I saw that in the paper as well. I was extremely disappointed to see Thompson essentially mimic the anti-rail hysteria that has become rampant in the Wisconsin GOP in the last couple years, particularly since this project/proposal is precisely what he worked to put into place when he was governor about a decade ago or so.
"Stop The Train!"
- Thread starter WhoozOn1st
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
Ryan
Court Jester
Oh, he still pro-rail, when it doesn't conflict with his being pro-Republican.
I suppose I shouldn't be quite as surprised at his now anti-rail views, given the about-face he did regarding rail transit in Milwaukee about 15 years ago or so, when there was an emerging consensus in favor of a "grand plan" for transportation along the I-94 East-West Freeway corridor involving light rail and HOV lanes, and went from being at least moderately supportive of light rail to completely opposed to any state funding of it. However, until today, it was unclear whether he was going to completely repudiate his previous support for intercity passenger rail.
More from Scott Walker, a conservative who I think is seriously misinformed regarding the Chicago - MKE - MSN - STP passenger rail improvements : "Walker appointee was rail promoter"
I'm getting more and more worried about ever seeing rail service to Madison, WI. All I can do is get involved, and write more to my Elected Representatives.
Oh, and AlanB: have at it. The antis as per usual, are out in force.
The Western Wisconsin Rail Coalition has a list of rebuttals to Mr. Walkers', and rail opponents', criticisms:
From the Western WI rail Coalition, some rebuttal points to use when discussing the train with the opponents:
HSR: Answering The Critics
To sum it up:
1. Wisconsin has been planning this for the better part of two decades. Numerous studies have been published and rail service is part of the State Rail Plan.
2. The federal government has been involved in transportation spending for almost a century now, including funding the Interstate System. While objecting to the funds for the improvement of rail service, does Mr. Walker also suggest that all federal funding for all programs -- including highways -- be refused ?
3. The $ 7.5 million operating cost is less than 2/10ths of one percent of the entire WI DOT budget.
4. HSR is a transportation investment, not a jobs program. Note that nobody is measuring highways by how many permanent jobs their maintenance creates.
5. For every one dollar invested, the return is estimated to be $ 1.80.
6. Highways do not cover their costs, and, lately, the gas tax has covered only 51 percent of highway maintenance costs. This route is estimated to cover 65 percent of its costs, possibly more.
7. This is an extension of an already popular Hiawatha service. it is estimated that the service will have over 300,000 riders in its first year of operation alone. Dane County ( of which Madison is the seat ) has a population of 491,357 ( 2009 est. ) ( source: US Census Bureau ) .
8. Just because one person wouldn't take the train doesn't mean that nobody will. Driving has costs that are not limited to gas money alone. "Wear and Tear," and insurance, and even costs of lost wages due to collision-related injuries and deaths, are all costs associated with driving. Currently ( 2009 and 2010 ), the IRS allows for driving costs to be calculated at $ 0.50 per mile. That would make driving between Madison and MKE one-way ( 79 miles ) cost $ 39.50, or $ 79 per round trip.
9. The use of transportation funds for non-transportation purposes is of concern to all transportation advocates. This is an investment in the future, in anticipation of future transportation needs between Chicago, MKE, MSN, and Saint Paul, MN.
10. HSR is innovative, and an investment in the future. If Scott Walker wishes to emulate Tommy Thompson, Mr. Walker ought to invest in passenger rail service improvements, particularly investments that have been planned for two decades.
I'm getting more and more worried about ever seeing rail service to Madison, WI. All I can do is get involved, and write more to my Elected Representatives.
Oh, and AlanB: have at it. The antis as per usual, are out in force.
The Western Wisconsin Rail Coalition has a list of rebuttals to Mr. Walkers', and rail opponents', criticisms:
From the Western WI rail Coalition, some rebuttal points to use when discussing the train with the opponents:
HSR: Answering The Critics
To sum it up:
1. Wisconsin has been planning this for the better part of two decades. Numerous studies have been published and rail service is part of the State Rail Plan.
2. The federal government has been involved in transportation spending for almost a century now, including funding the Interstate System. While objecting to the funds for the improvement of rail service, does Mr. Walker also suggest that all federal funding for all programs -- including highways -- be refused ?
3. The $ 7.5 million operating cost is less than 2/10ths of one percent of the entire WI DOT budget.
4. HSR is a transportation investment, not a jobs program. Note that nobody is measuring highways by how many permanent jobs their maintenance creates.
5. For every one dollar invested, the return is estimated to be $ 1.80.
6. Highways do not cover their costs, and, lately, the gas tax has covered only 51 percent of highway maintenance costs. This route is estimated to cover 65 percent of its costs, possibly more.
7. This is an extension of an already popular Hiawatha service. it is estimated that the service will have over 300,000 riders in its first year of operation alone. Dane County ( of which Madison is the seat ) has a population of 491,357 ( 2009 est. ) ( source: US Census Bureau ) .
8. Just because one person wouldn't take the train doesn't mean that nobody will. Driving has costs that are not limited to gas money alone. "Wear and Tear," and insurance, and even costs of lost wages due to collision-related injuries and deaths, are all costs associated with driving. Currently ( 2009 and 2010 ), the IRS allows for driving costs to be calculated at $ 0.50 per mile. That would make driving between Madison and MKE one-way ( 79 miles ) cost $ 39.50, or $ 79 per round trip.
9. The use of transportation funds for non-transportation purposes is of concern to all transportation advocates. This is an investment in the future, in anticipation of future transportation needs between Chicago, MKE, MSN, and Saint Paul, MN.
10. HSR is innovative, and an investment in the future. If Scott Walker wishes to emulate Tommy Thompson, Mr. Walker ought to invest in passenger rail service improvements, particularly investments that have been planned for two decades.
Last edited by a moderator:
Does this also mean the Amtrak will change the name on it's one and only named locomotive, "Tommy G. Thompson"?
Actually I believe that the name was already physically removed from the engine when it got a new paint job a few years back. I'm not sure if the "official" records still carry the name or not.
A few more articles from Madison papers:
From the Capital Times: Walker wants to stop the train, but can he?
From Isthmus: What's wrong with high-speed rail An economist looks at the numbers and deems HSR not a good deal. The reader comments, including the author's reply, are longer and more in-depth than the article itself. Unlike the cesspool of most newspaper comments sections, Isthmus requires real names, so the discussion is thoughtful. Especially interesting is a refutation of the author by a writer who identifies himself as a transportation planner.
From the Capital Times: Walker wants to stop the train, but can he?
From Isthmus: What's wrong with high-speed rail An economist looks at the numbers and deems HSR not a good deal. The reader comments, including the author's reply, are longer and more in-depth than the article itself. Unlike the cesspool of most newspaper comments sections, Isthmus requires real names, so the discussion is thoughtful. Especially interesting is a refutation of the author by a writer who identifies himself as a transportation planner.
Here's a good video interview done with both Frank Busalacchi, of WisDOT, and Rep. Scott Fitzgerald. Busalacchi does a pretty good job of defending the project and admits they are pressing forward and will have spent $300 million by years end. Fitzgerald admits that if Walker is elected they will try any to stop it. When asked that, even it means throwing away $300 million of the taxpayers money, Fitzgerald says he has no problem with that. :angry2:
http://www.wisn.com/video/24718612/detail.html
http://www.wisn.com/video/24718612/detail.html
Here's an update, via the Wall Street Journal: Racing to build a Midwestern rail line.
amtrakwolverine
Engineer
So with this deal The train can't be stopped?
No, it can still be stopped. Likely-governor-to-be Scott Walker can still cancel it once he takes office in January. This deal, as I understand it, just authorizes the state to spend all of the $800+ million they received. It is highly unlikely (probably impossible) that all will be spent by January, and even it it was, Walker could still back out of contracts.
Well he can still cancel it, but at considerable cost to the taxpayers. Even though the entire $830 million won't be spent, some of it already it spent and it will cost him money and penalties to break the contracts. All told it wouldn't surprise me between what has already been spent, what will be spent by the time the new Gov takes over, plus the penalties and expenses to cancel things that the state would be on the hook for perhaps $300M to $400M that they would have to repay. Money the state doesn't have.
By that point I'm sure that some enterprising reporting will figure out that based upon the worst case subsidy of $7.5 Million that they could run the trains for 40 years before they would have spent $300 Million.
Additionally the article that was linked to also suggests that they are trying to get the Fed to consider picking up some of the annual subsidies at least for the first few years. That would remove Mr. Walker's biggest objection to this train if that happens. He'd now look like an idiot if he killed the train with the Fed picking up the subsidies for the first few years if he killed the train and forced Wisconsin to repay a few hundred million to the Fed.
Walker would like to use that money for highway projects. Something similar happened under the Thompson administration, where federal money for a Milwaukee light rail project was diverted to highways. A bunch of things need to fall into place:
- Scott Walker becomes governor. (Almost certain)
- Republican majority in Wisconsin Assembly and Senate. (My guess--one but not the other.)
- Republican majority in U.S. House and Sanate. (One likely, the other maybe.)
- Acquiesence of Administration. (Not likely.)
Without that, the most Walker could do is cancel the contracts and send the money back, including the money already spent, so it can be used in some other state.
I'm sure there will be a flurry of activity to hammer those contracts into place before the end of the year. It would be interesting to see what kind of payment structures and penalty clauses those contracts will have. Any component of the project that involves procuring supplies and scheduling equipment would naturally have some significant up-front cost.
One major construction company in the state, Kraemer & Sons, already has a contract for the land bridges between Watertown and Waterloo, based on last summer's authorization.
CP Rail would be the prime contractor for the Milwaukee-Watertown segment since it's their property, and they stand to benefit with added capacity and road improvements. WSOR, the freight operator on the Watertown-Madison segment, gets decent roadbed out of the project. (WSOR CEO Bill Gardner is a Walker supporter, by the way.) Watertown and Waterloo get industrial development potential with freight trackage that's visibly "here to stay." Talgo is setting up shop in Milwaukee with an initial order to replace current CHI-MKE fleet and more to be ordered with expansion of service. There are a bunch of business interests lined up to make life difficult for Walker. We'll see what happens.
I would like to point out that Mr. Walker, should he win the election to governorship, will also have the authority to de-fund the train service. We are by no means out of the woods, here. Walker has also stated that he would reject the funds no matter what the cost. The only problem would be where the money for repayment would come from. Wisconsin, being one of the smaller States of the Union, doesn't have much on hand right now.
Walker would also have an electorate many of whom feel that the train has been shoved down their throats. This electorate is solidly convinced that the train service will be a drain on the taxpayer's wallet, no matter how much evidence I post otherwise. Hell, the most recent activities and estimates have come in under what the WI state DOT has estimated.
Walker would also have an electorate many of whom feel that the train has been shoved down their throats. This electorate is solidly convinced that the train service will be a drain on the taxpayer's wallet, no matter how much evidence I post otherwise. Hell, the most recent activities and estimates have come in under what the WI state DOT has estimated.
Last edited by a moderator:
By de-fund I'm assuming that you mean that he won't release the monies to pay for the annual subsidies.
Yes, he can do that, however doing so triggers the repayment clause to the Fed. The state is obligated to run that train for a certain number of years by accepting the $800M. Failure to operate the train means repaying the entire $800+M.
that is what I meant by de-fund. He could refuse to authorize, or refuse to spend, the money. Again, take a look at the comments on the Milwaukee Journal's site on this act. It has made a lot of folks angry, and Barrett ( the train supporting Gubernatorial candidate) could suffer the consequences -- by losing votes. Not that I mind, however -- Walker ought to be forced to build the rail service. Also, I continue to notice just how many opponents refer to the service as Madison - Milwaukee, when in reality it is Chicago to Saint Paul ( and, possibly, Duluth, MN, or Winnipeg, MB, Canada ) via Madison & Milwaukee.
amtrakwolverine
Engineer
Well has Scott walker won any updates on that?
Last edited by a moderator:
It looks as if Scott Walker has indeed won.
If I interpret the news article correctly, the deal means that the contracts will all be signed and the funds obligated before Walker takes office. Depending on the rules and laws, the new governor may be very restricted in his ability to stop the project. That a $800+ million project, totally funded by the federal government, to provide 110 mph rail service to connect two major cities in the state and to Chicago has become such a political football is hard to comprehend. The state could spend $800 million on a major highway bridge project with nary a public complaint.
However, the projection is that Kasich has won in Ohio. The 3C corridor project is almost certainly dead.
amtrakwolverine
Engineer
This is why America can't have Japanese style bullet trains cause we can't elect people who will support it. We keep electing people who kill it.
Devil's Advocate
⠀⠀⠀
Bingo.
Also, think back to the postwar period. Europe and Japan were decimated. They had lost a bit of their arrogance and in their slightly more humble state they decided to move in a different direction and provide new services like universal health care and to rebuild their infrastructure with efficient mass transit. But here in America the attitude was somewhat different. We were awash with new wealth and saw no problems leaving every working class family to fend for themselves so that they might exclusively reap the occasional reward or suffer any number of unfortunate situations alone. The personal vehicle was the perfect embodiment of that go-it-alone attitude. The upper crust eventually moved toward the growing airline industry that catered to them while the working class began acquiring automobiles en mass. Airlines were eventually deregulated and dropped their ticket prices to artificially low levels for decades in an attempt to secure a commanding market share. These below-cost tickets allowed even working class families to fly if they were flexible enough with dates and times. The current combination of near universal vehicle ownership along with quick and easy flights to almost anywhere ensures that killing passenger rail will continue to be an easy win for many American politicians for decades to come. If I were a politician I'd probably be anti-rail myself simply because it polls so well among likely voters of the conservative and independent persuasions. Now, as for how to fix this, I'm not really sure. Right now we seem to have one of the most anti-rail governments ever on the way and I'm not sure how we can counter that effectively.
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately, I don't see any new money for rail for the next few years. However, with a few exceptions (stubborn state governors), money that has been authorized will probably get spent.
Amtrak should, hopefully, be okay. Don't forget that we had an anti-rail administration and Republican control of both houses of Congress in the 2000s, and Amtrak is still here. Amtrak is probably even a bit stronger today than they were ten years ago.
So, will it be tough? Yes. Is it the end? Far from it.
