As reported in the Washington Times, Senator Sam Brownback is supporting a tax on battered women who leave their abusive husbands. Brownback is the chairman of the Senate subcommittee in charge of Washington DC’s budget and is looking for ways to “encourage” low income families to stay together. The article explains:
…the program would reward low-income couples who remain married and contribute to a savings account. Those contributions, [Brownback] said, could be matched with federal funds at a 2-to-1 or 3-to-1 ratio.
“It’s a part of an incentive to getting them into a program to work on developing goals, work habits and a productive citizenry,” he said.
At first glance this seems like a decent idea. We all know that working class families often struggle to pay the bills. Why not help them save many for the future?
The insidious part of this proposal is that it only applies to families that have a married mother and father. Single mothers on the run from abusive husbands? Either get re-married or forget about assistance. Single father whose wife died in a car accident who is trying to raise three kids and work two jobs? He either can get remarried immediately or lose out on the benefits. Loving, committed gay parents who work hard to provide a good life for their adopted foster children? They get nothing.
In short, a system to provide all low income workers with a government augmented savings account would be a wonderful idea. A system that only rewards people who are in a heterosexual marriage is wrong. It amounts to a tax on battered women. Senator Brownback should be ashamed.
3 Comments
Anything Brownshirt authors is going to homophobic, anti woman,
anti human being. Brownshirt is the moral equivilant of Himmler
and the intelletual equivilant of the tooth fairy. Sorry for demeaning
the tooth fairy. Thanks for the site.
So given three choices:
A) Ubiquitous support to low income earners.
B) Some low income support with arbitrary exceptions that Brownback coincidentally supports.
C) No support to low income earners at all.
You actually prefer C to B? That’s cold man, you must really hate this Brownback dude.
Thomas
“arbitrary exceptions that Brownback coincidentally supports”
man – interested in a bridge or some beachfront property?
I don’t think B/C is a necessary choice – this isn’t about helping anybody, it’s about attacking those who are different than Brownback – sorry – not playing.
Nice work KSNate – keep meaning to get more active here.