There seems to be a troubling anti-rail reflex in too many Americans today. Driving is seen as a God-given right; riding a train is seen as a non-starter. Everyone has heard over and over trains are slow, uncomfortable, and a waste of taxpayer dollars.
The hard part isn’t upgrading rails or improving stations, or getting better rolling stock (although it ain’t easy). The hard part is changing minds.
Good piece Ellis. Train stations can attract riders if they are pleasant, safe places to gather. Investing in improving them is a good idea to spur ridership.
I have to say, why on earth would a state legislature write a bill to *ban* the construction of light rail?? Even with the "compromise" of enabling certain counties to fund transportation projects through referendums, why even bother with this needling, unnecessary rule? Why can't counties and municipalities decide to construct the kind of transportation infrastructure that they deem most appropriate given their circumstances?
It's evident that that rule serves no purpose other than to bully and dominate the city-dwellers the state's ruling party scorns. "We decide what you get to build, you should start driving a car like real Americans."
That may have been what was intended, and afaict it bans the use of public money to facilitate the construction of light rail. I suppose a loophole would be that light rail can be built through private investment, but I don't see that ever happening. Functionally, its a statewide light rail ban.
It was sad when the daily IND-CHI was discontinued. It made for a delightful day trip to Chicago, as well as a way to deadhead equipment to Beech Grove for maintenance.
There seems to be a troubling anti-rail reflex in too many Americans today. Driving is seen as a God-given right; riding a train is seen as a non-starter. Everyone has heard over and over trains are slow, uncomfortable, and a waste of taxpayer dollars.
The hard part isn’t upgrading rails or improving stations, or getting better rolling stock (although it ain’t easy). The hard part is changing minds.
Good piece Ellis. Train stations can attract riders if they are pleasant, safe places to gather. Investing in improving them is a good idea to spur ridership.
I have to say, why on earth would a state legislature write a bill to *ban* the construction of light rail?? Even with the "compromise" of enabling certain counties to fund transportation projects through referendums, why even bother with this needling, unnecessary rule? Why can't counties and municipalities decide to construct the kind of transportation infrastructure that they deem most appropriate given their circumstances?
It's evident that that rule serves no purpose other than to bully and dominate the city-dwellers the state's ruling party scorns. "We decide what you get to build, you should start driving a car like real Americans."
Not just mean, but senseless.
I think the law meant the state wouldn’t contribute to light rail projects.
That may have been what was intended, and afaict it bans the use of public money to facilitate the construction of light rail. I suppose a loophole would be that light rail can be built through private investment, but I don't see that ever happening. Functionally, its a statewide light rail ban.
I challenge you to find a more regressive, backward state government than Indiana.
It was sad when the daily IND-CHI was discontinued. It made for a delightful day trip to Chicago, as well as a way to deadhead equipment to Beech Grove for maintenance.