Marshall Plan

[mommyoffive]

I saw this on the news this morning.  What are your thoughts? 

The Marshall Plan for Moms Wants Biden to Step Up for Women | Fatherly

 

What Is The Marshall Plan for Moms?

The ad, an open letter to President Joe Biden, calls on him to “establish a task force” to create such a plan in the first 100 days of his administration. Right now, some demands are vague, and others are asking Biden to prioritize many of his clear campaign promises that have yet to be passed in his short tenure as president. The most specific ask is to provide means-tested, short-term monthly payments of $2,400 to mothers. The others are “long overdue policies like paid family leave, affordable childcare and pay equity.”

 

There is reason to believe that Biden will act on at least some of these issues. His Build Back Better platform includes 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave, and he’s also promised “to make child care more affordable and accessible for working families.” Early moves in the Biden administration to gather more pay data from companies are widely seen as a precursor to action to shrink the pay gap.

Without many specific policy asks, it’s difficult to know what the effect of the Marshall Plan for Moms would be if it were implemented. We do know that monthly payments to stay at home parents would change the financial calculus of what it means to raise children. And it doesn’t seem politically outlandish. After all, the conversion of the child tax credit to a $300 or $350 refundable monthly payment is currently being discussed by senior Democrats in both houses of Congress.

[MEmama]

I hope they mean parents, not just mothers. What about non biological mothers? What about fathers? What about gay couples? Or guardians? I’m not a fan of the language at all. It leaves so much grey area and is inherently sexist and exclusionary.

Also without knowing any more about this, I find it absurd to be placing specific demands on a president who has already prioritized assistance and equality for families. He’s been in office what, a week and a half? And has been working hard the entire time. It’s not as if he has forgotten about his promises, sheesh! 

[Farrar]

I mean, they're working on the family payments. If it happens, it definitely won't be tied to mothers specifically. It'll be tied to kids and families.

Mothers have been specifically harder hit in the pandemic than a lot of other groups and I think that needs to be recognized in society and in policies that help working parents. I think it's important to call out that not having better family leave policies is specifically anti-women. Women bear the brunt of those lack of policies. The reason there's not more traction for them is because society takes advantage of women as free labor and has forced many women out of the workplace during the pandemic as a result. But with the exception of medical leave for birth being extended, the actual policies should be for all parents. And the data bears out that that's better for women anyway.

[Lilaclady]

Ye

4 minutes ago, Farrar said:

I mean, they're working on the family payments. If it happens, it definitely won't be tied to mothers specifically. It'll be tied to kids and families.

Mothers have been specifically harder hit in the pandemic than a lot of other groups and I think that needs to be recognized in society and in policies that help working parents. I think it's important to call out that not having better family leave policies is specifically anti-women. Women bear the brunt of those lack of policies. The reason there's not more traction for them is because society takes advantage of women as free labor and has forced many women out of the workplace during the pandemic as a result. But with the exception of medical leave for birth being extended, the actual policies should be for all parents. And the data bears out that that's better for women anyway.

yes I agree with this. While I do agree that they should work on the language, it is really sad that all 140,000 jobs lost in December were lost by women. The inequality is just huge and the pandemic has made it much worse and it should be addressed but I don’t believe $2,400 is a reasonable amount. We can’t make up for the amount lost before but we can make things better going forward. 

[Murphy101]

I’m a proponent of UBI and “professional parent” stipends. They just make sense for communities and families and good economics.

That said, some sexism is just realism. Women are the only sex to bear children and  they should not be treated as a commodity or a less valued human because of it. Nor should they have to deny their woman-ness in order to be equal. 

[MEmama]

1 hour ago, Murphy101 said:

I’m a proponent of UBI and “professional parent” stipends. They just make sense for communities and families and good economics.

That said, some sexism is just realism. Women are the only sex to bear children and  they should not be treated as a commodity or a less valued human because of it. Nor should they have to deny their woman-ness in order to be equal. 

While only AFAB folks are capable of bearing children, they aren’t the only people raising them.

I'm not against policies that level the playing field (far from it!), but I am concerned about language that leaves out segments of the population that the policies need to protect. Admittedly I know nothing about this so called Marshall Plan nor the women who are spearheading it. I do know there is an awful amount of anti-rights people couched as concerned, even liberal leaning folks and that leaves me suspicious. What this group seems to be asking for are parental rights, and framing it as specifically “moms” only leaves me wondering about the motives. 

[Farrar]

22 minutes ago, MEmama said:

While only AFAB folks are capable of bearing children, they aren’t the only people raising them.

I'm not against policies that level the playing field (far from it!), but I am concerned about language that leaves out segments of the population that the policies need to protect. Admittedly I know nothing about this so called Marshall Plan nor the women who are spearheading it. I do know there is an awful amount of anti-rights people couched as concerned, even liberal leaning folks and that leaves me suspicious. What this group seems to be asking for are parental rights, and framing it as specifically “moms” only leaves me wondering about the motives. 

I don't know anything about the group, so I can't say. I can think of different motivations for that framing - some that I'd agree with and others that I really wouldn't.

It's important to talk about the reason for a policy and how policies can have outsized affects on particular groups. Mothers are more affected by a lot of our policies about education, medical leave, family leave, etc. When those policies don't take mothers in particular into account - not just families or parents - then the outsize negative affects are more likely to continue.

On the other hand, it's important to have policies that are equitably accessible for all. So in the case of leave, while mothers tend to be more deeply affected by the lack of leave, I don't think having only maternal leave helps anywhere near as much as insisting on parental leave across the board. It's better for families, fathers, mothers, kids... everyone. But when a question about parental leave is framed without considering who is more likely to take advantage of it, then it can seem like it's less needed than it is.

[Murphy101]

Policies geared to protecting females should not be able to be used by those who aren’t females.

Policies for parents should be for should be for all parents.

Wording does matter.  Whether it is the proper wording on a specific section I do not know yet. Likely some of us would not agree if it is correct all the time  

 

[Farrar]

Policies for people giving birth can apply to anyone giving birth and I don't care how they want to identify themselves. Policies that deal with sexual health, menstrual products, etc. are the same. Who cares who does the buying. There just shouldn't be a tax on menstrual products. 

Beyond that, there isn't a need for policies that single out women as mothers, even if there's a need for policy makers to be aware and sensitive to the statistical realities of how policies typically affect particular groups such as women and mothers more or less and what specific needs a group like mothers has that are not be adequately addressed in society. 

There's no need to single out women and hang a sign on a policy meant to help parents that's for leave, medical care, education, children, mental health access, etc. that says "females only." Not unless the goal is to hurt men who are playing the primary parent role for whatever reason (gay couples, widows, single fathers, or men who are playing that role in a straight relationship) or to exclude trans folk.

It also would be less likely to pass muster legally if women are singled out, making it even less likely to help any actual mothers if a law or policy just ends up challenged and thrown out.

And, now this thread is most likely just going to go down a transphobic spiral, if I know anything about the history of this board.

[Farrar]

Rights are not a zero sum game.

[SKL]

As a single working mom who pays more than enough taxes already, and as a small business owner paying tax on money that is not brought home, I'll say I'm not in favor of raising taxes to pay for every nice-to-have out there.  Increasing taxes on people like me (who pay a disproportionate amount of tax) will cut into my ability to employ moms with an appropriate compensation.

I also haven't seen a lot of evidence that putting the government in charge of family-related / child-related things improves quality,

And I'm sick to death of identity politics.  If it is decided that kids need something and the government should pay for it, then the money should follow the kid in need, not the female up the chain.

As far as pay equity, more recent studies have indicated that there isn't much of a gap that can't be attributed to things like shorter work experience, less education / career-relevant skills, and negotiations by moms for more flexible working conditions.  Maybe more (hopefully objectives) studies could be done.

[Carol in Cal.]

1 hour ago, Farrar said:

Rights are not a zero sum game.

No, but taxes are.