Spring Step Women's Gerberas Heels Heeled Sandal Blue Leather Heels Gerberas a4f394

Spring Step Women's Gerberas Heels Heeled Sandal Blue Leather Heels Gerberas a4f394

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
Brand: Spring Step
US Shoe Size (Women's): 40 M Color: Blue Leather
Style: 803230_1734004 UPC: Does not apply
January 10, 2018

Spring Step Women's Gerberas Heels Heeled Sandal Blue Leather Heels Gerberas a4f394

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.

Test Item - DO NOT BID OR PURCHASE - multi qty,ASICS GEL ENHANCE ULTRA 4.0 T75CQ 1626 PHANTOM BURGUNDY WOMEN SHOES SIZE 6.5,NEW with box Reebok Freestyle Hi Face Stockholm 9US ( SOLD OUT EVERYWHERE!! ),PUMA Tsugi Jun Women's White Black Neon Sneakers 36705102 Size 6.5,Gola Women's Coaster Rainbow Sneaker Off White/Multi Canvas Sneakers,Nike Duel Racer Womens Size 7 String Chrome White Beige Running Shoes 927243-201Nike Free 5.0 TR Fit 5 Print Womens Training Shoes 704674 007 Size 7.5 Gray NIB,Pleaser Women's Adore 709VLRS Ankle-Strap Sandal White Patent/White,Wmns Nike Lunarepic Low Flyknit Sz 5.5-8.5 Blue/Black 843765-406 FREE SHIPPING,Nike Size 10 Womens White Gray Air Max 90 Ultra Running Shoes NWOB 881108-102New FILA Disruptor II 2 Unisex Sneakers Athletic Shoes Triple BLACK/FS1HTA1078X,Ryka Women's Revere Walking Shoe - Choose SZ/Color,NIKE CORTEZ BASIC QS AH3054 600 Pink 7Y = 25cm,Puma Ftr Slipstream LT Fluo Peach 355832 01 Women's,MNX15 Women Elevator Shoes GIO NAVY Height Increase 10cm by FedEx Fast Ship,Keds Women's Scout Boot Splash Twill WX Sneaker, Black, 9 M US,Man's/Woman's Skechers Women's Goldie-Rainbow Sneaker Customer first Strong value King of the crowd,Adidas NEO Lite Racer [DB0577] Women Casual Shoes Orchid Tint/White,Mr/Ms NIKE WOMENINTERNATIONALIST PREMIUM GREY/WHT/PLATNUM/ANTHRACITE 828404-006 S:6.5 Wear resistant fashionable Seasonal hot sale,Puma Fenty By Rihanna Black Leather Textile Womens The Trainer 190398 01 P5ASICS Gel Kayano 19 Running Shoes Women’s Size 6.5 US Near Mint Condition,PUMA Womens 9.5 Basket Classic LifeStyle Wns Fashion Sneaker- White Gold,Jordan 9 IX university blue space jam size 7y - 8.5 Wmns 2010,Asics GT-2000 6 Pink Grey Women Running Shoes Regular B Width T855N-700,Kaepa Women's TouchUp Cheer Shoe White Size 8,WOMEN'S SHOES SNEAKERS MERRELL BARE ACCESS FLEX [J12618],Z Coil Womens Slip On Slides Gray Suede Pain Relief Comfort Shoes Spring S 11W,PUMA Women's Fierce Lasercut Wn Sneaker, - Choose SZ/Color,New Balance 574 Blue/Yellow Luau WL574ILA Women's SZ 5.5,nike womens Lunarepic Flyknit running trainers 818677 504 sneakers SAMPLE,

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 Air Max 90 Womens 325213-048 Dark Wolf Grey White Running Shoes Size 7.5,

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.