MEPHISTO WOMEN'S MILA GT SIZE 10 M BOOTIES IN BLACK LYCRA BRAND NEW IN BOOTIES THE BOX! 82ccab

MEPHISTO WOMEN'S MILA GT SIZE 10 M BOOTIES IN BLACK LYCRA BRAND NEW IN BOOTIES THE BOX! 82ccab

Item specifics

Condition:
New with box: A brand-new, unused, and unworn item (including handmade items) in the original packaging (such as ... Read moreabout the condition
Model: Mila
Theme: Boho, Clubwear, Festival, Grunge Modified Item: No
Pattern: Solid Style: Booties
Fastening: Slip On Product Line: Booties
EU: 7.5 Heel Height: Med (1 3/4 in. to 2 3/4 in.)
Color: Black US Shoe Size (Women's): 10
Occasion: All Occasion wear Material: Lycra & Gore-Tex
Brand: Mephisto Width: Medium (B, M)
Heel Type: Block UPC: 887067572929
January 10, 2018

MEPHISTO WOMEN'S MILA GT SIZE 10 M BOOTIES IN BLACK LYCRA BRAND NEW IN BOOTIES THE BOX! 82ccab

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.

Rajasthani Handmade Jutti Women Ethnic Jodhpuri Mojari Sandal Ethnic Style,Harley-Davidson Women's Inman Mills 5.25" Motorcycle Boots D83877FLY London Women's Yex668fly Mid Calf Boot - Choose SZ/Color,Munro Newbury Women's black suede pull on tall boots sz. 9 M,Chic Womens Mary Janes Casual Shoes US Plus size Flat Heel Pumps Patent Leather,COLE HAAN NIKERIR Black Patent Leather Buckles Flat Slip On Shoe Women’s Size 8B,New Clarks Womens 26129366 Navy Loafers Size 8 (A, N),Red Wing Heritage Iron Ranger 6-Inch 3066 Black Boundary Women's Boots 03066,Jambu Women's "CORDOBA" BROWN CLOGS Sz. 7.5 M,$450 New 10 Crosby Derek Lam Kaley Sz 6.5 m Black Hair Calf Suede Wedges Boots,Womens Ladies Espadrilles Flat Pom Pom Sandals Slip On Strappy Comfy Size ShoesFRYE Melissa Western Over The Knee Boots, CognacSTALLION 8 Black Leather Eagle Custom White Red Western Cowboy Boots,Ovation Women's Alistair Country Boot - 468822Black Casual Glitter Cushioned Closed Round Toe Womens Ballet Flats Size 8,Henrik Vibskov Minime Oxford shoes UK5 EU38Men/Women saint laurent boots 38 Various goods high quality Global sales,FRYE Women's Molly Button Tall-SMVLE Riding Boot Tan 5.5 M US,Joie Bentlee Over the Knee OTK Boots in Chestnut Suede $575 Size 37.5 New,Ladies Clarks Riding Style Boots Maymie Stellar,THE TOUCH OF NINA Blue And Black Low Block Heel Shoes Size 8.5 Leather B3232,Hot Women Slip On Flat Heel Sequins College Loafers Canvas Platform Spring ShoesA|X Armani Exchange Women's Buckle Ankle Boot - Choose SZ/color,Teva Women's W DE LA Vina Dos Chelsea Boot, Bungee Cord, 11 M US,Lucky Brand Womens Brown Slides Size 6.5 (419301),Lolita Womens Punk Cross Strap Low Heels Mary Janes Court Patent Leather Shoes,New Womens Girls Pointed Toe Bowknot Casual Rhinestones Flat Slip On Pumps Shoes,NWB Jeffrey Campbell Vejar Nude Leather Boot,,Tory Burch Broome Distressed Black Leather Combat Boots Fur Lining Zip 9 NIB$475,Girls Womens Sweet Casual Mary Janes Ankle Strap Flats Lolita Shoes Comfort New,

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

Man/Woman Casadei boots. 39.5 Complete specification range delicate Great choice,

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.