Bush Election Boondoggles Part I

The biggest election year boondoggle is already getting plenty of press; both mainstream and in the blogosphere. I want to talk about another, much smaller boondoggle.

In this environment of ever expanding federal deficits as far as the eye can see, when state and federal programs to help the truly needy are being cut everywhere, BushCo, in a nod to their fundamentalist, right-wing, wacko base are willing to blow $1.5 billion on promoting marriage.

There is some evidence that education programs that promote good communication on important marital matters really do help couples remain married. There is less evidence, but still some, that such programs aimed at people before they marry are helpful as well. All well and good. However, you just know that nothing this administration does can be for the good it can do or because sound science says it's the right thing to do. What sort of restrictions can you imagine would be in such a program that would increase it's appeal to the rabid, bible-thumpers on the right?

Well, there's the much hated 1996 "Defense of Marriage Act," which specifies that for any federal program a married couple must only be defined as... go ahead, you know the answer... a man and a woman.

There are other problems of course. Many groups worry that such programs would be de facto coercion to marry or that there would be pressure for women to remain in abusive marriages.

Beyond that, I'm concerned that such programs would provide ammunition for local and state judiciaries to roll back the gains made in divorce law over the past several decades. They could be induced to add restrictions to divorce statutes and knowing the propensity of conservatives to define everything in terms of how it can benefit males (and especially WASP males), you could expect such restrictions to fall most heavily on women.

In combination with the DMA, such programs are sure to be heralded as a move back to the "good old days" when heterosexual marriage for life was not only expected, but tacitly enforced by societal convention and by the law regardless of the toll it takes on women and children.

"Compassionate Conservatives." Makes your head hurt doesn't it?

I think the word you're looking for is "oxymoron."