Wisconsin Legislators (Democrats!) call for High Speed Rail funds to be diverted for bridge repair

[TheMightyFavog]

http://dailyreporter.com/blog/2010/07/07/legislators-ask-for-funding-to-repair-hoan-bridge/

State Rep. Christine Sinicki, D-Milwaukee, and state Sen. Jeff Plale, D-South Milwaukee, sent a letter Wednesday to federal officials asking for money to stabilize safety issues on the Hoan Bridge.

The bridge recently required attention to catch falling debris and Sinicki and Plale have asked for $250 million to be diverted from the more than $800 million Wisconsin received to build high-speed rail between Milwaukee and Madison, Sinicki said.

“I don’t think it’s going to kill the high-speed rail project, but it’s going to delay it,” she said. “But we’ve waited 15 years for that. I think we can wait a couple more years. Frankly, I think this is a much higher priority.

“Chunks are coming off the bridge, and people are worried,” Sinicki added. “We don’t want another situation like what happened in Minnesota.”

[Sebastian Doyle]

1. Seems logical to me

People still have to drive until the trains are there. Repairing the existing infrastructure is just as important as the new stuff.

[Zoeisright]

3. Yes, exactly.

Since states are hurting because of years of repuke rule, fix the stuff that's broken first.

[Radical Activist]

8. If it's just as important

then let's start spending the same amount on highways and mass transit.

[Sebastian Doyle]

13. Why don't we stop flushing money down a giant toilet in the middle eastern desert

and have enough money to fix the highways & bridges AND build the high speed trains at the same time?

[NoNothing]

2. A couple of points

1. It's hard to see how the proposed link between Madison and Milwaukee is worth the cost. There is already a major interstate connecting the two that is rarely at capacity and there is regular bus service as well. Also, it's really a lie to call it a "high-speed" rail project, as it would not, as planned, exceed 79 miles per hour. So, it would be no faster than driving (factoring in intermediate stops), and barely faster than taking the bus, and would cost more than either.

2. The bridge really is important to metropolitan connectivity. It had a structural problem a few years ago, and there is a possibility that if it is not fixed people will be killed.

[sandnsea]

5. You have to START

What the fuck.

Nobody in this thread should bitch about the gulf oil if they are this damn short-sighted about getting off of oil.

[NoNothing]

9. Trains run on diesel

Buses can actually be more fuel efficient than trains, especially when utilization is low.

[sandnsea]

14. And run at 200+ mph?

I am so flabbergasted at these comments I can't even speak.

http://earthandindustry.com/2010/06/fastest-high-speed-train-rolls-off-production-line-in-china/

[NoNothing]

15. Slow down and read the comments

The "high speed rail" project in question - the actual one between Milwaukee and Madison, would run at 79 mph. Yup, barely faster than a bus.

[sandnsea]

4. So divert highway funds

Ask for more highway funds.

Don't take money away from high speed.

And this is Wisconsin. How are we supposed to make progress in Arkansas when Wisconsin Democrats act this stupid.

[dragonlady]

16. The freeway from Milwaukee to IL is now being widened

That didn't need to be done, because all it will do is just speed up commuting by a fraction. It's going to cost $1.9 billion! The money could have gone into this bridge (and some other bridges in Milwaukee that are being replaced on an emergency basis). And other infrastructure projects around the state. Unbelievable.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/29569969.html

[Radical Activist]

6. Morons!

The never-ending demands for road repairs will always be there sucking money into a giant pit of fail. The chance to build a high speed rail system may not come for another 15 years after this.

[msongs]

7. raise the gas tax to pay for the bridge, as the bridge is there to aid gas vehicles nt

[Wickerman]

10. I agree, but it would be a no sale in Wisconsin

Taxes are already hirer per gallon (.05?) than across the border in Minnesota.

[NoNothing]

11. In Wisconsin

Gas taxes go into the transportation fund which is supposed to pay for such things. However the state has tried to make up budget deficits by using that transportation fund money to cover other expenses. So what you propose has already been done, unfortunately, the state did not follow through.

[Deep13]

12. Then fix it. Pretty sure the Wisc. legislature has the power to do that.

Recovery Act funds are for expanding and modernizing infrastructure, not just patching up the old stuff. I don't buy the claim that they are tapped out because they refuse to admit that what they really need is a state tax hike to take care of their infrastructure problems.