Getting the story right
Posted: 4:17PM January 17th, 2012 | Comments
This is the original text of Phil Busse's letter to the editor regarding the CapTimes cover story "Rolling Resistance" from January 4. It was edited for space and posted on the CapTimes website this morning.
* * *
I was interested to read Steven Elbow’s article “Rolling Resistance” (cover story, Jan 4). About 18 months ago, I returned from two decades living in San Francisco and Portland to my hometown, Madison; in part, I moved back because I was excited that a high-speed rail line would connect me to Minneapolis and Chicago, and, as such, would keep me connected to the social, economic and professional opportunities in the larger cities, while enjoying Madison’s “small-town” charm. Of course, that hasn’t happened, and the loss of the rail-line is a primary reason that I’m considering leaving Madison now, for a more forward-thinking and connected city.
All of which is to say that, yes, I am frustrated that a year ago the rail-line lost its federal funding, and while I found Elbow’s update about the status of the far-reaching federal plan to lay out high-speed rail across the country, I was frustrated by the inaccuracy of reporting: Governor Walker, contrary to the representation throughout the article, did not give back the federal funding.
In fact, events unfolded as follows: After Scott Walker won the gubernatorial election in November 2010, the incumbent governor, Jim Doyle, halted any forward momentum on the rail-line project. In turn, and probably anticipating Walker’s rejection of funds, the federal government withdrew further funding for the project. This happened before Gov. Walker even took office. Does Gov. Walker deserve some blame? Yes. But so does Gov. Doyle. It is disingenuous to report that Gov. Walker returned the funding; reinforcing this popular myth weakens other valid points in the article by undermining the journalistic integrity of the reporting.
I certainly appreciate several of the points that Elbow makes in the article—notably, that high-speed rail has strangely and unfortunately become a bipartisan issue, sidelined by Republican bickering, instead of being examined for the economic, social and environmental benefits it can provide. Madison, in particular, stands to be left far behind as other cities and states connect. Sure, Madison has a proud history as a prosperous and relevant city, but that current status does not guarantee Madison a role in the 21st Century; the country and the world are evolving, and if Madison and the state do not adopt and accept new models of sustainability and operations, it surely deserves to be left behind.
Cities like Tacoma, Washington, and Astoria, Oregon, are far less well-known and prosperous than nearby places like Seattle and Portland, largely because those cities were not blessed as endpoints for cross-country railroads in the 19th Century. As a result, they did not reap the benefits accrued by connecting to the rest of the country and being part of a larger economy.
I appreciate the reporting but also hasten that to be factually correct—as opposed to following the momentum of popular opinion—will strengthen our public debate.
Phil Busse
Director of Communications
Sustain Dane
