Legislation: The Social Responsibility in Parenting Act

Social responsibility is one of my big political points, and overpopulation is another. I believe the two are connected, in that those that have more than two children are being socially irresponsible regardless of their financial ability to take care of those children or not. Wealth is a limited thing and by having more than two children you are either setting one or more of them up for a substandard lifestyle, or (in my mind) worse, forcing someone else’s child into one.
I also understand some people claim that their assumed right (because there is no such real right) to have as many children as they want is connected to their religious freedom. I completely disagree, but I can acknowledge that any such attempt to curtail their social irresponsibility in this regard would lead to a stalling of any act of legislation attempting to enforce it. Therefore I have come up with a rough outline for the following act of legislation which I call the “Social Responsibility in Parenting Act”.

The very first step is to not just end tax credits for having children (if a person claims they should be allowed to have as many children as they want because they can financially support it then they should receive no assistance from the government), but to reverse it, giving a tax credit to those families that have only one, or no children. This is accomplished by associating a tax credit with each person, or a “child credit”, for which each person can either receive their tax credit each year, or have a child. In the case where there is one or more children and divorce, or other family splitting, occurs, the same rules in place for taxes currently still apply, only the parent claiming primary custody is the one who loses their tax credits instead of visa versa.

Under the above system this allows for a two parent, two child system (which is my ideal) but does not address those who claim the “right” to have more than two. This could be solved by allowing for those with no children and/ or no plans for children to sell their “child credits” to another family for a lump sum, surrendering their right for the yearly tax credit they would receive instead. Much the same way you can settle a structured settlement for one lump sum, this would allows those with no interest in having children and no, or limited, need for the tax credit to allow for others to have larger families, effectively halting population growth (at least legally), and hopefully reducing it.

As for the violations of this new act of legislation, well there are thousands of couples unable to have children and stuck in the adoption process, sometimes due to lack of available qualified children. By taking away the children of violators of this Act, after it has become law, we could provide for these new families while remaining within the statutes created by the same Act.

It is my belief that we need something in place soon, if not now, to help curtail the overpopulation of our own country. The side effects of overpopulation can already be seen, in previous years with the large number of families’ dependant of state or federal assistance, and more recently with the collapse of the economy and the consequences thereof. I believe this act would create a fair “middle ground” allowing for those who want larger families, rewarding those who choose to be more socially responsible, and assisting those who want to start a family but for biological reasons are having difficulty doing so.