A lawmaker's perspective
By Rick Dantzler
Rick Dantzler is a former state legislator from Polk County who served 16 years (1983-1999) in the Florida Legislature -- eight years each in the Florida House and the Florida Senate. He's a onetime candidate for governor and the author of three books. Senator Dantzler now practices governmental, administrative and environmental law with the firm Frost Van den Boom & Smith in Bartow. He and his wife, Julie, have two daughters.
To everyone involved in this movement, thank you. I am amazed at the sophistication of your efforts and the progress you’ve made. Movements aren’t achieved overnight and success is not guaranteed, but you have shined a light on some of the most pressing issues of our time and laid the predicate for lasting governmental reform.
Notwithstanding the fantastic start, I believe it is necessary to hit head-on a tension that exists within the hearts of most legislators, whether they admit it or not, for continued success. It’s a tension I know exists because I struggled with it in my 16 years in the Florida Legislature, and this legislature leans more to the right than I did. That is, I fought myself constantly over the dilemma of appropriating public money for issues which I perceived as being largely the result of out-of-wedlock birth (especially with teens), and staying true to a general philosophy that it is not the responsibility of taxpayers to pay for what most would consider to be irresponsible behavior.
Forty-one percent of all births in the United Sates are out of wedlock, and Medicaid (taxpayers) is paying for the births of more than half of the children born in Florida (not all out of wedlock, of course). There are now four generations of families where great-grandmother became pregnant, then grandmother became pregnant, then mother became pregnant, and then daughter became pregnant, with not a single marriage between them. While I do not for a moment suggest that one is pre-destined to a particular outcome based solely on birth circumstance, the statistics are overwhelming. On every social indicator, children born out of wedlock are several times more likely to struggle than those born into two-parent homes, and this has consequences to taxpayers.
Helping those who find themselves in these circumstances is the right thing to do and they deserve our compassion and support, not our judgment. It’s also the smart thing to do because certainly it’s a “pay now or pay more later” proposition to some extent. Nevertheless, what is the taxpayers’ responsibility? Funding for the programs we care about has grown over the decades but those needing the services have grown more, so is it even working?
These are fair questions, and those who ask them are not uncaring. I’ve drawn my own conclusions to these questions, and like any thinking person my opinions have matured over the years and continue to evolve. I don’t wish to stigmatize anyone or be discouraging to a single mother who is doing her best to raise her kids because goodness knows she’s up against enough already, but I know we must address the belief among rank and file legislators that it is the high rate of out-of-wedlock birth that is driving the need for much of the funding we seek. Otherwise, the support we receive will be tepid.
How do we address these questions? First, we shouldn’t shy away from talking about the societal implications of high rates of out-of-wedlock birth. We must let legislators know we are aware of it and that our intention is to reduce it, not solely because of a moral concern but also because of the higher statistical connection between out-of-wedlock birth and less than optimal outcomes for kids.
Next, we must help legislators understand that the reasons why kids have kids are varied and complex, not just the result of irresponsible impulses or misguided financial considerations. I’ve been a high school football coach in a public school for the last six years, and it has been eye-opening. The family situations for many of my players are so difficult I’m astonished at how strong my guys must be in order to overcome the negative influences in their lives. I’ve gained a new appreciation for what they’re up against and how easy it is to fall in with the destructive behavior which is all around them.
Finally, we must convince legislators that the programs we seek to fund are effective at reducing out-of-wedlock birth. It would be a mistake to assume they see a nexus because any objective historical analysis of social programs would be, frankly, mixed. How will our programs reverse negative trends? We have to be able to make that argument persuasively.
If we’re direct with legislators about our understanding of the societal implications of out-of-wedlock birth, help them understand the influence of environment on why so many unmarried women (especially teens) get pregnant, and show the effectiveness of the programs we seek to fund at reducing out-of-wedlock birth, we’ll be pleased with the support they give us.