The Anti-Sam Brownback Blog

President Bush’s Healthy Marriage Initiative seems to appear any time republicans are worried about support from their Christian Fundamentalist base. Given the subject matter, it should be no surprise that Senator Sam Brownback is involved. The Washington Times reports:

“Tragically, government spends hundreds of billions of dollars each year to pick up the pieces when marriage fails, yet does virtually nothing to preserve or strengthen marriage,” Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) said in a letter sent Thursday to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-IA).
“The healthy marriage initiative represents a bold departure from this pattern of failed policy,” said the letter, which was signed by Republican Sens. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, Jim Talent of Missouri, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Sam Brownback of Kansas, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Mel Martinez of Florida and David Vitter of Louisiana.

A veritable who’s who of panderers to the religious right. How does this legislation encourage marriage? The Heritage Foundation explains:

The proposed program would seek to increase healthy marriage by providing individuals and couples with:

• Accurate information on the value of marriage in the lives of men, women, and children;
• Marriage-skills education that will enable couples to reduce conflict and increase the happiness and longevity of their relationship; and
• Experimental reductions in the financial penalties against marriage that are currently contained in all federal welfare programs.

Of course all of these claimed benefits would only be for heterosexual couples. No need for gay or lesbian couples to attempt to get the benefits. This is par for the course for these intolerant republicans. Certainly Brownback doesn’t like gays and lesbians. The HRC is quick to comment on the rank hypocrisy:

“We think it’s ironic that the administration is spending $1.5 billion to support this [marriage initiative] while at the same time considering a constitutional amendment that would deny the security and stability and protection of marriage to literally millions of same-sex couples who are in lifelong devoted, committed relationships and want to embrace those rights,” said HRC spokesman Mark Shields.

I don’t have a problem with the counseling services the legislation would provide, even though I’m sure most of the money would go to churches which would discriminate and proselytize. Frankly, churches have taken the lead on marriage counseling and I wish more secular options were available.

My main concern with this government meddling in marriage centers around the last point of financial incentives. I don’t believe the government should be in the business of monetizing marriage. It seems to me that a decision to marry based upon potential financial benefits is built upon a shaky foundation. Besides seeming crass, would republicans really want people marrying for the money?

Additionally, why should women women who have abusive boyfriends be financially encouraged to marry them? Shouldn’t a strong woman who walks away from abuse be rewarded for trying to provide a better environment for her children? Why penalize women in this way?

Obviously this legislation is pandering towards a certain set of voters who don’t care about women’s or GLBT issues. Brownback certainly fits that category.