Texas manditory marriage classes (unless you want to pay $60)
blackredyellow
Posts: 5,889
What an asinine story on two fronts:
1) Pay for a $60 marriage license or the option of paying for and attending a state-sponsored 8 hour marriage class??? Give me a break - I got married last year, and I wouldn't have wanted to do either... Planning a wedding usually takes a lot of time and a lot of money... giving up 8 hours on a stupid class (that I have to pay for anyway) or paying $60 for a license is overboard... So much for a party that wants to keep government out of people's lives.
2) Just some of the quotes in bold - these idiots have no clue what they are actually voting on and passing... and they actually try to justify it.
May 16, 2007, 12:19PM
Marriage fee gets surprise blessing
House OKs cost increase, but some lawmakers say bill slipped past them
By POLLY ROSS HUGHES
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN — In a switch some blamed on end-of-session blur, the House sent Gov. Rick Perry a bill Tuesday that doubles marriage license fees to $60 unless future brides and grooms take a class on how to be good spouses.
Before the Senate approved the bill with the fee hike last week, the House had taken it out, calling it a marriage tax and government meddling in private lives.
Tuesday, the House reversed itself, returning a carrot-and-stick approach to the bill. You take the eight-hour class, your marriage license is free. You don't, you pay double.
"It just got past me. It got past us all," said Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, who said he still opposes the fee hike and would change his vote if he could.
"I admit that. We're all busy doing conference committees, doing amendments or whatever the case may be," he said. "I know a lot of people weren't paying attention."
Bill sponsor Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, was not available to comment on passage of this bill because he was tied up as chief budget writer for the House.
Perry spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger said the governor "looks forward to reviewing the bill in its entirety" when it hits his desk.
"The governor certainly supports the idea behind the bill to strengthen marriages," she added.
Republicans were the only House members who switched their vote on the fee hike, offering a mixture of reasons.
Rep. Tony Goolsby, R-Dallas, said he "had a lapse of memory" and, like Talton, mistakenly voted to go along with the Senate's marriage fee hike.
"I don't think it's necessary," he said, adding he still believes the fee hike is wrong. "You know how it is in the last days of the session. We go at rapid fire here passing bills. I just didn't catch it."
Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, who earlier convinced a majority of the House the fee hike amounts to a "marriage tax," made a belated request that the House reconsider its 84-56 vote approving it.
It was not granted.
"I was just surprised," she said. "I'm not sure people were aware of what happened."
'On a downward spiral'
Chisum urged the House to adopt the Senate's version of his bill to strengthen marriages and families, noting $40 billion a year is paid in child support across the country.
"Divorce is wrecking this country," he said. "We have far too many divorces, in most cases in the first three to four years of marriage. If we don't focus on keeping families together, then we're on a downward spiral."
Rep. Pete Gallego, D-Alpine, tried to rally House members to stand by their earlier vote.
"This House has already voted on the issue of (not) doubling the cost of a marriage license," he said.
Gallego said the issue is even larger than a fee hike, harking back to President Reagan's warning against government as the answer to all problems.
Rep. Gary Elkins, R-Houston, who earlier said he had a gnawing concern about government's proper role in society, switched his vote.
Now, after two or three e-mails urging him to support the "healthy marriage" bill, he said it's good for his district.
"Honestly, if a couple can't afford $60 for a marriage license, they probably shouldn't get married," he said.
A break for the poor
The bill says couples must take the classes within a year of applying for a marriage license. The classes must teach conflict management, communication skills and keys to a successful marriage, but not parenting or financing skills.
While it is not clear how much classes would cost, a separate measure related to Chisum's bill would use welfare funds to pay for classes for low-income Texans.
Rep. Tommy Merritt, R-Longview, stuck to his vote against the marriage fee hike as an inducement to take classes.
"I just think the government has no business interfering in the sanctity of a marriage," he said.
He predicted that marriage classes will pop up around Texas, just as defensive driving classes did, based on a bill the Legislature passed.
"There are individuals that make money off of defensive driving. This is just another way for some opportunist to come here under the perception that this is a good idea," he said. "A lot of people will make money off of it. It's terrible."
Rep. Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, argued in April that it was hypocritical for Chisum, the House's chief budget writer, to propose doubling marriage fees to $60 or more than tripling them to $100.
He voted against the fee hike then, but now says $60 is reasonable and he'd like his own daughter to take the class.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/4807939.html
1) Pay for a $60 marriage license or the option of paying for and attending a state-sponsored 8 hour marriage class??? Give me a break - I got married last year, and I wouldn't have wanted to do either... Planning a wedding usually takes a lot of time and a lot of money... giving up 8 hours on a stupid class (that I have to pay for anyway) or paying $60 for a license is overboard... So much for a party that wants to keep government out of people's lives.
2) Just some of the quotes in bold - these idiots have no clue what they are actually voting on and passing... and they actually try to justify it.
May 16, 2007, 12:19PM
Marriage fee gets surprise blessing
House OKs cost increase, but some lawmakers say bill slipped past them
By POLLY ROSS HUGHES
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN — In a switch some blamed on end-of-session blur, the House sent Gov. Rick Perry a bill Tuesday that doubles marriage license fees to $60 unless future brides and grooms take a class on how to be good spouses.
Before the Senate approved the bill with the fee hike last week, the House had taken it out, calling it a marriage tax and government meddling in private lives.
Tuesday, the House reversed itself, returning a carrot-and-stick approach to the bill. You take the eight-hour class, your marriage license is free. You don't, you pay double.
"It just got past me. It got past us all," said Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, who said he still opposes the fee hike and would change his vote if he could.
"I admit that. We're all busy doing conference committees, doing amendments or whatever the case may be," he said. "I know a lot of people weren't paying attention."
Bill sponsor Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, was not available to comment on passage of this bill because he was tied up as chief budget writer for the House.
Perry spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger said the governor "looks forward to reviewing the bill in its entirety" when it hits his desk.
"The governor certainly supports the idea behind the bill to strengthen marriages," she added.
Republicans were the only House members who switched their vote on the fee hike, offering a mixture of reasons.
Rep. Tony Goolsby, R-Dallas, said he "had a lapse of memory" and, like Talton, mistakenly voted to go along with the Senate's marriage fee hike.
"I don't think it's necessary," he said, adding he still believes the fee hike is wrong. "You know how it is in the last days of the session. We go at rapid fire here passing bills. I just didn't catch it."
Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, who earlier convinced a majority of the House the fee hike amounts to a "marriage tax," made a belated request that the House reconsider its 84-56 vote approving it.
It was not granted.
"I was just surprised," she said. "I'm not sure people were aware of what happened."
'On a downward spiral'
Chisum urged the House to adopt the Senate's version of his bill to strengthen marriages and families, noting $40 billion a year is paid in child support across the country.
"Divorce is wrecking this country," he said. "We have far too many divorces, in most cases in the first three to four years of marriage. If we don't focus on keeping families together, then we're on a downward spiral."
Rep. Pete Gallego, D-Alpine, tried to rally House members to stand by their earlier vote.
"This House has already voted on the issue of (not) doubling the cost of a marriage license," he said.
Gallego said the issue is even larger than a fee hike, harking back to President Reagan's warning against government as the answer to all problems.
Rep. Gary Elkins, R-Houston, who earlier said he had a gnawing concern about government's proper role in society, switched his vote.
Now, after two or three e-mails urging him to support the "healthy marriage" bill, he said it's good for his district.
"Honestly, if a couple can't afford $60 for a marriage license, they probably shouldn't get married," he said.
A break for the poor
The bill says couples must take the classes within a year of applying for a marriage license. The classes must teach conflict management, communication skills and keys to a successful marriage, but not parenting or financing skills.
While it is not clear how much classes would cost, a separate measure related to Chisum's bill would use welfare funds to pay for classes for low-income Texans.
Rep. Tommy Merritt, R-Longview, stuck to his vote against the marriage fee hike as an inducement to take classes.
"I just think the government has no business interfering in the sanctity of a marriage," he said.
He predicted that marriage classes will pop up around Texas, just as defensive driving classes did, based on a bill the Legislature passed.
"There are individuals that make money off of defensive driving. This is just another way for some opportunist to come here under the perception that this is a good idea," he said. "A lot of people will make money off of it. It's terrible."
Rep. Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, argued in April that it was hypocritical for Chisum, the House's chief budget writer, to propose doubling marriage fees to $60 or more than tripling them to $100.
He voted against the fee hike then, but now says $60 is reasonable and he'd like his own daughter to take the class.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/4807939.html
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Rep. Gary Elkins, R-Houston, who earlier said he had a gnawing concern about government's proper role in society, switched his vote.
Now, after two or three e-mails urging him to support the "healthy marriage" bill, he said it's good for his district.
"Honestly, if a couple can't afford $60 for a marriage license, they probably shouldn't get married," he said.
wtf? What exactly does getting married have to do with having money? $60 is a lot of money to some people... I can just picture a young poor couple with a small child having to fork over $60 that could go to baby formula or diapers for a stupid license... I'm sorry hon, we can't get married this month because we can't afford a license."
I guess proof of more of the disconnect that politicians have with the rest of the country.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I'd be opposed to mandating it even if they were worthwhile, but wasting everyone's time and money adds injury to the insult.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
She's wearing the sun dress, btw.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I was going to say, that sounded like a lot of clothes for one person
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln