No to $800 Million: Foresight or Folly
The State of Wisconsin has finally been successful in giving back $800 million in federal funding that would have been spent creating jobs in our state economy. The funding would also have helped build the kind of passenger rail system we will need in the 21st century to be economically competitive. Finding a way to subsidize the transportation investments of other states did not come easy and required persistence. But hard work by the incoming state administration paid off and the US Department of Transportation announced on December 9th that the money refused by Wisconsin would be redistributed to California, Florida, Washington, Illinois, New York, Maine, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Iowa, and Indiana.
Shortly after the public announcement by the federal government, I received a long email from a local resident describing the state’s efforts to give back the $800 million as “shameful.” While perhaps having a certain cachet from some perspectives as a very apt and succinct policy assessment, the label may be too harsh. Still, it does seem somewhat inconsistent to talk about creating 250,000 jobs, while turning away $800 million that would certainly have helped to do just that.
Over 140 years ago, William Seward’s effort to purchase the territory of Alaska was derided as “Seward’s Folly.” History has since confirmed that it was foresight, not folly, to invest in the country’s future by adding the territory of Alaska. On the other hand, in the 1950s, Wisconsin refused to accept federal funding to extend the interstate highway system through the state. That proved to be folly as Wisconsin had to divert state resources over the next 30 years to complete the state’s major highway system.
Eau Claire is “small potatoes” compared to the state of Wisconsin. We simply don’t have the luxury of indulging in an ideology that turns a blind eye to sorely needed investment in our families, businesses, and economy. Apparently that is an option open to the state.
Saying no to $800 million in jobs and infrastructure investment. Foresight or folly? What will the next generation say?