Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > December > 08
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Single women could usher in big government
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Two trends bedevil America. One is taxes. The second, more important, is marriage.
Those who pay no taxes have no check on their appetite for services. If somebody else is paying, nothing’s unaffordable.
At the federal level, 41 percent of the U.S. population is totally outside the income tax system, according to the Washington-based Tax Foundation. Since 2000, the number of filers with no tax liability, zero, has increased from 29 million to 42 million in 2005. Of 132.6 million returns filed in 2005, only 90.6 million paid taxes. The rest got back all they’d paid in — and more.
The second and more important concern, largely because of its impact on children, is the rise of single-parent households. Over the past 25 years, the percentage has grown from a quarter to a third. In Georgia, 35 percent of children live in single-parent homes and 39.2 percent of births in 2004 were to unmarried women, according to the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Almost 70 percent of black children, almost half of Hispanic and a quarter of white children are born to unmarried women.
The liberal polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research singled out unmarried women and their potential impact on future elections. What it found should chill the spines of those who wish to reverse, or even slow, the growth of government — not so much because of its cost, but because Big Government steals the initiative and enterprise and independence of its wards.
“Because of the often stark economic reality of a single-income family, they [unmarried women] support an active government that will give all Americans a chance to get ahead, not just the affluent,” the organization reported.
As the nation discovered decades ago with welfare policies that pushed men out of the lives of poor women, except for procreation, women who previously found security in marriage turned instead to government. As Greenberg Quinlan Rosner find, unmarried women are a rich vein to be mined by Democrats. From its findings:
• “Marital status is playing an increasingly defining role in elections. For the 2006 congressional elections, the ‘marriage gap’ was 32 points, far bigger than the gender gap, which was just 9 points. Among women, the marriage gap was an even bigger 36 points … unmarried women tend to vote like other unmarried women, regardless of other powerful demographic variables such as age, income and education.”
• “Unmarried women are easily the largest segment of the Democratic base — bigger than Hispanics and African Americans combined.” And the second most loyal, second only to blacks. They favor Democrats over Republicans by a 70-24 margin, and Hillary Clinton over Rudy Giuliani by 66-30.
• “From 1960 to 2006, the percentage of the voting age population that was unmarried grew from 27 to 45 percent … If this trend continues, the unmarried will be a majority of the population within 15 years.”
• Their top economic concern is health care. “This group strongly supports fundamental reform to provide universal coverage that can never be taken away.”
• “In total, there are over 53 million unmarried women of voting age, a number that dwarfs the percentage of seniors, people of color and even union members.” Of those who voted in 2006, two-thirds chose Democrats. Some 20 million, however, did not vote. That’s 41 percent of the unmarrieds. Among the married, it was 29 percent. But “2008 could be very different if progressives see the opportunity before them.” Unmarried women “emerge as the largest contributor to the Democratic vote in 2008.”
Greenberg Quinlan Rosner views them as the “Democrats’ evangelicals.” opining that “if progressives turn them out, unmarried women can be as important to Democrats in 2008 as evangelicals were to Republicans in 2004.”
Combine the two: fewer people who pay taxes and a growing bloc of women who rely on government for their financial security and their household’s well-being.
The challenge for the nation is to rebuild the traditional two-parent family — primarily for the sake of children, but also as a balance to more and bigger government.
• Jim Wooten is the associate editorial page editor. His column appears Sundays, Tuesdays and Fridays.
Permalink | Comments (182) | Post your comment | Categories: Column
