A Chicago to Twin Cities train would not be a second Empire Builder, but would be a state supported corridor train operating under a new name. Minnesota has been conducting a study on a 90 to 110 mph "HSR" corridor to the Twin Cities with the involvement of the Wisconsin DOT, but that is a fairly expensive project.
Just to be clear, you're speaking of the Quad Cities train that might get extended to Iowa City/Des Moines/Omaha, right? IIRC, the Illini goes to Carbondale...which would be an odd way to get to Iowa!
Sorry, I misused Ilini as short for Illinois service. I was indeed talking about the quad cities or Dubuque, which I read about on another current thread on AU. I should have checked nomenclature.
The schedule for a Twin Cities corridor train might have similarities to the Lynchburg Regional and the Crescent. The schedule times would be only a couple of hours off from the EB, but the corridor train provides a lot more seats and more reliable service, especially eastbound to Chicago in this case. The Twin Cities departure could be mid morning, getting to CHI by early evening dinner time. And occasionally picking up everyone waiting for a very late EB from the Twin Cities to Columbus WI for a trip to Chicago. The departure from CHI is easier to separate from the EB schedule with a late morning departure to arrive at the Twin Cities by early evening and at St. Cloud at a reasonable hour, if the service extends there.
That's fine, but as MN governor, I'd make darn sure that the train I'm paying for doesn't stop in your state, then.
It's called negotiation and knowing the hand you are dealt and how to play that hand. Swinging through Iowa requires Iowa to play. Traveling through WI without any stops will cause WisDOT to basically hold up any improvement to the tracks. Continuing through WI may mean that MN pays for the equipment and for the slot, while WI pays for things specific to WI, such as railroad crossing upgrades. Lots of things will happened between this story and something actually happening. As a Wisconsin taxpayer, I expect my state government, no matter who runs it, to get the best deal it can get from Minnesota.
That would be a silly thing to do as MN citizens want to travel to Milwaukee as well as Chicago. I think people are overreacting to the concept that Walker and WI might block a Twin Cities corridor service. ME or more specifically, NNEPRA, pays for the Downeaster with no support from NH; NC pays for the Carolinian with no financial support from VA. If MN pays to subsidize the service and for the rolling stock, MN's primary negotiations are with CP, Amtrak, and IL/Metra.
I not quite sure I understand your comments. What "trainiacs" are causing the anti-transit Scott Walker to act as he does? If Wisconsin doesn't want to play ball with Minnesota, then fares for Wisconsin riders should be much higher than those originating in Minnesota. That sounds fair to me.
And as a Minnesota taxpayer, I'd want to make sure that that train does stop at least a few places in Wisconsin. If WI doesn't want to chip in anything, maybe charge more per mile (or some sort of reduced subsidy) for trips that are solely within WI and IL (with probably an exception for La Crosse, as a lot of Minnesotans will use that stop as well.) But honestly, Minnesotans (and people visiting Minnesota) will probably be the largest benefactors of this...outside of maybe Columbus to Chicago (assuming Madison, either city or state, pays for a connecting bus) trips.
The train situation in Wisconsin was polluted with Gov Jim Doyle handed out no-bid contracts for Talgo trainsets and tried to lock the project into place before the 2010 election. The proposed Milw-Madison section of HSR, which was to be the opening segment of a CHI-MSP line was sold to Madison folks as a commuter rail project, thus they demanded a stop in downtown Madison, rather than the Madison airport -- which would have resulted in a backing out movement to rejoin the main track. There was also a Milwaukee-Racine-Kenosha rail project proposed where the Democrat legislature rammed through a property tax funding mechanism that put the cost burden on those who would not ride it, not those who would have benefitted from it financially. The key point of all those political transactions is that they were done without negotiation. When people got the option to vote the people out how made those decision, they did.
The decision to rebuild I-94 in Kenosha and Racine counties was initiated under the Jim Doyle administration.
