|

February 2006- Vol. 8, No. 1
Please note: With this issue, CFFPP will be taking a short
break from producing our monthly Policy Briefings. During this time
we will be assessing the most valuable aspects of the briefing to
our readers and considering revisions to its format. We will be sending
a survey to our subscription list and hope that you will respond at
that time. Thank you.
Pass It On! Campaign Begins:
Encourage Your State to Implement Child Support Provisions in Budget
Bill that Can Benefit Poor Families
While the TANF provisions contained in the budget bill that was
passed by Congress and signed into law on February 8, 2006 will
create additional requirements and restrictions on poor families,
some of the child support provisions could allow for relief from
child support debt that is owed to the state to repay welfare costs,
thus increasing child support payments to families (see below for
a summary of the child support provisions contained in the legislation).
In order to encourage these policy changes, CFFPP is initiating
a campaign to advocate at the state level for the adoption of some
of the provisions. Please visit our website, www.cffpp.org
for information on our campaign. To receive additional information
and strategies as they become available, contact Jacquelyn Boggess
at boggess@cffpp.org.
Budget Bill Passes Congress; Contains Reauthorization
of TANF and Program Cuts
On February 8, 2006, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005
was signed into law. The legislation reduces funding for domestic
programs aimed at low-income families by $182 billion over five
years while at the same time cutting taxes for high-income families
by an estimated $285 billion over five years. The Tax Policy Center
estimates that households with annual incomes of more than $1 million
will average a benefit of $136,000 per year in tax breaks, and the
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) reports that if the
tax cuts are made permanent, this same group would receive more
than $600 billion in tax cuts.
TANF reauthorization, the subject of much debate that ended in
failure to reach agreement over that past 5 years, was folded into
this broad budget bill with little debate of the provisions that
were enacted. This new legislation contains changes to the program
that reach beyond earlier proposals to increase work requirements.
At issue are several provisions that would shift more than $6.8
billion worth of costs to state governments. The cuts to the child
support enforcement, child welfare and food stamp programs would
increase the costs to states for administering these federally mandated
programs. Funding for marriage and fatherhood initiatives are also
contained in the legislation. Among the changes:
TANF and Work Requirement:
- There will be pressure on states to increase work requirements
on all families. Families that receive cash assistance services,
child care assistance, and families that participate in educational
activities designed to increase self-sufficiency, job training,
and work will now be included in the state participation rates.
- Although the definition of work activities has not changed,
a potentially critical change is that the Secretary of Health
and Human Services (HHS) is now required to:
- Publicize regulations to ensure consistent measurement
of work participation rates under state programs funded under
TANF and State programs funded with qualified State expenditures,
which shall include:
- Determining whether an activity of a recipient of assistance
may be treated as a work activity under subsection D (ìactivities
definedî)
- Uniform methods for reporting hours of work by recipient
of assistance
- The type of document needed to verify reported hours
of work by a recipient of assistance
- The circumstances under which a parent who resides with
a child who is a recipient of assistance should be included
in the work participation rates.
- Review the state procedures established in accordance with
the requirement that states establish and maintain work participation
verification procedures.
- By September 30, 2006, States must establish and maintain work
participation verification procedures that determine:
- Whether activities may be counted as work activities
- How to count and verify reported hours of work
- Who is a work-eligible individual.
Child Support Cuts
Cuts to the state child support enforcement programs are expected
to reduce federal funding for the program by as much as $5 billion
and to cost families up to $8.4 billion. The specific provisions that
affect funding of the program include:
- State child support enforcement programs are prohibited from
receiving federal matching funds to reimburse their costs when
the activities were paid for with performance incentive funds.
This funding was considered "double-dipping" by the Congressional
Budget Office.
- The federal match rate to states for genetic testing to determine
paternity is reduced to 66% from 90%.
- States are required to collect an annual fee of $25 from families
seeking child support enforcement services who have never been
a TANF recipient when collections reach at least $500.
Child Welfare and Foster Care Cuts
More than $1.3 billion over five years in cuts to child welfare and
foster care programs are contained in the legislation. The cuts include:
- A cut of $380 million over five years for foster care assistance
provided to caretaker relatives of low-income children.
- Foster care casework services are cut by $174 million over five
years.
- Medicaid Targeted Case Management services for children in foster
care are cut by $760 million over five years.
Food Stamp Cuts
An estimated $844 million is cut from the food stamp program over
five years. The following provisions are contained in the legislation:
- Families receiving TANF-funded services are no longer automatically
eligible for food stamp benefits.
- The period of time before which legal immigrants become eligible
for food stamp benefits is extended from 5 to 7 years.
Child Support Enforcement
The legislation makes a number of changes to child support distribution.
Many of these have the potential to pass-through more payments to
families. They include:
- Elimination of the assignment of child support for any period
prior to the receipt of TANF assistance. This will have the effect
of reducing child support debt owed to the state by noncustodial
parents, and of increasing the amount of child support distributed
to TANF families. This will go into effect as of October 1, 2009.
- States will have the option and an incentive to pass-through
child support to families on TANF. The pass-through will:
- Allow the state to pass through child support for families
who are current TANF recipients and for families who formerly
received assistance. The federal government would provide
an incentive for states to choose the pass-through option
by not requiring that states pay the federal share of the
child support that was passed through to the family.
- For families that currently receive assistance, the state
must also disregard the child support that is passed through
to the family when determining the amount and type of assistance
provided to the family. The amount paid to the family can
be up to $100 for a family with one child and $200 for a family
with 2 or more children.
- These provisions will be in effect as of October 1, 2008.
- The federal government used to pay 90% of the paternity establishment
laboratory costs. This new law says that the federal government
will only pay 66%.
- There is now a mandatory fee for successful child support collection
for families who have received TANF assistance. If the agency
collects at least $500.00, they will retain $25.00 of the money.
- States have the option to treat federal tax offsets like other
types of collections. If a state chooses this option, it will
no longer be required to pay the government ahead of the custodial
parent when distributing arrears collected through the offset.
A technical amendment to the Internal Revenue Code also affects
the offset, giving priority to child support arrears in distribution
and eliminating the distinction between arrears owed to the government
and to the family. Prior to this legislation the government was
given priority in distribution of the offset.
- Child support orders for TANF families must be reviewed by the
child support agency every three years, effective October 1, 2007.
- States must include a provision in child support orders for
medical support provided by one or both parents. States have the
option of enforcing the medical support order. Medical support
is defined as either health insurance or payment by the parent
for the childís medical expenses.
Marriage Promotion and Fatherhood Initiatives
The budget includes funding for marriage promotion and fatherhood
programs. It authorizes up to $150 million per year for each year
from fiscal years 2006 through 2010, or $750 million over the five-year
period for related activities. Up to $50 million is designated for
responsible fatherhood programs, $2 million for child welfare and
TANF services to tribal families, and the remainder is to be used
for programs that promote healthy marriage.
As part of any application for funding, programs must demonstrate
how they will address issues of domestic violence by:
- Making a commitment to consult with experts in or relevant community-based
domestic violence coalitions in developing their programs and
activities.
- Describing what they will do to ensure that participation in
the program is voluntary.
The legislation defines eight allowable marriage promotion activities:
- Public advertising campaigns on the value of marriage and the
skills needed to form and sustain healthy marriages.
- Education in high school on the value of marriage, relationship
skills, and budgeting.
- Programs targeted on non-married pregnant women and non-married
expectant fathers including marriage education, and marriage/relationship
skills; these programs may include parenting skills, financial
management, conflict resolution, and job/career advancement.
- Programs targeted on engaged couples and couples or individuals
interested in marriage; these programs can include pre-marital
education and marriage skills training.
- Programs for married couples; these programs can include pre-marital
education and marriage skills training.
- Divorce reduction programs that teach relationship skills.
- Marriage mentoring programs that use married couples as role
models and mentors in at-risk communities.
- Programs to reduce the disincentives to marriage in means-tested
aid programs, if offered in conjunction with another healthy marriage
activity.
The President is planning to seek an additional $100 million per
year beginning in fiscal year 2007 for a new Family Formation
and Healthy Marriage State Grants Program that would require
a state match and would be awarded to states on a competitive basis.
Eligible applicants for the fatherhood funds include states, public
and private nonprofit community organizations, including faith-based
organizations, territories, Indian tribes and tribal organizations.
The four allowable activities are defined as:
- Activities to promote marriage or sustain marriage through activities
such as counseling, mentoring, disseminating information about
the benefits of marriage and 2-parent involvement for children,
enhancing relationship skills, education regarding how to control
aggressive behavior, disseminating information on the causes of
domestic violence and child abuse, marriage preparation programs,
premarital counseling, marital inventories, skills-based marriage
education, financial planning seminars, including improving a
family's ability to effectively manage family business affairs
by means such as education, counseling, or mentoring on matters
related to family finances, including household management, budgeting,
banking, and handling of financial transactions and home maintenance,
and divorce education and reduction programs, including mediation
and counseling.
- Activities to promote responsible parenting through activities
such as counseling, mentoring, and mediation, disseminating information
about good parenting practices, skills-based parenting education,
encouraging child support payments, and other methods.
- Activities to foster economic stability by helping fathers improve
their economic status by providing activities such as work first
services, job search, job training, subsidized employment, job
retention, job enhancement, and encouraging education, including
career-advancing education, dissemination of employment materials,
coordination with existing employment services such as welfare-to-work
programs, referrals to local employment training initiatives,
and other methods.
- Activities to promote responsible fatherhood that are conducted
through a contract with a nationally recognized, nonprofit fatherhood
promotion organization, such as the development, promotion, and
distribution of a media campaign to encourage the appropriate
involvement of parents in the life of any child and specifically
the issue of responsible fatherhood , and the development of a
national clearinghouse to assist States and communities in efforts
to promote and support marriage and responsible fatherhood .
Organizations interested in applying for funding for any of these
activities should check regularly at http://grants.gov
for the Request for Proposal that will be issued in the near future.
Thanks to the Center for Law and Social Policy and the Center on
Budget Policy and Priorities for parts of the information provided
above. Further details are available at their websites, www.clasp.org
and www.cbpp.org.
The text of the legislation can be obtained at www.thomas.gov.
Search for Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.
Measurement of Poverty
- While the provisions above have become law, there are still
more cuts and restrictions contained in the Presidentís 2007 budget
(released on February 6, 2006). One would eliminate the Survey
of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), a critical source
of data on poverty and income for the Census Bureau and researchers.
According to the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), the
SIPP ìprovides unique information about low-income families across
the nation. No other large-scale survey is explicitly designed
to measure the effects of policy on the same individuals over
time. Without the SIPP we will have a harder time researching
which programs effectively raise families out of poverty, and
how budget cuts affect program beneficiaries.î For more information
about the SIPP, go to http://www.ceprdata.org/savesipp/savesipp.html.
CEPR has created a letter to oppose the cut and is seeking organizations
and individuals to sign-on by visiting http://ceprdata.org/savesipp/organization.html.
State Child Support News
- The state of Michigan has initiated a program that offers to
forgive 75 percent of child support debt owed to the state by
thousands of noncustodial parents who have children with custodial
parents who have received public assistance. For these families,
child support payments made by the noncustodial parent are currently
retained by the state in order to recover the cost of providing
assistance to the family. The offer is contingent on several conditions,
including:
- The children for whom the child support debt was incurred
must have reached the age of 18 or older.
- The parent must pay 25% of the child support debt that is
owed to the state. o The parent must pay 100% of any debt owed
to the custodial parent, and
- The parent must pay 100% of any court fees that have not
been paid.
According to Marilyn Stephen, director of the state Office of Child
Support, about half of the $9 billion in child support arrearages
owed by noncustodial parents in the state is owed to the government
and not the custodial parent. The state expects that approximately
25,000 noncustodial parents, who collectively owe $380 million are
eligible for this offer. Because the program is aimed at those with
long-standing cases and who can afford to pay the required portions
of the debt in one sum, it is estimated that approximately $18 million
will be collected. The collections will increase federal incentive
payments to the state, which are base in part on a stateís collection
record. The program began February 1 and runs through April 30.
For more information, see Parents get child support offer,
The Detroit News, January 30,2006, http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.exe/article?AID=/20060130/METRO/601300335&
SearchID=732353789989&template=printart
- Child support orders may be increasing for some parents in Utah,
where the state Senate has approved a bill that would adjust child
support guidelines and have the effect of increasing child support
orders by as much as 25% for low-income noncustodial parents.
The state does not pass-through child support to families if they
are on public assistance, so for these families the increase will
be owed to the state as repayment for the cost of assistance.
The bill would also make the following changes to child support
law:
- Allow the court to order that a portion of a child support
payment be used to repair the relationship between the noncustodial
parent and child when the custodial parent has interfered with
the relationship.
- Ease the conditions for imputing wages to parents by adding
“employment opportunities” as a factor on which
probable earnings and employment potential can be based.
- Award a tax exemption for dependent children equally to each
parent regardless of custody (by evenly dividing the children
on whom the exemption is based and alternating years for children
when the number of children is odd). Currently, there is no
presumption, but the court considers the relative contribution
of each parent to the cost of raising the child in awarding
a tax exemption.
The bill, S.B. 195, has been passed by the Senate and introduced
in the House. It is available at http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2006/bills/sbillamd/sb0195.htm.
Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom, the
Child Support Agency will undergo a complete review following widespread
agreement that the system is in disarray. Enforcement has been turned
over to private debt collectors until completion of the review.
The agency was found to have spent more on debt recovery than was
recovered, and the Prime Minister had called for urgent reforms
as early as 1998. For more information, see Unacceptable CSA
Faces Overhaul, February 9, 2006, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4695544.stm.
|