Opposition




"With congressional Republicans beating the drum about profligate and wasteful government spending, they may want to take a hard look at a federal program pushed by a host of top GOPers during the Bush-era and reauthorized in late 2010, as the Republican deficit craze took hold. Originally championed by Republican lawmakers including Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, and current Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback, a federal initiative to promote marriage as a cure for poverty dumped hundreds of millions of dollars into programs that either had no impact or a negative effect on the relationships of the couples who took part."

"The Alternatives to Marriage Project opposes marriage promotion because it stigmatizes unmarried people and institutionalizes discrimination against singles and diverse family forms. We believe that policies designed to help children should focus on supporting all the types of families in which children really live. We believe that people who care for one another should be supported in their efforts to build healthy, happy relationships ... There is no evidence that it is an effective way to help people escape poverty. It diverts funds from poverty-fighting programs that have been proven to work."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rationale

Image
When the program was launched, Heritage Foundation explained: "The erosion of marriage during the past four decades has had large-scale negative effects on both children and adults: It lies at the heart of many of the social problems with which the government currently grapples. The beneficial effects of marriage on individuals and society are beyond reasonable dispute, and there is a broad and growing consensus that government policy should promote rather than discourage healthy marriage. In response to these trends, President George W. Bush has proposed--as part of welfare reform reauthorization--the creation of a pilot program to promote healthy and stable marriage. Participation in the program would be strictly voluntary. Funding for the program would be small-scale: $300 million per year. This sum represents one penny to promote healthy marriage for every five dollars government currently spends to subsidize single parenthood. Moreover, this small investment today could resul...
Read more

Publications

"Designing a Marriage Education Demonstration and Evaluation for Low-Income Married Couples," August 2008. "Spending Time Together: Time Use Estimates for Economically Disadvantaged and Nondisadvantaged Married Couples in the United States," September 2009. "Early Lessons from the Implementation of a Relationship and Marriage Skills Program for Low-Income Married Couples," September 2010. "Supporting Healthy Marriage: Early Impacts on Low-Income Families," February 2012. "Supporting Healthy Marriage: Final Implementation Findings," August 2012. "Supporting Healthy Marriage: 30-Month Impact Report," Scheduled for Fall 2013.
Read more

Proponents

Image
The Heritage Foundation and Brookings Institution were early proponents. "By fostering better life decisions and stronger relationship skills, marriage programs can increase child well-being and adult happiness and reduce child poverty and welfare dependence. Yet opponents make it sound as if the government would be forcing people into unhappy unions. It's nonsense." "Federal and state legislation enacted over the past decade clearly reflects a growing national interest in reducing the number of children growing up without both parents.... The central policy question is whether it is possible to implement programs that can increase the number of children who are raised by both parents in healthy and stable marriages, especially within disadvantaged populations known to be at higher risk for family instability." In 2006 testimony to a House Appropriations Subcommittee, Wade Horn further highlighted the program's goals in a request for increased funding: ...
Read more