If you’re on welfare and raped in Pennsylvania, you may be out of luck when it comes to receiving extra welfare benefits. A new Pennsylvania House bill wants to limit the amount of TANF assistance that low-income women receive based on the amount of children they give birth to while covered under the program. But they threw in a stipulation on births that resulted from rape.

The Pennsylvania lawmakers behind the bill include,  State Reps. RoseMarie Swanger (R), Tom Caltagirone (D), Mark Gillen (R), Keith Gillespie (R), Adam Harris (R), and Mike Tobash (R). These MEN feel the state shouldn’t provide additional benefits for newborns .  Here’s the kicker. If a woman happens to get chosen by god and raped, I’ll call this getting “Mourdocked”,  and gives birth to a child,  she may seek an exception to this rule so that her welfare benefits aren’t slashed. But that will happen if she can provide proof that the sexual assault was reported as well as the abuser’s identity (because we all know that every rape victim knows who raped them):

In determining the amount of assistance payments to a recipient family of benefits under the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) Program, the department shall revise the schedule of benefits to be paid to the recipient family by eliminating the increment in benefits under the program for which that family would otherwise be eligible as a result of the birth of a child conceived during the period in which the family is eligible for benefits under the TANF Program. […] Elimination of benefits under subsection (d) shall not apply to any child conceived as a result of rape or incest if the department: (1) receives a non-notarized, signed statement from the pregnant woman stating that she was a victim of rape or incest, as the case may be, and that she reported the crime, including the identity of the offender, if known, to a law enforcement agency having the requisite jurisdiction or, in the case of incest where a pregnant minor is the victim, to the county child protective service agency and stating the name of the law enforcement agency or child protective service agency to which the report was made and the date such report was made.

On one hand, the law is trying to prevent baby making machines from going forth and multiplying any further, and expecting the state to foot the bill. But on the other hand, Pennsylvania is throwing a monkey wrench into the mix.  Maybe Senate candidate Richard Mourdock should let Pennsylvania realize, this is God’s work, and since God created the people who created welfare, then, it’s only fair that the state should get rid of this ridiculous stipulation.

According to the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network, 54 percent of rapes and sexual assaults are not reported to the police. Last month, New Mexico’s Children, Youth and Families Department considered a similar measure that would have only exempted victims of “forcible rape” from having to file child support claims against an absent parent. Gov. Susana Martinez (R) quickly pulled the “forcible” language after the proposal sparked backlash.

What do you think about the bill?

Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • Pema

    THe only problem I see with this bill is the requirement to identify your attacker. That’s just ridiculous. However a person who is already on public assistance should not be having MORE kids. For those people who say there are only a few bad apples abusing the system – please! I live in NYC and I see these women all the time (in fact some of them are in my extended family). People having children they cannot support is VERY common and the practice should not be encouraged.

  • Oh PA… Gotta love that crazy ass state I call home (sarcasm intended)

  • paul

    Wow

    it doesn’t take much to divide and conquer “black” people – does it?

    Propose some clearly unnecessary law, (as SAMM ^^ above has clearly shown) but depict it as necessary to address a problem caused by some demonized or outcast population, and let the bigots and racists give it the public support it needs to pass into legislation.

    Funny though, that when whites threaten something privileged nigros benefit from, oh say, like – affirmative action, we’re all supposed to rally behind the call to defend something only FREELOADING privileged nigros benefit from.

    Well

    if you’re “brainy” enough to get a place at a decent college you don’t need to get in on an AA ticket – using the logic you apply to poor black people and the logic white people apply to YOU.

    Also, they keep telling people to vote for Obama – against the republican threat to women’s reproductive rights.

    I’m assuming the reproductive rights they want to preserve includes the right to HAVE your baby – not just to abort it – and to obtain all the benefits that having a baby entitles you to.

    Just sleep walking into totalitarianism.

  • I hate it when people that use babies as a meal ticket however, aren’t these the same people that want to limit women’s access to birth control?

    I do think rape victims should report their rape but that decision is entirely up to them. Not the state. If the authorities wanted women to report rapes they need to stop victim blaming and slut shaming so that women would go to authorities rather than shoulder the pain themselves.

    I’ve heard half of rape cases don’t end in conviction anyway. See “The Accused” the woman is the one on trial, not the man.