COLUMBUS, Ohio - State Sen. Shannon Jones had been barreling down I-71 on March 23 as she made her way to Columbus in the pre-dawn hours.

"Shhhh...don't tell anyone but I'm driving twice as fast on 71 to Columbus as Strickland's slow-speed rail," the Springboro Republican messaged on her Twitter account after completing her commute. "Even my soccer mom mobile can far exceed slow rail speeds," she sent a few minutes later.

Jones' soccer mom smack talk about the 39 mph average speed of the proposed 3C passenger rail line is one of the most persistent criticisms of the rail line championed by Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland and designed to link Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati.

3C detractors have plenty of questions about the overall cost of the project and the projected annual ridership of 478,000. But the proposed schedule for the trains -- which shows a 255-mile Cleveland to Cincinnati trip taking 6.5 hours -- has become a lightning rod for criticism.

How the proposal is perceived by Republican lawmakers -- and the public at large -- is crucial now as approval of the $400 million federally funded project awaits bipartisan "supermajority" approval from the state controlling board. While a vote has yet to be taken, both GOP state senators on the controlling board have said they are highly skeptical of the project and suggested they may vote no.

The first test is expected to come soon when state officials ask the controlling board for the green light to spend $25 million of the federal rail grant on engineering and environmental work that will better detail the 3C plan. That $25 million would also enable the state to begin talks with freight rail companies on track improvement and scheduling questions, which should prove to be complicated.

Stung by what they feel is an inaccurate portrayal of "snail rail" based on rough estimates from Amtrak, the Strickland administration asserts that the 39 mph figure is misleading -- and below the average speed that the 3C will actually reach.

"Unfortunately, a lot of that criticism is based on that proposed schedule," said Ohio Department of Transportation spokesman Scott Varner. "But we know the trains will go faster than that -- our modelers have already found a couple of locations where a longer curve can be turned into a straightaway."

Because the 3C would run

on existing freight rail lines, Varner said that speed limits at some points that apply to freight lines -- such as when going over bridges -- can be raised for passenger trains without making additional improvements. He said state engineers have also been busy identifying freight rail crossings that can be reconfigured to keep passenger trains moving at a faster clip.

Varner points to passenger trains in Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Texas and Oklahoma that all operate with average speeds in the 45 to 55 mph range as models for the 3C, which would have a top speed of 79 mph.

That may not sound like much, but jumping from an average speed of 39 to 46 mph would shave an hour off the Cleveland to Cincinnati trip time laid out in the proposed schedule. And an average speed of 57 mph would knock two hours off the travel time.

"While some will say that's not fast enough, that's the kind of speed that has ridership up in these other states," Varner said.

State Sen. Jon Husted, an influential Republican from the Dayton area, said the speed of the train is a big factor in the overall equation because it will play into how many people want to ride the train. He isn't sold that an incremental jump in speed matters.

"I'm not sure that the difference between 39 miles per hour and 45 miles per hour makes that big of a difference," he said with a laugh. "Ultimately, if you really want to escalate the ridership you need to make it faster than driving, but that costs a lot of money to do and may not be practical in Ohio."

State rail officials acknowledge that much work needs to be done to get the existing rail lines even up to 45 or 55 mph average speed they envision for the 3C. Additional tracks will need to be built at bottlenecks in major cities as well as in the Greenwich area in Huron County where east-west and north-south freight traffic cross. And rail lines would need to be replaced at certain points just to get passenger trains up to car-like speeds.

For example, Rail America operates freight trains with a top speed of 25 mph along a 12-mile stretch of the proposed 3C corridor outside of Cincinnati. Company officials say that major track upgrades would be needed to go any faster.

"We have older rail that is smaller in size," said Dave Arganbright, the company's vice president of government affairs. "If you want to run trains any faster, then you would need to put in more modern-sized rail."

To be eligible for the $400 million in federal money, Ohio officials had to tell federal rail authorities that the 3C would be run on rail lines capable of reaching 110 mph within a "reasonable" timeframe.

And while Ohio officials are quick to point out how the 3C could pick up speed, they aren't as quick to acknowledge the difficulties in reaching speeds above 79 mph on the state's existing freight lines.

Increased maintenance, crossing and signal upgrades are all federally mandated as you increase train speeds, which could send costs soaring as the top speed of the 3C moved from 79 to 90 to 110 mph.

Freight company CSX showed a concern with passenger trains moving faster than 90 mph when it signed a memorandum of understanding with state rail officials that called for new tracks to be built if passenger trains want to break 90 mph.

"It escalates costs, there is no question," said Husted. "ODOT has been talking out of both sides of its mouth on this issue -- they say that the proposal is the first step to 110 mph trains, but you could never do 110 on these tracks."