This Should Make Ann Romney Feel MUCH Better

[dadakarma]

Pete Stark Introduces Bill to Classify Child-Rearing as Work Under Welfare’s Work Requirement

Pete Stark has introduced his bill called the Women’s Option to Raise Kids (WORK) Act, which would allow low-income mothers with children up to 3 years old to classify their child-rearing responsibilities as work, just the way Ann Romney did:

Current law does not count low-income stay-at-home parents who are raising young children as meeting the necessary Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) work requirement. Current law also bans states from counting these individuals toward that state’s work participation rate, which can result in financial penalties if not met. This effectively bars low-income parents who choose to stay home to raise their young children from access to the financial support of TANF.

The WORK Act would amend TANF law to recognize the critical job of raising children age three or younger as work. Under the legislation, low-income parents could work, receive job training, search for work, or raise their children until they are school-aged without fear of losing TANF support and being pushed deeper into poverty. This is the same option that wealthy families, such as the Romneys, enjoy.

The WORK Act has the usual suspects as co-sponsors, including Progressive Caucus members John Lewis (D-GA), Gwen Moore (D-WI), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rosa DeLauro (D-CA), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), and Laura Richardson (D-CA). But something that backs Republicans, and Mitt Romney, into a corner in this fashion should have far more than 12 co-sponsors. The entire point of the Ann Romney hissy fit was that raising kids equals work and ought to be respected. Nobody disagreed with that idea. All this bill would do would be to codify that principle into law, so that stay-at-home single moms can benefit from welfare in the early years of raising children.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/04/...k-requirement/

[dadakarma]

I was waiting for someone to push this issue!

Oh, those cute little Romneys. Always one step behind.

Awwwful QUIET on this thread.

[Peter1469]

Hitler did something similar. He gave tax dollars to hot German chicks who bred new Germans. Brilliant move if you need more citizens. And no the unattractive women didn't get crap.

[RollingWave]

Pete Stark Introduces Bill to Classify Child-Rearing as Work Under Welfare’s Work Requirement

Pete Stark has introduced his bill called the Women’s Option to Raise Kids (WORK) Act, which would allow low-income mothers with children up to 3 years old to classify their child-rearing responsibilities as work, just the way Ann Romney did

I see oneeeee small problem here

Given that Pete Stark raised this bill, expect it to get totally shot down as socialism (though this one really is pretty much socialism)

[Alias]

Pete Stark Introduces Bill to Classify Child-Rearing as Work Under Welfare’s Work Requirement

Pete Stark has introduced his bill called the Women’s Option to Raise Kids (WORK) Act, which would allow low-income mothers with children up to 3 years old to classify their child-rearing responsibilities as work, just the way Ann Romney did:

Current law does not count low-income stay-at-home parents who are raising young children as meeting the necessary Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) work requirement. Current law also bans states from counting these individuals toward that state’s work participation rate, which can result in financial penalties if not met. This effectively bars low-income parents who choose to stay home to raise their young children from access to the financial support of TANF.

The WORK Act would amend TANF law to recognize the critical job of raising children age three or younger as work. Under the legislation, low-income parents could work, receive job training, search for work, or raise their children until they are school-aged without fear of losing TANF support and being pushed deeper into poverty. This is the same option that wealthy families, such as the Romneys, enjoy.

The WORK Act has the usual suspects as co-sponsors, including Progressive Caucus members John Lewis (D-GA), Gwen Moore (D-WI), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rosa DeLauro (D-CA), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), and Laura Richardson (D-CA). But something that backs Republicans, and Mitt Romney, into a corner in this fashion should have far more than 12 co-sponsors. The entire point of the Ann Romney hissy fit was that raising kids equals work and ought to be respected. Nobody disagreed with that idea. All this bill would do would be to codify that principle into law, so that stay-at-home single moms can benefit from welfare in the early years of raising children.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/04/...k-requirement/

"re-classify". The left is good at that. Get the govt involved and classify some people to make a political statement. Smart people and don't you forget it.

[OFBUACMKA]

Hitler did something similar. He gave tax dollars to hot German chicks who bred new Germans. Brilliant move if you need more citizens. And no the unattractive women didn't get crap.

FLUKES OF THE WORLD - REJOICE!

(sorry, missed the "unattractive" part - she wouldn't qualify...)

[OFBUACMKA]

Pete Stark has introduced his bill called the Women’s Option to Raise Kids (WORK) Act, which would allow low-income mothers with children up to 3 years old to classify their child-rearing responsibilities as work, just the way Ann Romney did:

The WORK Act would amend TANF law to recognize the critical job of raising children age three or younger as work. Under the legislation, low-income parents could work, receive job training, search for work, or raise their children until they are school-aged without fear of losing TANF support and being pushed deeper into poverty. This is the same option that wealthy families, such as the Romneys, enjoy.

The WORK Act has the usual suspects as co-sponsors, including Progressive Caucus members John Lewis (D-GA), Gwen Moore (D-WI), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rosa DeLauro (D-CA), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), and Laura Richardson (D-CA). But something that backs Republicans, and Mitt Romney, into a corner in this fashion should have far more than 12 co-sponsors. The entire point of the Ann Romney hissy fit was that raising kids equals work and ought to be respected. Nobody disagreed with that idea. All this bill would do would be to codify that principle into law, so that stay-at-home single moms can benefit from welfare in the early years of raising children.

Just a couple of things:
1.Ann Romney said raising children was work - no one with children disputes that. I don't recall her saying she should get paid for it.

2.Why does this "back Republicans, and Mitt Romney into a corner"?

3.Why are you calling Liberal Democrats "Progressives" - is there some stigma attached to the word "Liberal"?

4."Hissy fit"? That's a bit strong, don't you think? If she were the wife of a "progressive", I get the feeling you'd be high-fiving her and saying something along the lines of "sing it, sister!"

Here's the problem I see. While Ann Romney was fortunate enough to be able to stay home and raise her children, I don't think this should be an entitlement for everyone. There is daycare, there are programs and, quite frankly, I see too much of an opportunity to abuse the system. A simple fact of life is that some "can" and some "can't". I don't see it as the government's responsibility to ensure everyone "can".

[annata]

young mothers can go on welfare for children up to 3 years old, that's toddler age. after 3, then they can go to daycare.
I have no problem with this, not everyone can go to work, or job train, those first couple years are important bonding time, and really, a mother of a 2 or 3 year old, can work if she wants to -but i'd allow her to just stay home. seems the compassionate, and worthwhile way to go.

[OFBUACMKA]

It has to do with Romney's attitude toward motherhood as 'work' when it applies to his wife (and her staff), as opposed to mothers who don't belong to the privileged class.

Double standard, as it were.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/1...to-go-to-work/

There are double standards everywhere. Those who can, do. Those who can't, "make do". Some mothers will have to go to work. This si hardly what I'd consider "backing Romney inot a corner".

[Alias]

It has to do with Romney's attitude toward motherhood as 'work' when it applies to his wife (and her staff), as opposed to mothers who don't belong to the privileged class.

Double standard, as it were.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/1...to-go-to-work/

Do you think Michelle Obama and her husband belong to the "privileged class"?