[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.
____________________