H 79°, L 59° | Tomorrow: 
H 81°, L 65°
As this state is about to receive its share of the stimulus package signed last week, there are many ideas being thrown around for public projects to spend the money. A proposed Minneapolis to Chicago Amtrak line is being seriously considered. Gov. Jim Doyle traveled to Spain this week to test how efficient their rail systems are and is hoping to model this new rail system after theirs. However, given the continuing downward trend the economy is showing, suggestions to use the majority of this stimulus towards a three-state railroad system seem inefficient. There are better ways for this money to be used.
The proposed idea of a Minneapolis-Chicago Amtrak of Gov. Doyle will have stops in Madison and Milwaukee also. That being said, any geographer (or a well-informed kindergartener for that matter) would conclude that the majority of this rail would be in Wisconsin. What is still unclear at this time is whether the majority of the cost would be paid for by Wisconsin. During a conference call from Spain, Gov. Doyle did not shed light on how this project would be constructed or paid for, but he assured the citizens of the state that “the opportunities for us to move forward in Wisconsin are very good.” Other than the fact that he showed he not only knows our state motto but believes it, I begin to question whether he really knows the consequences of his proposed idea. Although the economies of Madison and Milwaukee would gladly accept the new business, the other cities of the state would not see any benefit from a railroad system through Wisconsin. It is not fair to the other cities if we spend the stimulus money on a system that benefits so few.
If we are to use this money to help bring our state out from economic hardship, then why are we focusing on plans that do not affect every citizen in this state? Instead, we should be funding every city with projects and essentially localizing the stimulus package. It is a great injustice that we give the state any part of the stimulus money. The state cannot know exactly how every city will be affected by this recession. Therefore, the stimulus money should be given directly to each city to distribute wisely. The economy of Green Bay is not the same economy of New Berlin. It would make no sense to try to solve both cities’ problems by having state produced programs.
Having a state funded rail system does not serve every citizen that will be paying for it. What people are failing to realize is that this is not free money. It is an advancement the citizens will pay off later through taxes. Therefore, making every citizen pay for a rail system that benefits only those who use it seems ethically wrong. Although they are the two most populous cities in Wisconsin, their economies will not fix the others in the state.
By having the package distributed equally based on population to each city, it would better help every economy. Instead of using the money to produce a project that boosts the economy of a few cities, why not give cities money towards public work projects. As we compare this recession with the depression in the 1930s, the thing that helped boost economies was public work projects. If we adapt that same principal today, should that not boost our economies also? Building things such as new parks, schools and roadways would bring jobs to the city and make every city that much better. There are problems in every city of this state that need fixing, and it would be irresponsible not to use this money towards improving them. There is not going to be another war to pull us out of this hard time. We have been fighting one for the last six years, and look where it has led us. We need to focus on the other programs of the New Deal that helped stabilize the economy.
The bad ideas of Gov. Doyle can now include the Minneapolis-Chicago Amtrak idea. It is not the appropriate time for this program to take place as it would be fiscally irresponsible to do so. This state, with its growing unemployment rates, needs programs that will help everyone find work and help stimulate the economy. Although this program would give jobs, it is better for the cities to give jobs locally to the unemployed. This is why the importance of local public work programs is necessary. As Gov. Doyle comes back from Spain with an itch to go European, let’s hope he didn’t bring us a billion dollar souvenir back with him.
Zach Day ([email protected]) is a freshman majoring in journalism.
IP hash: 19cd14ba
Zach,
First, there is a Chicago to Minneapolis Amtrak line, and there is a Milwaukee to Chicago route (the Hiawatha). Perhaps, you meant high-speed rail?
Second, Milwaukee and Madison are the biggest cities in the state. In fact approximately 1.7 million people live in the Milwaukee region, and another 500,000 are near Madison. So you would be building a rail line that would serve half the state in population. On top of being half the state, they’re the biggest economies in the state, and drive the state. If you can make them healthier, you’re going to generate a lot more jobs, than say by building a riverwalk in Stoughton.
On a final note, the only line seriously being considered for construction with this round of funds is Madison to Milwaukee (not the entire system). The preliminary engineering work has already been done (see the past state budget). It would stop in Oconomowoc and travel at speeds up to 110mph.
The rail money is in addition to the money we would get otherwise, and hasn’t been assigned a corridor yet.
-Jeramey Jannene-
IP hash: c1965e41
Well I think your story needs some fact checking! Here are some links to help you better acquaint yourself with something that you have no idea about!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122298615110699903.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway(Amtrakstation)
http://www.startribune.com/local/east/35637504.html
The revenue brought into smaller communities along the proposed route would nearly double in as much as 5 to 10 years. Ridership on the Empire Builder has grown 10% to 20% annually since 1981. The Empire Builder route is Amtrak’s most popular long distance train and always has been.
Traditionally the Chicago to Minneapolis corridor is the most popular rail travel corridor outside of the Northeast Regional service area, and this is the perfect thing to to with federal money as it will increase ridership on Amtrak, build local jobs and communities, offer a greater option of transportation alternatives to smaller communities, and finally it is nonsensical to think that spending these funds on parks and schools will do anything to help the economy in the near term. We need fixes now, not when little Johnny graduates from high school in 10 years.
Investing in an green form of transportation (rail travel is by far the greenest way to go) that will grow with Wisconsin and bring tourism dollars as well as carbon reductions is a totally win-win situation. In cities that are along the Empire Builder route there is a 20% bonus in local tax revenue from tourism alone. Almost all of Wisconsin’s better known attractions are already on the route (Wisconsin Dells, Madison, Milwaukee, La Crosse).
IP hash: b43eab93
Zach, perhaps you should do a google search for “Wisconsin Dells,” then report back about a rail line through that area.
IP hash: 29f3b997
Zach,
I think you need to bone up on the state’s demography. While there is a good bit of population dispersal throughout the state relaitve to MN and Il, 70% of the state’s population live in 25 or metropolitan counties in WI with one-fourth of the pop living in Dane and Milwaukee, combined. The remaining 30% of the state’s population live in 47 non-metro counties.
A municipal fiscal agent strategy on your part is a fantasy. The state as a fiscal agent is prudent. The monies then funnel down to the county level. The state’s shared revenue streams act this way.
Infrastructure and improved rail capacity will help this state tremendously. It is amazing that one can live in a metro area with close to half a million people and not be able to catch a train a Chicago or Twin Cities. It’s embarrassing, really. This will also help pave the way for local rail in Milwaukee and Madison areas. It’s coming no matter how much you wanting to hold onto outdated thinking. You might as well embrace it.
IP hash: 36df6eaa
Zach, You talk of burdening taxpayers with the cost of new rail service, citing the fact that not everyone will be able to use that new service. Then you immediately propose building roads, parks, and school - something which many of the people paying taxes to build will never see.
IP hash: 66279167
Every politician in the Country has seen the High Speed Rail Stimulus funds and are promising their constituents new rail passenger projects. President Obama is going to have to multiply the bread and the fish on a massive scale because $8-9 Billion is only going to buy high speed rail for one maybe 2 states. A good portion of that money is going to be used on VP Joe Biden’s route between Boston and Washington, D.C. (Northeast Corridor)
No way can Wisconsin afford to pay the ongoing subsidy for such a long distance route, even if it could afford the track and station improvements. So in my view, way too much of a leap in distance. Missouri struggles with it’s cross state rail route subsidy and it’s a shorter distance I believe. Wisconsin would be better served to concentrate on speed improvements to the 85 mile Chicago-Milwaukee Corridor. Continue to invest there and get that up to high speed status first. Then extend North to Madison.
I used to be a Wisconsin Resident and a big supporter of passenger rail in the state. Sadly numerous opportunities were lost from 1971 to the present. The biggest problem is politicians using rail as a vote grabbing initiative instead of a long-term transportation investment initiative. I see it happening here again. No real long-term rail planning council or funding mechanism in place….”get yours while you can” approach to rail system funding in the state. It just doesn’t work that way.
Another reason I am happy to have left the state and reside in Texas now. The Politicians actually respond to Emails and Phone calls in Texas…….plenty of room for more Wisconsin refugees as well.
IP hash: a2742fa3
I disagree with this article wholeheartedly. Like someone pointed out earlier, the suggestions that you have proposed are comparable to that which would be spent on rails. All you are suggesting is spending (and spending MORE, I might add, considering building new roads costs a great deal more than transit as far as returns go) on something else. You also say that in the 1930s to get out of the depression the government enacted public works—well I have news for you, this IS a public work. So since, as you said, public works were a factor that brought the U.S. out of the depression, and since transit is a public work of sorts, thus your argument technically would define transit as being a reasonable and potentially beneficial solution to our economic problems. Check your premises and conclusions and then come back to us when you have a real argument against the implementation of rails in Wisconsin.
IP hash: 587b44e0
Nothing like a child second-guessing the work of educated adults…
IP hash: d32fac2c
Freshman! I’m not really appalled at the writer of the article as I am the lack of vetting done by editors.
IP hash: 97afb96a
Zac
Woudn’t it be nice to jump on a Amtrak and go Milwaukee or Chicago or perhaps Minneapolis. Nobody wants to go on a bus, and soon there will be no flights out of small town Madison. Rail is the future,Think Green.
Joe
Joe,
IP hash: 9e477e11
Zach - please do some research before you opine on complicated topics, instead of just writing down whatever pops into your head.
“It is not fair to the other cities if we spend the stimulus money on a system that benefits so few.”
Did you read the proposals at all? Communities around the state would be served by bus lines, giving rail access to all Wisconsin residents. High-speed rail would make Wisconsin more accessible to visitors from the Twin Cities and Chicago, and increase tourism in the state. Who wants to visit an outdated city and be forced to rent a car and drive for hours to get to their next destination? Regional transit will bring enormous monetary benefits to Wisconsin. It is never fiscally irresponsible to make smart investments in our future.
“Having a state funded rail system does not serve every citizen that will be paying for it.”
In fact, it will be paid for in part by lots of people who currently use it for free. That’s right, I’m talking about visitors. Right now, visitors to Wisconsin drive on our roads hundreds of thousands of times each year without paying a cent for their upkeep or construction. A transit system would be paid for in part by sales taxes, which visitors DO pay. Shouldn’t our transportation network be funded by EVERYONE who uses it, instead of pushing the cost entirely onto Wisconsin residents through property taxes?
“What people are failing to realize is that this is not free money.”
Are you suggesting that parks, schools, and roadways are constructed with “free money”? You contradict yourself on this point several times. You suggest that “the importance of local public work programs is necessary” (sentence construction FAIL, btw), while failing to note that these projects cost money too (and transit would constitute a public works project anyways, so you render your own point moot).
Zach, please stop disrespecting our state and DO SOME RESEARCH before you write! And BH copy editors - better editing please? (At least for his horrendous grammar and sentence structure?)
IP hash: 2369f97e
Yeah, you’d better drop the old “farmer paying for a city slicker choo choo” argument as fast as you can- The people that finance that farmer’s operation, or build his equipment might use that train. Perfecting the market (i.e. solving market inadequacies) is what taxes are all about, aren’t they? How are your schools and road proposals any different?
Second on that ‘shame on the editor comment’ really- this reads like the diatribes of a poorly informed, finger wagging high schooler.
IP hash: 1530cd0b
The train between Minneapolis and Chicago is a great idea. that will help boost the local economy. I hope the Gov will buy the Spanish Talgo Trains like they run in Oregon. Those are great!
IP hash: 2c1b6024
Dude, This article is really bad. I thought going to Madison meant you were smarter than this!!! First of all I like how you said “It is not fair to the other cities if we spend the stimulus money on a system that benefits so few. Having a state funded rail system does not serve every citizen that will be paying for it.” This statement my friend is retarded. How the hell are you going to find a way to benefit EVERYBODY who pays for it. This rail system makes a ton of sense and you are horribly uniformed. You disgraced the Madison name son!
IP hash: 4ae9feb3
As a person from the east coast where trains are common let me just say no one really uses that sit. Amtrak bleeds money all the time and the government has to spend money to support it. A high speed rail would be very different and a vast improvement. However, the funds allocated for this are not nearly enough to actually complete such a project. Not to mention its just as Zach says not a good time to be wasting money on things that won’t see returns for atleast ten years. A rail of that magnitude would take awhile to build and we don’t have as many laborers ready to work as we did in the 1930’s economy.
Zach wins
IP hash: add6f37b
As a person from the east coast where trains are common let me just say i can never find a seat on the train. i take the train from guilford, ct to new york,new haven, boston, chicago, and to the south. i think individuals should take advantage of the cheap, convenient services provided by trains seeing as the money is, in face, being bled anyway. (i do recognize that amtrak and the government do foolishly spend money but if no one is going to change it, might as well take advantage). also, i believe it is a good time to “waste” money on projects such as trains to create jobs and prepare ourselves for our imminent future. you don’t need 4 lanes of highway going everywhere and anywhere if we’re all going to be without oil and walking before we know it.
IP hash: a0781305
“Although the economies of Madison and Milwaukee would gladly accept the new business, the other cities of the state would not see any benefit from a railroad system through Wisconsin”
Last I checked, Wisconsin had a population around 5.6 million. Of those, 476K were in Dane County and 951K were in Milwaukee County. Waukeesha County (379K), Racine County (195K) and Kenosha County (163K) would also clearly benefit from the Milwaukee train service, and are likely to have stops. Current plans involve a high-speed rail stop in La Crosse County (111K). This totals to 2.275 Million Wisconsin residents who would benefit directly from having nearby high-speed rail access to Minneapolis and Chicago.
That’s about 40% of the state’s population. Build the damn train already — it’s far from a waste, and current proposals have Wisconsin paying for less than half of it.
ON TOP OF that, the high-speed rail follows the same routes proposed to be used for Dane County Commuter Rail — and the two can share track. Which means that this doubles as a Madison-area transit system. Something similar may be possible in Milwaukee.
On top of that, the actual proposal also involves additional, connecting rail service from Milwaukee to Green Bay in Brown County (243K) via several intervening counties (Washington County 128K, Fond du Lac 99K, etc.) {lus bus connections for the less populous parts of the state. These would be less expensive projects, but they’re not very useful unless they connect to a fast “trunk line” to Minneapolis, Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago. If they do connect to that high-speed trunk line, they are very useful for the communities they run through.
What an ignorant, poorly researched piece. Among the largest public works projects of the 1930s were giant railroad lines. You like public works, what’s your problem with rail?
IP hash: bb14a186
While I understand that this is an opinion piece, does ‘opinion’ mean ‘I don’t need facts’? This may have done well as a high school paper, but I expect more from UW-Madison in their writers, freshmen may they be. Please start checking facts and forming more stable arguments before trying to inform students, alumni, and other readers.