Topeka — Saying “I do” could be a cheap date under a bill before the Legislature.
House Bill 2585 would waive the marriage license fee for people who can’t afford it.
Rep. Joe Patton, R-Topeka, said he proposed the measure to help people get married because studies show that marriage has a lot of positive outcomes, such as improved well-being of children and adults and greater earnings for family members.
“However, many couples don’t marry because they can’t afford to pay the marriage license fee,” Patton said.
Under his legislation, the $69 marriage fee would be waived if the couple filed a poverty affidavit, similar to when Kansas courts waive docket fees.
“Eliminating the financial burden to marry for those with limited incomes in our state would have a positive impact on the number of marriages in our state which would lead to stronger families and society,” he said.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
rooster (anonymous) says…
WOW, this is simply amazing.
The Kansas legislature has found a way to improve marriage at a cost of $69 bucks. Sign me up!
You know I was wanting to get married to my ol lady but there is no way i'm spending my hard earned $69 bucks on no weddin license. Thats crazy talk.
I think the cumulative IQ of this state drops every second.
Informed (anonymous) says…
How do we become a 'poverty waver'? Do we just stand on the street corner and wave as poor people walk by? Do we make an arbitrary assumption of their relative worth?
workinghard (anonymous) says…
I thought we already had that covered, it's called "common law" marriage.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
And if your union is blessed with issue remember, "can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em."
KU_cynic (anonymous) says…
Kansas Legislature considers poverty wavers for those looking to get married, but unable to pay fees
The word is "waiver".
Sheesh.
lllwll (anonymous) says…
This is crap.
i want a refund.
50YearResident (anonymous) says…
Whats next, stupidity waiver for those too dumb to get married? Oh, wait these may be the some people!
Machiavelli_mania (anonymous) says…
i think we should make marriage hard to get and hard to maintain. marriage should not be a legal and legislative issue at all.
sunny (anonymous) says…
This is ridiculous! I am almost positive these losers that can't pay $69 to get married (which is bs) have cell phones and cigarettes. They have probably brought children into the mix that they can't feed!
More handouts...yep that is exactly what we need!
love2bike (anonymous) says…
another "tax break" by the friendly legislature!
sunny (anonymous) says…
This isn't a 'tax break'....this is a hand out! 'Waiver'...get it?
BorderRuffian (anonymous) says…
That's right! Declare yourselves too poor to afford the wedding license, then go out and blow thousands of dollars on the rehearsal dinner, tuxes, dresses, cake, decorations, and the reception. Makes great sense. Oh, and stiff the preacher if ya decide to get married in a church.
Too poor to afford a wedding license? Then how in the world do you think you are going to be able to afford to be married together. Anyone who thinks that'two can live cheaper than one' is just plain nuts.
Too poor to afford a wedding license? Then go out, get training or an education, get a job, and work. OOPS - sorry about that, that'd make them Republicans.
overthemoon (anonymous) says…
I assume this will apply to gay couples as well. Though I don't know a lot of gay couples in poverty. Most of my gay friends are high achieving, productive members of the community.
blue73harley (anonymous) says…
If it doesn't work out, can I get a divorce waiver?
tomatogrower (anonymous) says…
workinghard (Anonymous) says…
I thought we already had that covered, it's called “common law” marriage.
I'm not sure, but I think common law marriage was eliminated when you conservatives voted in the anti-gay marriage.
oneeye_wilbur (anonymous) says…
omg! my grandparents would have qualifited before the depression. this is the most stupid idea yet to come from topeka. I find it hard to believe that someone who is getting married, who can afford cigarettes, beer, cell phones, eating at Long John Silvers, cannot afford $69.
Now this is something to protest about!
youarewhatyoueat (anonymous) says…
tomato, i think common law still exists, i know a (now fully married) couple who were common-law for 2 years before getting hitched.
the only reason i don't do common law or the real thing is because i want to remain debt-free. i don't need any institution approving of my long-term relationship, anyway, although there is less paperwork for married couples.
none2 (anonymous) says…
The state is also working with the federal government to make sure poor people have dishwashers. Perhaps they could combine this with free marriage and presto voila you have not only a spouse, but appliances.
There is just one troublesome issue. What good is it for the state to wave the license fee if they also don't include free (or heavily discounted) wedding rings? They could do it in the form of a voucher to stores like Kay's or Zale's, (I specifically excluded Jared since they are too good to use the normal possessive form: Jared's like most jewelry stores.) Does Walmart sell wedding rings?
fallingwhilereading (anonymous) says…
Most of you commenting claim marriage is a Christian act between a male and female whenever gay marriage comes up in the LJ. How Christain are you when you choose to not help the poor? Did Christ ever have a sermon saying treat the poor and needy like crap? I understand the theory of evolution is difficult for some kansans to grasp, especially when your thoughts and actions resemble that of a lesser primate.
AreUNorml (anonymous) says…
Machiavelli_mania (Anonymous) says…
i think we should make marriage hard to get and hard to maintain. marriage should not be a legal and legislative issue at all.
******************
This statement contradicts itself. These are two separate thoughts completely.
Either there are rules that govern how hard it is to get married and maintain. Or the government gets out of the marriage business altogether. you can't have both.
fallingwhilereading (anonymous) says…
Why should you have to pay a goverment to be married. What does the goverment need to be involed in a relationship between two people. I thought Kansas was about having smaller goverment. A goverment that doesn't intrude on one's life. Some suedo republican state Kansas is.
hedshrinker (anonymous) says…
Best entertainment all day reading this, altho kinda sad when I think all the nonsense this legislature has been up to so far....trying to reverse the public places smoking ban which has made it tolerable to go out to eat, trying to prevent mandatory health insurance pruchase (see BC Anthem of Calif, raising non-gp rates 30-40 % b/c all the healthy people can't afford and won't buy insurance),,,,,let's see, our educational system is going to hell in a handbasket, but we're going to subsidize people who shouldn't be starting out family life if they don't have $69 to spare. Pathetic!!!!!
oneeye_wilbur (anonymous) says…
I'd like to see the document that has to be filled out>
will it list, ownershiip of a house? will it list rent paid? will it list WHAT?
Why doesn't the J/W get the proposed document to be filled out and print it in the paper. That would be fun. to read, maybe on Valentines Day.
This must really be a plan to promote family values.
misplacedcheesehead (anonymous) says…
This is stupidity. Considering the number of marriages that end in divorce, why does the state think more marriages will benefit anyone? More marriages entered into=more marriages ending in divorce. What the heck is the point?
Eride (anonymous) says…
Yes because people should get married when they can't afford $69.
feeble (anonymous) says…
So, when I got married a while back in JoCo (still am, very happy, thank you!) I got a pretty good laugh at the proximity of the ATM machine to the marriage license office in the JoCo court house on Sante Fe.
Mariposa (anonymous) says…
How does anyone know what other people are spending their money on?
This is a good idea. People who are legally married have made a contract, a vow to each other. In my opinion getting married in a church would be good, but many today are not in a church.
Telling people not to "breed unless you can feed" is crass and vulgar. Poor people get married, form families, have children, and they love them dearly. No one knows when they are going to need help or under what circumstances.
This proposition is from someone who deeply believes in marriage and family and deeply believes that it should be preserved and encouraged for the stability of our society.
Something that crosses party, class and racial lines, or should.
KansasPerson (anonymous) says…
I agree with the posters who say that if you can't afford a $69 marriage license, you have no business setting up a household. What happened to actually trying to prepare for life?
Secondly, I have known several couples who put off getting married until they could afford it (or they didn't get married at all because they said they couldn't afford a wedding) and in no case were they referring to the marriage license fee. They were always talking about the big wedding, the dress, the tux, the reception, etc. etc. etc.
Dumb legislation, right up there with the idea about taxing the people who pay their taxes with a paper form instead of online.
parrothead8 (anonymous) says…
BorderRuffian (Anonymous) says…
Too poor to afford a wedding license? Then go out, get training or an education, get a job, and work. OOPS - sorry about that, that'd make them Republicans.
Wasn't it a Republican who proposed this bill?
jayhawklawrence (anonymous) says…
It is a very sad situation in Topeka.
I don't even want to know how much dumber it can get.
artichokeheart (anonymous) says…
blue73harley (Anonymous) says…
"If it doesn't work out, can I get a divorce waiver?"
There it is.
tanzer (anonymous) says…
our legislators are republicans... nearly all of them
50YearResident (anonymous) says…
Getting married but broke? Here is a voucher for the $69 fee, compliments of the Great State of Kansas. But wait if you do it right now, we also throw in a free maturnity voucher to cover your first child. The voucher is good anytime within the next year. What ?. Can you use it in 90 days? Yes you can, in fact if you use it within 90 days we will also include 1 years free rent and welfare payments for up to 3 years! Congratulations and welcome to Kansas,
deathpenaltyliberal (anonymous) says…
Since it easily costs the state $69 to process the paperwork to enforce the marriage contract, why should we subsidize someone else? If you don't like it, go "common law".
sherlock (anonymous) says…
Well now we know why couples choose "to live together" instead of going for the legal vows! Its because they cant afford the $69.00!!!!! Yeah sure!!!! So why not lower the cost instead of making a new rule! AS IF this will solve the problem anyway. What a joke! Makes one wonder what the people in Topeka Gov. do all day? Apparently not much!
alm77 (anonymous) says…
youarewhat says "the only reason i don't do common law or the real thing is because i want to remain debt-free" -- I don't understand this statement. I'm assuming you think that a marriage would make you responsible for your spouses debt, but that's not true. Even married couples have separate debt. It's when you divorce that the court can tell you to pay up and you can become responsible for their debt. Even then, you're only mandated to pay your ex, their debtors can't come after you.
webmocker (anonymous) says…
Following the logic of the Honorable Representative Joe Patton, the following should also be part of his proposal:
“[Allowing gays to marry] in our state would have a positive impact on the number of marriages in our state which would lead to stronger families and society,” he said.
georgeofwesternkansas (anonymous) says…
The only way government can give something, is to first take it.
riverat (Joe Hyde) says…
And how many dollars does a couple need to get a marriage license in Kansas? Sixty-nine?
Won't surprise me if our legislators waive that. Most of 'em probably suffer fits of righteous indignation just thinking about it.
LeviCircle (anonymous) says…
From the Kansas Bar Association website:
http://www.ksbar.org/public/public_re...
Common Law Marriages
A common law marriage is a marriage by agreement of the two persons without any formal ceremony or license. A common law marriage will be recognized in Kansas if the couple considers themselves to be married and publicly holds themselves out to be married and if they are legally eligible to marry. No minimum period of cohabitation is required.
Common Law marriages are subject to the same legal obligations and privileges that apply to marriages with licenses. Once a common law marriage is established, the couple must get a court ordered divorce to terminate the marriage.
So, be you rich or poor, just don't bother with the State! There's no need to declare yourself legally poor, nor to spend $69. Have your wedding, fancy or plain; go on your honeymoon, Motel 6 or the Bahamas - and live your lives. You don't need to bring the State into the mix.
Ricky_Vaughn (anonymous) says…
This is the kind of crap the KS gov't wastes its time on?
Ricky_Vaughn (anonymous) says…
Who needs a marriage license anyway? I'll save the $69 and stick it to the man.
workinghard (anonymous) says…
tomatogrower- your comment was fine until you got to the "when you conservatives voted in the anti-gay marriage." part. You have no idea how I voted or if I am a conservative or not. Are you assuming everyone but you is a conservative? A simple 2 second search would have told you Kansas does have common law marriages.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…
69, presto you are married.... then it will be 68 and I owe you one.
meggers (anonymous) says…
This, from the same legislators who just passed deep Medicaid cuts for the poor, mentally ill, elderly, and disabled?
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
middlewait (anonymous) says…
“However, many couples don’t marry because they can’t afford to pay the marriage license fee,” Patton said.
Whether you are for or against this proposal, this statement is indicative of what is wrong with how many of our representatives think and govern--"many couples don't marry because they can't afford to pay the marriage license fee"? How in the world does Patton come up with this one? Did he get a call from a constituent? Did he hear some talk at the coffee shop? I cannot imagine that anyone has actually done a study or survey that found this to be true, so he just makes up a "fact" to support whatever he wants to do. Call him out on it, people, instead of wasting your time arguing with each other over which of you is the biggest idiot.
love2bike (anonymous) says…
How do these folks get elected to office?
love2bike (anonymous) says…
How much time is the legislature going to spend on this one, and how much is it going to cost us?
sourpuss (anonymous) says…
69... heh heh.
Did_I_say_that (DIST) says…
So much for "waiting until we can afford it." Next up: Waive fees for maternity care; which, of course, wouldn't be necessary had they not waived the original 69.
ralphralph (anonymous) says…
Legislature: Get to work (real work) or go home.
sunny (anonymous) says…
Poor people get married, form families, have children, and they love them dearly. No one knows when they are going to need help or under what circumstances.
No one said poor people don't love their children dearly. They should love the rest of us tax paying employed people and support their children.
And trust me, if you cannot come up with 69 bucks to get married, you certainly can't afford to BE married, or even think about having a child!
pdecell (Paul Decelles) says…
I bet Patton doesn't have a shred of data to justify this bill. But why let a little detail like that interfere with political posturing.