Monday, March 01, 2010

The Hook

And we’re the fish.

By the time the next governor takes office in January, the state will have spent nearly $57 million in federal funds for the Milwaukee-to-Madison route, according to the state’s application for the federal dollars. If a future governor halts the project, the federal government would not reimburse the state for any money spent, and the state would have to repay any money it had already received, Klein said.

Neumann and Walker say, however, that they would weigh the money already spent against what taxpayers would have to spend in the future. The federal application estimates state support for operating the Milwaukee-to-Madison line at $7.5 million in 2013, plus $8.1 million for the Milwaukee-to-Chicago leg, with the combined annual total growing from $15.6 million to $28 million by 2022.

“If I get to be governor, and we find this thing is going to be an economic boondoggle for the people of this state, we will shut it down,” Neumann said.

As a home builder, Neumann said, he has ended construction projects when “it was still much better to walk away than to have a continuing drain on our resources.”

Walker said his analysis would include not only the question of whether the operating costs would use tax dollars, but also whether they would take money away from highways and bus systems. He also voiced concern about construction cost overruns, even though the $810 million budget includes more than $158 million for inflation and contingencies. The answers to those questions will determine whether the project proceeds, Walker said.

Do you see the hook?  It’s the ol’ “we’ve already spent $57 million and you wouldn’t want to waste that by not building a train, would you!?!?”

I would hope that a new governor wouldn’t feel obligated to waste more money just because his predecessor did.

(10) Comments
Posted by Owen at 0744 hrs
Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

  1. This sounds strangely familiar-remember that bridge in Alaska?  Now Wisconsin will have years of operating costs to cover the Choo-choo to nowhere.

    BTW, where are the press conferences held by our Commissioner of Railroads on this?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 01, 2010 at 0821 hrs


  2. This is a winning issue for pretty much any Wisconsin race, be it Gov, Assembly or Senate. 

    I’m guessing 75% of the people think the idea of spending $1 billion and counting for a train from Milwaukee to the Madison airport is a dumb idea.  Tell them a round trip ticket will cost between $50 to $66 and they gasp further. 

    Tell them it only will go 79mph but that a decade from now with another couple billion invested it might go 119mph and their reaction is even worse. 

    It is a race against the clock to the November elections to see whether Obama, Pelosi and Doyle can bankrupt this country with borrowed Chinese money before being stopped.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 01, 2010 at 0841 hrs


  3. It is impossible that the Doylet Line ChooChoo will actually be self-supporting—or even close to it.

    Take the $57MM loss and run.  If Walker doesn’t do that, he’ll have to be reminded, I guess.

    Posted by dad29 on March 01, 2010 at 0942 hrs


  4. Its like our very own Taggart Transcontinental right here in Wisconsin. We’ll bury millions in this line, while having no money for maintenance, or unforseen issues…. I thin we should call it the Comet!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 01, 2010 at 0951 hrs


  5. (from the Simpson’s) “Monorail…..monorail…..”

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 01, 2010 at 1004 hrs


  6. It’s amazing how many people erroneously think that sunk costs have value when making an assessment of what the best decision is going forward.

    If they can keep the round trip price at 125% of the bus (right now the bus is $19.00, $17.50 on-line), the train will do okay, but it won’t draw that many people from cars unless there is much better transit available at both ends.

    I would love to see passenger service from Madison to Milwaukee and Chicago, but the plan we have so far is a combination of poor (though expensive) compromises.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 01, 2010 at 1137 hrs


  7. I think a better analysis is to point out that the money spent to date has been spent on upgrades to the existing Chicago - Milwaukee - St. Paul route.    In that sense it hasn’t been wasted and won’t be if the Milwaukee to Madison extension isn’t built.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 01, 2010 at 1202 hrs


  8. I would love to see passenger service from Madison to Milwaukee and Chicago, but the plan we have so far is a combination of poor (though expensive) compromises.

    It’s already available. Take I-94 east to Milwaukee, then I-43 south to Chicago. Or, direct from Madison to Chicago on I-90.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 01, 2010 at 2054 hrs


  9. And I guarantee this doesn’t end at the operating and maintenance costs.  Once this line is in place, Madison and Dane County will try to force their pet regional rail project through on the logic that this line ends at the Dane County Regional Airport and people need to get from there to other places.  And I wouldn’t be surprised if Milwaukee followed suit if Madison/Dane County were successful.  This line is just the tip of the iceberg.

    Posted by Jib on March 02, 2010 at 0102 hrs


  10. It’s already available. Take I-94 east to Milwaukee, then I-43 south to Chicago. Or, direct from Madison to Chicago on I-90.

    I’m glad you aren’t running the train. The second one gets you to Chicago, but it’s not passenger service. The first directions send me to Beloit via Milwaukee.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 02, 2010 at 1515 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.