Here's an editorial from the Tucson paper on a subject we've discussed here.
Tucson, Arizona Monday, 10 September 2001
Ignoring reality
There was a time not long ago in America when people who chose not to marry were talked about in whispers or regarded with disdain, especially if they dared to live together or have children without tying the knot. The state of Arizona has taken a step backward toward those bad old days with its latest effort to promote marriage on the untested theory that it will save taxpayers money.
The state's Department of Economic Security recently rolled out a new $1-million program that will offer marriage skills workshops at discounts or for free to couples who plan to wed or have recently done so. The program money, generated by federal welfare savings, will also pay for complimentary "marriage handbooks" to be handed out when people apply for licenses. They cover topics such as communication skills, budgeting and family law. The handbooks will also include information about "covenant marriage" - a legal option offered only in Arizona, Lousiana and Arkansas, which is intended to make divorce more difficult and is widely backed by religious conservatives.
The new marriage education program is the brainchild of Rep. Mark Anderson, who originally sought about $6 million for the effort, including $2.9 million for a "media campaign to promote the heath and societal benefits of marriage." The scaled down version was approved by legislators despite Gov. Jane Hull's concern that the state might be sticking its nose a little too far into peoples' private lives.
Anderson, a Mesa Republican who attributes many costly social ills to the state's 64 percent divorce rate, called the new plan "a significant development whose goal is to lower the divorce rate, save taxpayers' money and change the culture of divorce to a culture of healthy marriage."
Sparing children from the trauma of family breakdown is a worthy aim. But Anderson's reasoning is flawed on several counts, not the least of which is that there's little evidence his new program will achieve that goal. A wealth of studies show that children tend to be better off in stable two-parent situations. However, there is scant research on whether government-funded marriage initiatives are effective in promoting that stability. Given that lack of research, plus the fact that Arizona - and a handful of other states that have passed such measures - have legislatures rife with religious conservatives, such measures seem motivated by the desire to impose moral values on citizens.
Francie Noyes, a spokesperson for Hull, said the governor objected to the plan because she questioned whether the Legislature should be meddling in such personal matters, and she thought the $1-million would be better spent on job training or other economic aid to strengthen families.
"Very simply, the governor was not sure, in a time of really serious budget constraints, that the state should be telling people what to do in their marriages," Noyes said. "The governor is the kind of Republican who believes that if you get the economy going and get people into jobs, they can take care of their own private lives."
We agree. Besides sticking the state's nose where it doesn't belong, the new program is tantamount to the Legislature endorsing heterosexual marriage as its preferred lifestyle option, reinforcing the 1930s notion that traditional marriage deserves a higher degree of public respectability than other living arrangements.
The plan does nothing to help unmarried couples raising kids and ignores the reality that only about one-quarter of Americans now live in so-called "nuclear families" made up of two married parents and their offspring.
The whole thing harkens back to an unkind era when marriage was the only socially acceptable way of life and those in other situations were stigmatized by the wider community.
The $1-million being used for marriage promotion would be much better spent on job training, child care or other time-tested programs aimed at helping Arizona parents become more self sufficient - no matter what their marital status. |
