There is an interesting debate occurring in Washington — not over the continuing cuts in core health and environmental programs, but one of the programs that was protected from cuts. The Obama Administration has continued the funding of programs encouraging marriage and promoting fatherhood . . . to the tune of over $120 million. It was part of a large effort of the Bush Administration funding both faith-based programs and family-oriented projects.
There is an office called the Administration for Children and Families, (ACF) in the Department of Health and Human Services. It has continued to issue grants totaling $119.4 million in grants to 120 organizations. Of these, $59.9 million went to 60 “marriage programs.”
Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation insists that the programs are essential to fight the decline of the American family.
I am less convinced that this program is more worthy of funding than, for example, the NOAA budget or other programs. Of course, this same Administration that continues to burn hundreds of millions in Iraq and Afghanistan as we shutdown core programs for lack of funding.
What is clear is that (to paraphrase Animal Farm) will all programs may be equal, some are more equal than others when it comes to budget cuts.
What do you think?
Source:
Raff,
I didnt mean irrelevant in regards to the discussion. If that were the case, I wouldnt have responded at all. I meant irrelevant in the context of decision making about the money. I can think people should buy me all the awesome video games that are coming out that i cant afford, but seeing how its their money, my opinion on how it should be spent is irrelevant.
OS,
I agree with your post and it is not irrelevant. No one’s opinion is irrelevant here, ekeyra. Not even yours.
This is social engineering and we are the specimens to be studied.
Scribe,
“That money would be better spent on subsidizing mental health services targeted at reducing domestic violence and child abuse.
But I guess that would be socialized government interference with our freedoms.”
That first statement is nothing more than your opinion on what to do with other people’s money, therefore completely irrelevant. If domestic violence and lack of mental health services are truly a concern of yours, why not start you own voluntarily funded program instead of insisting that other people pay for your social agenda? How about convincing people to contribute of their own free will? Or is that too much work?
To your second point, yes, absolutely. Heres why: The money the government would spend on domestic violence and child abuse had to be taken from someone before the government can spend it. The appropriation of resources is the violation of liberty and no amount of “good” done with it will ever counteract the criminal nature of how those funds were obtained.
When your trying to be sarcastic, try not making my point for me. Your making it too easy.
They need to change some wording. “Marriage skills training” sounds like kama sutra.
From the looks of it, what they’re promoting isn’t so much *marriage,* as responsibility.
Well,
the program seems to be poorly named at least. It’s hard to begrudgethe money if the program works and the point that it was protected and Obama didn’t have to isn’t lost on me either.
But a really lousey name.
Administration for Children & Family: Healthy Marriage Initiative
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage/
What is HMI?
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/healthymarriage/about/mission.html
Excerpt:
Background
In 1996 Congress made the following findings [1]:
Marriage is the foundation of a successful society.
Marriage is an essential institution of a successful society which promotes the interests of children.
In order to encourage States to strengthen marriages,
The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 provides funding of $150 million each year for healthy marriage promotion and fatherhood. Key requirements of the law specify that:
Funds may be used for competitive research and demonstration projects to test promising approaches to encourage healthy marriages and promote involved, committed, and responsible fatherhood by public and private entities and also for providing technical assistance to States and Tribes.
Applicants for funds must commit to consult with experts in domestic violence; applications must describe how programs will address issues of domestic violence and ensure that participation is voluntary.
Healthy marriage promotion awards must be used for eight specified activities, including marriage education, marriage skills training, public advertising campaigns, high school education on the value of marriage and marriage mentoring programs.
Not more than $50 million each year may be used for activities promoting fatherhood, such as counseling, mentoring, marriage education, enhancing relationship skills, parenting, and activities to foster economic stability.
A long time ago I stated that even though Divorce is a state issue…as well as marriage….A lot of the issues are part of the Federalization of the Family Laws of each and every state….where everything in a state case is reported to the Federal Government….This is the agency responsible for the administration of such deeds….I though then and I think now….that this is too much of an infringement upon peoples otherwise privacy….Get a divorce…record filed with the state…get a divorce with children….and all that information is filed with the state and now Federal government….There is a whole lot more that just blows the mind…..
Most of the work done with the grants in San Antonio is done with refugee and immigrant families.
And it wouldn’t cost Obama a single vote if he zeroed out the entire program.
SwM,
Good info … thanks … makes me feel a little better
Some of the money goes to prisoner re-entry programs and some goes to fight domestic abuse. Some of the grants go to teaching parenting skills in underprivileged families. Illiteracy programs for families receive ACF grants. The community organizations are so starved for funds that any money they get is a help.
puzzling,
Not a problem for those of us who support immigration.
That money would be better spent on subsidizing mental health services targeted at reducing domestic violence and child abuse.
But I guess that would be socialized government interference with our freedoms.
Elaine,
Maybe they’ll set up a Honeymoon suite at the White House.
I think the government should be doing none of this.
Of course, the social security scheme and other entitlements rely on ever-more new workers to pay over-promised benefits for today’s recipients. While the US fundamentally has a spending problem, the demographic lens of declining birth rates is a concern to these kinds of programs as well. Ask anyone in Japan.
Baby Bundle: Japan’s Cash Incentive for Parenthood
Elaine M.,
Sinister statements….I am sure you are on the watch list somewhere….lol….
This does seem to be kinda dubious….I wonder if having folks employed would help the prospect of marriage….Oh yeah….The GOP Mantra…..Keeping Millions Unemployed to get One Man out of a Job…..
Pandering is always a sign of weakness … pandering to religion is a dangerous weakness … idiots!
I’d like to find out more about these “marriage programs.” Do they help support Match.com and eHarmony?
What a waste of time and money.