The role of government intervention in people's lives has been a long-standing debate in this country. However, this debate just recently grew more significant with President Bush's recent welfare reform plan, which includes a measure to spend $1.5 billion over the next five years on marriage promotion.¹

The idea to promote marriage is not a new one however. In 1998, economists in Oklahoma concluded that being poor and being single were interrelated, and so the state dumped millions of dollars into marriage promotion and training. The marriage promotion programs in Oklahoma, as well as a similar one in West Virginia, are aimed at single moms and poor couples who are undecided on whether to wed. These programs not only encourage people to get married (female welfare recipients in West Virginia receive an additional $100 per month) but also offer classes that build skills to uphold a healthy and long lasting marriage.¹

To date, marriage promotion programs had been strictly state endeavors, but the Bush administration has taken a liking to the idea, thus the attempt to make it a federal program. Backers of the new plan, which is awaiting a vote in the Senate, say that the program has three positive results. First, by providing a positive atmosphere for children who may have otherwise been raised in a single parent setting; children with parents who are in stable marriages statistically succeed more in school. Secondly, by encouraging single mothers into healthy marriages, there will be fewer burdens upon the state welfare system in the long run. Lastly, domestic violence caused by unhealthy marriages would decrease with couples learning how to peacefully work through their marital problems.

Critics of the new measure are concerned about government involvement in the structuring of people's personal lives. Additionally, there are concerns as to the usefulness of the plan, because statistics relating to the success or failure of programs in the states which have implemented marriage promotion measures have thus far proved indecisive. So the worry is that the government is spending taxpayers' money on yet another program that won't have noticeable results. Furthermore, some have wondered whether a better use of the $1.5 billion would be to direct it toward job creation and education, which almost always results in alleviating poverty (mothers who possess a bachelor's degree make up less than 2 percent of the welfare rolls).²

Either way, the senate is going to decide shortly upon whether Bush's plan should be made into a federal program. If it passes, it would most likely spur his approval rating among conservatives who have recently been angered by the president's apparent soft approach to the issue of same-sex marriages. He has not outright supported a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages but that may not hurt his reelection chances in November if he stands firmly behind government promotion of "strong marriages and stable families."³

Footnotes:
1 Murphy, Clara. "Wedded to the value of marriage". BBC News Online (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3397539.stm)
Thursday, 15 January, 2004

2 Bauchner, Elizabeth. "Bush Marriage Initiative Robs Billions from Needy". Women's eNews
(http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1519) September, 10 2003

3 "Bush welfare plan promotes marriage, work, Bush welfare plan promotes marriage, work"
CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/02/26/welfare.reform/index.html)
February 27, 2002