Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more) Search Archives

Blogs

Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)

Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)

Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)

FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)

Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)

Education done right (1/27/2011)

To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)

(more)

People around the country are asking the same question about operating costs for rail lines, said Laura Kliewer, director of the Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission. There really isn’t an answer, she said, because the federal government did not start investing large amounts of money into high-speed rail until 2009.

....The state came up with a rough estimate of operating costs when it applied for the money, but the actual cost is unknown, Klein said. The estimate — $8.2 million annually in 2013 dollars — is preliminary and based on the cost of running Amtrak trains from Milwaukee to Chicago.

.... Wisconsin has until Sept. 30, 2010, to accept the money before the grant offer expires. But the Legislature is scheduled to adjourn April 22 until after the Jan. 3, 2011, inauguration. So barring a special session or an extension of the federal deadline, lawmakers have 10 weeks to accept the money.

The $8.2 million annual estimate is good enough for Terry McGowan, business manager for the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 139.

“I’m opposed to anything coming out of the transportation fund other than for the purpose of road building, but I do see this as a great project to put our people to work,” he said. “And I don’t worry about the maintenance and operating costs any more than I would the maintenance or operating costs of highway.”

The administration has chosen to elevate an expensive program targeted at an extraordinarily narrow segment of the traveling public over programs that could provide meaningful relief to tens of millions of travelers on a daily basis.

…. Until January, the DOT served as little more than a spigot for federal dollars to fund a dubious jobs program.

…. The administration’s high-speed-rail initiative is at least conceived as an actual transportation program with a goal of improving mobility between cities. But the plan’s stunningly narrow impact disqualifies it as a marquee program. Intercity rail currently accounts for less than 1 percent of all travel in the U.S. It will compete primarily with short-haul (less than 500 miles) air travel, but all air travel, including long-haul trips, accounts for just 10.8 percent of all travel in the U.S.

… Freight bottlenecks in Chicago disrupt the distribution of goods and services nationwide.

…. Perhaps even more troubling is the Obama administration’s apparent unwillingness to tackle seriously our dysfunctional approach to funding the nation’s deteriorating infrastructure.

…. After wallowing in political Never Never Land for more than a year, it’s time for federal transportation policy to move forward. Unfortunately, this won’t happen as long as the Obama administration continues to marginalize the DOT with low-impact projects that sidestep the major transportation challenges of the day.

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.

Post a Reply

Print this Article

Email Article to a Friend