Governor defends plans for passenger rail | The Columbus Dispatch

Very weak defense.

we do need change. (in governors.)

OH gosh, after that incredible defense of increasing the federal debt by another $400,000,000 for something that will not work, count me in as a big fan. I'll make sure I drive the 2+ hours to get on a train in any of the THREE C's and then travel 40 MPH to go to another city....Wait,,, I think I'll just drive direct and get there hours sooner.. What a waste of taxpayers money, wait.. taxpayers DEBT as we don't have the funds..........

Richard wrote:

OH gosh, after that incredible defense of increasing the federal debt by another $400,000,000 for something that will not work, count me in as a big fan. I'll make sure I drive the 2+ hours to get on a train in any of the THREE C's and then travel 40 MPH to go to another city....Wait,,, I think I'll just drive direct and get there hours sooner.. What a waste of taxpayers money, wait.. taxpayers DEBT as we don't have the funds..........

The gov's desire to "create many jobs" doesn't fly (or go down the rails). The construction jobs are only temporary and would benefit a select few that are working on other projects. Let's face facts - this will not be successful, adds to the national debt, adds to the state budget (which is already bloated), won't create sustainable jobs for a number of years, benefits campaign contributors (construction companies), and most of all - IS DOOMED BEFORE IT EVEN STARTS. Look at the history of Ohio passenger rail - IT FAILED!

Rather than creating more infrastructure that will need maintenance how about using the funds to fix the stuff we already have in place? What good is an improved freight-handling capability if the roads and bridges from the terminals are falling apart? Young adults may be willing to embrace change but are they willing to pay to maintain the investment 30 years down the road? If the past is any indication the answer is NO. The poor condition of our local, state and national infrastructure should be an embarrassment and a cause for alarm to us all.

Whether you do like the idea of a rail system or not, the facts do not change. Taxpayers are paying for this. This is not just some pie in the sky deal where the government found $400 million stuffed under a matress. Our grandkids will still be paying for this one and I do not want to put more debt on our offspring than is already there. I know progress needs money but lets not just throw that much money at a project that comes with no guarantees.

I think it's hard to predict the long term benefit that rail service might provide to the state. No doubt, when it first opens, if the trains only run at 40mph it won't be popular or profitable. However, long-term, if we don't make an effort to try this, we may regret it. If we don't take the $400M it will go somewhere else like CA. CA isn't passing on this opportunity and they have much higher debt and more problems than we do. Rail works in Europe, it could eventually work here too.

Sounds like the message we are hearing from Obama - "we know what is best for you". I cannot believe Gov. Strickland is putting his whole political future at risk on this. I can guarantee you, though, Gov. Kasich will "stop this in its tracks"!

They sure are generous with my money!

In day to day existence, it is normal to consider the plans of change to be extravagant...not worth the effort.....
What is not realized day to day realities change. Consider $8 to $10 per gallon gasoline. Your kid goes to college at UC, or BW. You moved to Pickerington. The economy is in another recession. Choices to transport the children to school are available to you the parent. It now costs $200.00 per car trip in your SUV that has gained a fuel efficiency of 20 miles per gallon. You tell the college student child don't come home to see your boyfriend, it's just too expensive.

Choices for the kids are the bus, car-pool, shuttle vans, hitchhiking, hiking, well maybe not all reasonable choices.

How about the train ? With the lack of planning, there is o train to take, it does not exist in the $8 to $10 per gallon day, it ws not considered prudent Feb 24, 2010.

With planning, a great choice is available, safe, efficient, much less expensive,(if viewed in future costs), environmentally significant, scenic, fast, historic, plausible, needed, desired, sensible and on and on. Applaud today and its blessing, but look to the future, see the need America, OHIO, fill it, just do it.

Gotta be open-minded wrote:

I think it's hard to predict the long term benefit that rail service might provide to the state. No doubt, when it first opens, if the trains only run at 40mph it won't be popular or profitable. However, long-term, if we don't make an effort to try this, we may regret it. If we don't take the $400M it will go somewhere else like CA. CA isn't passing on this opportunity and they have much higher debt and more problems than we do. Rail works in Europe, it could eventually work here too.

It was exactly your kind of thinking that got California in the mess they are in financially. So you want to turn Ohio into California?

Rail was big in the late 1800's and early 20th century. Then it was passed over by more efficient means of transportation.
If we bring back obsolete rail service now, lets rebuild the canal system also.

It seems most the people here are looking short term, aren't aware of the facts, and don't understand the cost of transportation.

Ex: The intersection of I-70/I-71 will cost $1.6 billion (yes, billion), for that money, we could fund the entire 3C rail corridor for 71 years (at which time 70/71 will need rebuilt).

This is the "start" to rail service - while high-speed rail may be years away, this will provide permanent jobs to both operations and maintenance personnel (the $17 million operations/maintenace cost will pay these people their salary). It will also lead to economic development in these communities & tie Ohio in to the rest of the nation's passenger rail service.

If we all step back from our own agendas, look at the big picture, & look long term & I think we'll see this rail service is both an asset and a bargin.

Have you driven 71 between Cinn & Cleveland? Do you think another lane will solve the congestion issue? This is an opportunity to put an environmentally friendly, congestion freeing mode of transportation in our state (we're the largest state without rail & we have higher popoulation density than most states with successful rail lines) and we're balking at the opportunity.

Two questions:

1. Is it really true that passenger trains in the U.S. can't go faster than like 79 mph, because of federal regulations, and if so

2. Why not make the majority of the trains that run on this track express trains, without stops between the major cities? Instead of averaging 39 mph, they could average 79, and more people would ride because the C cities are going to be where most of the riders come from anyway.

Fox Mulder wrote:

Rail was big in the late 1800's and early 20th century. Then it was passed over by more efficient means of transportation.
If we bring back obsolete rail service now, lets rebuild the canal system also.

I agree. We can all have little rafts and we can pole them down the canals to our destinations. Let's reopen the canals and return to the good old days. It would be so SUSTAINABLE. It would save our mother THE EARTH.

Fox Mulder wrote:

Rail was big in the late 1800's and early 20th century. Then it was passed over by more efficient means of transportation.
If we bring back obsolete rail service now, lets rebuild the canal system also.

Uh, sure. That's just why industrialized countries other than us have extensive passenger rail systems that virtually everyone uses. Japan and the Western European nations are so caught in the past, man...

I still think the northern part of this hi speed rail route is wrong, it should go through Newark, New Philadelphia, Canton and Akron

Do people not fully read articles? These trains will go 70 mph between the cities, which last time I checked is 5 mph faster than the current speed limit on the highways. The 40 mph stat that keeps getting thrown out there is an average speed over a trip from Cleveland to Cincinnati, or visa versa, which includes stops in Columbus and Dayton on the way.
I wish people would bother understanding the facts before posting nonsense on a message board.

anonymous wrote:

<quoted text>
Uh, sure. That's just why industrialized countries other than us have extensive passenger rail systems that virtually everyone uses. Japan and the Western European nations are so caught in the past, man...

If everybody else jumped off a cliff....

Trying as I have been for the last two years to get Gov. Strickland to open his eyes, ears and mind to a new kind of train technology, our good governor is using fundamentally flawed reasoning to back his slow train to the past. Continuing with the 3C train as proposed is not a crucial first-step to the future; rather, it's a bad idea at a bad time that will cement us for decades to come to an old train technology born in the 19th century. Contrary to Gov. Strickland's understanding of train technology, the 3C will never lead to high speed rail. If it would, as Strickland says it can, then he could also be lead to believe that a 30-story building can be built on the foundation designed for a 3-story building. The 3C train proposal is the equivalent of re-starting gas-fueled, propeller-driven bi-planes flying across the state, stopping at each county airport along the way. Such a plan would create jobs building bi-planes, would spur economic development at county airports and maybe convince a few folks to fly low and slow instead of using their cars. I doubt our good governor would advocate for such a plan, but he is doing so with the 3C. For a better, faster, newer train technology -- and the big question no one, especially the media has thought to ask is "What train technology will you use?" -- I direct readers' attention to Tubular Rail [www.tubularrail.com]. Until Gov. Strickland answers the train technology question, everything else is secondary. Ohio, if it proceeds with the 3C, will show the world just how backward its thinking is. Four-hundred million should be spent on deploying a future train, not a train from the days of cowboys and Indians. It's not too late for Gov. Strickland to change his mind, like he did on gambling, but he has to open his mind to birthing a new train industry that will create many thousands of jobs to build it. Gov. Strickland, what more do we at Tubular Rail have to do to get your development and transportation officials to give us serious consideration? If you chose the wrong train technology today, the future won't forgive you, and neither will Ohio tax payers.