To "Justmyopinion48": Your comment seems harsh but is pretty much on target IMHO. Have experienced this in my life. Was laid off in 1974 to 1976 for 18 months. Took 12 weeks to get my first unemployment check. (none of that call in on phone or use computer back then). Never used up my 26 weeks of unemployment. Worked for seed corn company, Libby's, Dana ... whereever I could so I would not risk running out of unemployment. My wife and I and young daughter survived. Now forward to recent years: My son was a 2 year temp hire at Chrysler. When that 2 years ended and he was without a job, I encouraged him to get another so unemployment did not run out. He did within a month and worked for a company in Beloit for almost a year. They closed the plant and went to Mexico. He was getting 330 per week unemployment ... New benefit year put him down to 141 per week. Yet other people in the same situation that never went out and looked for work after Chrysler were still getting 330 per week on extension after extension. Something is clearly wrong with our system. ALSO: used to be that parents helped out their children with hand-me-down furniture, etc. Now my wife and I get the hand-me-downs (27 and 32 inch old style TV's) from our kids since they have to have the latest flat screens. We do not even have a flat screen. Too many people expecting everything now and getting in money trouble. People complain that the "rich" should pay more taxes. The really rich can afford accountants to find ways not to pay taxes. The middle class are the ones that are actually paying the taxes that pay for all these entitlement programs. And yet many seeking these entitlements do not seem to realize where the money comes from ... just that it is there and they want some of it.

Well said Piznat. Using food for fuel (corn for ethanol) is part of what drives food prices. Wheat crop failure in Russia, more demand from developing countries, growing populations are all part of it as well. So why would you want to use taxpayer money to have a farmer basically reduce production ??? To save the land from developers? Look around you people ... you will see land planted in this spring that already has had drainage pipe ran for development because the economy does not support development. Farmland has a higher value for farming right now than it has for development. At $7.00 a bushel futures for corn (twice the norm) farmland is in high demand for farming, not developing. The government, state and federal (CRP) need to stop paying taxdollars for farmers not to grow crops and stop paying subsidies for corn or soybean based ethanol. To use more energy to generate the amount of energy one gets from a gallon of ethanol is insane. Lets be using things like switchgrass, wood pulp, etc. for ethanol production that are renewable and do not entail a net energy loss. Oh, I forgot, that would not buy enough votes. IMHO

Who is going to benefit from this bill? Again walkie talkies puppets. Your right wtp, the farmers do put the non-productive land aside. Why? Because is is less productive doesn't reduce the cost of putting the crop in, fact is the cost rises with less production. What your saying is that you agree with the fact that even though you own the land they can do what they want with it at the price they set. Just like selling the state power plant. Another no bid sale.

Thanks for the link i-luv-jvl. It's very informative.

This whole program was another entitlement program and really should not effect food prices. As it was, basically a farmer said, "I want to sell land but I don't want to sell it to just anybody", so the state (you and I) comes in and pays way high price to farmer for land so a developer can't buy it. If you need the money and have to sell, sell it the way I have to. Don't expect the state and Fed to keep bailing out on this kind of program.

Little by little people will begin to see just how much the Governor's bill is affecting everyone in the working class. As for PrettyWoman's comments regarding the Governor just wanting to please the taxpayer by eliminating debt, she needs to go read recent Government legislation to be enlightened as to where this money is going. It's going directly to the corporations he's paying back for supporting his campaign, not to the taxpayer.
http://legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/data/act...
(This is but ONE of the many corporate tax cuts that was passed within a month of the Governor in office.)

Want to save farmland?... With healthy prices for crops and the use value assessment law, rural landowners are not inclined to sell their land for development purposes. A government sponsored program could never 'save' enough farmland in Wisconsin to make any real difference, and the strips of land that PACE set out to preserve is certainly is not going to be a factor in food prices.

To the folks who claim this program impacts food prices, you have oversimplified the food price debate. Food pricing is not that simple, and I doubt that it has any impact at all. Consider this, demand for food globally, currency value, gov't subsidies for things like ethanol raising demand, farmers choosing to grow high value crops, and that is just the tip of the ice burg. A silly program to slow development at enormous taxpayer expense may not be the best way to spend that money.

Jusymy

Who do you think supports your income? We all do in one way or another. We all need each other to make Wisconsin to work. This is how this country was built. You take away from some, others will take away from you, thats the way it works. You can't take income way from the working people and expect this state to recover. Take away from the farm land and food prices go up.
We can see through our rose colored glasses, its the blind that concerns the citizens of Wisconsin

crushproof: You said there is no more land to produce food. There are billions of acreas in the country that is in set aside and you are paying the farmer to do so. The farmer moves into town and South in the winter. You may not see much of it around here because the land is so productive that it is not cost effective for a farmer to do so. Much of this land is just so so and that is why the farmer put his land on idol. This land can still produce food, not just the yeilds you get around here.

We don't need farms in Wisconsin. We can buy our food from Mexico, Central and South America. After all, the wealthy with their lowered income taxes will be creating all those promised high paying jobs so we can afford the food.

Is our state government now involved in trying to "sell off" privately - held lands in our state? Will they do it honestly or through eminent domain (like with the recent oil pipeline through this area)? It seems like the politicians who claim to support economic development are more interested in selling off our personal real estate to out of state (and country) developers. Let's post signs at the borders next to the Wisconsin Open for Business signs. They could say A Progressive State FOR SALE to The Highest Politically Supportive Bidder, free to our close friends.

"No more unemployment. No more insurance coverage. . . Blah, blah, blah." Just WHO do you think is/was PAYING for all of the "free" government dole? Common' folks - let's get the rose-colored glasses off and realize that the "middle class" that everyone is so anxious to protect is being taxed to death. We cannot afford to continue to pay for every thing for everybody. And I especially feel that way when I know of way too many people who never looked for a job while under "extended" unemployment because they would make more receiving benefits. Now tell me something about this country, this new work ethic, this "way of life" that seems to be the expectation of so many! If we (middle-classers) hadn't worked ourselves hard, saved whatever we could, denied ourselves things, do you think we would be in a position of helping anyone or doing anything? All of you who think the government OWES you something: Get off your butts and start denying yourselves everything you think you deserve and start earning it. Maybe you, too, will have an increased appreciation of keeping what you earned - or at least enough to live on!

Clarification: the state portion of this cost is funded by the program. There is no impact to the State. Pre caffenine... my bad.

prettywoman

Next time you go grocery shopping take a camera along. Take pictures of the prices and in a year take another picture and compare the difference. Once you wipe the tears away after paying the increase then you can thank yourself for your support of walkie talkie. Every time you go the the grocery store your supporting the farmer. You take away that support and you'll see the difference real fast. I hope some of your family is on unemployment, because when the unemployment comes up for renew it's not going to happen under this bill. No unemployment, no health insurance, if you support this you have a major problems and I advise you seek help fast

Crushproof: The article said "Generally, the state covers about one-quarter of the cost of each project. Federal money pays for half." You said "This program funded itself."

It can't be 3/4 funded by the government and as you claim, fully funded by itself. Which one is it?

That was directed to Prettywoman...

You still think so huh? Please read up on what Walker wants, the amount of people protesting it then come back with an informed opinion.

When the environment you live in is destroyed and gone, food prices are sky rocketing because there is no more useable crop ground... lets see how pleased you are then! This program funded itself.The was no need to terminate it. The only reason it is be unfunded is because of the real estate lobby not wanting to charge the tiny fee's associated with developing good crop ground.

Gov. Scott Walker’s decision to eliminate this program reflects the desires of the voters' quest for fiscal responsibility. I doubt if a county boards' resolution will make any difference. His job is to please the voters, not government bodies.