The Alternatives to Marriage Project
(ATMP) and several women's groups oppose President Bush's plan to
include marriage promotion in welfare reauthorization, claiming
that marriage promoting policies harm more children and families
than they help.
Their newly released report, "Let Them Eat Wedding Rings: The
Role Of Marriage Promotion in Welfare Reform," comments on the
misguided attempts to end poverty by using welfare dollars to
promote marriage. The report falsely concludes that marriage is not
an effective solution to poverty and that there is no clear
relationship between marriage rates and child poverty.
This is quite to the contrary. In fact, studies show that the
fastest way to escape poverty is to get married. On the contrary,
the fastest way into poverty is divorce. The reason: two incomes
are better than one. Or in the case where a spouse is unemployed,
one income is better than none. A child born and raised outside of
marriage will spend 51 percent of his childhood in poverty. By
contrast, a child born inside marriage and raised by both parents
in an intact marriage will spend only 7 percent of his childhood in
poverty. And a child raised by a never-married mother is more than
7 times more likely to be poor than a child raised in an intact
marriage. Children who grow up with absent fathers are also more
likely to drop out of school, become addicted to drugs, have a
child out-of-wedlock, or end up in prison. But instead of embracing
these findings, women's groups such as the ATMP choose to repudiate
them, in an attempt to preserve their own "marriage to the
government."
The report further suggests that welfare policies should not
discriminate on the basis of marital status. In reality, the
welfare system discriminates against married-couple families by
penalizing single mothers who choose to free themselves from the
cycle of dependency and marry. Welfare programs penalize marriage
and reward single parenthood because of the inherent design of all
means-tested programs. In a means-tested program, the benefits are
reduced as non-welfare income rises. Thus, under any means-tested
system, a mother will receive greater benefits if she remains
single than if she is married to a working husband. Welfare not
only serves as a substitute for a husband, it actually penalizes
marriage because a low-income couple will experience a significant
drop in combined income if they marry. In order to encourage
marriage, welfare policies should not discriminate against married
couple families, the type of household most beneficial to
children.
These studies illustrate the importance of encouraging healthy
marriages and two-parent married families as a major goal of
welfare reform. Which is why the President's plan directs up to
$300 million in block grants to states for programs that encourage
healthy, stable marriages. These programs include pre-marital
education and counseling, as well as research and technical
assistance into promising approaches that work.
Too many Americans have been injured by helping hand of the
state. The welfare system has become the enemy of individual effort
and responsibility, with dependence passed from one generation to
the next. Overall caseloads increased substantially over the last
30 years. Between 1965 and 1995, federal and state spending on the
poor increased from around $40 billion to more than $350 billion a
year. Yet, during the same 30-year period, we've made virtually no
progress in reducing child poverty. Perhaps it's time to try
something else. Perhaps it's time to change the system that rewards
failure and punishes success; that encourages dependency and
illegitimacy and discourages marriage and work.
Many welfare recipients will concur. In fact, the majority of
former welfare families feel that it is more rewarding to be a
responsible citizen than a welfare client; it is better to be a
breadwinner respected by your family. And despite what ATMP
believes, most women don't want to be married to the government.
They want to be free to make their own decisions, choose their own
destiny, and make their children's lives better - without the
government encroachment. Raising children by themselves is an
incredibly difficult job. In many cases, their lives and their
children lives would be better if they and the fathers of their
children were united in marriage. The government is no substitute
for a spouse.
Which is why welfare reform's priorities should be the reduction
of dependency and poverty through work and marriage. We must face
the impact of deteriorating marriage forthrightly. There is no
better time to start than now. So let the ATMP eat their words.
After all, it's only themselves they're hurting.
Jennifer Garrett is a researcher in
domestic policy studies for The Heritage Foundation, a
Washington-based public policy research institute.