Some state legislators are already complaining about the strings that will come attached to the $810 million in federal stimulus money to connect Madison and Milwaukee by passenger rail.
The gripe for those like Sen. Alberta Darling (R-Menomonee Falls) is that Wisconsin cannot afford the ongoing operational subsidies that would be required for a new train line.
So could Wisconsin "Just Say No" to high-speed rail?
Yes, says Chris Klein of the state Department of Transportation.
"It will have to go through Joint Finance," the budget controlling committee of the Legislature, he notes.
And the Legislature could say, "We don't want no stinkin', half-empty, traffic clogging, whistle-blowing train just so Madison libs can feel good about themselves."
But rejecting the rail funds would mean the federal money is lost and could not be applied to other transportation uses.
"The money is a grant, like any other grant," says Klein. "It is for a specific purpose."
The question, of course, is how much would it cost the state each year to operate the Madison-Milwaukee train including repairs, maintenance and purchase of replacement equipment.
Klein says those figures have not been calculated and won't be known until further down the road.
But he notes that all modes of transportation in Wisconsin - buses, highways, bicycles, harbors, etc. - are subsidized through the state's $6.8 billion transportation fund.
And to put the cost of new highways in perspective, adding one lane to Interstate 94 between Milwaukee and the Illinois line is costing $1.9 billion - twice the cost of the rail line.
Still, given all the train skeptics out there, you wonder if somebody like Republican Scott Walker will try to make it an issue in the governor's race.
Mike Ivey is a columnist with The Cap Times in Madison (Blog used with permission.)
13 Comments
Great article, thank you. I took particular note of one line in particular: "adding one lane to Interstate 94...is costing $1.9 billion - twice the cost of the rail line." Golly. Maybe this is a good idea.
Mike Ivey wrote "Still, given all the train skeptics out there, you wonder if somebody like Republican Scott Walker will try to make it an issue in the governor's race."
Some folks are rabid about things they don't grasp that might add a whole dollar to their taxes even though it would save them many more simoleans from the investment, folks who put their brain cells on autopilot about the time they learned to tie their shoes.
The world is changing, and that scares them. Where did they learn to think that the world was a safe place that was always going to be the same? The world has always been changing. It comes in waves, and your choices have always been to surf or drown. The time to be scared is when things stall, because then you are dead - or might as well be.
How did cars and suburbia become the only measures of happiness these
folks have? There is something fundamentally wrong with our culture if that is the only yardstick these folks find to tell how they are doing. No wonder we have this "I-got-mine-screw-everyone-else" mentality, such as these folks who don't want to have to pay school taxes because their kids aren't in school.
I've learned that some seem threatened when ideas are advanced that they're not familiar with. Any idea they don't have themselves is likewise a vague threat of sorts and is therefore pronounced wrong ... and that's a far greater threat to our way of life than even the most unusual or unpatriotic trend. We have polititcians who want to pass an amendment against everything they don't like under the name of getting the government off our backs. They wrap themselves in the flag, but forget what the flag stands for. Fortunately, these totally-devoid-of-ideas folks have little effect other than to delay the inevitable, in which case, they do a Congressman (Tom) Delay. That beanhead had the gall to show up at the opening of Houston's light-rail system and claim he was always for it ... this after 20 years of him stalling even a nickel's worth of government funds to be spent on the project. (Like San Diego's, it was built with totally local funds - and they've already voted to expand, even before the new line opened). I tell you, it's enough to give sleazeball politicians a bad name. Me, I like people who have actual thoughts once in a while, and who may even tolerate an attitude or idea they weren't born with.
Lou, speak for yourself, you certainly do not represent people who prefer to KNOW what they are doing and what the cost will be BEFORE they jump head first into the shallow pool. Bob quickly took note of the cost for one lane on I-94. The other side of the equation is the one lane will move a little more that 5 times the people of the rail.
Thus the one lane is two and half times more efficient at volume. Know the numbers before jumping. I'm all for better transit. I proposed a free bus system in the county would pay for itself simply by the rejuvination it would provide to the downtown. But just fell on deaf ears because it is not a shiny unneeded train; or a trolley for god's sake.
Very much like trying to get you and others to stop following like sheeple and think for yourselves. Trains are nice. But truly inefficient and inconvenient when you factor all parts of the equation. Do you care; nope; not if it isn't a train. All the studies demonstrated that dedicated bus is far superior to train. Do you care; nope; because it is not a train. We could swing the upkeep of busses but can not come near to paying the upkeep of a train; do you care; nope; it's not a train.
Hopefully it will occur to you and others. The 'opposers' are opposed NOT because we are dumb troglidites. It's because we took the time to do the numbers on both sides of the equation. We look at reality of the now and what can be BEFORE we jump.
And for crying out loud; would one of the proponents please take a moment and get the subsidized cost for Bill? Truly it appears the answer is being purposely avoided.
This would be hilarious if it weren't so sad. Regarding the annual cost to operate the train- "Klein says those figures have not been calculated and won't be known until further down the road." Then on what basis are all the proponents have been judging this hair-brained idea? I understand how the politicians, the train nuts, the spendthrift leftists and their sheep would be ok with this boondoggle without knowing important facts such as annual cost to operate. But how about all those high-powered business execs? What a joke.
As to the comparison of the cost of the train line to the freeway lane- The annual daily traffic count on I-94 between Kenosha and Milwaukee is approximately 100,000. How many people will ride the slow train to the Madison airport every day? 300? 400? 500? Assuming only one and one-half passengers per car, you have 150,000 daily person-car trips divided by four lanes = 37,500 vs 500 daily rides on the slow train. The construction cost per trip per day on the freeway is approximately $50,000, for the train it is $1,620,000. This does not include operating costs. Tell me the slow train to the Madison airport is a good use of our tax money. (I know, this sounds good to math geniuses like Welke).
RE-Rugani- Please keep telling us how we need to live our lives. You are going to score a lot of points.
The United States got way behind Europe in the public transit game when Europe made all the trains public after WWII. We kept the majority of them private -- though many were still subsidized with public dollars; a lot of "rail barons" got very, very rich, but the quality wasn't maintained like it was in Europe. Once upon a time, Republicans were the biggest boosters of trains and public transit. (When it made them money.) Now, Democrats like trains. Strange how things change.
Every time this topic comes up, we get the same negative pov that is posed around the question of a subsidized cost. And if we (who are not in the bean counting business) don't have the answer, we're somehow unqualified to speak on the issue. We're not allowed to applaud those who feel this is a good idea, which includes a host of local business leaders and governmental leaders (because they of course are all self-serving elitists). Face it fellas, we could say the cost is a quarter or a quarter million, and you wouldn't buy it. You clearly know better.
Meanwhile, you're missing an important point. In the past (in fact, in the present as well) huge dollars are allocated to build and repair roadways without anyone so much as tapping a steering wheel. But along comes some people with the vision to do what other countries have already done in terms of significantly improving transportation choices - choices that can help take the gas pump needle out of our arms - and you guys can't hit your calculators fast enough. If your noses were pressed any harder into the trees, you'd be sneezing bark. Don't like trains? Fine. Take the bus.
RE-Welke- It is not that you aren't in the bean counting business, its that you are not in the thinking business. You can't refute the numbers and you don't really care if a train is exceedingly wasteful, you just want it- like a little kid who doesn't care what the toy costs and really has no concept of its expense. Your only argument for the train appears to be that everyone else has one. Mommy!
Where else except in government could you have a $810 million project supported by politicians and their followers, without knowing what the operating costs are? Who makes an "investment" this large without knowing the numbers? Corrupt, idiot governments and their followers that don't don't care about the taxpayer's money.
PS- I would be for the train if it made sense. The Chicago CTA runs a large operating deficit, but is necessary because Chicago would be total gridlock without it. We don't have a similar need here in Wisconsin, especially for a slow train the Madison airport.
Marsh, since when do I have to refute your numbers? Who are you? An elected official?
An expert in public transportation? Did I miss your book on the topic? What we have here is your opinion that a train is "exceedingly wasteful" and a series of condescending, insulting rants about "corrupt, idiot governments and their followers." Ok, fine. We heard ya. Point made. Over and out.
RE: Welke- You and the other train supporters should refute my numbers, or at least supply your own numbers, being you want to spend our tax money on the slow train to the Madison airport. The experts in pubic transportation (Klein-DOT) admit they don't have the numbers and the politicians and the rest of the train proponents don't care what they are. I'm just an educated, informed citizen who has the ability to understand and analyze data and facts, and I have enough experience and common sense to know what is wasteful. Are you so foolish to believe you have to be an elected official to understand what is a boondoggle? Buck up, use your brain!
PS- I turns out that Doyle's numbers were inflated regarding jobs to be created for the slow train to the Madison airport. Why am I not surprised?
PPS- So what is the subsidy per ride?
Bill, I believe I read the article concerning jobs. Roughly 4500 on average during contruction versus the Doylet number of Thirteen Thousand. Long term I believe I read 55 jobs.
Bob, all kidding, joking and barbs aside, I truly believe we all want improvement. But we can certainly agree that government will certainly foul it up. For god's sake they can not even add and subtract well enough to balance a budget. I do not like the idea of Wisconsin deciding to favor subsidizing trains for 55 jobs meanwhile we lose hundreds of jobs for those who are employed driving for badger bus and other private companies.
Private bus company = provide service and pay taxes. Governent train = maybe we get good service but past history would disagree AND they take our taxes. Seems like the citizen is getting the shaft....
Bob W., they'll talk around in circles but never answer your question. BM is even too lazy to make up his own talking points.
He's assuming there is a high subsidy per rider and relying on everyone else to prove his vitriol wrong. In the mean time, he lords around his assumptions as though they're fact(and we all know what they say about assumptions).
Either way, there is no longer any real debate about this. The plans have been made, the line has been funded, and the trains ordered. Madison will be getting a train to Chicago, via Milwaukee and every stop along the way will reap the benefits of that.
What they fear is a positive example of government working in general and rail transit in particular. All of their whining reflects their fears that this, in fact, will be a success.
I guess the goal of WI politicians is to have a train, not an accessible way for people to move around the state. If the people that wanted high speed rail would be expelling the low cost easy access of this decision I would feel better about it. All I hear is "We have High Speed Rail" like some other city that we are nothing like. Kind of like "Keeping up with the Jones". I would rather our Politicians fight for the true outcomes we want, easy access, low cost travel, freedom to move as we please, lower tax burdens, more jobs (real jobs not mystery jobs)... rather than worrying about what THINGS we can spend money on. We are not Europe, we are not San Diego or Houston. Those towns and countries are crowded and/or the roadways are terrible. We are Milwaukee and southeast WI, a great place to live where travel is easy and cheap. Roadways, for the most part are easy to use and beautiful. I wonder how many of the supporters above have taken the train more than 10 times last year. If they answer truthfully I would wager my car that none of them have!!!! And these are the people that are adamant about the use. How many others who could careless or dislike the idea will ever use it? Lastly, I love the fact that the people that want this call trains the future like this is the newest technology available. If I am not mistaken, were they not invented prior to autos???
One aspect of the train between Milwaukee and Madison that has not been discussed, that I have seen at least, is that (depending on the timing of the trains) this train could become a commuter rail system for Milwaukee. Madison as well if the train were routed into the city (not the airport). I admit, it is hard to theoretically think about how many people would travel between Milwaukee and Madison on a given day on the train. It doesn't seem like it would be a huge amount of people (although I fully admit I could be wrong) but who knows, sometimes you can't forecast accurately because people simply haven't been given the opportunity to change their behavior if they so choose. The anecdotal evidence regarding this number that is being thrown around just makes this discussion meaningless, which is unfortunate as this is a major investment. The numbers I would be interested in are the amount of people who live in Brookfield, Oconomowoc and Watertown who would use the train to commute to work in downtown Milwaukee. (Again, and the reverse if the train goes into Madison or some sort of streetcar system is set up to bring people from the airport to the city center a la Portland, OR) There are many people who live in the Oconomowoc/Brookfield region who work in downtown Milwaukee. Would they take the train into the city and back just like people on the LIRR, Metro-North or Metra? If the Milwaukee Connector gets built, this range could also extend to wherever that goes. I simply don't know the answer to this question, but I haven't seen this possible revenue source discussed at all and I feel like this is not a complete discussion unless this possible piece of the train is brought up.