PUMA Team Women's Tazon 6 WN's FM Sneaker Black Team PUMA Gold 8.5 M US 4dc1d5

PUMA Team Women's Tazon 6 WN's FM Sneaker Black Team PUMA Gold 8.5 M US 4dc1d5

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
Size: 8.5 M US
MPN: 18987727-001-8.5 M US Department: womens
Model: 18987727-001-8.5 M US Color: Puma Black-puma Team Gold
Brand: PUMA US Shoe Size (Women's): Does not apply
UPC: 191240975385 EAN: 0191240975385
January 10, 2018

PUMA Team Women's Tazon 6 WN's FM Sneaker Black Team PUMA Gold 8.5 M US 4dc1d5

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.

Keds Women's Double Decker MLB Slip-On Sneaker San Francisco Giants,Nike Air Jordan 1 Retro High GG Black Metallic Red Bronze Kids Women 332148-022,Vans SK8 Hi Reissue Velvet Women's Trainers Shoes High Top Red/Black,ASICS Gel Nimbus 17 Running Shoes Women’s Size 6 US Near Mint Condition,Scottish Deerhound Running Shoes For Women- Free Shipping,adidas AX2 CP - Grey - Womens,Reebok Women's Pump Plus Ultk Track Shoe,Nike Air Presto Black White womens sizes 878068 001Skechers Performance Women's Go Step Lite Adorbs - Choose SZ/Color,Puma Basket Heart Women's Shoes Peach Beige 363073-11,Men's/Women's 580 KG MARINE PRUNE Easy to clean surface Price reduction Non-slip,AB488 D.A.T.E. (DATE) shoes silver glitter suede women sneakers,Crocs Women's Busy Day Strappy Wedge Black/Black Walking Shoes,adidas Performance DA9955 Womens Aerobounce PR w Running Shoe- Choose SZ/Color.,NEW ADIDAS ORIGINALS STAN SMITH WOMENS WHITE SHOES SNEAKERS CQ2810 SIZE 6.5,Asics S568N Gel-Fit Vida Sneaker Black Silver 179296,New Balance Wl420 Classic 70's Running Womens Blush Pink Trainers,Gentleman/Lady Rieker-Antistress Women's Daisy 15 quality Has a long reputation Clearance sale,New Balance Women's Sneakers 410 Shoes Black Sneakers Leisure NEW WL410,RYKA ENHANCE 2 Womens Enhance Cross-Trainer Shoe- Choose SZ/Color.,5.11 Tactical 16002 Womens Recon Scope Orange Running, Cross Training Shoes 9.5,NEW PUMA FENTY BY RIHANNA BOW SNEAKERS SIZE 5.5 WOMANS GREEN,adidas Climacool Vent W Chalk Blue White Grey Women Running Shoes Sneaker CG3920,PUMA MATCH LO BASIC SPORTS WN'S-W Womens Match Basic Sports WNs Tennis Shoe,NEW BALANCE WOMEN WL574ESB 574 CLASSICS SKY BLUE GREY Lifestyle Sneakers 6-10,Vlado Women's Siren Sneaker Burgundy Neoprene High TopsAdidas Originals EQT Support RF Women's Fitness Gym Workout Trainers Green,New Balance WLD5KYP4 Womens Track Shoes- Choose SZ/Color.Man's/Woman's Joie Dakota Printed Low Top Sneaker Rich design Primary quality Export,Nike Air Max 90 Black-Cool Grey/White 325213-037 Women's Size 11 Fits Mens 9.5

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

NIKE Women's AIR MAX ZERO LOTC QS Champagne Mid Navy SIZE 7 847125 600 BOXED,

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.