[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 20 (Wednesday, February 1, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H1031-H1038]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                  COST-EFFECTIVENESS IN WELFARE REFORM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 4, 1995, the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Woolsey] is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, over $5 billion in child support goes 
uncollected every year. This is a national disgrace that is punishing 
our children and bankrupting our welfare system.
  Tonight I am pleased to be joined by many of my Democratic colleagues 
to call attention to this tragedy and to call on the 104th Congress to 
make child support collection a top priority as we work to reform the 
welfare system. Democrats have long recognized that holding both 
parents responsible for their children is the most cost-effective way 
to reduce the welfare rolls.
  Why then, we ask, is there no mention of child support in the 
Republican's welfare reform bill? Why then did it take so much prodding 
to get the Republican leadership to even schedule a hearing on child 
support collection? Do they not know that getting family child support 
is one of the best ways to get them off welfare?
  Mr. Speaker, I have known for over 25 years just how important child 
support is in preventing the need for welfare, because in 1968 I was a 
single working mother with three small children, ages 1, 3, and 5. 
Although I had a court order, I never received a penny in child 
support. In order to provide my children with the health care and child 
care they needed, I was forced to go on welfare to supplement my wages.
                              {time}  1900

  Today, Mr. Speaker, millions of families are forced to go on welfare 
for the same reason. In fact, 91 percent of first-time welfare 
recipients cite lack of financial support from a parent as the main 
reason they are on welfare.
  [[Page H1032]] Currently, The Federal Government pays over $1 billion 
a year to help almost 1,500 State and local agencies collect child 
support. This piecemeal approach results in failing State collection 
rates, some as low as 9 percent. Even more alarming is the fact that 
once a parent who owes support crosses State lines, as approximately 
one-third of them do, it becomes all but impossible to enforce 
collection.
  Consequently, Mr. Speaker, less than $1 for every $10 owed in 
interstate child support is collected. When it comes to fixing our 
child support system, however, the Republican leadership seems content 
on sticking with the status quo, which means the taxpayers get stuck 
once again with a billion dollar bill for a system that barely works.
  Democrats know that our families can no longer afford business as 
usual. We know that the failure to collect child support is not a 
State-by-State problem; it is a national crisis demanding a national 
solution.
  It is time to revolutionize child support; it is time to 
revolutionize child support payment collection in order to make sure 
all of our children receive the support they need and deserve. That 
means strengthening paternity establishment laws, that means tough new 
penalties for parents who refuse to pay support, that means 
establishing a national registry of child support orders so we can 
track parents across State lines, and that means taking a serious look 
at proposals to increase interstate collection, including legislation 
to federalize the child support system.
  Mr. Speaker, I welcome the Republican leadership's late arrival to 
the child support reform debate. Child support collection after all 
should not be an issue along party lines. Democrats, however, do not 
want minor changes to the system or tinkering around the edges; we want 
fundamental changes.
  Mr. Speaker, in the United States if we had had a child support 
system in place like the ones Democrats have proposed, I might not have 
needed to go on welfare in the first place. Now we have the opportunity 
to make sure all families in situations like mine are not forced to go 
on welfare because they do not receive the support they need and 
deserve.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Thurman].
  Mrs. THURMAN. I thank the gentlewoman from California and certainly 
appreciate her efforts tonight in bringing a very important issue, 
important not only to Congress but to the debate that has been taking 
place in our State legislatures, has been taking place in all of the 
legislatures across this country. I can assure you that my district 
offices who generally deal with these issues on an everyday basis, this 
is one of the No. 1 issues we deal with in trying to help single 
parents find or restore back child enforcement or child support 
payments because of the concern that they have for their children.
  If you allow me, I would like to take some time and read a statement 
that I have talking about what I see as some of the issues with some 
background and what I think we might be able to do, some things we 
might be able to do to help.
  Mr. Speaker, the Child Support Enforcement Program as it exists today 
appears to be dysfunctional. Caseloads are impossibly high and Federal 
requirements for providing services to interested parties may be 
conflicting, counterproductive, and unrealistic. Portions of the 
program may even present the intended recipients with economic 
disincentives to cooperate. Meanwhile, birth and family separation 
statistics indicate a growing number of potential clients.
  The statistics are staggering. One in four American families with 
children today are headed by women. In these single-parent families, 
the future of these children are directly linked to that of their 
mothers. Low standards of living are often the result of the high 
expense of raising children, lower salaries typically earned by women, 
and insufficient or nonexistent child support payments. Poor 
enforcement of child support orders greatly worsens the plight of these 
vulnerable children.
  Even though there are efforts to strengthen child support 
enforcement, the current system has failed to ensure that children 
receive financial support from both parents. Repeated reports have 
shown that the potential for child support is approximately $48 billion 
per year. However, only $14 billion is actually paid.
  For these reasons, a critical part of reforming the welfare system is 
improving this country's child support enforcement system. Improvements 
in the child support system will ensure that children can count on 
support from both parents and that the cost of public benefits can be 
reduced while working mothers' real income is raised.
  A tough stance must be taken on nonpayment of child support. There 
are at least four areas that must be addressed. First, efforts to 
enhance noncustodial parent location and identification must be 
strengthened. Second, the process by which child support orders are 
established must be improved. Third, efforts to establish hospital-
based paternity must be enforced. And fourth, child support enforcement 
must be made real by the passage of punitive measures for deadbeat 
parents.
  Noncustodial parent location and identification would be enhanced by 
having States maintain registries of child support orders. Moreover, 
the functions of the parent locator in the Department of Health and 
Human Services should be expanded. The interstate locator should be 
designated to link State-to-State child support order registers into an 
automated central system.
  Hospital-based paternity should be established by ensuring that 
States have simple civil consent procedures for paternity establishment 
available at hospitals at the time of birth.
  Moreover, benefits should be made contingent on paternity 
establishment. At this time, there is no reciprocal obligation for 
welfare recipients to help the Government locate the absent parent. The 
burden of certain parent locator information should be shifted to the 
applicant of welfare benefits. Of course, certain situations are unique 
and need to be taken into account, as when the parent cannot be found 
or if the mother fears harm to herself or her child.
  These measures are not meant to be punitive but just responsible. 
Parents who willfully and fully comply with paternity establishment 
requirements should not be denied benefits. Nor should they be denied 
benefits if the State has not met its responsibilities and obligations 
in assisting with paternity establishment.
  Finally, uncompromising punitive measures for deadbeat dads should be 
fully enforced. This should be done by withholding income from deadbeat 
dads for child support orders. We must establish procedures so that 
liens can be imposed against insurance settlements, gambling and 
lottery winnings, and other awards. Noncompliant fathers, who are 
delinquent in their support payments, should be required to enter a 
work program in which they work to pay off benefits meant to support 
their children.
  Mr. Speaker, studies have proven it is not the inability to pay, but 
rather the refusal to pay that has plunged children into the depths of 
poverty. Most noncustodial parents are able-bodied and can contribute 
to the financial support of their children. Simply put, they do not pay 
because they know they can get away without paying. I offer my ideas as 
a tough yet fair approach in dealing with a problem that is keeping 
billions of dollars from children in our country.
  I say again to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Woolsey] that we 
appreciate her bringing this to our attention, and I think all the 
ideas that will be discussed will open up a debate that is necessary.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. I thank the gentlewoman for her contribution, and I 
yield to the gentlewoman from Missouri [Ms. McCarthy].
  Ms. McCARTHY. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise as a member of the Welfare Reform Task Force to 
discuss the serious problem of child support enforcement in this 
country and to note the absence of meaningful child support enforcement 
provisions in the Personal Responsibility Act.
  Mr. Speaker, every child has two parents. Raising a child is the 
obligation of both these parents. Unfortunately, in my own State of 
Missouri many parents are not meeting their financial obligations. 
According to Missouri's Division of Child Support Enforcement, 
[[Page H1033]] $963 million is owed by noncustodial parents to over 
500,000 children.
  Because of these shocking figures, last year our State enacted reform 
legislation that stiffened compliance procedures for child support 
payments. I was proud to be a part the effort in Missouri to see these 
much-needed reforms enacted. It is my hope that many of these programs, 
such as the Parents Fair Share Program and the Savings Connection 
Program can be duplicated at the Federal level.
                              {time}  1910

  What is important to remember is that the failure of parents to make 
child support payments places children at risk. When child support 
payments are irregular or missed, the incidence of child poverty 
increases significantly. According to the Association for Children for 
Enforcement of Support, 50 percent of all white children growing up in 
a single parent household who do not receive support live at or below 
the poverty line, and 70 percent of all African American children 
growing up in a single parent family live at or below poverty level.
  For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, we at the Federal level have to take 
stronger action to ensure that parents meet their financial obligations 
to their children. While I am encouraged that the Family Reinforcement 
Act adds some provisions to strengthen child support orders, I do 
believe that stronger provisions need to be added during consideration 
of the bill. In fact, I believe attention should be given to the 
provisions in the bill introduced by the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
[Mrs. Kennelly], which I am cosponsoring, which would deny Federal 
benefits to individuals owing child support and withhold business and 
drivers licenses from individuals owing child support. In addition, I 
will offer consideration of the State reform provisions enacted in 
Missouri and other States.
  Mr. Speaker, this is not a partisan issue. I believe there is broad 
agreement that more needs to be done to ensure that child support 
payments are made. While we cannot force parents to spend time with 
their children, we certainly can place strict enforcement requirements 
on those mothers and fathers who abandon their children and fail to 
meet their financial obligations.
  Mr. Speaker, I intend to work hard with the gentlewoman from 
California [Ms. Woolsey] and others to achieve bipartisan support to 
enact strong child support enforcement legislation this session.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York 
[Mrs. Maloney].
  Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California 
[Ms. Woolsey] for organizing this special order and for her hard work 
on the welfare reform task force of the Democratic Party and the Child 
Enforcement Act along with the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Mrs. 
Kennelly].
  Mr. Speaker, everyone knows that raising a child is the 
responsibility of both parents, so it is a national disgrace that we 
collect only 18 percent of all child support cases. Everyone knows that 
establishing paternity will increase accountability. So it is 
unacceptable that we identify only 18 percent of the AFDC children 
without a legal father. Everyone knows that increasing child support 
collection is very doable, so it is simply wrong that we collect only 
$14 billion out of a potential $48 billion every year. That is a $34 
billion gap that could be collected and be part of the Federal 
Treasury.
  Mr. Speaker, enforcing comprehensive child support should be high 
priority of Congress. We can and should expand the penalties for child 
support delinquency. We can and should simplify the procedures for 
establishing paternity. We can and should set up a national registry of 
child support orders. We can and should institute more performance-
based incentives.
  However, Mr. Speaker, I have looked, and I cannot find these 
provisions in the Contract With America.
  Mr. Speaker, any welfare reform should also have reforms for child 
support enforcement. Improving the current child support systems is not 
only cost effective, but it will also enable many families to avoid 
welfare. Penalties such as denying professional, recreational, and 
drivers licenses to a delinquent deadbeat parent will cut down on 
teenage pregnancies and help increase enforcement. Penalties such as 
enforcing liens on real property and reporting delinquency to credit 
bureaus will send a strong message about responsibility. When these 
penalties are adequately enforced, a deadbeat parent will think twice 
about avoiding payments.
  Those who are hurt most by deadbeat dads are our children. They are 
our most vulnerable citizens. They cannot vote, cannot speak for 
themselves, cannot spend millions of dollars lobbying Congress, yet one 
in every five children is poor. Even worse, one out of every two 
children in female-headed households are poor. These children need 
child support payments to literally put food into their mouths, yet 
time after time these same children receive little or no support from 
their deadbeat parent. This financial abandonment creates untold 
hardships for our children and for the American public.
  Child poverty has been linked to higher education
   and medical costs and to increased crime rates. According to the 
Children's Defense Fund, child poverty costs this Nation between $36 
billion and $177 billion in reduced future worker productivity and 
employment. The deadbeat parent who has not paid their child support 
has not only neglected their legal responsibility to their child, but 
has also neglected their responsibility to their country.

  We all know that the present child support system is in shambles. For 
many single parent families child support payments are irregular, late, 
missed, and often not paid at all. Those who do receive payments find 
them wholly inadequate. The average child support payment for a poor 
woman is only $5 per day. That is not even enough for a family meal at 
McDonald's. No wonder so many children are living in poverty.
  Every day single parents struggle to provide needed food, clothing, 
shelter, and health care. Why should children be punished for the sins 
of their deadbeat parent? Why should the American public foot the bill 
for the irresponsible parent?
  Already 17.6 million children live in single-parent homes. As more 
and more children live in single-parent homes, the need for stronger 
child support enforcement will only get worse.
  Child support programs more than pay for themselves. For every $1 
spent, $4 more are collected.
  Child support instills responsibility. Child support prevents 
welfare. Child support raises children from poverty. Mr. Speaker, what 
are we waiting for? Let us address this issue now. Our country and our 
children deserve nothing less, and again I ask you to include this in 
the welfare reform package.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. 
Scott].
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Woolsey] for her hard work and leadership on welfare reform and child 
support enforcement in particular.
  Mr. Speaker, we all recognize that a child deserves the emotional 
support of both parents. Today, with close to 6 million children living 
in poverty, it is clear that children are in desperate need of 
financial support from both parents. The discussion on children in 
single-parent families has been primarily focused on welfare reform, 
specifically Aid to Families with Dependent Children. However, the 
issue of child support enforcement has curiously been absent in most of 
the discussion on family preservation and family support.
  It has been reported that there is over $34 billion in uncollected 
child support payments. In fact, child support orders are established 
in only about half of children--for half of children who should receive 
them. And even for those who have support orders, only have receive the 
full payment. According to the Children's Defense Fund,

       The vast majority of children served by state child support 
     enforcement agencies not only do not have full collections 
     made on their behalf, but fail to have any collection made at 
     all.

  An estimated $7.4 billion of uncollected child support should go to 
poor children. In many, many cases, it is the lack of child support 
that forces families to go on to welfare to begin with.
  [[Page H1034]] Consider this, Mr. Speaker: With a child support 
payment and even a minimum wage job coupled with earned income tax 
credit and food stamps, that together could put a family on to the path 
of self-sufficiency. If we address the support services
 such as child care, health care, and transportation through welfare 
reform, the family can be self-sufficient. This has all the components 
of a plan that accomplishes the goal of lifting families out of 
poverty: work and responsibility.

  In my State of Virginia, Mr. Speaker, we have implemented a strategy 
to aggressively go after noncustodial parents who choose to ignore 
their financial responsibility to their children. We have created a 
system to increase paternity establishment including providing in-
hospital paternity acknowledgment, and we have decided that 
establishment of support orders will be a priority. Virginia is now 
considered a national model for this system of paternity establishment, 
and we have collected over $230 million in child support, including $40 
million which was collected on behalf of children in AFDC families.
  Much of the uncollected support involved out-of-State parents, so the 
need for a national cooperation is obvious.
  For some families, the receipt of a steady support payment is enough 
to lift children out of poverty or prevent them from needing AFDC 
benefits. A new initiative called: A child support assurance system 
accomplishes this task. Child support assurance guarantees a fixed 
amount of child support for each child as long as a child support order 
is in place.
  Whatever the noncustodial parents pays goes toward that guarantee, so 
if the parent pays all of what is owed, there is only a little 
administrative expense. If only part is paid, the cost of the guarantee 
is probably less than AFDC would have been anyway.
  Child support assurance removes the work disincentives that we so 
often hear about from welfare recipients. In a child support assurance 
system, the family receives the entire guarantee and does not have to 
worry about a reduction in their take home pay if they work. For 
example with a $250 guarantee, if you stay at home you receive $250. 
But if you work part time, make $300 a month you still get the entire 
$250 plus your earnings. If you work full time, you still get the 
entire $250 and get to keep your earnings. In fact, when you add in the 
earned income tax credit and the monthly child support assurance 
payment, work will always pay. Child support assurance demonstrations 
report that recipients are able to increase their work hours by 25 
percent and increase their earnings by 25 percent. Without the child 
support assurance, many families will probably turn to welfare as a 
means of support.
  Clearly, programs designed to lift children out of poverty must 
acknowledge that both parents have an obligation to support their 
children. Child support systems formalize this arrangement--when we 
aggressively pursue the noncustodial parent. A system of child support 
assurance not only recognizes the importance of this arrangement, but 
makes it easier for families to find their own way on the path to self-
sufficiency.
  As we consider welfare reform, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, we must 
consider child support enforcement and innovations such as child 
support assurance. We can lift more families out of poverty and fulfill 
our goal of encouraging work and responsibility.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Neal], with whom I cochair the Democratic welfare task force.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, today is day 29 of the Contract With America. 
We have passed the quarter mark for the first 100 days. Until day 27, 
we heard nothing about child support being included in the contract.
  Why was child support not included in the contract? How could such an 
important issue be ignored? I have carefully reviewed the Personal 
Responsibility Act and it includes no child support provisions.
  On day 27, we heard that the Republicans will include child support 
enforcement provisions in the Personal Responsibility Act. We had to 
wait until day 27. Where were the child support provisions?
  It is day 29 of the Contract With America. It is time for us to start 
talking about the details of child support enforcement. This will send 
the American people the message that we are serious about welfare 
reform. A tough child support system requires both parents to live up 
to their responsibilities.
  How could we have welfare reform without child support enforcement 
provision? Child support is welfare prevention. For every $1 spent on 
administrative expenses, $4 is collected in child support. Paying child 
support is also the ultimate measure of personal responsibility.
  The potential for child support collection is estimated at $48 
billion per year. Only $14 billion is actually paid. This leaves an 
estimated collection gap of about $34 billion. This gap needs to be 
closed. Yet it was not until day 27 that the Republicans decided to 
address the issue of closing this $34 billion gap.
  One in four children now lives in single parent homes. Without better 
child support enforcement, too many of these children will not have the 
support they need and deserve. In 1992, 17.6 million children lived in 
single parent homes. We need to improve these statistics now.
  My home State of Massachusetts has been very successful with child 
support enforcement and would serve as a role model for the rest of the 
country. Massachusetts has increased its child support collection rate 
from 51 to 67 percent over a 3-year period. But Massachusetts is only 
one State, we must make an improvement on the Federal level.
  Child support is one area in which State flexibility is not needed. 
States should be uniform on this issue. We should be able to collect 
child support awards across State lines.
  Successful child support enforcement includes streamlining the 
paternity-establishment process. We should give States performance-
based incentives for improving paternity-establishment rates.
  Out-of-wedlock births have increased at an outrageous rate. In 1991, 
approximately 30 percent of all children born were born to unwed 
mothers. These children need to be given a fighting chance. Remember, 
there is no such thing as an illegitimate baby.
  We need to collect awards that we owed. We need States to establish a 
central registry and centralized collection and disbursement 
capability.
  We need to establish a national commission to study State guidelines 
and the desirability of uniform national guidelines.
  We need to ensure fair award levels. Awards are generally set too 
low. If awards were modified to current guidelines, an additional $7.3 
billion--22 percent of the gap--could be saved.
  It is day 29 of the contract. Child support is finally starting to 
receive the recognition it deserves. Let's not stop now. We have to 
work together to close this $34 billion gap. Paying your child support 
is the ultimate measure of personal responsibility.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Owens].
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I will just take 2 minutes to associate 
myself with the remarks that have been made before.
  We are all in favor of welfare reform. We are all in favor of 
reforming any aspect of Government that certainly will save money and 
improve efficiency. There is no program in Government anywhere that 
could not benefit from reform, including the CIA and the aircraft 
procurement program that is going to purchase the F-22, spending 
billions of dollars. There are numerous programs that ought to be 
reformed, and welfare is certainly no exception.
  The problem is, we do not want to have reform be merely a persecution 
of poor children and poor women. The fact that the majority party has 
chosen to trivialize child support enforcement and not deal with it up 
to now is shocking. I hope it will no longer be a partisan issue, that 
they will really get on board, and child support enforcement will 
become a major part of this reform process.
  Let us have welfare reform, but let us do it thoroughly. Let us deal 
with the provision of jobs and job training for welfare mothers. Let us 
deal with the child support enforcement. Billions of dollars are at 
stake here. We have heard the citing of the kind of money 
[[Page H1035]] that can be recovered, and there are simple steps that 
can be taken. The question is why have we waited so long. Why have all 
these decades gone by, and we have not gone out to collect the kind of 
money that should be collected from absent parents.
  Let us get on board now and have thorough and complete welfare 
reform.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
[Mrs. Kennelly].
  Mrs. KENNELLY. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, when parents evade their responsibilities, children 
suffer--and the taxpayers often get left with the bill.
  To protect both children and taxpayers from the consequences of 
parental irresponsibility, we need to improve our child support 
enforcement system. We need to send a clear and unmistakable message: 
Both parents must provide for their children.
  So today, I rise in strong support of bipartisan legislation 
introduced today by the Congressional Women's Caucus--legislation that 
will improve almost every aspect of our current child support 
enforcement system.
  The Child Support Responsibility Act would extend much-needed help to 
custodial parents who, despite time-consuming, often expensive efforts, 
are still not able to enforce their child support orders across State 
lines.
  Interstate cases account for about one-third of all child support 
awards. Because of differences in State law regarding enforcement, 
jurisdiction, and service of process, such cases are often among the 
most difficult. In fact, the General Accounting Office has reported, 
that 34 percent of mothers in interstate cases reported that they had 
never received a support payment in 1989. The figure for mothers in 
intrastate cases is just 19 percent.
  Beyond that, the Office of Child Support Enforcement reports that 
interstate cases represent nearly one-third of IV-D child support cases 
with collections, but yield only 8 percent of collected support.
  Mr. Speaker, we can do better. We can act on the recommendations of 
the U.S. Commission on Child Support Enforcement, take a comprehensive 
approach to solving these problems, and pass the Child Support 
Responsibility Act.
  This bill would establish a central registry in each State of all 
child support orders issued in the State. It would make uniform the law 
governing the interaction
 among States in child support matters. It would set up a national 
registry of child support orders to assist States in locating absent 
parents and enforcing orders. And it would expand the penalties for 
delinquency.

  Mr. Speaker, I know there are some who would rather not talk about 
this matter. They say you don't understand, I have reasons for not 
paying. But I would say to my colleagues, consider the plight undergone 
by the custodial parent and by the children when these child support 
payments are not made--and when there seems to be nowhere to turn.
  Let me close with one last point.
  All of us have heard the calls through the Halls of Congress for 
young mothers to be more responsible in regard to welfare reform. I 
completely agree. Shouldn't we also demand, equally loudly and clearly, 
that fathers be responsible.
  Separation happens. Divorce happens. It's a fact of life. But the 
responsibility assumed by having a child continues. It is not 
temporary; it is permanent; it should not be easy to evade; and the 
children should not be left to bear the consequences.
  There is a $34 billion child support enforcement gap. If we don't 
work harder to collect that money, millions of children will go without 
the support they deserve. In many cases, the taxpayers will have to 
pick up the bill for an absentee parent.
  Let's put that responsibility back where it belongs. Let's ensure 
that parents--both custodial and noncustodial--live up to 
their responsibilities. And let's make sure our children get the 
support they need and deserve.
                              {time}  1930

  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. 
Jackson-Lee].
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, somewhere in a school in Houston sits a 
child by the name of Mary. A teacher writes on the blackboard the word 
h-o-p-e. Ask Mary what does that word mean. Mary looks and looks again 
and the teacher points to the word h-o-p-e.
  And Mary says to the teacher, ``nothing, ma'am, nothing for me.''
  I say, Mr. Speaker, we should give young Mary hope, hope of survival, 
hope of being able to survive with a single parent, hope of being able 
to make it and to be successful. I think, Mr. Speaker, we can begin to 
give Mary hope by reforming our welfare system as one of the biggest 
challenges before Congress today. But I really think that we can reform 
the welfare system by doing comprehensive reform. And that includes 
child support enforcement.
  Mr. Speaker, reforming our welfare system is one of the biggest 
challenges before the Congress today. I am here this evening to 
emphasize the point that real welfare reform is comprehensive reform--
and this includes child support enforcement.
  Unpaid child support hurts families across the Nation every day. 
Today, 63 percent of absent parents contribute no child support. 
Shockingly, it is estimated that the potential for child support 
collections is approximately $48 billion a year. However, only $14 
billion is actually paid, leaving a collection gap of $34 billion.
  Mr. Speaker, there are many obvious steps that this Congress can take 
to bring in some of this uncollected child support. First, we can begin 
by providing adequate funding for the National Child Support 
Enforcement Collection Agency so that they can enhance coordination for 
collections across State lines and improve Federal tracking of 
delinquent orders.
  In addition, a comprehensive child support strategy is necessary to 
help custodial parents escape welfare and stay in the work force. A 
comprehensive child support strategy needs stronger requirements for 
paternity establishment. We need tough new penalties for those who 
refuse to pay, such as: wage withholding, suspension of drivers' and 
professional licenses, and property seizures.
  Congress should also require all States to adopt the Uniform 
Interstate Family Support Act. My State of Texas was the second State 
to adopt UIFSA. The crux of UIFSA is ``one order--one State'' and it 
gives States the ability to serve wage withholding orders directly on 
an employer in another State.
  States currently receive 66 percent Federal financial participation 
matching funds plus incentives for AFDC and some non-AFDC collections. 
This funding scheme hurts States like Texas because we have a low AFDC 
grant. We would like to see a higher Federal participation and more 
incentives in the form of increased funding for meeting certain 
performance goals. Bottom line--the program is currently underfunded 
both at the State and Federal level and cannot keep up with the growing 
caseload. Texas currently uses the States share of AFDC that we recover 
from absent parents as the State portion of the Federal funding scheme. 
Since the average welfare grant in Texas is $174 and in California it 
is $400, Texas recovers less and has less to use to pull down Federal 
dollars and therefore is less able to help families move off of 
welfare.
  Mr. Speaker, child support is one of the real engines of welfare 
reform, as it requires parents to take financial responsibility for 
their children. As this Congress tackles the problem of welfare reform 
and works to move our families toward self-sufficiency and 
independence, let us be certain to include child support as an 
important component of this endeavor.
  As this Congress tackles the problem of welfare reform and works to 
move families toward self-sufficiency and independence, let us again 
give little Mary hope. Let us be certain to include the child as an 
important component of this endeavor. Let us remember that child 
enforcement must be part of welfare reform.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Meehan].
  Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague, the gentlewoman 
from California [Ms. Woolsey], for this opportunity to speak on such an 
important issue and compliment her in putting this together.
  [[Page H1036]] I want to refer to the experience that I had before I 
was elected to the Congress 2 years ago. I was the first assistant 
district attorney in Middlesex County, which is the largest county in 
Massachusetts. And in that position, I had an opportunity to look at 
the child support enforcement in Massachusetts and a person from the 
State revenue department came into my office and asked me to make that 
a priority within the district attorney's office. There had been a new 
statute that had been passed in Massachusetts for tougher, stricter 
enforcement, but a case had never been tried, a criminal case under 
that statute.
  And I looked at the case of a person from Lowell, MA, someone by the 
name of Edward Orlando, who had gotten a divorce from his wife. And he 
had moved out and he moved to New York City where he set up an 
apartment with his girlfriend. And they lived on 52d street. And at the 
same time they lived in that very expensive section of New York City, 
he had a place in the Caribbean as well. The only problem is, Mr. 
Orlando left 11 children back in Massachusetts, 6 of whom were still 
living at home in Lowell.
  Audrey Orlando faced some very difficult choices. She did not receive 
a single child support payment for over a year. By the time several 
years had gone by, Edward Orlando owed his wife $47,000 in back child 
support. The bank was foreclosing on the mortgage of that home on 
Billings Street in Lowell. Audrey Orlando was unable to collect the 
money, facing foreclosure because of a system that was broken down and 
could not work.

                              {time}  1940

  People who are not paying child support are able to go to other 
States and use the statutes against each other, pit one State against 
another, so the child enforcement officials are unable to collect that 
money.
  I took that case in the DA's office and told Mrs. Orlando I would 
make it a priority. I was able to use the long-arm statute to reach out 
and find this defendant in New York. We brought him back to 
Massachusetts, but not before he was detained at Riker's Island for 
about a month as we set up to bring him back to Massachusetts.
  This defendant was stunned that any prosecutor from anywhere would 
bring him back or hold him and detain him at Riker's Island, like a 
common criminal, $47,000 in back support. We brought him back to 
Massachusetts, where he stood trial.
  I decided to make this case a priority. I personally prosecuted the 
case. The evidence was overwhelming. Although on paper Mr. Orlando, did 
not have any money, we found that his lifestyle was such that the 
evidence was overwhelming that he in fact was not meeting his legal and 
moral obligation.
  After we finished the conclusion of the evidence and the conclusion 
of the final arguments, Mr. Orlando got up and pleaded guilty. He was 
sent to jail for 3 months, 3 months sentence, and was ordered to pay 
the child support.
  Guess what happened after the 3 months? Mr. Orlando skipped out and 
still has not paid the child support. I still have in my office the 
case of Mrs. Orlando, trying to avoid being foreclosed on her home.
  She is like thousands of other women across America who are 
stereotyped in some ways about being a welfare mother, because for a 
period of time she had to go on welfare. She works two jobs, 7 days a 
week, to try to keep those foreclosing on her home from kicking her and 
her family out of her home.
  This case illustrates the problem that we have. We need a Federal 
system. If a person is convicted of a speeding ticket in one community 
or one State and goes to another State, we have a computer system to 
catch that person. It is unconscionable that we do not have a way to 
force people to pay child support.
  There is a legal and moral responsibility here. Child support is not 
the residue of a bad marriage, it is an obligation that is legal and 
moral.
  I might add, Mr. Speaker, in closing, 90 percent, by the way, of the 
money, of the $38 billion that is owed in this country in child 
support, are men who owe women. I can't help but believe that a court 
system all across America dominated by male judges and male personnel, 
and a Congress, frankly, that is dominated by males, I can't help but 
think if 90 percent of the money owed were women who owed men, the 
system would have found a way to find a way to collect this money.
  I thank the gentlewoman for yielding, and I hope that together this 
year we can finally set up a Federal system to make people meet their 
moral and legal obligation.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina [Jim 
Clyburn].
  Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to address the important issue of 
child support enforcement. There can be no denying that there is a 
problem. It is estimated that each year over $34 billion of child 
support goes uncollected. My own State of South Carolina has a 
collection rate of just 24 percent of court-ordered child support 
payments. But there is more to the problem than an inability to collect 
payments.
  For the many children whose paternity has not been established there 
can be no child support order. And in the relatively few cases where 
there is a court order, child support payments are rarely adjusted for 
inflation, and the amount averages less than $3,000 a year.
  Each year only $14 billion of the estimated $48 billion owed in child 
support is collected. The $34 billion left uncollected is the 
difference between financial independence and living in poverty or on 
welfare for many single parent families.
  In 1990, women headed 86 percent of the single parent families in 
this country, and single parent families headed by women are seven 
times as likely to live in poverty. Of the single parent families 
headed by women in 1990, almost 36 percent received some sort of 
governmental assistance.
  The statistics make it clear. Ensuring the full collection of 
reasonable child support payments is one of the most effective means to 
prevent many of our Nation's children from living in poverty. Child 
support payments could enable many single parent families to leave 
welfare or prevent them from entering the system in the first place.
  Yet, there is absolutely no mention of child support enforcement in 
the welfare reform bill included by the Republicans in their so called 
Contract With America. The Republicans claim that their bill will end 
dependency on welfare, eliminate out of wedlock births, and eradicate 
teenage pregnancy. They boast their bill will do all this, yet it 
leaves untapped the $34 billion of uncollected child support each year.
  According to the Republican bill H.R. 4, children born to unwed 
mothers under the age of 18, or 21 if the State so desires, will be 
permanently ineligible for welfare benefits. According to H.R. 4, 
benefits will also be denied to children whose paternity has not been 
established or who were conceived by or born to mothers while they were 
receiving welfare.
  Yet, while the Republican bill includes numerous provisions to 
exclude certain mothers and their children from receiving benefits, 
there are no provisions to crack down on deadbeat dads. The Republicans 
choose to focus on the failings of teenage mothers trying to raise 
their children on their own while making no attempt to punish fathers 
for abandoning their children. Mr. Speaker, it takes two.
  What kind of family values would our Government promote if it were to 
deny aid to children born to unwed teenage mothers while allowing a 
father to shirk his obligations as proposed by the Republicans? What 
kind of mixed message would we send to our teenagers that a teenage 
mother will be forced to live in poverty without any assistance as she 
struggles to raise her child while the father bears none of the burden?
  It is high time that we reformed child support enforcement in this 
country. Fathers must be identified, reasonable child support orders 
must be established, and child support payments must be collected.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Harold 
Ford, who is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Human Resources 
of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  [[Page H1037]] (Mr. FORD asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I rise and thank the gentlewoman from 
California [Ms. Woolsey] for requesting these special orders tonight on 
child support enforcement, and commend her for her leadership here in 
the Congress, and also for cochairing the Task Force on Welfare Reform.
  Mr. Speaker, I was disturbed to read the other day what the 
Associated Press article is showing from the National Center for 
Children in Poverty. Six million children under the age of 6 were found 
to live in poverty in 1992.
  I certainly would like to say to my colleagues, those of us who serve 
on the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and 
Means, the Personal Responsibility Act that excluded child support 
enforcement, we applaud and commend the chairman, Clay Shaw, for now 
saying that he will include child support enforcement. But women in 
this Congress, both Democrats and Republicans alike, are making sure 
that we respond to this compenent of the welfare reform package.
  Emphasis should be placed on reducing poverty by keeping families 
together, enforcing child support obligations, as well as promoting 
self-sufficiency, assisting with day care and transportation, and 
providing education, training, and work incentives that are needed.
  Ignoring child support enforcement sends the wrong message in 
America. It says that a noncustodial parent who is one-half responsible 
for the birth of a child does not have any responsibility for that 
child at all. That is wrong, and hopefully we in the Committee on Ways 
and Means, and my colleagues in this House, will make sure that we join 
with the Governors of this Nation and say that a strong child support 
enforcement component of the welfare reform package will in fact be a 
part of this bill that we will bring to the Congress, hopefully in the 
first 100 days.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. I yield to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Nadler].

                              {time}  1950


                       child support enforcement

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague Representative 
Lynn Woolsey for organizing this special order to bring attention to 
the urgency and severity of the crisis of the noncollection of child 
support.
  Mr. Speaker, before I came to this House I had considerable 
experience in this area. I am proud to have been the author during my 
16 years in the New York State Assembly of 22 State laws that 
strengthened child support enforcement methods and of being a prime 
sponsor of the Child Support Standards Act which established guidelines 
for setting support awards. We enacted laws providing for interception 
of State income tax refunds, of stock dividend payments, and interest 
payments owed to defaulting parents. We mandated withholding child 
support automatically from the obligated payer's salary as soon as the 
support order was issued. We mandated child support defaults being 
included in all credit reports. We authorized the State to use every 
conceivable method to collect support owed on behalf of the custodial 
parents.
  Still we failed. We increased collection rates substantially, but 
they were still woefully inadequate. Why?
  Mostly for two reasons. First, establishing paternity was still very 
difficult. Second, because when obligated parents went to another 
State, as 30 percent do nationally, all our collection methods went out 
the window, and we had to resort to the very weak interstate 
enforcement system.
  Clearly we need a national enforcement system that will strengthen 
the paternity establishment system and will put in place a uniform 
national child support collection system.
  The Internal Revenue Service should be given the job of collecting 
child support and should be mandated to use all the force and powers it 
uses to collect taxes to collect child support.
  Let the Federal Government set uniform minimum child support 
standards. Let the Federal Government pay every custodial parent a 
basic child support benefit and then reimburse itself by collecting the 
money owed from the obligated parents. In this way we would put the 
obligation on the Government, not on the custodial parent, to chase 
after the noncustodial parent to collect the funds to reimburse itself. 
And the child, the children, would have assured support.
  One thing should be made clear. This is not primarily a problem of 
the poor. Although mothers and children are often rendered poor by 
noncollection of support due, we are more often than not talking about 
middle class or even wealthy families.
  Make no mistake. Without seriously addressing the collection of child 
support, there can be no real welfare reform.
  That is why it is so shocking that the so-called Personal 
Responsibility Act barely deals with child support and seeks instead to 
punish poor mothers. Welfare reform must begin with child support 
enforcement measures. That would save the taxpayers money, make the 
lives of children and custodial parents much easier and teach the 
lesson that fathers too have responsibilities. Then we can reform the 
welfare system to deal with the much smaller problem that would then 
remain.
  Mr. Speaker, I call on this Congress to take on the challenge of 
making child support orders real and enforced and so to improve the 
lives of millions of our children.
  Again, I thank Congresswoman Woolsey for organizing this special 
order.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Puerto Rico 
[Mr. Romero-Barcelo].
  Mr. ROMERO-BARCELO. Mr. Speaker, today I join our colleagues in 
defense of our children.
  For obvious reasons, children are in a defenseless position; they 
have little if any means by which to improve their standard of living. 
Since they do not vote, they have no political leverage. Therefore, 
government has a responsibility to watch over the well-being of 
children.
  How can children have a bright future when they grow up in the 
darkness, lacking fulfillment of the basic needs so important in human 
development? How do we expect to have a better future for our Nation if 
we ignore the needs of our children today? Child support and its 
enforcement should be a top priority of welfare reform.
  Almost everyone today would agree that the welfare system must be 
revamped and that meaningful reform is in order. Differences in 
opinion, however, arise on the methods and fine print necessary to 
achieve real changes that will help those in need to break the cycle of 
poverty or those who need a second change.
  According to the information provided by the National Center for 
Children in Poverty, more than a quarter of American children under age 
6 were living in poverty in 1992, though nearly three in five poor 
children had working parents. These figures represent a total of 25 
percent of the population in that age group.
  As the representative of 3.7 million U.S. citizens in Puerto Rico 
which has some of the highest poverty statistics in the country, I know 
the urgency of a comprehensive child support strategy.
  The Child Support Program records show that over $34 billion in 
accumulated unpaid support was due to over 16 million children in the 
United States at the end of 1989. The collection rate was 19 percent of 
the total amount due in Child Support cases. Unfortunately, the system 
fails to ensure that children receive adequate support from both 
parents. For most children born out of wedlock, a child support order 
is never awarded. Also, of all the child support orders, the full 
amount of child support is collected in only about one out of every two 
cases.
  Single parent families struggle every day to provide needed food, 
clothing, shelter and health care for their children. When child 
support payments are irregular, missed, or not paid at all, the 
incidence of child poverty drastically increases.
  Fifty percent of all white children growing up in single parent 
households who do not receive child support live at or below the 
poverty level;
  Sixty percent of all hispanic children growing up in single parent 
households live at or below poverty levels;
  [[Page H1038]] Seventy percent of all African-American children 
growing up in single parent families live at or below the poverty 
level. Surely these figures demonstrate that decisive action is needed.
  There are many things we can do to improve and enhance the current 
child support system. For example, we can require uniform procedures 
for dealing with interstate cases, which are currently the most 
difficult to pursue. We can improve tracking of delinquent parents 
through national reporting of child support orders and by establishing 
a Federal registry of child support orders.
  Moreover, we need tough new penalties for those who refuse to pay, 
such as authorizing withholding part of wages and allow suspension of 
professional, occupational, and even drivers' licenses as a means of 
forcing the delinquent parent to comply with support payment orders.
  If we do not take action on child support now, we will be requiring 
young mothers to be responsible, while we give fathers an exemption. 
The Personal Responsibility Act, H.R. 4, cuts young, single mothers 
from welfare, but it does noting to improve child support enforcement.
  By ignoring child support enforcement we are sending the wrong 
message. It says that the noncustodial parent who is 50 percent 
responsible for the child does not have any real responsibility to 
support his child. If more noncustodial parents are made to pay child 
support, welfare will not be necessary for many families.
  Sensitivity has always been a characteristic of the American 
experience. In good times and bad, we have been a caring nation that 
values responsibilities to continue this tradition and make sure that 
children in America are protected.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, America is experiencing a serious problem: 
Too many working and able-bodied parents are not taking responsibility 
for their children. The time has come to declare war on our current 
welfare system so that we can properly address the situation.
  In every war, battles must be fought and won. One of the biggest 
battles we must fight is improving and reforming this Nation's child 
support enforcement problem.
  The reasons for engaging in this battle are clear: 63 percent of the 
absent parents in this country do not pay child support. Approximately 
$35 billion is lost each year in uncollected child support payments. 
And in my own State of Maryland, absent parents defaulted on more than 
$325 million in court-ordered child support in 1993. Most importantly, 
we all must remember--the children suffer when child support is not 
paid.
  As a nation and as a society we cannot afford a social safety net 
without expecting obligations and demanding responsibilities. For any 
type of welfare reform to be successful, individuals must accept the 
responsibility of working and providing for their families. In 1990, 
absent parents paid only $14 billion in child support. But if child 
support reflecting current ability to pay were established and 
enforced, single parents and their children would have received almost 
$48 billion. This translates into more money for food, shelter, 
clothing, and child care and a reduction in the Federal burden. We must 
send a clear signal that both parents who bring children into this 
world must take responsibility for supporting them.
  That is why we need a tough, smart child support program which 
requires both mothers and fathers to live up to their responsibilities. 
We must target those individuals who believe they don't have to take 
care of their kids because their neighbors--hard-working, tax paying, 
responsible citizens--will. The buck must start and stop with the 
parents.
  The children of this country need the billions in outstanding and 
uncollected child support. Payment of child support could save this 
country billions of dollars if we could move people off welfare and 
keep others from joining the rolls. The financial burden of supporting 
the children must once and for all shift from the government to the 
parents. If we can do this, we will be well on our way to winning our 
first battle in the war on welfare.
  Any comprehensive welfare proposal must include child support 
enforcement. Yet, the Republican Contract With America does not. Are 
the Republicans saying to the nonpaying parents that they do not have 
to support their kids? If they are here to promote personal 
responsibility and do the people's business, this critical area should 
have been included in the Personal Responsibility Act.
  At the urging of Democrats, I am pleased Chairman Shaw has agreed to 
include this child support enforcement within the Personal 
Responsibility Act.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Markey].
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The time of 
the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my time 
by 3 minutes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. That request cannot be extended in fairness 
to others that have had the 60-minute.
  Under the rules, a single Member cannot control more than an hour. 
However, if another Member would like to yield time, that would be 
appropriate.

                          ____________________