Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

So what is the problem in WI, trying to save taxpayer money?

At least three of the Wisconsin state Senate Republicans currently demanding that public workers sacrifice benefits, wages and even collective bargaining rights for the sake of the budget have applied for and received hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal farm subsidies

From 1995 through 2009, state Sens. Luther Olsen, Dale Schultz and Sheila Harsdorf all had stakes in farms that received between them more than $300,000 in taxpayer funds.

Those federal appropriations had no direct impact on the state’s current budget woes, but the cash spent on those subsidies, which went to support a range of functions -- from soybean production to small hog operations -- could have been used elsewhere, perhaps even in Wisconsin. More than that, critics say, it muddles the notion, pushed by these lawmakers and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), that only they are serious about reining in an overextended, overspent government.

As Carr acknowledged, there is more than a little irony in the use of government largess by the same senators now demanding that public workers tighten their belts.

Farm subsidies have long been criticized by conservatives and progressives alike as a clear waste of taxpayer money, but supporters of federal farm policy and less partial observers caution that for small farms, taxpayer help is key to survival. In the case of the Wisconsin state legislators, the farms in question seem to be primarily family operations.

On his 2011 financial disclosure form -- obtained by The Huffington Post via a records request with the State of Wisconsin Government Accountability Board -- Olsen lists Riverview Farm in the town of Waushara as a business interest. There are a number of other Olsens listed as partners, with Luther Olsen claiming a 20 percent stake. According to the Environmental Working Group, Riverview Farm in Waushara County has received $58,502 subsidies from 1995 to 2009. Another Riverview Farm in nearby Portage County received $25,730, though there is no word as to whether this is a related entity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/08/wisconsin-state-senate-republicans_n_833058.html

http://farm.ewg.org/persondetail.php?custnumber=A03862832&summlevel=address

Answer Question
 
sweet-a-kins

Asked by sweet-a-kins at 2:27 PM on Mar. 9, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
Answers (16)
  • "Had stakes in"? So they were investors?
    lovinangels

    Answer by lovinangels at 2:38 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • Sorry sweet, I don't support farm subsidies or the regulations that make them necessary for some small farmers to stay afloat.
    yourspecialkid

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 2:39 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • lovin, they may be family farms, turned corps for estate/trust purposes. We saw a lot of this while I was a trust officer. My husband is a shareholder in his families farm..they are far from the evil rich corps people whine about. It just allows the farm to pass from generation to generation without paying estate taxes every time the patriarch/matriarch dies.
    yourspecialkid

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 2:42 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • I'm just wondering how much the "evil Republicans" even KNEW about these subsidies. and How much say they had.
    lovinangels

    Answer by lovinangels at 2:51 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • Farm Subsidies are a waste and contribute to big nanny government... So, sure stop farm subsidies while restricting public employees pensions, salary, etc... Let's reign it ALL in....  If I lived in WI, I might be inclined to take action....  But I don't.....  ;o)

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:07 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • On his 2011 financial disclosure form -- obtained by The Huffington Post via a records request with the State of Wisconsin Government Accountability Board -- Olsen lists Riverview Farm in the town of Waushara as a business interest. There are a number of other Olsens listed as partners, with Luther Olsen claiming a 20 percent stake. According to the Environmental Working Group, Riverview Farm in Waushara County has received $58,502 subsidies from 1995 to 2009. Another Riverview Farm in nearby Portage County received $25,730, though there is no word as to whether this is a related entity.


    However, anyone with a business sense knows that this is vague.. What % interest does he have in the business? Enough of a % to have a "say" in the decisions?  OP, this is an example of sssssssssssssssssstretching....

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:09 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • To answer your question...... Nothing.. How about YOU answer your question. What is wrong with it?
    itsmesteph11

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 3:14 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • "Those federal appropriations had no direct impact on the state’s current budget woes..."

    ***
    I stopped reading at this point.

    Since the writer made it clear they were about to compare apples to oranges...in other words drawing parallels where they cease to exist!

    Reach....stretch!! LOL
    LoriKeet

    Answer by LoriKeet at 3:40 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • Its called hypocrisy


    Get off the governement $$ but that's not for me.....

    sweet-a-kins

    Comment by sweet-a-kins (original poster) at 3:42 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

  • Op (1) do you understand business interest? (2) can you tell me the % interest they have in said businesses? Until you clear up the holes in the link, you have nothing but a liberal rant based on speculation.
    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:51 PM on Mar. 9, 2011

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN