In the Midwest, the election of two Republican governors appears to have stopped development of improved passenger train service. The governors appear to be arguing that the projects are wrong.
Ohio Governor-elect John Kasich is following the same path as Wisconsin's incoming Republican governor, Scott Walker, emerging as a fierce foe of new government spending on an old transportation standby, passenger rail.First, a joke. A man walks into the streetcar company's office.
Kasich sent letters Monday to President Barack Obama, as well as Ohio's outgoing governor, to pull the plug on a $400 million passenger train project to link Cleveland to Cincinnati.
"You could get from Cleveland to Cincinnati faster in 1935 than you could with this so-called high-speed rail," said Kasich spokesman, Rob Nichols.
Tuesday, Walker followed Kasich's lead, sending a letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood to reaffirm his opposition to the high-speed rail plan.
The Obama administration's plans for high-speed rail appear to be hitting dead ends in Wisconsin and Ohio and a speed bump in Florida, where another Republican governor is due to take over after midterm elections.
"I'd like to apply for a job as a streetcar conductor."
"What's your name?"
"Rob Nichols."
"Sorry, we've got too many of those already."
It is true that passenger trains ran faster in Ohio, and in Wisconsin, years ago. That fact, by itself, does not render the project a bad project. It does, however, put on Passenger Rail advocates the obligation to make the case for the additional expenditure on special signalling and motive power to run trains faster, rather than proposing that the signalling and track structure rules be amended to permit the existing trains to travel at 125 mph on existing tracks.
But Passenger Rail advocates evidently failed to make the case, according to Milwaukee newscaster Gene Mueller.
I don't know whether to embrace the train or to accept it as a waste of federal cash, and I think others share my confusion. Blame that on Washington, including Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood who did such a lousy job of explaining what high-speed rail was all about when he held a news conference about it in Watertown over the summer. Instead of making his case, LaHood did nothing but insist that the train was going to happen, digging in his boots but offering nothing in the way of explaining the need or desire for such an undertaking.Regular readers of Cold Spring Shops are aware that the value of an extended train service is to provide connectivity. Yet the opponents were able to frame it as a train from Milwaukee to somewhere near Madison.
But no one will ride the train between Milwaukee and Madison when it's so easy to drive, some argue. Ridership is booming on the Milwaukee-Chicago line at a projected 800,000 passengers this year, [Carrie Anne] Renlund [of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation] said. The Milwaukee-Madison line could see 475,000 riders its first year in 2013, the state has projected.Passenger Train Journal editor Mike Schafer elaborates on the meaning of regional travel.
"I think it's important to keep in mind that this is to Chicago. It's Madison to Chicago. It's not a commuter line between Milwaukee and Madison. People like to compare the train to cars all the time, but really it's regional travel. It's a much better comparison to air travel," she said.
Trains are hardly a fad. We've been relying on them since the 19th century, and high-speed rail has taken off in Europe and other parts of the world. If gas prices soar again, we'll welcome some alternatives to highway travel.
[T]he point that is being missed by residents of southeastern Wisconsin is that the extension isn't simply to serve the Milwaukee-Madison market. The extension creates a matrix of sub-corridors aside from just Milwaukee-Madison. Madison, Watertown, and (if they got a station) Oconomowoc residents will be able to take the train to the Milwaukee County Airport Amtrak station to catch a flight. (This station is currently the most popular between Chicago and Milwaukee, with the exception of Chicago). Waukesha County residents could catch their trains at a Brookfield station and ride through to Chicago instead of driving to the Milwaukee Airport Amtrak station (which is what many west suburban residents do now to catch a train to Chicago; the airport Amtrak station is easier to deal with than downtown Milwaukee).If Wisconsin residents are missing this point, some of the responsibility lies with Passenger Rail advocates. Regular readers of Passenger Train Journal get this. Cold Spring Shops readers have had ample opportunity to grasp the value of intermediate stops. (Disclaimer: Mike and I have collaborated on several articles on Midwestern passenger service.) But nobody told Gene Mueller.
What better way to kill a project in these austere times by labeling it a costly boondoggle that will leave the state with a hefty operational tab once it's built? I know why I take the Amtrak to Chicago--the cost, the convenience, the ability to leave my car at home without having to pay for hotel parking, the way the Hiawatha allows me to avoid Chicago freeway gridlock. Madison-to-Milwaukee supporters have yet to tell me what I pay for a ticket, much less the advantages of taking the train instead of my car (I can go from my home to Camp Randall in an hour or so on a UW football game day--can high speed rail match that? Would it still be cheaper for me to drive?).Some days you almost require rapid transit to get from the parking lots to the stadium, and if there's construction on the interstate (is there ever not construction on the interstate?) or a fender-bender on East Gorham Street you're looking at an hour from the Cottage Grove exit to the parking lot. And if you live within an hour's drive of Madison under normal circumstances, you're probably one of the people Mr Schafer is referring to who parks at the airport station for the 75 minute Hiawatha to Chicago. A few improvements in the running times through Milwaukee and perhaps you're avoiding the Zoo interchange and downing that first Starbucks out of Brookfield.
That is, if the seats haven't been taken out of Madison.
Jim Imhoff, the incoming chairman of the Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce, said members of his group "overwhelmingly" support the rail line and the chamber will write Walker to express that.Milwaukee's business community takes an I've got mine posture.
Imhoff, the chief executive officer of First Weber Group, a statewide real estate agency based in Madison, said he feels that opponents of the rail line are giving up potentially large economic development benefits to avoid the costs of operating the line.
"To me it's like somebody giving you $500,000 for a new home and you complaining that you have to pay real estate taxes," Imhoff said.
Kevin Conroy, president and chief executive officer of the Madison biotech company Exact Sciences Corp., said the connection beyond Milwaukee is critical.
"Chicago is a very significant economy in the Midwest, and we want to be connected to it in a world where being connected accentuates growth," said Conroy, who added that he would personally take the train on his regular business trips to Chicago.
"Quite frankly, our focus was on ensuring that we had that (Hiawatha) connection to Chicago for lots of reasons. (The Madison line has) been more of a nice-to-have discussion than a need-to-have discussion in the business community in southeastern Wisconsin," [Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce president Tim] Sheehy said Wednesday. "In a sense, why beat a dead train?"Mr Kettler, are you willing to endorse the Cold Spring Shops "give them their head to 110" campaign? Stroke of the pen, 62 minute trains!
His comments were echoed Wednesday in separate interviews with top executives at two prominent Milwaukee manufacturers.
"This money is being thrown around without a lot of market research and financial justification," said Tim Sullivan, chief executive officer of Bucyrus International Inc. in South Milwaukee. "I just think that's crazy."
Rick Kettler, president and chief operating officer of Wagner Companies, a Milwaukee metal products manufacturer, said the money would be better spent on the Milwaukee-to-Chicago line.
"I love the idea of high-speed rail, but I love the idea of high-speed rail between places where people go," Kettler said.
The incoming governors of Ohio and Wisconsin would both like the money allocated for rail infrastructure improvements to go to roads instead.
Both Walker and Kasich have made the case that money would be better spent on other construction projects, primarily roads and bridges. They also don't want their states hit with annual operating costs once the projects are up and running. Ohio faces an $8 billion budget deficit, while Wisconsin has a $2.7 billion deficit.There's a little problem: Congress has to authorize the change.
U.S. Rep. Tom Petri of Fond du Lac, a veteran member of the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said he supports Walker's plan but sees little hope for it to succeed. That's because the money already has been set aside specifically for rail and there are other states requesting it for that purpose, Petri said in an interview.Not only that, the new majority's critics to their left will be more than happy to call out any pork-barreling or ear-marking.
Petri opposed the federal stimulus bill containing the rail funding but has not taken a position on the Madison-to-Milwaukee rail project itself, which would include a possible stop in his district in Watertown.
"Now this money, if Wisconsin decides not to use it, is still in that grant program and in the normal course of events would be rebid and go to New York or California or one of the (other) states," Petri said. "For us to keep that money would require us to change the law, and that would mean getting the votes of (states like) New York and California and Florida. It's conceivable but very unlikely."
And even if Wisconsin is able to get the money diverted to roads, it's unlikely to do much good. Gene Mueller is ambivalent.
[Train opponents] say the cash should be used for infrastructure, a-k-a "roads". There's no doubt our freeways and bridges need work--remember what happened with Milwaukee's Zoo Interchange this past spring--but how long do we stay addicted to a steady diet of orange barrels and wider interstates? The highway beast is an animal with an insatiable appetite, and blacktop ain't cheap, either. We talk the talk about transportation alternatives every time gasoline cracks three bucks a gallon, but we lose our backbone when the price creeps back down. My village, Hales Corners, stands to be cut in half by an expanded Highway 100 that the DOT is pushing--a wider road the state says we need to accommodate projected traffic spikes but a project that is poised to turn the heart of my village's business district into a commuter drive-by while leaving locals with shops that'll be a struggle to get to. It happens all the time in Wisconsin, where bigger and wider is seen as the only DOT alternative.That alternative does create jobs for traffic cops and tow-truck drivers and the coroner, in the same way that vandalism creates work for the glazier. The editors of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel suggest that there's an opportunity cost.
We urge [governor-elect Scott] Walker to rethink his opposition, particularly since one of his biggest objections - the continuing costs to the state in operating subsidies for the line - might be shrinking. The state has said that the $7.5 million yearly figure bandied about during the campaign can go down to about $750,000 yearly if federal aid covers 90% of operating costs - what occurs on Amtrak's existing Milwaukee-to-Chicago line.Jim Rowen at The Political Environment looks at the costs of a few road projects that are unlikely to have much effect on drive times or congestion.
This Milwaukee-to-Madison line would be a bargain at $7.5 million. At $750,000, it's a steal.
No? How much per mile is the I-94 widening costing the state? And Walker is pledging broad tax cuts to spur economic development in the state. Until we see what Walker and the Legislature agree to, the cost to the state budget is unknowable but it's likely to be significant. If targeted tax cuts and incentives do create jobs, it could be worth it. Much as a rail line would be at $750,000 a year.
Federal authorities have said the state's share of high-speed rail construction is zero dollars, and the annual contribution for operations would be $750,000.The road system is hardly self-supporting, anyway.
Consider that the Wisconsin Department of Transportation has already spent at least $8.8 million to acquire land and plan for an I-94 interchange in Western Waukesha County to serve a shopping mall at Pabst Farms that has twice been delayed and may never be built.
By WisDOT standards - - it is spending $1.9 billion on the I-94 north/south project from Milwaukee to the Illinois state line, while the Zoo Interchange is projected at more than $2 billion - - $8.8 million is chicken feed, and $750,000 is what, a kernel of corn?
Yet $8.8 million would cover the state's train operating share for nearly 12 years.
The latest Federal Highway Administration numbers (for 2008) show that only 51% of highway costs are covered by user fees, including the gas tax, vehicle taxes and tolls. At the same time, many passenger rail systems cover 50% or more of their operating expenses out of the fare box. The most recent Federal Transit Administration data (also for 2008) show that nationally, commuter rail (the closest parallel to Wisconsin's planned new trains) covered 50.3% of its operating costs from fares. In contrast, bus systems, which libertarian transit critics promote over trains, covered only 26.3% of their operating costs. Between highways and trains, it's a wash.Another $800 million doesn't provide much more by way of road improvement, and there are other states in line for the grants.
In comments Tuesday in Chicago, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, a Democrat, said his state would be delighted to step in and take additional high-speed cash if Wisconsin pulls out of the project.New York already has space for dedicated passenger tracks in the Empire Corridor -- one simply replaces the tracks the Vanderbilts installed and Robert R. Young removed -- and a Talgo train would be just the thing for the service to Rockford and Dubuque (you could upgrade the Metra line from Big Timber and build a connection to the old Illinois Central at Genoa for a lot less than $800 million) and emulate the Chicago Great Western's Red Bird.
"Well, hey, we'd like all the money that Wisconsin is getting for high speed rail," Quinn said at a news conference. "If they're going to turn it down, which I think is a very bad decision on their part, but if they're going to turn down that money, we can use it in Illinois. We're building a fast train from Chicago to St. Louis and we want to build fast trains all over the Midwest."
Quinn said he already has spoken with Vice President Joe Biden about trying to secure additional high-speed funds for Illinois - the state is already receiving $1.2 billion - from states such as Wisconsin and is seeking to lure manufacturing jobs linked to rail cars from Wisconsin to Illinois as well. New York Governor-elect Andrew Cuomo also has said his state would like Wisconsin's share of the passenger rail money.
The plan to connect Minneapolis and Chicago with high speed trains through Wisconsin has been derailed. Wisconsin's next governor says he wants highways, not railroads. That puts Rockford in a prime position.One plan for the faster trains envisions a routing by way of Rockford, Dubuque, and Rochester, Minnesota to the Twin Cities.
It's been 30 years since Rockford saw a passenger train. And now the city could get a high speed route.
There is a Talgo train factory on the north side of Milwaukee, at least for now.
"If Wisconsin is losing its enthusiasm for its rail program and others are not, we could go to Illinois and manufacture world-class trains there," said Nora Friend, Talgo vice president for public affairs and business development. "We certainly appreciate Gov. Quinn reaching out to us. We will consider very seriously states that want to grow their rail program."In a future post, I hope to give Canadian Pacific Railway's reaction to Wisconsin's request. The improvements between Milwaukee and Watertown include restoration of the second main track for passenger and freight operation; its cancellation will affect the railroad's plans.
No comments:
Post a Comment