JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ISSUES

Poverty rates among female-headed households in the United States are substantially, and persistently, higher than poverty rates for households headed by married persons or unmarried males (see figure 1). This fact is presented as evidence in support of the claim that choices by women to live in nontraditional arrangements rank as an important cause of poverty and that, moreover, an effective anti-poverty policy should focus on redesign-ing welfare programs and the tax code so as to strengthen incentives to marriage and dis-incentives to nonmarital births.1 The family promotion initiatives favored by the political right are underpinned by viewpoints about the causes of rising female headship and illegitimacy—views articu-lated by Charles Murray (1984).2 For Murray, the modern welfare state is supported by an ideology that blames “the system ” for society’s ills and relieves those dwelling at its fringes of moral responsibility for their own economic fortunes. As a result, behavioral patterns that in a more enlightened society are stigmatized and discouraged have been de-stigmatized and encouraged.3 The solution is a re-establishment of personal responsi-bility. The Personal Responsibility and Work Reconciliation Act of 1996 (the welfare reform bill) apparently marks a movement toward this goal. There remains a perplexing question to which Murray and others on the political right have not given a satisfactory answer. Specifically, if marriage offers a dependable route to a better economic station, why do so many poor females remain single or become divorced?