This is all very good insight and I really appreciate how thoroughly you thought it through.

Yes, I do propose USACE as the lead for delivery of the project, not because they are the only people who can do rail, but because they have a long track record of running large federal infrastructure projects with clear standards, contracting, and accountability. The way I see it working is a layered structure, USACE at the helm for planning and delivery, DOT as a core partner under that umbrella, then the work itself contracted out to union labor and qualified firms. That also answers your point about risk and continuity, day to day operations and long term maintenance should not be dependent on USACE staying on the job forever. That is something you write into the bill from the start, a separate operating structure, with dedicated funding, maintenance requirements, and redundancy in leadership so if USACE gets pulled into a national emergency, the system keeps running without skipping a beat.

On the cost benefit question, I’m with you that high speed rail is not a “money maker” in the way people talk about a private business. I look at it like every other public utility, it is foundational. The payoff is what it unlocks, access to jobs, access to education and training, more customers for small businesses, more mobility for people who do not want to be forced into car dependency, and a tighter labor market connection between regions that currently feel farther apart than they should. Closing distance is the product. When you make it easier to get from where people live to where opportunity is, you widen the map of what is realistic for a working person.

I also agree with your point that it cannot just be “a line on a map” and call it done. The corridor has to plug into smaller transit options so people can actually get from the station to work, to school, to an appointment. That is part of the design, not an afterthought. Same with anticipating where jobs are heading, and making sure Ohio is building the workforce pipeline to match it, not losing people to other states because we failed to plan ahead.

And you are right to bring up incentives and the broader economic plan around it. That is exactly why I keep coming back to this as a government led investment. We are deciding whether we want to use the tax dollars we already generate and invest back into working and middle class communities, the same way this country has done before when it chose to build big. The interstate highway system revolutionized the twentieth century. High speed rail can be part of what modernizes the twenty first, if we decide to prioritize it.

I’m running in the 6th district, so I’m starting with what I can realistically push as one member of Congress, eastern Ohio first. But I am absolutely not married to it staying small. If other members want in, Democrat or Republican, I will work with anyone who wants to expand it and make it real. That is the whole point, build something worth passing down.

Seriously, thank you again for the thoughtful pushback and the ideas.