscal year 2013, then please write to your senators. Both of them. Tell Sens. Portman and Brown that the language Chabot chose to use, under Title 49 Sec. 5302 of the U.S. Code, blocks federal funding for certain types of investments in highways, railroads, buses, ferryboats and others.

 

For links on how to contact Sens. Brown and Portman, go to:

http://allaboardohio.org/2012/06/28/cincy-streetcar-attack-could-block-highway-railroad-bus-ferryboat-projects/

^Thanks for that, KJP.

 

So does this mean that the Chabot amendment will only stand for one year, because it is in the 2013 budget? That is, if the Chabot amendment is to last beyond FY 2013, it has to be included in subsequent budgets as well?

 

 

So does this mean that the Chabot amendment will only stand for one year, because it is in the 2013 budget? That is, if the Chabot amendment is to last beyond FY 2013, it has to be included in subsequent budgets as well?

 

That is correct, IF it survives to make it in the final bill following a conference committee.

This is my take on the Chabot amendment.

 

Assuming that the Chabot amendment even takes effect, the Chabot amendment will not affect the current streetcar project (the OTR loop) because federal funds have already been granted. The Chabot amendment will probably not affect the proposed uptown extension, because realistically it will not be built or even designed in 2013. So as far as ACTUAL federal funds expended on the streetcar go, it does almost nothing. It neither helps nor hurts Cincinnati economically.

 

What the Chabot amendment does is places Chabot solidly on the anti-streetcar side, taking advantage of all of the anti-streetcar sentiment that is already out there, and reinforcing his anti-tax reputation, which has worked for him so far. He will of course lose some votes from streetcar supporters, but most streetcar supporters weren't going to vote for him anyway.

 

It also puts another thorn in the side of Mallory and the City Manager, who are in the same political party as Presiden Obama. Not to mention, it gets Chabot's name in the media again. Even unpopular actions can help a political candidate due to name recognition.

 

The risk to him is that he may alienate some of the "I'm in favor of rail transit but just not THIS project" folks that were already on his side.

The impacts of Chabot's amendment, if it stays in the final bill that is signed into law, could have far-reaching impacts. If an agency seeks a TIGER grant or other federal grant that benefits a controlled right of way for transportation uses in Cincinnati, its possible the application may be ruled ineligible.

 

And here's one example of the potential and wide-ranging impact of the Chabot amendment:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2068.msg628942.html#msg628942

My god did Chabot know what he was doing? Or Chris finney or what ever his name is wrote the amendment and forwarded it to Chabot?

It could delay, e.g., studying BRT for a year+.

^I wouldn't worry about Amtrak. The Chabot amendment says "fixed guideway." The FRA definiation of "fixed guideway" specifies transit. Is Amtrak transit?

 

Even if the amendment does apply to Amtrak, do you think that Amtrak will really avoid Cincinnati just because a politician threw a reverse earmark into the law? If Chris Finney calls up the Amtrak director and tells him that he's not allowed to use federal funds to operate through Cincinnati, don't you think the directory is going to say "Huh?"  :? And doesn't the intent of the law matter?

 

Now if that proposed hovercraft Ferry Boat on the Ohio River from Anderson Township to downtown ever gets denied by the Chabot Amendment, then we would have something to talk about. (kidding  :wink:) How is a ferry boat a "fixed guidway?"  :roll:

Via 5chw4r7z:

http://5chw4r7z.blogspot.com/2012/07/big-thud-transportation-housing-and.html

 

Apparently Chabot's "amendment" is all just much ado about nothing.

Via 5chw4r7z:

http://5chw4r7z.blogspot.com/2012/07/big-thud-transportation-housing-and.html

 

Apparently Chabot's "amendment" is all just much ado about nothing.

 

Maybe, but I don't think we can take a chance. This thing could just become law and then where would we be?

Would be pretty crazy if Obama vetoed the bill due to the Cincinnati amendment, as Schwartz's post suggests could happen (in fact it has allegedly been threatened).

Apparently there's a couple of other similar amendments from an anti-rail representative in California, one that would cut off federal funding for a light rail subway for San Francisco's Muni Metro system, and other that would cut off federal funding for California's proposed high-speed rail system. If these amendments, along with Chabot's, make it into the final conference report, then a presidential veto wouldn't be surprising.