[mywittyname]

It's not that people wouldn't approve a tax increase to support it. The issue is that every politician in the state would attack a light rail project for the city.

The city managed to complete a street car after ten years, but it faced opposition from the mayor, the governor, and federal congressman. The congressman in question even pushed a law that would prohibit any federal funding from going to the operation of the project. How fucked up is that? A congressman who prevents federal funding from flowing into their district.

[mbg721]

Cincinnati in particular also suffers from a hodgepodge of local government entities that don't really get along. The bus system is run at the county level, but the city limits end before that. Anecdotally, a friend of mine claims that his family voted against the early-2000s light-rail plan on the basis that it would have resulted in the City of Deer Park being downgraded to a village.

[bernawil]

But is it fair to compare light rail with subways? Seems to me light rail is the worst of all worlds: Slow, low carrying capacity, subject to the same traffic as cars and probably expensive.

[mywittyname]

On a technical level: no.

On a political level: yes.

The political opposition to the project had nothing to do with preferring a technically superior form of public transportation. Instead, it was opposition to public transportation in general.

[bernawil]

That sounds fair, but another pov: I'm pretty much in favor of subways but I'd be opposed to any light rail project in a heartbeat.

[astrange]

Light rail works great downtown. In particular, slowness is a good thing for local businesses. Fast travel like cars does not encourage people to go to your store, it encourages people to drive past it. This is why e.g. Melbourne has a free transit zone in the CBD.

[minot]

Car dealership campaign contributions?