Government should not provide marriage incentives

President Bush is asking Congress to set aside $300 million to increase the number of two-parent homes.

With the national divorce rate at more than 50 percent, the government is trying to develop programs to get couples to marry and to keep those already married to stay together. But most states do not know what they would do with the money, which comes out of welfare’s pocket, because most government officials are not sure.

Utah provides a free video with marriage tips, and West Virginia gives married couples on welfare an extra $100. But beyond marriage counseling and tax incentives, few states have yet to propose solutions.

Bush’s reasoning for the push for “healthy marriages” is to ebb the poverty rate, especially among children.

Even if states had a substantial program to encourage couples to get and stay married, it is a realm that should remain untouched by the government. Marriage and divorce is a private decision between two people and must remain so. Once the government begins to offer cash incentives, people might marry for the wrong reasons. Marriage counseling only can help the couples that choose to use it.

If the government wants to decrease poverty rates throughout the nation, it needs to go to the source of poverty — unemployment. The proposed $300 million could go to stimulating job growth or training classes so people can learn the skills they need to get and keep a job.

Two-parent homes are not the answer to all the nation’s problems. The government has its hands in virtually every aspect of people’s life. But marriage is something that should stay untouched. To marry or divorce is a personal question, not necessarily a government one.

Public should not vote to remove officers that were not elected

Residents of Evendale are taking matters into their own hands by suing the Cincinnati suburb for a vote.

But this is not a demand for a usual referendum. The vote is to decide whether Officer Stephen Roach should be allowed to stay on the police force. Roach was the officer who shot and killed an unarmed black man while on the Cincinnati police force last April but later was acquitted of any wrongdoing. The citizens of Evendale do not feel comfortable with Roach protecting the community.

Despite its uneasiness, the community needs to realize that Roach’s employment is an administrative decision, not one that can be voted on. Roach’s position is not elected by the people and therefore cannot be voted on by the people.

The decision to hire and fire such employees must be left to the police chief or the city council. After a report, released in March, found Roach violated police procedure and lied to investigators, Evendale’s police chief placed the officer on administrative duty and gave him until January, a year to the day he was hired, to clear his name. If he is not able to do so, Roach will be fired.

This action should be sufficient for the community members. If not, they can contact their council members with concerns. If they still do not agree with the decision, citizens can opt to vote someone else into the council seat in the next election.