Men's Dr Martens Brown Slip Size 9 Oil And Slip Brown Resistant Work Boots 6d2b1a

Men's Dr Martens Brown Slip Size 9 Oil And Slip Brown Resistant Work Boots 6d2b1aMen's Dr Martens Brown Slip Size 9 Oil And Slip Brown Resistant Work Boots 6d2b1aMen's Dr Martens Brown Slip Size 9 Oil And Slip Brown Resistant Work Boots 6d2b1aMen's Dr Martens Brown Slip Size 9 Oil And Slip Brown Resistant Work Boots 6d2b1aMen's Dr Martens Brown Slip Size 9 Oil And Slip Brown Resistant Work Boots 6d2b1a

Item specifics

Condition:
: An item that has been or previously. See the seller’s listing for full details and ... Read moreabout the condition
Brand: Dr. Martens
US Shoe Size (Men's): 9 Fastening: Lace Up
Country/Region of Manufacture: China Upper Material: Leather
Features: Slip Resistant Style: Work & Safety
Color: Brown
January 10, 2018

Men's Dr Martens Brown Slip Size 9 Oil And Slip Brown Resistant Work Boots 6d2b1a

Back to Blog

Highlights

Print Post
  • A new Minnesota law represents the bi-partisan possibilities of enacting legislation based on the consensus that marriage is a vital tool for reducing poverty. Tweet This
  • Minnesota recently enacted a 12-month “honeymoon” period for newly-married couples receiving assistance through the state's TANF. Tweet This

Many discussions about safety-net programs tend to focus on financial cliffs—how the impact of getting a raise or working additional hours may make participants ineligible for the very benefits they need to move into economic stability. Marriage is rarely part of this discussion, even though numerous studies show marriage is an important tool for moving families out of poverty.1 That marriage is often absent from these discussions is especially ironic, since the promotion of family stability—by encouraging marriage and discouraging nonmarital births—was among the chief policy rationales for welfare reform in 1996.

After reviewing research stressing the importance of eliminating marriage penalties, we developed and successfully advocated for legislation that would create a “honeymoon” period for newly-married couples receiving assistance through Minnesota’s version of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). The legislation (HF 1453/SF 1165) received strong bipartisan support and was enacted by a Republican Legislature and Democratic Governor Mark Dayton in 2017. In our view, it represents the bi-partisan possibilities of enacting legislation based on the consensus that marriage is a vital tool for reducing poverty and fostering child well-being.

Crafting a Policy

Minnesota’s version of TANF is the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP), which provides work support and cash assistance for children and their parents, who are often low wage workers between jobs. There has been no increase in the amount of the cash benefit to participants in over 30 years. Both of our organizations were involved in advocating for an increase.

As we talked with people of faith across our state, especially religious leaders, we kept hearing about couples who wanted to be married but couldn’t afford to make this decision because adding another adult to the family’s income would put them over the poverty threshold used to determine eligibility.2 The concerns were often strongest for couples expecting a baby who wished to be married before birth of their child. Unfortunately, marriage would result in a loss of benefits at the exact time the new mother would be unable to work. We sought to address this marriage disincentive.

Framing the Legislation

In our experience, all elected officials want to help families and individuals in poverty. They desire all our citizens to be economically stable and prosperous, but they often have different ideas about how to make that happen. Our goal was to frame our bill in a way that showed a commitment to helping children live in stable, secure homes that lawmakers from both parties could champion.

To that end, we drafted a bill to create an 18-month window after marriage in which a new spouse’s income would not count when determining eligibility—a “honeymoon” period. This income disregard was modeled on an existing statute that addressed child support for children on MFIP. Due to constitutional concerns related to marriage incentive programs, we consciously chose to structure the bill in a way that would allow couples to choose to marry rather than reward those who married.

Making the Pitch

In seeking bill sponsors (and later other supporters), we spoke about the benefits of marriage to children and the challenges to couples that wanted to marry but knew the very real financial impact this would have on their families. We shared that the federal TANF Program, which is used to fund MFIP, specifically lists two marriage-related goals: to promote marriage and to reduce the number of children born out of wedlock.

We provided data from a joint American Enterprise Institute/Los Angeles Times study3 in which people in poverty were asked: “How often do you think unmarried adults chose not to get married to avoid losing welfare benefits?” Twenty-four percent of participants answered, “almost always,” and an additional 23% answered, “often.”

We also gave legislators highlighted copies of a 2009 study of the federal TANF program that showed participation in the TANF program had a negative effect on the probability of marriage, an effect that disappeared once participants moved off the program.4

In building strong bipartisan support for the legislation, we addressed some concerns along the way. For example, we made it clear that we were not judging single parents but instead creating a viable option for couples who wanted to be married. We also clarified that nothing in the bill would trap a parent in a relationship that was dangerous for the parent or children.

Our House author identified a concern we hadn’t anticipated—should the state allow continued participation in the MFIP program if a participant marries a middle or upper-class individual? We addressed this by amending the bill to include a cap on the income disregard, set at 275% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines, the standard used to determine whether pregnant women and children are eligible for Medicaid.

In both chambers, the bill passed unanimously and was included in an omnibus bill signed by our Governor. Ultimately, the bill had to be amended to provide an income disregard for 12 months instead of the original 18. This change was unfortunate given that, ideally, this honeymoon period would last two or three years. Despite this amendment, the new law will likely make a significant impact by removing an obstacle to marriage for low-income households in our state.

Kodiak Journey Composite Toe Composite Plate WP Men's Brown Work Boots 11MROBERT WAYNE “DURANGO” BLACK WINGTIP FLEUR DE LIS LEATHER ANKLE BOOTS MENS 7,Thorogood - 834-6219 -Lightweight 8" sidezip Waterproof Commando Deuce- Size: 9W,Dakota 8" Quad Basic ST Composite Plate Men's Tan Work Boots 10MUS Military GI Boots, Hot Weather Jungle Panama Sole Olive Drab/Black,Corcoran 4390 hot weather Army Desert Tan Ranger type Boots 9.0 M mens,$168 ANDREW MARC MOORE SUEDE BOOT US 10.5/,Ariat 10016291 Sport Western Fiddle Brown Wide Square Toe Boots Mens size 11.5 D,Men's Justin Size 10.5 D Brown Leather USA Made Western Cowboy Boots,SADDLE TRAMP Black Leather Zip Ankle Cowboy Boots Mens Size 9 Style 98175BShilongo Leather Brown Uniquely Crafted Honey Namibia Desert Men Shoes Size 9W,Salomon Rawson Hiking Trail Men Boots New Size US 10.5English Laundry Men's Bond Chelsea Boot, Brown, 10 M USMr/Ms Double H Harness Boots 10 EE Strong heat and wear resistance First grade in its class Explosive good goodsCaterpillar Junction Suede Leather Ankle Padded Burnt Olive Army Winter Boots,VTG MENS STEWART COWBOY LEATHER BLACK BOOTS SIZE 12 B,American Steel Toe Mens Leather Work Boots Size 6.5M,Salomon X Mountain Contagrip Water Resistant Walking Hiking Unisex Boots M 7 W 8,JUSTIN BLACK LEATHER WESTERN COWBOY BOOTS MEN'S 11DMen High Quality Leather Motorcycle Biker Shoes Round Toe Buckle Zip Ankle Boots,MENS DUCK WINTER WATERPROOF BOOTS = CHAMPION available in 7 or 8 = NEW = ss20,MAGNUM RESPONSE PLUS 8.0 BLACK WORK MOTORCYCLE BOOTS SIZE 7,COLE HAAN AIR BLYTHE Mens 10.5 M Ankle Boots Cap Toe SUEDE Black PLAID C09658,Men's Sperry Top-Sider A/O Chukka Dark Brown Leather Boots Boat ShoesMENS UNBRANDED Burgundy Leather Uppers COWBOY WESTERN BOOTS SIZE 10.5 D USA,Punk Men Embroidery Floral Pointy Toe Ankle Boots Winter Leather Chukka Shoes sz,LL Bean Sherpa Lined Men's Duck Boots Zipper Style NWOB Unworn Size 8 W wideDakota 6 877 Steel Men's Black Work Boots 10M,Merrell Valley Mid Hiking Trail Men Boots NEW Size US 8.5 10.5 M,SIZE 8.5 D MEN'S VINTAGE COWBOY WESTERN BOOTS, 9568 MADE USA - TONY LAMA

Join the IFS Mailing List

Sign up for our mailing list to receive ongoing updates from IFS.

Institute for Family Studies

© 2018 Institute for Family Studies

Mens High Top Pointed Toe Ankle Boots Casual Shoes Hidden Heel British Clubs New,

Contact

Interested in learning more about the work of the Institute for Family Studies? Please feel free to contact us by using your preferred method detailed below.
 

Mailing Address:

P.O. Box 1502
Charlottesville, VA 22902
 


610.733.4804

Media Inquiries

We encourage members of the media interested in learning more about the people and projects behind the work of the Institute for Family Studies to get started by perusing our "Media Kit" materials.

Media Kit

Support

Thanks for your interest in supporting the work of The Institute for Family Studies. Please mail support checks to the address below:

The Institute for Family Studies
P.O. Box 1502
Charlottesville, VA 22902

If you would like to donate online, please click the button below to be taken to our donation form:

Donate

You can also support us on Patreon via the button below:

IFS on Patreon

The Institute for Family Studies is a 501(c)3 organization. Your donation will be tax-deductible.