"What major purchase does anyone in this room make without knowing the cost before you make the purchase? It is inconceivable to me that we do not know what something is going to cost of that magnitude before we actually consent to the cost,” Sen. Mary Felzkowski said. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

A bill to implement state-level enforcement of federal hospital price transparency requirements in Wisconsin, with the goal of bringing down the cost of health care, received pushback from hospital representatives and support from employers on Wednesday.

Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin) told the Senate Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs Committee that ensuring that the cost of services provided would help with health care affordability.  

“When hospitals clearly share pricing information, patients can make informed decisions. Trust in the system grows and costs come down naturally,” Bradley said, adding that the bill would ensure Wisconsin “reaps the benefits” of changes made by the Trump administration. 

During his first term, President Donald Trump’s administration implemented rules to require hospitals to post pricing information online. The effects of the changes on patients’ costs have been mixed. At the start of his second term, Trump signed an executive order intended to bolster the effort and in December, the administration proposed a new rule that aims to simplify how price data is organized and shared with people. 

SB 383 would instruct the Wisconsin Department of Health Services to enforce federal price transparency requirements for hospitals. 

Bradley and Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia), the bill coauthors, said it is needed to help ensure that federal policies are being followed.

“Sometimes we need to take action to make sure that it goes all the way through the state and all of our residents have access to the things that are expected through federal law,” Wittke said. 

Bradley said the lawmakers aren’t trying to penalize hospitals, just ensure people have access to information. 

If a hospital is found to be out of compliance under the bill, Wisconsin DHS would be able to take several actions including providing a written notice to the hospital, requesting a corrective action plan or imposing a financial penalty. DHS would also need to keep a public list of any hospitals that have violated the requirements.

Hospitals would also need to be certified as being in compliance with the requirements when seeking judgment from a court against a patient who owes a debt for services.

Lawmakers introduced a similar bill in 2023, but it failed to receive a floor vote in the Senate and advance in the Assembly.

The current version of the bill includes a provision that says that if federal laws change and are eliminated, then provisions in the bill that establish state level requirements for publishing prices will take effect.

Under those provisions, each hospital would need to make a list of “shoppable services” — ones that can be scheduled in advance such as a knee replacement — available with the standard charge for each item that would be publicly available. A hospital’s list would need to include at least 300 “shoppable services,” and if a hospital doesn’t provide that many, it must list all of its shoppable services.

The change is meant to avoid overlapping and varying requirements, though hospital representatives expressed concerns that would happen anyway.

The Wisconsin Hospital Association (WHA) opposes the bill. Christian Moran, the WHA vice president of Medicaid and payer reimbursement policy, said during the hearing that the organization’s opposition to the bill is not opposition to price transparency.

“Our opposition is to the added regulatory complexity that is created by layering on state level enforcement and state level regulations and unlimited fines on Wisconsin hospitals when robust federal regulation and enforcement already exists,” Moran said.

Moran said no Wisconsin hospitals have been fined for noncompliance since the first federal regulations went into effect. 

“Personal experience, it’s somewhat inevitable: if you pass legislation on the state level that mirrors the federal level it will eventually not match up,” John Russell, president and CEO of Prairie Ridge Health, said. 

Hospital representatives also expressed concerns that not enough attention was being given to the role of health insurance companies. 

“The solution proposed to you in [SB] 383 is to double up on existing enforcement for hospitals while ignoring the state’s current responsibility to enforce and monitor insurance compliance,” Moran said.

Brian Stephens, CEO of the Door County Medical Center, said the state should be more focused on the “middlemen” including insurance providers, saying that bolstering the transparency of hospital costs has its limitations. He spoke to the work that his medical center has done over many years to improve transparency of prices.

“There’s a disconnect in this country between the concerted efforts of health care providers to provide reasonable and transparent prices and the costs that people are paying for health insurance. Unfortunately, hospital price transparency efforts have not put a dent in that dichotomy,” Stephens said. “Perhaps we need to be asking for more transparency from health insurance companies and other middlemen to understand the real drivers of health care costs in our country. Perhaps hospitals have just become a good punching bag for folks who need an effective sound bite. The reality is that, despite our wholehearted commitment to providing reasonable upfront prices, transparency has its limitations. What are the odds that a person waking up with pain will take the time to bring out his or her phone and search the most affordable hospital or clinic prior to seeking treatment.”

Sen. Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) said the testimony focused on the insurance companies’ role sounded like “a lot of finger-pointing.” 

Several other states have adopted laws or are in the process of advancing bills to bolster price transparency including Colorado, Washington State and Ohio. 

Patrick Neville, a former Republican state representative in Colorado who helped pass a similar law in his state, testified on the Wisconsin bill, saying provisions in his home state have already helped. He told the story of one patient who was charged nearly $80,000 for a hysterectomy, but didn’t have to pay the cost.

“Because we had the consumer protections in this bill in Colorado, and they weren’t compliant with price transparency. They couldn’t actually collect that $80,000,” Neville said. “That was really important and powerful for the actual consumer in this case, and so it’s actually working in Colorado.” 

Neville added that the Colorado legislation did not codify the federal rules, but he wishes it had. 

“Any president could get rid of those rules at any point and I think the way this bill is crafted… It’s hugely important,” Neville said. “That’s a clever way to craft it.” 

Several employers testified in favor of the legislation. 

Erik Sonju, president of Fitchburg-based Power System Engineering, described the unpredictable jumps in health care costs that his company has grappled with since 2018 when he started in his position. He said that 2023 was the year the “straw broke” as they dealt with a 20% increase in insurance rates and he wasn’t able to get clear answers about the rising cost. 

Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) told the committee that the cost of health care is too high. 

“This is common sense. What major purchase does anyone in this room make without knowing the cost before you make the purchase? It is inconceivable to me that we do not know what something is going to cost of that magnitude before we actually consent to the cost,” Felzkowski said.  

Felzkowski is the lead coauthor on two of the other bills the committee took up. SB 796 would require insurers to submit information about claims to the Wisconsin Health Information Organization (WHIO), a nonprofit organization that collects health care claims data, and SB 797 would provide a $600,000 grant for the WHIO to establish an online dashboard of health care claims information and to add new payer data.

The committee also took testimony on SB 703, coauthored by Wittke and Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), which would establish that employers who sponsor group health insurance plans have a right to data relating to the employees and dependents covered under those plans, including claims data, utilization reports and other information necessary to understand and manage health care costs.

Wittke said the bill will maintain privacy protections by requiring employers to designate a HIPAA compliance privacy officer and ensure that the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance maintains oversight. The bill also includes a provision prohibiting data from being sold to any party without the permission of the plan sponsor and the person to whom the claims data relates.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) argued that a measure regulating the use of student names and pronouns was needed to standardize policies across the state. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

A bill that would require school districts to inform parents when students want to use pronouns and names that differ from the ones given to them at birth received significant pushback Tuesday during a Senate Education Committee hearing.

The committee also took testimony on a bill to add video requirements to human growth and development curriculum as well as to opt the state into a federal school choice tax credit program.

Under SB 120, Wisconsin schools would be required to adopt a policy on name and pronoun changes by July 1, 2026. Policies would not require written authorization if school staff are using a shortened version of a student’s first or middle name.

Sen. André Jacque (R-New Franken) and Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) argued that the measure was needed to standardize policies across the state and ensure parents are involved in conversations related to pronoun and name changes for students. Many testified in opposition to the bill, saying it would do harm to students and infringe on local decision making. 

“It is deeply troubling to me that school staff are being encouraged to keep parents out of major life decisions concerning their children, while at the same time these same officials cannot give them aspirin without parental approval. Why would schools promote secrecy in such a way?” Jacque said. “Something has gone terribly wrong in our education system if officials inherently perceive parents as harmful to their own children. Parents are legally accountable for the health and welfare of their own children… Hiding from us important things that are going on in their lives is not only disrespectful to parents, it is harmful to our children.” 

Jacque said the legislation would be consistent with a 2023 ruling by a Waukesha County Circuit Court judge, which found that a policy that allowed students in the Kettle Moraine School District to change their names and pronouns in school violated the rights of parents to make medical decisions for their children. The school district now has a policy that requires express parental consent for staff to use different names and pronouns. 

“To me, if there’s going to be a name and pronoun change the school should be working together with parents and students to advance that together,” Dittrich said. 

Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) pushed back on the Republican bill, saying it would infringe on local communities’ ability to make decisions about policies and would harm students.

“You could sub out the words ‘parental decision making’ and say that the Legislature is going to have the best authority of what should happen — instead of parents, instead of local governments, instead of local school boards. You’re saying that you guys know better,” Larson said. 

“That’s a total distortion of what the bill does,” Dittrich said.

Larson asked the bill authors to consider a situation where parents may not be accepting of a student who wants to use a different name and pronouns. 

“You are expediting that situation by making it come to a head when there are parents who are less than understanding, who are brought up under a very strict and very incorrect… and you are forcing the question in a vulnerable population that is already overly targeted with transphobia with this, which is already overly targeted for bullying, which is already higher than the average rates of suicide and mental health. You are bullying them by bringing this bill forward,” Larson said.

“You are saying we should hide information and not facilitate those conversations,” Jacque replied. Dittrich added that Larson was “trampling all over parental rights.”

Paul Bartlett, a father of two transgender children, said the bill works to “prioritize the unfounded fears of conservative parents over the well-being of children.” 

“Like any parent, I want my children to thrive and be happy. They are well supported against these continued legislative attacks, but many trans and nonbinary kids are not,” Bartlett said. He said that school should be a refuge for unsupported students, “not a place where teachers are obligated to out and humiliate them.” 

Bartlett pointed out that lawmakers recently approved a law, known as Bradyn’s Law, that seeks to protect young people from being sexually extorted online. 

“That everyone agreed on [that bill] was important because what we were doing was preventing teenagers from killing themselves basically from humiliation… and yet these bills, they do the opposite,” Bartlett said. 

Bartlett noted that anti-trans laws have a negative effect on young transgender people. 

According to a 2024 survey by the Trevor Project, 45% of transgender and nonbinary youth have reported that they or their family have considered moving to a different state due to anti-LGBTQ+ politics and laws, and about 90% have said that their wellbeing was negatively affected by  recent politics. 

The Trevor Project survey, which pulled from the experiences of over 18,000 LGBTQ+ youth, also found that 39% of LGBTQ+ young people, including 46% of transgender and nonbinary young people, had seriously considered attempting suicide. 

“I just don’t understand, like, why do we keep doing this?” Bartlett said.

Abigail Swetz, executive director of FAIR Wisconsin, said bills that target transgender youth contribute to the mental health struggles they face. 

The bill is part of a slate of bills that Wisconsin Republicans introduced related to transgender people, including children, last year. According to the 2025 anti-trans bills tracker, there were over 1,020 bills introduced across the country including 20 in Wisconsin. 

“Inclusive policies, like making it possible for students to use an affirming name and the pronouns that best represent their identity in school in an easily accessible way — those policies are a pressure valve making it possible for [youth] to live fully and healthily,” Swetz said. 

Swetz said when she previously worked as a teacher she helped support students that were preparing to share information about themselves with their family and said it was important to follow the child’s lead. 

“The youth themselves are the experts in their own experience and have a better understanding than anyone about the challenges they might face when it comes to acceptance and safety at home. I have witnessed that conversation go well, and I have seen it go badly,” Swetz said. She said the bill that lawmakers were pushing “aims to traffic in distrust while a process like this, one that is directed by a well-supported young person, is actually how we can build trust between parents, children and school staff.” 

Peggy Wirtz-Olson, president of the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC), said she was speaking out against the bill on behalf of the students who would be “devastated” by the bill. 

“All students deserve safe and welcoming schools, not only some of them, every single one of them, and that includes our trans students,” Wirtz-Olsen said. “The simple use of preferred names and pronouns is associated with a large decrease in depressive symptoms, suicidal thoughts and even suicidal attempts. Respecting preferred names and pronouns is a proven measure to show respect, earn trust, affirm our students, so they can feel safe, and they can focus on learning.”

Requiring videos of fetal development

Lawmakers also took testimony on a bill to add requirements for schools that offer human growth and development education. 

Human growth and development is optional for Wisconsin school districts, but for those that do opt in, state law includes some requirements including encouraging abstinence for students who are unmarried. 

SB 371 would add requirements that explanations of pregnancy, prenatal development and childbirth include a high definition video that shows the development of the brain, heart, sex organs and other organs, a rendering of the fertilization process and fetal development as well as a presentation on each trimester of pregnancy and the physical and emotional health of the mother. 

The bill would also require that instruction on parental responsibility include information on the importance of secure interpersonal relationships for infant mental health and on the value of reading to young children. 

Bill coauthors Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) and Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) rejected the assertion that the bill is a mandate, noting that school districts do not have to teach human growth and development. 

“Today’s youth are technologically and visually inclined learners. We should lean into this to better convey this important information,” Felzkowski said. She also added that there should be bipartisan agreement around “preparing the young women of today with all the knowledge they could need to prepare for motherhood and young men for fatherhood.” 

“Being able to actually see the real life process of fetal development in action will be more tangible to students than textbooks or seeing it in a still diagram or a drawing. We have a resource at our disposal to bring science into our classroom and we should use it to our advantage to give students a stronger educational experience,” Nedweski said.

Nedweski also said it “might not be obvious to some people that using an iPad as a babysitter is not healthy” and that it is “far more important for their health to read to children and to bond with them.”

Larson asked the lawmakers what type of research they had to back up the change to state law.

“There’s not one specific scientific research that we’re relating this to,” Felzkowski said. “Just Google it and numerous things will pop up, or we can have our staff do that for you.”

No one spoke against the bill. 

The Wisconsin Public Health Association (WPHA) and the Wisconsin Association of Local Health Departments and Boards are registered against the bill, according to the Wisconsin Lobbying website. The organizations outlined their concerns with the Assembly version of the bill in a statement to the Wisconsin Examiner. 

The organizations said they opposed the legislation in part because it doesn’t do anything to restore the educational standards that were in place under the Healthy Youth Act. The former state law, which included a more comprehensive policy that required providing age-appropriate instruction in human growth and development, was adopted in 2010 but was later repealed in 2012 during a special session under former Gov. Scott Walker, who reestablished abstinence-only education. 

“Evidence-based, comprehensive instruction is essential to equip students with accurate information and skills necessary to make informed decisions about their sexual health, reducing rates of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. It also promotes healthy relationships, consent, and emotional well-being, contributing to overall public health and safety,” the organizations said in the statement.

DPI spokesperson Chris Bucher told the Examiner in an email that the state already has similar guidelines for human development instruction in state law and said the bill is an example of infringing on local control. 

“It is up to districts to determine human development curriculum for what best fits their community. This is also another unfunded mandate for districts choosing to offer human development. District budgets are already stretched thin,” Bucher said. “If the Legislature wants to mandate specific instruction, they should provide funding for curriculum.”

Federal choice tax credit program 

SB 600 would instruct Gov. Tony Evers to opt Wisconsin into a federal school choice tax credit program.

Gov. Tony Evers has previously said he will not opt Wisconsin into the program, and if the bill were passed by the Senate and Assembly instructing Evers to take action, he could veto the legislation. 

A provision in the federal law signed by President Donald Trump in July, which goes into effect in 2027, will provide a dollar-for-dollar tax credit of up to $1,700 to people who donate to a qualifying “scholarship granting program” to support certain educational expenses including tuition and board at private schools, tutoring and books. 

However, governors in each state must decide whether to opt in and have until Jan. 1, 2027 to do so.

Felzkowski said it would be “shortsighted and self-defeating” to not opt into the tax credit, noting that other states including North Carolina, Tennessee, Nebraska, Texas, South Dakota and Iowa, are already opting in. 

If Wisconsinites opt into the federal tax credit, the money will be directed to private schools outside the state if the law does not pass, Felzkowski said. “Our dollars will be going to those states… instead of our students here in the state of Wisconsin.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Senate President Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) said she hopes her "fellow assemblymen continue to put pressure on their leadership" to pass postpartum Medicaid expansion. Felzkowski spoke at a Republican press conference about postpartum Medicaid expansion in April. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Senate President Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) said in a year-end interview with the Wisconsin Examiner that the year has been one of “very steady growth” and top priorities for her in the remaining legislative session include passing legislation to help bring down the cost of health care, advancing medical cannabis legislation and passing additional tax cuts. 

Felzkowski pointed to the state budget in which lawmakers and Gov. Tony Evers increased funding for roads and transportation costs, cut taxes including for retirees, increased special education funding and dedicated funding to mental health initiatives. She was one of four Senate Republicans to vote against the state budget, a vote she said she took because of her opposition to increasing the state’s hospital assessment without health care reforms. 

A slimmed down, 18-member Republican majority in the Senate this session and several GOP senators who took a stand against a compromise budget deal gave Senate Democrats an opening to come to the budget negotiating table, and to win compromises on school funding as well as stop cuts to the University of Wisconsin system.

Felzkowski said the slimmer margins this year have been normal. 

“If you look back for the last 30 years, when the Republicans are in control, we are normally at 18-15 margin in the Senate,” Felzkowski said. “When we were up to like 22, that was kind of a gift, so we are a very strong Republican majority right now.”

Felzskowski said working on health care affordability will be her top priority when lawmakers return in January. This includes working on health care price transparency and working to advance her legislation that would make changes to the regulation of pharmacy benefit managers — third-party companies that manage prescription drug benefits between health plans, employers and government programs.

Health care and prescription drugs

Felzkowski’s bill would allow patients to use any licensed pharmacy in the state without facing penalties and require benefit managers to pay pharmacy claims within 30 days. 

“Our neighbors to the south in Illinois just passed their version of PBM reform,” Felzkowski said, adding that her bill has passed out of committee and lawmakers are now discussing whether it will receive a full Senate vote. 

Felzkowski’s health care price transparency legislation would require hospitals to make publicly available to consumers the standard costs of “shoppable services,” which would be defined as those that can be scheduled in advance such as x-rays, MRIs and knee replacements. 

“What is one thing that you buy that you have no idea what it’s going to cost? It’s health care. That’s absolutely ridiculous,” Felzkowski said. “Other states have passed it. They’re starting to see the fruition of it and it does work. There’s a reason we have the fifth highest health care costs. It’s because our Legislature has not done anything to help bring those costs down and it’s time that we actually start doing that.” 

Felzkowski, who has been a longtime advocate for legalizing medical cannabis, said the Senate is “closer than ever” to having a vote on the floor on a proposal to do so, but she believes the chances of the Assembly advancing legislation remain “slim.”

Felzskowski said she hopes legislation to extend Medicaid coverage for postpartum women from 60 days after giving birth to one year isn’t dead this session. Wisconsin is one of two states in the U.S. that haven’t accepted the federal extension.

“I hope that my fellow assemblymen continue to put pressure on their leadership… Deep red states, blue states as well as purple states across the nation have postpartum care for 12 months and they’ve done it because it’s the return on investments for taxpayers as well as being the right thing to do,” Felzskowski said. “We see baby thrive, we see mom thrive, and it actually lowers the cost down the road.”

Fate of WisconsinEye

Felzkowski said Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos are having discussions about solutions to the shutdown of WisconsinEye, the nonprofit service that provides video coverage of legislative hearings, floor sessions and Wisconsin state government business. WisconsinEye halted its livestream and pulled down its video archive last week due to a lack of funding.

“Even if we do something temporary to get us through a session… just get through until April and then do a really deep dive on what should be the next step,” Felzkowski said, adding that that includes looking at how other states cover their state government.

“The transparency is important,” she said, adding they want to ensure people still have access to government proceedings and a record is still being kept of it all.

Felzkowski said she hopes Republicans can get one more tax cut done before the end of the legislative session next year. 

New tax cuts in the works

A few of the ideas legislators are considering include eliminating taxes on tips and overtime. 

“Anytime we can return money to our citizens is a good thing,” Felzkowski said, adding that state Republicans would like to align Wisconsin tax cuts with federal policy. The federal megabill approved in July included a tax deduction on tips and overtime that will be available from 2025 through 2028.

This December, Wisconsin residents are experiencing the highest property tax hikes since 2018, according to a recent Wisconsin Policy Forum report. The report explained that state budget decisions including Evers’ veto that allows school districts an annual $325 per pupil increase for the next 400 years as well as lawmakers’ decision to not provide any increase to state general aid this year have led to the hikes. 

Asked whether lawmakers will look to solutions for lowering property taxes, Felzkowski said it would take a new governor. 

“We have given [Evers] numerous chances to reverse that 400-year veto and he keeps vetoing the bill, so it’s on the governor’s plate right now,” Felzkowski said. “Until we get a different governor in the East Wing and we can start seriously addressing education and all the things that are wrong with it, I don’t know what to say.” 

Felzkowski said that even with the state budget surplus there wasn’t enough state money for the general aid increase.

“There were a lot of mouths to feed on that budget,” Felzkowski said. “With increasing revenues all over, there was not enough money out there to backfill that $325… We would have had to have raised taxes dramatically to do that. The dollars didn’t exist.”

Felzkowski said on education that she hopes Wisconsin will opt into the new federal education tax credit program. The program would provide a dollar-to-dollar tax credit of up to $1,700 to people who donate to a qualifying “scholarship granting program” to support taxpayer-financed private-school vouchers. Evers would need to opt the state into the program by Jan. 1, 2027, but so far has said he won’t. 

Confident GOP will hold Senate in 2026 

Wisconsin Republicans have held control of the state Assembly and Senate since 2010, and next year will test the strength of that majority when the state’s 17 odd-numbered Senate seats will be up for election for the first time under new legislative maps adopted in 2024. 

Last year when the maps were in place for the 16 even-numbered seats, Democrats were able to flip four seats. In 2026, Republicans will need to make sure Democrats cannot flip two additional Senate seats to hold control of the body.

Felzkowski expressed confidence that they will do so. 

“We will come back with a strong Republican majority. We have better policies, we have better ideas and we run great candidates,” Felzkowski said.

There will be several key, competitive districts in 2026 including Senate District 5, which is currently held by Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), Senate District 17, which is currently held by Sen. Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green) and Senate District 31, currently represented by incumbent Sen. Jeff Smith (D-Brunswick) who will face a challenge from Sen. Jesse James (R-Thorp). 

“We’re going to run on the same policies we’ve always run on: lower taxes, strong freedoms, strong economies, strong education and government getting out of your way so that you can live the American dream,” Felzkowski said. “The Democrats are going to run on an anti-Donald Trump policy, more government, more influence in your life. It’s all they’ve ever run for.”

Some Democrats have taken election results in 2025 as a sign that people are unhappy with the Trump administration and are ready to elect Democrats. 

Felzkowski said she didn’t think that 2025 election results in other states were going to be applicable in Wisconsin, though she said the new maps could be challenging for Republican candidates. 

“Wisconsin is kind of a unique state. We’re a very purple state,” Felzkowski said. “We knew those candidates in Virginia were going to win, I mean, it’s a blue state so I mean you can’t really base us on what happened in Virginia and New Jersey… We’re going to be running in Democratic-gerrymandered seats, so we’re going to have to work very hard, but we will win.”

Wisconsin also has an open race for governor on the ballot next year. U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, who is considered the frontrunner in the GOP primary, and Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann, are the current Republican hopefuls.

Felzkowski said she probably won’t endorse in the Republican primary for governor, but she is looking for a candidate who is a “conservative reformer who’s willing to take on the tough issues from health care, education, and corrections, lowering taxes” as well as someone who will do “a deep dive into our agencies,” adding that she hopes they’ll work to root out “waste, fraud and abuse.” 

The Democratic field of candidates is much larger including Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, state Sen. Kelda Roys (D-Madison), state Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), Milwaukee County Exec. David Crowley, former Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation CEO Missy Hughes, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, former Department of Administration Secretary Joel Brennan and former state Rep. Brett Hulsey.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Oak Bluff Natural Area in Door County, which was protected by the Door County Land Trust using Knowles-Nelson Stewardship funds in 2023. (Photo by Kay McKinley)

At a Wisconsin Assembly committee meeting in November to consider a proposal to extend the widely popular Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program, Rep. Rob Swearingen (R-Rhinelander) complained that too much land in his district has been conserved through the program.

That sentiment has become increasingly common among a subset of Republicans in the Wisconsin Legislature, most of them representing the far northern reaches of the state. The complaint they often make is that Knowles-Nelson has taken too much land off local property tax rolls, depriving already struggling local governments of important revenue. 

These complaints also go hand-in-hand with laments that the Wisconsin Supreme Court undermined the Legislature’s authority to conduct oversight of the grant program by ruling the Republican-controlled Joint Committee on Finance was unconstitutionally blocking stewardship grant projects proposed by the Department of Natural Resources. These Republicans say that their districts have borne the burden of Wisconsin’s land conservation goals for too long and some of that work should shift to southern parts of the state.

Because of this group’s objections in the Republican legislative caucus, the stewardship program is facing its demise next year.

Popular program hits roadblocks 

The Knowles-Nelson program was started in 1989 to fund land conservation in the state. Grants from the program to local governments and non-profits help cover some of the costs for purchasing and conserving land that can be used for recreation, preserving animal habitats and supporting local industries such as forestry. Polls have shown an overwhelming majority of Wisconsinites support the program. 

Despite that support, it is set to expire next summer and, so far, legislative efforts to extend the program have failed. 

In his initial 2025-27 state budget proposal, Gov. Tony Evers asked to extend the program for ten years with $100 million in annual funding. Republicans stripped that provision from the budget immediately. 

Rep. Tony Kurtz (R-Wonewoc) and Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point) have authored a bill that would extend the program for four years at $28 million per year. The bill also includes a provision that would require the full Legislature to approve any land purchases that cost more than $1 million — a proposal that critics say would be far too slow for the speed at which real estate transactions need to move. 

A separate proposal from Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) would re-authorize the program for six years at $72 million per year and create an independent board made up of members appointed by the Legislature to approve large land purchases through the program.

Separately, Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) has introduced a proposed constitutional amendment that would require the full Legislature to approve any state spending on land conservation.

Data contradicts lawmakers’ complaints 

The complaints that Knowles-Nelson has conserved too much Northwoods land may prove fatal to the program in a Legislature that has been unable to find common ground on environmental issues. 

But an analysis of public lands data shows that the Knowles-Nelson program plays a comparatively small role in Wisconsin’s conserved land portfolio. Despite the claims of critics, the program’s land purchases have been made in all corners of the state. 

knowles nelson by assembly district

“Knowles-Nelson becomes like sort of the straw man argument,” says Charles Carlin, director of strategic initiatives at the land conservation non-profit Gathering Waters. “If legislators stood up and said, ‘I don’t think that we should have public land in the way that we do, we should reduce our public land portfolio,’ that would be a terribly unpopular position.”

The program has widespread support, he says.

“Public lands are the prized heritage of Americans, right?” Carlin says. “It’s one of the only things that we just largely agree on as a country, is that we are really proud of our public lands. And this is part of our national identity, and I think it’s certainly part of our Wisconsin identity.” 

Swearingen’s 34th district, which covers north central Wisconsin from Rhinelander up to the Michigan border, has more land conserved by the DNR than any other district in the state — almost 335,000 acres, nearly 24% of the district. That includes land set aside for state parks, natural areas, forests and similar uses. 

But only 4.7% of the district is conserved through Knowles-Nelson. Another 4.6% of his district is conserved by the federal government, and 8.6% is conserved county forest land. 

Despite the claims that Knowles-Nelson has devoured valuable land across the state, no Assembly district has had more than 5.1% of its land conserved through the program, data shows. The average amount of Knowles-Nelson conserved land across all 99 Assembly districts is 1.13%. 

Many small purchases

Ron Eckstein, a board member of Wisconsin Green Fire, says Knowles-Nelson is best equipped to help the state purchase smaller tracts to connect already conserved land across the southern part of the state. 

“Many state fish and wildlife areas, state parks, and state natural areas across the southern two-thirds of Wisconsin have private land inholdings within their property boundaries,” he said in an email. 

“It is very important to continue to purchase these inholdings so these state properties can meet their intended purpose: fish and wildlife habitat, rare species, game species, public access, recreation and recreational trails,” Eckstein said. “This means continuing the long-term, slow process of purchasing a 20-acre tract here and an 80-acre tract there to complete these state-owned areas and fulfill their public purpose.”

state land by assembly district

Other DNR land and federal land take up hundreds of thousands more acres across the state. 

The 74th District, represented by Rep. Chanz Green and Sen. Romaine Quinn has the most Knowles-Nelson land at 5.1%. Nearly 11% of the district is other DNR land while 14.5% is federal land and 23.8% is county land.

Twenty Assembly districts have more general DNR conserved land than the 74th has Knowles-Nelson land. 

Across the five Assembly districts with the most federal land, 1,596,129 acres have been conserved. Across the five districts with the most Knowles-Nelson land, 413,453 acres have been conserved. 

The data also contradicts Republican claims that the northern parts of the state unfairly get too much land conservation attention. 

The Dane County districts represented by Reps. Mike Bare (D-Verona), Alex Joers (D-Waunakee) and Shelia Stubbs (D-Madison) are all among the 10 districts with the highest percentage of land conserved through Knowles-Nelson. Rep. Karen DeSanto’s Baraboo-area district, Rep. Chuck Wichgers’ suburban Waukesha County district and Rep. Scott Krug’s district south of Stevens Point are also in the top 10.

When divided by dollar amount, Knowles-Nelson is similarly disbursed. Since its inception, $1.2 billion has been given out through the program to all but one of the Assembly districts; the Milwaukee district of Rep. Supreme Moore-Omukunde (D-Milwaukee) is the only district to not receive any money. 

The 36th district, represented by Rep. Jeff Mursau (R-Crivitz), has gotten the most of that money — $102 million, which amounts to 7% of the total Knowles-Nelson purchases over the program’s lifetime. But districts have received an average of $13 million through the program.

federal land by assembly district

“While we’ve done some really cool things with Knowles-Nelson, it’s largely been a drop in the bucket of our sort of overall public lands portfolio,” Carlin says. While some critics complain about the state’s total public land portfolio, he adds,  “Knowles Nelson investments are really targeted and strategic, and cumulatively not actually that big.”

Republicans defend focusing on Knowles-Nelson because they have limited control over the land conserved by the federal and county governments.  Legislators have authority over the program through the biennial budget process and the confirmation of members of the Natural Resources Board, but despite that, have put the stewardship program in the crosshairs. 

In the last several years, Republicans on the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee began using passive review — an anonymous veto system — to selectively block some Knowles-Nelson projects, to the wide condemnation of members of the public and conservation groups. A 2024 state Supreme Court ruling, in a lawsuit filed by Gov. Tony Evers against the committee’s co-chair, Sen. Howard Marklein, found that the “legislative veto” was unconstitutional. 

“Until the Evers v. Marklein decision by the liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court, there was a good process in place for new stewardship land purchases,” Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) told the Wisconsin Examiner in a statement. “Those checks and balances between the executive branch and the Legislature ensured that it was a collective decision, and that the state did not overpay for stewardship land. Unfortunately, since this process was destroyed, the Legislature is forced to put even more scrutiny on the stewardship program.”

County Forest by Assembly District

Carlin says the program has played an important role in helping local governments in more rural parts of the state invest in projects that help the local economy in the long term. Dane County’s recently passed 2026 budget includes $20 million for land conservation, which is not an expense most counties can afford. 

“But if collectively, we choose as a state to say this is an important priority, we’re all going to work on this together, then we can make meaningful investments in rural communities that wouldn’t otherwise be able to do it themselves,” Carlin says. 

“At a time when there is such incredible inequality of wealth and opportunity,” he adds, “what the data tells us is that Knowles-Nelson has been a really good democratizer of investments in conservation and recreation.”