Milwaukee Biz Blog

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.)

Since the 1960s, Wisconsin has largely stood by while other states aggressively competed for their fair share of federal grants and aid. That bottom-quartile performance among the 50 states is why Wisconsin has long been known as a “tax donor” state, meaning its taxpayers contribute far more to the feds than they get in return.

Now an award of $810 million in federal stimulus money will extend high-speed rail from the Chicago-Milwaukee corridor to Madison and, in time, to the Twin Cities area in Minnesota. For once, Wisconsin got to the train station on time.

By working with other Midwest states, Wisconsin made a compelling case to get a share of the $8 billion in federal high-speed rail grants. About $55 billion in requests were submitted, many from larger states, yet the Wisconsin line was selected to receive more than 10 percent of the total pie. Only Florida and California (states with many times Wisconsin’s population) and another Midwest project stretching from Chicago to St. Louis received larger federal grants.

That’s a result of Midwest states hanging together instead of hanging separately. At the Midwest High Speed Rail Summit in Chicago last summer, eight states signed a memorandum of understanding that delivered a clear message of political unanimity. Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle was among five governors who pushed for the summit, which led to Washington receiving one regional set of priorities instead of potentially competing plans.

Opponents of high-speed rail will continue to question the federal investment and what it might cost states in matching dollars, but there are reasons to celebrate the Jan. 28 announcement vs. lying down on the tracks:

• Better connections for Wisconsin: Milwaukee will get two more lines to Chicago and Madison will be connected to Chicago via Milwaukee by 2013, if all goes as planned. Those are vital connections for commerce within the region and they help to establish better connections to the East and West Coasts – and beyond.
• Better connections for the region: The proposed line to the Twin Cities would tie together the major hubs of the “I-Q Corridor,” which extends from Chicago through Wisconsin and into Minnesota. A distance of only 400 miles separates two dynamos of the Midwest economy – Chicago and Minneapolis/St. Paul. That’s a shorter distance than what separates San Diego from the “Silicon Valley” in California. Within the region are some of the nation’s leading research universities, federal labs, financial centers, tech companies and talent pools. High-speed rail will help bring them closer together.
• More travel choices make sense: Rail will give people another option while easing congestion on highways and in airports. As the economy improves, air travel will see more delays, the Brookings Institution noted in a recent report. Lengthy airline delays (two hours or more) are twice as common now as in 1990 and may get worse as the economy recovers. By the way, half of all flights in the United States and 30 percent of the passenger traffic take place on trips of 500 miles or less – well within the range of the Wisconsin lines.
• High-speed rail use is growing: Passenger rail ridership has been trending up nationally. Amtrak carried nearly 27.2  million passengers in fiscal 2009, marking the second highest ridership total since the National Railroad Passenger Corp. began operations in 1971. The 27.2 million passengers for the 12 months ending Sept. 30, 2009, fell short of the all-time record of 28.7 million for fiscal 2008, but exceeded fiscal 2007 by 5.1 percent.
• It will create jobs: State officials have estimated the project would lead to 13,000 jobs in construction and manufacturing in Wisconsin. Some of those are train manufacturing jobs through an agreement between Wisconsin and Patentes Talgo, the Spanish train maker. That 13,000 estimate may not be far off, according to the American Association of Railroads. It calculates that each $1 billion in rail investment creates 20,000 jobs.

The costs of high-speed rail are high - but so are highways and air travel, which are also heavily subsidized.  Wisconsin can gain a competitive advantage through high-speed rail while strengthening its role as an economic player in the Upper Midwest. With help from its neighbors, Wisconsin finally won a major federal lobbying campaign. Let’s keep it on track.

Tom Still is president of the Wisconsin Technology Council.

On behalf of the nearly 7,400 employees we represent, we wish to express the important role regional transportation plays in our economic future. We are committed to ensuring dedicated funding for a balanced regional transit system and encouraging our business colleagues to do the same.

We represent two of southeastern Wisconsin’s largest institutions and provide critical services to thousands of local residents on a daily basis. We understand that a fully-funded transit infrastructure impacts our clients, customers, business, and the economic climate in southeastern Wisconsin. We have hundreds of employees that use buses to get to work every day, however that number continues to decrease as the bus system disintegrates. Continued cuts to the system impair our employees’ ability to get to work and our clients’ and customers’ ability to get critical services and products.

We hope it is clear that we understand firsthand how transit affects our larger community as well as our specific organizations, and we are committed to working with the Legislature to see that a politically and economically sound funding source for transit is implemented in our region during this session.

We are issuing a call to action for our representatives in Madison. We need a truly regional, multi-county, multi-modal regional transit authority including Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee Counties to be immediately focused on improving bus transit throughout the region and advancing the KRM commuter rail project. We must have a dedicated funding mechanism for transit, which must provide property tax relief, restore routes and rescind fare increases to allow for efficient and effective bus operations throughout the region to allow for economic development and regional growth.

We are willing to call, write or visit with our legislators to communicate the urgency of this issue to our region and our vision for regional transit, we urge residents of Kenosha to do the same.

In summary, our feeling regarding adequately funded regional transportation is simple- get it done. It is our goal, and we hope yours, to work actively to see that it does.

Robert Mariano is chairman and chief executive officer of Roundy’s Supermarkets Inc. in Milwaukee. This blog was co-written by Dick Hansen, president and CEO of Johnson Financial Group Inc., Racine.

Southeastern Wisconsin is in the midst of the greatest and most expensive upgrades to its transportation infrastructure since the Interstate Highway System was constructed by the Eisenhower administration in the 1950s.

Projects include:

• The $810 million completion of the Marquette Interchange reconstruction was recently completed.
• The current $1.9 billion construction of the I-94 expansion between Milwaukee and the Illinois state line is set to be completed in 2016.
• The temporary $15.3 million reconstruction of the Zoo Interchange has begun.
• The Obama administration recently announced $810 million in federal funding for high-speed rail to connect Milwaukee to Madison.

The burning question now is how will all of these projects be paid for at a time when local, state and federal governments are broke? The issue of funding dominated the discussion of a transit forum co-presented by WisPolitics and BizTimes Milwaukee on Thursday.

 

The Zoo Interchange, built in 1963, is the busiest interchange in Wisconsin, providing connections between I-94, I-894 and U.S. 45. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) is repairing three of the key bridges of the interchange.

“Milwaukee has an aging system. It did the job it intended to do from the start,” Tom Carlsen, former WisDOT Secretary, said at the forum. “This was done according to the age and the use of the structure of when it was designed.”

“It has been a perfect storm of design deficiencies in the last 50 to 60 years,” added Kenneth Yunker, executive director Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, referring to the Zoo Interchange.

According to Ryan Luck, project construction chief for emergency bridge replacement for WisDOT, the temporary repair construction of the Zoo Interchange is contracted for $15.3 million. Construction has occurred primarily during the evening hours. However, ramps have been shut down on weekends.

According to Luck, there are two more closures projected for May and demolition on June 14.
WisDOT is evaluating a long-term solution for the Zoo Interchange. Some have speculated the long-term plan could cost $2.3 billion, which would make it the most expensive project in state history.

“The Zoo Interchange is a bottleneck, and that interchange is the heart of Milwaukee’s freeway system, and that heart beats for the Wisconsin economy and all commercial traffic comes together there with the traffic from Fox Valley and Appleton,” Carlsen said.

“The Medical College of Wisconsin’s No. 1 priority is transportation. We were disappointed with what happened with the budget last year. It is critical to get patients, faculty and students on our campus, especially when we serve over 1 million patients on our campus each year,” said Kathryn Kuhn, associate vice president of government affairs at the Medical College of Wisconsin. “We don’t want to wait until 2016, we need it now and need it done right.”

Funding for the Zoo Interchange reconstruction has fueled a heated debate with local business leaders and politicians who disagree on how to sustain transportation funding for the state of Wisconsin.
“The state of transportation in Wisconsin is in flux, it is in trouble, but is positioned for opportunity,” said Craig Thompson executive director of the Transportation Development Association of Wisconsin. “We need to diversify our funding for transportation.”

On Jan. 28, the Obama administration announced $822 million in federal stimulus funds for high-speed rail projects in Wisconsin, including $810 million for a highs-speed rail line to connect Milwaukee to Madison. The Milwaukee to Madison rail service is expected to be operational by 2013, according to the White House.

“All (projects) need to get done. We can’t just pick and choose and say transit is necessary but then pick and choose. We can’t set a priority. All needs to get done, and that’s the challenge ahead,” Yunker added.

One heavily debated alternative source of funding today was a gas sales tax increase.

“I’d like to get off the gas tax,” said Carlsen in his opening remarks.

Tollways also were discussed as an alternative to tax increases. According to Gretchen Schuldt co-chair of Citizens Allied for Sane Highways, “Tolls are inevitable.” 

“When the taxpayer invests money, they want it used wisely, and we need the confidence of the public to invest in this infrastructure,” Luck said.

“We need to find a smarter way for funding in both southeastern Wisconsin and across the state. We need more money and transportation is a return on investment for our economy,” Thompson said.

“Transportation funding is static. If we look at it as static, then we can’t afford to do one project over another.”

“We need to synchronize efforts and get all on the same page with cost factors to eliminate confusion,” said Dan Devine mayor of West Allis.

“To continue to have the CEOs of S.C. Johnson and Son Inc., Roundy’s Supermarkets Inc., and AT&T Wisconsin, some of our last major employers in the state of Wisconsin and economy-based industries behind rail says a lot,” Yunker said.

 

Liz Ramus is a reporter for BizTimes Milwaukee.

Now that it is a virtual certainty that intercity passenger train service will be returning to the Milwaukee-Madison corridor, thanks to the leadership of Gov. Jim Doyle and the Obama administration’s award of $823 million for construction of this line, it is time to address the proposed location of the Madison train terminal.

The current plan provides that the Madison terminal for this new service will be at the Dane County Regional Airport - miles from the Capitol and downtown Madison. The airport location is a mistake that must be corrected if the new service is going to succeed.

It is well established that one of the principal challenges of successful intercity rail passenger service is addressing the problem of the “last mile,” namely the ability of rail service to provide a connection between the train terminal and a traveler’s final destination.

Where the last mile can be covered by a short walk, short taxi ride or a short trip on local transit, rail service will be successful. The success of the existing Hiawatha service between Milwaukee and Chicago is a perfect example of this principle. The downtown location of Chicago’s Union Station makes Hiawatha service very attractive because a rail traveler can access all of downtown Chicago and surrounding neighborhoods, such as Michigan Avenue (“the Magnificent Mile”) and the Museum Campus (Field Museum, Shedd Aquarium & Soldier Field) by walking, a short taxi ride or a short transit trip. In fact, the entire Chicago metropolitan area is accessible from Union Station because Chicago’s commuter rail and rapid transit lines all converge in downtown.

It is this connectivity that has enabled Chicago to maintain the most robust intercity passenger rail service outside of the Northeast U.S. corridor and why Chicago will be the hub of the proposed Midwest Regional Rail System.

To a lesser extent, the same is true for Milwaukee’s Intermodal Station. Downtown Milwaukee is presently accessible by walking or by a short taxi ride. Milwaukee is currently planning a Downtown Streetcar Circulator which will greatly enhance the connections between the Intermodal Station and downtown Milwaukee and surrounding neighborhoods. Again, connectivity is the key to successful intercity rail passenger service.

The principle of connectivity is universally applied in Europe where every major city is served by a downtown rail passenger terminal that provides connections via foot, taxi and other transit service to multiple final destinations.

The official rationale for the Dane County Regional Airport location is that it will save travel time on the eventual high-speed passenger rail line to the Twin Cities. There are several problems with this rationale.
First, it assumes that high-speed passenger rail service will in fact be built between Madison and the Twin Cities. In the short run (the next 10 to 15 years), this assumption is questionable.
Years of planning will be required to accomplish this service extension. A route has not yet been selected and when it is, this service extension will require an investment several times larger than the $823 million allocated to the Milwaukee-Madison corridor.

Under a best case scenario (planning proceeds with no major technical or political delays and billions of federal funds are made available to finance the project despite the current political environment), I believe it will take a minimum of 10 years to implement such service.

A more likely scenario is that the current federal appropriation for high-speed rail represents an opportunity which Congress will not duplicate in the near future until at least some of the corridors funded by the $8 billion appropriation contained in the federal stimulus bill are up and running and the public can assess their costs and benefits. Under this scenario, high-speed rail to the Twin Cities is 15 to 20 years in the future, at best.

Therefore, it will be 10 to 20 years before high-speed rail service is extended beyond the Dane County Regional Airport. Given this reality, it makes more sense to build a downtown Madison station now, and when, and if, high-speed service is extended to the Twin Cities, Madison area station locations can be adjusted if that is deemed necessary at that time.

Second, even if high-speed rail service is extended to the Twin Cities, a downtown Madison terminal will not significantly diminish the quality of that service. The argument is that travel time to the Twin Cities will be lengthened because trains will have to go into downtown Madison, change ends (the train engineer would have to transfer from one end of the train to the other) and proceed back out toward the Twin Cities. This maneuver would involve some additional travel time for a Chicago-Twin Cities trip that would take somewhere between five and six hours overall. However, given the huge benefit of a downtown terminal location (the “last mile” issue), this additional travel time is well worth the trade-off.

On this point, we can again learn from our European friends. I recently returned from a trip to Italy where I rode the Italian high-speed trains between Rome and Florence. Rome and Florence are intermediate stops on the Naples-to-Milan high-speed line (186 mph service). At both Rome and Florence, the high-speed trains travel into the historic downtown stub end stations, the engineer changes ends, and the train proceeds to back out to rejoin the high speed right-of-way. In both cases, travel time is added to the overall Naples-to-Milan trip versus a station stop on the high-speed right-of-way on the outskirts of Rome and Florence.

The Italian rail planners realize that one of the principal benefits of this rail service is that it serves downtown Florence and Rome, and a stop on the outskirts of town would defeat the whole purpose of the high speed service - service to the city centers of the major Italian cities on the line.

In short, the Dane County Regional Airport plan is flawed. This station location will diminish ridership on the line and will jeopardize the success of the service. Travelers whose final destination is downtown Madison, surrounding neighborhoods or the University of Wisconsin will simply continue to drive or take existing inter-city buses because the “last mile” must be covered by a long taxi ride or a transfer to local transit.

For example, the fastest local transit connection between the State Capitol and the airport takes 30 minutes (not including wait time) and requires a transfer between bus routes. Even if Dane County builds some type of commuter rail/light rail service connecting downtown Madison and the airport, there will still be a transfer and a relatively long trip on this mode. As for walking, this option would be completely out of the question unless the traveler is actually going to the airport.

Advocates of transportation choice and sustainable transportation infrastructure have been waiting decades for a high-speed rail connection between Wisconsin’s two largest cities, and it is exciting that this connection will now be built.

However, the Dane County Regional Airport rail terminal will jeopardize the success of this connection and in so doing, diminish the chances for future extensions to the Twin Cities, the Fox River Valley and Green Bay.

We are at the dawn of a new era in intercity transportation in Wisconsin, but there are many skeptics who will exploit any evidence that this new service has failed to achieve its predicted ridership or produce the predicted public benefits. This has to be done right because the future of high-speed rail in Wisconsin will hinge on the performance of this new corridor.

 

Alderman Robert Bauman, a longtime transit proponent, represents Milwaukee's 4th Aldermanic District.

It will be interesting to watch how the debate over the expansion of southeastern Wisconsin’s mass transit system splits the region’s business community into two factions: those who want to invest public dollars to expand and improve the mass transit system, and those who do not.

The roster of the camp of supporters for improved and expanded mass transit reads like a who’s who of business in the region:

• “This is not a want, this is an absolute need for the community,” said Tim Sullivan, president and chief executive officer of South Milwaukee-based Bucyrus International Inc.
• “It’s critical that this legislation pass during the spring 2010 session,” said Robert Mariano, chairman and CEO of Milwaukee-based Roundy’s Supermarkets Inc. “It is foolish to ignore, this is an economic development issue. Transit builds the economy.”
• “For the vitality of southeastern Wisconsin, getting this bill through the legislature is critical,” said Scott VanderSanden, president of AT&T Wisconsin.
• “We believe regional transit and the KRM is an important investment in the future of our region,” said J. Fisk Johnson, chairman and CEO of Racine-based S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. “More efficient and more affordable public transit can help make a city an even more attractive place for business and can help the vibrancy of a community. The lack of accessibility to Milwaukee and Chicago is a big reason it is more challenging to attract key people to our company.”
• “It’s really frustrating to see the constant deterioration of public transit,” said Ed Zore, CEO of Milwaukee-based Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. “It’s really important for business to have a good public transit system.” Zore said about 700 of his company’s employees use public transit.

Add to this lineup the likes of Greater Milwaukee Committee president Julia Taylor and Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce (MMAC) vice president Pete Beitzel, and we’ve got a critical mass of business interests lining up in support of mass transit.

 

Beitzel says the debate reminds him of the conversation that took place when the Eisenhower administration embarked on the creation of America’s Interstate Highway system. Public dollars created a system that was not financially self-sustaining, but provided benefits for the common good - mainly interstate commerce and travel.

“This is the beginning of a sort of mini interstate of rail service, and Milwaukee is lucky because some forms of manufacturing and maintenance will be done here and that’s a major positive for job creation,” Beitzel said. “The work being done on the track before, during and after construction will create jobs here, it will reduce travel time, and the additional set of trains will allow us to eventually increase service frequency back and forth. People will say it’s a lot of money, but they said the same thing when we were establishing the interstate highway program. When initially establishing any infrastructure it’s not cheap, but for Milwaukee the facility is already here, we aren’t going to have to put a lot of extra money into the project.”

The new debate over mass transit escalated late last week, when BizTimes Milwaukee broke the exclusive story that the Obama administration intends to spend $810 million in federal bucks to build a high-speed railroad to connect Milwaukee to Madison.

Normally, the news that the federal government will spend more than $800 million in a state is warmly greeted by the local folks. However, look for the local impact of the federal gravy train to be a focus of debate in Wisconsin’s gubernatorial race.

Critics of the high-speed rail project say the state will be left holding the bag for high maintenance and operating costs. Those fears will no doubt be fanned by Milwaukee’s talk radio hosts, who have been screaming for years against any public investments in things that go “Choo! Choo!”

We’ll explore the arguments both for and against expanded mass transit in future editions of BizTimes Milwaukee. Stay tuned.

 

Steve Jagler is executive editor of BizTimes Milwaukee.

 

On behalf of the Greater Milwaukee Committee, I applaud Gov. Jim Doyle on several major transit announcements last week and his efforts to address southeastern Wisconsin’s transit shortcomings.

In his recent State of the State Address, Gov. Doyle demonstrated key leadership by continuing to work for transit legislation that would provide dedicated funding and property tax relief to save our local transit systems and bring about the KRM (Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee) commuter rail, efforts that my members overwhelmingly support.

I would also like to congratulate the governor for securing more than $800 million in federal dollars to build a high-speed rail line between Milwaukee and Madison.

This investment in transit further illustrates the need for a fully functional infrastructure, starting with an adequately funded bus system, to strengthen and revitalize our economy.

I am hopeful that Gov. Doyle’s leadership on this issue will be reflected by legislative action in the current session.

Transit legislation currently in the works in Madison reflects the collective appeal from the local business, labor and civic communities who understand that dedicated funding for transit is critical to the future of our region.

As echoed by my colleagues at a recent press conference, an adequately funded transit system will preserve and expand job opportunities in southeastern Wisconsin, promote job creation and allow us to be competitive in attracting and retaining top talent.

On behalf of the GMC, I commend the governor for his support of transit solutions for our region and urge the State Legislature to follow his lead. Our region cannot afford to be without the jobs, economic development and property tax relief that will result from the passage of the current transit legislation.

It is now in the hands of our State Legislature to continue upon the momentum created by Gov. Doyle, the business community, labor coalitions and countless southeastern Wisconsin constituents.

 

Julia Taylor is president of the Greater Milwaukee Committee (GMC), a nonprofit organization of southeastern Wisconsin’s business, labor, academic, philanthropic, nonprofit and civic leaders.

Thesis #1: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 generated massive amounts of federal stimulus to the economy, saving or creating thousands of jobs and saving the country from the next Great Depression.
Thesis #2: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was a $1 trillion boondoggle that was not needed and will heap mountains of national debt upon future generations.

 

History will sort out which of those two assessments will ring true for the ages. For now, the only thing known is that intelligent people stand in each of the two camps.

Judging from the speakers at a recent Public Policy Forum Viewpoint Luncheon, there are plenty of elements of truth in both statements, even if they seem at once contradictory.

Sharon Robinson, director of administration for the City of Milwaukee, said that, if nothing else, the stimulus dollars so far have enabled public bodies to keep thousands of vital employees such police officers, firefighters and teachers on the payrolls. The city also used $20 million to repair streets that otherwise would still have potholes, she said.
“Our budget for 2010 would have been a whole lot worse if the stimulus had not come into play,” Robinson said.

Indeed, the roadbuilders have been rejoicing about the stimulus act. The industry was facing one of its worst years of all time with the recession until those stimulus funds came along, according to Pat Goss, executive director of the Wisconsin Transportation Builders Association.
“With the stimulus, it was one of the best (years for roadbuilders). From our perspective, it was a tremendous success,” Goss said. “In a short term, this is a jobs retention bill.”

Arthur Harrington, attorney at Godfrey & Kahn, said the stimulus act has not yet fulfilled President Barack Obama’s promises to provide funds for “shovel ready” projects and create thousands of new jobs.
“This is not a stimulus bill. In my mind, it’s a cushion bill,” Harrington said. “My concern is, what happens after (2009)? If you want to jumpstart private industry, there’s a different model.”

State Rep. Jeff Stone (R-Greendale) said the stimulus dollars have not reached the private sector, where true wealth and job creation is generated.
“Much of that money went into things to stabilize taxes,” Stone said. “My concern is that we may have extended into the future a little bit the day of reckoning (of balancing public budgets) … We haven’t produced jobs with the stimulus plan.”

Mark Wagner, vice president of government relations for Johnson Controls Inc., has a different take. His Milwaukee-based company landed a $299 million research grant to develop lithium batteries for the next generation of hybrid vehicles.
Without the direct stimulus from the federal government, the development of those batteries would have “gone to Asia,” Wagner said.
Wagner foresees additional stimulus projects to retrofit dozens of public buildings in southeastern Wisconsin in 2010.
“We expect to see a major amount of activity in the second quarter … It’s out there. It’s coming,” Wagner said. “We’re just kind of seeing the tip of the iceberg right now. The bulk of it is going to come (in 2010). It will be in 2010 that you’ll really start to see the impact.”

In the congressional elections of 2010, the Obama administration and the Democrats will no doubt paint the stimulus act as a great economic panacea. The Republicans will no doubt paint it as a catastrophic failure.

As with most complex political issues of our time, the truth is more complicated than either of those planks and lies somewhere in between.

Steve Jagler is executive editor of BizTimes Milwaukee.

Editor’s note: House Budget Committee Ranking Republican Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on Wednesday introduced his legislation, “A Roadmap for America’s Future 2.0,” updated to reflect the nation’s current economic conditions. He wrote the following essay about his plan.

Our nation is barreling down a path of uncontrolled federal government spending, unsustainable entitlement growth, and crushing levels of taxes and debt. If we resign ourselves to this, our health and retirement security programs will grow themselves into extinction; our debt will explode and cripple our economy’s ability to compete – let alone lead – in the 21st century marketplace; and our failure will condemn future generations to declining standards of living.

Incredibly, Washington’s leadership appears committed not only to adhere to this path, but to hasten America’s march down it.

Simply saying “no” to the further government expansions – simply maintaining today’s “status quo” - is no longer an option: our health care sector must be reformed; our economy needs sustained job creation and real growth; and we must tackle the greatest threat to our economic and fiscal future – the crushing debt burden driven by the unsustainable growth in entitlement spending.

America needs an alternative. For that reason, I am re-introducing “A Roadmap for America’s Future” – updated to reflect the dramatic decline in our economic and fiscal condition since its introduction in 2008, while still achieving its key goals.

“A Roadmap for America’s Future 2.0” is not simply a slimmed-down version of the “progressive” ideology now prevailing in Washington. It is a comprehensive plan to ensure health and retirement security for all Americans; to lift the debt burdens that are mounting every day because of Washington’s reckless spending; and to promote jobs and competitiveness in the 21st century global economy.

Roadmap is a complete legislative proposal consisting of specific policies backed up by Congressional Budget Office estimates of its fiscal and economic consequences.

It’s unlikely that everyone will agree with every aspect of my proposal, and that’s fine. My hope is that it will spur all Americans to not only take a hard look down the dangerous path our country is headed, but also to become actively involved in restoring our ability – and long-held legacy – of leaving the next generation of Americans better off.

U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Janesville) represents Wisconsin’s 1st Congressional District.

As an elected public official, I often hear - or read in the case of e-mail - about hot-button issues that have raised the ire of residents looking for answers on why we vote the way we do, or who is responsible for what decision.

I will say it’s much rarer to get calls thanking us for our vote, but it does happen. More often than not a phone call starts with a rather charged and emotional opening statement … “I can’t believe YOU people voted for this nonsense”…or “why are YOU building this gas station right next to MY house.”

After a brief explanation, a calm usually comes over the call (not always, but most of the time) and a relatively pleasant two-way conversation takes place. At its best, that’s how it should work.

Let’s be honest. Any elected official should be happy whenever a constituent takes the time to make the call or send an e-mail. It’s a chance to make a one-to-one connection with a citizen, much more valuable than a campaign flyer or a quick, 10-second front-porch greeting during a political campaign. It’s also an opportunity to gauge public support, check the temperature of the citizenry, and to get a general feel for how your city, state, or country is doing.

In our current climate of highly-charged “right” vs. “left” politics, I often get calls beyond the scope of my job as an alderman, questions relating to national health care, state government, mass transit, etc.
While some of these issues can touch local politics, often the residents are just looking for an outlet for their frustrations, or answers to questions they have about the bigger issues that they feel aren’t being addressed by their state or national elected representatives.

It could be they feel more comfortable talking to a locally-elected official than a “politician” who has thousands or even millions of constituents, and may not have a direct line of communication with individual citizens. It may be a reflection of state and national governments-and their endless number of faceless departments and agencies-that have pointed the arrow away from the top of the responsibility ladder, and back towards local government.

We don’t have to look any farther than the recent Hoan Bridge repair vs. demolition debate to see how this can play out. Local elected officials like State Rep. Mark Honadel (R-South Milwaukee) and County Supervisor Pat Jursik taking the leadership role on the issue because of a State Department (Transportation in this case) unwilling or unable to listen to and respond to its citizens in a timely, open, and honest conversation about an issue decided at the state level, but impacting all of us locally.

All leaders, at the local, state or national levels, elected or appointed, have a duty to listen to, respond to, and to engage the citizens at all times, not when its politically convenient, or because its easier to point the finger (middle or otherwise)  in somebody else’s direction.

 

Steve Scaffidi is the alderman representing the 3rd District in of Oak Creek.