Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, April 7, 2011

Gov. Brownback, SRS secretary discussing marriage initiatives

April 7, 2011

Advertisement

— Gov. Sam Brownback and the state’s social service agency chief met Thursday with a group of people to brainstorm on “healthy marriage initiatives.”

“The goal is to have more intact families in Kansas,” said Michelle Schroeder, a spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services.

Schroeder said SRS Secretary Rob Siedlecki and Brownback met with scholars and researchers from across the nation. She declined to name them.

“We’re at the beginning of the process,” she said.

Siedlecki and Brownback have talked in the past about promoting marriage. Siedlecki has also said he was developing new faith-based initiatives at SRS.

Siedlecki is a former high-ranking Florida Department of Health official who also worked in the U.S. Justice Department’s Task Force on Faith-Based Initiatives under President George W. Bush.

Comments

newmath 3 years ago

Something that can help families... How about making it so that a couple that wants to have children, but can't, are able to adopt a child with out $20,000 in legal fees.

0

deec 3 years ago

No, I think we get the alleged point. The problem with that theory is the assumption that all welfare recipients are unwed mothers. Or that cohabiting couples, married or no, do not qualify for benefits. These are income-based programs. Marital status has nothing to do with who qualifies; money (or lack thereof) does. Benefits are based on total household income. It doesn't matter whether the income is junior's after school job, mom's second job, or the income from mom and dad's jobs. It's the money, not the marital status of the earners that determines eligibility.

0

alm77 3 years ago

I think some of you are missing the point (and clearly have never visited the SRS office that has been plastered with these promotions for years). The "marriage initiative" is to get couples who have a child together to get married so that the state isn't paying out as much support to the mother or having the expense of chasing the father for child support.

0

tange 3 years ago

Yeah? Show me the prenup.

0

autie 3 years ago

I am sure my great uncle Sam would have something smart to say about all this.....I am terrible afraid Mr Siedliecki is licking something.....OH Sam...Folks...suck it up and go to the barrricades. This false populism will not last long...in the next legislative round the ruination will fall. Sam will be sucking hind teat soon...cause you see guys, my great uncle Sam always told me, "you can't pray a lie"..

0

groovette 3 years ago

Look at the framing. "Healthy Marriage" initiatives (subtext: healthy marriage = heterosexual, 'man in charge' marriage). If you're against those initiatives, you're against "healthy" marriage . Who is going to come out and say they're AGAINST healthy marriage? This kind of framing is the something the conservatives have worked to attain, and they're very good at it.
You won't change a conservative's mind, but when discussing this with independents or moderates, remind them that this country was founded on principals of liberty, freedom, equality, and the pursuit of happiness--for EVERYONE. That's what "healthy" really means. There is no exclusion of gay people in either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Our country's founders made sure of that, for all of us. Treating U.S. citizens as less than that because they're gay is unhealthy for all of us.

0

Jan Rolls 3 years ago

If he is so worried about couples staying together why not send every married couple a check so they can pay their bills and not argue about them.

0

ochocinco 3 years ago

Interesting. When Sebelius was outlawing private energy companies in Western Kansas, liberals weren't crying "freedom" but were applauding her tyranny for unproven "environmental" reasons. Now when Brownback uses the word "marriage" and "initiative" in the same sentence the libs freak out, claiming to be discriminated against merely because they don't share the same religion as Brownback.

But Brownback can't win. If he tried to get rid of the SRS to save costs, you'd have literally dozens of protesters and an LJW cover story about how he doesn't care for the poor. If he appeals to traditional conservative ideas in running the SRS, he is injecting "religion." If liberals were truly for liberty, they would argue for the state to get rid of the SRS, replacing its services with private charity instead.

0

firebird27 3 years ago

I suspect Brownbeck also means that a "healthy" family includes "heterosexual" parents. I seriously doubt that he wants to change the definition of family (marriage) to include the gay community. I do not believe the Governor believes gay parents provide a "healthy" family environment.

0

igby 3 years ago

Bubble double toil and trouble....i hate to be the one to bust your bubble....but this is all about baby mamma drama and slashing benefits for the who daddy me don't know girl. Lol.

0

lindseybraden 3 years ago

Just remember he was elected in to office...

0

Beth Bird 3 years ago

"Siedlecki and Brownback have talked in the past about promoting marriage. Siedlecki has also said he was developing new faith-based initiatives at SRS. "

EXCUSE ME?? WHAT ABOUT SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE???

0

Richard Heckler 3 years ago

This man Brownback is nuts if he and his friends believe they are keys to any successful marriage!!!

Jobs and NEW industry Mr Brownback!!!

You sir should stay out of people's private lives for you sir are NOT the great moral giant of our time !!!

0

overthemoon 3 years ago

Now let me get this straight. Michelle Obama simply proposes focus on healthier lifestyle that SUGGESTS that kid and adults eat more sensibly and she is attacked for 'Government Overreach'. And the same people who were screaming about that want Government to create a program for marriage initiatives, and that's good and wise?

0

Roland Gunslinger 3 years ago

"Siedlecki has also said he was developing new faith-based initiatives at SRS. "

"also worked in the U.S. Justice Department’s Task Force on Faith-Based Initiatives"

Faith based initiatives...

Welcome to the Theocratic State of Kansas.

Sharia Law anyone?

0

Alceste 3 years ago

SRS Secretary Rob Siedlecki is unqualified for this slot, but he's as qualified as any duffus within the KU Schoolf of Social Welfare. Irrespective, a mere five years ago, this is what was written about SRS Secretary Rob Siedlecki when he was running for a seat in the Florida legislature. He lost that election. See: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/local_news/election/races/house85.html :

Profiles Name: Robert Siedlecki Jr. Age: 37 Personal: Lives in Wellington, married with two daughters. Professional: General counsel for SuperShuttle, a shared-ride company; previously an adviser at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in Washington, D.C. Political background: None. Positions on issues: Wants to create a permanent, month-long state sales tax holiday for hurricane supplies; supports making Save Our Homes property tax exemptions transferrable when an owner buys a new home; wants to press Congress for a federal solution to the state's homeowners insurance crisis.

This guy is no professional Public Welfare career individual. He's simply a political hack in a political hack appointee slot, having been appointed by a Grade D political hack who the simpleton population of Kansas elected to be their governor in their ever so Kansas ways of stupidity.

He lost the Florida election; continued on with his ever so important work of General counsel for SuperShuttle, a shared-ride company until he got the political hack appointment within the Florida Dept. of Health as "chief of staff", whatever that is.

0

Benthere 3 years ago

An easy solution is hefty fines for infidelity and outrageous fines for domestic violence. Everyone in this country is money motivated...how about a $50,000 fine against a cheating spouse or and another $100,000 fine if the husband is a wife beater? The state can take it out of their checks every month and give a minuscule amount to the other spouse, to prevent abuse of the system.

That should keep people in line in that regards. Then they can change laws so it isn't so easy to file for divorce, or a psychiatric evaluation must be passed in order to file for divorce.

0

Paul R Getto 3 years ago

Vocal: "I certainly don't want to go back to the 1950's." === But, but, but...........the fifties were when June Cleaver cooked dinner in high heels and pearls, when men beat their wives and no one cared, when special education students were sometimes locked in the basement or the attic, when a portion of the women pulled the shades and drank after hubby went to work, when they invented the first 'happy pills' to keep these bored housewives quiet and in the kitchen, when women put up with anything because there were few options to survive except at the whim of their husband. There were some cool things, but the backward vision of our Christiban government is sometimes disturbing. You probably have the wrong century. Muscular Sam and his union-busting jesus are more suited for the 14th or 15th century. http://www.yuricareport.com/PoliticalAnalysis/GodsSenatorBrownback.html

0

Kim Murphree 3 years ago

You know, whatever anyone believes about marriage, its just not the government's place to interfere...and "promoting marriage" in the rightwing terms, generally means finding financial "incentives" to force people to marry or stay married---that's not a great thing, especially for those in situations that are abusive---personally, I think Brownie and the bunch want to try to recreate the world of teh 1950's where alot of people did not have rights and social norms did not allow anyone who wasn't part of a nuclear family to be supported or to live well independently. I certainly don't want to go back to the 1950's. I also want to ask this governor who touted that he would make Kansas business friendly and bring jobs to our state---where's the beef??? I suspect that the strategy all along was to quell the concerns of moderate Republicans with the talk of commerce, while all along the real agenda was social--to force certain parts of the population back into their "place." Under this ideology, people like Nancy Landon-Kassebaum would never have had the opportunity to be in office---more importantly any of the women in this administration would not have been allowed to serve--and the irony--almost hypocrisy is that these women who have benefitted from the decades of women's rights advocates--are now participating in dismantling everything that they gained. How can they do that and look at themselves in the mirror each day?

0

Ralph Reed 3 years ago

From the article: "Schroeder said SRS Secretary Rob Siedlecki and Brownback met with scholars and researchers from across the nation. She declined to name them. “We’re at the beginning of the process,” she said."


Brownstripe: I think this skirts the edges of violating the Kansas Open Meetings Act. Is it OK for the Gov to do that, but everyone else has to comply?

It's also interesting how 'He/She declined to name them...' appears a lot with Brownback's administration. Why is that; is it that they really realize what they're doing is wrong? However, this is in keeping with the precedent set by the KS Republican Manifesto which we discussed in January. http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/jan...


I agree with Paul in that this is another instance of Brownback's pelvic politics. This may be a follow-up to an article in the 3 Jan Topeka Capitol Journal. http://cjonline.com/news/state/2011-01-03/brownback_names_srs_kdhe_heads


@TJ_in_Lawrence. re: your 0632. The only "tough decisions" I've seen come out of Brownback's administration are cuts to education thereby hurting students, supporting lower corporate income taxes so more of the tax burden falls on the middle class and other initiatives. I guess that's OK if you want uneducated, broke sheeple.

0

redmoonrising 3 years ago

I think by the time it comes for Sam to announce for the Big One, he will be such a laughingstock around the country they will think of committing him instead of being committed to him. Geesh, next they will be telling us how many times a week having sex will make us all feel better too. This article makes me see a bunch of robotic people all lined up waiting to be paired with the robotic person in the adjoining line so they can be married, happily ever after or until one of them wakes up from the dream.

0

mloburgio 3 years ago

Another flat tire on brownbacks roadmap for kansas "on a bus he rented from an alabama company" we have been tea_bagged ■Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a federal constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man & a woman. ■As the family is our basic unit of society, we oppose initiatives that erode parental rights, such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. http://www.freestaterambler.com/?p=13

0

newmath 3 years ago

JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS

The number 1 thing parents argue over is money. Perhaps more JOBS would help.

GET FOCUSED ON JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS

0

FarneyMac 3 years ago

Awesome, Brownback is ruling the state with the goals of his Opus Dei cult in mind - outlaw divorce! Birth control is probably next. On the bright side, booze is here to stay.

0

autie 3 years ago

TJ, is it hard to breath with your hand in the sand? Do those grains get in your ears?

When is the god danged gobermint gonna get out of the family's business and get in the gobermint business? Oh. I forgot. Sam is part of the Family.

0

JJE007 3 years ago

Disgusting. Are we going to have to watch while church and state have sloppy, make-up sex?

0

TJ_in_Lawrence 3 years ago

I love it. Everytime Gov. Brownback has tried to make a cut or tough decision about the budget in Kansas, some group screams foul. But all you hear on this story is how he should be focusing on the economy. Many of our budget woes are rooted in the breakdown of the family and the abdication of our responsibilities as parents. Anything we do to strengthen the family unit is a good thing.

0

Paul R Getto 3 years ago

This is called pelvic politics in some circles. R's are obsessed with contolling and shaping people's lives to conform with their ideology. Too bad they are not capable of concentrating on the economy, the budget and our educational system.

0

igby 3 years ago

Like a buger from a bad sinus infection. Like a pond with indivisable tad poles. Like a caper with a pit that cracks your filling. Lol.

0

igby 3 years ago

The bastates at the dept. Of revenue have been doing this for over 10 years. They married me without me even getting a kiss. Yes, they harrased me for 7 years claiming that i was married to a woman by the name of gloria dietrict. Claim that i filed my tax return wrong and owed pentalies and interest of 309.00 on 5 tax returns. They filed a tax lein on my house and ruined my credit for 7 years. This started in 98 and the tax lein in 03. So i set out to pay the bastates back for their harrasment. I studied all about evil and spells and majic and put a curse on them to no end. Demons are eating every thing up. Lol. Got tax? got trash? got trouble? you name it and its like pac man eating away at your state like that japanese flying turtle in a godzillia rerun.

0

Christine Anderson 3 years ago

Hey, I say we all send Brownnose and Sidekick congratulatory cards, as they are comtemplating marriage and all. ROFLOL.

0

trinity 3 years ago

oh. dear. god. or celestial being, whatev. isn't infusing any type of religious/faith based values in to the government structure unconstitutional???? wtf?? and if dear reader thinks that won't happen under this moron's watch-well-think again. now he's got a cronie in on it-oh mercy. i wish i hadn't have read this, this late in the evening. livid doesn't even begin to describe how i feel. :(

0

DeMontfort 3 years ago

SRS is developing faith-based initiatives? Like what? Will I have to pray that my food stamps don't get cut off now?

0

deec 3 years ago

When was this story?

0

jhawkinsf 3 years ago

I'll preface this again as I have several times, I was listening to NPR (I do that a lot) and heard this story several years ago. A major university (I think it was Michigan) conducted a study of a group that self identified themselves as being unhappy in their marriage. They followed this group for several years. As one might expect, many divorced. But what surprised researchers was that the group that divorced did not get happier. In fact, they reported being less happy than those that stayed together. The researchers speculated that marriage is like a job. And those that do a job, even one they don't like but do it well, feel better than those who quit the job.
Given that children who are in a house with a stable marriage do better (overall) than those who come from broken homes or single parent homes, I think it's good that we all encourage marriage. Given that divorce does not guarantee that you will be happier, I think it's good that divorce should be discouraged. I applaud efforts made by anyone to encourage happy marriages. And I certainly believe that if marriage is a good institution (overall) we should extend that institution to all members of our society.

0

akuna 3 years ago

Is this really what our Governor should be spending his time on? I thought our state was in a dire economic crisis... What a jackass!

0

tomatogrower 3 years ago

It's the economy stupid. When is Brownback going to get it? He has made sure several people in the government don't have jobs, and now he wants to force people to stay married? One of his little supporters wants to make sure the federal government doesn't bring in the lab thing in Manhattan, and I don't see private industries breaking down the doors to move here. I guess if a person has to be married, because it takes 2 or more jobs to survive, then I guess that promotes marriage. Not sure how happy though.

What if the man beats the wife, or vice versa? Is that good for the kids? And how is this smaller government? Hypocrite and clueless, but Kansas voted for him. What does that say about the voters?

0

Cait McKnelly 3 years ago

Per usual. They're all for "small government" as long as they can keep their head up the woman's crotch.

0

Jan Rolls 3 years ago

Now they are going to start pushng their right wing ideas on others? Yeah that's creating jobs. When are they going to talk about jobs? I can't wait to see the first lawsuit when someone is forced to undergo their religious teachings in order to receive benefits. They'll probably have phelps teaching their classes.

0

Anne Bracker 3 years ago

If they really wanted to promote intact, stable families, they would promote same-sex marriage. Sadly, I don't think they recognize that fact.

0

pavlovs_dog 3 years ago

Just brilliant, try to repackage 21st century social mores to match 1950's television: the way Sam thinks things "should be." Where Are The Jobs?

0

seeker_of_truth 3 years ago

Saw headline, thought Brownie and Rob were thinking of getting married. Since they are christian republicans, sounded reasonable and normal behavior.

0

Steve Jacob 3 years ago

Just shaking my head. Nothing says a happy family more then a piece of paper I guess. I am sure we all want children to have good homes, but sometimes having both parents in the same house is not a good idea.

I just think faith should not be the answer to government problems. Republicans want the government out of our lives while taking away our freedoms.

0

TomJoad23 3 years ago

wow this seems like a really dumb idea, and a waste of my money. Maybe we should tell Brownback to stop being a moron....ultra christian right wing nutjob

0

northtowngrl 3 years ago

Just reading the headline, my first thought was... Already? How long have they been dating?????

0

mom_of_three 3 years ago

You mean like outlawing divorce.? Didn't think so.

0

captainzeep 3 years ago

Huh...interesting. I suspect focus on improving Kansas infrastructure, education and job creation would be more beneficial to my family. I know another $10k household income would enhance marital harmony at my house.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.