22 January, 2009

The Why and Wherefore of Passenger Rail in Wisconsin

James Rowen posted recently about the need for rail service between Chicago and Madison if we Cheeseheads are going to be hosting Olympic cycling events in 2016.

I agree with Rowen that bringing Amtrak service to Madison is a great idea but I remain skeptical that it's going to happen anytime soon, not least because President Obama's (how nice to type that instead of "President Bush") stimulus package has morphed into something not nearly as public transportation friendly as it once was. Here's what Obama said to the U.S. Conference of Mayors a few days ago:

The reason for the reduction in overall funding -- we took money out of Amtrak and out of aviation; we took money out of the Corps of Engineers, reduced the water infrastructure program, the drinking water and the wastewater treatment facilities and sewer lines, reduced that from $14 billion to roughly $9 billion -- was the tax cut initiative that had to be paid for in some way by keeping the entire package in the range of $850 billion. (Emphasis mine.)

Gotta have those tax cuts.

As long as we're talking about trains, I'd like to point out this map from the folks at the Midwest High Speed Rail blog:


View Larger Map


This map is entitled "U.S. Regional Rail Projects Shovel Ready Within Four Months". If the Feds provide the cash, these projects can get underway within four months. Notice that Wisconsin has nothing on the map. Perhaps extending Amtrak service to Madison is one of those ready within a year projects.

There are a few proposals for rail in Wisconsin: put Madison on the Empire Builder route, a commuter line between Madison and Milwaukee, a commuter line between Sun Prairie and Middleton, a commuter line serving Milwaukee, Racine, & Kenosha, and light rail within Madison. Everyone wants rail everywhere but that's just not possible. A rumor starts that federal funding might be available and suddenly everybody has a pet rail project.

I think that Wisconsin needs a commission to figure out what rail projects should be a priority. The federal coffers are not going to be open for any and all rail projects so we as a state should prioritize things and make an effort as a state to secure federal funding. The Madison area has certain rail desires as does the southeastern corner of the state - I think we need to take a larger view.

People like Tom Still of the Wisconsin Technology Council promote regionalism, which is to say that we ought to stop thinking about the Madison business climate and instead think about partnering with Milwaukee, if not the Upper Midwest as a whole because Milwaukee is not our competition – other countries are.

The governor, the DoT, officials from Madison, Dane County, the Milwaukee area, and Green Bay should get together and talk strategy. The rail pie is shrinking and it seems like local officials are working at cross purposes as they compete for federal funds. Instead, representatives should get together and discuss the benefits and disadvantages of the various proposals.

How would the proposed Midwest Regional Rail System, which adds Amtrak service to Madison and Green Bay, affect Wisconsin if it were to be implemented?

What does commuter rail accomplish? Would more people benefit from the proposed Kenosha Racine Milwaukee line than from a Sun Prairie to Middleton line?

In what ways would Wisconsin benefit by linking its two largest cities via a commuter line?

What does rail mean to Wisconsin? Is it about reducing traffic and pollution? Or about strengthening regional economic ties? Both? None of the above? Are the goals long term or short term? Medium term?

Keep in mind that we're in the middle of a recession. Additionally, the anti-rail crowd would do well to remember that, while rail does indeed cost a lot of money, our existing system of roads costs billions and billions of dollars as well. Similarly, pro-rail folks should understand that existing rail networks do not have an infinite capacity.

There's more at stake here than whether or not Wisconsin looks bush league in the eyes of Olympic participants and observers in 2016.

No comments: