Kasich Kills 3C Train

« Transit or On-Street Parking: What’s Better for Business?

Kasich Kills 3C Train

November 10, 2010 by John

I’m going to try to keep this brief since it’s mostly old news now anyway.

Governor-elect Kasich is making good on his campaign promises by rejecting federal stimulus funds for startup passenger rail service between Ohio’s four largest cities.

Kasich wants passenger-train spending stopped; Strickland refuses
Governor-elect says $400 million should go for roads or freight rail in Ohio
Monday, November 8, 2010 03:51 PM
By Mark Niquette
The Columbus Dispatch

Gov.-elect John Kasich today formally asked outgoing Gov. Ted Strickland to halt any further spending for a proposed high-speed passenger rail system, saying no more funding should go toward a project that Kasich doesn’t want.

Kasich sent a letter to Strickland asking him to cancel all contracts for the project and also wrote to President Barack Obama asking him to instead reallocate the $400 million that Ohio received for the rail project for freight rail or roads in the state.

“In the event that you cannot accede to my request, I ask that you take no actions to spend the funds allocated to Ohio so that these funds can go toward reducing the federal government’s $1.4 trillion deficit,” Kasich wrote to Obama.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, a Republican from Illinois, has already sent a letter to Kasich, telling him that the funding cannot be used for anything other than rail.

Feds to Kasich: No rail, no stimulus funds
President Barack Obama’s administration made it official today: If Ohio Gov-elect John Kasich doesn’t want to use $400 million in federal stimulus money allocated for a high-speed passenger rail system, it can’t be used for anything else and the state will lose the money.

Responding to a letter that Kasich sent yesterday to Obama, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood sent Kasich a letter today making that position clear.

Meanwhile, New York Governor Cuomo has graciously volunteered to take the money that Ohio and Wisconsin don’t want and use it for one of the many major rail projects in his state.

We’ll take that 1.26 billion in transit funds: Governor-elect Andrew Cuomo
BY Richard Sisk
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Saturday, November 6th 2010, 4:00 AM

WASHINGTON – Gov.-elect Andrew Cuomo made a pitch Friday to snatch $1.26 billion in high-speed rail money from incoming Republican governors who don’t want it.

In a letter to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, Cuomo said New York would be happy to grab the federal funding that Govs.-elect John Kasich (R-Ohio) and Scott Walker (R-Wis.) campaigned against.

I’ve personally been very excited about the prospect of restoring train service to Columbus and am disappointed that it will have to wait for another time.

I don’t quite understand the opposition from Kasich to the 3C. The project is projected to have a benefit to cost ratio of 3:1 according to ODOT. You’ll be hard-pressed to find many other transportation investments with that return. Furthermore, it’s a great time to invest in infrastructure due to low interest rates.

I guess either Kasich doesn’t trust ODOT’s numbers or doesn’t think that’s a good enough return on investment.

I could probably write about this all night, but I’m not going to waste my time. Sorry to lose you 3C.

Rate this:

Posted in Rail X-ing | 13 Comments

13 Responses

on November 10, 2010 at 12:32 pm | Reply george

“I don’t quite understand the opposition from Kasich to the 3C.”

You will not because Kasich is bone headed. Despite being told multiple times that the stimulus is ONLY for railways, he kept preaching that we should use this money for roads and bridges. Now, NY will have that money and the jobs that were free gift to Ohio. Not to mention, the long term economical/environmental advantage of having railways.
on November 10, 2010 at 1:47 pm | Reply John

Sharp Rise In Oil Prices Could Hinder Recovery
by Jeff Brady

Crude oil futures took a sharp jump last week and are approaching $90 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Back in January 2009, oil was selling for less than $32 per barrel.

READ MORE

I hope you all enjoy sitting in Thanksgiving traffic on I-71 without any reasonable options, because you’re going to be doing it for many years and probably paying more for it as time goes on.
on November 10, 2010 at 6:39 pm | Reply Tweets that mention Kasich Kills 3C Train « Xing Columbus -- Topsy.com

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by John Clem and derdrache, Matthew Carbone. Matthew Carbone said: Sad day for Ohio Transit RT @derdrache: Kasich isn't even in office yet and he's already f'ing up Ohio. http://bit.ly/cXSMmc [...]
on November 10, 2010 at 8:48 pm | Reply Bruce Rawson

Ohio elects a Fox News mouthpiece for governor! What was Sarah Palin unavailable?
on November 11, 2010 at 10:48 pm | Reply John

November 09, 2010
New Yorkers’ high-speed rail Facebook campaign hits all the right notes

The people of New York, like those in many other states, recognize the value high-speed rail offers.

They know that saying “No” to high speed rail is saying “No” to jobs, “No” to revitalized manufacturing, and “No” to economic development.

And what’s worse, it means saying “No” to American workers at a time when they sorely need those jobs.

…Well, an American high-speed rail network will be an engine of job creation. We worked hard to secure commitments from over 30 foreign rail manufacturers to expand or move their base of operations to the United States. That’s because we want them to reopen shuttered manufacturing plants and put skilled workers back on the job.

These companies know high-speed rail, and they are ready to partner with the states or regions awarded rail grants. Even better? They are ready to hire tens of thousands of American workers to get the job done.

READ MORE
on November 15, 2010 at 2:23 pm | Reply Where do Businesses Stand on 3C Train? « Xing Columbus

[...] be interested to hear if there are any major corporations asking the Governor-Elect to re-think this. Business leaders in Milwaukee, Madison differ on train By Jason Stein of the Journal Sentinel Nov. [...]
on December 17, 2010 at 2:57 pm | Reply tgreen

SO SAD THAT WE ARE BEING PUNISH FOR NO REASON…THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A RELIABLE RESOURCE FOR US AND HE MESSED IT UP…POOR OHIO WHEN WILL PEOPLE GET IT THROUGH THERE HEAD. THAT WE WANT TO BE A STATE THAT ATRACTS PEOPLE NOT SCARE THEM AWAY.WE CANT EVEN PREPARE OUR SELFS FOR THE FUTURE,AND BECOME A BIG AND FUN CITY..BYE THE WAY THIS CITY ISNT BIG AT ALL..
on March 3, 2011 at 11:25 am | Reply John Kasich Defines “Shoving” Legislation Through | Libel's Affairs of the State

[...] the budget bill currently in the White House slashes 700,000 jobs. Kasich, like Scott Walker, also killed a plan that would bring jobs to Ohio and offer residents that commute to large cities a cost effective alternative to the ever rising [...]
on July 14, 2011 at 10:27 am | Reply brucw

There’s a well reasoned article, or post mortem, in The Economist from July 3 ’11 “High speed rail- How fast is fast enough?” regarding the future of passenger rail in the US.
on October 18, 2012 at 8:22 pm | Reply Dan

I realize that this is no longer news but I’ve taken an interest to this topic as of late as I am a student at Ohio State student whose home town is a suburb outside of Cincinnati. I was still in high school when this article was written, so my knowledge on the topic is limited and some of the resources are gone now. The ODOT article you linked is now longer available – I would have been interested to read it . I’ve done some research on public transportation as I don’t own a vehicle. I really don’t see what 3C would have offered that bus service doesn’t. I would estimate the average speed to be similar. Even thanksgiving traffic hasn’t added more than 45 minutes to my trip in the past couple years. The train probably offers an environmental benefit if used effectively, but this doesn’t concern the average rider who just wants to pay their money and get where they’re going as fast as possible. It would actually be more inconvenient for an OSU student going north as Lakefront Lines has buses which will pick you up at the student union. 3C would have to be cheaper to offer any benefit to me. Also, the feds were picking up the tab to build 3C, but, based on Amtrak’s performance, 3C would have ultimately been a taxpayer burden. Might not be a fair comparison because of Amtrak’s ridiculous prices but the speeds are similar. Even the buses are only filled near capacity on holiday weekends, so I don’t see this thing staying afloat through profit. True high speed rail would be great! It would save time even compared to driving. I don’t know if it will ever happen in this country though because our infrastructure has not been built around rail. It’s kindoff important to have a straight line between cities when you’re zooming through the countryside at 150+mph. Just some thoughts. Like I said, its hard to find information on this now so I may be unaware of some potential benefits – I just don’t see what it offers over a bus.
on October 18, 2012 at 10:23 pm | Reply John

I would say the main advantage of rail over bus is avoiding road congestion, a smoother ride, and more spacious seating. Operating costs can also be lower, since you can have one operator pull multiple cars instead of one driver per bus. However, a high level of ridership is necessary to realize that benefit.

Obviously, capital costs with rail are much higher since the highway is a sunk cost. You are correct that 3C would have required some subsidy, but I wouldn’t necessarily call it a burden. Roads and airports require public subsidies too. It’s just a matter of deciding how much we want to fund transportation, from what sources, and how much of that should go to different modes.

As for the country not being build around rail, I think that’s nonsense. Most of the US west of the Appalachians was built up around rail. It has been rebuilt in the last 60 years around cars. In the next 100 years, we’ll rebuild much of the country again. Our transportation investments will help influence the form of that development. Europe certainly wasn’t build around rail, but they have stricter land use controls, more expensive gas, and have made fast intercity rail a higher priority than we have in the last several decades.
on October 19, 2012 at 10:03 pm | Reply Dan

Fair enough. For what its worth, I was talking to my brother and he consistently has a full bus coming home from his university. It’s much more convenient there as all buses from LFL pick students up at the union, so perhaps mass transportation would be in higher demand if it was more convenient for people.

I should have stated that our current infrastructure has not been built around rail. The only place you can find passenger rail in Cincinnati now is, ironically, a museum. Well, actually, I do think there are some pleasure railways – dinner trains, etc. All of the arguments you gave for rail are valid but I’m not sure that they justify 3C over bus transportation. The extra capacity would justify it if people would make use of it. Well, simply making use of it alone would justify it, and that’s where the real question lines. I’m not sure it would get used over other transportation options. True high speed rail would offer huge benefits. As long as the government was not unjustly seizing private land to make it (fair compensation and such), I would be in favor of true high speed rail. I’m just not sure that 3C accomplishes anything as an intermediate as what we would really need to due is acquire land for rail while I think 3C mostly used existing rail which would not accommodate high speed rail travel.

It has been a pleasure exchanging thoughts with you John. If a 150mph+ rail line was ever proposed, I think that we would find ourselves much more in agreement. It will be interesting to see where the future takes this issue. I definitely do not think that Ohio has heard the last word on rail transportation.
on October 20, 2012 at 6:13 pm | Reply John

I’m not sure it would get used over other transportation options.

There were quite a few studies done to forecast ridership and revenue, so I don’t see much point in us speculating about it. In the end, the train was expected to require $17 million in annual operating subsidy. True high speed rail would most likely have lower operating costs and higher ridership, possibly requiring no operating subsidy. However, the capital costs for true high sped rail would be huge in comparison to the 3C starter line. For me, I was happy with the 3C starter plan and working towards increased frequencies and speeds. Others were obviously less than happy with the plan. The point is moot for now though.