Malcolm Cutchins: Divorce, unwed childbearing create burden for taxpayers

A recent study was released, significantly on our taxes-due date (April 15). It revealed yet another disturbing financial burden on society. The study was conducted by the Georgia Family Council, the Institute for American Values, the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, and Families Northwest.

The statistics of the study shows the staggering taxpayer costs (a minimum of $112 billion annually) associated with divorce and unwed childbearing. If that doesn’t sound high to you, that translates into more than $1 trillion in local, state and federal costs over the past decade alone. Even a small improvement in the health of marriage in our country would result in huge savings.

It really does pay to strengthen the institution of the family, the most basic building block of our culture. It has been noted, “strong, stable marriages represent the greatest hope for future generations.”

This study, “The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing: First-Ever Estimates for the Nation and All Fifty States,” was published by the Institute for American Values, New York.

“Family fragmentation” is the term used to describe the combined effects of divorce and unwed childbirth. Fourteen different programs and areas make up the $112 billion cost estimate, with Medicaid and the justice system being the two highest portions of the total. Critics who might say, “Well, that’s just one study; there’s really no advantage to marriage,” will have to ignore much supporting research of the positive financial benefits of marriage – in contrast to the very negative taxpayer costs outlined above. For example, The National Marriage Project at
Rutgers University concludes “married men earn from 10 to 40 percent more than single men who have similar education and job experience.” (Researchers think it is related to the “productive behavior as a result of marriage” that makes the difference.)

Even in the long run, marriage makes a significant difference. A 1992 Rutgers report concludes “individuals who are not continuously married have significantly lower wealth that those who remain married throughout their lives.”

A recent Wall Street Journal article concludes “Cities that invest in families also thrive economically.” The author (Joel Kotkin) is an internationally known authority on social and economic trends. He writes that married people with children are generally more motivated and successful. He concludes, “Families provide the most reliable foundation for successful economics.”

Dennis Prager, a prolific author who has lectured on seven continents, notes the problem with adult men and their sons in this day in a June 10 article on Townhall.com. “When I Was a Boy, America Was a Better Place.” In a very profound observation, he describes the problem as “The contemporary absence of men in boys’ lives is not only unprecedented in American history; it is probably unprecedented in recorded history.”

It has been suggested that the best thing “dating couples that want to prosper” could do is to “spend their tax rebate on a pair of wedding rings.” (That assumes there are ample finances upon which to marry.)

With the 2008 election coming up, a major concern of voters should be to really assess which party will tax families the least. You get more of what you encourage. Otherwise, our own government will contribute to a poorer economy and less stability for the children born into our society.

Dr. Malcolm Cutchins is an emeritus professor of engineering of Auburn University and writes a column for the Opelika-Auburn News.