This Wisconsin Department of Transportation graphic says it all, doesn’t it? The top line is how much the department spent on highway construction over time; the line with the big jump where high-speed rail was supposed to go represents how much WisDOT spent on rail over the same time period.
The 2010 and 2011 amounts are budgeted figures.
A new slogan for Gov. Scott Walker — “Mono-modal: the only way to go.”
Click on the picture to make it larger.
For every $10 WisDOT spends on roads, $9.20 goes to roads; 2 cents would go to the Madison-Milwaukee high speed rail development.
“If we massively subsidize roads made of concrete and asphalt for people who drive cars and trucks, there’s nothing wrong with a comparable subsidy for roads made of steel rails for people who ride trains.”
These are the concluding words of a op-ed by David R. Riemer, director of the Community Advocates Public Policy Institute at Community Advocates Inc. You know those roads? They’re heavily subsidized (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, April 3, 2010)
The following graphs were built from Riemer’s Excel spreadsheet and from Wisconsin Department of Transportation data: State Transportation Data
SOURCE
The source of Road funds – by percentage:
58.2% of Road funds come from the use of motorized vehicles: Fuel, Registration, Title, Fees.
41.4% of Road funds come from your Income, Property, and Sales taxes.
EXPENSE
How are Road funds spent?
92% of State transportation revenues are spent on roads.
Mass Transit receives 4.42 %
Railroads, Harbors, Airports receive 3.36%
The proposed Milwaukee to Madison Rail line would get 0.21% of State Transportation Funds..
In dollars:
For every $10 WisDOT spends on roads:
$9.20 goes to roads
44 cents goes to Mass Transit operations
34 cents goes to Rail, Harbors and Airport
2 cents would go to the operation of the Madison-Milwaukee high speed rail.
THE ROAD USER
We all use roads.
Car and truck drivers pay for roads with gasoline taxes and fees.
When a product is delivered the price includes the fuel and registration fees of the truck, and those fees are paid by you and me, the buyer.
And so everyone uses and pays for roads. While drivers pay per mile through gasoline taxes, their ride is subsidized by the rest of us.
CONSIDERATIONS FOR CHANGE
Consider other common services: water, sewer, gas, telephone, and electricity. For these we charge closer to cost because we have meters in each house to calculate real usage.
As Riemer points out: “For the most part … we don’t sock it to the taxpayers to subsidize the users of these equally essential services. Rather, the users of those services pay, more-or-less, for 100% of the cost.”
All transportation is subsidized. From the sidewalk to the airport, an effective government will provide the infrastructure that serves all citizens. An effective government will remove barriers to accessing jobs, schools, hospitals, recreation, and commerce.
To serve taxpayers who should not drive do not drive, cannot drive, or do not want to drive, we need transportation policy that brings the benefits of mobility to all citizens.
From the Transport Politic, common sense and important facts:
… in Wisconsin and Ohio, newly elected Republicans soon to enter gubernatorial offices, have promised to shut down their local federally funded intercity rail corridors that they fear will overwhelm them with future operating expenses. Of course, those complaints are patently absurd when put in context of each state’s respective overall transportation budget. Wisconsin, for instance, spends more than a billion dollars on roadway construction annually and would have been asked to contribute a mere $7.5 million to train operations. Is such a small contribution really such a huge price to pay for a transportation alternative?
Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are talking about slashing transportation funding by a lot — $7 billion to $8 billion per year, according to d.c.streetsblog.org.
It also looks like money desperately needed for transit will be the first to get the ax.
From streetsblog:
Apparently, for Republicans, the big target for cuts appears to be transit spending. Tymon suggested to the Road Gang that the current $8 billion allocated for transit annually could shrink to $5 billion. The Road Gang was, apparently, relieved to see that transit would bear the brunt of the burden of spending cuts.
Meanwhile, Jim Tymon, staff director of the House Highways and Transit Subcommittee, said the Republicans want to bring transportation spending back to it roots in the 1950s – interstate commerce and travel, with a strong focus on the National Highway System. It all adds up to a possible revision of the longstanding 80/20 ratio governing highway and transit spending, with transit losing ground. Tymon confirmed that a new calculus could be coming.
According to Streetsblog’s sources, Tymon discussed reducing the Surface Transportation Program and eliminating federal mandates to states about how they should spend their money – for example, the “inappropriate” mandate for bike-ped projects, which he said should be up to state discretion.
Ugly, ugly, ugly.
A company in China is going to launch buses that straddle two lanes of traffic, allowing cars to pass underneath it as it moves along regular ol’ streets.
From the Utne Reader:
Commuters board from a station one story above the ground, and when the straddling bus parks to pick up riders—as many as 1200 per vehicle—it doesn’t disrupt the flow of traffic…The innovating company, Shenzhen Huashi Future Parking Equipment, claims that building the infrastructure for straddling buses is three times faster and much cheaper than a comparable distance of new subways. The wheel-rail-hybrid buses are powered by municipal electricity and solar energy, thus reducing the cost of their operation as well as fuel consumption. They will purportedly reduce traffic jams by 25 percent.