What really does COAST have against passenger rail transportation? They claim it's often "too damned expensive," yet you never see them opposing other expensive forms of transportation, many of which are often way more expensive than passenger rail transportation. COAST can't even make a good argument for being against passenger rail transportation. This was ever so apparent in the recent election when their passenger rail charter amendment, Issue 9, was defeated by Cincinnati voters %56 - %44.
Recently, COAST blogged about Amtrak rail service in the Northeastern Corridor being delayed due to electrical problems caused by inclement weather. What COAST conveniently failed to mention though, was that AMTRAK service was back up and running after only a three hour delay, while the roads and airports continued to be hampered, delayed and closed due to the snowstorm on the East Coast.
So after only a three hour delay, Amtrak's North Eastern Corridor was back up and running...
While the roads and airports were still affected by snow...
So COAST, why lie? Why continue to try and mislead about passenger rail transportation and not oppose the massive amounts additional taxes and spending that other transportation projects will require? You've come out in clear opposition to the Ohio 3C Passenger Rail project, but have remained completely silent on the local issues of the BILLION DOLLAR Brent Spence Bridge Replacement and $675 Million I-75 Re-Widening. Why remain silent on these instances of additional spending? Kind of goes against your group's title doesn't it?
Makes you think; who's paying and lobbying them to drum up support against passenger rail transportation and remain silent on other transportation projects that waste millions of dollars more?
To anyone reading this that may be paying/lobbying COAST to do just that: You might want to rethink who you're paying to do your dirty work. As COAST/NAACP/WEDEMANDAVOTE proved in the last election, they're not very good at it. See: Issue 9 Election Results