When it comes to high-speed rail, the Republican gubernatorial candidates are way off track.
Both Republican frontrunner Scott Walker and his September 14 primary opponent Mark Neumann promise to halt high-speed rail if they take office this January. Each candidate claims to be concerned with the long-term operating and maintenance expenses that will follow the $810 million federal grant project to connect Milwaukee to downtown Madison with a rail line.
Instead, the Republicans argue that the money should be used for state highway maintenance and repairs, completely overlooking the fact that the federal dollars are allocated specifically to high-speed rail and could not be used otherwise. Sure, lobbyists could fight to reallocate the money, but in effect the state would be cutting a check back to the federal government for $810 million.
Almost every majority-backed large federal spending program is a prime target in GOP election rhetoric this year, and high-speed rail is no different. This feels like a politically divided argument for argument's sake as Republicans struggle to look as conservative as possible before the primary.
But the economic implications of high-speed rail for Wisconsin are simply too great. We can't allow partisan politics to immobilize such an important national-scale project.
According to polls conducted as part of Refocus Wisconsin, a recent study sponsored by the Wisconsin Policy Research Institution, over 6 in 10 Wisconsinites ""think the best and brightest leave Wisconsin to work in other states.""
This perception highlights Wisconsin's national image problem, one that unfortunately lags behind in both business development and retention. As it is right now, Wisconsin can't compete with its surrounding Midwestern states. Startup businesses in the Chicago and Twin Cities area bank on easy transportation —for both clients and employees—and the cities cater to them through expansive air and rail systems.
If we want to turn our state's economy around, we need to look more attractive to potential business owners compared to our rival states. In Madison, that's apparent to everyone. ""The role of infrastructure providing incentives to locate in one place instead of another is very real [for businesses]"" said Charles Franklin, a professor of political science at UW-Madison. Repairing potholes in Milwaukee is fine, but it won't change the way businesses consider locating expanding on a national scale.
And that's what's being overlooked—the national picture.
This project is by no means limited to Milwaukee and Madison, or even Chicago and Minneapolis. It's a large-scale project meant to connect the nation via select arterial hubs that shoot off into other towns and localities. Back in the 1950s, Wisconsin would never back out of the interstate highways system, and we should take the same stance for high-speed rail.
By abandoning high-speed rail, both Republican candidates are sending a message to the entire state that they are not committed to long-term economic development. The consequences of pumping the brakes on high-speed rail are painfully obvious; we're telling the rest of the country that, in terms of being attractive to potential businesses, we're not ready to compete on a national level.
If the Republicans main counterargument to high-speed rail is additional maintenance and upkeep fees, then they need to take a close look in the mirror. Wisconsin dedicated over $3.5 billion to highways last session, whereas high-speed rail would need less than a fraction to operate by comparison. ""We're talking about a surprisingly small subsidy for rail as a percentage of total transportation,"" said Franklin.
Not to mention that it would provide jobs on trains and stations, and it would entice business owners looking for easy access and transportation. The operating fees are, quite literally, a small price to pay.
When Republicans pretend they can magically take federally allocated money and transform it into sealed potholes across the state, they're doing a double disservice to Wisconsin. One, they're lying. Two, they're considerably undervaluing the economic boon and regional transportation benefits the rail could offer on a national scale.
As the primary approaches, high-speed rail won't be hotly debated since both candidates take the same stance. But after Sept. 14, I hope this is an issue that will completely derail Republicans.
Dan Tollefson is a senior majoring in English. Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
