Balenciaga Camel Stiv.to Pelle S.cuol Daim Reverse Wedges Size B) US 8 Regular (M, B) Size 4cc583

Balenciaga Camel Stiv.to Pelle S.cuol Daim Reverse Wedges Size B) US 8 Regular (M, B) Size 4cc583
Gently used
  • Scuff on soles

This item has visible signs of wear

New suede boots. Looks new without visible wear (I wear it once). with original package

Listed by:  Vita Reynolds

Responds within: 24 hrs

Ask a Question

Brand:

Balenciaga

Color:

Beige Camel

Heel Height:

High 3"-4"

Heel Style:

Wedge

Size:

US 8

Style/Collection:

stiv.to pelle s.cuol daim reverse

Width:

Regular (M, B)

Type:

Wedges

Style Tags:

Balenciaga Wedges


January 10, 2018

Balenciaga Camel Stiv.to Pelle S.cuol Daim Reverse Wedges Size B) US 8 Regular (M, B) Size 4cc583

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.

Tory Burch Tan Leather 'reva' Ballet Flats Size US 6 Regular (M, B),Jimmy Choo Boots/Booties Size US 8 Regular (M, B),Christian Louboutin Peep Toe Pumps Size EU 37 (Approx. US 7) Regular (M, B)Fendi 60967 Flats Size US 7.5 Regular (M, B)adidas Gray Nmd Mens Sneakers Size US 10 Regular (M, B)Tory Burch Navy Selma Flat Tumbled Leather Sandals Size US 6.5 Regular (M, B),Giuseppe Zanotti White Design New Women Euro 40 Sneakers Size US 9.5 Regular (M, B),Christian Louboutin Black 3080746pk20 Pumps Size EU 41 (Approx. US 11) Regular (M, B),Loeffler Randall Nude Tan Ankle Strap Heels Pumps Size US 7 Regular (M, B),Dolce Vita Gray Suede Pointed Toe Ankle Boots/Booties Size US 7 Regular (M, B)Giuseppe Zanotti Black Embellished Satin Pumps Size US 8.5 Regular (M, B),Burberry Plaid Rainboots Boots/Booties Size US 9 Regular (M, B),Pour La Victoire Black/Red/Gold Black/Red/Gold Boots/Booties Size US 10 Regular (M, B),RED Valentino Pink Leather Flats Sandals Size US 7 Regular (M, B),Salvatore Ferragamo Beige Flats Size US 7 Regular (M, B),Jimmy Choo Tan & Black Patent Leather Heels Pumps Size EU 39.5 (Approx. US 9.5) Regular (M, B),Stuart Weitzman Brown Choked Up Fur-lined Wedges Size US 8 Regular (M, B),Burberry Prorsum Bright Claret Snakeskin Python Eu 37.5 Sandals Size US 7.5 Regular (M, B)RED Valentino Black With Bow High Top Suede Sneakers Size US 7 Regular (M, B),Charlotte Olympia Red Suede Dotty Platform Pumps Size EU 40.5 (Approx. US 10.5) Regular (M, B)Balenciaga Rust Leather New Easy Chelsea Fashion Heel Ankle Boots/Booties Size EU 41 (Approx. US 11) Regular (M, B),Miu Miu Purple/Black Velvet Buckled Ankle Tie Ribbon Ballerina Ballet Flats Size EU 39 (Approx. US 9) Regular (M, B),Saint Laurent Red Yves Tribtoo Platforms Size US 9.5 Narrow (Aa, N)Stuart Weitzman Smoke Gray Tieland Stretch Velvet Over The Knee Boots/Booties Size US 8.5 Regular (M, B),Valentino Red Rockstud Pumps Size EU 38.5 (Approx. US 8.5) Regular (M, B)Giuseppe Zanotti Red Patent Plexi New Darcey Mules/Slides Size EU 38.5 (Approx. US 8.5) Regular (M, B),Brunello Cucinelli Brown Womens Leather Chelsea Ankle Boots/Booties Size US 9.5 Regular (M, B),Tory Burch Multi-color Laila 50 Leopard Print Pony Hair Bow Gold Reva Zip Ankle Boots/Booties Size US 11 Regular (M, B),Tory Burch Black/ Gold Claire Reva Leather Ballet Black/ Flats Size US 6 Regular (M, B),Alexander Wang Black Gemma Sandals Size US 7 Regular (M, B),

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

Stuart Weitzman Black 'fringe Benefit' Sandals Size US 7.5 Regular (M, B),

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.