Not so long ago, there was a bipartisan consensus in favor of any infrastructure improvements for Wisconsin. Both business and labor, Republicans and Democrats, favored the building and expansion of the freeways. Airport or freight rail improvements, new phone or electrical connections – any infrastructure upgrades were assumed to be something that would improve the economy. But that consensus began to break down in the late 1970s, and the result can be seen today, in the dogmatic decision by Republican Gov.-elect Scott Walker to reject the $810 million in federal funds to build a high-speed railroad.
It was then-Assemblyman John Norquist who led the charge in the 1970s against a freeway expansion that was going to run through the city’s South Side, destroying neighborhoods. Initially, this was just about protecting constituents from losing their homes, but it soon grew into a philosophy by Norquist and others that the city was getting torn up to create more freeways that encouraged urban sprawl and the exodus of the middle class to the suburbs.
Thus, a freeway connection that would have run along the lake in the Downtown area (which probably everybody would now agree was a disastrous idea) and into Bay View was killed. So was a freeway extension running through the North Side of the city.
Norquist, however, was still rather alone (even among Democrats) when, as mayor of Milwaukee, he began to embrace light rail as a more urban solution to transit, one that would encourage density and provide an alternative to freeways. But over time, Democrats began to get aboard the train idea, while Republicans were lukewarm, but hardly hostile.
Indeed, Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson was receptive to a deal using some federal funds for light rail. He would later join the board of directors of Amtrak and was a champion of high-speed rail.
Enter talk radio. Conservative talker Mark Belling was an opponent of all things Norquistian, including light rail, and would eventually be reinforced by Charlie Sykes. They both, of course, have a huge conflict of interest. Any person commuting by rail means one less auto commuter who could be listening to the radio. Talk radio’s adamant opposition to rail transit would help to harden the positions of Republicans and Democrats, and helped push Thompson to back off from a compromise supporting light rail. Republican legislators in Waukesha worked to kill any federal funding for light rail – even though it was a project being done in Milwaukee County.
Labor unions and business remained in favor of any infrastructure improvements, but labor’s power was in decline, and business leaders, who never like controversy (much less getting attacked on talk radio), were pretty careful in the support they gave ideas like high-speed rail or the KRM commuter line. Meanwhile, the state lobbying group, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, has over the last decade or two transformed from a more bipartisan, pro-business group into what is essentially an adjunct of the Republican Party.
Thus you had Walker killing business for the Spanish train company Talgo, which had been attracted to Milwaukee to build high-speed trains – and with little criticism of him from business leaders. “Talgo is … disappointed that the business community did not speak about the facts on this project,” company vice president Nora Friend told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “Talgo was encouraged by the business community to move to Wisconsin, and they were silent about the very same facts that made this project the only one in the nation that qualified to be fully funded by the federal government.”
This has not been the first time Walker stepped on a pro-business initiative. He publicly undercut the efforts of the Milwaukee 7 to promote the seven counties of Southeastern Wisconsin, complaining that because of the level of taxes here, it’s like “putting lipstick on a pig.” There seemed to be no consequences for Walker for this comment, and most business leaders supported his run for governor.
Either way, Wisconsinites were going to pay taxes to support high-speed projects nationally. As Mayor Tom Barrett pointed out, Wisconsinites are paying $140 million in federal taxes for the entire federal high-speed rail program, but were getting $810 million for a rail line better connecting Chicago to Milwaukee to Madison to Minneapolis. And the annual operating costs for this are estimated at $1 million a year.
Yes, the line was hardly high-speed: Even after all the money was spent, the trains weren’t likely to travel faster than 110 miles an hour. But it would improve a rail line – Chicago to Milwaukee – that’s already important to businesspeople, and put this state at the center of a Chicago to Twin Cities connection – and all for $1 million a year. That would have been a no-brainer for Thompson, who would have pulled out all the stops to make it happen.
But we’ve moved far beyond the quaint days of such state boosterism. The old consensus that Wisconsin needed great institutions and universities, great transportation and infrastructure, great state parks and pristine lakes, seems to be in disarray, with liberals and conservatives in constant disagreement. As Milwaukee county executive, Walker’s principal concern seemed to be cutting taxes – whatever the costs. His first action as governor, even before taking office, is more of the same.
Media Flubs Coverage of the Issue
“The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is doing anything it can to keep the Milwaukee to Madison somewhat high-speed train alive,” conservative blogger James Wigderson recently complained. I disagree. I think the paper’s agenda was far more complicated – if there was any agenda at all.
During the campaign for governor, Scott Walker constantly repeated the mantra that high-speed rail would cost $7.5 million a year for its operating costs. The newspaper was doing plenty of “Politifact” columns correcting errors, but never did one questioning that figure. In fact, state officials estimated that 80 percent of the annual costs were likely to be picked up by the federal government, but the JS seemed less than anxious to publish this information. Members of the administration of Gov. Jim Doyle were so frustrated by this that they called me, and I reported the statistic.
Once the election was over, the Journal Sentinel changed course and began doing almost daily stories on high-speed rail, in each case including a graph like this: “The state initially estimated those costs at $7.5 million a year, after subtracting fare revenue, but revised ridership estimates could have cut taxpayers’ share by $2.8 million. The state also could have used part of its federal highway funds to cover 80 percent to 90 percent of the taxpayer share.” In short, the annual operating costs would be $1 million or less.
Why the flip-flop in how the issue was covered? Perhaps the newspaper was simply cautious in how it covered the issue before the election, not wanting to tilt too far in favor of either candidate.
The other possibility is that the JS editors wanted Walker to win (they did endorse him) but also wanted high-speed rail. They wanted to have their cake and eat it.
Whatever the explanation, I’d say that on this issue, the voters were poorly served by the paper.
The Buzz
-The project to rebuild the train shed at Milwaukee’s downtown train station has an opportunity to rebuild the platform at the same height as the deck of the trains. That way, passengers wouldn’t have to ascend and descend stairs, which causes annoyance and accidents, and slows down the process. Why redo it and not make it more convenient?
-And the Sports Nut blames Sports Illustrated – and quite a few others – for the Packers’ loss to the Lions.
