Family Values

     What does it mean to support “family values?” I see the term tossed about in a variety of circumstances and by any number of people, including various politicians. After all, who can be against the family? People normally use the term with little or no explanation. They just toss it out there as if we all agree on what the term means, what it stands for, and why it’s important. I hear friends say, “I support the “family values” candidate.” I wonder, have we given any real thought to what it means to support families and family values? What does the term really mean; stripped of political baggage?

     For the purposes of this essay, I will use the following definition: Politically speaking, to support family values means that I recognize the contribution of strong families to our nation and culture and consequently, support public policy that strengthens the American family. So what would a family values candidate support?

     First, a family values candidate would understand that families are messy things. Families do not fit well into this age of slick, Madison Ave., sound-bite driven, twitter-based attention span, drive through culture.  Families take effort. They require patience. All too frequently individuals and groups choose poorly. They make decisions that seem right at the time; however, as events unfold the gravity of the mistake manifests itself. When dealing with families love and patience rule. If you desire to be a functioning, contributing, part of a family you must roll up your sleeves and invest time and energy. As a pluralistic society, we may argue about the composition and structure of a family, but we all must understand that successful families require an extensive investment of time and energy. A candidate who claims to support family values necessarily agrees to a lot of untidy hard work. Any candidate who supports one-size-fits-all, cookie cutter solutions to family issues either does not really care, or has not given the problem set serious consideration.

     Second, a family values candidate would support public wage policy that enables non-professional or non-degreed individuals to earn a living wage. Far too many individuals must work two or three jobs in order to secure the basic necessities. In order to support families, our culture must recognize and honor the day laborer as well as the high powered lawyer. The rate of recompense will differ, naturally; however, the day laborer deserves a living wage for the sweat of his brow. We need to structure our society so that we do not consign those who are either unable or unfitted for careers requiring advanced education to lives of drudgery. All contributing members of society ought to earn enough to secure their present and a future for their progeny.

     Third and closely related, a family values ought to support a work-week structured around forty hours. Recent research shows that the average American works 47 hours a week; among the highest of the industrialized nations of the world. We frequently chastise parents for not spending enough time with their children, yet we support policies that make it hard for them to set aside enough time to engage in active parenting.

As President Theodore Roosevelt said, “No man can be a good citizen unless he has a wage more than sufficient to cover the bare cost of living and hours of labor short enough so that after his day’s work is done he will have time and energy to bear his share in the management of the community, to help in carrying the general load.”

A family values candidate should support programs that allow all members of society, no matter their education or rank, to enjoy the warm embrace of family; the opportunity to nurture and enjoy those crucial familial bonds that bind generations together. Failure to support such platforms relegates large sectors of society to a life of struggle without hope of either relief or the joy of raising children.

     Fourth, a family values public servant supports an equitable public education system. Too many families have no choice but to send their children, their future and their hope, to marginal public schools. A public official who supports family values will find ways to strengthen those public institutions charged with educating our future. Supporting these institutions often involves great risk since those who need the most help (children and the poor) have the weakest voice. Often voucher programs and charter schools service a very selective community, draining resources from an already underfunded system. A family values oriented candidate supports teachers by paying them well, giving them the maximum freedom possible in the classroom, keeping class sizes at an acceptable level, recruiting the best and brightest, and encouraging respect for the profession. A well run education system provides not only a hope for the future, but also, a stable present; a safe environment where parents can send their children.

     Fifth, a family values politician understands the importance of a viable publicly managed retirement system to a stable society. While the well-heeled may chafe at the sight of their funds going into a social-security system, they need to take a broader, longer view. While it is true that the well-to-do could invest those funds on their own, receiving an excellent return rate, the majority of poor and middle class must deal with the vagaries of life on a day to day basis and would find sequestering those assets into some sort of retirement plan extremely hard. Without some sort of social security plan most families would revert to a pre-depression model in which families would shoulder the additional financial burden of parents who age out of the workforce. We need policies that ensure the elderly do not suffer abject poverty and that families do not endure needless eroding of income to care for loved ones.

      Sixth, a family values oriented public servant works to discourage and diminish abortion. In this arena I expect practical, executable policy that reduces the societal pressures that make abortion a viable option for many; not meaningless sound-bite oriented votes on impossible legislation. Resolving this thorny, intractable problem will take hard detailed work. However, for a politician to claim this mantle, they must be willing to labor at this problem from a variety of angles, incrementally chipping away at this vexing and abhorrent societal ill. Grandstanding, posturing, and the like are all out. We need thoughtful approaches that get at the root causes of this issue.

     Seventh, a family values statesman understands the need for affordable healthcare for all. The time for posturing has passed. The time for creative thinking and work has arrived. What we have is a good start; we need to correct any serious problems and fine tune for the future. In our land of plenty, families need not grapple with choosing food or needed medication. A family values stand keeps the impact of such legislative actions on all families in mind, not just those with large wallets. Again, in this issue, as with abortion, we need good solid practicable ideas not posturing and meaningless votes.

     These are just some of the family values we ought to weigh when considering public policy and candidates. We should also consider real work as opposed to slogans. It is one thing for a politician, serving or elected, to vocally espouse “family values,” but it is much more important for them to be willing to shoulder the burden of detailed research required for truly creative legislation. We as the electorate ought to demand such commitment from those who seek our support. After all, our families and values hang in the balance.