Sponsors (3)
Affirms the importance of fathers and supports efforts to promote engaged fatherhood by calling for research, supportive programs, and policy ideas to reduce fatherlessness. It highlights links between absent fathers and social problems (violence, substance abuse, suicide), notes effects of incarceration and welfare disincentives, and suggests policy options such as tax incentives, custody reforms, and a national promotional effort to encourage two‑parent involvement. The measure is a non‑legislative expression of support and a request for study and policy development rather than a directive that creates new federal programs or spending; it asks for research, program support ideas, and consideration of policy tools to increase father engagement.
Fathers play an important role in providing nurture and support for children, enabling them to learn, develop, and reach their full potential.
Fatherlessness and the lack of important role models in the lives of children are identified as a root cause of the violence and unrest being witnessed in the Nation.
Despite some successful legislation and the creation of fatherhood initiatives, fatherless homes are still prevalent.
Research shows children do best when raised by two parents in a committed and long-term marriage.
According to the United States Census Bureau, 18,400,000 children in the United States live without a father in the home.
Primary effects are symbolic and agenda‑setting rather than direct legal or budgetary changes. Directly affected groups include children and families (they are the focus of proposed research and program ideas) and fathers (including noncustodial and formerly incarcerated fathers) who could benefit from expanded supportive programs if policymakers act on the recommendations. Community organizations, social service providers, reentry programs, family courts, and researchers could see increased attention, partnerships, or future funding opportunities if recommendations are pursued. State and local policymakers might consider legislative or programmatic responses (tax policy changes, custody/visitation rules, outreach campaigns). Because the measure itself does not appropriate funds or alter law, immediate practical impacts are limited; its main effect is to encourage study, program development, and policy proposals that could later affect service delivery, benefits, and family law in participating jurisdictions. Potential controversies or implementation challenges include debates over the appropriate role of government in family policy, equity and gender‑role concerns, welfare policy tradeoffs, and how to design incentives without unintended consequences.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Last progress June 6, 2025 (8 months ago)
Introduced on June 6, 2025 by Burgess Owens