Let's not get hysterical about historic preservation

Confession: I like big government. I like water coming out of my faucet, paved streets and firetrucks that show up when summoned.

But do I really need government to provide me with a sense of nostalgia? Two examples of government spending, one local and one federal, have me wondering what price we're willing to pay to cling to a bit of the past.

Recently, I took the express Amtrak train from Washington, D.C., to New York City. If I include the train's 90-minute tardiness, I could've driven the distance in holiday weekend traffic and still have been ahead.

Standing in 100-degree heat waiting for a diesel-powered behemoth, I began to wonder why my fellow taxpayers and I are subsidizing this system to the tune of $1 billion annually.

A billion dollars per year is chicken feed compared with the $12 billion a month leaving our treasury for Iraq. But I know what the $12 billion is paying for: war. The $1 billion is paying to keep afloat our nation's only passenger rail system. It is an evocative reminder of the days when rails were king, conductors tipped their hats from train-car doorways and porters served us graciously as we traversed the continent.

Maybe it is because America is still a relatively new country that we can't bear to get rid of the old. We love choo-choo trains and our tax dollars ensure there will always be one steaming along.

The Bush administration has tried for two years running to eliminate the Amtrak subsidies that have been ongoing since 1971. I don't support a wholesale cutoff. Amtrak would be forced into bankruptcy at a time when rising gas prices have boosted its ridership to an all-time high. Moreover, there would have to be some transportation replacement in the 500 destinations in 46 states served by the rail line.

We ought to resolve this. We can't afford spending on nostalgia. Congress needs to provide health insurance to poor children and full funding for public-school reform.

The question of how much to spend on nostalgia remains even when pointed inward at those of us in Seattle. Recently, the City Council began looking to designate 38 downtown buildings as historic landmarks. An additional 56 buildings could be designated as landmarks over the next couple of years.

I love old buildings as much as anyone. When I pass the turn-of-the-century wharves on the central waterfront or the Central Building on Third Avenue and Columbia — all nominees for landmark designation — — I see right into the soul of this city. But how much nostalgia becomes too much? Containing our enthusiasm to designate anything older than ourselves — for example, the brick box that is the Seattle Labor Temple at 2800 First Ave. — could mean more dollars available for law enforcement and our schools.

Councilman Peter Steinbrueck, chairman of the Urban Planning and Development Committee, is practically a historic landmark. His father led the battle to preserve Pike Place Market, and the adjacent park bears his name. Understandably, the younger Steinbrueck wants to hold the line against what he describes as "the rapid rise of new high-rises" erasing our past.

But more than 50 buildings downtown already are Seattle landmarks. Adding a few more makes sense — but a few dozen?

Steinbrueck is more compelling when he points out that 10 of the nominees are apartment buildings. Landmarking the structures will deter developers from creating fancy, market-rate condos and keep some affordable housing in the city.

We're willing to dig deep in our collective pocket to hear the train whistle or have the opportunity to wander through beautiful old buildings. I like these links to the past. But we're hungering for a kind of nostalgia government can ill afford.

I have moved around on this issue of nostalgia. I want government efforts to hold onto some of the past. But I don't want to go overboard.

Keep subsidizing the train but shrink the allotment. Save a few buildings. But don't save all of them. Historical preservation is a good thing. Hysterical preservation is not.

Lynne K. Varner's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is lvarner@seattletimes.com for a podcast Q&A with the author, go to Editorial/Opinion at seattletimes.com