• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Illinois General Assembly - House Bill HB6064 - WOW!!!

Beaudreaux

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I wonder if this will ever even make it to the floor for a vote? I doubt it. If it does, do you think the Governor will sign it?

Illinois General Assembly - Bill Status for HB6064

Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the Vital Records Act. Removes a provision concerning use of the biological father's name on the birth certificate if not married to the biological mother. Provides that if the unmarried mother cannot or refuses to name the child's father, either a father must be conclusively established by DNA evidence or, within 30 days after birth, another family member who will financially provide for the child must be named, in court, on the birth certificate. Provides that absent DNA evidence or a family member's name, a birth certificate will not be issued and the mother will be ineligible for financial aid from the State for support of the child. Provides an exception for artificially inseminated mothers. Amends the Illinois Public Aid Code. Provides that a family that does not comply with the Vital Records Act provision concerning birth certificates of unmarried mothers shall be ineligible for aid for support of the child. Effective immediately.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
FieldTheorist said:
One has to sincerely hope not.
Click to expand...

I think it's a good idea to get the father to take financial responsibility, or at least someone other than tax payers should be the first line of financial support, but... holy cow, this goes WAY beyond that.
 
Hell of a mess to be opening up.
 
Beaudreaux said:
I think it's a good idea to get the father to take financial responsibility, or at least someone other than tax payers should be the first line of financial support, but... holy cow, this goes WAY beyond that.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I don't even necessarily agree with the last bit, but this is just overtly, unabashedly designed to attack single-parent mothers.

God, I hate American culture sometimes.
 
I'm fairly certain that the same law has been proposed in Arizona, which doesn't surprise me a damn bit.
 
Beaudreaux said:
I wonder if this will ever even make it to the floor for a vote? I doubt it. If it does, do you think the Governor will sign it?

Illinois General Assembly - Bill Status for HB6064
Click to expand...
The obvious specific intent of this law, despite however it may appear on the surface, is for the state to chase the fathers of children born to welfare mothers or those seeking it, in order for the state to recoup disbursed child support welfare monies.

The women have been protecting their boyfriends & concubines through anonymity, and this has been brewing for decades!

But what a brute force method! No Birth Cert issued? Yowsa!

Now the bigger picture is: The state is deeply in hock to their union pension funds, and are cutting expenses in every way possible, and certain non-taxpaying demographics are the easiest to scapegoat and beat-up, incurring the least public back-lash.
 
To deny a child a birth certificate... my god, that will affect that child's very ability to be educated, to get a SS number, to get a job, to support him/herself. What kind of maniacal horror do these people want to inflict on this poor child? And why? To punish a mother who carried that baby to term, gave birth to it, because she wanted her child and refused to abort it?

What the hell is wrong with these people??
 
DiAnna said:
To deny a child a birth certificate... my god, that will affect that child's very ability to be educated, to get a SS number, to get a job, to support him/herself. What kind of maniacal horror do these people want to inflict on this poor child? And why? To punish a mother who carried that baby to term, gave birth to it, because she wanted her child and refused to abort it?

What the hell is wrong with these people??
Click to expand...

They were writing legislation while under the influence of conservatism and misogyny. Trust, I did those once a long time ago, they **** up your ability to think clearly really, really badly.
 
Chomsky said:
The obvious specific intent of this law, despite however it may appear on the surface, is for the state to chase the fathers of children born to welfare mothers or those seeking it, in order for the state to recoup disbursed child support welfare monies.

The women have been protecting their boyfriends & concubines through anonymity, and this has been brewing for decades!

But what a brute force method! No Birth Cert issued? Yowsa!

Now the bigger picture is: The state is deeply in hock to their union pension funds, and are cutting expenses in every way possible, and certain non-taxpaying demographics are the easiest to scapegoat and beat-up, incurring the least public back-lash.
Click to expand...

You see this just like I do - I agree with the underlying reasoning and purpose, but like I also said above in post #4 above - Holy Cow, this goes WAY beyond that.
 
There was a proposed Arizona bill that was/is similar if not identical. At present I am unable to find it. Maybe it didn't make it out of committee, I don't know. The idea is so ridiculous that it is difficult to be believe the very Tea Party Az legislature didn't get it out of committee. It's just too crazy for them to ignore. A chance to practice social engineering in the name of small government? Hell, that has Arizona written all over it. Illinois too.

A few months before the bill was proposed here Tea Partisan AZ Gov. Ducey went to Koch Camp for 4 days in California where the governor (who is all about transparency, but very short on details involving government) said the conference was very worth while. What exactly was discussed we don't know. You wonder if at the meeting Tea Party governors and legislators shared ideas out of their asses with each other.

Want to bet Illinois and Arizona got their ideas from the same source?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom