I Hear the Train a Comin’
I know it may sound a little silly to ask this at this point, but where in the Constitution does it give the federal government the power to force a state to construct and support a train? At least up until now, the fed at least had to bribe state politicians to enact stupid federal initiatives.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Gov. Jim Doyle on Thursday portrayed a planned Milwaukee-to-Madison high-speed rail line as an unstoppable train that Republican gubernatorial candidates can’t derail.
“High-speed rail is coming to Wisconsin,” LaHood said. “There’s no stopping it.
LaHood was in Watertown to sign an agreement to release $46.7 million of the $810 million in federal stimulus money that Wisconsin is receiving to build the 110-mph line.
That’s the second installment, after a previous $5.7 million payment.
Republican gubernatorial candidates Scott Walker and Mark Neumann have threatened to shut down construction on the line if they’re elected, saying they don’t want taxpayers burdened by operating costs. Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, the leading Democrat in the governor’s race, backs high-speed rail.
But LaHood, a former Republican congressman now serving in a Democratic administration, brushed those concerns aside, saying high-speed rail is a national program that will survive changes in political leadership.
This arrogance, this party-crossing, class-crossing, domain-crossing arrogance is going to destroy this great country.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 1245 hrs
Thanks for getting that song stuck in my head.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 1302 hrs
LaHood was in Watertown to sign an agreement to release $46.7 million of the $810 million in federal stimulus money that Wisconsin is receiving to build the 110-mph line.
That’s the second installment, after a previous $5.7 million payment.
To me, it seems like the wheels were already set in motion. It seems like PERHAPS the state ASKED the Federal Government for assistance. After all, this is the SECOND installment payment…Not sure how you feel the Federal Government is “forcing” Wisconsin to do something the goernor requested.. Your governor, whether you voted for him or not, set these wheels in motion. Or, am i missing something???
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 1325 hrs
I know it may sound a little silly to ask this at this point, but where in the Constitution does it give the federal government the power to force a state to construct and support a train?
The same place the federal government is granted the power to force all of us the pay for the creation and maintenance of a space program.
Posted by Jay4Liberty on July 29, 2010 at 1334 hrs
creation and maintenance of a space program.
Or interstate highways.
Or armies.
Or mail delivery.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 1550 hrs
LaHood is an F.I.B. with a big title, for the time being.
And the choochoo WILL be stopped.
Posted by dad29 on July 29, 2010 at 1615 hrs
There is NO way the state can be forced to pay operating costs nor can it be forced to participate in construction of the railroad. If Secty. LaHood and President Obama can convince Congress to finance construction and operation then of course they are free to do so. Governor Walker or Neumann can simply not provide $ in the biennial budget for operations and they can direct the WisDOT secretary not to participate in construction planning and implementation. Given the lack of statewide support for this project, today’s announcement is a gift to whomever wins the 9/14 GOP nomination.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 1726 hrs
Or interstate highways.
Or armies.
Or mail delivery.
Ah yes the cry of “We do these other things so this thing is also OK.”
I thought only Mark Belling used that argument, good to see people from across the political spectrum can use that circular logic as well.
Posted by Jay4Liberty on July 29, 2010 at 1741 hrs
Given the lack of statewide support for this project, today’s announcement is a gift to whomever wins the 9/14 GOP nomination.
Not really. The vast majority of Wisconsinites don’t know and don’t care about this train. This is now and will forever be a regional issue. It’d be like trying to get voters in Superior wound up about commuter rail in Madison. It’s totally pointless. Walker and Barrett could both stand to figure out that nobody really cares to watch them use the gubernatorial campaign as a proxy war over who’s screwed Milwaukee up more.
Mark my words, the likelihood of success in this race is inversely proportional to the amount of time carping about Milwaukee’s issues.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on July 29, 2010 at 1823 hrs
Ah yes the cry of “We do these other things so this thing is also OK.”
I never made a normative claim of whether anything was OK or not.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 1943 hrs
Try to be consistent, RS. I thought you outstaters would like someone who said, “Don’t spend on Milwaukee.”
Posted by steveegg on July 29, 2010 at 2042 hrs
The same place the federal government is granted the power to force all of us the pay for the creation and maintenance of a space program.
Why do you always bring up this ridiculous point? I suspect that you’d have more people agree with you if you said the earth was flat. It’s a ridiculous notion.
It’d be like trying to get voters in Superior wound up about commuter rail in Madison.
I suspect they will be a bit more wound up when they get to pay for it with their taxes.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 2052 hrs
True, RS. You claimed that those outside of SE Wisconsin would be very upset at sending money to fix Milwaukee’s sewer system, but now say that the same people wouldn’t care about spending roughly the same amount of money on a train that only services Milwaukee and Madison. Which is it?
Posted by Owen on July 29, 2010 at 2059 hrs
Recess, I missed your rebuttals in this discussion. Glad to see you’re back from vacation… where did you go?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 2104 hrs
Why do you always bring up this ridiculous point? I suspect that you’d have more people agree with you if you said the earth was flat. It’s a ridiculous notion.
What’s the problem? Can you not see the idiocy of crying about the constitutionality of some things but turning a blind eye to others? How is it ridiculous? Why is it perfectly OK to ask “where in the Constitution does it give the federal government the power to force a state to construct and support a train?” Is it because the train is bad and we should follow the constitution in that case, but shooting tin cans into space is something you like so therefore the constitution is meaningless?
I’m really trying to understand these neo-constitutionalists, but usually all I get is moronic replies like….well like yours.
Posted by Jay4Liberty on July 29, 2010 at 2129 hrs
Take note, it’s no longer a representative Government. You are owned, and you will do as you’re told.
SUBMIT…...............or die.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2010 at 2131 hrs
I will clarify.
The sewer issue is one of municipal negligence. It’d be like if your neighbor built a crappy house, knew he built a crappy house, did nothing to fix his crappy house, and then when it fell over, your city levied a special assessment on you to build him a new house.
It’s a simple issue to frame politically. It’s an issue of accountability and responsibility. People generally don’t like paying for other people’s irresponsibility. I think it’s safe to say that’s a common theme around here. Look no further than the general tenor of the discussions on immigration. Accountability and responsibility are extremely visceral notions in politics. People will often concern themselves about those traits even when the underlying concern is minor and doesn’t warrant the attention they give it.
The train, on the other hand, is a snoozer because it’s a pure policy issue and virtually all of the funding behind it is federal. So we’re paying for it, kind of, but it’s not money coming from the people who’d be governing the state. And voters are smart enough to recognize that $810 million in federal money is going to get spent somewhere once it’s appropriated - whether it’s on a train in Wisconsin or a bridge in Oregon.
Just like with immigration, the train doesn’t affect the lives of most people on a day-to-day basis. It’s not like talking to voters about the economy, or jobs, or health care, or the schools their kids go to. So the question then is, can the train be turned into something emotionally visceral, like immigration?
I think you’d have to be crazy to say yes.
This isn’t to say someone can’t try to paint the train as a Milwaukee issue. I’m just telling you that voters won’t bite.
Milwaukee isn’t the cupcake here, it’s just the frosting. I suspect some of you see “Milwaukee sewer” and “Milwaukee train” and immediately think the issue is “Milwaukee,” rather than “sewer” and “train.” The Milwaukee part only matters to the extent you could make the original argument stick. And I suspect that, as I outlined, sewer would be a much stickier argument than train, because it goes directly to the issues of accountability and responsibility that voters are attracted to.
Of course, none of this should be construed as an endorsement on my part of the rail project. Like most of you, I think that money could’ve been better spent elsewhere, or possibly not spent at all.
(oh, and Jason, I usually stop reading comment threads when they get long because they either turn into a giant circle jerk among a few of you or you’re all engaged in an entirely pointless and tangential discussion with Scott. Tell you what, I’ll start answering every question on every comment thread as soon as our host agrees to do the same. I suspect, however, that like me, the host is probably too busy to respond to everything.)
Posted by Recess Supervisor on July 30, 2010 at 0428 hrs
But to answer your question, Jason, this is why I feel okay using the phrase “teabagger.” It’s because some of the idiots in the Tea Party crowd were using the phrase all along. If they’re encouraging one another to teabag people, completely oblivious to the very well-known sexual connotation of the phrase, it’s only right to call them teabaggers.
If you guys can use teabag as a verb, I can use teabagger as a noun: it means “one who teabags.”
Posted by Recess Supervisor on July 30, 2010 at 0436 hrs
I agree with George Mitchell. This is a huge win for Walker.
Last night on Fox 6, Ted Perry did his commentary piece where he mocked LaHood’s presentation from yesterday. Apparently LaHood made a remark along the lines of “Well, we have to get the rail line up and running before we can tell you what the operating costs will be”
Perry was rather incredulous at that idea and called it irresponsible. Said you can’t spend a billion on a project and not know what the operating costs will end up being. He was amazed at how poor LaHood’s answer was.
When you lose a left-leaning guy like Ted Perry on the issue, you have problems.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 30, 2010 at 0629 hrs
on a train that only services Milwaukee and Madison
Even MORE on-point: it will only carry lobbyists and lawyers from point-to-point.If Walker can’t make hay out of that, he deserves to lose—especially when he mentions that Superior, Green Bay, Appleton, and Wausau taxpayers will finance the operational costs.
Posted by dad29 on July 30, 2010 at 0818 hrs
Your governor, whether you voted for him or not, set these wheels in motion. Or, am i missing something???
Yeah, you did miss the most important point…
But LaHood, a former Republican congressman now serving in a Democratic administration, brushed those concerns aside, saying high-speed rail is a national program that will survive changes in political leadership.
That’s the point you missed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 30, 2010 at 1059 hrs
Recess, I can see why you chose to run from that thread. You explanation here is extremely weak. You really twisted to get that out. Pathetic.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 30, 2010 at 1102 hrs
I think it’s the same place that specifies a 60% vote is needed to pass anything through the Senate. Not.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 30, 2010 at 1149 hrs
Why not establish a straight line from Milwaukee to the twin cities eliminating Madison from the route. Utilize old freight tracks, you need to update them but purchasing property gets dropped from the equation.
If Madison wants onboard they can cough up the cost of there own commuter line using local tax dollars to hook up with the mainline.
A straight line through the center of the state puts every taxpayer a stone throw away from the line drawing more users. If I could get to Hayward in two hours on a Friday afternoon life is good. Imagine all the commerce or tourism the blighted depressed northern counties would draw in from Milwaukee and Chicago.
This would all make the most sense but of course never fly as it would ruffle to many feathers in Madison if they had to cough up there money, it would then be branded a waste of tax dollars.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 30, 2010 at 1411 hrs
I’ve ridden Amtrak a lot and have always enjoyed it. The primary reason for that is that I don’t care whether I get there on time or not. Vacations for me shouldn’t be about rushing from one place to another in order to relax wwhen I get there. If I don’t have a set time to check in someplace, the train is fun and relaxing, much more so than any airline that I’ve ver been on. Being crammed into a metal tube and rocketed into the sky is not my idea of a relaxing time.
But I oppose the high-speed rail concept. First off, unless it runs on its own track without grade crossings and freight traffic, it is going to be just as slow as any freight train, especially with the number of stops that they have planned. IIRC, the Japanese and European high speed trains run point to point with virtually no intermediate stops. I’ll bet that the average speed of this things will be about 50 MPH or less.
I also oppose it because there has been no public outcry6 demanding it. The idea was conjured up by the political class and they decided that it was a good idea, not the public. Where were all of the people who, before the politicians floated this idea, demanding that a high-speed train be built?
Then you have the matter of the buses. It has never been explained to me why the buses between Milwaukee and Madison are no good? They have wireless internet, they are comfortable, and they get you there faster than any train would. You don’t have to expend money to build special tracks and grade crossings. the buses already exist and won’t require an expensive bureaucracy to suppor them. What’s wrong with the bus service that we have now? Is it because it isn’t European?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 30, 2010 at 1509 hrs
Total Entries: 19644
Total Comments: 129733
Most Recent Entry: 02/08/2012 01:08 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/08/2012 01:08 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 127
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/08/2012 01:42 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).