Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess it isn't clothes rending dispair that I've fallen into, but I definitely went into a funk when I read the headlines. Wisconsin will keep some of its money to upgrade services between Milwaukee and Chicago. That's all. I can't understand why an incoming governor would give away over 800 million dollars of investment into a state that would promote job growth, economic diversification, and alternative sources of transportation thereby relaxing much of the stress put on our roads and highways.
The only explaination I can come up with is that he thought that the Obama administration would bend to his demands, and he would be able to use the money for roads. Unfortunately for the state of Wisconsin, it didn't.
With that being said, the brigher side of the picture is that Wisconsin will no longer be committed to paying 2 million dollars in operational costs every year. Whether that balances out the investment in freight and passenger rail service is up to you. Thoughts?
Wisconsin will no longer be committed to paying 2 million dollars in operational costs every year.
Two million dollars? Nothing is 2 million dollars anymore. This deal was not made or broken for 2 million dollars. I thought it was more like 8 million. Translation, 12 million. However, that could easily be cut back to the "proposed" 8 million with service cuts immediately after the shortfall was recognized. Been there, done that.
That aside, I'm still not sure whether the rail project would have been good for Wisconsin. There is no question to me that it would have been good for image, but whether it would have actually made the state more economically viable or less economically viable, is something that nobody will ever know (but a few will claim to know). Personally, I would have liked to see it come to fruition strictly from an image standpoint. Economically, I have a hard time believing that it would work. Since I don't vote or pay income tax in Wisconsin anymore, so it's really not my issue. I do feel a bit sorry for Wisconsin as a state, though. It needs a lot of help. Wisconsin needs a major makeover, and it needs to cater to every single shred of profitable business that it can attract.
For now I would have to say I'm happy with not having it. The unfortunate thing is the Feds will make sure they blow the money someplace instead of cutting back on spending or using it to fix the current roads.
I firmly believe that the money that was offered would fall far short of covering the cost of the rail leaving WI with a huge bill to finish the product. Then the yearly upkeep, staff & administration would cost millions more each year. The speed of the proposed new train was not much faster than existing.
I was also at a railroad safety training long before this rail was actually proposed, but was being discussed. The instructor was not against the idea but said financially he did not see how the Government could afford it and there were concerns about if it could even be safely done in WI.
More recent data moved the cost of yearly operation to closer to 2 million, based on changes made by Amtrak and the Doyle administration after the initial proposal was published in 2009. This included changes in car design, engine design being more fuel efficient, additional cars, owning instead of leasing train sets, and changing that crummy snack bar that the trains have into a sandwich shop. I wholeheartedly agree on the image thing. Just HAVING an upgraded train line that connects our two largest cities with other regional centers of commerce is a big plus, especially when it's front and center in a proposal for a company to choose a new headquarters or regional hub.
Although I also agree with Stone1 on the 'fix our roads' idea, I look at it differently. The roads are always, always, always in need of maintenance. This comes from living in a part of the nation where freezing and thawing occur. You will always be able to say, "we should spend the money on fixing the roads". Isn't the cliche something like, 'welcome to WI where we have four seasons: winter, winter, winter, and road construction'? Fixing and re-fixing and re-fixing the roads isn't going to get us anywhere but pouring a ton of money into a pit that never gets filled. Roads, might I remind you, also never turn a profit.
I can't argue with the money that was offered not covering the total costs of the project; these things tend to balloon after you've signed contracts. But, I can say that if we want to be more viable as a state, throwing our money into widening and expanding the roads that will always need to be fixed in five years isn't my idea of economic viability. Sure, road construction workers will always be employed, but is this the direction that we want our state to go in?
I understand opposition to the rail on the basis of cost, now. We are not in any position to throw money around like drunken sailors. What I have a difficult time reconciling is that spending the money, or any money, on widening and and fixing our roads is in any way better than diversifying our transportation system in the most populous corridor in the state in a way that relies less on importing oil and fossil fuels.
But, the point is moot now. I trust that soon-to-be Governor Walker has some good job creating proposals. He has been given all of the tools necessary to get done everything he wants to get done and pass all of his promised legislation. He's got four years to win over the hearts and minds of the other less-than-half of the state.
The unfortunate thing is the Feds will make sure they blow the money someplace instead of cutting back on spending or using it to fix the current roads.
Yep. Agreed 100%. It is being spent whether there is a good place to spend it or not.
Yep. Agreed 100%. It is being spent whether there is a good place to spend it or not.
Yeppers eh, we have barrels of money to spend on unneeded things like this. That being said, Wisconsin does not have the population desity to make this low speed train a viable project.
Yeppers eh, we have barrels of money to spend on unneeded things like this. That being said, Wisconsin does not have the population desity to make this low speed train a viable project.
With our current fiscal mess, passenger rail doesn't make much sense anywhere, and we can't afford to widen existing highway infrastructure. The government needs to partner with private industry to get more out of our existing infrastructure, and the easiest way is through driverless car technology. Barring mechanical failure, you can almost eliminate accidents by taking the driver out of the equation. Other benefits include eliminating drunk driving, reducing gridlock, and increasing the overall carrying capacity and motility of our current infrastructure.
I know that this refrain has been preached for decades, but if you look at current driver-assist technology, driverless cars will likely be here in the next 15-20 years.
Call me cynical, but I think that this has very little to do with costs. This was seen as an Obama plan and it was politically expedient for Mr. Walker to align himself against it. Since it was one of the centerpieces of his campaign, he had no choice but to continue to oppose, no matter what evidence that this might be a bad idea came up subsequently. I agree with banannarama's comments about roads. Roads will never be profitable. Why expect other modes of transportation to be? It seems quite shortsighted to me, but we deserve the leaders we get.
One thing I am curious about, is whether we have to pay back the money that has been spent already (which I think was part of the deal). That would be the ultimate tragedy. 1st we lose jobs and manufacturing in the state, then the taxpayers have to foot the bill for what is a partially completed, non-functional rail line. Literally throwing away money. All in the name of aligning yourself against the President. Very fiscally responsible.
With our current fiscal mess, passenger rail doesn't make much sense anywhere, and we can't afford to widen existing highway infrastructure. The government needs to partner with private industry to get more out of our existing infrastructure, and the easiest way is through driverless car technology. Barring mechanical failure, you can almost eliminate accidents by taking the driver out of the equation. Other benefits include eliminating drunk driving, reducing gridlock, and increasing the overall carrying capacity and motility of our current infrastructure.
I know that this refrain has been preached for decades, but if you look at current driver-assist technology, driverless cars will likely be here in the next 15-20 years.
I remember 40 years ago we were suppose to have been to Mars already and every garage was going to have a flying car.
So, therefore I will leave the future to the future and base my decissions on what is happening right now. Once again, I am not saying that rail transportation is not a viable assest. BUT I am sayin that this is unneeded in the state of wisonsin Because we do not have the population density that would be needed to make this a self sustaining project. There is a proper place for this type of transportation but because of the density of OUR population, not in Wisconsin and not with our state taxes to keep operation of this going.
The feigned indignation by rail opponents over the forecasted $7.5 million in operating fees for the now-defunct line was overly exaggerated at best and a complete lie at worst. Mind you that the annual budget for WisDot is $2.5 billion - meaning that operating costs would have amounted to 0.3% of the state's transportation budget. Come on! When you factor in the fact that, unlike roads, the train's operating funding is generated in part by farebox revenue and also the fact that the Feds would have subsidized up to 90% of the train's operating costs - like they do for the exisitng leg of the Hiawatha line, then Scott Walker's actions become all the more enraging.
The $810 million grant represents a capital cost, which is spread out over thirty years as an investment rather than the whole sum functioning as a line item in the operating budget, where deficits are incurred. This large sum of federal dollars was a once-in-a-generation level of funding that doesn't come around often and Gov.-elect Boy Wonder squandered it. If he was really, truly concerned about the operating costs, then why didn't he take Madison and Milwaukee up on their offers to contribute towards the funding of operating the new segment? Why didn't he take the oft-tried, more conservative/libertarian tact of finding a private partner to operate the new stations and lease out space to concessionaires for revenue?
This was about politics and the fact that Walker was trying to score points with an increasingly extremist segment of the population that is goaded by talk radio blowhards on a daily basis. This was about political grandstanding for the sake of advancement through the ranks of his own party; and the biggest crime of all is that he has now cost the state hundreds of billions of dollars in economic activity over the next thirty years that the rail line would have brought.
The train would've attracted a significant level of ridership given the fact that it would have been an extension of the existing Hiawatha line - which upon completion, would've served:
12 million residents that live along the corridor in southeastern Wisconsin and the Chicagoland area
2 Big Ten universities, 3 state universities, and other prominent universities such as U of Chicago, Marquette, DePaul, etc
one of the leading research and technology centers in the country with a growing pool of innovative businesses
3 international airports, one of which is the second-busiest in the world, and another served directly with an existing station on the rail line
Eventually the line was to be extended to the Twin Cities - a metro of 3.5 million that is one of the fastest growing metros in the Midwest.
This wasn't merely about offering a ride to only Wisconsin residents; this was about connecting the state's businesses and assets with the rest of the world and now it's gone. To those that think that the state will have another chance in the near-future, I hate to bust your bubble, but opportunities like this do not come that often and if the state chooses to move ahead in the future, it will be exponentially more expensive as the cost of labor, materials, and debt service will be much higher than they are now in this depressed economy.
This was a project that received bipartisan support throughout its planning phases - including past support from Walker himself when he was in the State Assembly. Walker's irrational decision represents malicious neglect to the economic well-being of Wisconsin and his actions - will be condemned by history as such.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
