[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 103 (Thursday, September 7, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H7297-H7321]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 CHILD SUPPORT DISTRIBUTION ACT OF 2000

  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House 
Resolution 566, I call up the bill (H.R. 4678) to provide more child 
support money to families leaving welfare, to simplify the rules 
governing the assignment and the distribution of child support 
collected by States on behalf of children, to improve the collection of 
child support, to promote marriage, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 566, the bill 
is considered read for amendment.
  The text of H.R. 4678 is as follows:

                               H.R. 4678

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Child Support Distribution 
     Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.

                 TITLE I--DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD SUPPORT

Sec. 101. Distribution of child support collected by States on behalf 
              of children receiving certain welfare benefits.

        TITLE II--REVIEW AND ADJUSTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS

Sec. 201. Mandatory review and modification of child support orders for 
              TANF recipients.

            TITLE III--EXPANDED INFORMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 301. Guidelines for involvement of public non-IV-D and private 
              agencies in child support enforcement.

    Subtitle A--State Option to Provide Information and Enforcement 
    Mechanisms to Public Non-IV-D Child Support Enforcement Agencies

Sec. 311. Establishment and enforcement of child support obligations by 
              public non-IV-D child support enforcement agencies.
Sec. 312. Use of certain enforcement mechanisms.
Sec. 313. Effective date.

    Subtitle B--State Option to Provide Information and Enforcement 
        Mechanisms to Private Child Support Enforcement Agencies

Sec. 321. Establishment and enforcement of child support obligations by 
              private child support enforcement agencies.
Sec. 322. Use of certain enforcement mechanisms.
Sec. 323. Effective date.

                     TITLE IV--EXPANDED ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 401. Decrease in amount of child support arrearage triggering 
              passport denial.
Sec. 402. Use of tax refund intercept program to collect past-due child 
              support on behalf of children who are not minors.

                      TITLE V--FATHERHOOD PROGRAMS

                  Subtitle A--Fatherhood Grant Program

Sec. 501. Fatherhood grants.

        Subtitle B--Fatherhood Projects of National Significance

Sec. 511. Fatherhood projects of national significance.

                        TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 601. Change dates for abstinence evaluation.
Sec. 602. Report on undistributed child support payments.
Sec. 603. Use of new hire information to assist in administration of 
              unemployment compensation programs.
Sec. 604. Immigration provisions.
Sec. 605. Correction of errors in conforming amendments in the Welfare-
              To-Work and Child Support Amendments of 1999.
Sec. 606. Elimination of set-aside of welfare-to-work funds for 
              successful performance bonus.

                       TITLE VII--EFFECTIVE DATE

Sec. 701. Effective date.

                 TITLE I--DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD SUPPORT

     SEC. 101. DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTED BY STATES 
                   ON BEHALF OF CHILDREN RECEIVING CERTAIN WELFARE 
                   BENEFITS.

       (a) Modification of Rule Requiring Assignment of Support 
     Rights as a Condition of Receiving TANF.--Section 408(a)(3) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 608(a)(3)) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(3) No assistance for families not assigning certain 
     support rights to the state.--A State to which a grant is 
     made under section 403 shall require, as a condition of 
     providing assistance to a family under the State program 
     funded under this part, that a member of the family assign to 
     the State any rights the family member may have or acquire 
     (on behalf of the family member or of any other person for 
     whom the family member has applied for or is receiving such 
     assistance) to support from any other person for any period 
     for which the family receives assistance under the program, 
     in an amount equal to the lesser of--
       ``(A) the number of months for which the family receives or 
     has received assistance from the State (within the meaning of 
     section 457) and for which there is in effect a support order 
     on behalf of the family member or such other person, 
     multiplied by the amount of monthly support awarded by the 
     order; or
       ``(B) the total amount of assistance so provided to the 
     family.''.
       (b) Increasing Child Support Payments to Families and 
     Simplifying Child Support Distribution Rules.--
       (1) Distribution rules.--
       (A) In general.--Section 457(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     657(a)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) In General.--Subject to subsections (d) and (e), the 
     amounts collected on behalf of a family as support by a State 
     pursuant to a plan approved under this part shall be 
     distributed as follows:
       ``(1) Families receiving assistance.--In the case of a 
     family receiving assistance from the State, the State shall--
       ``(A) pay to the Federal Government the Federal share of 
     the amount collected, subject to paragraph (3)(A);
       ``(B) retain, or pay to the family, the State share of the 
     amount collected, subject to paragraph (3)(B); and
       ``(C) pay to the family any remaining amount.
       ``(2) Families that formerly received assistance.--In the 
     case of a family that formerly received assistance from the 
     State:
       ``(A) Current support.--To the extent that the amount 
     collected does not exceed the current support amount, the 
     State shall pay the amount to the family.
       ``(B) Arrearages.--To the extent that the amount collected 
     exceeds the current support amount, the State--
       ``(i) shall first pay to the family the excess amount, to 
     the extent necessary to satisfy support arrearages not 
     assigned pursuant to section 408(a)(3);
       ``(ii) if the amount collected exceeds the amount required 
     to be paid to the family under clause (i), shall--

       ``(I) pay to the Federal Government, the Federal share of 
     the excess amount described in this clause, subject to 
     paragraph (3)(A); and
       ``(II) retain, or pay to the family, the State share of the 
     excess amount described in this clause, subject to paragraph 
     (3)(B); and

       ``(iii) shall pay to the family any remaining amount.
       ``(3) Limitations.--
       ``(A) Federal reimbursements.--The total of the amounts 
     paid by the State to the Federal Government under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2) of this subsection with respect to a family shall 
     not exceed the Federal share of the amount assigned with 
     respect to the family pursuant to section 408(a)(3).
       ``(B) State reimbursements.--The total of the amounts 
     retained by the State under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this 
     subsection with

[[Page H7298]]

     respect to a family shall not exceed the State share of the 
     amount assigned with respect to the family pursuant to 
     section 408(a)(3).
       ``(4) Families that never received assistance.--In the case 
     of any other family, the State shall pay the amount collected 
     to the family.
       ``(5) Families under certain agreements.--Notwithstanding 
     paragraphs (1) through (4), in the case of an amount 
     collected for a family in accordance with a cooperative 
     agreement under section 454(33), the State shall distribute 
     the amount collected pursuant to the terms of the agreement.
       ``(6) State financing options.--To the extent that the 
     State share of the amount payable to a family for a month 
     pursuant to paragraph (2)(B) of this subsection exceeds the 
     amount that the State estimates (under procedures approved by 
     the Secretary) would have been payable to the family for the 
     month pursuant to former section 457(a)(2) (as in effect for 
     the State immediately before the date this subsection first 
     applies to the State) if such former section had remained in 
     effect, the State may elect to use the grant made to the 
     State under section 403(a) to pay the amount, or to have the 
     payment considered a qualified State expenditure for purposes 
     of section 409(a)(7), but not both. For purposes of section 
     455, any such payment from the grant made to the State under 
     section 403(a) shall be considered an amount expended for the 
     operation of the plan approved under section 454.''.
       (B) Approval of estimation procedures.--Not later than 
     October 1, 2001, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
     in consultation with the States (as defined for purposes of 
     part D of title IV of the Social Security Act), shall 
     establish the procedures to be used to make the estimate 
     described in section 457(a)(6) of such Act.
       (2) Current support amount defined.--Section 457(c) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 657(c)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(5) Current support amount.--The term `current support 
     amount' means, with respect to amounts collected as support 
     on behalf of a family, the amount designated as the monthly 
     support obligation of the noncustodial parent in the order 
     requiring the support.''.
       (3) Conversion of permanently assigned child support 
     obligations.--Section 457(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 657(b)) 
     is amended by inserting ``until October 1, 2007 (or such 
     earlier date as the State may select)'' before the period.
       (c) Ban on Recovery of Medicaid Costs for Certain Births.--
     Section 454 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 654) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (32);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (33) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (33) the following:
       ``(34) provide that the State shall not use the State 
     program operated under this part to collect any amount owed 
     to the State by reason of costs incurred under the State plan 
     approved under title XIX for the birth of a child for whom 
     support rights have been assigned pursuant to section 
     408(a)(3), 471(a)(17), or 1912.''.
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)(I)(aa) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     609(a)(7)(B)(i)(I)(aa)) is amended by striking 
     ``457(a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``457(a)(1)(B)(ii)''.
       (2) Section 404(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 604(a)) is 
     amended--
       (A) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) to fund payment of an amount pursuant to section 
     457(a)(2)(B), but only to the extent that the State properly 
     elects under section 457(a)(6) to use the grant to fund the 
     payment.''.
       (3) Section 409(a)(7)(B)(i) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     609(a)(7)(B)(i)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

       ``(V) Portions of certain child support payments collected 
     on behalf of and distributed to families no longer receiving 
     assistance.--Any amount paid by a State pursuant to section 
     457(a)(2)(B)(i), but only to the extent that the State 
     properly elects under section 457(a)(6) to have the payment 
     considered a qualified State expenditure.''.

       (e) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall 
     take effect on October 1, 2005, and shall apply to payments 
     under parts A and D of title IV of the Social Security Act 
     for calendar quarters beginning on or after such date, and 
     without regard to whether regulations to implement such 
     amendments (in the case of State programs operated under such 
     part D) are promulgated by such date.
       (2) State option to accelerate effective date.--In 
     addition, a State may elect to have the amendments made by 
     this section apply to the State and to amounts collected by 
     the State, on and after such date as the State may select 
     that is after the date of the enactment of this Act and 
     before October 1, 2005.

        TITLE II--REVIEW AND ADJUSTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS

     SEC. 201. MANDATORY REVIEW AND MODIFICATION OF CHILD SUPPORT 
                   ORDERS FOR TANF RECIPIENTS.

       (a) Review Every 3 Years.--Section 466(a)(10)(A)(i) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 666(a)(10)(A)(i)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or,'' and inserting ``or''; and
       (2) by striking ``upon the request of the State agency 
     under the State plan or of either parent,''.
       (b) Review Upon Leaving TANF.--
       (1) Notice of certain families leaving tanf.--Section 
     402(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(8) Certification that the child support enforcement 
     program will be provided notice of certan families leaving 
     tanf program.--A certification by the chief executive officer 
     of the State that the State has established procedures to 
     ensure that the State agency administering the child support 
     enforcement program under the State plan approved under part 
     D will be provided notice of the impending discontinuation of 
     assistance to an individual under the State program funded 
     under this part if the individual has custody of a child 
     whose other parent is alive and not living at home with the 
     child.''.
       (2) Review.--Section 466(a)(10) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     666(a)(10)) is amended--
       (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``upon request'';
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``this paragraph'' and 
     inserting ``subparagraph (A) or (B)''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) Review upon leaving tanf.--On receipt of a notice 
     issued pursuant to section 402(a)(8), the State child support 
     enforcement agency shall--
       ``(i) examine the case file involved;
       ``(ii) determine what actions (if any) are needed to locate 
     any noncustodial parent, establish paternity or a support 
     order, or enforce a support order in the case;
       ``(iii) immediately take the actions; and
       ``(iv) if there is a support order in the case which the 
     State has not reviewed during the 1-year period ending with 
     receipt of the notice, notwithstanding subparagraph (B), 
     review and, if appropriate, adjust the order in accordance 
     with subparagraph (A).''.

            TITLE III--EXPANDED INFORMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

     SEC. 301. GUIDELINES FOR INVOLVEMENT OF PUBLIC NON-IV-D AND 
                   PRIVATE AGENCIES IN CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services, in consultation with States (as defined for 
     purposes of part D of title IV of the Social Security Act), 
     local governments, and individuals or companies knowledgable 
     about involving entities, other than State agencies operating 
     child support enforcement programs under such part, in child 
     support enforcement, shall develop separate sets of 
     recommendations which address the participation of public 
     non-IV-D child support enforcement agencies (as defined in 
     section 466(h) of such Act) and private child support 
     enforcement agencies (as defined in section 466(i) of such 
     Act) in child support enforcement pursuant to the amendments 
     made by this title. The matters addressed by the 
     recommendations shall include substantive and procedural 
     rules which should be followed with respect to privacy 
     safeguards, data security, due process rights, administrative 
     compatibility with State and Federal automated systems, 
     eligibility requirements (such as registration, licensing, 
     and posting of bonds) for access to information and use of 
     enforcement mechanisms, recovery of costs by charging fees, 
     and penalties for violations of the rules.
       (b) Issuance of Report.--Not later than October 1, 2001, 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall issue to the 
     general public a written report containing the separate sets 
     of recommendations required by subsection (a).
       (c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.

    Subtitle A--State Option to Provide Information and Enforcement 
    Mechanisms to Public Non-IV-D Child Support Enforcement Agencies

     SEC. 311. ESTABLISHMENT AND ENFORCEMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT 
                   OBLIGATIONS BY PUBLIC NON-IV-D CHILD SUPPORT 
                   ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.

       (a) State Plan Requirements.--Section 454 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 654), as amended by section 101(c) of 
     this Act, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (33), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (34), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (34) the following:
       ``(35) at the option of the State, provide that--
       ``(A) subject to the privacy safeguards of paragraph (26), 
     the State agency responsible for administering the State plan 
     under this part may provide to a public non-IV-D child 
     support enforcement agency (as defined in section 466(h)) all 
     information in the State Directory of New Hires and any 
     information obtained through information comparisons under 
     section 453(j)(3) about an individual with respect to whom 
     the public agency is seeking to establish or enforce a child 
     support obligation, if the public agency meets such 
     requirements as the State may establish and has entered into 
     an agreement with the State under which the public agency has 
     made a binding commitment to carry out establishment and 
     enforcement activities with

[[Page H7299]]

     respect to the child support obligation subject to the same 
     data security, privacy protection, and due process 
     requirements applicable to the State agency and in accordance 
     with procedures approved by the head of the State agency;
       ``(B) the State agency may charge and collect fees from any 
     such public agency to recover costs incurred by the State 
     agency in providing information and services to the public 
     agency pursuant to this part.''.
       (b) Public Non-IV-D Child Support Enforcement Agency 
     Defined.--Section 466 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 666) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Public Non-IV-D Child Support Enforcement Agency 
     Defined.--In this part, the term `public non-IV-D child 
     support enforcement agency' means an agency, of a political 
     subdivision of a State, which is principally responsible for 
     the operation of a child support registry or for the 
     establishment or enforcement of an obligation to pay child 
     support (as defined in section 459(i)(2)) other than pursuant 
     to the State plan approved under this part.''.

     SEC. 312. USE OF CERTAIN ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS.

       (a) Federal Tax Refund Intercept.--
       (1) Additional state plan requirement.--Section 454(35) of 
     the Social Security Act, as added by section 311(a) of this 
     Act, is amended--
       (1) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) the State agency may transmit to the Secretary of the 
     Treasury pursuant to section 464 a notice submitted by a 
     public non-IV-D child support enforcement agency (in such 
     form and manner as the State agency may prescribe) that a 
     named individual owes past-due child support (as defined in 
     section 464(c)) which the public agency has agreed to 
     collect, and may collect from the public agency any fee which 
     the State is required to pay for the cost of applying the 
     offset procedure in the case.''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--Section 464 of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 664) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(2)(A)--
       (i) in the 1st sentence, by striking
     ``, and that the State agency'' and inserting ``or which a 
     public non-IV-D child support enforcement agency in the State 
     has agreed to collect, and that the State agency (or the 
     public non-IV-D child support enforcement agency)''; and
       (ii) in the 2nd sentence, by striking ``he'' and inserting 
     ``the Secretary of the Treasury''; and
       (B) in subsection (a)(3)(A)--
       (i) in the 1st sentence, by inserting ``(or, in the case 
     the State is acting on behalf of a public non-IV-D child 
     support enforcement agency, the public non-IV-D child support 
     enforcement agency)'' after ``the State''; and
       (ii) in the 2nd sentence, by inserting ``(or, as 
     applicable, the public non-IV-D child support enforcement 
     agency's)'' after ``State's''.
       (b) Reporting Arrearages to Credit Bureaus.--Section 
     466(a)(7)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 666(a)(7)(A)) is amended 
     by inserting ``, and allowing the State to include in the 
     report similar information provided (in such form and manner 
     as the State agency may prescribe) by a public non-IV-D child 
     support enforcement agency'' before the period.
       (c) Passport Sanctions.--Section 454(31) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 654(31)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
       (2) by adding ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) the State agency may include in the certification any 
     such determination, notice of which is provided to the State 
     agency (in such form and manner as the State agency may 
     require) by a public non-IV-D child support enforcement 
     agency;''.
       (d) Financial Institution Data Matches.--
       (1) In general.--Section 466(a)(17) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     666(a)(17)) is amended by redesignating subparagraph (D) as 
     subparagraph (E) and inserting after subparagraph (C) the 
     following:
       ``(D) Coordination with public non-iv-d child support 
     enforcement agencies.--The identifying information described 
     in subparagraph (A)(i) which is provided by the State may 
     include any such identifying information that is provided to 
     the State agency by a public non-IV-D child support 
     enforcement agency in such form and manner as the State 
     agency may require.''.
       (2) Liability protections.--Section 469A(d) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 669a(d)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(3) State child support enforcement agency.--The term 
     `State child support enforcement agency' includes, with 
     respect to a financial record of an individual, a public non-
     IV-D child support enforcement agency if the public agency is 
     seeking to establish or enforce a child support obligation 
     with respect to the individual pursuant to an agreement 
     described in section 454(35)(A).''.
       (e) Use of Income Withholding for Unemployment Insurance 
     Benefits.--
       (1) Disclosure of wage information.--Section 303(e)(1) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 503(e)(1)) is amended by striking the 
     second sentence and inserting the following:
     ``For purposes of this subsection, the term `child support 
     obligations' means obligations to pay child support (as 
     defined in section 459(i)(2) of the Social Security Act).''.
       (2) Authority to withhold.--Section 303(e)(2)(A) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 503(e)(2)(A)) is amended--
       (A) in clause (i), by inserting ``and the identity and 
     location of the State or local child support enforcement 
     agency enforcing the obligations (to the extent known)'' 
     before the comma;
       (B) in clause (iii)(III), by striking ``462(e)'' and 
     inserting ``459(i)(5)''; and
       (C) in the matter following clause (iv), by striking 
     ``his'' and inserting ``the individual's''.
       (3) Conforming amendment.--Section 303(e)(4) of such Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 503(e)(4)) is amended by striking ``the last 
     sentence of paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``section 454 which 
     has been approved by the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services under part D of title IV or pursuant to an agreement 
     described in section 454(35)(A)''.

     SEC. 313. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as provided in section 701(b), the amendments made 
     by this subtitle shall take effect on October 1, 2002, and 
     shall apply to payments under part D of title IV of the 
     Social Security Act for calendar quarters beginning on or 
     after such date, and without regard to whether regulations to 
     implement such amendments are promulgated by such date.

    Subtitle B--State Option To Provide Information and Enforcement 
        Mechanisms to Private Child Support Enforcement Agencies

     SEC. 321. ESTABLISHMENT AND ENFORCEMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT 
                   OBLIGATIONS BY PRIVATE CHILD SUPPORT 
                   ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.

       (a) State Plan Requirements.--Section 454 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 654), as amended by sections 101(c), 
     311(a), and 312(a)(1) of this Act, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (34), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (35), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (35) the following:
       ``(36) at the option of the State, provide that--
       ``(A) subject to the privacy safeguards of paragraph (26), 
     the State agency responsible for administering the State plan 
     under this part may provide to a private child support 
     enforcement agency (as defined in section 466(i)) any 
     information in the State Directory of New Hires and any 
     information obtained through information comparisons under 
     section 453(j)(3) about an individual with respect to whom 
     the private agency is seeking to establish or enforce a child 
     support obligation, if the private agency meets such 
     requirements as the State may establish and has entered into 
     an agreement with the State under which the private agency 
     has made a binding commitment to carry out establishment and 
     enforcement activities with respect to the child support 
     obligation subject to the same data security, privacy 
     protection, and due process requirements applicable to the 
     State agency and in accordance with procedures approved by 
     the head of the State agency;
       ``(B) the State agency may charge and collect fees from any 
     such private agency to recover costs incurred by the State 
     agency in providing information and services to the private 
     agency pursuant to this part.''.
       (b) Private Child Support Enforcement Agency Defined.--
     Section 466 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 666), as amended by 
     section 311(b) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(i) Private Child Support Enforcement Agency Defined.--In 
     this part, the term `private child support enforcement 
     agency' means a person or any other non-public entity which 
     seeks to establish or enforce an obligation to pay child 
     support (as defined in section 459(i)(2)).''.

     SEC. 322. USE OF CERTAIN ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS.

       (a) Federal Tax Refund Intercept.--
       (1) Additional state plan requirement.--Section 454(36) of 
     the Social Security Act, as added by section 321(a) of this 
     Act, is amended--
       (A) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (A) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) the State agency may transmit to the Secretary of the 
     Treasury pursuant to section 464 any notice submitted by a 
     private child support enforcement agency (in such form and 
     manner as the State agency may prescribe) that a named 
     individual owes past-due child support (as defined in section 
     464(c)) which the private agency has agreed to collect, and 
     may collect from the private agency any fee which the State 
     is required to pay for the cost of applying the offset 
     procedure in the case.''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--Section 464(a) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 664(a)), as amended by section 312(a)(2) of this Act, 
     is amended by inserting ``(or private)'' after ``public non-
     IV-D'' each place it appears.
       (b) Reporting Arrearages to Credit Bureaus.--Section 
     466(a)(7)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 666(a)(7)(A)), as amended 
     by section 312(b) of this Act, is amended by inserting ``(or 
     private)'' after ``public non-IV-D''.
       (c) Passport Sanctions.--Section 454(31)(C) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 654(31)), as amended by section 312(c) of this Act, is 
     amended by inserting ``(or private)'' after ``public non-IV-
     D''.
       (d) Financial Institution Data Matches.--
       (1) In general.--Section 466(a)(17)(D) of such Act, as 
     added by section 311(d) of this Act, is amended by inserting 
     ``(or private)'' after ``public non-IV-D''.

[[Page H7300]]

       (2) Liability protections.--Section 469A(d)(3) of such Act, 
     as added by section 312(d)(2) of this Act, is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``(or private)'' after ``public non-IV-
     D'';
       (B) by inserting ``(or private) after ``the public'' each 
     place it appears; and
       (C) by inserting ``(or 454(36)(A))'' before the period.
       (e) Use of Income Withholding for Unemployment Insurance 
     Benefits.--Section 303(e)(4) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     503(e)(4)), as amended by section 312(e)(3) of this Act, is 
     amended by inserting ``, and includes a private child support 
     enforcement agency (as defined in section 466(i)) with 
     respect to an individual who is an applicant for, or who is 
     determined to be eligible for unemployment compensation if 
     the State in which the private child support enforcement 
     agency is located confirms that the private child support 
     enforcement agency is seeking to establish, modify, or 
     enforce a child support obligation of the individual pursuant 
     to an agreement described in section 454(36)(A)'' before the 
     period.

     SEC. 323. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as provided in section 801(b), the amendments made 
     by this subtitle shall take effect on October 1, 2003, and 
     shall apply to payments under part D of title IV of the 
     Social Security Act for calendar quarters beginning on or 
     after such date, and without regard to whether regulations to 
     implement such amendments are promulgated by such date.

                     TITLE IV--EXPANDED ENFORCEMENT

     SEC. 401. DECREASE IN AMOUNT OF CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGE 
                   TRIGGERING PASSPORT DENIAL.

       Section 452(k) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     652(k)) is amended by striking ``$5,000'' and inserting 
     ``$2,500''.

     SEC. 402. USE OF TAX REFUND INTERCEPT PROGRAM TO COLLECT 
                   PAST-DUE CHILD SUPPORT ON BEHALF OF CHILDREN 
                   WHO ARE NOT MINORS.

       Section 464 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 664) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)(A), by striking ``(as that term is 
     defined for purposes of this paragraph under subsection 
     (c))''; and
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     as used in'' and inserting ``In''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``(whether or not a minor)'' after ``a 
     child'' each place it appears; and
       (B) by striking paragraphs (2) and (3).

                      TITLE V--FATHERHOOD PROGRAMS

                  Subtitle A--Fatherhood Grant Program

     SEC. 501. FATHERHOOD GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--Part A of title IV of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 601-619) is amended by inserting after section 
     403 the following:

     ``SEC. 403A. FATHERHOOD PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to make 
     grants available to public and private entities for projects 
     designed to--
       ``(1) promote marriage through counseling, mentoring, 
     disseminating information about the advantages of marriage, 
     enhancing relationship skills, teaching how to control 
     aggressive behavior, and other methods;
       ``(2) promote successful parenting through counseling, 
     mentoring, disseminating information about good parenting 
     practices including prepregnancy, family planning, training 
     parents in money management, encouraging child support 
     payments, encouraging regular visitation between fathers and 
     their children, and other methods; and
       ``(3) help fathers and their families avoid or leave cash 
     welfare provided by the program under part A and improve 
     their economic status by providing work first services, job 
     search, job training, subsidized employment, career-advancing 
     education, job retention, job enhancement, and other methods.
       ``(b) Fatherhood Grants.--
       ``(1) Applications.--An entity desiring a grant to carry 
     out a project described in subsection (a) may submit to the 
     Secretary an application that contains the following:
       ``(A) A description of the project and how the project will 
     be carried out.
       ``(B) A description of how the project will address all 
     three of the purposes of this section.
       ``(C) A written commitment by the entity that the project 
     will allow an individual to participate in the project only 
     if the individual is--
       ``(i) a father of a child who is, or within the past 24 
     months has been, a recipient of assistance or services under 
     a State program funded under this part;
       ``(ii) a father, including an expectant or married father, 
     whose income (net of court-ordered child support) is less 
     than 150 percent of the poverty line (as defined in section 
     673(2) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, 
     including any revision required by such section, applicable 
     to a family of the size involved); or
       ``(iii) a parent referred to in paragraph (3)(A)(iii).
       ``(D) A written commitment by the entity that the entity 
     will provide for the project, from funds obtained from non-
     Federal sources, amounts (including in-kind contributions) 
     equal in value to--
       ``(i) 20 percent of the amount of any grant made to the 
     entity under this subsection; or
       ``(ii) such lesser percentage as the Secretary deems 
     appropriate (which shall be not less than 10 percent) of such 
     amount, if the application demonstrates that there are 
     circumstances that limit the ability of the entity to raise 
     funds or obtain resources.
       ``(E) A written commitment by the entity that the entity 
     will make available to each individual participating in the 
     project education about alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs and 
     the effects of abusing such substances, and information about 
     HIV/AIDS and its transmission.
       ``(2) Consideration of applications by interagency panel.--
       ``(A) Establishment.--There is established a panel to be 
     known as the `Fatherhood Grants Recommendations Panel' (in 
     this subparagraph referred to as the `Panel').
       ``(B) Membership.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Panel shall be composed of 10 
     members, as follows:

       ``(I) Two members of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(II) Two members of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     Secretary of Labor.
       ``(III) Two members of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives.
       ``(IV) One member of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means of 
     the House of Representatives.
       ``(V) Two members of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     Chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate.
       ``(VI) One member of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Finance of the 
     Senate.

       ``(ii) Qualifications.--An individual shall not be eligible 
     to serve on the Panel unless the individual has experience in 
     programs for fathers, programs for the poor, programs for 
     children, program administration, or program research.
       ``(iii) Conflicts of interest.--An individual shall not be 
     eligible to serve on the Panel if such service would pose a 
     conflict of interest for the individual.
       ``(iv) Timing of appointments.--The appointment of members 
     to the Panel shall be completed not later than April 1, 2001.
       ``(C) Duties.--
       ``(i) Review and make recommendations on project 
     applications.--The Panel shall review all applications 
     submitted pursuant to paragraph (1), and make recommendations 
     to the Secretary regarding which applicants should be awarded 
     grants under this subsection, with due regard for the 
     provisions of paragraph (3), but shall not recommend that a 
     project be awarded such a grant if the application describing 
     the project does not attempt to meet the requirement of 
     paragraph (1)(B).
       ``(ii) Timing.--The Panel shall make such recommendations 
     not later than October 1, 2001.
       ``(D) Term of office.--Each member appointed to the Panel 
     shall serve for the life of the Panel.
       ``(E) Prohibition on compensation.--Members of the Panel 
     may not receive pay, allowances, or benefits by reason of 
     their service on the Panel.
       ``(F) Travel expenses.--Each member of the Panel shall 
     receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, in accordance with sections 5702 and 5703 of 
     title 5, United States Code.
       ``(G) Meetings.--The Panel shall meet as often as is 
     necessary to complete the business of the Panel.
       ``(H) Chairperson.--The Chairperson of the Panel shall be 
     designated by the Secretary at the time of appointment.
       ``(I) Staff of federal agencies.--The Secretary may detail 
     any personnel of the Department of Health and Human Services 
     and the Secretary of Labor may detail any personnel of the 
     Department of Labor to the Panel to assist the Panel in 
     carrying out its duties under this paragraph.
       ``(J) Obtaining official data.--The Panel may secure 
     directly from any department or agency of the United States 
     information necessary to enable it to carry out this 
     paragraph. On request of the Chairperson of the Panel, the 
     head of the department or agency shall furnish that 
     information to the Panel.
       ``(K) Mails.--The Panel may use the United States mails in 
     the same manner and under the same conditions as other 
     departments and agencies of the United States.
       ``(L) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate on October 1, 
     2001.
       ``(3) Rules governing grants.--
       ``(A) Grant awards.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall award matching 
     grants, on a competitive basis, among entities submitting 
     applications therefor which meet the requirements of 
     paragraph (1), in amounts that take into account the written 
     commitments referred to in paragraph (1)(D).
       ``(ii) Timing.--On October 1, 2001, the Secretary shall 
     award not more than $140,000,000 in matching grants after 
     considering the recommendations submitted pursuant to 
     paragraph (2)(C)(i).
       ``(iii) Nondiscrimination.--The provisions of this section 
     shall be applied and administered so as to ensure that 
     mothers, expectant mothers, and married mothers are eligible 
     for benefits and services under projects awarded grants under 
     this section on the same basis as fathers, expectant fathers, 
     and married fathers.
       ``(B) Preferences.--In determining which entities to which 
     to award grants under this subsection, the Secretary shall 
     give preference to an entity--
       ``(i) to the extent that the application submitted by the 
     entity describes actions that

[[Page H7301]]

     the entity will take that are designed to encourage or 
     facilitate the payment of child support, including but not 
     limited to--

       ``(I) obtaining a written commitment by the agency 
     responsible for administering the State plan approved under 
     part D for the State in which the project is to be carried 
     out that the State will voluntarily cancel child support 
     arrearages owed to the State by the father as a result of the 
     father providing various supports to the family such as 
     maintaining a regular child support payment schedule or 
     living with his children;
       ``(II) obtaining a written commitment by the entity that 
     the entity will help participating fathers who cooperate with 
     the agency in improving their credit rating; and
       ``(III) helping fathers arrange and maintain a consistent 
     schedule of visits with their children, unless it would be 
     unsafe;

       ``(ii) to the extent that the application includes written 
     agreements of cooperation with other private and governmental 
     agencies, including the State or local program funded under 
     this part, the local Workforce Investment Board, the State or 
     local program funded under part D, community-based domestic 
     violence programs, and the State or local program funded 
     under part E, which should include a description of the 
     services each such agency will provide to fathers 
     participating in the project described in the application;
       ``(iii) to the extent that the application describes a 
     project that will enroll a high percentage of project 
     participants within 6 months before or after the birth of the 
     child; or
       ``(iv) to the extent that the application sets forth clear 
     and practical methods by which fathers will be recruited to 
     participate in the project.
       ``(C) Minimum percentage of recipients of grant funds to be 
     nongovernmental (including faith-based) organizations.--Not 
     less than 75 percent of the entities awarded grants under 
     this subsection in each fiscal year (other than entities 
     awarded such grants pursuant to the preferences required by 
     subparagraph (B)) shall be awarded to--
       ``(i) nongovernmental (including faith-based) 
     organizations; or
       ``(ii) governmental organizations that pass through to 
     organizations referred to in clause (i) at least 50 percent 
     of the amount of the grant.
       ``(D) Diversity of projects.--
       ``(i) In general.--In determining which entities to which 
     to award grants under this subsection, the Secretary shall 
     attempt to achieve a balance among entities of differing 
     sizes, entities in differing geographic areas, entities in 
     urban versus rural areas, and entities employing differing 
     methods of achieving the purposes of this section.
       ``(ii) Report to the congress.--Within 90 days after each 
     award of grants under subparagraph (A)(ii), the Secretary 
     shall submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate 
     a brief report on the diversity of projectes selected to 
     receive funds under the grant program. The report shall 
     include a comparison of funding for projects located in urban 
     areas, projects located in suburban areas, and projects 
     located in rural areas.
       ``(E) Payment of grant in four equal annual installments.--
     During the fiscal year in which a grant is awarded under this 
     subsection and each of the succeeding three fiscal years, the 
     Secretary shall provide to the entity awarded the grant an 
     amount equal to \1/4\ of the amount of the grant.
       ``(4) Use of funds.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each entity to which a grant is made 
     under this subsection shall use grant funds provided under 
     this subsection in accordance with the application requesting 
     the grant, the requirements of this subsection, and the 
     regulations prescribed under this subsection, and may use the 
     grant funds to support community-wide initiatives to address 
     the purposes of this section.
       ``(B) Nondisplacement.--
       ``(i) In general.--An adult in a work activity described in 
     section 407(d) which is funded, in whole or in part, by funds 
     provided under this section shall not be employed or 
     assigned--

       ``(I) when any other individual is on layoff from the same 
     or any substantially equivalent job; or
       ``(II) if the employer has terminated the employment of any 
     regular employee or otherwise caused an involuntary reduction 
     of its workforce in order to fill the vacancy so created with 
     such an adult.

       ``(ii) Grievance procedure.--

       ``(I) In general.--Complaints alleging violations of clause 
     (i) in a State may be resolved--

       ``(aa) if the State has established a grievance procedure 
     under section 403(a)(5)(I)(iv), pursuant to the grievance 
     procedure; or
       ``(bb) otherwise, pursuant to the grievance procedure 
     established by the State under section 407(f)(3).

       ``(II) Forfeiture of grant if grievance procedure not 
     available.--If a complaint referred to in subclause (I) is 
     made against an entity to which a grant has been made under 
     this section with respect to a project, and the complaint 
     cannot be brought to, or cannot be resolved within 90 days 
     after being brought, by a grievance procedure referred to in 
     subclause (I), then the entity shall immediately return to 
     the Secretary all funds provided to the entity under this 
     section for the project, and the Secretary shall immediately 
     rescind the grant.

       ``(C) Rule of construction.--This section shall not be 
     construed to require the participation of a father in a 
     project funded under this section to be discontinued by the 
     project on the basis of changed economic circumstances of the 
     father.
       ``(D) Rule of construction on marriage.--This section shall 
     not be construed to authorize the Secretary to define 
     marriage for purposes of this section.
       ``(E) Penalty for misuse of grant funds.--If the Secretary 
     determines that an entity to which a grant is made under this 
     subsection has used any amount of the grant in violation of 
     subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall require the entity to 
     remit to the Secretary an amount equal to the amount so used, 
     plus all remaining grant funds, and the entity shall 
     thereafter be ineligible for any grant under this subsection.
       ``(F) Remittance of unused grant funds.--Each entity to 
     which a grant is awarded under this subsection shall remit to 
     the Secretary all funds paid under the grant that remain at 
     the end of the fifth fiscal year ending after the initial 
     grant award.
       ``(5) Authority of agencies to exchange information.--Each 
     agency administering a program funded under this part or a 
     State plan approved under part D may share the name, address, 
     telephone number, and identifying case number information in 
     the State program funded under this part, of fathers for 
     purposes of assisting in determining the eligibility of 
     fathers to participate in projects receiving grants under 
     this section, and in contacting fathers potentially eligible 
     to participate in the projects, subject to all applicable 
     privacy laws.
       ``(6) Evaluation.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Labor, shall, directly or by grant, contract, or 
     interagency agreement, conduct an evaluation of projects 
     funded under this section (other than under subsection 
     (c)(1)). The evaluation shall assess, among other outcomes 
     selected by the Secretary, effects of the projects on 
     marriage, parenting, employment, earnings, and payment of 
     child support. In selecting projects for the evaluation, the 
     Secretary should include projects that, in the Secretary's 
     judgment, are most likely to impact the matters described in 
     the purposes of this section. In conducting the evaluation, 
     random assignment should be used wherever possible.
       ``(7) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as may be necessary to carry out this subsection.
       ``(8) Limitation on applicability of other provisions of 
     this part.--Sections 404 through 410 shall not apply to this 
     section or to amounts paid under this section, and shall not 
     be applied to an entity solely by reason of receipt of funds 
     pursuant to this section. A project shall not be considered a 
     State program funded under this part solely by reason of 
     receipt of funds paid under this section.
       ``(9) Funding.--
       ``(A) In general.--
       ``(i) Interagency panel.--Of the amounts made available 
     pursuant to section 403(a)(1)(E) to carry out this section 
     for fiscal year 2001, a total of $150,000 shall be made 
     available for the interagency panel established by paragraph 
     (2) of this subsection.
       ``(ii) Grants.--Of the amounts made available pursuant to 
     section 403(a)(1)(E) to carry out this section for fiscal 
     years 2002 through 2005, a total of $140,000,000 shall be 
     made available for grants under this subsection.
       ``(iii) Evaluation.--Of the amounts made available pursuant 
     to section 403(a)(1)(E) to carry out this section for fiscal 
     years 2001 through 2006, a total of $6,000,000 shall be made 
     available for the evaluation required by paragraph (6) of 
     this subsection.
       ``(B) Availability.--
       ``(i) Grant funds.--The amounts made available pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A)(ii) shall remain available until the end of 
     fiscal year 2006.
       ``(ii) Evaluation funds.--The amounts made available 
     pursuant to subparagraph (A)(iii) shall remain available 
     until the end of fiscal year 2008.''.
       (b) Funding.--Section 403(a)(1)(E) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     603(a)(1)(E)) is amended by inserting ``, and for fiscal 
     years 2001 through 2007, such sums as are necessary to carry 
     out section 403A'' before the period.
       (c) Applicability of Charitable Choice Provisions of 
     Welfare Reform.--Section 104 of the Personal Responsibility 
     and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 
     604a) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(l) Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this 
     section, this section shall apply to any entity to which 
     funds have been provided under section 403A of the Social 
     Security Act in the same manner in which this section applies 
     to States, and, for purposes of this section, any project for 
     which such funds are so provided shall be considered a 
     program described in subsection (a)(2).''.

        Subtitle B--Fatherhood Projects of National Significance

     SEC. 511. FATHERHOOD PROJECTS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.

       Section 403A of the Social Security Act, as added by 
     subtitle A of this title, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(c) Fatherhood Projects of National Significance.--
       ``(1) National clearinghouse.--The Secretary shall award a 
     $5,000,000 grant to a nationally recognized, nonprofit 
     fatherhood promotion organization with at least 4 years of 
     experience in designing and disseminating a national public 
     education campaign, including the production and successful 
     placement of television, radio, and print public

[[Page H7302]]

     service announcements which promote the importance of 
     responsible fatherhood, and with at least 4 years experience 
     providing consultation and training to community-based 
     organizations interested in implementing fatherhood outreach, 
     support, or skill development programs with an emphasis on 
     promoting married fatherhood as the ideal, to--
       ``(A) develop, promote, and distribute to interested 
     States, local governments, public agencies, and private 
     nonprofit organizations, including charitable and religious 
     organizations, a media campaign that encourages the 
     appropriate involvement of both parents in the life of any 
     child of the parents, and encourages such organizations to 
     develope or sponsor programs that specifically address the 
     issue of responsible fatherhood and the advantages conferred 
     on children by marriage;
       ``(B) develop a national clearinghouse to assist States, 
     communities, and private entities in efforts to promote and 
     support marriage and responsible fatherhood by collecting, 
     evaluating, and making available (through the Internet and by 
     other means) to all interested parties, information regarding 
     media campaigns and fatherhood programs;
       ``(C) develop and distribute materials that are for use by 
     entities described in subparagraph (A) or (B) and that help 
     young adults manage their money, develop the knowledge and 
     skills needed to promote successful marriages, plan for 
     future expenditures and investments, and plan for retirement;
       ``(D) develop and distribute materials that are for use by 
     entities described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) and that list 
     all the sources of public support for education and training 
     that are available to young adults, including government 
     spending programs as well as benefits under Federal and State 
     tax laws.
       ``(2) Multicity fatherhood projects.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall award a $5,000,000 
     grant to each of two nationally recognized nonprofit 
     fatherhood promotion organizations which meet the 
     requirements of subparagraph (B), at least one of which 
     organizations meets the requirement of subparagraph (C).
       ``(B) Requirements.--The requirements of this subparagraph 
     are the following:
       ``(i) The organization must have several years of 
     experience in designing and conducting programs that meet the 
     purposes described in paragraph (1).
       ``(ii) The organization must have experience in 
     simultaneously conducting such programs in more than one 
     major metropolitan area and in coordinating such programs 
     with local government agencies and private, nonprofit 
     agencies, including State or local agencies responsible for 
     conducting the program under part D and Workfore Investment 
     Boards.
       ``(iii) The organization must submit to the Secretary an 
     application that meets all the conditions applicable to the 
     organization under this section and that provides for 
     projects to be conducted in three major metropolitan areas.
       ``(C) Use of married couples to deliver services in the 
     inner city.--The requirement of this subparagraph is that the 
     organization has extensive experience in using married 
     couples to deliver program services in the inner city.
       ``(3) Payment of grants in four equal annual 
     installments.--During each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005, 
     the Secretary shall provide to each entity awarded a grant 
     under this subsection an amount equal to \1/4\ of the amount 
     of the grant.
       ``(4) Funding.--
       ``(A) In general.--Of the amounts made available pursuant 
     to section 403(a)(1)(E) to carry out this section, $3,750,000 
     shall be made available for grants under this subsection for 
     each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005.
       ``(B) Availability.--The amounts made available pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) shall remain available until the end of 
     fiscal year 2005.''.

                        TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

     SEC. 601. CHANGE DATES FOR ABSTINENCE EVALUATION.

       (a) In General.--Section 403(a)(5)(G)(iii) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)(G)(iii)), as amended by 
     section 606(a) of this Act, is amended by striking ``2001'' 
     and inserting ``2005''.
       (b) Interim Report Required.--Section 403(a)(5)(G) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)(G)), as so amended, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(iv) Interim report.--Not later than January 1, 2002, the 
     Secretary shall submit to the Congress a interim report on 
     the evaluations referred to in clause (i).''.

     SEC. 602. REPORT ON UNDISTRIBUTED CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS.

       Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
     submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate a 
     report on the procedures that the States use generally to 
     locate custodial parents for whom child support has been 
     collected but not yet distributed due to a change in address. 
     The report shall include an estimate of the total amount of 
     such undistributed child support and the average length of 
     time it takes for such child support to be distributed. The 
     Secretary shall include in the report recommendations as to 
     whether additional procedures should be established at the 
     State or Federal level to expedite the payment of 
     undistributed child support.

     SEC. 603. USE OF NEW HIRE INFORMATION TO ASSIST IN 
                   ADMINISTRATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 453(j) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 653(j)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(7) Information comparisons and disclosure to assist in 
     administration of unemployment compensation programs.--
       ``(A) In general.--If a State agency responsible for the 
     administration of an unemployment compensation program under 
     Federal or State law transmits to the Secretary the name and 
     social security account number of an individual, the 
     Secretary shall, if the information in the National Directory 
     of New Hires indicates that the individual may be employed, 
     disclose to the State agency the name, address, and employer 
     identification number of any putative employer of the 
     individual, subject to this paragraph.
       ``(B) Condition on disclosure.--The Secretary shall make a 
     disclosure under subparagraph (A) only to the extent that the 
     Secretary determines that the disclosure would not interfere 
     with the effective operation of the program under this part.
       ``(C) Use of information.--A State agency may use 
     information provided under this paragraph only for purposes 
     of administering a program referred to in subparagraph 
     (A).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on October 1, 2000.

     SEC. 604. IMMIGRATION PROVISIONS.

       (a) Nonimmigrant Aliens Ineligible to Receive Visas and 
     Excluded From Admission for Nonpayment of Child Support.--
       (1) In general.--Section 212(a)(10) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(10)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(F) Nonpayment of child support.--
       ``(i) In general.--Any nonimmigrant alien is inadmissible 
     who is legally obligated under a judgment, decree, or order 
     to pay child support (as defined in section 459(i) of the 
     Social Security Act), and whose failure to pay such child 
     support has resulted in an arrearage exceeding $2,500, until 
     child support payments under the judgment, decree, or order 
     are satisfied or the nonimmigrant alien is in compliance with 
     an approved payment agreement.
       ``(ii) Waiver authorized.--The Attorney General may waive 
     the application of clause (i) in the case of an alien, if the 
     Attorney General--

       ``(I) has received a request for the waiver from the court 
     or administrative agency having jurisdiction over the 
     judgment, decree, or order obligating the alien to pay child 
     support that is referred to in such clause; or
       ``(II) determines that there are prevailing humanitarian or 
     public interest concerns.''.

       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection 
     shall take effect 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (b) Authorization to Serve Legal Process in Child Support 
     Cases on Certain Arriving Aliens.--
       (1) In general.--Section 235(d) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1225(d)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(5) Authority to serve process in child support cases.--
       ``(A) In general.--To the extent consistent with State law, 
     immigration officers are authorized to serve on any alien who 
     is an applicant for admission to the United States legal 
     process with respect to any action to enforce or establish a 
     legal obligation of an individual to pay child support (as 
     defined in section 459(i) of the Social Security Act).
       ``(B) Definition.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the 
     term `legal process' means any writ, order, summons or other 
     similar process, which is issued by--
       ``(i) a court or an administrative agency of competent 
     jurisdiction in any State, territory, or possession of the 
     United States; or
       ``(ii) an authorized official pursuant to an order of such 
     a court or agency or pursuant to State or local law.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection 
     shall apply to aliens applying for admission to the United 
     States on or after 180 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.
       (c) Authorization to Share Child Support Enforcement 
     Information to Enforce Immigration and Naturalization Law.--
       (1) Secretarial responsibility.--Section 452 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 652) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(m) If the Secretary receives a certification by a State 
     agency, in accordance with section 454(37), that an 
     individual who is a nonimmigrant alien (as defined in section 
     101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act) owes 
     arrearages of child support in an amount exceeding $2,500, 
     the Secretary may, at the request of the State agency, the 
     Secretary of State, or the Attorney General, or on the 
     Secretary's own initiative, provide such certification to the 
     Secretary of State and the Attorney General information in 
     order to enable them to carry out their responsibilities 
     under sections 212(a)(10) and 235(d) of such Act.''.
       (2) State agency responsibility.--Section 454 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 654), as amended by sections 101(c), 
     311(a), 312(a)(1), 321(a), and 322(a) of this Act, is 
     amended--

[[Page H7303]]

       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (35);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (36) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (36) the following:
       ``(37) provide that the State agency will have in effect a 
     procedure for certifying to the Secretary, in such format and 
     accompained by such supporting documentation as the Secretary 
     may require, determinations that nonimmigrant aliens owe 
     arrearages of child support in an amount exceeding 
     $2,500.''.

     SEC. 605. CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN CONFORMING AMENDMENTS IN 
                   THE WELFARE-TO-WORK AND CHILD SUPPORT 
                   AMENDMENTS OF 1999.

       (a) In General.--Section 403(a)(5) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)), as amended by section 606(a) of 
     this Act, is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``$1,500,000'' and 
     inserting ``$15,000,000'';
       (2) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``$900,000'' and 
     inserting ``$9,000,000'';
       (3) in subparagraph (G)(i), by striking ``$300,000'' and 
     inserting ``$3,000,000''.
       (b) Retroactivity.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     of this section shall take effect as if included in the 
     enactment of section 806 of H.R. 3424 of the 106th Congress 
     by section 1000(a)(4) of Public Law 106-113.

     SEC. 606. ELIMINATION OF SET-ASIDE OF WELFARE-TO-WORK FUNDS 
                   FOR SUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE BONUS.

       (a) In General.--Section 403(a)(5) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)) is amended by striking subparagraph 
     (E) and redesignating subparagraphs (F) through (K) as 
     subparagraphs (E) through (J), respectively.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 403(a)(5)(A)(i) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     603(a)(5)(A)(i)) is amended by striking ``subparagraph (I)'' 
     and inserting ``subparagraph (H)''.
       (2) Subclause (I) of each of subparagraphs (A)(iv) and 
     (B)(v) of section 403(a)(5) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     603(a)(5)(A)(iv)(I) and (B)(v)(I)) is amended--
       (A) in item (aa)--
       (i) by striking ``(I)'' and inserting ``(H)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``(G), and (H)'' and inserting ``and 
     (G)''; and
       (B) in item (bb), by striking ``(F)'' and inserting 
     ``(E)''.
       (3) Section 403(a)(5)(B)(v) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     603(a)(5)(B)) is amended in the matter preceding subclause 
     (I) by striking ``(I)'' and inserting ``(H)''.
       (4) Subparagraphs (E) and (F) of section 403(a)(5) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)(F) and (G)), as so redesignated by 
     subsection (a) of this section, are each amended by striking 
     ``(I)'' and inserting ``(H)''.
       (5) Section 412(a)(3)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     612(a)(3)(A)) is amended by striking ``403(a)(5)(I)'' and 
     inserting ``403(a)(5)(H)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

                       TITLE VII--EFFECTIVE DATE

     SEC. 701. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in sections 101(e), 
     301(c), 313, 323, 603(b), 605(b) and 606, and in subsection 
     (b) of this section, this Act and the amendments made by this 
     Act shall take effect on October 1, 2001, and shall apply to 
     payments under part D of title IV of the Social Security Act 
     for calendar quarters beginning on or after such date, and 
     without regard to whether regulations to implement such 
     amendments are promulgated by such date.
       (b) Delay Permitted if State Legislation Required.--In the 
     case of a State plan approved under section 454 of the Social 
     Security Act which requires State legislation (other than 
     legislation appropriating funds) in order for the plan to 
     meet the additional requirements imposed by the amendments 
     made by this Act, the State plan shall not be regarded as 
     failing to comply with the additional requirements solely on 
     the basis of the failure of the plan to meet the additional 
     requirements before the 1st day of the 1st calendar quarter 
     beginning after the close of the 1st regular session of the 
     State legislature that begins after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act. For purposes of the previous sentence, in the 
     case of a State that has a 2-year legislative session, each 
     year of such session shall be deemed to be a separate regular 
     session of the State legislature.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The amendment printed in the bill, modified 
by the amendment permitted by the order of the House of today, is 
adopted.
  The text of H.R. 4678, as amended, as modified, is as follows:

                               H.R. 4678

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Child Support Distribution 
     Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.

                 TITLE I--DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD SUPPORT

Sec. 101. Distribution of child support collected by States on behalf 
              of children receiving certain welfare benefits.

        TITLE II--REVIEW AND ADJUSTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS

Sec. 201. Mandatory review and modification of child support orders for 
              TANF recipients.

    TITLE III--DEMONSTRATION OF EXPANDED INFORMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 301. Guidelines for involvement of public non-IV-D child support 
              enforcement agencies in child support enforcement.
Sec. 302. Demonstrations involving establishment and enforcement of 
              child support obligations by public non-IV-D child 
              support enforcement agencies.
Sec. 303. GAO report to Congress on private child support enforcement 
              agencies.
Sec. 304. Effective date.

                     TITLE IV--EXPANDED ENFORCEMENT

Sec. 401. Decrease in amount of child support arrearage triggering 
              passport denial.
Sec. 402. Use of tax refund intercept program to collect past-due child 
              support on behalf of children who are not minors.
Sec. 403. Garnishment of compensation paid to veterans for service-
              connected disabilities in order to enforce child support 
              obligations.

                      TITLE V--FATHERHOOD PROGRAMS

                  Subtitle A--Fatherhood Grant Program

Sec. 501. Fatherhood grants.

        Subtitle B--Fatherhood Projects of National Significance

Sec. 511. Fatherhood projects of national significance.

                        TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 601. Change dates for abstinence evaluation.
Sec. 602. Report on undistributed child support payments.
Sec. 603. Use of new hire information to assist in administration of 
              unemployment compensation programs.
Sec. 604. Immigration provisions.
Sec. 605. Correction of errors in conforming amendments in the Welfare-
              To-Work and Child Support Amendments of 1999.
Sec. 606. Elimination of set-aside of welfare-to-work funds for 
              successful performance bonus.
Sec. 607. Increase in payment rate to States for expenditures for short 
              term training of staff of certain child welfare agencies.

                       TITLE VII--EFFECTIVE DATE

Sec. 701. Effective date.

                 TITLE I--DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD SUPPORT

     SEC. 101. DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTED BY STATES 
                   ON BEHALF OF CHILDREN RECEIVING CERTAIN WELFARE 
                   BENEFITS.

       (a) Modification of Rule Requiring Assignment of Support 
     Rights as a Condition of Receiving TANF.--Section 408(a)(3) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 608(a)(3)) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(3) No assistance for families not assigning certain 
     support rights to the state.--A State to which a grant is 
     made under section 403 shall require, as a condition of 
     providing assistance to a family under the State program 
     funded under this part, that a member of the family assign to 
     the State any rights the family member may have (on behalf of 
     the family member or of any other person for whom the family 
     member has applied for or is receiving such assistance) to 
     support from any other person, not exceeding the total amount 
     of assistance so provided to the family, which accrues during 
     the period that the family receives assistance under the 
     program.''.
       (b) Increasing Child Support Payments to Families and 
     Simplifying Child Support Distribution Rules.--
       (1) Distribution rules.--
       (A) In general.--Section 457(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     657(a)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) In General.--Subject to subsections (d) and (e), the 
     amounts collected on behalf of a family as support by a State 
     pursuant to a plan approved under this part shall be 
     distributed as follows:
       ``(1) Families receiving assistance.--In the case of a 
     family receiving assistance from the State, the State shall--
       ``(A) pay to the Federal Government the Federal share of 
     the amount collected, subject to paragraph (3)(A);
       ``(B) retain, or pay to the family, the State share of the 
     amount collected, subject to paragraph (3)(B); and
       ``(C) pay to the family any remaining amount.
       ``(2) Families that formerly received assistance.--In the 
     case of a family that formerly received assistance from the 
     State:
       ``(A) Current support.--To the extent that the amount 
     collected does not exceed the current support amount, the 
     State shall pay the amount to the family.
       ``(B) Arrearages.--To the extent that the amount collected 
     exceeds the current support amount, the State--
       ``(i) shall first pay to the family the excess amount, to 
     the extent necessary to satisfy support arrearages not 
     assigned pursuant to section 408(a)(3);
       ``(ii) if the amount collected exceeds the amount required 
     to be paid to the family under clause (i), shall--

       ``(I) pay to the Federal Government, the Federal share of 
     the excess amount described in this clause, subject to 
     paragraph (3)(A); and
       ``(II) retain, or pay to the family, the State share of the 
     excess amount described in this clause, subject to paragraph 
     (3)(B); and

[[Page H7304]]

       ``(iii) shall pay to the family any remaining amount.
       ``(3) Limitations.--
       ``(A) Federal reimbursements.--The total of the amounts 
     paid by the State to the Federal Government under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2) of this subsection with respect to a family shall 
     not exceed the Federal share of the amount assigned with 
     respect to the family pursuant to section 408(a)(3).
       ``(B) State reimbursements.--The total of the amounts 
     retained by the State under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this 
     subsection with respect to a family shall not exceed the 
     State share of the amount assigned with respect to the family 
     pursuant to section 408(a)(3).
       ``(4) Families that never received assistance.--In the case 
     of any other family, the State shall pay the amount collected 
     to the family.
       ``(5) Families under certain agreements.--Notwithstanding 
     paragraphs (1) through (4), in the case of an amount 
     collected for a family in accordance with a cooperative 
     agreement under section 454(33), the State shall distribute 
     the amount collected pursuant to the terms of the agreement.
       ``(6) State financing options.--To the extent that the 
     State share of the amount payable to a family for a month 
     pursuant to paragraph (2)(B) of this subsection exceeds the 
     amount that the State estimates (under procedures approved by 
     the Secretary) would have been payable to the family for the 
     month pursuant to former section 457(a)(2) (as in effect for 
     the State immediately before the date this subsection first 
     applies to the State) if such former section had remained in 
     effect, the State may elect to use the grant made to the 
     State under section 403(a) to pay the amount, or to have the 
     payment considered a qualified State expenditure for purposes 
     of section 409(a)(7), but not both.''.
       ``(7) State option to pass through additional support with 
     federal financial participation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), 
     a State shall not be required to pay to the Federal 
     Government the Federal share of an amount collected on behalf 
     of a family that is not a recipient of assistance under the 
     State program funded under part A, to the extent that the 
     State pays the amount to the family.
       ``(B) Recipients of tanf for less than 5 years.--
       ``(i) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), 
     a State shall not be required to pay to the Federal 
     Government the Federal share of an amount collected on behalf 
     of a family that is a recipient of assistance under the State 
     program funded under part A and that has received the 
     assistance for not more than 5 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this paragraph, to the extent that--

       ``(I) the State pays the amount to the family; and
       ``(II) subject to clause (ii), the amount is disregarded in 
     determining the amount and type of the assistance provided to 
     the family.

       ``(ii) Limitation.--Of the amount disregarded as described 
     in clause (i)(II), the maximum amount that may be taken into 
     account for purposes of clause (i) shall not exceed $400 per 
     month, except that, in the case of a family that includes 2 
     or more children, the State may elect to increase the maximum 
     amount to not more than $600 per month.''.
       (B) Approval of estimation procedures.--Not later than 
     October 1, 2001, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
     in consultation with the States (as defined for purposes of 
     part D of title IV of the Social Security Act), shall 
     establish the procedures to be used to make the estimate 
     described in section 457(a)(6) of such Act.
       (2) Current support amount defined.--Section 457(c) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 657(c)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(5) Current support amount.--The term `current support 
     amount' means, with respect to amounts collected as support 
     on behalf of a family, the amount designated as the monthly 
     support obligation of the noncustodial parent in the order 
     requiring the support.''.
       (c) Ban on Recovery of Medicaid Costs for Certain Births.--
     Section 454 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 654) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (32);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (33) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (33) the following:
       ``(34) provide that the State shall not use the State 
     program operated under this part to collect any amount owed 
     to the State by reason of costs incurred under the State plan 
     approved under title XIX for the birth of a child for whom 
     support rights have been assigned pursuant to section 
     408(a)(3), 471(a)(17), or 1912.''.
       (d) State Option to Discontinue Certain Support 
     Assignments.--Section 457(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 657(b)) 
     is amended by striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''.
       (e) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 409(a)(7)(B)(i)(I)(aa) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     609(a)(7)(B)(i)(I)(aa)) is amended by striking 
     ``457(a)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``457(a)(1)''.
       (2) Section 404(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 604(a)) is 
     amended--
       (A) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) to fund payment of an amount pursuant to clause (i) 
     or (ii) of section 457(a)(2)(B), but only to the extent that 
     the State properly elects under section 457(a)(6) to use the 
     grant to fund the payment.''.
       (3) Section 409(a)(7)(B)(i) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     609(a)(7)(B)(i)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

       ``(V) Portions of certain child support payments collected 
     on behalf of and distributed to families no longer receiving 
     assistance.--Any amount paid by a State pursuant to clause 
     (i) or (ii) of section 457(a)(2)(B), but only to the extent 
     that the State properly elects under section 457(a)(6) to 
     have the payment considered a qualified State expenditure.''.

       (f) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall 
     take effect on October 1, 2005, and shall apply to payments 
     under parts A and D of title IV of the Social Security Act 
     for calendar quarters beginning on or after such date, and 
     without regard to whether regulations to implement such 
     amendments (in the case of State programs operated under such 
     part D) are promulgated by such date.
       (2) State option to accelerate effective date.--In 
     addition, a State may elect to have the amendments made by 
     this section apply to the State and to amounts collected by 
     the State, on and after such date as the State may select 
     that is after the date of the enactment of this Act and 
     before October 1, 2005.

        TITLE II--REVIEW AND ADJUSTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS

     SEC. 201. MANDATORY REVIEW AND MODIFICATION OF CHILD SUPPORT 
                   ORDERS FOR TANF RECIPIENTS.

       (a) Review Every 3 Years.--Section 466(a)(10)(A)(i) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 666(a)(10)(A)(i)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or,'' and inserting ``or''; and
       (2) by striking ``upon the request of the State agency 
     under the State plan or of either parent,''.
       (b) Review Upon Leaving TANF.--
       (1) Notice of certain families leaving tanf.--Section 
     402(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(8) Certification that the child support enforcement 
     program will be provided notice of certan families leaving 
     tanf program.--A certification by the chief executive officer 
     of the State that the State has established procedures to 
     ensure that the State agency administering the child support 
     enforcement program under the State plan approved under part 
     D will be provided notice of the impending discontinuation of 
     assistance to an individual under the State program funded 
     under this part if the individual has custody of a child 
     whose other parent is alive and not living at home with the 
     child.''.
       (2) Review.--Section 466(a)(10) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     666(a)(10)) is amended--
       (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``upon request'';
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``this paragraph'' and 
     inserting ``subparagraph (A) or (B)''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) Review upon leaving tanf.--On receipt of a notice 
     issued pursuant to section 402(a)(8), the State child support 
     enforcement agency shall--
       ``(i) examine the case file involved;
       ``(ii) determine what actions (if any) are needed to locate 
     any noncustodial parent, establish paternity or a support 
     order, or enforce a support order in the case;
       ``(iii) immediately take the actions; and
       ``(iv) if there is a support order in the case which the 
     State has not reviewed during the 1-year period ending with 
     receipt of the notice, notwithstanding subparagraph (B), 
     review and, if appropriate, adjust the order in accordance 
     with subparagraph (A).''.

   TITLE III--DEMONSTRATIONS OF EXPANDED INFORMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

     SEC. 301. GUIDELINES FOR INVOLVEMENT OF PUBLIC NON-IV-D CHILD 
                   SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN CHILD SUPPORT 
                   ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) In General.--Not later than October 1, 2001, the 
     Secretary, in consultation with States, local governments, 
     and individuals or companies knowledgable about involving 
     public non-IV-D child support enforcement agencies in child 
     support enforcement, shall develop recommendations which 
     address the participation of public non-IV-D child support 
     enforcement agencies in the establishment and enforcement of 
     child support obligations. The matters addressed by the 
     recommendations shall include substantive and procedural 
     rules which should be followed with respect to privacy 
     safeguards, data security, due process rights, administrative 
     compatibility with State and Federal automated systems, 
     eligibility requirements (such as registration, licensing, 
     and posting of bonds) for access to information and use of 
     enforcement mechanisms, recovery of costs by charging fees, 
     penalties for violations of the rules, treatment of 
     collections for purposes of section 458 of such Act, and 
     avoidance of duplication of effort.
       (b) Definitions.--In this title:
       (1) Child support.--The term ``child support'' has the 
     meaning given in section 459(i)(2) of the Social Security 
     Act.
       (2) Public non-iv-d child support enforcement agency.--The 
     term ``public non-IV-D child support enforcement agency'' 
     means an agency, of a political subdivision of a State, which 
     is principally responsible for the operation of a child 
     support registry or for the establishment or enforcement of 
     an obligation to pay child support other than pursuant to the 
     State plan approved under part D of title IV of such Act, or 
     a clerk of court office of a political subdivision of a 
     State.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.
       (4) State.--The term ``State'' shall have the meaning given 
     in section 1101(a)(1) of the Social Security Act for purposes 
     of part D of title IV of such Act.

[[Page H7305]]

     SEC. 302. DEMONSTRATIONS INVOLVING ESTABLISHMENT AND 
                   ENFORCEMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATIONS BY 
                   PUBLIC NON-IV-D CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 
                   AGENCIES.

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to determine 
     the extent to which public non-IV-D child support enforcement 
     agencies may contribute effectively to the establishment and 
     enforcement of child support obligations.
       (b) Applications.--
       (1) Consideration.--The Secretary shall consider all 
     applications received from States desiring to conduct 
     demonstration projects under this section.
       (2) Preferences.--In considering which applications to 
     approve under this section, the Secretary shall give 
     preference to applications submitted by States that had a 
     public non-IV-D child support enforcement agency as of 
     January 1, 2000.
       (3) Approval.--
       (A) Timing; limitation on number of projects.--On July 1, 
     2002, the Secretary may approve not more than 10 applications 
     for projects providing for the participation of a public non-
     IV-D child support enforcement agency in the establishment 
     and enforcement of child support obligations, and, if the 
     Secretary receives at least 5 such applications that meet 
     such requirements as the Secretary may establish, shall 
     approve not less than 5 such applications.
       (B) Requirements.--The Secretary may not approve an 
     application for a project unless--
       (i) the applicant and the Secretary have entered into a 
     written agreement which addresses at a minimum, privacy 
     safeguards, data security, due process rights, automated 
     systems, liability, oversight, and fees, and the applicant 
     has made a commitment to conduct the project in accordance 
     with the written agreement and such other requirements as the 
     Secretary may establish;
       (ii) the project includes a research plan (but such plan 
     shall not be required to use random assignment) that is 
     focused on assessing the costs and benefits of the project; 
     and
       (iii) the project appears likely to contribute 
     significantly to the achievement of the purpose of this 
     title.
       (c) Demonstration Authority.--On approval of an application 
     submitted by a State under this section--
       (1) the State agency responsible for administering the 
     State plan under part D of title IV of the Social Security 
     Act may, subject to the privacy safeguards of section 454(26) 
     of such Act, provide to any public non-IV-D child support 
     enforcement agency participating in the demonstration project 
     all information in the State Directory of New Hires and any 
     information obtained through information comparisons under 
     section 453(j)(3) of such Act about an individual with 
     respect to whom the public non-IV-D agency is seeking to 
     establish or enforce a child support obligation, if the 
     public non-IV-D agency meets such requirements as the State 
     may establish and has entered into an agreement with the 
     State under which the public non-IV-D agency has made a 
     binding commitment to carry out establishment and enforcement 
     activities with respect to the child support obligation 
     subject to the same data security, privacy protection, and 
     due process requirements applicable to the State agency and 
     in accordance with procedures approved by the head of the 
     State agency;
       (2) the State agency may charge and collect fees from any 
     such public non-IV-D agency to recover costs incurred by the 
     State agency in providing information and services to the 
     public non-IV-D agency under the demonstration project;
       (3) if a public non-IV-D child support enforcement agency 
     has agreed to collect past-due support (as defined in section 
     464(c) of such Act) owed by a named individual, and the State 
     agency has submitted a notice to the Secretary of the 
     Treasury pursuant to section 464 of such Act on behalf of the 
     public non-IV-D agency, then the Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall consider the State agency to have agreed to collect 
     such support for purposes of such section 464, and the State 
     agency may collect from the public non-IV-D agency any fee 
     which the State is required to pay for the cost of applying 
     the offset procedure in the case;
       (4) for so long as a public non-IV-D child support 
     enforcement agency is participating in the demonstration 
     project, the public non-IV-D agency shall be considered part 
     of the State agency for purposes of section 469A of such Act; 
     and
       (5) for so long as a public non-IV-D child support 
     enforcement agency is participating in the demonstration 
     project, the public non-IV-D agency shall be considered part 
     of the State agency for purposes of section 303(e) of such 
     Act but only with respect to any child support obligation 
     that the public non-IV-D agency has agreed to collect.
       (d) Waiver Authority.--The Secretary may waive or vary the 
     applicability of any provision of section 303(e), 454(31), 
     464, 466(a)(7), 466(a)(17), and 469A of the Social Security 
     Act to the extent necessary to enable the conduct of 
     demonstration projects under this section, subject to the 
     preservation of the data security, privacy protection, and 
     due process requirements of part D of title IV of such Act.
       (e) Federal Audit.--
       (1) In general.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall conduct an audit of the demonstration projects 
     conducted under this section for the purpose of examining and 
     evaluating the manner in which information and enforcement 
     tools are used by the public non-IV-D child support 
     enforcement agencies participating in the projects.
       (2) Report to the congress.--
       (A) In general.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall submit to the Congress a report on the audit 
     required by paragraph (1).
       (B) Timing.--The report required by subparagraph (A) shall 
     be so submitted not later than October 1, 2004.
       (f) Secretarial Report to the Congress.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall submit to the Congress 
     a report on the demonstration projects conducted under this 
     section, which shall include the results of any research or 
     evaluation conducted pursuant to this title, and shall 
     include policy recommendations regarding the establishment 
     and enforcement of child support obligations by the agencies 
     involved.
       (2) Timing.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall be 
     so submitted not later than October 1, 2005.

     SEC. 303. GAO REPORT TO CONGRESS ON PRIVATE CHILD SUPPORT 
                   ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.

       (a) In General.--Not later than October 1, 2001, the 
     Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the 
     Congress a report on the activities of private child support 
     enforcement agencies that shall be designed to help the 
     Congress determine whether the agencies are providing a 
     needed service in a fair manner using accepted debt 
     collection practices and at a reasonable fee.
       (b) Matters to be Addressed.--Among the matters addressed 
     by the report required by subsection (a) shall be the 
     following:
       (1) The number of private child support enforcement 
     agencies.
       (2) The types of debt collection activities conducted by 
     the private agencies.
       (3) The fees charged by the private agencies.
       (4) The methods used by the private agencies to collect 
     fees from custodial parents.
       (5) The nature and degree of cooperation the private 
     agencies receive from State agencies responsible for 
     administering State plans under part D of title IV of the 
     Social Security Act.
       (6) The extent to which the conduct of the private agencies 
     is subject to State or Federal regulation, and if so, the 
     extent to which the regulations are effectively enforced.
       (7) The amount of child support owed but uncollected and 
     changes in this amount in recent years.
       (8) The average period of time required for the completion 
     of successful enforcement actions yielding collections of 
     past-due child support by both the child support enforcement 
     programs operated pursuant to State plans approved under part 
     D of title IV of the Social Security Act and, to the extent 
     known, by private child support enforcement agencies.
       (9) The types of Federal and State child support 
     enforcement remedies and resources currently available to 
     private child support enforcement agencies, and the types of 
     such remedies and resources now restricted to use by State 
     agencies administering State plans referred to in paragraph 
     (8).
       (c) Private Child Support Enforcement Agency Defined.--In 
     this section, the term ``private child support enforcement 
     agency'' means a person or any other non-public entity which 
     seeks to establish or enforce an obligation to pay child 
     support (as defined in section 459(i)(2) of the Social 
     Security Act).

     SEC. 304. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This title shall take effect on the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

                     TITLE IV--EXPANDED ENFORCEMENT

     SEC. 401. DECREASE IN AMOUNT OF CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGE 
                   TRIGGERING PASSPORT DENIAL.

       Section 452(k) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     652(k)) is amended by striking ``$5,000'' and inserting 
     ``$2,500''.

     SEC. 402. USE OF TAX REFUND INTERCEPT PROGRAM TO COLLECT 
                   PAST-DUE CHILD SUPPORT ON BEHALF OF CHILDREN 
                   WHO ARE NOT MINORS.

       Section 464 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 664) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)(A), by striking ``(as that term is 
     defined for purposes of this paragraph under subsection 
     (c))''; and
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     as used in'' and inserting ``In''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``(whether or not a minor)'' after ``a 
     child'' each place it appears; and
       (B) by striking paragraphs (2) and (3).

     SEC. 403. GARNISHMENT OF COMPENSATION PAID TO VETERANS FOR 
                   SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITIES IN ORDER TO 
                   ENFORCE CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATIONS.

       Section 459(h) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     659(h)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(A)(ii)(V), by striking all that 
     follows ``Armed Forces'' and inserting a semicolon; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Limitations with respect to compensation paid to 
     veterans for service-connected disabilities.--Notwithstanding 
     any other provision of this section:
       ``(A) Compensation described in paragraph (1)(A)(ii)(V) 
     shall not be subject to withholding pursuant to this 
     section--
       ``(i) for payment of alimony; or
       ``(ii) for payment of child support if the individual is 
     fewer than 60 days in arrears in payment of the support.
       ``(B) Not more than 50 percent of any payment of 
     compensation described in paragraph (1)(A)(ii)(V) may be 
     withheld pursuant to this section.''.

                      TITLE V--FATHERHOOD PROGRAMS

                  Subtitle A--Fatherhood Grant Program

     SEC. 501. FATHERHOOD GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--Part A of title IV of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 601-619) is amended by inserting after section 
     403 the following:

     ``SEC. 403A. FATHERHOOD PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to make 
     grants available to public and private entities for projects 
     designed to--

[[Page H7306]]

       ``(1) promote marriage through counseling, mentoring, 
     disseminating information about the advantages of marriage, 
     enhancing relationship skills, teaching how to control 
     aggressive behavior, disseminating information on the causes 
     and treatment of domestic violence and child abuse, and other 
     methods;
       ``(2) promote successful parenting through such activities 
     as counseling, mentoring, disseminating information about 
     good parenting practices including prepregnancy, family 
     planning, training parents in money management, encouraging 
     child support payments, encouraging regular visitation 
     between fathers and their children, and other methods; and
       ``(3) help fathers and their families avoid or leave cash 
     welfare provided by the program under part A and improve 
     their economic status by providing such activities as work 
     first services, job search, job training, subsidized 
     employment, career-advancing education, job retention, job 
     enhancement, and other methods.
       ``(b) Fatherhood Grants.--
       ``(1) Applications.--An entity desiring a grant to carry 
     out a project described in subsection (a) may submit to the 
     Secretary an application that contains the following:
       ``(A) A description of the project and how the project will 
     be carried out.
       ``(B) A description of how the project will address all 
     three of the purposes of this section.
       ``(C) A written commitment by the entity that the project 
     will allow an individual to participate in the project only 
     if the individual is--
       ``(i) a father of a child who is, or within the past 24 
     months has been, a recipient of assistance or services under 
     a State program funded under this part;
       ``(ii) a father, including an expectant or married father, 
     whose income (net of court-ordered child support) is less 
     than 150 percent of the poverty line (as defined in section 
     673(2) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, 
     including any revision required by such section, applicable 
     to a family of the size involved);
       ``(iii) a parent referred to in paragraph (3)(A)(iii); or
       ``(iv) at risk of parenthood outside marriage, but not more 
     than 25 percent of the participants in the project may 
     qualify for participation under this clause.
       ``(D) A written commitment by the entity that the entity 
     will provide for the project, from funds obtained from non-
     Federal sources, amounts (including in-kind contributions) 
     equal in value to--
       ``(i) 20 percent of the amount of any grant made to the 
     entity under this subsection; or
       ``(ii) such lesser percentage as the Secretary deems 
     appropriate (which shall be not less than 10 percent) of such 
     amount, if the application demonstrates that there are 
     circumstances that limit the ability of the entity to raise 
     funds or obtain resources.
       ``(E) A written commitment by the entity that the entity 
     will make available to each individual participating in the 
     project education about the causes of domestic violence and 
     child abuse and local programs to prevent and treat abuse, 
     education about alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs and the 
     effects of abusing such substances, and information about 
     sexually transmitted diseases and their transmission, 
     including HIV/AIDS and human papillomavirus (HPV).
       ``(2) Consideration of applications by interagency panel.--
       ``(A) Establishment.--There is established a panel to be 
     known as the `Fatherhood Grants Recommendations Panel' (in 
     this subparagraph referred to as the `Panel').
       ``(B) Membership.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Panel shall be composed of 10 
     members, as follows:

       ``(I) Two members of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(II) Two members of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     Secretary of Labor.
       ``(III) Two members of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives.
       ``(IV) One member of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means of 
     the House of Representatives.
       ``(V) Two members of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     Chairman of the Committee on Finance of the Senate.
       ``(VI) One member of the Panel shall be appointed by the 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Finance of the 
     Senate.

       ``(ii) Qualifications.--An individual shall not be eligible 
     to serve on the Panel unless the individual has experience in 
     programs for fathers, programs for the poor, programs for 
     children, program administration, program research, or 
     programs of domestic violence prevention and treatment.
       ``(iii) Conflicts of interest.--An individual shall not be 
     eligible to serve on the Panel if such service would pose a 
     conflict of interest for the individual.
       ``(iv) Timing of appointments.--The appointment of members 
     to the Panel shall be completed not later than April 1, 2001.
       ``(C) Duties.--
       ``(i) Review and make recommendations on project 
     applications.--The Panel shall review all applications 
     submitted pursuant to paragraph (1), and make recommendations 
     to the Secretary regarding which applicants should be awarded 
     grants under this subsection, with due regard for the 
     provisions of paragraph (3), but shall not recommend that a 
     project be awarded such a grant if the application describing 
     the project does not attempt to meet the requirement of 
     paragraph (1)(B).
       ``(ii) Timing.--The Panel shall make such recommendations 
     not later than October 1, 2001.
       ``(D) Term of office.--Each member appointed to the Panel 
     shall serve for the life of the Panel.
       ``(E) Prohibition on compensation.--Members of the Panel 
     may not receive pay, allowances, or benefits by reason of 
     their service on the Panel.
       ``(F) Travel expenses.--Each member of the Panel shall 
     receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, in accordance with sections 5702 and 5703 of 
     title 5, United States Code.
       ``(G) Meetings.--The Panel shall meet as often as is 
     necessary to complete the business of the Panel.
       ``(H) Chairperson.--The Chairperson of the Panel shall be 
     designated by the Secretary at the time of appointment.
       ``(I) Staff of federal agencies.--The Secretary may detail 
     any personnel of the Department of Health and Human Services 
     and the Secretary of Labor may detail any personnel of the 
     Department of Labor to the Panel to assist the Panel in 
     carrying out its duties under this paragraph.
       ``(J) Obtaining official data.--The Panel may secure 
     directly from any department or agency of the United States 
     information necessary to enable it to carry out this 
     paragraph. On request of the Chairperson of the Panel, the 
     head of the department or agency shall furnish that 
     information to the Panel.
       ``(K) Mails.--The Panel may use the United States mails in 
     the same manner and under the same conditions as other 
     departments and agencies of the United States.
       ``(L) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate on October 1, 
     2001.
       ``(3) Rules governing grants.--
       ``(A) Grant awards.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary shall award matching 
     grants, on a competitive basis, among entities submitting 
     applications therefor which meet the requirements of 
     paragraph (1), in amounts that take into account the written 
     commitments referred to in paragraph (1)(D).
       ``(ii) Timing.--On October 1, 2001, the Secretary shall 
     award not more than $140,000,000 in matching grants after 
     considering the recommendations submitted pursuant to 
     paragraph (2)(C)(i).
       ``(iii) Nondiscrimination.--The provisions of this section 
     shall be applied and administered so as to ensure that 
     mothers, expectant mothers, and married mothers are eligible 
     for benefits and services under projects awarded grants under 
     this section on the same basis as fathers, expectant fathers, 
     and married fathers.
       ``(B) Preferences.--In determining which entities to which 
     to award grants under this subsection, the Secretary shall 
     give preference to an entity--
       ``(i) to the extent that the application submitted by the 
     entity sets forth clear and practical methods to encourage 
     and sustain marriage;
       ``(ii) to the extent that the application submitted by the 
     entity describes actions that the entity will take that are 
     designed to encourage or facilitate the payment of child 
     support, including but not limited to--

       ``(I) obtaining a written commitment by the agency 
     responsible for administering the State plan approved under 
     part D for the State in which the project is to be carried 
     out that the State will voluntarily cancel child support 
     arrearages owed to the State by the father as a result of the 
     father providing various supports to the family such as 
     maintaining a regular child support payment schedule living 
     with his children or marrying the mother of his children, 
     unless the father has been convicted of a crime involving 
     domestic violence or child abuse;
       ``(II) obtaining a written commitment by the entity that 
     the entity will help participating fathers who cooperate with 
     the agency in improving their credit rating; and
       ``(III) helping fathers arrange and maintain a consistent 
     schedule of visits with their children, unless it would be 
     unsafe;

       ``(iii) to the extent that the application includes written 
     agreements of cooperation with other private and governmental 
     agencies, including the State or local program funded under 
     this part, the local Workforce Investment Board, the State or 
     local program funded under part D, community-based domestic 
     violence programs, and the State or local program funded 
     under part E, which should include a description of the 
     services each such agency will provide to fathers 
     participating in the project described in the application;
       ``(iv) to the extent that the application describes a 
     project that will enroll a high percentage of project 
     participants within 6 months before or after the birth of the 
     child; or
       ``(v) to the extent that the application sets forth clear 
     and practical methods by which fathers will be recruited to 
     participate in the project.
       ``(C) Minimum percentage of recipients of grant funds to be 
     nongovernmental (including faith-based) organizations.--Not 
     less than 75 percent of the entities awarded grants under 
     this subsection in each fiscal year (other than entities 
     awarded such grants pursuant to the preferences required by 
     subparagraph (B)) shall be awarded to--
       ``(i) nongovernmental (including faith-based) 
     organizations; or
       ``(ii) governmental organizations that pass through to 
     organizations referred to in clause (i) at least 50 percent 
     of the amount of the grant.
       ``(D) Diversity of projects.--
       ``(i) In general.--In determining which entities to which 
     to award grants under this subsection, the Secretary shall 
     attempt to achieve a balance among entities of differing 
     sizes, entities in differing geographic areas, entities in 
     urban versus rural areas, and entities employing differing 
     methods of achieving the purposes of this section.
       ``(ii) Report to the congress.--Within 90 days after each 
     award of grants under subparagraph (A)(ii), the Secretary 
     shall submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House 
     of

[[Page H7307]]

     Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate a 
     brief report on the diversity of projectes selected to 
     receive funds under the grant program. The report shall 
     include a comparison of funding for projects located in urban 
     areas, projects located in suburban areas, and projects 
     located in rural areas.
       ``(E) Payment of grant in four equal annual installments.--
     During the fiscal year in which a grant is awarded under this 
     subsection and each of the succeeding three fiscal years, the 
     Secretary shall provide to the entity awarded the grant an 
     amount equal to \1/4\ of the amount of the grant.
       ``(4) Use of funds.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each entity to which a grant is made 
     under this section shall use grant funds provided under this 
     section in accordance with the application requesting the 
     grant, the requirements of this section, and the regulations 
     prescribed under this section, and may use grant funds to 
     support community-wide initiatives to address the purposes of 
     this section, but may not use grant funds for court 
     proceedings on matters of child visitation or child custody 
     or for legislative advocacy.
       ``(B) Nondisplacement.--
       ``(i) In general.--An adult in a work activity described in 
     section 407(d) which is funded, in whole or in part, by funds 
     provided under this section shall not be employed or 
     assigned--

       ``(I) when any other individual is on layoff from the same 
     or any substantially equivalent job; or
       ``(II) if the employer has terminated the employment of any 
     regular employee or otherwise caused an involuntary reduction 
     of its workforce in order to fill the vacancy so created with 
     such an adult.

       ``(ii) Grievance procedure.--

       ``(I) In general.--Complaints alleging violations of clause 
     (i) in a State may be resolved--

       ``(aa) if the State has established a grievance procedure 
     under section 403(a)(5)(I)(iv), pursuant to the grievance 
     procedure; or
       ``(bb) otherwise, pursuant to the grievance procedure 
     established by the State under section 407(f)(3).

       ``(II) Forfeiture of grant if grievance procedure not 
     available.--If a complaint referred to in subclause (I) is 
     made against an entity to which a grant has been made under 
     this section with respect to a project, and the complaint 
     cannot be brought to, or cannot be resolved within 90 days 
     after being brought, by a grievance procedure referred to in 
     subclause (I), then the entity shall immediately return to 
     the Secretary all funds provided to the entity under this 
     section for the project, and the Secretary shall immediately 
     rescind the grant.

       ``(C) Rule of construction.--This section shall not be 
     construed to require the participation of a father in a 
     project funded under this section to be discontinued by the 
     project on the basis of changed economic circumstances of the 
     father.
       ``(D) Rule of construction on marriage.--This section shall 
     not be construed to authorize the Secretary to define 
     marriage for purposes of this section.
       ``(E) Penalty for misuse of grant funds.--If the Secretary 
     determines that an entity to which a grant is made under this 
     subsection has used any amount of the grant in violation of 
     subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall require the entity to 
     remit to the Secretary an amount equal to the amount so used, 
     plus all remaining grant funds, and the entity shall 
     thereafter be ineligible for any grant under this subsection.
       ``(F) Remittance of unused grant funds.--Each entity to 
     which a grant is awarded under this subsection shall remit to 
     the Secretary all funds paid under the grant that remain at 
     the end of the fifth fiscal year ending after the initial 
     grant award.
       ``(5) Authority of agencies to exchange information.--Each 
     agency administering a program funded under this part or a 
     State plan approved under part D may share the name, address, 
     telephone number, and identifying case number information in 
     the State program funded under this part, of fathers for 
     purposes of assisting in determining the eligibility of 
     fathers to participate in projects receiving grants under 
     this section, and in contacting fathers potentially eligible 
     to participate in the projects, subject to all applicable 
     privacy laws.
       ``(6) Evaluation.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Labor, shall, directly or by grant, contract, or 
     interagency agreement, conduct an evaluation of projects 
     funded under this section (other than under subsection 
     (c)(1)). The evaluation shall assess, among other outcomes 
     selected by the Secretary, effects of the projects on 
     marriage, parenting, employment, earnings, payment of child 
     support, and incidence of domestic violence and child abuse. 
     In selecting projects for the evaluation, the Secretary 
     should include projects that, in the Secretary's judgment, 
     are most likely to impact the matters described in the 
     purposes of this section. In conducting the evaluation, 
     random assignment should be used wherever possible.
       ``(7) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as may be necessary to carry out this subsection.
       ``(8) Limitation on applicability of other provisions of 
     this part.--Sections 404 through 410 shall not apply to this 
     section or to amounts paid under this section, and shall not 
     be applied to an entity solely by reason of receipt of funds 
     pursuant to this section. A project shall not be considered a 
     State program funded under this part solely by reason of 
     receipt of funds paid under this section.
       ``(9) Funding.--
       ``(A) In general.--
       ``(i) Interagency panel.--Of the amounts made available 
     pursuant to section 403(a)(1)(E) to carry out this section 
     for fiscal year 2001, a total of $150,000 shall be made 
     available for the interagency panel established by paragraph 
     (2) of this subsection.
       ``(ii) Grants.--Of the amounts made available pursuant to 
     section 403(a)(1)(E) to carry out this section for fiscal 
     years 2002 through 2005, a total of $140,000,000 shall be 
     made available for grants under this subsection.
       ``(iii) Evaluation.--Of the amounts made available pursuant 
     to section 403(a)(1)(E) to carry out this section for fiscal 
     years 2001 through 2006, a total of $6,000,000 shall be made 
     available for the evaluation required by paragraph (6) of 
     this subsection.
       ``(B) Availability.--
       ``(i) Grant funds.--The amounts made available pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A)(ii) shall remain available until the end of 
     fiscal year 2006.
       ``(ii) Evaluation funds.--The amounts made available 
     pursuant to subparagraph (A)(iii) shall remain available 
     until the end of fiscal year 2008.''.
       (b) Funding.--Section 403(a)(1)(E) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     603(a)(1)(E)) is amended by inserting ``, and for fiscal 
     years 2001 through 2007, such sums as are necessary to carry 
     out section 403A'' before the period.
       (c) Applicability of Charitable Choice Provisions of 
     Welfare Reform.--Section 104 of the Personal Responsibility 
     and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 
     604a) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(l) Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this 
     section, this section shall apply to any entity to which 
     funds have been provided under section 403A of the Social 
     Security Act in the same manner in which this section applies 
     to States, and, for purposes of this section, any project for 
     which such funds are so provided shall be considered a 
     program described in subsection (a)(2).''.

        Subtitle B--Fatherhood Projects of National Significance

     SEC. 511. FATHERHOOD PROJECTS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE.

       Section 403A of the Social Security Act, as added by 
     subtitle A of this title, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(c) Fatherhood Projects of National Significance.--
       ``(1) National clearinghouse.--The Secretary shall award a 
     $5,000,000 grant to a nationally recognized, nonprofit 
     fatherhood promotion organization with at least 4 years of 
     experience in designing and disseminating a national public 
     education campaign, including the production and successful 
     placement of television, radio, and print public service 
     announcements which promote the importance of responsible 
     fatherhood, and with at least 4 years experience providing 
     consultation and training to community-based organizations 
     interested in implementing fatherhood outreach, support, or 
     skill development programs with an emphasis on promoting 
     married fatherhood as the ideal, to--
       ``(A) develop, promote, and distribute to interested 
     States, local governments, public agencies, and private 
     nonprofit organizations, including charitable and religious 
     organizations, a media campaign that encourages the 
     appropriate involvement of both parents in the life of any 
     child of the parents, and encourages such organizations to 
     develop or sponsor programs that specifically address the 
     issue of responsible fatherhood and the advantages conferred 
     on children by marriage;
       ``(B) develop a national clearinghouse to assist States, 
     communities, and private entities in efforts to promote and 
     support marriage and responsible fatherhood by collecting, 
     evaluating, and making available (through the Internet and by 
     other means) to all interested parties, information regarding 
     media campaigns and fatherhood programs;
       ``(C) develop and distribute materials that are for use by 
     entities described in subparagraph (A) or (B) and that help 
     young adults manage their money, develop the knowledge and 
     skills needed to promote successful marriages, plan for 
     future expenditures and investments, and plan for retirement;
       ``(D) develop and distribute materials that are for use by 
     entities described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) and that list 
     all the sources of public support for education and training 
     that are available to young adults, including government 
     spending programs as well as benefits under Federal and State 
     tax laws; and
       ``(E) develop and distribute materials that are for use by 
     entities described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) and that 
     provide information on domestic violence and child abuse 
     prevention and treatment.
       ``(2) Multicity fatherhood projects.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall award a $5,000,000 
     grant to each of two nationally recognized nonprofit 
     fatherhood promotion organizations which meet the 
     requirements of subparagraph (B), at least one of which 
     organizations meets the requirement of subparagraph (C).
       ``(B) Requirements.--The requirements of this subparagraph 
     are the following:
       ``(i) The organization must have several years of 
     experience in designing and conducting programs that meet the 
     purposes described in paragraph (1).
       ``(ii) The organization must have experience in 
     simultaneously conducting such programs in more than one 
     major metropolitan area and in coordinating such programs 
     with local government agencies and private, nonprofit 
     agencies, including State or local agencies responsible for 
     conducting the program under part D and Workfore Investment 
     Boards.
       ``(iii) The organization must submit to the Secretary an 
     application that meets all the conditions applicable to the 
     organization under this

[[Page H7308]]

     section and that provides for projects to be conducted in 
     three major metropolitan areas.
       ``(C) Use of married couples to deliver services in the 
     inner city.--The requirement of this subparagraph is that the 
     organization has extensive experience in using married 
     couples to deliver program services in the inner city.
       ``(3) Payment of grants in four equal annual 
     installments.--During each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005, 
     the Secretary shall provide to each entity awarded a grant 
     under this subsection an amount equal to \1/4\ of the amount 
     of the grant.
       ``(4) Funding.--
       ``(A) In general.--Of the amounts made available pursuant 
     to section 403(a)(1)(E) to carry out this section, $3,750,000 
     shall be made available for grants under this subsection for 
     each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005.
       ``(B) Availability.--The amounts made available pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) shall remain available until the end of 
     fiscal year 2005.''.

                        TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

     SEC. 601. CHANGE DATES FOR ABSTINENCE EVALUATION.

       (a) In General.--Section 403(a)(5)(G)(iii) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)(G)(iii)), as amended by 
     section 606(a) of this Act, is amended by striking ``2001'' 
     and inserting ``2005''.
       (b) Interim Report Required.--Section 403(a)(5)(G) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)(G)), as so amended, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(iv) Interim report.--Not later than January 1, 2002, the 
     Secretary shall submit to the Congress a interim report on 
     the evaluations referred to in clause (i).''.

     SEC. 602. REPORT ON UNDISTRIBUTED CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS.

       Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
     submit to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate a 
     report on the procedures that the States use generally to 
     locate custodial parents for whom child support has been 
     collected but not yet distributed due to a change in address. 
     The report shall include an estimate of the total amount of 
     such undistributed child support and the average length of 
     time it takes for such child support to be distributed. The 
     Secretary shall include in the report recommendations as to 
     whether additional procedures should be established at the 
     State or Federal level to expedite the payment of 
     undistributed child support.

     SEC. 603. USE OF NEW HIRE INFORMATION TO ASSIST IN 
                   ADMINISTRATION OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 453(j) of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 653(j)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(7) Information comparisons and disclosure to assist in 
     administration of unemployment compensation programs.--
       ``(A) In general.--If a State agency responsible for the 
     administration of an unemployment compensation program under 
     Federal or State law transmits to the Secretary the name and 
     social security account number of an individual, the 
     Secretary shall, if the information in the National Directory 
     of New Hires indicates that the individual may be employed, 
     disclose to the State agency the name, address, and employer 
     identification number of any putative employer of the 
     individual, subject to this paragraph.
       ``(B) Condition on disclosure.--The Secretary shall make a 
     disclosure under subparagraph (A) only to the extent that the 
     Secretary determines that the disclosure would not interfere 
     with the effective operation of the program under this part.
       ``(C) Use of information.--A State agency may use 
     information provided under this paragraph only for purposes 
     of administering a program referred to in subparagraph 
     (A).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on October 1, 2000.

     SEC. 604. IMMIGRATION PROVISIONS.

       (a) Nonimmigrant Aliens Ineligible to Receive Visas and 
     Excluded From Admission for Nonpayment of Child Support.--
       (1) In general.--Section 212(a)(10) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(10)) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(F) Nonpayment of child support.--
       ``(i) In general.--Any nonimmigrant alien is inadmissible 
     who is legally obligated under a judgment, decree, or order 
     to pay child support (as defined in section 459(i) of the 
     Social Security Act), and whose failure to pay such child 
     support has resulted in an arrearage exceeding $2,500, until 
     child support payments under the judgment, decree, or order 
     are satisfied or the nonimmigrant alien is in compliance with 
     an approved payment agreement.
       ``(ii) Waiver authorized.--The Attorney General may waive 
     the application of clause (i) in the case of an alien, if the 
     Attorney General--

       ``(I) has received a request for the waiver from the court 
     or administrative agency having jurisdiction over the 
     judgment, decree, or order obligating the alien to pay child 
     support that is referred to in such clause; or
       ``(II) determines that there are prevailing humanitarian or 
     public interest concerns.''.

       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection 
     shall take effect 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (b) Authorization to Serve Legal Process in Child Support 
     Cases on Certain Arriving Aliens.--
       (1) In general.--Section 235(d) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1225(d)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(5) Authority to serve process in child support cases.--
       ``(A) In general.--To the extent consistent with State law, 
     immigration officers are authorized to serve on any alien who 
     is an applicant for admission to the United States legal 
     process with respect to any action to enforce or establish a 
     legal obligation of an individual to pay child support (as 
     defined in section 459(i) of the Social Security Act).
       ``(B) Definition.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the 
     term `legal process' means any writ, order, summons or other 
     similar process, which is issued by--
       ``(i) a court or an administrative agency of competent 
     jurisdiction in any State, territory, or possession of the 
     United States; or
       ``(ii) an authorized official pursuant to an order of such 
     a court or agency or pursuant to State or local law.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection 
     shall apply to aliens applying for admission to the United 
     States on or after 180 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.
       (c) Authorization To Share Child Support Enforcement 
     Information To Enforce Immigration and Naturalization Law.--
       (1) Secretarial responsibility.--Section 452 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 652) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(m) If the Secretary receives a certification by a State 
     agency, in accordance with section 454(35), that an 
     individual who is a nonimmigrant alien (as defined in section 
     101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act) owes 
     arrearages of child support in an amount exceeding $2,500, 
     the Secretary may, at the request of the State agency, the 
     Secretary of State, or the Attorney General, or on the 
     Secretary's own initiative, provide such certification to the 
     Secretary of State and the Attorney General information in 
     order to enable them to carry out their responsibilities 
     under sections 212(a)(10) and 235(d) of such Act.''.
       (2) State agency responsibility.--Section 454 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 654), as amended by section 101(c) of 
     this Act, is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (33);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (34) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (34) the following:
       ``(35) provide that the State agency will have in effect a 
     procedure for certifying to the Secretary, in such format and 
     accompained by such supporting documentation as the Secretary 
     may require, determinations that nonimmigrant aliens owe 
     arrearages of child support in an amount exceeding $2,500.''.

     SEC. 605. CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN CONFORMING AMENDMENTS IN 
                   THE WELFARE-TO-WORK AND CHILD SUPPORT 
                   AMENDMENTS OF 1999.

       The amendments made by section 2402 of Public Law 106-246 
     shall take effect as if included in the enactment of section 
     806 of H.R. 3424 of the 106th Congress by section 1000(a)(4) 
     of Public Law 106-113.

     SEC. 606. ELIMINATION OF SET-ASIDE OF WELFARE-TO-WORK FUNDS 
                   FOR SUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE BONUS.

       (a) In General.--Section 403(a)(5) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)) is amended by striking subparagraph 
     (E) and redesignating subparagraphs (F) through (K) as 
     subparagraphs (E) through (J), respectively.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 403(a)(5)(A)(i) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     603(a)(5)(A)(i)) is amended by striking ``subparagraph (I)'' 
     and inserting ``subparagraph (H)''.
       (2) Subclause (I) of each of subparagraphs (A)(iv) and 
     (B)(v) of section 403(a)(5) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     603(a)(5)(A)(iv)(I) and (B)(v)(I)) is amended--
       (A) in item (aa)--
       (i) by striking ``(I)'' and inserting ``(H)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``(G), and (H)'' and inserting ``and 
     (G)''; and
       (B) in item (bb), by striking ``(F)'' and inserting 
     ``(E)''.
       (3) Section 403(a)(5)(B)(v) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     603(a)(5)(B)) is amended in the matter preceding subclause 
     (I) by striking ``(I)'' and inserting ``(H)''.
       (4) Subparagraphs (E) and (F) of section 403(a)(5) of such 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 603(a)(5)(F) and (G)), as so redesignated by 
     subsection (a) of this section, are each amended by striking 
     ``(I)'' and inserting ``(H)''.
       (5) Section 412(a)(3)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     612(a)(3)(A)) is amended by striking ``403(a)(5)(I)'' and 
     inserting ``403(a)(5)(H)''.
       (c) Funding.--Section 403(a)(5)(I)(i)(II) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 603(a)(5)(I)(i)(II)) is amended by striking 
     ``$1,450,000,000'' and inserting ``$1,400,000,000''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 607. INCREASE IN PAYMENT RATE TO STATES FOR EXPENDITURES 
                   FOR SHORT TERM TRAINING OF STAFF OF CERTAIN 
                   CHILD WELFARE AGENCIES.

       Section 474(a)(3)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     674(a)(3)(B)) is amended by inserting ``, or State-licensed 
     or State-approved child welfare agencies providing 
     services,'' after ``child care institutions''.

                       TITLE VII--EFFECTIVE DATE

     SEC. 701. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in sections 101(e), 
     304, 603(b), 605(b) and 606, and in subsection (b) of this 
     section, this Act and the amendments made by this Act shall 
     take effect on October 1, 2001, and shall apply to payments

[[Page H7309]]

     under part D of title IV of the Social Security Act for 
     calendar quarters beginning on or after such date, and 
     without regard to whether regulations to implement such 
     amendments are promulgated by such date.
       (b) Delay Permitted if State Legislation Required.--In the 
     case of a State plan approved under section 454 of the Social 
     Security Act which requires State legislation (other than 
     legislation appropriating funds) in order for the plan to 
     meet the additional requirements imposed by the amendments 
     made by this Act, the State plan shall not be regarded as 
     failing to comply with the additional requirements solely on 
     the basis of the failure of the plan to meet the additional 
     requirements before the 1st day of the 1st calendar quarter 
     beginning after the close of the 1st regular session of the 
     State legislature that begins after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act. For purposes of the previous sentence, in the 
     case of a State that has a 2-year legislative session, each 
     year of such session shall be deemed to be a separate regular 
     session of the State legislature.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. After 1 hour of debate on the bill, as 
amended, it shall be in order to consider a further amendment printed 
in part B of the report if offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Scott) or his designee, which shall be considered read, and shall be 
debatable for 10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the 
proponent and an opponent.
  The gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) and the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) each will control 30 minutes of debate on 
the bill.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson).
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  (Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I begin by expressing my 
appreciation to my colleague and ranking member, the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Cardin), and his very capable staff. This bill we bring 
before the House today was fashioned in some of its most significant 
sections by the gentleman's hard work and insight, and I thank him.
  I also want to thank my colleagues on the Conservative Action Team, 
who have helped us strengthen the marriage provisions in the fatherhood 
program that is such a vital part of this legislation. The gentleman 
from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn) and his associates have worked with us in 
good faith and have improved this bill both by changing the procedure 
under which it is being debated and by adding excellent provisions to 
the bill.
  The 1996 welfare reform law has been one of the greatest social 
policy successes of the last half century. Due in great measure to this 
legislation and excellent reforms in the earned income credit, Medicaid 
child care, and other programs that support working families, work by 
single mothers, and especially never-married single mothers has 
increased in the last 5 years to its highest level ever. The result, 
according to a broad Census Bureau measure of poverty, is that we have 
reduced child poverty by nearly 30 percent in the last 5 years. We have 
reduced child poverty by nearly 30 percent in the last 5 years. This is 
a historic achievement made possible by legislation that originated in 
this body.
  Welfare reform has put us on the right track. But many of these 
single mothers and their children are struggling on extremely low 
incomes. Those who used to be on welfare are now in the workforce, but 
all too often their day-to-day personal struggle is nothing short of 
heroic. They work hard to juggle transportation, child care, work, and 
family time. It is a big job and millions of women are tackling it with 
determination and grit. So we come before our colleagues today with a 
proposal to ensure that these mothers who have left welfare get all the 
help they deserve. Under this bill they will get to keep more of the 
child support money the fathers of their children are paying.
  It is time to modernize the child support system's connection with 
welfare and require that a woman get 100 percent of the father's child 
support payment as she leaves welfare. That is exactly what this bill 
does. When fully implemented, this legislation will provide young 
mothers leaving welfare with an additional $700 million per year. That 
is $3.5 billion over 5 years. And every penny of it comes from child 
support payments made by fathers.
  In addition, this bill allows States to pass along child support 
through to the family while the family is still on welfare. This will 
encourage the development of the bond between the noncustodial parent 
in the family, help them develop an understanding of their economic 
ties, and better prepare families for the transfer off of welfare. 
Remember, if they understand the economic ties that bind, they are 
going to be better positioned to develop the emotional ties that bind 
and on which life depends.
  Of course, the best solution for these single mothers and their 
children would be to form two-parent families through marriage. We now 
have overwhelming evidence from research that marriage is good for 
health and happiness of both mothers and fathers, but the greatest 
beneficiaries of marriage are the children. Thus, as part of a very 
balanced package we bring to the floor today, we propose to fund small-
scale community and faith-based projects throughout the Nation to 
promote marriage and better parenting by low-income fathers whose 
children are on welfare and to help them improve their economic 
circumstances.
  I know that many in this body doubt that government should be 
involved in promoting marriage, so I urge them to consider how our 
proposal would work. We want to provide seed money to help faith-based 
and other community organizations tackle this vital job. Seventy-five 
percent of the funds must support nongovernmental organizations. So we 
are not creating a new government program and bureaucracy. Government 
is simply a mechanism to help private organizations perform this 
important work.
  Let me also mention the legitimate concern of some that women could 
be pressured into violent relationships. In this bill we have added 
many provisions to assure that domestic violence and child abuse are 
prevented and, when necessary, that referrals are made to local 
services to help families in which violence is occurring.
  But we must in good conscience build on the important fact discovered 
through welfare reform. Because of its paternity determination 
requirements, we now know that 80 percent of the adults having out-of-
wedlock children are serious about their relationship and believe it 
will be lasting. That is simply astounding. And we did not know that 
before welfare reform was implemented. Yet, after 2 years, after 2 
years, most fathers are out of the picture. This bill will help many 
poor young men and women, more than half of whom live together when the 
child is born, and as I said, 80 percent of whom say they hope to form 
a lasting relationship, to fulfill that dream through education and 
support.
  These young people are poor. They often live in dangerous 
communities, lack economic prowess, and have few role models to follow 
to help them form stable, lasting marriages. These young couples face 
long odds. This bill will help them. It will help them work toward 
marriage; it will help them work toward becoming better parents and 
work toward economic advancement. For example, we will now provide the 
same help in getting a job to the fathers of children on welfare as we 
do to mothers on welfare. In other areas we will provide some of the 
education that has so helped women to their male partners. It is just 
common sense.
  This bill will move us a dramatic step forward in helping our poorest 
young people help themselves by making sure that child support money 
stays in the family. This will help young mothers to avoid or get off 
welfare, and bring young fathers and their children closer together.
  The fatherhood provisions of this bill promote more responsible 
behavior by fathers, including marriage, better parenting, and work. 
Through the fatherhood demonstration grants and the child support 
distribution reforms, we will bring our Nation a giant step forward on 
that path to building strong families and helping our poorest young 
people and children realize their dreams.
  Again, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Cardin), for his very significant contribution to this family-
strengthening bipartisan legislation. Today we advance the agenda of 
personal responsibility and strengthen the family ties

[[Page H7310]]

on which the well-being of our children depends.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1200

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bentsen).
  (Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Maryland for 
yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the author of the bill, the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), who has been the leader in 
this effort.
  I rise in strong support of H.R. 4678, the Child Support Distribution 
Act, a measure that promises to boost more families out of poverty and 
seeks to remedy the serious trend of fatherlessness.
  Over the past 40 years, the number of children living in households 
without fathers has tripled from just over five million in 1960 to 17 
million today. This void has repercussions not only on the financial 
stability of the child but also on the child's emotional well-being and 
moral development.
  Statistics show that, without fathers in their lives, children are 
five times more likely to live in poverty, two times more likely to 
commit crimes, over twice as likely to abuse alcohol or drugs, and more 
likely to become pregnant as teenagers.
  I am dedicated to strengthening the family. As a parent, I believe it 
to be my responsibility to teach my own daughters values and ethics by 
which to live. H.R. 4678 encourages responsible fatherhood by 
establishing a fatherhood grant program that would fund public and 
private fatherhood programs for fiscal years 2001 through 2007.
  H.R. 4678 would fund fatherhood programs that promote successful 
parenting by not only teaching parenting skills and encouraging healthy 
child-parent relationships but also deliver job training to fathers to 
help break the cycle of poverty.
  Additionally, and equally as important, under H.R. 4678, children 
would benefit from more child support collected by the States on their 
behalf. For families leaving welfare, H.R. 4678 would compel States to 
distribute all arrears before the State could receive any arrears owed 
to it for the period the family collected welfare.
  Under current law, a family that leaves welfare only receives 50 
percent of any past due child support payments. H.R. 4678 will also 
provide States with an option to pass the entire child support payment 
on to the family on welfare. Presently, States keep the child support 
payment and split the payment evenly with the Federal Government.
  Under H.R. 4678, $3.5 billion in additional child support would be 
provided to needy children over a 5-year period and $5 billion over the 
decade.
  Mr. Speaker, as a father, I find it hard to believe that some would 
fail to honor their obligation to support their own children. But the 
sad truth as we know it is that far too many become deadbeat parents 
and far too often the children are pushed into poverty.
  We in Congress began the effort to aid the States in child support 
enforcement through the welfare reform legislation that the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) spoke of which we passed in 1996 with 
my support; and we should continue this important task by passing this 
bill, H.R. 4678, the Child Support Distribution Act, today.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my 
colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller).
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, this is a great day. I want to thank the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) for her leadership and my 
friend the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) for his leadership in 
crafting a bipartisan bill.
  I think back to 1994, when I had the privilege of being elected to 
this body, and at that time there were more children living in poverty 
than ever before. As a result of the welfare reform efforts led by this 
Congress, we have now seen a reduction by one-half of our Nation's 
welfare rolls.
  This legislation addressing fatherhood and families and strengthening 
families is a continued positive, successful step forward. That is why 
I want to commend the chairwoman and the ranking member for this 
effort.
  I also want to thank the committee for including an amendment that 
was offered by the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Thurman) and myself 
which treats more fairly private organizations such as Catholic 
charities and Jewish Welfare League and others who serve in providing 
foster care and other child care services under the programs in this 
legislation.
  Under current law, the Federal Government provides a 75 percent 
matching rate for funds spent training public child welfare workers. 
But that match is not there for those private workers through Catholic 
charities and other organizations.
  Our amendment, which was included in this legislation, brings parity 
to the treatment of both public and private workers involved in child 
welfare.
  I would point out that in my home State of Illinois the majority of 
our programs the majority of the children are served by private 
organizations such as Catholic charities. In fact, 80 percent of foster 
care services are offered by private child welfare agencies.
  Florida is moving towards a 100 percent completely private system. 
New York and Kansas are also heavily dependent on this. And that is why 
this legislation is so important.
  Our legislation provides parity by providing that same equal 75 
percent match for training programs. And it is the right thing to do. 
If we want to list the private sector, we need to treat the private 
sector fairly and equally with the public sector. Those who benefit the 
most, of course, are the children who are served. Because a trained 
workforce results not only in better care for children but 
strengthening of our families.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), a senior member of the Committee 
on Ways and Means, the former ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Human Resources, and a person who has been extremely active on child 
support issues.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill; and I 
congratulate the leadership of the subcommittee, the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Cardin), for all of their hard work on this.
  This bill, in a few words, will improve life for the millions of poor 
children. It would seem obvious that the essential purpose of our child 
support enforcement program should be to collect child support for 
children who need it.
  Thirteen and a half million children in the U.S., almost 20 percent, 
currently live in poverty. One-third of children in single-parent 
families are poor. And those children are half again as likely to be 
poor if they do not receive child support.
  Unfortunately, under current law, the top priority of our child 
support enforcement system is to reimburse States for past welfare 
costs.
  In my home State of Michigan, we collect over $160 million a year in 
child support owed to children who have received welfare at some point. 
These children and their families are among the poorest in the State. 
But the vast majority of the child support money we collect in the 
State does not go to improve their lives.
  Instead, over $60 million is paid to the Federal Government and 
almost $70 million goes directly into the State treasury. Most of the 
rest is used to pay administrative costs or to reimburse the State for 
health benefits provided to the families. Little of it goes to the kids 
who need it.
  This policy deprives poor children of needed income and creates a 
disincentive for their fathers to pay support. The legislation we are 
considering today would put kids first in the child support system. I 
believe that this legislation will reduce child poverty, and that is 
such an essential task.
  Child support income is more than a fourth of the household budget 
for the average family that receives child support. The only source of 
income that is larger is the parent's income from work. Research shows 
that single parents who receive child support are more likely to work 
than those who do

[[Page H7311]]

not. The child support income would allow these parents to forgo second 
and third jobs to try to keep their families afloat.
  Our work, though, on child support is far from over. Nationwide, less 
than a third of eligible families receive child support now. In 
Michigan, which has a better-than-average child support enforcement 
structure, barely half of eligible families receive any child support 
at all. Almost 200,000 mothers and their children receive zero.
  Child support collections through the Federal child support 
enforcement system have increased since the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. It 
gave child support collectors new tools, like the ability to suspend 
driver's licenses. But clearly we still have much work to do in this 
area. But this bill is an important further step, one that will improve 
the quality of life for millions of poor children.
  I say this in tribute to the work of the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
(Mrs. Johnson) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) and 
everybody else over the years, some of the Members who are not here 
today in this Congress who have worked on this important area.
  We should pass this legislation and put children first in our child 
support system.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 
2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the 
chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, who has 
provided extraordinary leadership for families and children.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4678, the Child Support 
Distribution Act of 2000. I commend the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
(Chairman Johnson) for her active work on this bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I am especially pleased with those provisions of this 
act that promote marriage, fatherhood and strong families.
  Prior to recess, the body passed a resolution by the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) on the importance of each of these areas. Some 
of the points in that resolution are worth repeating I think.
  In 1998, 1.2 million babies, or 33 percent of all newborns, were born 
out of wedlock.
  According to a 1996 Gallup Poll, 79.1 percent of Americans believe 
the most significant family or social problem facing America is the 
physical absence of the father from the home and the resulting lack of 
involvement of fathers in the rearing and development of their 
children.
  According to the Bureau of the Census, in 1996, almost 17 million 
children in the United States, one-fourth of all children in the United 
States, lived in families where the father was absent.
  The United States is now the world's leader in fatherless families, 
according to the United States Bureau of the Census.
  Mr. Speaker, as a Nation, we must focus more attention on addressing 
these issues. This legislation is a step in the right direction.
  Specifically, the fatherhood program included under this child 
support act provides a source of funding for local communities to carry 
out programs designed to strengthen families. This includes programs 
that disseminate information about the advantages of marriage and 
promote marriage through mentoring and provide classes on how to 
control aggressive behavior, that train parents in money management, 
and programs that help fathers and their families break free of 
reliance upon welfare.
  Again, I commend the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) for 
her commitment in this area.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) who has been one of our real 
champions on helping us understand the issues concerning child support 
and who has done a great job in helping our committee.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4678. I commend 
my colleagues the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) and the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) for their efforts to improve our 
country's child support system.
  As many of my colleagues are aware, I know firsthand the importance 
of child support. Thirty years ago, I was a single, working mom with 
three young children. In fact, my children were 1, 3, and 5 years old. 
My children's father did not pay court-ordered child support, and my 
salary alone was not enough to make ends meet.
  As a result, we were forced to go on welfare. Had we received child 
support, we would not have been on welfare.
  Today millions of American families still rely on welfare for the 
exact same reason, a deadbeat parent. That was not fair to my family 30 
years ago. It is not fair to families today. And it is certainly not 
fair to the American taxpayers. But it is also not fair when child 
support is paid and the family never sees a penny because the State and 
the Federal Government keeps it.
  This bill before us today will change that.
  The CBO estimates that the improved ``pass through'' provisions in 
H.R. 4678 will get more than $1 billion of child support every year 
into low-income families and help children in need.
  It is hard being a kid today, so we must show them that they are 
important. Kids who know that their dads and moms care enough to see 
that there is food on the table and shoes on their feet get the message 
loud and clear: they are cared about and that they matter.
  While it is not a perfect bill, H.R. 4678 does help to send the 
message to our children, our children all over the country, that they 
do matter.

                              {time}  1215

  I urge that my colleagues support and vote for H.R. 4678.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English), a member of the 
subcommittee.
  Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise in support of 
this legislation, the presence of which on the floor is a great tribute 
to the gentlewoman who chairs our subcommittee and the ranking member 
and their bipartisan effort to help kids. I am delighted to support 
this legislation, which in my view speaks to a fundamental 
congressional responsibility, to provide States with the necessary 
tools to ensure that families leaving welfare are receiving the child 
support that they are entitled to.
  Under this legislation, we give families who have left public 
assistance first rights to any child support arrears that are owed to 
them, before Federal and State government are reimbursed for costs 
incurred while the family was on assistance. This legislation speaks to 
the confusion of the current distribution rules which are complex, 
simplifying them to make them easier to understand and lower the 
administrative burden for the States.
  I think that we can all agree that the staff time used to decipher 
these rules would be better spent by trying to increase collections. 
This bill also includes the creation of a fatherhood grant program, an 
issue we have addressed here on the floor in the past which would work 
with low-income fathers to promote marriage, encourage them to play an 
active role in their child's lives, and help them get better jobs. 
Ultimately, these children benefit not only from the financial support 
that a noncustodial parent provides but also from the stability of 
having both parents involved in their upbringing. This legislation is a 
mammoth step in the right direction in terms of reforming the child 
support distribution system.
  I would encourage all of my colleagues to unite in bipartisan support 
of this important initiative.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to first start by thanking my colleague and 
friend, the Chair of our subcommittee, the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
(Mrs. Johnson), for bringing this legislation forward. It has not been 
an easy process and rarely is important legislation moved forward 
without the hard work of our Chair. The gentlewoman from Connecticut 
deserves a lot of credit for her tenacity in staying with this issue. 
The legislation before us moves our Nation forward on a policy that 
will help children by getting more child support

[[Page H7312]]

to the family. While that might sound like common sense, current law 
actually penalizes States that want to send child support collections 
to families struggling to leave welfare and in some cases to families 
that have already left public assistance.
  I can tell my colleagues in my own State of Maryland our legislature 
has struggled with this issue. Because of the penalties imposed by 
Federal law, they have been unable to reach agreement to pass more 
child support through to the families. If a State sends child support 
collections to a family on welfare, they still owe the Federal 
Government between half to three-quarters of that same child support 
payment. This has discouraged States from sending child support to 
families and encouraged them to adopt an effective 100 percent tax rate 
on child support payments to certain families. The Child Support 
Distribution Act as modified by the amendment included in the rule 
would end this disincentive for States to send child support to 
families.
  The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) pointed out that when 
this bill is fully implemented, $1 billion a year in child support will 
go to low-income families. During the 10-year phase-in period, $6.3 
billion of child support collections will actually go to the families. 
That is good news for families in our Nation. This bipartisan measure 
would provide States with various options to send child support to low-
income families with the Federal Government acting as a partner rather 
than a financial barrier for the States to do what they believe is best 
for the families in their own States.
  For example, a State would be able to permit the pass-through of $400 
a month to families receiving cash welfare as long as that amount is 
disregarded for welfare payment purposes. In addition, States could 
send all support to families that have left cash assistance.
  Now, there are three primary reasons why this makes good policy 
sense. The first and the most obvious that we have talked about is that 
more resources are going to go into low-income families. There is a 
better chance that families will actually be able to succeed and get 
off of welfare and be able to take care of their own financial needs. 
That is the obvious reason why this legislation makes sense.
  The second, it encourages the noncustodial parent to be more involved 
in the upbringing of his or her child. In most cases it is the father. 
But it connects the father to the family when the money goes directly 
to the needs of the child. It makes it easier to collect child support. 
A father is going to be more willing to pay the money when the money 
actually goes to the family.
  And the third is that it simplifies the administration of our child 
support system. Our committees have had hearings and have listened to 
child support enforcement people at our State level about the 
complexity of our current system. This legislation, in fact, will 
simplify that system.
  In addition to the child support provisions that are included in this 
legislation, we have also put into this legislation the fatherhood 
initiative that already passed this body by an overwhelming vote last 
year; $150 million in grants to community-based organizations to 
promote marriage, encourage the payment of child support, and enhance 
the employment prospect of low-income parents. I am particularly 
pleased that that legislation has been modified.
  We continue to learn. We have put additional provisions in that 
legislation to prevent domestic violence. That is certainly a welcome 
addition that we were able to include in the legislation. We have also 
included in the legislation before my colleagues improvements in our 
child support enforcement provisions as it relates to the issuance of 
passports and visas for those who are delinquent in the payment of 
child support.
  Mr. Speaker, child support for families is common sense. Now we must 
make it the law of the land. I strongly urge all my colleagues to 
support this legislation. We are very pleased that many of the outside 
groups, the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, the National 
Women's Law Center, the Center for Law and Social Policy, the 
Children's Defense Fund, all urge a favorable vote on this legislation 
because, as they state in their letter to us dated July 26, it will 
distribute more support to families to help them maintain employment 
and reduce welfare, it simplifies the State child support system, and 
it provides the needed services to low-income noncustodial parents to 
help them support and raise their children.
  Lastly, Mr. Speaker, let me point out that this legislation has had a 
rough going through our committee. I particularly want to thank Ron 
Haskins of the majority staff and Nick Gwyn of the Democratic staff for 
putting children first and finding a way that we could bridge our 
differences so that we could bring forward the legislation today that 
enjoys strong bipartisan support. I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I too as others have done today rise in 
strong support of the gentlewoman from Connecticut's and the gentleman 
from Maryland's Child Support Distribution Act of 2000. This 
legislation improves on the success of the child support enforcement 
measures enacted in the historic 1996 welfare reform bill, a bill which 
itself has dramatically reduced welfare dependency and afforded real 
opportunity where once there was none.
  I want to focus my comments on a particular section of the bill that 
I introduced as H.R. 4071, the Child Support Fairness and Federal Tax 
Refund Interception Act to modernize the Federal tax refund offset 
program. The Federal tax refund offset program is the second most 
effective way of collecting back child support, accounting for one-
third of all back child support collected. But current law limits this 
program to parents who are on public assistance or parents with 
children who are still minors or parents with disabled adult children. 
My provision expands the eligibility for this program to parents with 
children regardless of their age or disability status.
  A constituent of mine, Lisa McCave, of Wilmington, Delaware, wrote me 
a compelling letter last summer advocating for this change in the law. 
She had to stand by and watch a $2,426 Federal tax refund go to her 
husband in Georgia even though he owed her nearly $7,000 in back child 
support just because her son was no longer a minor. As she said in her 
letter to me, ``We must be able to get all moneys available toward 
paying child support in arrearage no matter if the child has become an 
adult when the arrearage is being paid. We should not have to make our 
children do without necessaries nor should we have to work two and 
three jobs to make up for an irresponsible, noncontributing parent.''
  On behalf of Lisa McCave and other single parents like her, these 
artificial barriers should be torn down. A noncustodial parent should 
not be able to escape their child support responsibilities by playing a 
waiting game until their child is 18.
  I want to thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) and 
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) for their leadership on this 
issue and urge my colleagues to support this important bill.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I stand in strong support of H.R. 4678.
  Let me just tell my colleagues my perspective. Our welfare reform 
policy has been built on two things: the single mother and her needs, 
which is rightfully so, and then the principle of work, work if you are 
able to work. But the third leg of the stool, if you will, that we have 
totally ignored is marriage. Because we have had for years a welfare 
reform system that says to the father, you are an economic 
disadvantage. You are irrelevant to the well-being of your children. We 
have even gone so far as to say you are somewhat of an alley cat. You 
get a girl pregnant and she is 16 years old, hit the road and we will 
deal with her. It is a ridiculous policy.
  What H.R. 4678 does is bring the dad back in the formula. I have met 
with the Georgia fatherhood program. We have one of their chapters in 
Savannah, which I represent. In one of their

[[Page H7313]]

meetings, I met with four of these dads. Here is their personal kind of 
general story. When I was 18 years old, I became a father. But I was 
not ready to live up to that responsibility and the Government backed 
that decision. The Government said I do not have to. If I do hang 
around, we lose housing, we lose health care, we lose day care, we lose 
transportation benefits. So it was easy for me to hit the road. And so 
I left, and a lot of my friends in this situation left. But nobody ever 
told me what it was like to have the arms of a little 5-year-old girl 
hug my neck and call me Daddy. Now I have learned that and I want to 
come back. But I do not want the mama of this little girl, I do not 
want my little girl to be penalized because I want to come back and be 
the dad now and do right. Yet that is what our system has been telling 
him.
  But through this bill, we are saying not only are you going to come 
back but we are going to give you job training because we want you to 
have stability in your life so that you can have stability in your 
marriage and your child's life. We are going to give you some education 
skills, job training skills, and parenthood skills. You are going to 
feel good.
  Mr. Speaker, I have looked into the eyes of four of these dads and 
their testimony is very, very powerful. We owe this to them. We owe it 
to the institution of marriage. We owe it to welfare and social reform; 
but more than anything else, we owe it to millions and millions of kids 
who our economic policy has said, you are going to go through life 
without a dad. This way we can change that. This gives us an 
opportunity. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott).

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Cardin) for yielding the time to me.
  Later in the debate, I will be offering an amendment and a motion to 
recommit. The amendment prohibits the use of Federal funds and 
proselytization. It requires that there should be no discrimination 
against the beneficiaries based on religion and to make sure that civil 
rights laws will apply to these Federal funds.
  The motion to recommit will provide that we should not discriminate 
in employment during the course of these programs.
  I just wanted to read a list of organizations supporting both the 
amendment and the motion to recommit, because I would not have time 
during the consideration of the amendment and the motion. Those who 
support both the amendment and the motion to recommit will be the 
American Baptist Churches USA; the ACLU; the American Federation of 
State, County and Municipal Employees; the American Jewish Committee; 
the American Jewish Congress; the Americans United; the ADL; 
Antidefamation League; the Central Conference of American Rabbis 
Council on Religious Freedom/Friends Committee on National Legislation; 
Quaker; Hadassah; the Jewish Council for Public Affairs; the Na'amat 
USA; the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselors; 
the National Council of Jewish Women; the National Education 
Association; the National PTA; People for the American Way; Service 
Employees International Union; the AFL-CIO; the Union of American 
Hebrew Congregations; the Unitarian Universalist Association; the Women 
of Reform Judaism; the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce; and the 
Presbyterian Church USA Washington Office.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 
3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt).
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
(Mrs. Johnson) for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I also thank the gentlewoman for her commitment and her 
efforts to get this important bill to the floor, and I am pleased that 
my friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), has worked so hard 
to bring this bill to the floor as well.
  There is no question that in our society in the last generation, too 
often fathers have been absent without leave. Too often fathers have 
not been where they were supposed to be, have not been doing what they 
were supposed to be doing, and rightly and appropriately, because of 
that, so much of our effort has been to figure out what we could do to 
help mothers.
  Well, one thing we can do to help mothers is to try to help create an 
environment where fathers really function as fathers, where fathers do 
more than father a child, they actually play the role of fathers in 
this society. This bill is a significant step in that direction.
  This bill is a significant effort to try to make that happen. 
Education, job training, parenthood training are all skills that 
fathers need. We are changing lots of communities in America, beginning 
with welfare reform; and people in those many communities begin to see 
for the first time a community driven by work, not welfare.
  They also need an opportunity to see a community driven by two-parent 
families, not single moms struggling to get by. Too many young men in 
America have grown up in the last decade, maybe even the last 3 decades 
in communities where there were no role models of fathers, in 
communities where we do not just pick up the fatherhood parenting 
skills by watching what happens next door, because what happens next 
door is exactly what happened at your house, a single mom struggling to 
get by, nobody to help her with that process.
  This bill goes beyond adding the important resources that it does add 
to collecting child support. It goes beyond that and works hard for the 
first time in a significant way at a Federal level to help fathers 
become fathers to do that through faith-based organizations and 
community-based organizations.
  And as well intentioned as I know the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Scott) will be with his motion to recommit, of course, I am opposed to 
that, because I think involving these community-based and faith-based 
organizations, as this bill does, with the appropriate protections 
already in the law and in this bill, is a way to deliver these 
services.
  How do we deliver services that create guidelines, the role models, 
the thoughts about parenthood and fatherhood, if we immediately exclude 
from that people who understand the community, people who work in that 
community and community-based and faith-based organizations all the 
time.
  We need to look constantly for better ways to deliver these messages 
that make our society more of what we want it to be. Fathers working 
alongside mothers, raising children in an environment driven by work 
and values and family is what we need to be trying to build our society 
on. That can happen more effectively with the implementation this bill.
  I am for it. I urge my colleagues to vote for it. I am grateful to my 
colleagues who have worked so hard to bring this important piece of 
legislation to the floor today.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I support the Scott amendment. I think it is a common 
sense approach, and I hope that this body will approve that amendment. 
But I want to make it clear, regardless of what happens on the Scott 
amendment, it is important that we approve this legislation.
  Let me point out that all the Democratic Members of the subcommittee, 
which include the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark), the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Matsui), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Coyne), and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson) and myself 
sent a letter out to make it clear that if the Scott amendment does not 
pass, we urge support for H.R. 4678 because the bill takes real steps 
to lift low-income mothers and their children out of poverty. This is 
very important legislation.
  Secondly, let me just quote, if I might, from Governor Glendening of 
Maryland, when I asked him about the pass through issue in my own 
State, he said in the last session, the Maryland general assembly 
considered this issue, but decided not to take action on such a 
significant and costly policy change without a clear knowledge of how 
the Federal Government will approach this issue and share in the costs 
involved.
  It is important that we pass legislation clarifying child support 
pass through, so that our States can take

[[Page H7314]]

advantage of the pass through issues to help low-income families.
  I urge my colleagues that, regardless of what position my colleagues 
take on the Scott amendment, to please support the final passage of the 
legislation.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to 
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).
  (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill for several 
reasons, and I want to enunciate a few of them. We will have a more 
extended discussion on charitable choice in a little bit.
  First off, I think it is important that conservatives understand that 
tough child support, child support that lets parents know, particularly 
fathers, that they cannot abandon their families is not only important 
for the financial support of families, but to send a message to America 
that, in fact, when one gets married, it is a serious thing that can 
have long-term consequences. When we have children, we have a lifetime 
obligation to do that.
  This bill also makes sure that the money collected from those fathers 
in the efforts that we have done here in the House to expand child 
support collection actually goes to the families and not merely to 
replace the government income that goes out to those families, but 
gives an incentive to help empower those families to move out of 
poverty because many times, after a divorce or after a separation, 
those families are driven into poverty.
  Many of the people who are there transition into poverty before they 
move off, because many of what usually are the mothers have the custody 
of the children, are trapped in poverty for a period of time. And the 
noncustodial parent falls behind in their child support payments or 
does not make it a full amount of payment or drives those payments low, 
and until there is a remarriage and until there is a career change, 
often there is a penalty on that. This bill tries to address those 
problems of child support.
  As a conservative, I am also particularly pleased in the efforts in 
the fatherhood area. Some have legitimate concerns as to the expanding 
role of government, and one question that comes up from some of my 
conservative colleagues is why would the government become involved in 
fatherhood initiatives? Partly it is because the government indirectly 
violated the do no harm goal of what I believe should be the number one 
priority of the Federal Government.
  What the Federal Government has done over time, by programs that are 
well intentioned, they have given, in fact, a disincentive to marriage 
in this country, they have made it easier for fathers to abandon their 
families, to not provide the support.
  In public housing, we have had discrimination on families. In fact, 
if you have two incomes blended together, you go over the income cap, 
so there is a disincentive in much of public housing in the United 
States.
  To stay married, the marriage penalty and the tax code gives economic 
disincentives to stay married. We have program after program that is, 
in fact, in the name of good intentioned efforts to help single moms 
has, in fact, separated the dad from many families because of 
indirectly many government programs. I believe that fatherhood is, in 
fact, essential and having fathers involved in the life of their 
children is essential.
  We have seen creative programs in Oklahoma, in many States, Oklahoma 
being a model, in many States in fatherhood initiatives. We need to 
expand these programs. We need and cannot address the problems of teen 
violence, of drug abuse and many other things unless we have both 
parents involved, unless in particular as many books are currently 
pointing out, fathers need to be involved with young boys, they also 
need to be involved with their daughters in a different way, but 
particularly as we look at questions of youth violence and school 
dropouts and many of the problems in society, we must have fathers 
involved.
  My belief is, we would not be facing this crisis as much today if the 
Federal Government had not already messed this up, and this is part a 
compensatory way not to take over these programs but to facilitate, 
which leads us to the question of charitable choice.
  It is my great honor to be House cochair with the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Andrews) of the Empowerment Caucus, the Senate cosponsors 
and leaders of that are Senator Santorum and Senator Lieberman. In our 
empowerment package which Senator Lieberman, vice presidential 
candidate Lieberman, said the legislation we introduced today is really 
a model of cooperation and innovation. It combines much of the 
President's new markets initiatives and Republican-favored American 
Community Renewal Act and a progressive new synthesis for stimulating 
investment entrepreneurship and economic opportunity in disadvantaged 
communities.
  In that package sponsored by Senator Lieberman, unless he would 
change his mind on what he has backed for years here, it allows 
religious faith-based providers to become involved in this without 
diminishing the religious freedom of the beneficiaries or of the 
organizations.
  Vice President Gore has also supported as has Governor Bush faith-
based organizations in being eligible for government grants without 
changing the nature of those religious institutions, i.e., employment 
questions that are within the law, and, b, without restricting and 
reaching into other programs that they do that are not funded with 
government funds.
  Let us make it sure as we debate this today, we cannot use government 
funds to proselytize, that is clear. We can never use government funds 
to proselytize.
  This amendment that we are going to debate today is in advance over 
any other debate we have, which now is reaching into the private funds 
of those organizations, as to whether they can do anything of religious 
character, we all agree no public funds can be used for 
proselytization, that is a government principle that is long standing 
and upheld by the courts. But the courts have recently ruled that you 
cannot also reach into the faith-based organizations that in fact we 
are allowed to give computers to religious schools because the 
computers themselves do not proselytize. It is not the business of the 
government to decide whether proselytization will occur on those 
computers, we just cannot directly fund it.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, let me make it clear, there is no disagreement on either 
side of the aisle or that I know of any Member of this body, that the 
participation of the faith-based groups in the programs we are talking 
about. They are an instrumental part of the fabric of our Nation and 
are extremely important in the delivery of services.
  The question is, it must be consistent with the Constitution 
establishment clause and separation of church and State.
  I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for bringing forward 
two amendments or two opportunities for us to clarify that issue. And 
we are going to have a healthy debate on it. At the end of the day, the 
House, this body will work its will; and whatever the results are, I am 
prepared to abide by.
  I urge at the end of the day that we all join together as we have 
during this debate and support the passage of this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say, Listen up America. So often 
what happens on this House floor is not reported by the media, unless 
there is a conflict and a battle. The fact that the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Cardin) and I have spent many, many hours thinking about 
this bill, listening to people's concerns about it, working out the 
problems means that it comes to the floor with agreement, but it is a 
dramatic change in public policy.
  It is going to make an enormous difference in the ability of our 
Nation to build strong families. It is going to make an enormous 
difference in the lives of children. Just as welfare reform put models 
of work in our neighborhood, so his bill will put models of marriage in 
those neighborhoods, creating the umbrella of economic and emotional 
security under which children can grow well and strong.

[[Page H7315]]

  Research has documented over and over, what we have never been 
willing on this floor to talk about, the importance of marriage and 
what it means to children. So today we take that step. We are going to 
help people learn how to parent, help people understand marriage, help 
people take that option.
  Why?
  Because mothers and fathers do better in marriage, but we are doing 
this for the kids.

                              {time}  1245

  Years ago when I was a freshman in this body, I was a member of the 
Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families. We held a hearing on 
children's fears, and the goal of the hearing was to demonstrate that 
children's greatest fear was of nuclear war. In fact, what the hearing 
demonstrated was that children's greatest fear was of divorce.
  Children need moms, they need dads, and we need to honor the role of 
fathers and help those who come into it without preparation to succeed 
in it, just as much as we need to help women on welfare succeed 
economically.
  This bill will help men whose children are on welfare succeed 
economically, in the same way welfare gives the mothers of their 
children that help, but it goes beyond that and addresses the emotional 
need to grow of young people so that they can not only succeed 
economically, but succeed as parents and succeed as co-parents of this 
child.
  So this is a giant change in public policy, it is a radical step 
forward, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I 
must oppose H.R. 4678, the Child Support Distribution Act. While I 
applaud the sections of the bill providing increased flexibility to 
states to ensure that child support payments go to benefit children, 
rather than government bureaucrats, other provisions of H.R. 4678 
present grave dangers to individual liberty, privacy, constitutional 
government and the sanctity of the American family.
  I am particularly disturbed by the language expanding the use of the 
National Directory of New Hires, popularly known as the ``new hires 
database'', in order to more effectively administer the unemployment 
compensation system and deny visas and residency to non-citizens who 
are delinquent in child support payments. Identifying persons who are 
failing to fulfill their legal obligation to pay child support is a 
worthy goal, as an OB-GYN who has delivered over four thousand babies 
in my over thirty year medical career, words cannot express the 
contempt I hold for those who would refuse to support their children. 
Similarly, preventing fraud in the unemployment program is obviously 
important to the nation's employers and employees whose taxes finance 
the unemployment insurance system.
  However much I share the goals meant to be accomplished by the 
expanded uses of the database, I must remind my colleagues that the 
road to serfdom, like the road to hell, is paved with noble purposes 
and good intentions. Expanding the use of the new hires database brings 
us closer to the day when the database is a universal tracking system 
allowing government officials easy access to every individual's 
employment and credit history. Providing the government with that level 
of power to track citizens is to invite abuse of individual liberties.
  The threat of the expansion of the new hires database is magnified by 
the fact that it uses on the social security number, which has become 
for all intents and purposes a de facto national ID number. In addition 
to threatening liberty, forcing Americans to divulge their uniform 
identifier for inclusion in a database also facilitates the horrendous 
crime of identity theft. In order to protect American citizens from 
both private and public criminals I have introduced legislation, H.R. 
220, restricting the use of the social security number to purposes 
related to social security administration so that the government cannot 
establish databases linked by a common identifier.
  I would also remind my colleagues that the federal government has no 
constitutional authority to be involved in the collection of child 
support, much less invade the privacy of every citizen in order to 
ferret out a few wrongdoers. Constitutionally, there are only three 
federal crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and piracy on the high seas. 
For Congress to authorize federal involvement in any other law 
enforcement issue is a violation on the limits on Congressional power 
contained in Article 1, section 8 and the 10th Amendment of the United 
States Constitution. No less an authority than Chief Justice William 
Renhquist has stated that Congress is creating too many federal laws 
and infringing on the proper police powers of the states.
  In a free society, constitutional limits on government power and the 
liberty of citizens must never be sacrificed to increase the efficiency 
of any government program, no matter how noble the program's goal. 
Again I ask my colleagues to keep in mind that the dangerous road 
toward the loss of liberty begins when members of Congress put other 
goals ahead of our oath to preserve the Constitution and protect the 
liberty of our constituents.

  While the expanded use of the new hires database provides sufficient 
justification for constitutionalists to oppose this bill, H.R. 4678 
also must be opposed as it furthers the intrusion of the federal 
government into family life through the use of federal funds to support 
``fatherhood programs.'' Mr. Speaker, the federal government is neither 
constitutionally authorized nor institutionally competent to promote 
responsible fatherhood. In fact, by leveling taxes on responsible 
parents to provide special programs for irresponsible parents the 
federal government is punishing responsible fathers!
  Federal programs promoting responsible fatherhood are another example 
of how the unintended consequences of government interventions are used 
to justify further expansions of state power. After all, it was the 
federal welfare state which undermined the traditional family as well 
as the ethic of self-responsibility so vital to maintaining a free 
society. In particular, the welfare state has promoted the belief that 
the government (re: taxpayer) has the primary responsibility for child-
rearing, not the parents. When a large number of citizens view 
parenting as proper function of the central state it is inevitable that 
there will be an increase in those who fail to fulfill their 
obligations as parents. Without the destructive effects of the welfare 
state, there would be little need for federal programs to promote 
responsible fatherhood.
  Instead of furthering federal involvement in the family, Congress 
should stop pumping the narcotic of welfare into America's communities 
by defunding federal bureaucracies and returning responsibility for 
providing assistance to those institutions best able to provide help 
without fostering an ethic of irresponsibility and dependancy: private 
charities and churches.
  Certain of my colleagues will say that this bill does promote 
effective charity through expansion of the ``charitable choice'' 
program where taxpayer funds are provided to ``faith-based'' 
institutions in order to administer certain welfare programs. While I 
have no doubt that churches are better able to foster strong families 
than federal bureaucrats, I am concerned that providing taxpayer 
funding for religious institutions will force the institutions to 
water-down their message--thus weakening the very feature that makes 
these institutions effective in the first place!
  Furthermore, providing taxpayers dollars to secular institutions 
violates the rights of taxpayers not to be forced to subsidize beliefs 
that may offend them. As Thomas Jefferson said ``To compel a man to 
furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he 
disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.''
  In conclusion, H.R. 4678, the Child Support Distribution Act, 
violates the Constitution by expanding the use of the new hires 
database, thus threatening the liberty and privacy of all Americans, as 
well as by expanding the federal role in family in the misguided belief 
that the state can somehow promote responsible fatherhood. By expanding 
the so-called ``charitable choice'' program this bill also violates the 
conscience of millions of taxpayers and runs the risk of turning 
effective religious charities into agents of the welfare state. It also 
furthers the federalization of crime control by increasing the federal 
role in child support despite the fact that the federal government has 
no constitutional authority in this area. I therefore urge my 
colleagues to reject this bill and return responsibility for America's 
children to states, local communities and, most importantly, parents.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express concerns 
regarding H.R. 4678, the Child Support Distribution Act of 2000, a bill 
intended to provide more child support money to families leaving 
welfare. The debate over welfare reform is very different from the 
reality of families struggling to escape poverty. Millions of taxpayers 
dollars have gone to private contractors who's only mission should be 
the preparation of adults who receive welfare to move from dependence 
to independence. Unfortunately, the amount of professional assistance 
made available to these families nor the qualifications of those 
contractors who are federally funded for the express purpose of 
providing counseling and job assistance to adults as they transition 
from welfare to work is not available. We do not have any effective 
measure as to the success or lack thereof of our effort to reform our 
nation's welfare system. For this reason, I would challenge my 
colleagues in this body to raise the bar on any legislative action that 
would effect the income of those families, which are transitioning from 
welfare to work.

[[Page H7316]]

  This is an issue of great importance to children residing in the City 
of Houston and across this nation and, therefore, should be addressed 
under an open unrestricted rule, not under one which only allows one 
amendment such as in this case. The state of Texas has the fourth 
largest child support caseload in the nation with 1.2 million cases 
involving 2 million children. Child support collections for these cases 
increased 15% from $757 million in State Fiscal Year 1998 to $868 
million in State Fiscal Year 1999.
  Under current law, states are entitled to child support payments 
while a family is receiving cash welfare payments. And when a family 
leaves welfare, the state received 50% of any past due child support 
payments and the family receives 50%. Fortunately, this legislation 
would allow states to send child support payments directly to families 
who are also receiving welfare. This should not be an option for the 
states, but a requirement that they send all child support payments to 
these families for the care of their children.
  Under current law, states are entitled to child support payments 
while a family is receiving cash welfare payments. And when a family 
leaves welfare, the state receives 50% of any past due child support 
payments and the family receives 50%. Fortunately, this legislation 
would allow states to send child support payments directly to families 
who are also receiving welfare. This should not be an option for the 
states, but a requirement that they send all child support payments to 
these families for the care of their children.
  This bill should maximize the amount of child support funds that 
states should provide to families in order to increase the potential 
for success as families struggle to escape poverty under current 
welfare reform law. It is only fair that the amount of child support 
collected on their behalf should actually go for the care of these 
children. It is also very important that states provide this additional 
support during the critical period after a family leaves welfare. As 
the current bill is written the effective date for this provision is 
October 1, 2005, with an allowance for those states which wish to being 
providing these additional child support funds earlier being permitted 
to do so.
  If members of this body have forgotten that welfare reform has been 
implemented and families are as we speak on this matter being denied 
additional assistance from states because their time has run out for 
access to federally subsidized living assistance benefits. To suggest 
that some of these families can wait until October of 2005 to receive 
child support payments which are legally due them is obscene and 
irresponsible on the part of this body's leadership. This issue is not 
a republican issue or a democratic issue, but a children's issue and 
should be treated as such, this legislation should be worked on until 
our children are helped and treated fairly.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this 
important legislation which will improve the chances of parents trying 
to manage the transition from welfare to work.
  The underlying bill will significantly strengthen child support 
enforcement efforts and improve the lives of working families and their 
children. I am particularly pleased that this bill will improve the 
lives of thousands of women working hard to support themselves and 
their families on their own.
  This legislation will focus more of the funds collected from child 
support enforcement activities on the individuals who are actually owed 
the funds. Too often, in spite of our best efforts to continually 
improve enforcement activities, child support dollars often fail to 
reach the families and children who so desperately need them.
  This change will ensure that single mothers receive an additional 
$3.5 billion over the next five years.
  This marks yet another important improvement in child support 
enforcement activities. I am extremely proud that the Clinton 
Administration and Congress have made so many significant strides in 
this arena. Last year, we collected over $16 billion in child support--
more than twice the amount collected in 1992.
  In 1992, I introduced the Child Support and Enforcement Improvements 
Act which was designed to improve the ability of states to collect 
overdue child support payments. Many of the provisions of that bill 
were included in the 1996 Welfare Reform legislation and have helped 
child support collections continue to rise.
  I am proud we have been able to use innovative ways to improve 
collections including new efforts to redirect tax refund dollars which 
have resulted in $1.3 billion in additional collections, and programs 
to match delinquent parents with financial records which have also 
yielded $3 billion since last August. This legislation is another 
important step in the effort to ensure that all Americans fulfill their 
responsibilities as parents. It will help families achieve independence 
and ensure that more children grow up in safe, stable households.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this common-sense legislation 
today.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Child Support 
Distribution Act (H.R. 4678) which will allow more child support money 
to get to the families who need and deserve this compensation. I would 
like to commend Chairwoman Nancy Johnson for sponsoring this 
legislation and for working tirelessly on behalf of the families of 
America who will benefit from this bill. I would also like to thank 
Mrs. Johnson for working with me and my colleagues to make improvements 
to this legislation as it moved through Committee.
  On June 26, I along with my colleague Representative Joe Barton 
submitted a letter to Mrs. Johnson asking that Title III of H.R. 4678 
be deleted due to the serious privacy threat the language posed to 
highly sensitive and personal information. Under Title III, private 
child support collection agencies would be granted access to national 
data bases established in 1996 exclusively to facilitate securing 
delinquent child support payments by federally funded state child 
support collection agencies. These databases house personal financial, 
wage and health information. Under current law, state child support 
agencies and their contractors are subject to federal regulation with 
respect to the use and disclosure of this sensitive information. 
However, under Title III of the bill, private collection agencies would 
have been allowed to access this same information with no federal 
protections whatsoever.
  In addition we submitted a letter to Secretary Shalala at the 
Department of Health and Human Services asking her to urge the 
President to veto any legislation that would allow unregulated access 
to access to these databases.
  We were not the only ones disturbed by the language in Title III, 
consumer privacy groups, state organizations, and employer groups as 
well as child advocacy groups were all in strong opposition to the 
title. These groups included the Children's Defense Fund, the National 
Women's Law Center, the Center for Law and Social Policy, the 
Association for Children for Enforcement of Support, Inc., the Consumer 
Federation of America, Consumers Union, U.S. Public Interest Research 
Group, and the American Payroll Association. These groups understood 
that allowing unfettered access to these databases could ultimately 
undermine child support enforcement efforts.
  In compelling testimony regarding the privacy threat associated with 
expanding access to these databases, Joan Entmacher, Director of the 
National Women's Law Center stated the following on May 18 before the 
Human Resources Subcommittee on Ways and Means:

       Over the years, Congress has worked to increase the 
     effectiveness of child support enforcement while protecting 
     the privacy of individuals. In the Family Support Act of 1988 
     and Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
     Reconciliation Act of 1996, Congress required the creation of 
     the automated systems and databases essential to effective 
     state child support enforcement, and addressed legitimate 
     privacy concerns by carefully limiting access to and use of 
     the information. If access to these databases is expanded, 
     and abuses occur, a future Congress or state legislatures may 
     conclude that the only way to protect privacy would be to 
     dismantle these databases altogether, permanently setting 
     back child support enforcement.

  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that Chairwoman Johnson was receptive to 
our concerns and elected to preserve privacy by removing Title III from 
the bill. Again, I commend my esteemed colleague Representative Johnson 
for her leadership on this matter.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). All time for general debate on 
the bill has expired.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Scott

  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Scott:
       Page 39, after line 19, insert the following:
       ``(E) Protection for beneficiaries.--An entity to which a 
     grant is made under this section shall not subject a 
     participant in a program assisted with the grant to sectarian 
     worship, instruction, or proselytization.
       ``(F) Rule of construction on receipt of financial 
     assistance under this section.--For purposes of any Federal, 
     State, or local law, receipt of financial assistance from a 
     grant made under this section shall constitute receipt of 
     Federal financial assistance or aid.
       Page 39, line 20, strike ``(E)'' and insert ``(G)''.
       Page 40, line 5, strike ``(F)'' and insert ``(H)''.
       Page 43, line 15, insert ``(except the except clause of 
     subsection (g))'' after ``this section''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 566, the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.

[[Page H7317]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes and 40 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, all of the provisions in this amendment have been 
previously accepted by the majority in the other bills, H.R. 3222, Even 
Start, and H.R. 4141 the Safe and Drug-Free Schools, which contained 
the charitable choice provisions.
  In the charitable choice part of this provision that allows the 
Federal funding of faith-based organizations, the first provision of 
this amendment clarifies that any eligible entity request not subject a 
participant during the course of a publicly funded fatherhood program 
to sectarian worship instruction or proselytization. Under the bill, 
the charitable choice provision only provides that no direct funds can 
be used for that purpose. This would not, of course, cover privately 
paid employees or volunteers, who could use the Federal-funded program 
to promote their sectarian agenda.
  The concern here is that you have individuals seeking assistance in a 
federally funded fatherhood program, and in essence they become a 
captive audience. It is wrong to take advantage of their need for 
services and essentially require them to participate in a federally 
sponsored sectarian worship program. I say ``federally sponsored'' 
because, according to the bill, the bill allows the programs to be paid 
for with 80 percent of the expenses being paid for by Federal funds.
  The majority had previously accepted this provision, and in the 
committee report accompanying the Even Start bill, H.R. 3122, that 
report outlines the acceptance of that amendment.
  Another portion of this amendment closes the loophole contained in 
the bill which would allow discrimination against some beneficiaries 
based on their religion. There should be no circumstance in which a 
person is denied benefits under a federally funded program solely 
because of that person's religious beliefs.
  Finally, my amendment clarifies that programs using Federal funds are 
technically in receipt of Federal financial assistance. This makes it 
clear that in the cases of insidious discrimination, the Department of 
Justice could use enforcement procedures under title VI of the Civil 
Rights Act to enforce civil rights of beneficiaries and employees.
  Mr. Speaker, these provisions have previously been accepted by the 
majority in two other bills.
  The amendment will protect beneficiaries from unwarranted 
proselytization and discrimination, and it ensures that civil rights 
protections available to all other Federal programs will apply to this 
legislation.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Connecticut is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to make very clear that the amendment that 
the gentleman is offering is not the same amendment that is in the Even 
Start legislation or in the Drug-Free Schools bill. It is different in 
its wording, and the difference is significant.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana 
(Mr. Souder).
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairwoman for her efforts and 
should have said that earlier on the full bill. I appreciate her 
leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, I am not going to get into a lot of discussion here 
about the amazing wonders that some of these groups are accomplishing 
around the country that are faith based, but I want to get into the 
technical thing.
  As a person who has been a primary negotiator with the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott) on this, I immediately realized when the phone 
call came to me a couple of days ago in Indiana that this was not the 
same amendment, and it has an overwhelming difference which made me 
resist it.
  I have worked with the gentleman because we agree with many of the 
basic parts of this, that you cannot fund through government funds 
sectarian worship, instruction or proselytizing, and that there are 
certain civil rights laws that are required to be upheld regardless in 
employment discrimination.
  But what this program does and this amendment would do is reach into 
the private funding. The differences, for example, are as we went 
through Even Start, where people are often in a school or on school 
grounds and in a defined program, a fatherhood program may have 
different components, and the way the gentleman has worded this, ``in a 
program,'' ``program'' is not clearly defined, that it could be a 
fatherhood initiative that has many components.
  The component funded by the Federal Government cannot proselytize. 
But, as I mentioned earlier, we also have a Supreme Court decision that 
has come through since we have had these discussions at the Committee 
on Education and the Workforce, Mitchell versus Helms. The majority 
clearly ruled that, for example, a computer can be given to a religious 
institution, because the computer does not do the proselytizing, nor 
does a building do the proselytizing, nor does a book that does not 
have proselytizing in it do proselytizing.
  If other funds from that organization do proselytizing, then, as long 
as an individual recipient has a choice, as long as there is not 
discrimination based on religion and who is in the program, things 
which we agreed with before and which are protected under law, whether 
or not the Scott amendment passes, you cannot discriminate on who you 
serve if you get government funds; you cannot discriminate and use 
government funds for proselytizing; you cannot practice racial 
discrimination, for example. But you can, for example, have a program 
that if part of the fatherhood program gets a computer, or if we help 
fund a building, and that group happens to have a religious component 
to their program not funded by the Federal Government, it does not mean 
that they have to drop everything else that is in their fatherhood 
program, such as Charles Ballard's in Cleveland does. He cannot use 
government funds to proselytize, but he can use government funds to do 
other things. I think it is wonderful, and I think the programs are 
wonderful.
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 45 seconds.
  First of all, on the question of whether or not you can discriminate 
against who you serve, the second part of this amendment deals with 
that directly, and that is you cannot under any circumstances 
discriminate on who you serve based on religion. The bill includes a 
loophole, and this amendment will close that loophole.
  On the question of whether you can proselytize during a federally 
funded program, that is clear, Mr. Speaker. You should not be able to 
proselytize; you should not be able to run a program that does that. 
This amendment makes it clear. The bill as it is leaves it open, that 
you can run a federally sponsored sectarian worship program with 
Federal funds.
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SCOTT. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, my question is, does the gentleman grant 
that there is a difference between ``during,'' which we have had 
before, and ``in a program''? Because we have agreed that during a 
program funded by government funds, that is directly funded, you 
cannot, but ``in a program'' is broader. Does the gentleman agree with 
that being the difference?
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, no, I do not, because 
under the bill it only includes direct funds. So if you are running the 
program and have someone come into the program during the program to 
proselytize with indirect funds, or volunteer, you have got your 
captive audience, and that is wrong.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would remind the gentleman that you cannot do it 
during the program. Current law very clearly prohibits public monies 
for sectarian worship, instruction or proselytizing. In addition, 
current law is very clear that no program receiving Federal funds may 
discriminate based on race, color, national origin, disability, or age. 
This amendment is not necessary to enforce title VI of the Civil Rights

[[Page H7318]]

Act, section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act or the Age 
Discrimination Act. It is not necessary, further, to present 
proselytizing.
  What it does do is to change the provisions on which we have relied 
for a number of years and will thereby frighten churches away from 
being willing to participate in this program. Remember, these fathers 
that we are trying to reach out to are the very people that government 
has not been able to reach, that the bureaucracy is not going to be 
able to get at them. That is why we want the churches to help.
  In many neighborhoods, frankly, the black churches, the Hispanic 
churches, are the only institutions left standing; and we want them to 
be able to get some Federal money to help them teach parenting skills, 
teach financial management skills, do work-readiness programs, to help 
these fathers take their economic responsibility and their emotional 
responsibility to their kids.
  The big advantage of this is going to be that if that neighborhood 
church is able to bring these men back into their families and help 
these families grow then they will be there to support those families 
throughout the many decades of growth that families go through, through 
the hard times, which we all know are a part of our lives, as well as 
through the good times.
  So to pass this amendment would absolutely, without question, chill 
the participation of the ecumenical community, not just the Protestant 
churches and the Catholic church, but the synagogues and the mosques, 
in this program. That would be a tragedy for men, for families, and for 
children.
  I urge defeat of the amendment.
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The important word here, Mr. Speaker, is ``direct,'' that you can run 
especially a church program indirectly with a captive audience that you 
have got, and that is the essential word. When you say you cannot 
proselytize, in fact you can, if you do it indirectly.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
(Mrs. Johnson).
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I do not agree that there 
is a loophole. Clearly you cannot do it during the program. If you go 
as far as the gentleman's bill, to say you cannot do it ``in'' the 
program, is significant and will disallow a lot of normal church 
activities.
  But my deepest concern is not whether or not the gentleman and I 
argue this technically, whether lawyers agree or disagree. The fact is 
that a change in the wording of this provision that has been in place 
now for I think 4 years, starting with welfare reform, will chill the 
participation, particularly of the small churches that we are trying to 
get involved through this bill.
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, the amendment has three provisions. One is to disallow 
any proselytization during the program. It says in the wording ``a 
participant in a program assisted by Federal funds.'' It also prohibits 
any discrimination in terms of who you serve, and it provides for civil 
rights protections under Federal law that apply to every other Federal 
program. I would hope that we would adopt this amendment.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Scott 
amendment and the motion to recommit in opposition to the Charitable 
Choice provisions in The Child Support Distribution Act, H.R. 4678. 
These provisions would weaken important anti-discrimination civil 
rights protections; violate the constitutional separation of church and 
state; and entangle religious institutions in the reach of government. 
These provisions explicitly enable faith-based organizations to 
proselytize to those receiving public services; to discriminate in 
employment decisions with public funds; and provide that faith 
organizations need not alter their religious character causing adverse 
consequences.
  While the underlying child support provisions in this bill are 
important to help families raising their children and that they are 
endorsed by the Children's Defense Fund, the Center on Budget and 
Policy Priorities, and CLASP, my opposition is focused solely on the 
Charitable Choice provisions. Also, opposing these Charitable Choice 
provisions is The Work Group for Religious Freedom in Social Services, 
a coalition of more than 40 national religious, civil rights, civil 
liberties, and education organizations, including the ACLU, American 
Baptist Churches, USA, American Jewish Committee, and Americans United 
for Separation of church and State.
  The Scott amendment is essential because it would strengthen 
prohibitions against proselytizing and prevent discrimination against 
beneficiaries. It also would clarify that beneficiaries who received 
direct grants or beneficiaries who receive indirect assistance are both 
in receipt of federal financial assistance.
  The amendment has three main components. First, although the bill 
would prohibit federal funds provided directly to recipient 
institutions from being expended for sectarian workshop, instruction, 
or proselytizing, the bill does not extended the prohibition to 
privately funded staff pursuing these activities toward individuals 
receiving public services within the publicly funded program. The Scott 
amendment recognizes that it is inappropriate for publicly funded 
institutions and programs to include a component of proselytization and 
would prevent this. Second, the Scott amendment would close a loophole 
enabling discrimination against beneficiaries when another existing 
local, state, or federal law permits it. Third, the Scott amendment 
makes it clear to our court system that when federal funds are involved 
federal civil rights apply and they can be enforces under the Civil 
Rights Act Title VI or other applying laws. This would apply even if 
federal financial assistance is provided via a voucher, certificate, or 
other indirect methods.
  Scott's motion to recommit addresses employment discrimination and 
would strike the bill's provision allowing religious organizations to 
use public funds to discriminate in hiring. All of these needed 
protections are very important to ensure that the religious rights and 
the civil rights of Americans can be exercised and where they overlap, 
there is an appropriate balance. They also would serve to protect the 
separation of church and state. I urge my colleagues to support the 
Scott amendment and motion to recommit.

                              {time}  1300

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). All time has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 566, the previous question is ordered on 
the bill and on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Scott).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 163, 
noes 257, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 455]

                               AYES--163

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Campbell
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Edwards
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (FL)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson, E.B.
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larson
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Slaughter
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Strickland
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--257

     Aderholt
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr

[[Page H7319]]


     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Clement
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dingell
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ewing
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kasich
     Kelly
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuykendall
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     Mascara
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paul
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Kaptur
       

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Engel
     Everett
     Jefferson
     Jones (OH)
     Lazio
     McCollum
     McIntosh
     Owens
     Riley
     Tanner
     Towns
     Vento
       
     Young (AK)
       

                              {time}  1323

  Messrs. SALMON, DAVIS of Florida, DAVIS of Virginia and HILL of 
Indiana changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Ms. ESHOO and Messrs. GEPHARDT, BALDACCI and COSTELLO changed their 
vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The question is on the 
engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                Motion to Recommit Offered By Mr. Scott

  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. SCOTT. I am in its present form, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Scott moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4678 to the 
     Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to report the 
     same to the House forthwith with the following amendment:
       Page 43, line 15, insert ``(other than subsection (f))'' 
     after ``this section''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott) is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his 
motion.
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to make it clear to my 
colleagues that the motion does not kill the bill. It simply strikes 
the provision contained in the bill which allows employment 
discrimination and reports the bill immediately back to the House for 
consideration without that provision.
  Mr. Speaker, the motion makes it clear that a religious organization 
participating in a fatherhood program may not use Federal funds to 
discriminate in their hiring based on religion. Mr. Speaker, the idea 
that religious bigotry might take place with Federal funds is not 
speculative.
  During several debates that we have had on this issue, it has been 
established that it is the intent of the sponsors to allow a religious 
organization using Federal funds under charitable choice to fire or 
refuse to hire a perfectly qualified employee solely or based on that 
person's religion. One said that a Jewish organization could fire a 
Protestant if they choose.
  Furthermore, some proponents of charitable choice have gone so far to 
suggest that charitable choice would not work unless one could 
discriminate. One proponent was quoted in Congressional Quarterly 
stating that groups should not be barred from Federal funds because 
they are a Christian organization and like to hire Christians.
  Mr. Speaker, there was a time when some Americans, because of their 
religion, were not considered qualified for certain jobs. In fact, 
before 1960, it was thought that a Catholic could not be elected 
President. Before the civil rights laws passed, people of certain 
religions were routinely subject to invidious discrimination when they 
sought employment. Fortunately the civil rights laws of the 1960s put 
an end to that practice, and we no longer see signs suggesting that 
those particular religions need not apply for jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing to know that at the same time that 
we are considering the first person of the Jewish faith to be our Vice 
President that at the same time we are considering legislation which 
will allow religious organizations to practice religious discrimination 
in federally funded programs.
  Federally funded religious bigotry is wrong, and so I urge the 
adoption of the motion to recommit with instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Edwards).
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, this vote is very clear. It is nonpartisan. 
If my colleagues favor using Federal tax dollars to discriminate based 
on religion for federally funded jobs, then vote ``no'' on this motion. 
But if my colleagues think it is wrong to take the American people's 
tax dollars and put out a sign that says no Jews, no Protestants, or no 
Catholics, no Muslims need apply for this federally funded job, then 
they should vote ``yes'' for this motion.

                              {time}  1330

  I would suggest it is wrong to discriminate against any American 
citizen based on religion. I think to use Federal tax dollars to 
subsidize that religious discrimination should be intolerable, and it 
should be unacceptable in this bill or any bill that passes this House. 
I urge, for that reason, a bipartisan ``yes'' vote on this motion to 
recommit.
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to 
indicate that if this amendment does not pass, we will have people 
having the ability to tell people that they do not hire their kind 
because of their religion. This amendment would prohibit that practice, 
would prohibit discrimination based on religion in federally funded 
programs.
  I would hope that we would take a stand against religious bigotry and 
adopt the motion to recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong 
opposition to the motion to recommit, and I yield 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), my ranking member.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) is recognized for 5 minutes, and the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) is yielded to for 30 seconds.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this 
time.

[[Page H7320]]

  Mr. Speaker, there are different views in this House in regards to 
this particular issue. I happen to agree with the position of the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and will support the motion. 
However, regardless of what happens on the motion, I urge my colleagues 
to support the final passage of this legislation.
  I am joined in this request by all the Democratic members of our 
subcommittee: the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark), the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Matsui), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Coyne), and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson).
  This is an extremely important bill. Let the House work its will on 
this motion, but please support final passage.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, this is a very critical vote. The question 
is whether we are going to repeal title VII of the Civil Rights Act 
that has exempted churches from being regulated in their employment 
patterns.
  This is a question of church governance and whether we are now going 
to say that churches, if they are going to participate in any Federal 
program, can no longer be churches. If we take the religious nature out 
of the churches and say that they cannot control who they hire, we have 
changed the nature of current law. We have changed the nature of the 
Civil Rights Act, title VII, that was given in particular to churches 
so they did not fall under this type of thing.
  In the recent decision on Mitchell versus Helms, for the majority, 
Justice Thomas wrote, ``The religious nature of a recipient should not 
matter to the constitutional analysis so long as the recipient 
adequately furthers the government's secular purpose.''
  We all agree they cannot proselytize with government funds. If they 
are accomplishing our goal of fatherhood, of housing, of juvenile 
justice, whatever our goal is, to get kids off drugs, as long as they 
are not proselytizing with our government funds, I do not believe we in 
Congress should tell a church that they should no longer be a church or 
they cannot participate.
  We need the involvement of all parts of our community. This amendment 
would in fact gut almost any denomination from being willing to 
participate in trying to address the problems that so desperately need 
our cooperative efforts.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling).
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time.
  My good friend from Virginia, and we are good friends, said that this 
does not gut the bill, does not kill the bill. There is no question it 
kills the bill. Title VII at the present time exempts churches and 
religious organizations from employment discrimination laws. So, 
obviously, the church is not going to give up that title VII exemption 
or the religious organization, so they just do not participate.
  So we will lose some of the very most important people that could 
make this program work simply because we have gutted the bill; we have 
eliminated their participation. It is just as simple as that.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a difficult issue. But for 4 years now this 
Nation has had Charitable Choice language in its welfare reform bill, 
in its Even Start program, and in other legislative initiatives for the 
explicit purpose of allowing churches to be part of the social service 
delivery system because often they can reach people that no government 
agency can reach.
  There are neighborhoods in America, there are areas of America where 
the only institutions left are small churches. Those small churches 
cannot tolerate complex, burdensome regulations governing their 
activities, but they can provide services without proselytizing. 
Clearly under current law, they cannot use Federal funds on any program 
that is going to proselytize. They cannot use Federal funds if they are 
going to discriminate. All those things are in current Charitable 
Choice laws and they have worked. Do not change it.
  And particularly do not change it in this fatherhood bill, because 
the fathers we are trying to reach are outside of the traditional 
system. The most likely agencies to reach them are the very small black 
churches in poor neighborhoods, Hispanic churches, other small 
institutions that we hope will be able to reach out to these fathers, 
and help bring them back into being the emotional parent of their child 
as well as the economic parent.
  Charitable Choice provisions have worked. Do not vote for this motion 
to recommit because it will destroy the opportunity of particularly our 
smallest churches to participate in the fatherhood grant demonstration 
program. And that would be really a tragedy because it would weaken us 
in reaching people that traditionally in our society we have not been 
able to reach. Government has not reached them, the big institutional 
churches have not reached them, and we need, we need, to reach into the 
neighborhoods where the people need our help.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 175, 
noes 249, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 456]

                               AYES--175

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill (IN)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larson
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Moore
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--249

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Borski
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ewing
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons

[[Page H7321]]


     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kildee
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kuykendall
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ose
     Oxley
     Packard
     Paul
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Engel
     Everett
     Jefferson
     Jones (OH)
     McCollum
     McIntosh
     Owens
     Towns
     Vento
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1355

  Mr. SPRATT and Mr. COOKSEY changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mrs. CAPPS changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The question is on the passage 
of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 405, 
nays 18, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 457]

                               YEAS--405

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Ose
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--18

     Ackerman
     Bateman
     Cannon
     Chenoweth-Hage
     Coburn
     Frank (MA)
     Gejdenson
     Graham
     Hostettler
     Jackson (IL)
     Jones (NC)
     Manzullo
     Paul
     Payne
     Sanford
     Scott
     Shadegg
     Waters

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Engel
     Everett
     Ewing
     Jefferson
     Jones (OH)
     McCollum
     McIntosh
     Owens
     Towns
     Vento
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1412

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________