Will Republicans Vote To Allow “Mom” To Stay Home?

The Republican party has made two things very clear in the last few months — motherhood is a noble endeavor and real work, and that they will cut off pretty much any bill, organization or effort that will help women avoid being mothers in the first place.

So, now it’s time for them to put their money where their mouths are, literally.  It’s time for them to let mothers stay home with their children.

Congressional Democrats are putting Republicans to the test with their new “WORK (Women’s Option to Raise Kids) Act,” a bill that would allow women to count raising children under the age of three as “working” under the rules applied to allow her to continue to receive government assistance, according to the Huffington Post. “Mitt Romney was for forcing mothers into the workforce before he decided that ‘all moms are working moms,’ bill sponsor Democrat Pete Stark of California told the publication.  “I think we should take Mr. Romney at his most recent word and change our federal laws to recognize the importance and legitimacy of raising young children. That’s why I’m introducing the WORK Act to provide low-income parents the option of staying home to raise young children without fear of being pushed into poverty.”

It’s a win/win for Democrats.  If Republicans vote for the bill, women will get extra assistance in caring for their children.  If they vote against it, they’ll prove once again that anything they say about supporting women with children ends the moment the child is born.  If they vote for it, they disappoint their “cut welfare” Tea Party supporters.  If they vote against it, they anger women.

With choices like that, you can assume the GOP will be juggling priorities.  But at least then they may understand for a second what it is like to be a mom working outside the home.

Photo credit: Thinkstock

Love This? Never Miss Another Story.


Mae T.
Mae T.3 years ago

I would like to see this works. What going to happen when there's only the mother in the home and the only bread winner.

Nancy L.
Nancy L.3 years ago

This is too much ...

Jamie Clemons
Jamie Clemons3 years ago

Sorry I didn't read the article.

Jamie Clemons
Jamie Clemons3 years ago

Stupid. How do they think these women can afford to stay home and raise kids when there are no decent jobs out there?

Steven Brewer
Steven Brewer3 years ago

You are probably the first to rant against raising corporate taxes or cuts to corporate welfare while you rant against welfare for the least of our population, the former costing the American taxpayer hundreds of billions of dollars more than the latter ever would. If certain segments of our political overlords did their jobs and looked out for the welfare of our nation as a whole instead of kowtowing to corporate America with their hands out for what used to be called bribes, then maybe our nation’s manufacturing jobs would not have gone from over 15 million to just over 12 million during Bush’s two terms and our economy would not have been crashed by the greedy Wall St bankers more people would be able to take care of themselves. How can anyone know exactly where their tax dollars are going in budgets that are over 2 trillion dollars… do you pay two trillion dollars in for federal taxes… if not then quit the” us supporting them” mindset because the majority of Americans support the Christian (and other religion’s) tenet of caring for the least of our society. If it makes you feel better just think your tax dollars are exclusively going to fund our endless wars that kill thousands of those children you choose not to bear…

There should be taxes and penalties on people who think so highly of themselves so that they think they fund the entire federal budget and for anyone who thinks selfishness is a virtue…

Marilyn L.
Marilyn L.3 years ago


Shel G.
Shel G.3 years ago

Sorry, I can't agree with the proposed bill in any way at all. I'm not being hateful, but just can't see why should those of us who choose to remain childfree support those who have kids? I think there is huge merit in this day and age of exponential population growth in the idea of choosing not to have children. If you do decide to have children, you have to take the responsibillity to make choices about your career and finances, not expect the rest of the population to take care of you.

There should be tax and other incentives for people to have fewer kids, not more.

Sandra L.
Sandra L.3 years ago

Leigh, I can't speak to this particular act but it might interest you to know that Gloria Steinem has been an advocate for paternity leave, citing that children need more father-time.

Shelly Peterson
Shelly Peterson3 years ago

Republicans, don't want women in the work force...they want them to find a man to support them.

Frances C.
Frances C.3 years ago

No they won't. But they will try their hardest to weaken their safety net.