<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ballot Measures Force Commuters to Evaluate Transit Projects First-Hand</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:43:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/#comment-14465</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 04:40:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4482#comment-14465</guid>
		<description>West Virginia, and Kentucky. Amtrak isn&#039;t allowed to operate service Chicago-Indianapolis-Louisville because it&#039;s too short to qualify for federal subsidies, but it&#039;s allowed to operate service Chicago-Indianapolis-Cincinnati-suburban Kentucky-Washington.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>West Virginia, and Kentucky. Amtrak isn&#8217;t allowed to operate service Chicago-Indianapolis-Louisville because it&#8217;s too short to qualify for federal subsidies, but it&#8217;s allowed to operate service Chicago-Indianapolis-Cincinnati-suburban Kentucky-Washington.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathanael</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/#comment-14463</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathanael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 04:28:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4482#comment-14463</guid>
		<description>A number of people believe that the Cardinal exists for the following reasons:
(1) To shuttle equipment to Amtrak&#039;s shops in Beech Grove, outside Indianapolis.  Which was a crazy place for Amtrak to retain shops, but that decision was made back in the 1970s....
(2) To get votes from West Virginia.

It has a crazy short consist -- plus a bunch of empty cars being moved to and from the shops....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A number of people believe that the Cardinal exists for the following reasons:<br />
(1) To shuttle equipment to Amtrak&#8217;s shops in Beech Grove, outside Indianapolis.  Which was a crazy place for Amtrak to retain shops, but that decision was made back in the 1970s&#8230;.<br />
(2) To get votes from West Virginia.</p>
<p>It has a crazy short consist &#8212; plus a bunch of empty cars being moved to and from the shops&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Roberts</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/#comment-14356</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Roberts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:27:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4482#comment-14356</guid>
		<description>Interesting that the Cincy amendment failed, it looked pretty badly written, even to the point when I looked up the results this morning the headlines made it look like it was a vote against transit.  One of the TV station sites said &#039;Issue 9: Cincinnati Mass Transit Fails&#039; .  That makes it sound like voters rejected transit planning for Cincy.  Considering that it also appeared that the wording would hamper the 3-C as well as any future HSR for the area I am glad it failed.

One thing to remember is that with Ohio being in the middle of Chicago and the East Coast if Amtrak is only interested in serving those two termini at the optimal time (daylight) we in Ohio will always be left in the dark trying to connect to the once daily round trips for the Cardinal, the Lake Shore or the Capitol Limited between 1 and 4 in the morning.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting that the Cincy amendment failed, it looked pretty badly written, even to the point when I looked up the results this morning the headlines made it look like it was a vote against transit.  One of the TV station sites said &#8216;Issue 9: Cincinnati Mass Transit Fails&#8217; .  That makes it sound like voters rejected transit planning for Cincy.  Considering that it also appeared that the wording would hamper the 3-C as well as any future HSR for the area I am glad it failed.</p>
<p>One thing to remember is that with Ohio being in the middle of Chicago and the East Coast if Amtrak is only interested in serving those two termini at the optimal time (daylight) we in Ohio will always be left in the dark trying to connect to the once daily round trips for the Cardinal, the Lake Shore or the Capitol Limited between 1 and 4 in the morning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Loren Petrich</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/#comment-14355</link>
		<dc:creator>Loren Petrich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4482#comment-14355</guid>
		<description>The Northern Indiana proposal was defeated 80% - 20%:

http://nwitimes.com/news/local/porter/article_8e347474-c64e-57a2-8ea8-bf3fedf8346e.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Northern Indiana proposal was defeated 80% &#8211; 20%:</p>
<p><a href="http://nwitimes.com/news/local/porter/article_8e347474-c64e-57a2-8ea8-bf3fedf8346e.html" rel="nofollow">http://nwitimes.com/news/local/porter/article_8e347474-c64e-57a2-8ea8-bf3fedf8346e.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Loren Petrich</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/#comment-14303</link>
		<dc:creator>Loren Petrich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 04:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4482#comment-14303</guid>
		<description>As of this writing, the Cincinnati proposition has been defeated, 56% - 44%, with 93% of precincts reporting

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091103/NEWS0108/311030020/Voters+reject+city+rail+amendment

No news on the Northern Indiana measure, however.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As of this writing, the Cincinnati proposition has been defeated, 56% &#8211; 44%, with 93% of precincts reporting</p>
<p><a href="http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091103/NEWS0108/311030020/Voters+reject+city+rail+amendment" rel="nofollow">http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091103/NEWS0108/311030020/Voters+reject+city+rail+amendment</a></p>
<p>No news on the Northern Indiana measure, however.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Woody</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/#comment-14280</link>
		<dc:creator>Woody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:40:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4482#comment-14280</guid>
		<description>What is it indeed? Cincinnati also doesn&#039;t want to be bothered putting the station for the proposed 3 C&#039;s trains where passengers can connect with Amtrak&#039;s Cardinal. 

Not trying to be vindictive, but if I were King of Amtrak, I&#039;d go where I could feel more wanted: I&#039;d shut down the loser Cardinal and use the equipment instead to serve Detroit and Toledo and Cleveland and Pittsburgh in daylight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is it indeed? Cincinnati also doesn&#8217;t want to be bothered putting the station for the proposed 3 C&#8217;s trains where passengers can connect with Amtrak&#8217;s Cardinal. </p>
<p>Not trying to be vindictive, but if I were King of Amtrak, I&#8217;d go where I could feel more wanted: I&#8217;d shut down the loser Cardinal and use the equipment instead to serve Detroit and Toledo and Cleveland and Pittsburgh in daylight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jon</title>
		<link>http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/11/03/ballot-measures-force-commuters-to-evaluate-transit-projects-first-hand/#comment-14249</link>
		<dc:creator>jon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 20:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/?p=4482#comment-14249</guid>
		<description>what is it with opposition to rail in cincinnati? it has such a long history of opposition and killing rail projects.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>what is it with opposition to rail in cincinnati? it has such a long history of opposition and killing rail projects.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

