Strickland Admits High-Speed Rail Won't be High-Speed Anytime Soon
GOA Says FRA High-Speed Rail Initiative a "Vision...not a strategic plan."
Chicago-St. Louis Rail Corridor Gains Speed as 1st Route for Midwest Corridor
An Opeditude by John Michael Spinelli
June 25, 2009
COLUMBUS, OHIO: Calling into a rough and tumble, shock-jock radio show broadcasting from Cincinnati Wednesday, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland said Ohio needs to be included in the passenger rail system known as the Midwest Corridor, but admitted that Ohio's system would only run at slow, conventional speeds "in the near term" and that if ridership was poor, real "high-speed trains would not run in Ohio."
Strickland, a first-term Democratic Governor readying to mount a second-term campaign in 2010, spoke for a few minutes on the powerful station, answering a couple questions on his most recent proposal to plug a $3.2 billion hole in the next state budget, which by law is to start July 1. As Strickland and the Ohio House and Senate wrestle to find accommodation with each other on hundreds of differences between versions of the state budget each chamber passed in the preceding month, the political drama of who will win the day, and at what cost, is only starting to unfold. If this state budget were a weather event, high tides and fierce winds can be seen approaching on the horizon.
Eddie and Tracy, the hosts of the radio show heard on WLW700am, set the stage prior to Strickland calling in by stating their hostility for the Governor's passenger rail proposal. Jibberjabbering to kill time until they could throw questions at Strickland, the duo demonstrated their anti-rail plan bias, saying everyone they had talked to thought his idea to resuscitate long-dead passenger rail service between Cincinnati and Cleveland via Columbus or the 3-C Corridor was "a horrible idea." Others have said that if a billion dollars is going to be spent on it, it ought to at least be fast. But speed, the one essential ingredient that will attract riders, will be absent. Based on speed calculations from the Ohio Department of Transportation, the passenger train will only average 57-mph, a truly turtle pace.
Buoyant and optimistic despite the sour, declining economic health of the state and its next budget, Strickland again repeated his warning that if Ohio didn't take advantage of federal stimulus dollars being handed out by President Barack Obama's administration for the development of high-speed rail (HSR), Ohio will "be an island...because we won't be hooked into a system that involves entire Midwest."
Talking in general terms, Strickland said that if people had real choices of other modes of transportation, "they wouldn't need a car." But Ohio has cut its funding for mass transit by 60 percent over the last decade and intra-city/regional bus service is only poor at best, if it exists at all. Responding to the simple question of what's the economic upside to the state for a first-phase, conventional speed passenger train system that will cost a minimum of $1 billion to build, all the upbeat Governor could say is that all Ohio's "sports teams are urging him to proceed." One can only wonder how enthusiastic those sports team would be if they had to reach into their wallets to pay for it. Such user-fee revenues are fast becoming a tool of choice Washington is looking to more and more, as its spending comes into question by many who say huge deficits will break us all over time.
But even given what he called "modest" yearly public subsidies the system would need to cover its costs, Strickland said investing in passenger rail is less costly that investing in highways. But roads and bridges are what tie us together now, and as cars become more fuel efficient and cooler in terms of technology, drivers will opt for the privacy and convenience of their cars instead of trains that, after a six hour or more slow ride to the past, will dump them in urban cores where other transportation modes are slim to none, affectively marooning them at their destination.
"We won't establish high-speed rail in the near term," said Strickland, adding that spending upwards of $400 million was a "fairly modest first-step that would establish regular-speed [@ 79-mph] rail service." But putting the caboose before the engine, Strickland, whose job approval numbers have been ebbing as Ohio continues to lose hundreds of thousands of jobs on his watch, said, "if people didn't support it to justify further investment, then we wouldn't have to go to high speed." But for Strickland and his railroad advisers at ODOT, top high-speed means reaching 110-mph, a far cry in reality and cost from the HSR speeds Euro-style trains reach, which top out at 220-mph or more. But even with slick trains that fly along specially built, exorbitantly priced tracks that by design minimize cross traffic or signaling, even France's famous TGV trains have average speeds of 120-mph or less for their trips, according to reputable rail sources.
Strickland likely had not read through the seven-page testimony given Tuesday by Susan A. Fleming, Director of Physical Infrastructure Issues for the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) to the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safey, and Security, Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation of the US Senate.
If Strickland or his Director of Transportation have read it, then they know the GAO has concluded that, while the potential benefits of HSR projects are many, "these projects--both here and abroad-- are costly, take years to develop and build, and require substantial up-front public investment, as well as potentially long-term operating subsidies."
Furthermore, Fleming said President Obama's allocation of a paltry $8 billion for HSR is more a "vision...than a strageic plan," and that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the agency his Director of Transportation headed during the Clinton Administration, has "not established clear goals for the federal government in high-speed rail--other than establishing a 'longer term goal of developing a national high-speed intercity passenger rail network of corridors'--and does not define a clear federal role for involvement in high-speed rail projects other than providing Recovery Act funds."
Fleming said the $8 billion allocated to HSR development is "only a small fraction of the estimated costs for starting or enhancing service on the 11 federally authorized high-speed rail corridors." Sustained funding for HSR will come at the cost of taking federal funds away from other national priorities like health care, national defense, and support for ailing industries, which Ohio has a lot of these days, as Detroit's Big Three automakers try to reinvent themselves or face extinction in the marketplace.
Even though the 3-C Corridor is on the periphery of the federal Midwest corridor, the heart of this system is Chicago, which all train watchers expect to benefit from handsomely, given President Obama's long ties to Illinois and the Windy City, his home prior to the White House.
Making the point that Ohio, where passenger trains stopped running nearly 42 years ago and whose rail plans are so ill formed when compared to plans of states around it, likely won't fair well in snagging any meaningful Obama dollars, the governors of Illinois and Missouri, Quinn and Nixon respectively, have teamed up to lobby for an important share of Midwest Corridor funds to complete a high-speed train route connecting Chicago to St. Louis. For Michigan Governor Jennifer Grandholm, Chicago is at the other end of a HSR route from Detroit. And for Ohio, Toledo should be more energized to connect to this route, because it will be a long, long time [if ever] until it is connected to an intra-state line that would link it to Columbus, the middle C on the 3-C route.
The fanfare of returning passenger rail service to Ohio has caused state and local officials to day dream about their village or burg being a stop on the HSR network. With the absence of state dollars in the near- or long-term to properly fund the astronomical amount needed to build a system that will still need public subsidies for as far as the eye can see into the future and that will never have the ridership capacity to make it eve break even because it will be so slow and time consuming, Strickland and his Transportation Director will need more than pom-poms and smiles to convince hard working Ohioans [those who still have jobs] that they should build and subsidize a system that only a handful of riders will ride.
The Buckeye Institute, a fiscally conservative research outfit based in Columbus, entered the fray over HSR yesterday, when it said the vision of licky-split passenger trains is just too costly to all of us and that few people would ride even fewer miles each year. Much of what the BI said appears to be sourced to Randal O'Toole, of the Libertarian think tank The Cato Institute, who makes a strong case against HSR but fails to identify viable alternatives.
But if Ohio is so desperate for cash that it is ready to shutter many of its libraries, eliminate basic health care coverage to many of its poor including children by cutting Medicaid payments and taking away food from food banks, is it really a smart move to venture down a costly path to subsidize freight rail companies who own tracks passenger trains must run on when so many other human safety nets have such gaping holes in them?
John Michael Spinelli is a Certified Economic Development Financing Professional, business and travel writer and former credentialed Ohio Statehouse political reporter. He is registered to lobby in Ohio and is the Director of Ohio Operations for Tubular Rail Inc. Spinelli on Assignment is syndicated by Newstex.com, can be followed on Twitter @OhioNewsBureau and available for subscription to Kindle owners. To send a news tip or make comment, email ohionewsbureau@gmail.com
Posts
