Tennessee state senator: Reduce welfare payments to families if children don’t do well in school

A Tennessee state senator has come up with what I believe is a first: Republican State Sen. Stacey Campfield of Knoxville proposes to cut welfare benefits to parents whose children don’t make “satisfactory academic progress” in school.

Campfield believes that his bill would compel parents to work harder to ensure their kids excel in school. As you might imagine, his Senate Bill 1312 is triggering a lot of comment.

(If you want to read about another odd law, here is a story about an Arizona legislator who wants all public high-school seniors to recite an oath supporting the U.S. Constitution to be able to graduate.)

Here is a news article from the Knoxville News Sentinel:

While the Knoxville Republican says SB132 is a step toward “breaking the cycle of poverty,” Linda O’Neal, executive director of the Tennessee Commission on Children and Youth, says it could make life more difficult for parents and children who are already struggling.

Campfield said in an interview that the best way to “break the cycle of poverty” is through education and a child’s success in schooling rests on a “three-legged stool” — teachers, schools and parents.

He said Tennessee has already embarked on education reforms designed to improve the quality of teachers and the quality of schools. There should also be a focus on the “third leg,” parents, he said. “We’ve set the tone (through legislation) to push and improve teachers and schools,” Campfield said. “Now is the time to push those parents. This bill is giving them motivation to do more to help their children learn in school.”

“If the family doesn’t care if the child goes to school or does well in school, the odds of that child getting out of poverty are pretty low,” the senator said.

The bill applies to the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program. Current law says parents or guardians of children who are receiving benefits can lose 20 percent of those benefits if a child does not attend school. Campfield’s bill adds a new requirement that the child make “satisfactory academic progress” as well and raises the penalty to 30 percent of benefits.

“The maximum benefit for a mother with two children is $185 a month,” O’Neal said in an interview. “That’s already low. If you take $60 plus dollars away, you’re just further limiting people who already have extremely few resources… It’s just piling on.”

The bill defines “satisfactory academic progress” as advancing from one grade to the next and “receiving a score of proficient or advanced on required state examinations in the subject areas of mathematics and reading/language arts.” Those who fail to meet “competency” standards on end-of-course exams could also be deemed fall short of “satisfactory academic progress.”

On his own blog, Campfield explains his bill:

One of the top tickets to break the chain of poverty is education. To achieve a quality education is like a three legged stool. The state has put a lot of responsibility on schools and teachers to improve student performance. If the children don’t produce, it could impact the pay of the teacher and the standing of the school with the state. We have pushed two of the three legs of the student performance (teachers and schools) to improve, and they are.

While those two legs are important, one other leg has proven to be more important. The third leg has shown to have a greater impact on the children performance than the school, than the teacher, than race of the child, than the income of the parent, than the location of the student. The third leg of the stool (probably the most important leg) is the parents. We have done little to hold them accountable for their child’s performance. What my bill would do is put some responsibility on parents for their child’s performance.

If your child is failing their classes, if your child is not showing up to school, if your child has quit school. That is unacceptable. It is highly unlikely that child will ever escape poverty. The state can not continue to support the generational cycle of poverty. Just because parents may have quit school does not mean it is acceptable if their child does. Parents are responsible to make sure their kids are ready for school and that they get an education. If parents are not holding up their leg of the job (and your kids are not special needs) then the state is going to start holding back a portion of that parents government benefits.

The goal is not to punish anyone. No one will necessarily or instantly lose benefits because of this bills passage. The goal is to encourage parents to do what they should already be doing. We have to start breaking the cycle of generational poverty. I, nor anyone can assure a perfect 100% solution where everyone gets everything and no one loses benefits. but if we can pull 99% out of the cycle of poverty I will take that step.

–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog

159 comments Add your comment

Big Mama

January 25th, 2013
7:14 pm

Education and hard work are the best way to climb out poverty. However, I don’t think linking benefits to a child’s school performance is a good idea. A child raised in an insecure environment has enough stress and worry and doesn’t need to feel responsible for his family starving or going without heat if he flunks a spelling test. This sounds like another way to beat them while they’re down.

Why not find more innovative ways to provide security to these families so the kids can concentrate on school and make the most of their opportunities, limited though they may be?


January 25th, 2013
7:16 pm

It’s not unreasonable to expect a parent on Welfare to make sure their children are in school. If they receive benefits based on having children and won’t send said children to school, they should lose benefits and the children should be placed with a family that will.

I am speaking as a single parent who works and manages every penny in order to ensure I can get my children to school each day. Parenting means sacrificing whatever is necessary to raise healthy children. I go without stylists, manicures, mall shopping, fancy car, etc. because they come first. They shouldn’t suffer because their parents are irresponsible or uncaring.

It is not acceptable to teach children the entitlement mentality. Soon there will be no one left to produce anything.


January 25th, 2013
7:21 pm

@ Big Mama, ditto! How about also educating these families on HOW to help/support their child’s education. Most parents living in poverty do want their children to be successful in school, but simply just do not know HOW to help them. Empower the parents, empower the child.

Pride and Joy

January 25th, 2013
7:22 pm

If they reduce the welfare payments, kids will not do better in school. It just won’t work. Parents who fail to see the link between education and income will never see the link. We must instead focus on the children. Work with them so THEY understand it. Their parents are a lost cause.


January 25th, 2013
7:27 pm

A great idea! I teach in a school with over 90% students on welfare. Few parents care about their child’s school progress or behavior!

Throckmorton P. Gildersleeve

January 25th, 2013
7:30 pm

Please keep in mind that slum lord Stacy Campfield is an idiot and has helped make East TN the laughingstock of the nation. Campfield of the “AIDS was caused by sexual intercourse between a man and a monkey” and the ever popular “Don’t Say Gay” legislation. These are only 2 of his head turning blatherings. Google is your friend if you want to see just how low he has driven the IQ average of the TN legislature, which was pretty low to start with. Any half baked idea he proposes is guaranteed to be a product of his far right fringe lunacy and this one is no exception.


January 25th, 2013
7:41 pm

What a terrible idea and a sad man.

Voice of Truth

January 25th, 2013
7:43 pm

Tackling generational poverty is a worthy goal. However, the problem should not be over simplified thereby resulting in symptomatic solutions versus solutions that address the root cause of generational poverty. Reducing welfare payments for students not making academic progress really places the burden of ensuring the family has fiscal resources to survive, and barely at best, on the child and not solely on the parent where the burden should be. The parent of generational poverty made a decision to be poor whether by choice or acceptance of poverty and its related conditions. The question that begs to be addressed is how do we change the mindset of those experiencing generational poverty toward them embracing a rejection of poverty and an embracing of education while also providing societal support and motivation to matriculated to the middle class. One solution involves disbanding low income housing and providing the poor an opportunity to live in economically diverse communities. This would allow them to see pictures of success thereby giving them a vision of the possibilities. Another solution would be federal and state vouchers for a full ride to state post-secondary schools thereby affording those of generational poverty to educate themselves and become career ready. A third solution would be tax credits to relocate to zip codes of higher income levels thereby institutionalizing the value that poverty should be rejected and escaped when opportunity avails. Another solution should be state and federal tax credits for expenses that improve one’s household quality of life such as school visits, expenses for student travel, expenses related to educational academic camps and college visits. These are just a few actions that could be institutionalized as incentives for overcoming generational poverty. I am sure they are not flawless but at least they are ideas for a worthy debate.

Mary Elizabeth

January 25th, 2013
7:52 pm

In my opinion as a retired teacher and educational leader of 35 years, Republican State Senator Stacey Campfield’s thoughts in the article above are, frankly, simplistic and they lack enlightenment. Thinking in terms of “punishment” as a solution to societal and educational problems is small-minded, both mentally and spiritually. Societal and educational programs that reflect wisdom, and the insight of historical perspective, would be much more effective, as well as more humane, in solving these problems than would be punishment.

N. GA Teacher

January 25th, 2013
7:58 pm

This idea sounds good to the middle class and people who are part of the general culture, but, unfortunately, many generational poverty parents are NOT of that culture. They have an entirely different way of living their lives, and no punishments, taxes, rewards, etc. will change them. Maybe a dictatorship like China could make parents act differently by physically grabbing them and “reprogramming” them by force but otherwise forget it. We have forever lost most of the generational poverty underclass parents, but maybe there are ways we CAN reach the children that we have not thought of.

two cents worth

January 25th, 2013
8:10 pm

There is no need to punish and take away these funds. Instead, reward these families with an extra supplement for a job well done. 3% more for attendance, 3% more for success in language arts, 3% for success in math, 3% social studies, 3% science, and a requirement to attend two meetings with teachers per school year. If the child successfully graduates from high by age 19, a bonus check of $2500 would be in that diploma made out to the parent who helped break the cycle of poverty by teaching their child the importance of an education. Additional children would be 1% more per subject with a cap at 5% per family. (Three children in school) This would cost a fraction of what remediation programs cost and a fraction of what prison time, and continued welfare assistance costs.

Proud Teacher

January 25th, 2013
8:15 pm

How stupid! Impoverished children have enough pressure without the precarious demands of good grades. Who will determine what good grades are? All A’s? Minimum passing? Too many variables to make a blanket statement like this.

bootney farnsworth

January 25th, 2013
8:16 pm

nope, nope, and nope.

while I get the idea, here’s the problem. you can’t force kids to study, pay attention, ect.

I could go along with capping benefits, or removal from school, but not punishing parents and other siblings over something they can’t control.

find another solution

old school doc

January 25th, 2013
8:26 pm

Doesn’t Brazil have some sort of social program that tie benefits to habits that improve a child’s outcome ( like regular doctor appts, attendance at school, parent-teacher conferences, parenting classes)? I thought it was somehow making a difference… need to research it


January 25th, 2013
8:32 pm

This is a bad idea and will do nothing to break the cycle of poverty. As one poster recommended, you need to teach the parents how to help. This is a solution built on steroetypes. Obviously, this guy didn’t get the memo from Jindal to stop being stupid.

Grob Hahn

January 25th, 2013
8:35 pm

This is just as stupid as suspending children from school when they become disciplinary problems. However, I understand the frustration as well. Public assistance can’t be a free trough. If it costs nothing, why would anyone try to get off of it? This effort is exactly the wrong way to approach it. Instead we should require the parents to also attend school or targeted job training. If they have health issues, fine, let them work from a desk or on a phone setting appointments. Keep everyone busy so the transition back to working will not be a total shock. Until I hear a plan like that from republicans or democrats, I might start to have faith in them again. Instead we’ll have claims of racism and other assorted diversions that keep the issue needlessly emotional. If a kid can’t behave in school, we need them to be moved into another kind of school. Why is this concept so radical these days? When they screw up they need MORE school, not suspensions. But cutting off their food supply is barbaric.


January 25th, 2013
8:43 pm

The state senator is correct in that anything and everything should be used to stop generational poverty. Education is the starting block for anybody to be successful in out society, not just poor people. I think all parents should have to pay an amount of money out of their own pockets to the school their child attends. If these young children who are contemplating have babies to get government support knew that they will have to pay money, maybe they will not have babies. And this will end generational poverty.


January 25th, 2013
8:45 pm

How about also reducing legislators’ salaries if their kids don’t do well?

Mikey D.

January 25th, 2013
9:13 pm

Typical right-wing blather… Demonizing poor people in order to score political points. It’s amazing how many “leaders” in the deep south operate without any sort of conscience or morals. What’s even worse is how they work themselves into almost impenetrable job security simply by putting (R) behind their names.

Primary prevention

January 25th, 2013
9:15 pm

Unfortunately the senator’s “stick” is too far downstream. Primary prevention to break the cycle would recommend that generational government dependent/poverty parents (”parent” is more accurate) not be allowed to have children…

bootney farnsworth

January 25th, 2013
9:18 pm

when you draw unemployment long enough, the state makes you attend classes on how to look for work. adapt this idea so if you kid is failing, you take classes on how to be a better parent.

blow those off, then hold the benefits until the classes are taken.

bootney farnsworth

January 25th, 2013
9:20 pm

@ mikey

funny, I was thinking the same thing about democrats.


January 25th, 2013
9:21 pm

We do not need to reward parents with benefits when they are not responsible parents. And we already DO reward students who excel in high school… with the HOPE scholarship. Anyone can work and earn that.


January 25th, 2013
9:26 pm

I have worked at several Title I schools – low income – and have never noticed an abundance of parental involvement until I worked at a school with 96%+ ESOL population. Classes were offered for parents in their language that taught them about THE AMERICAN EDUCATION CULTURE AND HOW TO BECOME INVOLVED AND HELP THEIR CHILDREN SUCCEED. They signed up and they attended these classes faithfully! The auditorium was packed every time we had an honors program because their children were excelling. Our test scores were very encouraging. The discipline problems were much less than at my other schools with parental involvement all but absent. A majority of our parents didn’t speak English. A majority of our students came from large families with low incomes. I don’t know how to do it, but parental involvement in education is a must if we expect children to escape the culture of poverty. Certainly punishing a family’s children because their parents failed to become involved isn’t the answer. But the question still begs for an answer!


January 25th, 2013
9:38 pm

Just read the news from across the country these days and you realize that we have a bunch of morons in elected office. Bloomberg to this one, they are nuts! Hank Johnson is their poster child because he isn’t very bright but others are just plain nuts. It is a bipartisan basket too.


January 25th, 2013
9:49 pm

When I taught in a low-income school, teachers did not give low grades on report cards as they knew the children would come in the next day with bruises. On one hand, the parents wanted the children to have good grades, but did nothing to support it at home. They did not know how, and thought that simply sending the kids to school was enough. Once upon a time, that may have been true, but that is no longer the case. Since schools have their hands tied regarding discipline and any true consequences for not learning, not doing homework, etc., if the parents do not help children they do not learn how to learn. They discipline when it is too late, i.e. a bad report card. So this proposal to punish parents would only harm children unless it came with a LOT of training for the parents on how to help their children. (The days of schools being able to hold students accountable is not coming back soon, if ever, so no need to suggest.) Yes, the public schools are a mess. Fixable, yes, but not with crazies like this in charge.

Mary Elizabeth

January 25th, 2013
9:57 pm

“Certainly punishing a family’s children because their parents failed to become involved isn’t the answer. But the question still begs for an answer!”

The answer is education, not only for the children but also for their parents. Education combined with a caring, compassionate heart toward both the children and their parents will do more good, than will punishment, in helping to improve the lives of these people. That is why I gave of my own time in developing workshops on reading techniques for parents in the evenings in my school’s Media Center to any interested parents. The workships were held from 7 – 9 pm. I wrote article for the PTA newsletters which would publicize when I would hold these workshops with parents. As I recall, I served minimum refreshments so that the workshops had a relaxed, informal atmosphere.

We must not indulge in negative attitudes toward the underclasses. We must, instead, as a society, develop programs and invest in human resources who will help the underclasses and the uneducated to rise from their situation. Seeing that others genuinely care for them helps to give the underclasses hope, and that caring attiude also inspires the parents and their children to believe that improvement in their lives is possible, and that a change in their circumstances is within their reach.

This is what I found to be true in my decades of working with parents and their children, many of whom were from the underclass in society.

The Deal

January 25th, 2013
10:10 pm

I can see attendance being a factor but not grades. Why would you place the responsibility for the family’s finances on the back of a child? How awful. What if the parents are uneducated and can’t help the child academically?

Parents DO have control over having the children there on time, so I think tardies and attendance could be a reasonable measure for parental involvement but definitely NOT the child’s grades.

reality check

January 25th, 2013
10:46 pm

I believe in the early colonial adage: “If don’t work, you don’t eat.” We need to feed and care for innocent children but not lazy adults. Put the children in boarding schools and let the uninterested parents fend for themselves. The current welfare state is not lifting anyone. It is pertpetuating an underclass who expect others to take care of them. Allow parents who do care to live at the boarding house and help bathe and cook for the children. There should be no live-ins and no real privacy. Everything should be set up so that the adult would want to get out on her own and support herself. While at the boarding school parents could see good child care modeled and learn life skills like cooking.



January 25th, 2013
10:52 pm

Just goes to show Tennessee has about as many whacks in the senate as Georgia.

Campfield.,wherever there is a ludicrous notion, he’ll be there.
This is retarded..talk about putting pressure on kids..sorry johnny..you don’t get any food this week since you failed your math test.

Big Mama

January 25th, 2013
11:06 pm

Reality Check- it sounds like you are describing the orphanges that existed in the early part of the last century. Our society moved away from this model of child-rearing for a reason. It created dysfunctional adults and was rife with abuse. A quality environment results in a higher quality end product: adults who are self-sufficient and can contribute to society in a positive and meaningful way. A quality environment costs money and requires stabillity. Orphanges cannot provide this. Foster homes sometimes can provide this. But require a great deal of oversight (thus a lot of money). And politicians like to tell us that “our” money shouldn’t be spent on “those” people.


January 25th, 2013
11:07 pm

i think this is a good idea…… IF you also agree that teachers should be “punished” for not having their students do well in school also. if teacher’s pay is related to how well a child does in school, doesn’t it seem fair that a parent’s “pay” should also be tied to how well their own child does in school? for those that say that a parent can not FORCE a child to study/read/do homework, etc, doesn’t that argument hold true for the teacher also?

reality check

January 25th, 2013
11:13 pm

BIG MAMMA. How would you assess the success of our current welfare system?


January 25th, 2013
11:31 pm

It is hard for me to believe that all these teachers are this blog do not believe in accountability of the parent or believe in the principle that actions have consequences.

My son made two c’s his first semester of HS and it was during the last two weeks of the semester. I jerked the xbox out of his room, the TV, outlawed the use of the phone during the school week and the only way he could use his computer was for a school related activity. He then had to sit for at least one hour per night in front of my wife and myself for one hour per night and do homework and if he did not have homework then he would write a paper on a topic of my choosing. Guess what 4 A’s and 3 B’s the next semester and his items were returned. He wanted a new laptop his 10th grade year and we told him the price was 5 A’s and 2 B’s and he made 6 A’s and 1 B. Made the same grades 2nd semester to keep the computer. This year we offered $500 for all A’s and he accomplished the goal.

When these kids make it to the real world then they will be facing the same punishment and reward system. Raises and bonuses come when you exceed expectations and you get terminated when you fail to meet expectations.

You can never convince me that punishment and rewards do not work. It worked in my house and it works in the business world.

This Senator is onto a valid point that we need to teach even the poor that they will be held accountable for their actions and if they teach it to their children then these children will be successful in the real world.


January 25th, 2013
11:32 pm

Lets punish the senators if our school’s fail. Take away their pay and benefits and health care.
Let the fat jawed politicians go hungry, most of them look like they could miss a few meals.

Hungary kids, Who in their right mind would propose something like this..

@ The deal, well said..

Lets vote these kooks out –2014 and whats left in 2016

Sen. Stacey Campfield

January 25th, 2013
11:33 pm

Seriously folks, I am not re inventing the wheel. This is already being done in over 40 countries with positive results every where it is in place. Look it up.

Here is a quote from the article…

“Most of our Fixes columns so far have been about successful-but-small ideas. They face a common challenge: how to make them work on a bigger scale. This one is different. Brazil is employing a version of an idea now in use in some 40 countries around the globe, one already successful on a staggeringly enormous scale. This is likely the most important government anti-poverty program the world has ever seen. It is worth looking at how it works, and why it has been able to help so many people.”

Here is the link for more. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/...

Sen. Stacey Campfield


January 25th, 2013
11:36 pm

Mikey D.

January 25th, 2013
9:13 pm

“Typical right-wing blather… Demonizing poor people in order to score political points.”

So you would have approved of this if it was from a Democrat?

Big Mama

January 25th, 2013
11:42 pm

Reality Check- I am not defending the current welfare system because it is beyond help. Please see my post @ 7:14. We need an innovative approach that does not punish the child but provides an opportunity for parents and children to learn how to overcome poverty and become self-sufficient. I learned from my parents (by word and deed) how to manage a household, personal finances, responsibilities such as schoolwork, how to work and hold down a job, how to budget for groceries, etc. I am sure most children do get some of this instruction from their parents but sadly I see too many adults unable to function at the most basic level to believe that all were raised with parents to guide them and establish an example for them. I doubt it is because the parents don’t love their children or that they are bad people but more than likely never had the example themselves. It’s hard to provide something for your children if you don’t even know what it is. We need programs to teach parents how to manage their own households.

But I have to say I don’t have a problem also requiring sterilization of adults who are unable/unwilling to support their children when they have been given an opportunity to do so. Why burden them or society with more mouths to feed?


January 26th, 2013
12:04 am

I have a better idea, eliminate the TN maggot political salaries and benefits. I live in TN and I’m sick and tired of these bottom feeders living off taxpayers money. Its Cleary evident this jack leg twit has nothing to do in Nashville so why should we the people continue to pay his welfare salary.

Responsibility Shunned

January 26th, 2013
2:04 am

“Education combined with a caring, compassionate heart toward both the children and their parents will do more good, than will punishment, in helping to improve the lives of these people.”

Of course it will, Bless your heart.


January 26th, 2013
7:16 am

Surprised no ignorant comments about this being racist yet.


January 26th, 2013
7:55 am

I think a neuter and spay policy for welfare recipients would be more effective, but I’m sure the Obamacrats would argue that it is their “right” to have six kids by five different fathers – all on the taxpayers dime.

Of course, this is the same government that provides instruction to ILLEGAL ALIENS on how to apply for welfare, so we shouldn’t be surprised.

Old timer

January 26th, 2013
8:24 am

Part of the problem is this country is out of money. We must turn this cycle around as a generation from now there will be no money to help them.
Teaching juniors in a rural town in TN I had two girls expecting their third baby. Seems to me a first step would be to introduce birth control. And I am sure this happens in cities also….


January 26th, 2013
8:34 am

Definitely an interesting concept, but what I find more interesting is that many of the reasons I’m reading for not doing it are the same reasons teachers give for why they shouldn’t be held accountable for test scores. If parents can’t make their children study/go to school/pay attention/do what they’re supposed to do to succeed, then how are teachers supposed to do those things? In my experience of teaching kids in every SES group, I found that by far the kids who didn’t want to do what they were supposed to do came from single parent homes who were on a variety of taxpayer assistance. Mama wasn’t working, she was collecting welfare, section 8 housing, food stamps, but she sent her kids to school for free breakfast, free lunch, and no homework. These were the parents who wouldn’t come in for conferences and whose children expected me to provide them with notebooks, pencils, and whatever else they needed to do their work. I’m not sure a child’s performance should be tied to welfare, but I darn sure think that parents on welfare should be penalized if they don’t participate in their child’s education.


January 26th, 2013
8:41 am

Republicans now want to cheat their way to the White House. So, trying to save money on the backs of poor children comes as no surprise.

Jack ®

January 26th, 2013
8:42 am

I agree with Lee @7:55. As long as our policy is to reward promiscuous behavior, the problems with welfare generated children will never go away.


January 26th, 2013
8:46 am

By all means, punish the poor for the failures of society. What a blind-stupid proposal! Perhaps if those “job-creators” created jobs that paid living wages there wouldn’t be so many on welfare in the first place. To do so would also increase tax revenue. Perhaps if we really invested in education and did the things that have been shown time after time to work we would be able to provide better services (pre-K for everyone who wants it? Advance content area education for teachers? Smaller class sizes?). But we won’t because it costs money and threatens the establishment.

And what about the failing children of families not on welfare? Shall we charge them? Why not? I know plenty of well-off students that don’t do their job either. How shall we punish them? How shall we address their entitlement mentality that they can do whatever they want because they have money?

Get a job/better job, you say? Are you hiring? Not the right skills/education, you say? Are you willing to train/educate the right person? And no, everyone on welfare is not lazy and stupid. Most are unlucky, and would take that better job in a second if given the time of day by the so-called “job-creators”. This is discrimination pure and simple.


January 26th, 2013
8:53 am

It is too bad that some people just don,t give a dam about whether their kids succeed. The generational welfare epidemic is slowly devouring the United Stares. All these so called “temporary” programs have, in many cases, turned “permanent”. Where we live, there are families that have been living off the $2000 a month they get from the government for so long, there is no way they will ever go back to work. The elders in these families, teach the young ones early on, how to get the money from the government. We are being devoured by our own generosity.

Call Me Missouri

January 26th, 2013
9:12 am

I think if the family receives any type of public assistance, then the parents should be required to volunteer at the school, attend parent conferences, and parenting classes. However, I wonder how many parents will claim their children have a disability in order to get around this if it becomes a law. The schools in Tennessee should prepare for an inundataion of parents wanting their children to be evaluated so they still cannot be held responsible for the child’s academic performance. That creates a new set of issues with respect to additional funding for special education and the problems that will arise if any one ethnic group has a significant (majority) number of children that are categorized as students with disabilities.

Maureen Downey

January 26th, 2013
9:14 am

Thanks Sen. Campfield. Interesting link.
Maureen Downey