[House Report 106-793]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Rept. 106-793
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 1
======================================================================
CHILD SUPPORT DISTRIBUTION ACT OF 2000
_______
July 26, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Archer, from the Committee on Ways and Means, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 4678]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 4678) to provide more child support money to
families leaving welfare, to simplify the rules governing the
assignment and 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,
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction....................................................16
A. Purpose and Scope................................... 16
B. Background and Need for Legislation................. 16
C. Legislative History................................. 18
II. Explanation of Provisions.......................................19
III. Vote of The Committee...........................................55
IV. Budget Effects of The Bill......................................55
A. Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects............. 55
B. Statement Regarding New Budget Authority And Tax
Expenditures....................................... 55
C. Cost Estimate Prepared by The Congressional Budget
Office............................................. 55
V. Other Matters Required to Be Discussed Under The Rules of The
House...........................................................68
A. Committee Oversight Findings And Recommendations.... 68
B. Summary of Findings And Recommendations of The
Government Reform Committee........................ 68
C. Constitutional Authority Statement.................. 68
D. Information Relating to Unfunded Mandates........... 69
VI. Changes in Existing Laws Made by The Bill, as Reported..........69
VII. Letter from the Committee on the Judiciary......................94
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
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
``(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.''.
(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) 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 section
457(a)(2)(B)(i), 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 certain 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.--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.
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 have in effect laws
and procedures that provide authority for public non-IV-D child
support enforcement agencies to have access to child support
information or enforcement mechanisms available to the State.
(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 relating to
information-sharing 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--
``(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 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 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 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, 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 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 or
living with 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;
``(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 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 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 Workforce 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(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 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.
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose and Scope
The Child Support Distribution Act of 2000 is designed to
provide more child support money to families leaving welfare,
simplify the rules governing the assignment and distribution of
child support collected by States, improve the collection of
child support, implement a fatherhood grant program to promote
marriage, encourage successful parenting, and help fathers find
jobs and increase their earnings, and for other purposes.
B. Background and Need for Legislation
The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program, created in
1975 and authorized under Title IV-D of the Social Security
Act, is a State-Federal partnership developed to collect child
support payments from parents who do not live with their
children. In 1998, the most recent year for which data are
available, the program collected nearly $14.4 billion in child
support payments for single parents and their children, located
6.5 million noncustodial parents, established 848,000
paternities, and established 1.1 million child support orders.
Collections by the CSE program have increased more than 60
percent since 1993.
The 1996 welfare reform law (P.L. 104-193) improved the CSE
program by providing: immediate reporting of employer address
and wages for every person hired in the United States; strong
paternity establishment requirements; new mechanisms to collect
child support payments such as revocation of hunting, fishing,
and drivers licenses; and greater automation of the child
support system. These provisions are widely believed to be the
major reasons child support collections have improved so much
in recent years. However, as the States work toward even more
effective implementation of the welfare reform provisions,
there are several issues that were not fully addressed by the
1996 legislation.
The most important question is whether the family or the
Federal and State governments get to keep collections on past-
due child support. When families are on welfare, the State
retains all or most child support collections and shares them
with the Federal government. Before 1996, when the family left
welfare, States and the Federal government were able to retain
and split all payments on past-due support, a total of well
over $1 billion per year. However, the 1996 welfare reform law
(P.L. 104-193) required States and the Federal government to
pay approximately half of collections on past-due support to
mothers. Even so, government still retains approximately half
of the collections on child support, about $500 million per
year.
Since enactment of welfare reform in 1996, welfare rolls
have declined substantially as about 1 million former welfare
mothers left welfare for work. As was the case in 1995-96 when
the Committee required half of the collections on past-due
support to be paid to mothers, we are now intent on requiring
that the other half be paid to mothers. Given the remarkable
effort poor and low-income mothers are now making to stay off
welfare, a crucial goal of public policy should be to assist
them in every way possible. The $500 million per year the
Committee bill will provide for these mothers when the
provision is fully implemented is excellent public policy.
Moreover, because this policy results in the maximum amount of
the father's child support payments going to the mother and
children, the father's commitment to the family is strengthened
and made transparent to the mother and children.
In addition to these many advantages of the Committee's
policy of sharing additional child support collections with
families, the Committee bill also greatly simplifies the rules
for assignment and distribution of child support. The current
rules are exceedingly complex and make it all but impossible
for State computer programs to correctly distribute
collections. Many States have testified, written letters, or
called the Committee to request that everything possible be
done to simplify these complex distribution rules. The
Committee bill responds to these requests and makes the rules
of child support assignment and distribution simpler and more
straightforward than they have ever been.
Increasing the number and percentage of American children
living in two-parent families is vital if the nation is to make
serious and permanent progress against poverty. Thus, public
policy should aim to reduce the number of nonmarital births,
promote marriage, and increase the employment prospects of low-
income fathers. Title V of this bill, which contains the
Fathers Court Act, is the Committee's response to creating
Federal policy addressed to these goals.
So far, the goal of increasing personal responsibility by
emphasizing more work and fewer births outside marriage has
focused almost entirely on mothers. But single parenting, in
addition to being associated with very difficult and stressful
family life, will inevitably produce lots of financial
hardship. Even with the impressive array of work services and
income supplements that have increased dramatically in recent
years, a significant fraction of single parent families will
always face economic hardship. Moreover, a large and growing
body of scientific research, which has been summarized by
numerous witnesses at our hearings, shows that children reared
in single-parent families are less likely to perform well in
school, less likely to graduate, more likely to commit crimes,
more likely to have children outside marriage, and more likely
to be on welfare as adults than children reared in two-parent
families.
Thus, the Committee is now following the 1996 welfare
reforms with its next major step in creating a set of policies
and programs aimed at reducing poverty and increasing child
well being. More specifically, the Committee hopes by this
legislation to increase marriage, improve parenting, and
increase the income of fathers. To achieve these goals, we want
to encourage governmental and nongovernmental, including faith
based, organizations to develop programs that help fathers
significantly improve their contribution to family life by
helping them improve their relations with their children and
the children's mothers and by increasing their employment and
earnings. Over the next six years, this legislation would fund
a host of demonstration programs that would develop projects
aimed at helping fathers in these ways. By carefully evaluating
these new projects, we hope to learn how to design and
implement effective programs for fathers and their families.
C. Legislative History
Committee bill
On June 27, 2000 the Subcommittee on Human Resources
ordered favorably reported, with amendment, to the full
Committee, H.R. 4678, the ``Child Support Distribution Act of
2000'', by recorded vote (7-6), with a quorum present. The full
Committee on Ways and Means considered the Subcommittee
reported bill on July 19, 2000 and ordered it favorably
reported, as amended, on July 19, 2000, by voice vote.
Title V of H.R. 4678, as amended, contains provisions from
the Fathers Count Act of 1999 (H.R. 3073). On November 10,
1999, H.R. 3073 passed the House on a vote of 328 to 93. On
October 21, 1999 the Committee on Ways and Means reported the
bill, as amended to the floor of the House of Representatives.
On October 13, 1999 the Subcommittee on Human Resources ordered
favorably reported to the full Committee, H.R. 3073, the
``Fathers Count Act of 1999'', by a voice vote, with a quorum
present.
Legislative hearings
The Subcommittee on Human Resources held a hearing on May
18, 2000, to receive comments on H.R. 4469, the bill as
originally introduced by Chairman Nancy Johnson. Testimony at
the hearing was presented by the Administration, program
administrators, advocates, researchers, and Members of the U.S.
House of Representatives. The Subcommittee also conducted
hearings on May 19, 1998 (Serial 105-89), September 23, 1999
(Serial 106-31), and October 5, 1999 (Serial 106-30) on child
support enforcement issues, which included testimony from the
Administration, child support administrators, officials of
local child support programs that operate independently of the
Federal-State program, academic witnesses, researchers, and
advocacy groups. Testimony at these hearings concerned State
implementation of the 1996 child support reforms, the current
and potential role of child support enforcement outside the
Federal-State program funded under Title IV-D of the Social
Security Act, and the impact of domestic violence on child
support enforcement. The Subcommittee also held a hearing on
October 5, 1999 (Serial 106-30), to receive comments on H.R.
3073, the fatherhood legislation that is now Title V of H.R.
4678. Testimony at the hearing was presented by scholars,
program administrators, foundation executives, and Members of
the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. The
Subcommittee also conducted hearings on April 27, 1999 and July
30, 1998 (Serial 105-78) on fatherhood programs, which included
testimony from the Administration, researchers, advocates,
individuals who have designed and conducted programs for low-
income fathers, and young fathers whose children are on
welfare.
II. EXPLANATION OF PROVISIONS
1. Short Title
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
This Act may be cited as the ``Child Support Distribution
Act of 2000''.
Reason for change
Not applicable.
Title I. Distribution of Child Support
Sec. 101. Distribution of Child Support Collected by States on Behalf
of Children Receiving Certain Welfare Benefits
1. Modification of Rule Requiring Assignment of Support Rights as a
Condition of Receiving TANF
Present law
Federal law requires that as a condition of receiving
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds, the
parent or caretaker relative must assign her rights to child
support to the State. The assignment covers any child support
that accrues (or had already accrued before the family enrolled
in TANF) before the date the family leaves the TANF program.
The assignment must not exceed the total amount of assistance
paid to the family.
Explanation of provision
States must require adults receiving assistance from the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program to
assign to the State any rights members of the family have to
child support but only during the time the family receives TANF
benefits. The amount of support assigned to the State cannot
exceed the total amount of assistance provided to the family
that accrues while the family receives assistance.
Reason for change
See (2)(b) below.
2. Increasing Child Support Payments to Families and Simplifying Child
Support Distribution Rules
a. Distribution Rules
(1) Families Receiving Assistance
Present law
While the family receives TANF benefits, the State is
permitted to retain any current child support payments and any
assigned arrearages it collects up to the cumulative amount of
TANF benefits which have been paid to the family. The State can
decide how much, if any, of the State share (some, all, none)
of the child support payment collected on behalf of TANF
families to send to the family. The State is required to pay
the Federal government the Federal share of the child support
collected, even if the State shares its collections with
families.
Explanation of provision
Same as current law.
Reason for change
See (2)(b) below.
(2) Families That Formerly Received Assistance
(a) Current support
Present law
Current child support payments must be paid to the family
if the family is no longer on TANF.
Explanation of provision
Same as current law.
Reason for change
See (2)(b) below.
(b) Arrearages
Present law
Since October 1, 1997, if the amount collected exceeds
current support, child support arrearages (past-due support)
that accrue after the family leaves TANF are required to be
paid to the family before any monies may be retained by the
State. (Arrearages that accrued before the family began
receiving TANF do not have to be distributed to the family
first.) Beginning October 1, 2000, if the amount collected
exceeds current support, child support arrearages that accrued
before the family began receiving TANF also are required to be
distributed to the family first. If child support arrearages
are collected through the Federal income tax refund offset
program, the family does not have first claim on the arrearage
payments. Such arrearage payments are retained by the State and
the Federal government.
Explanation of provision
If the amount collected exceeds current support, the excess
is paid first to the family until the family is paid all the
child support arrearages that are owed. Once the family is
completely repaid, the State retains collections, paying the
Federal government its share, until the State has been repaid
the amount of child support that accumulated while the family
was on TANF or the amount of TANF benefits paid to the family,
whichever is less. Any remaining amount is paid to the family.
Reason for change
The Committee pursued three goals in changing the law on
assignment and distribution rules. First, since 1995, the
Committee has supported the policy of giving all payments on
child support arrearages to mothers. Providing these additional
funds to mothers leaving welfare will both increase their
incentive to leave welfare and increase the chances that they
will be able to sustain themselves and their children without
falling back on cash welfare. Second, testimony received by the
Committee overwhelmingly indicated that the current child
support distribution rules are nearly impossible to understand
and even more difficult to translate into computer software so
the States can operate their child support distribution
programs efficiently. Third, the Committee strongly agrees with
the view of experts on fatherhood programs and child advocates
that sending more of the child support payments made by fathers
to the mothers and children strengthens family bonds, provides
fathers with the assurance that their money is being spent on
their children, and reinforces for mothers and children the
fathers' commitment to their well-being. The Committee bill
greatly simplifies both the assignment rules and the
distribution rules and substantially increases the amount of
money being provided to families.
To a substantial degree, the Committee bill achieves all
three of these goals by following a simple ``on-off'' principle
with regard to both assignment and distribution rules. Thus,
when families are on welfare, both the assignment of child
support and any payments received during the period the family
is on welfare (up to the amount of the support order or the
amount of welfare payment, whichever is less) go to the State
and are split with the Federal government. However, when the
family is not on welfare, all child support that falls due and
all child support payments, both on current support and
arrearages, go to the family. If the family is no longer on
welfare, and if all past-due support has been repaid to the
family, then and only then can the State and Federal
governments retain payments on past-due support.
(3) Limitations
(a) Federal reimbursements
Present law
The total amount paid by the State to the Federal
government cannot exceed the Federal share of the amount of
child support collected.
Explanation of provision
The total amount paid by the State to the Federal
government cannot exceed the Federal share of the assignment
that occurred while the family was receiving TANF.
Reason for change
This provision is consistent with current law in that it
simply assures that the Federal government gets a share of
collections while the family is on welfare. The principle that
underlies this provision has been consistent since the
enactment of the child support enforcement program in 1975;
namely, that taxpayers should be reimbursed by noncustodial
parents because their taxes provided the cash benefits that
supported, in the absence of child support payments, the
noncustodial parents' children.
(b) State reimbursements
Present law
The total amount retained by the State cannot exceed either
the State share of the amount of child support collected, or
the amount necessary to reimburse the State for cash assistance
paid to the family.
Explanation of provision
The total amount retained by the State cannot exceed the
State share of the assignment that occurred while the family
was receiving TANF.
Reason for change
Again, as with the rules on Federal reimbursements, the
Committee bill does not alter the current-law principle that
government should be reimbursed for the cash welfare payments
made out of funds provided by taxpayers.
(4) Families That Never Received Assistance
Present law
Child support payments must be paid to the family if the
family never received TANF.
Explanation of provision
Same as current law.
Reason for change
Not applicable.
(5) Families Under Certain Agreements
Present law
Any State that has Indian country may enter into a
cooperative agreement with an Indian tribe if the tribe
demonstrates that it has an established tribal court system
with several specific characteristics. The Secretary of HHS may
make direct payments to Indian tribes that have approved child
support enforcement plans. In the case of child support
collected for a family under the cooperative agreement
described above, the State must distribute the amount collected
pursuant to the terms of the agreement.
Explanation of provision
Same as current law.
Reason for change
Not applicable.
(6) State Financing Options
Present law
The Federal government reimburses each State 66 percent
(more for certain expenses) of all allowable expenditures on
Child Support Enforcement activities. It also refunds to States
90 percent of the laboratory costs of establishing paternity
and 80 percent of a capped amount for developing and improving
statewide automated information systems. The Federal government
also provides States with an incentive payment. In addition to
the Federal matching and incentive payments, States can retain
part of their collections in welfare and former welfare cases.
The amount of child support collections that may be retained by
the State is governed by the child support distribution rules.
Federal law stipulates that any child support that is collected
on behalf of TANF families and subsequently passed through to
the families and disregarded in determining TANF benefits and
eligibility may be counted toward the TANF Maintenance of
Effort requirement.
Explanation of provision
If this legislation causes a State to retain less child
support than the State was allowed to retain under previous
law, the State may take either of two steps to offset the lost
revenue. First, the State may count the difference toward the
amount the State must spend under the Maintenance of Effort
requirement in the TANF program. Second, the State may use TANF
funds to reimburse itself for the difference. By October 1,
2001, the Secretary, in consultation with the States, must
establish the procedures by which the difference between the
State share of collections under previous law and this
provision are to be calculated.
Reason for change
Based on testimony and data reported by States that was
reviewed during the Committee hearings and during meetings
between Committee staff and both Federal and State officials,
many States are experiencing significant changes in financing
their child support program. About 30 percent of the average
State's funding of its child support program is the State share
of child support collections from welfare cases. But welfare
cases have declined by over 50 percent since 1994, thereby
reducing the number of cases from which States can retain
collections. This trend has been offset somewhat by the
increased effectiveness and efficiency of State programs as a
result of implementing the provisions of the child support
amendments that were part of the 1996 welfare reform law. Even
so, many States are having difficulty with financing. The
Committee has been working with States to help them absorb the
additional costs of the new distribution provisions of this
bill. The negotiations have resulted in two changes from
earlier versions of this bill. First, we have delayed mandatory
implementation for 5 years. This will provide States with time
to fully implement the 1996 amendments that should increase
their collections and efficiency. The delay will also provide
States with ample time to plan how they will absorb the
additional costs of providing more child support collections to
mothers leaving welfare. Second, the Committee bill allows
States to cover some or all of their losses by either counting
such losses toward their required maintenance of effort
spending in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
program or by using money from the TANF program to fund child
support activities, but not both. In either case, the total
amount of money cannot exceed the difference between the amount
of child support collections in welfare cases the States would
have been able to retain under previous law and the amount they
will be able to retain under the Committee bill. States have
the option of implementing some or all of the new rules at any
time after October 1, 2000.
b. Current Support Amount Defined
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The term ``current support amount'' means the amount of
support designated as the monthly support obligation of the
noncustodial parent in a child support order.
Reason for change
Although current law contains no definition of ``current
support amount'', the Committee's definition is consistent with
the common meaning of this term as it is now used by the courts
and by State child support programs.
3. Ban on Recovery of Medicaid Costs for Certain Births
Present law
Federal law requires States to implement procedures under
which bills for pregnancy, child birth, and genetic testing
constitute prima facie evidence of amounts incurred for such
services or testing on behalf of the child.
Explanation of provision
States must not use the Child Support Enforcement program
to collect money from noncustodial parents in the attempt to
recoup the costs of births paid by the Medicaid program.
Reason for change
The Committee has a long history of concern for the
financial plight of poor fathers, especially poor young
fathers. Through testimony and discussions with HHS and the
various Congressional agencies, we have discovered that some
States require fathers to pay up to $1,000 to reimburse the
State medicaid program for birth costs. There is wide agreement
among child advocates, State officials, and experts that many
young fathers are already saddled with big child support bills,
which are increased to even greater amounts by the practice of
charging fathers for the cost of birth. The Committee is intent
on developing a child support system that puts both paternity
orders and child support orders in place as soon after
nonmarital births as possible so that child support payments,
even if they are modest, can begin to flow before arrearages
start piling up. Our goal is to reduce the current unfortunate
situation of young fathers facing $5,000 or even $10,000 in
child support arrearages. Committee hearings have shown that
this level of debt drives many poor fathers underground and
prevents them from holding regular jobs. For this reason, we
believe the additional burden of medicaid birth payments
interferes with the overall policy of helping young fathers
both get out of debt and begin making payments on current
support. Thus, we are prohibiting States from using the child
support system to collect money from fathers to cover birth
costs.
4. Conforming Amendments
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Three conforming amendments are made to conform the
provisions of this title with other provisions of Title IV (the
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program) of the Social
Security Act.
Reason for change
These amendments are made simply to make other statutory
provisions consistent with the ones we have amended.
5. Effective Date
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Unless otherwise noted, the effective date for provisions
in this section is October 1, 2005 or earlier at State option.
Reason for change
The major provisions of this legislation have individual
effective dates that are specified in statutory changes. For
the remaining provisions, we have selected October 1, 2001 as a
reasonable effective date because States would be provided with
a minimum of 1 year to prepare for the changes. However, as is
normal practice for the Committee, we are granting additional
time for any provision that requires State legislation (other
than legislation to simply appropriate money).
Title II. Review and Adjustment of Child Support Orders
Sec. 201. Mandatory Review and Modification of Child Support Orders for
TANF Recipients
1. Review Every 3 Years
Present law
States have the option of reviewing child support orders
every 3 years and, if appropriate, adjusting orders that are
being enforced by the State Child Support Enforcement program.
Explanation of provision
States are required to review and update child support
orders that are being enforced by the State program every 3
years.
Reason for change
Child support orders become outdated on a regular basis.
The factors that cause support amounts to become outdated
include inflation, unemployment, promotions or job changes that
result in increased or decreased income, marriage by either
parent, disabilities, and a host of other changes. However,
States must invest time and money to update orders. According
to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), both States and the
Federal government would save money if child support orders
were updated every 3 years. Thus, because updating orders, if
done properly, always promotes fairness and because the CBO
estimates show that updating would save money, the Committee
feels it appropriate to require routine updates every 3 years.
2. Review Upon Leaving TANF
Present law
There is no identical provision in current law, but Federal
law requires States to provide notice to parents once every 3
years informing them of their right to request a review and, if
appropriate, an adjustment of their child support order.
Explanation of provision
The State TANF program is required to inform the State
Child Support Enforcement program when a family leaves the TANF
program if the parent has custody of a child whose other parent
is not living with the child. When the State Child Support
Enforcement agency receives the notice, the agency must examine
the family's case file, determine what actions need to be taken
to produce child support payments, take such actions
immediately, and review and adjust the order as necessary if
the order has not been updated during the previous 12 months.
Reason for change
For many years, under both Democratic and Republican
majorities, the Committee has pursued the goal of helping
mothers leave welfare and achieve self-support for themselves
and their children. The reforms made by Title I of this
legislation are another step toward helping mothers achieve
independence because they would result in mothers receiving
additional child support payments once they leave welfare.
Given the potential importance of child support payments in
helping mothers leave and stay off welfare, it makes sense to
require States to focus their attention on the child support
cases of mothers leaving welfare and to be certain that every
action, including award updating, is being taken to maximize
the amount of child support these mothers receive.
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
1. Issuance of Guidelines
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Secretary, in consultation with States, local
governments, and individuals or companies knowledgeable about
child support collection by agencies other than the Federal-
State Child Support Enforcement program, must develop a set of
recommendations which address the participation of public non-
IV-D child support enforcement agencies in child support
enforcement. The recommendations must include substantive and
procedural rules with respect to privacy safeguards, data
security, due process rights, administrative compatibility with
State and Federal automated systems, eligibility requirements
such as licensing and posting of bonds in order to gain access
to Federal and State child support information and enforcement
mechanisms, recovery of costs by charging fees, and penalties
for violations of rules. These recommendations are to be used
by States in their role of overseeing child support enforcement
by public non-IV-D agencies.
Reason for change
The Committee wants the Secretary to carefully review all
the issues associated with sharing information and enforcement
mechanisms with public non-IV-D agencies. In conducting the
review, the Secretary should consult widely with individuals
and organizations that have experience with debt collection,
data security, legal issues associated with privacy, and so
forth. We are granting the Secretary a full year to conduct
this study and, based on her findings, issue recommendations to
States that wish to conduct demonstrations on sharing
information and enforcement mechanisms with either public or
private agencies. Because the Secretary will be granted
authority to approve the demonstrations, she has the ability to
enforce the requirements that she believes to be necessary to
conduct the demonstrations without violating privacy, without
violating due process rights, without disrupting the effective
enforcement mechanisms now in place, without imposing
additional uncompensated costs on State or local IV-D programs,
or without violating any other consideration the Secretary
thinks important to successfully involving public non-IV-D
agencies in child support enforcement.
2. Definitions
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Several definitions are included in this section to clarify
the meaning of the statutory changes. The most important
definitions are those for public non-IV-D child support
enforcement agencies. A public non-IV-D child support
enforcement agency is 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 IV-D plan, or a clerk of court office of a political
subdivision of a State.
Reason for change
The purpose of the definition of public non-IV-D child
support enforcement agency is to clarify the types of agencies
that may participate in the demonstration projects.
Sec. 302. Demonstrations Involving Establishment and Enforcement of
Child Support Obligations by Public Non-IV-D Child Support Enforcement
Agencies
1. Purpose
Present law
Federal law requires the Federal Parent Locator Services to
obtain and provide to authorized persons (i.e., custodial
parents or their attorney or agent) information on, or
facilitating the discovery of, noncustodial parents. The
authorized person must submit a request for FPLS information
through the State Parent Locator Service established by the
State Child Support Enforcement agency. Upon written request,
the Federal Parent Locator Service will send the authorized
person the Social Security number and address of the
noncustodial parent, and the name of the noncustodial parent's
employer and the employer's address. Public and private
agencies not affiliated with the Child Support Enforcement
program currently have access to a limited number of
enforcement tools, such as wage withholding and property liens.
They also may use a variety of interstate enforcement tools.
Explanation of provision
The purpose of the demonstrations authorized in this title
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 on
behalf of custodial parents who need services.
Reason for change
Years of hearings by our Committee have demonstrated that
the Federal-State child support enforcement program authorized
under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act is improving but
still has major shortcomings. First, at least \1/3\rd of all
child support cases are operated outside the IV-D program.
These cases include those that involve direct cooperation
between parents who do not live together and those being
enforced by private sector lawyers or child support collection
agencies, or public non-IV-D child support agencies. These
parents, lawyers, collection agencies, and non-IV-D agencies do
not now have access to information and enforcement mechanisms
on the same basis as the IV-D program.
Second, of the 5.7 million welfare cases being enforced by
the IV-D program in 1998, only 14 percent yielded any
collections; of the 14.0 million non-welfare cases, only 22
percent yielded any collections. These and similar measures of
the effectiveness of the IV-D program are reviewed in some
detail in the Ways and Means Committee's 1998 Green Book (see
Section 8, pp. 545-657). In general, studies and data reviewed
there show that although the IV-D program has been growing
since its inception in 1978, overall national measures of child
support performance have not improved very much. The Federal-
State program already employs over 50,000 workers and costs
nearly $4 billion per year. It is unlikely that either the
Federal or State governments will soon appropriate the funds
necessary to hire more workers and spend even more money to
ensure services for those who do not now receive help. Thus, it
would seem reasonable to conclude that the IV-D program could
use help from sources such as non-IV-D public child support
agencies.
Given that there are now millions of custodial parents who
are not getting the help they need to collect child support,
coupled with the fact that there are important issues about
privacy, fees, due process, data security, and costs that might
be imposed on the IV-D program, the Committee has determined
that demonstrations involving public non-IV-D child support
agencies are the best policy. In this way, the number of States
exploring the expansion of child support information and
enforcement mechanisms can be controlled, the Secretary can set
strong rules and limits while providing oversight, and good
evaluations can be conducted.
2. Applications
a. Preferences
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
In considering applications for demonstrations, the
Secretary must give preference to applications from States that
have laws and procedures that provide authority for public
enforcement agencies to have access to child support
information or enforcement mechanisms.
Reason for change
Based on our Committee hearings and correspondence, it is
clear that a few States have facilitated child support
activities by public child support entities that operate
outside the IV-D program. States that have a record of working
cooperatively with such entities, as demonstrated by either
statutory or regulatory provisions or administrative practices,
should be the first ones considered for operating demonstration
programs. Unless there are compelling reasons for not awarding
a demonstration to these States, the Secretary should approve
their applications.
b. Approval
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Secretary is authorized to approve up to 10, and must
approve at least 5 (if at least 5 applications are received),
applications from States planning to conduct demonstrations
involving public non-IV-D collection agencies. Before any
application can be approved, the applicant State and the
Secretary must enter into a written agreement which addresses
privacy safeguards, data security, due process rights,
automated systems, liability, oversight, fees, and any other
topic specified by the Secretary. The application must also
include a research plan that focuses on assessing the costs and
benefits of the demonstration. Applications cannot be approved
unless the Secretary judges them to be likely to contribute
significantly to the achievement of the purpose of this title.
Demonstrations on public agencies can be approved on or after
July 1, 2002.
Reason for change
Because demonstrations involving public child support
agencies are relatively noncontroversial, and because several
States seem ready to conduct demonstrations, the Committee is
authorizing up to 10 public demonstrations. The demonstrations
must address the important issues, such as privacy, data
security, and due process, that the Committee has identified
through its hearing process and through extensive
correspondence and face-to-face meetings with advocates and
other interested parties. These issues will be spelled out in
detail by the Secretary's report (see above). We are requiring
research to be conducted and reported because the goal of the
demonstrations is to increase our knowledge of the potential
for public agencies to improve the nation's child support
enforcement system.
3. Demonstration Authority
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
States with approved demonstration applications are given
the authority to share information and certain enforcement
mechanisms with public child support agencies. The State agency
may collect fees to recover the costs of providing information
or access to enforcement mechanisms to public agencies. Public
agencies in States participating in a demonstration are granted
the authority to provide names for the Federal tax intercept
program, the unemployment compensation intercept program, the
passport denial program, the credit bureau reporting program,
and the financial institution data match program.
Reason for change
The Committee wants to clarify the specific provisions of
Federal child support statutes that States operating
demonstrations and public entities participating in
demonstrations can ask to be waived.
4. Waiver Authority
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
For purposes of this demonstration program, the Secretary
is given the authority to waive statutory requirements for the
unemployment compensation intercept program, for the passport
intercept program, for the Federal tax intercept program, for
the credit bureau reporting program, and for financial
institution data match program, and for the information
comparisons involving new hire data.
Reason for change
These are the specific information provisions and
enforcement mechanisms the Committee wants to make available to
public collection agencies to determine whether they can
augment the efforts of the Federal-State IV-D program. Thus, we
are providing the Secretary with the authority to waive these
provisions.
5. Federal Audit
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Comptroller General of the United States must conduct
an audit of all demonstration projects to evaluate the manner
in which information and enforcement mechanisms were used. The
Comptroller's report on demonstrations involving public
agencies is due on October 1, 2004.
Reason for change
The major reason the Committee is authorizing these
demonstrations is to determine whether public agencies can
contribute to the effective and efficient collection of child
support without violating privacy, due process rights, and data
security requirements and without imposing a burden on State
and local IV-D programs. Because the Comptroller General is
widely recognized as the watchdog agency of the Congress, it is
to be expected that we would turn to him for a careful and
detailed audit of how these demonstrations were conducted and
the extent to which they achieved the goals Congress has set.
6. Secretarial Report to the Congress
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Secretary must submit reports to Congress, based on the
evaluation studies and other sources, on her findings from the
demonstrations. The Secretary must include policy
recommendations on whether the demonstrations should continue
or be expanded. The Secretary's report on the public
demonstrations is due on October 1, 2005.
Reason for change
Again, the major reason the Committee is authorizing these
demonstrations is to determine whether public agencies can
contribute to the effective and efficient collection of child
support without violating privacy, due process rights, and data
security requirements and without imposing a burden on State
and local IV-D programs. Because the Secretary will be the
central actor in the demonstrations, Congress is requiring her
to evaluate all the information available about the
demonstrations, including the State evaluations and the
Comptroller General reports, and present Congress with a
summary of what has been learned along with her views on what
subsequent course of action Congress should take.
Sec. 303. GAO Report to Congress on Private Child Support Enforcement
Agencies
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Given all the claims and counterclaims about private child
support agencies the Committee has heard in hearings,
correspondence, and meetings, we are requiring the General
Accounting Office (GAO) to review all the evidence available
about these agencies and to prepare a report by October 1,
2001. The report must address the issue of whether private
agencies are providing a needed service in a fair manner using
accepted debt collection practices at a reasonable fee. The
report also will include information on the amount of past-due
child support, the time it takes to collect past-due support,
and the types of enforcement remedies currently available to
private child support agencies.
Reason for change
The Committee would like GAO to assess the need for
additional entities outside the IV-D program to participate in
child support enforcement. The Committee also wants to have a
public report by an experienced and unbiased agency about
whether private child support collection agencies as presently
constituted are functioning effectively and fairly.
Undoubtedly, the report will show that some agencies use
questionable practices and charge high fees. But given all the
conflicting claims, we want to know if on balance private
entities are making a positive contribution and, to the extent
that these are problems, whether the problems can be restricted
by government action.
Sec. 304. Effective Date
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
This title shall take effect on the date of the enactment
of this Act.
Reason for change
Not applicable.
Title IV. Expanded Enforcement
Sec. 401. Decrease in Amount of Child Support Arrearage Triggering
Passport Denial
Present law
The HHS Secretary is required to submit to the Secretary of
State the names of noncustodial parents who have been certified
by the State Child Support Enforcement agency as owing more
than $5,000 in past-due child support. The Secretary of State
is prohibited from issuing a passport to such noncustodial
parents.
Explanation of provision
The amount of past-due child support that triggers passport
revocation is reduced from $5,000 to $2,500.
Reason for change
The Committee seriously considered this proposal, which was
originally introduced by Mr. Andrews of New Jersey, last year.
However, as a result of meeting with the State Department about
their efforts to implement the original $5,000 provision from
the 1996 welfare reform law, we learned that the State
Department and HHS had worked together to develop an effective
procedure for transmitting information between the two
Departments and for terminating passports. Because the
Committee did not want to disrupt this new set of procedures
that appeared to be working well, we asked HHS in consultation
with the State Department to evaluate their procedures,
estimate how many more cases would be brought into the system
if Congress reduced the trigger from arrearages of $5,000 to
arrearages of $2,500, and make recommendations to the Committee
about whether HHS could handle the number of new cases. The
report, which the Committee received in October 1999,
recommended lowering the trigger. Thus, we are including the
provision in this legislation because it will produce
additional child support payments and thereby help more
families.
Sec. 402. Use of Tax Refund Intercept Program To Collect Past-Due Child
Support on Behalf of Children Who Are Not Minors
Present law
Federal law prohibits the use of the Federal income tax
refund offset program to recover past-due child support on
behalf of non-welfare cases in which the child is no longer a
minor.
Explanation of provision
The Federal income tax refund offset program may be used to
recover past-due child support on behalf of non-welfare cases
in which the child is no longer a minor.
Reason for change
Current law prohibits past-due child support debts to be
collected through the Federal tax intercept program on behalf
of children over age 18 unless the children were on welfare.
This policy violates equity by refusing a government service to
children whose families were not on welfare. Congress appears
to have adopted this restrictive policy because of concern that
the Department of Treasury would be overrun with tax
intercepts. However, now that the tax intercept program has
been in operation for over two decades and intercepts more than
one million tax returns each year, this modest expansion of the
program is a minor burden for Treasury. Originally proposed by
Representative Mike Castle (H.R. 4071), this provision promotes
equal treatment of all child support debts, increases
collections, and strengthens the important message that child
support debts cannot be avoided by withholding payment until
the child is no longer a minor.
Sec. 403. Garnishment of Compensation Paid to Veterans for Service-
Connected Disabilities in Order To Enforce Child Support Obligations
Present law
The disability compensation benefits of veterans are
treated differently than most forms of government payment for
purposes of paying child support. Whereas most government
payments are subject to being automatically withheld to pay
child support, veterans disability compensation is not subject
to intercept. The only exception occurs when veterans have
elected to forego some of their retirement pay in order to
collect additional disability payments. The advantage of
veterans replacing retirement pay with disability pay is that
the disability pay is not subject to taxation. With this
exception, which occurs rarely, the only way to obtain child
support payments from veterans' disability compensation is to
request that the Secretary of the Veterans Administration
intercept the disability compensation and make the child
support payments.
Explanation of provision
The Committee provision allows veterans' disability
compensation benefits to be intercepted and paid on a routine
basis to the custodial parent if the veteran is 60 days or more
in arrears on child support payments. This provision cannot be
used to collect alimony and no more than half of any particular
check can be intercepted.
Reason for change
The Committee, Federal child support officials, and State
child support officials have long believed that veterans'
disability compensation payments should be subject to
withholding to pay child support. The Committee provision moves
in this direction by allowing routine withholding once the
veteran has been 60 days in arrears. Although this procedure
still allows veterans' disability payments to be treated
differently than most other government payments, the fact that
veterans are receiving the payments because they were injured
in the line of duty seems to justify special treatment.
Title V. Fatherhood Programs
Subtitle A--Fatherhood Grant Program
Sec. 501. Fatherhood Grants
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Fatherhood Grant Programs would be added to the Social
Security Act as section 403A.
Reason for change
Based on extensive information, including testimony
presented to the Committee in three hearings over a 2-year
period, a major reason for poverty in the United States is the
rising number of single-parent families, especially those
created by nonmarital births. In addition, research presented
in our hearings shows that marriage is good for both adults and
children. Indeed, children reared in female-headed families are
more likely to fail in school, be arrested, have children
outside marriage, and go on welfare themselves. Thus, programs
that work directly with poor fathers and that emphasize
marriage, parenting, and employment may be able to have some
impact on both the number of children being reared in single-
parent families and, where marriage is not a possibility, to
strengthen the relationship between single fathers and their
children, including through the payment of child support. In
drafting this legislation, the Committee also is aware that the
welfare reform legislation of 1996, and indeed most Federal and
State social programs, are aimed primarily at helping single
mothers. The Fathers Count Act specifically extends a public
commitment to low-income fathers by designing programs that
attempt to help fathers improve their financial independence
and strengthen their ability to support a family.
1. Purpose
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The purposes of the Fatherhood Grant Programs are to:
(1) Promote marriage through counseling, mentoring,
disseminating information about the advantages of
marriage, enhancing relationship skills, teaching how
to control aggression, disseminating information on the
causes and treatment of domestic violence and child
abuse, and other methods;
(2) Promote successful parenting through counseling,
mentoring, disseminating information about good
parenting practices, 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 by improving their economic status by
providing work first services, job search assistance,
job training, subsidized employment, career-advancing
education, job retention, job enhancement, and other
methods.
Reason for change
The approach taken by the Committee in this legislation is
to fund demonstration projects to determine the extent to which
model programs can help reverse the negative impacts of single-
parent families on both adults and children. The most
straightforward solution to these negative impacts is to
increase the incidence of marriage. Whether marriage occurs or
not, a second approach to reducing the problems associated with
single-parent families is to promote the involvement of single
fathers with their children. Even if fathers do not live with
their children, they still have a responsibility to participate
in the child's rearing and to work as a team with the mother to
provide a solid foundation for the child's development. An
important part of the father's responsibility is the provision
of economic support. Since many poor fathers have a weak and
sporadic connection to the labor force, programs should also
aim to increase both the number of employed fathers and the
work skills of employed fathers so they can qualify for higher
paying jobs. The Committee selected these three goals--
increased marriage, better parenting (including payment of
child support), economic improvement--because they all can
contribute in fundamental ways to solving the problems
associated with single-parent families.
2. Fatherhood Grants
a. Applications
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
An entity desiring to carry out a project may submit to the
Secretary an application that contains the following:
(1) A description of the project and how the project
will be carried out;
(2) A description of how the project will address all
three purposes;
(3) A commitment that the project will enroll
individuals who are the father of a child who is, or in
the past 24 months has been, a recipient of benefits
from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or the
Welfare-to-Work programs or a father or expectant or
married father with income below 150 percent of the
poverty line after paying court-ordered child support;
and
(4) A commitment that the project will obtain support
from non-Federal sources (including in-kind
contributions) equal in value to 20 percent of the
grant. The Secretary may reduce the match requirement
to as low as 10 percent if the project demonstrates it
has limited ability to raise funds or obtain resources.
States cannot use Federal dollars or State dollars
counted toward their maintenance of effort requirement
in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program
as matching funds for the Fatherhood Program.
(5) A commitment that the project will make available
to each participant education about domestic violence
and child abuse treatment and prevention, alcohol,
tobacco and other drugs and the effects of using such
substances, and HIV/AIDS.
Reason for change
The Committee expects that entities wishing to conduct
fatherhood projects will submit applications that provide
thorough information on how many fathers (and in some cases,
mothers) will be enrolled, how they will be recruited, how long
they will be enrolled, the specific types of activities in
which they will participate, the type of staff and facilities
that will be required to conduct the project, the types of
private and public organizations that will participate in the
project, and other information deemed necessary by the
Secretary. Sponsoring entities are expected to make a
substantial commitment either in cash or in kind to the conduct
of the project. However, we are aware that some sponsoring
entities, especially those supported by community-based
organizations in poor areas, may have difficulty raising money
or resources to provide the required match. Thus, we are
providing authority to the Secretary to reduce the match to as
low as 10 percent if the entity sponsoring the project presents
adequate justification in its application. Because projects can
count in-kind contributions such as volunteer time (which
should be valued at the typical wage for work of that type in
the local area) and use of donated materials and facilities, we
believe most projects should be able to accumulate the
resources needed to provide the necessary match. Sponsoring
entities are expected to make a commitment that projects will
include information about domestic violence and child abuse
treatment and prevention, alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs,
and HIV/AIDS using a wide variety of methods and approaches to
these topics.
b. Consideration of Applications by Interagency Panel
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
A 10-member panel is established to review applications and
make recommendations to the Secretary regarding which
applicants should be awarded grants. The bipartisan panel is
appointed by the Administration and by Congress. Panel members
serve without compensation, and the Panel is terminated on
October 1, 2001. Appointments for the panel are made by the
Secretary (2 appointments), the Secretary of Labor (2), the
Chairman of Ways and Means (2), the Ranking Member of Ways and
Means (1), the Chairman of the Committee on Finance (2), and
the Ranking Member of the Committee on Finance (1).
Reason for change
Given the bipartisan support for this legislation, and the
substantial agreement on the purposes and methods that should
be used to increase the involvement of poor fathers in the
lives of their children and the children's mothers, the
Committee is expecting that individuals selected to review
project applications will work together on a harmonious basis.
Those in the Administration and Congress making the selections
for members of the Panel should attempt to select individuals
who have demonstrated the ability to work together with
colleagues in a cooperative manner and who have knowledge or
experience in one or more areas including fatherhood projects,
programs for the poor, program administration, program
research, or programs of domestic violence prevention and
treatment.
c. Rules Governing Grants
(1) Timing and Nondiscrimination
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Panel will be appointed by April 1, 2001 and will
select projects to recommend to the Secretary for funding under
the Title I Fatherhood Grant Program by October 1, 2001. The
projects would begin on or after October 1, 2001 and would be
funded at $140 million over four years. Mothers are eligible
for services on the same basis as fathers under the Fatherhood
Grant Program.
Reason for change
The Committee realizes that the Panel will be operating on
a tight schedule. However, the gravity of the problems being
addressed by the fatherhood projects should provide the
motivation needed to ensure that Congress and the
Administration make Panel appointments in a timely fashion and
that the Secretary move expeditiously to bring the Panel
together and to provide it with the support needed to function
efficiently and effectively. The Panel will recommend $140
million in projects to the Secretary, but the number of
projects funded and the amount of money per project is left
entirely to the discretion of the Panel and the Secretary. The
justification for this approach is that decisions will hinge in
major part on the number and quality of project applications
submitted. Only by examining the entire pool of applications
can good decisions be made about which ones to fund and at what
level. Congress intends to leave the Panel and the Secretary
with a great deal of discretion over which projects to select,
how many to select, and at what particular level of funding.
(2) Preferences
Present Law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Preference must be given to projects:
(1) That include policies to encourage payment of
child support such as having agreements with the State
child support agency that the State will cancel child
support arrearages owed by the father to the State in
proportion to the length of time the father pays child
support or resides with the child (unless the father
has been convicted of a crime involving domestic
violence or child abuse), helping fathers improve their
credit rating, and helping fathers arrange visitation
(unless it would be unsafe);
(2) That have written agreements of cooperation with
other agencies, including the State or local Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families program, the Workforce
Investment Board, and the State or local child support
enforcement agency; community-based domestic violence
programs, and the State or local child protection
program;
(3) That enroll a high percentage of participants
within 6 months before or after the child's birth;
(4) That have a clear and practical plan for how
fathers will be recruited.
Reason for change
In earlier drafts of this legislation, we included more
requirements and fewer preferences to guide the selection of
projects. But based on testimony at our hearing and other
communications provided to the Committee, we have moved away
from all but one requirement (see below) and adopted instead
the approach of requiring the Panel and the Secretary to
provide a preference for projects that display any or all of
four characteristics. The Committee agrees on a bipartisan
basis that each of these characteristics are exceptionally
important to the successful operation of fatherhood projects.
However, we are concerned that requiring projects, or a certain
percentage of projects, to meet these requirements has the
potential to greatly reduce the number of projects that could
qualify for participation. The Committee hopes to attract a
wide variety of entities to submit applications, including
community-based entities that may not have extensive experience
in meeting Federal requirements. In short, we face a trade off
between lots of requirements on the one hand and attracting
many and varied entities able to meet the requirements. The
compromise we reached is to convert requirements to preferences
and rely on the Panel and the Secretary to use good judgment in
selecting projects that will maximize both variety of
sponsoring entities and projects that are consistent with
Congressional preferences.
The four specific preferences we included reflect both
research brought to the Committee's attention and testimony
presented in our various hearings. In the past, child support
enforcement agencies have functioned primarily to collect money
from noncustodial parents, primarily fathers. Many of these
agencies have adopted a very tough stance toward fathers who do
not pay child support--a stance, we must point out, that is
consistent with Federal child support statutes. But in recent
years, a number of State and local child support agencies have
started to work with fathers to help them solve problems that
often interfered with their willingness and desire to pay child
support. The 1996 welfare reform law facilitated this process
by authorizing and funding Access and Visitation grants that
are now being operated in every State. These projects have
tried to help parents with custody and visitation issues by
attempting to mediate agreements between mothers and fathers.
Thus, the Committee wants the fatherhood projects to continue
this movement toward cooperation between mothers, fathers, and
child support agencies.
In addition, we have received extensive testimony that
young poor fathers often have substantial child support
arrearages by the time they are 20 or 21 years of age. If they
enroll in a project at that time with the intent of playing a
more responsible role in the life of their family, they are
greatly handicapped by a child support debt that can be many
thousands of dollars. Given the low income these poor fathers
typically earn, it is often demoralizing to face such a large
burden of debt. We have been pleasantly surprised that
advocates for both mothers and fathers seem to agree that if
fathers will begin paying child support on a regular basis, the
nonpayment of arrearages should not be a constant legal threat
against the father. In fact, we strongly encourage projects
that will actually forgive arrearages owed to the State in
proportion to the length of time fathers pay child support or
live with their children. The Committee strongly encourages
applications that pursue additional methods of encouraging
fathers to pay child support.
This emphasis on child support demonstrates the importance
of funding entities that have working relationships with other
agencies. Not only would it be advantageous for fatherhood
projects to work with child support agencies, but it also would
be useful to work with other private and government
organizations that can help achieve the purposes of this
legislation. Coordination with the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) program and with local Workforce
Investment Boards, for example, can help projects take
advantage of programs that have a strong record of helping
people get jobs and improve their job skills. In most cases,
fathers participating in the fatherhood projects would qualify
for work and training benefits under these other programs,
thereby allowing the fatherhood project to use their own
resources to achieve other purposes. Despite the many
advantages of coordination with these organizations, the
Committee was made aware through testimony and other means that
community-based projects often have difficulty making contact
with and then establishing a working relationship with other
agencies. For this reason, we do not want to make coordination
a requirement of funding and thereby reduce the number of local
entities that could qualify for funds.
The third preference is for projects that begin near the
time of the child's birth. Recent research, called to the
attention of the Committee by many of our witnesses and
summarized in the record of our April 27, 1999 Subcommittee on
Human Resources hearing by Professor Sara McLanahan of
Princeton University, shows that as many as half of the parents
of children born outside marriage are living together at the
time of the birth. Equally impressive, up to 80 percent of the
parents say they are in a serious relationship that could lead
to marriage. Given this surprising and encouraging situation,
it seems to make great sense to try to work with these young
couples to help them maintain and perhaps even improve their
relationship by providing them with role models of marriage,
helping them with finances and family planning, helping with
parenting, and providing them with other types of assistance. A
vital part of this approach would be to help the fathers
improve their economic prospects so they can provide firm
financial support to their family. The Committee has adopted
the approach of encouraging projects to begin working with
parents at the time of a nonmarital birth, but without imposing
inflexible requirements on how many projects must adopt this
strategy.
Finally, we heard repeatedly in testimony that fatherhood
projects have had some difficulty in identifying and recruiting
fathers. Thus, we want the Panel and the Secretary to carefully
scrutinize the recruitment plan of entities submitting
applications and favor projects that have a well conceived plan
and a record of attracting fathers to their programs.
(3) Minimum Percentage of Recipients of Grant Funds to be
Nongovernmental (Including Faith-Based)
Organizations
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Of grant funds available for fatherhood matching grants,
not less than 75 percent of the annual grant amount must be
awarded to nongovernmental (including faith-based)
organizations.
Reason for change
The requirement that 75 percent of the funds must be spent
on nongovernmental, including faith-based, organizations is one
requirement the Committee is retaining from previous versions
of the bill. Members of the Committee strongly believe that
local organizations that have their roots in the community are
best situated to gain the trust of fathers. The fact is that
fatherhood programs are in the business of producing
substantial changes in the behavior of fathers. To achieve this
end, it is a requirement to gain the trust of fathers and to
design programs that are tailored to the problems, needs, and
traditions of local communities. In many cases, it may be
possible to gain the benefits of community-based organizations
and larger, more resource rich, and more experienced
governmental organizations by designing cooperative projects in
which community organizations and government agencies join
forces to prepare grant proposals and conduct integrated
projects.
(4) Diversity of Projects
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
In determining which applications are selected for funding,
the Secretary must attempt to achieve balance among projects to
be conducted by entities of different sizes, in differing
geographical regions, in urban vs. rural areas, and in
employing differing methods of achieving the purposes of this
program.
Reason for change
The Committee wants to be certain that small, community-
based organizations are not placed at a disadvantage in the
competition for fatherhood funds under this legislation.
Because large entities with big budgets and government agencies
usually have an advantage in grant competitions, we want to
take steps to be certain that a major portion of grant funds
under this legislation supports community-based organizations.
We are hopeful that prospective grantees will capture the
advantages offered by both the smaller and less formal
community organizations and those of bigger, better-connected,
and more experienced governmental organizations by presenting
collaborative projects. The Committee also believes it is
important to have several projects that serve rural areas.
(5) Payment of Grant in Four Equal Annual Installments
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
During the four fiscal years of each project awarded a
grant, the Secretary must provide to each project an amount
equal to \1/4\th of the grant amount.
Reason for change
Regular payments will ensure that projects can pay their
bills in a planned and consistent fashion.
d. Use of Funds
(1) In General
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Projects must use funds in accord with the application
request, the requirements of this section, and the regulations
prescribed in this section. Funds may be used to support
community-wide initiatives to achieve the purposes of this
part. Funds may not be used for court proceedings on matters of
child visitation or child custody or for legislative advocacy
but may be used to provide general education or information
about access and visitation issues.
Reason for change
All projects receiving funds under the fatherhood grant
program must operate in accord with the provisions established
by their grant proposal and by the statute and the regulations
that govern this program. The Committee wants to emphasize that
all projects must address all three purposes of the
legislation. We do not expect that all projects will provide
equal weight to all three purposes, but the activities
described in their application and their actual use of
resources must reflect the projects' commitment to achieving
all three purposes.
(2) Nondisplacement
Present law
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program
prohibits participants who are engaging in a work activity from
filling a job vacancy if any individual is on layoff from the
same or an equivalent job with that employer or if the employer
has terminated the employment of any regular employee to create
the vacancy.
Explanation of provision
The worker nondisplacement provision from the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families program, slightly modified, is
applied to the Fatherhood Grant Program.
Reason for change
The purpose of including nondisplacement language is to
ensure that current workers will not be replaced by workers
participating in the fatherhood program.
(3) Rule of Construction
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Fathers participating in grant projects are not required by
Federal law to leave the project if their economic
circumstances change.
Reason for change
Once fathers have enrolled in the fatherhood program, they
should not be required to leave the program if their economic
circumstances improve. Particularly because a major program
goal is to increase fathers' employment and income, it would
make little sense to reward successful fathers by dropping them
from the program if they are no longer poor. In many cases,
even fathers who have improved their income may need assistance
with the other purposes of this project. In addition, fathers
economic circumstances may fall just as quickly as they
improved.
(4) Rule of Construction on Marriage
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Secretary is not given the authority to define marriage
for purposes of this section.
Reason for change
The Committee wishes to leave the definition of marriage to
the States, localities, and individual projects.
(5) Penalty for Misuse of Grant Funds
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Projects that spend money for unauthorized purposes must
forfeit all their remaining funds and remit to the Secretary an
amount equal to the amount misused. In addition, the entity is
ineligible for future grants.
Reason for change
There is no justification for misusing funds from the
fatherhood grant program. Thus, any project that violates the
Use of Funds requirements must repay all the money they
misspent, remit all unused funds to the Secretary, and be
ineligible for further participation in the program.
(6) Remittance of Unused Grant Funds
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Any funds remaining at the end of the 5th fiscal year
ending after the initial grant award must be returned to the
Secretary.
Reason for change
We are providing projects with four years of funding and a
fifth year to spend any money that remains after the four years
of project funding. It is our hope that entities funded by the
fatherhood grant program may be able to use the fifth year as a
transition to securing State, local, and private funds to
continue their projects.
e. Authority of Agencies to Exchange Information
Present law
States must have in place a series of privacy protections
in their child support enforcement program. These include
safeguards against unauthorized disclosure of information,
including the release of addresses of individuals involved in
the child support enforcement program.
Explanation of provision
State and local agencies administering the TANF program,
the Welfare-to-Work program, and the Child Support Enforcement
program may share information on fathers to determine their
eligibility to participate in programs and to contact eligible
fathers (subject to applicable privacy laws).
Reason for change
The Committee has received extensive information from State
and local agencies conducting Welfare-to-Work programs as well
as from private entities conducting fatherhood programs that it
is often difficult to obtain information from government
agencies. For projects trying to work with fathers of children
on welfare, a major goal is to identify and contact these
children's fathers so they can be invited to participate. For
this reason, the Committee is granting authority to the TANF
program, the Welfare-to-Work program, and the Child Support
Enforcement program to grant only the name, address, and
telephone number of fathers for participation in projects under
this legislation and under the Welfare-to-Work program. Thus,
we are carefully limiting access to only the information needed
to contact fathers and then only to programs that are working
directly with fathers. Moreover, all applicable privacy laws
apply to this provision, thereby insuring that any government
agency and any individual violating these terms is subject to
penalties.
f. Evaluation
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Secretary must reserve $6 million to conduct scientific
evaluations of fatherhood projects funded under this title and
under Subtitle B: Projects of National Significance. Evaluation
funds can be spent throughout the 6 years of the fatherhood
grants (2001-2005) plus one additional year (2006). The
evaluation must assess, among other outcomes, effects of the
projects on marriage, parenting, employment, earnings, payment
of child support, and domestic violence.
Reason for change
A major goal of the fatherhood grant program is to discover
whether high quality programs can increase marriage, improve
parenting, and increase the employment or income of fathers.
Thus, we are providing the Secretary with substantial resources
to conduct a scientific evaluation of the best programs to
determine whether they can in fact effect these and other
outcomes of interest and, if so, what types of projects and
activities are most likely to produce these outcomes. Funds for
the evaluation begin the year before projects actually start in
2001 and can be spent throughout the life of both waves of
fatherhood projects and then for one year afterward. It is the
hope of the Committee that HHS or its contractor will proceed
by studying fatherhood programs funded both by Subtitle A and
Subtitle B of Title V of this legislation, selecting the best
projects for evaluation, working with the projects to create
random assignment studies where possible, and then collecting
outcome information throughout the life of the project and
perhaps even after fathers leave the project. This approach
will ensure a maximum of information for Congress and others to
determine whether the fatherhood projects have been effective.
g. Regulations
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Secretary must prescribe such regulations as may be
necessary to carry out this section.
Reason for change
If the Secretary deems that regulations are necessary to
carry out the statutory provisions of this legislation,
Congress provides her with the authority to create such
regulations. Providing the Secretary with this authority is
necessary to ensure the smooth implementation of social
programs enacted by Congress.
h. Limitation on Applicability of Other Provisions of this Part
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Most provisions of the Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families program, such as use of funds, administrative
provisions, work requirements, and penalties, do not apply to
fatherhood grant programs.
Reason for change
Although closely connected with the welfare provisions of
the TANF block grant, of which the fatherhood program is a
part, the Committee realizes that the fatherhood projects are
very different than the TANF welfare program, especially in
that the fatherhood program does not provide cash welfare
benefits to its participants. Thus, we are granting substantial
flexibility to the Secretary and to the individual projects in
determining how the fatherhood program should operate.
i. Funding
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
A total of $150,000 is appropriated in 2001 to pay for
operation of the Interagency Panel. For the Fatherhood Grant
Program, a total of $140 million is appropriated for fiscal
years 2002 through 2005. For the evaluation, $6 million is made
available for the years 2001 through 2006.
Reason for change
The Committee is allocating funds totaling $140 million for
the fatherhood grant program. This amount is believed to be
sufficient to mount several dozen projects throughout the
nation, in both urban and rural areas, to determine which
fatherhood programs and approaches are most effective in
achieving the purposes of promoting marriage, improving
parenting, and increasing fathers' employment and earnings. A
total of $150,000 is set aside for the Panel, primarily to pay
for travel expenses for the Panel to meet in some central
location. The Committee believes the Panel should need one or
two meetings to determine its recommendations to the Secretary.
We assume that members of the Panel will be organized and
provided with materials by the Secretary before meeting and
that projects will be assigned to individual members of the
Panel for review in order to facilitate efficient decisions
about funding. The $6 million in funding set aside for the
evaluation is assumed, based on similar evaluations in the
past, to be adequate to conduct the type of evaluation outlined
above.
j. Applicability of Charitable Choice Provision of Welfare Reform
Present law
Section 104 of the Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, often referred to as
``charitable choice'', authorizes States to administer and
provide family assistance services through contracts with
charitable, religious, or private organizations. Under this
provision religious organizations are eligible on the same
basis as any other private organization to provide assistance
as contractors as long as their programs are implemented
consistent with the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. A
religious organization administering the program may not
discriminate against beneficiaries on the basis of religious
belief or refusal to participate in a religious practice.
States must provide an alternative provider for a beneficiary
who objects to the religious character of the designated
organization.
Explanation of provision
The charitable choice provision of the 1996 welfare reform
law applies to fatherhood programs funded under this section.
Reason for change
The Committee believes that religious organizations have an
important role to play in the nation's social policy. We oppose
any action that would provide an advantage in funding to faith-
based organizations, but it seems unwise to eliminate them from
the competition between entities that can design and conduct
the best projects to promote marriage, promote better
parenting, and help fathers increase their earnings. In fact,
promoting marriage and better parenting, as well as solving
some of the barriers to employment such as addictions, are
issues that would seem to be reasonable for churches and other
faith-based organizations to address. The goal of the Committee
in adopting this provision is simply to level the playing field
so that faith-based entities can have their applications
considered on the same basis as secular entities.
subtitle b. fatherhood projects of national significance
Sec. 511. Fatherhood Projects of National Significance
1. National Clearinghouse
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
To establish a National Clearinghouse on Fatherhood, the
Secretary must make a $5 million grant to a nationally
recognized nonprofit fatherhood promotion organization with at
least four years experience in disseminating a national public
education campaign and in providing consultation and training
to community based organizations interested in implementing
fatherhood programs. The National Clearinghouse will:
(1) Develop a media campaign that encourages the
appropriate involvement of both parents in the life of
their children, and encourages responsible fatherhood
and marriage;
(2) Collect, evaluate, and disseminate information to
other States about media campaigns promoting marriage
and fatherhood programs;
(3) Develop and disseminate materials to help young
adults manage their money, plan for future
expenditures; and
(4) Compile and distribute a list of all the sources
of public support for education and training for young
adults.
(5) Provide information on domestic violence and
child abuse prevention and treatment.
Reason for change
The Committee hopes to establish a national movement of
fatherhood projects addressed to helping young, especially
poor, fathers become better husbands, parents, and providers.
In addition to establishing a network of demonstration
programs, it is our intent to initiate a national Clearinghouse
that will produce, collect, and distribute information about
fatherhood and fatherhood programs to State and local projects
throughout the nation. Thus, we are providing funds for 4 years
of operation for such a clearinghouse. In addition to
collecting and distributing materials, we are directing the
Clearinghouse to create a list of the education benefits
provided by the State and Federal governments to young adults
and adults paying for education and training beyond or in lieu
of high school. The Committee has been impressed with the large
number of programs that provide such education and training
benefits, and with the near certainty that most young people do
not know these benefits exist or how to gain access to them.
Hence our requirement that the Clearinghouse produce and widely
distribute the list. It is the expectation of the Committee
that the Clearinghouse will provide most material free of
charge to those who need it. However, it may be appropriate for
some consumers of Clearinghouse material to pay fees. The
Committee expects the Secretary to determine circumstances
under which fees would be appropriate and the level of fees the
Clearinghouse could charge.
2. Multicity Fatherhood Projects
a. In General
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
The Secretary must award a $5 million grant to each of two
nationally recognized nonprofit fatherhood promotion
organizations to conduct projects aimed at achieving the
purposes of this legislation (promoting marriage, promoting
better parenting, and increasing fathers' income).
Reason for change
The Committee wants to ensure that some experienced and
tested fatherhood organizations mount demonstration programs in
major cities. Through our hearings and research, we have found
that there are several organizations that have sponsored
fatherhood programs in inner-city areas and that have
experience working with child support enforcement and other
government agencies. We believe these organizations have the
capacity and experience to design and conduct fatherhood
programs that have a good chance of producing important
outcomes. Thus, we are directing the Secretary to fund two such
organizations to conduct model programs in three cities. The
Committee also expects these model programs to provide
information about their program to the Clearinghouse so that
their programs and products can be disseminated throughout the
nation.
b. Requirements
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
To qualify for consideration, an entity submitting a grant
application must have:
(1) Several years experience designing and conducting
fatherhood programs;
(2) Experience simultaneously conducting fatherhood
projects in more than one major city and in
coordinating these programs with local government
agencies and private, nonprofit agencies including
State or local agencies responsible for child support
enforcement and agencies responsible for employment
services;
(3) A grant application that provides for projects to
be conducted in three major cities; and
(4) At least one of these organizations must have
extensive experience in using married couples to
deliver their program in the inner-city.
Reason for change
To create the greatest chance of having projects that
produce measurable impacts on marriage, parenting, or fathers
income, we are establishing a fairly rigorous set of standards
for projects that may submit an application and be approved by
the Secretary. The Committee believes this set of standards
will result in the selection of highly competent organizations.
3. Payment of Grants in Four Equal Annual Installments
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
For each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005, the Secretary
must provide to each project awarded a grant an amount equal to
\1/4\th of the grant amount.
Reason for change
Paying the grant in four equal parts assures that projects
can plan the flow of funds into their budget while reducing the
likelihood that projects will spend most of their funds before
the year ends. In addition, quarterly payments will allow the
recovery of more money if projects should lose their grant
because of unauthorized expenditures.
4. Funding
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
For each of fiscal years 2002 through 2005, $3,750,000 is
appropriated for grants for multicity projects.
Reason for change
Based on our understanding of the magnitude of the tasks at
hand, as well as our review of the budget of some fatherhood
projects, we assume that the national Clearinghouse can be
operated for a little more than $1 million per year and each of
the two multicity projects can be operated for a little more
than $400,000 per city per year or about $1.25 million per
project per year. The total cost of all three projects will be
$3.75 million per year or $15 million over 4 years.
Title VI. Miscellaneous
Sec. 601. Change Dates for Abstinence Evaluation
Present law
Federal law required that the HHS Secretary reserve $3
million for fiscal year 1998 and ``the amount so specified''
for fiscal year 1999 to evaluate Abstinence Education programs
directly or through grants, contracts or interagency
agreements. Funds must be spent by the end of fiscal year 2001.
Explanation of provision
Changes the date by which funds for the abstinence
education evaluation must be spent from the end of fiscal year
2001 to the end of fiscal year 2005.
Reason for change
The abstinence education projects are now being implemented
and HHS's evaluation contractor is in the final process of
selecting sites to participate in the evaluation. Given that
data collection is expected to begin in the spring and summer
of 2000, allowing data collection for the evaluation to proceed
until only 2001 would not allow the Committee and other
interested parties to have information about long-term impacts
of the abstinence education programs. Because long-term impacts
on attitudes and sexual behavior is the most important
information to come from the evaluation, the Committee is
extending use of evaluation funds through 2005. However, no
additional money is being authorized for the evaluation.
Sec. 602. Report on Undistributed Child Support Payments
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Within 6 months of enactment, the Secretary must submit to
the Committees on Ways and Means and Finance a report on the
procedures States use to locate custodial parents for whom
child support has been collected but not yet distributed due to
a change of address. The report must include an estimate of the
amount of such undistributed child support payments. The
Secretary must include recommendations on actions that should
be taken at the State or Federal level to expedite the payment
of undistributed child support.
Reason for change
The Committee has received both testimony and written
correspondence about child support payments that should be
distributed to mothers and children that are held by the State
for long periods. Apparently, States hold this money because
they do not have a current address. The Committee is greatly
concerned about this problem because the major goal of the
child support program is to provide money to custodial parents
and their children. Thus, we are directing the Secretary to
carefully examine this problem and its causes, to estimate the
amount of money that is undistributed and the length of time
for which it is undistributed, and to make recommendations
about Federal or State policies that could be useful in
attacking this problem.
Sec. 603. Use of New Hire Information to Assist in Administration of
Unemployment Compensation Programs
Present law
The 1996 welfare reform law (P.L. 104-193) required all
employers in the nation to report basic information on every
newly-hired employee to the State. States were in turn required
to collect all this information in the State Directory of New
Hires, to use this information to locate noncustodial parents
who owe child support and to send a wage withholding order to
their employer, and to periodically (within 3 business days)
report all information in their Directory of New Hires to the
Federal government. Information in the State Directory of New
Hires is used by State Employment Security Agencies (the agency
that operates the State unemployment compensation program) to
match against unemployment compensation records to determine
whether people drawing unemployment compensation benefits are
actually working.
Explanation of provision
State Employment Security Agencies are authorized to gain
access to information in the Federal Directory of New Hires.
Reason for change
The Committee has been informed by numerous States that
matching New Hire data against unemployment compensation
records is very successful at detecting individuals who are
both drawing unemployment compensation benefits and working.
Because the New Hire data is reported to the State so quickly,
and because the data matches are performed so quickly, work by
individuals drawing unemployment compensation is quickly
detected and payments are stopped, thereby saving considerable
sums of public money. However, many States have residents who
are drawing unemployment benefits from a previous job in their
State but then obtain work in an adjoining State. Because
States have access to the New Hire data only in their own
State, and not to the Federal Directory of New Hires, States
are not able to detect these cases. According to the
Congressional Budget Office, allowing States to have access to
the National Directory of New Hires would allow this fraud to
be detected and would save $60 million over 5 years.
Sec. 604. Immigration Provisions
1. Nonimmigrant Aliens Ineligible to Receive Visas and Excluded from
Admission for Nonpayment of Child Support
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Any non-immigrant alien is inadmissable to the United
States if he owes child support arrears in excess of $2,500 and
he has not entered into an approved payment plan. This
requirement can be waived if there is a request from the court
or agency with jurisdiction over the order, or if the Attorney
General determines humanitarian or public interests would be
served by such a waiver.
Reason for change
Considering that United States citizens are subject to the
suspension of their passports for the failure to pay court-
ordered child support, the Committee believes a similar
restriction should apply to non-citizens seeking access to the
United States when they owe excessive child support arrears to
U.S. citizens. Furthermore, the Committee does not believe that
individuals from foreign nations should be allowed to benefit
commercially in the United States while they refuse to live up
to their moral and legal obligations to U.S. families.
Therefore, the bill prevents certain immigrants entrance into
the U.S. if they owe more than $2,500 in child support arrears
(the same amount triggering passport suspension for U.S.
citizens). This restriction does not apply to permanent legal
residents, since for that population there may be more
effective means to enforce child support orders, such as direct
wage withholding from their American employers.
2. Authorization to Serve Legal Process in Child Support Cases on
Certain Arriving Aliens
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
Immigration officers are authorized to serve any alien who
is applying for admission to the U.S. with court orders or
summons regarding the applicant's obligation to pay child
support.
Reason for change
In order to make the Committee's provision on child support
payments by aliens effective, the alien must be presented with
court documents that clarify his legal obligation at the
earliest moment. Because of the difficulty of serving papers on
people who live in other countries, it is necessary to serve
the papers as soon as the alien enters the U.S. Immigration
officials are in a strong position to provide this service.
3. Authorization to Share Child Support Enforcement Information to
Enforce Immigration and Naturalization Law
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
When a State child support agency demonstrates that a non-
immigrant alien owes in excess of $2,500 in child support
arrears, the Secretary of HHS may alert the Secretary of State
and the Attorney General so they can undertake enforcement
activities.
Reason for change
The Committee's strategy for obtaining child support
payments from aliens requires that States, which keep extensive
information on child support payments, alert the Federal
government when aliens fall more than $2,500 behind in their
payments. Thus, we minimize confusion among the States by
having them report these cases to the Secretary of HHS, the
organization to which they routinely report child support data.
The Secretary then alerts the State Department which in turn
begins the process of rescinding or refusing to issue
passports. The Attorney General and the Secretary of State may
also learn about these cases in the course of carrying out
other responsibilities. Thus, the Committee provision also
authorizes them to report the cases the Secretary of HHS for
action
Sec. 605. Correction of Errors in Conforming Amendments in the Welfare-
to-Work and Child Support Amendments of 1999
Present law
Not applicable.
Explanation of provision
Two technical corrections are made in the statute
authorizing funds for the Welfare-to-Work program.
Reason for change
The Committee is simply using this legislation as a vehicle
to correct technical drafting mistakes in previous legislation.
Sec. 606. Elimination of Set-Aside of Welfare-to-Work Funds for
Successful Performance Bonus
Present law
The Welfare-to-Work program includes a set-aside of $100
million from FY1999 welfare-to-work funds (to be awarded in
fiscal year 2000) to provide a bonus to States with high
performance. In 1999, Congress reduced the bonus fund from $100
million to $50 million.
Explanation of provision
The Welfare-to-Work high performance bonus fund is
repealed.
Reason for change
The Welfare-to-Work program was enacted in 1997 to provide
additional funds for States and localities to mount programs to
help the most disadvantaged parents enter the workforce.
However, because the definition of ``disadvantaged'' in the
1997 legislation was very restrictive, States and localities
had a difficult time finding and enrolling participants. Thus,
the Welfare-to-Work program got off to a shaky and uneven
start. For this reason, and because the Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families block grant of which the Welfare-to-Work
program is a part, already has a $200 million per year
performance bonus, in 1999 Congress decided to use $50 million
of the $100 million performance bonus in the Welfare-to-Work
program to provide States with funds to expand their programs
for young adults leaving foster care. The Committee believes
that the remaining $50 million can be more productively used to
help finance this expansion of child support funds going to
mothers leaving welfare.
Sec. 607. Increase in Payment Rate to States for Expenditures for Short
Term Training of Staff of Certain Child Welfare Agencies
Present law
The Federal government provides an enhanced match rate of
75 percent for funds spent for child welfare training of
personnel who work in the public sector and for personnel
working in private agencies that provide institutional care.
Private agencies that provide child protection services (other
than institutional care) are not covered by the 75 percent
rate.
Explanation of provision
The legislation extends the 75 percent Federal matching
rate to personnel working in private agencies that provide
child welfare services if the agencies are approved or licensed
by the State.
Reason for change
There is nearly universal agreement that training of
personnel is one of the most effective ways to improve the
performance of child protection agencies in achieving the goals
of improving child safety, improving the quality of services to
children and families, and improving permanency of placements.
Because so many states contract with private agencies to
provide high quality child protection services, the Committee
felt it imperative to encourage better and more extensive
training of child protection workers employed by these private
agencies.
Title VII. Effective Date
Sec. 701. Effective Date
Present law
No provision.
Explanation of provision
With some exceptions noted above, the provisions of this
Act take effect on October 1, 2001. However, if a provision
requires State legislation to be implemented (other than the
appropriation of funds), the State is given additional time to
implement the provision.
Reason for change
The date of October 1, 2001 will give Federal and State
officials at least 1 year to prepare to implement selected
provisions of this legislation. Most of the more complex
provisions, especially those expected to have serious fiscal
impact on the States, have effective dates after October 1,
2001. Given the fact that many State legislatures have short
sessions each year, and that a few State legislatures meet only
every second year, Congress traditionally extends effective
dates if implementing a given provision would require State
legislative action. The Committee continues that tradition in
this bill, except for provisions that require only a State
appropriation of money for implementation.
III. VOTES OF THE COMMITTEE
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the following statements are made
concerning the votes of the Committee on Ways and Means in its
consideration of the bill, H.R. 4678.
Motion to Report the Bill
The bill, H.R. 4678, as amended, was ordered favorably
reported by voice vote on July 19, 2000, with a quorum present.
IV. BUDGET EFFECTS OF THE BILL
A. Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects
In compliance with clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the following statement is
made:
The Committee agrees with the estimate prepared by the
Congressional Budget office (CBO) which is included below.
B. Statement Regarding New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee states that the
Committee bill results in direct spending of $733 million over
5 years and a decrease in revenues of $59 million over 5 years.
This amount is accommodated by the allocation to the Committee
under the Budget Resolution.
C. Cost Estimate Prepared by the Congressional Budget Office
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives requiring a cost estimate
prepared by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the follow
report prepared by CBO is provided.
congressional budget office cost estimate
H.R. 4678--Child Support Distribution Act of 2000
Summary: H.R. 4678 would make several changes to the child
support enforcement program, including requiring the
distribution to families of more collections from child support
payments and the periodic updating of child support orders.
Other provisions would establish a program of grants to promote
responsible fatherhood, eliminate the welfare-to-work
performance bonus to states, increase the federal matching rate
for certain foster care training activities, and improve fraud
detection procedures in the unemployment compensation program.
CBO estimates that H.R. 4678 would reduce direct spending
in 2001 and increase such spending in each year from 2002 to
2010. The estimated net cost would be $733 million over five
years and $3.3 billion over 10 years. It would also cause a
reduction in revenues from unemployment taxes totaling $59
million over five years and $144 million over the 10-year
period. Consequently, CBO estimates that this bill would
decrease the government's surplus by $792 million over the
2001-2005 period and $3.4 billion over the 2001-2010 period.
Because the bill would affect direct spending and revenues,
pay-as-you-go procedures would apply.
The bill's changes to the child support enforcement program
may impose intergovernmental mandates on states because they
may not have sufficient flexibility to alter their financial
and programmatic responsibilities for that program to offset
the costs of those changes. In total, losses to states as a
result of the changes would exceed the annual threaholds
established in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)--$55
million in 2000, adjusted annually for inflation. Other
provisions of the bill would also affect state budgets, but
those provisions would not be mandates as defined by UMRA, and
in some cases, would provide additional assistance to states.
The bill contains no private-sector mandates as defined in
UMRA.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetry impact of H.R. 4678 is shown in Table 1. The costs of
this legislation fall within budget functions 500 (education,
training, employment, and social services), 550 (health), and
600 (income security).
TABLE 1.--ESTIMATED BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF H.R. 4678
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars
-----------------------------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIRECT SPENDING
Spending Under Current Law:
Child Support Administration.............. 2,844 3,028 3,268 3,521 3,813 4,052
Child Support Collections................. -845 -825 -820 -860 -915 -965
Food Stamps............................... 18,557 19,176 20,064 20,767 21,522 22,260
TANF...................................... 15,700 16,400 17,000 17,400 17,750 18,050
Medicaid.................................. 115,145 124,254 134,118 145,081 158,181 172,418
Foster Care............................... 5,171 5,625 6,074 6,514 6,962 7,436
Unemployment Compensation................. 21,522 22,726 24,258 26,539 28,804 30,587
Welfare-to-Work Grants.................... 660 885 540 0 0 0
Fatherhood Grants......................... 0 0 0 0 0 0
=================================================================
Proposed Changes:
Child Support Administration.............. 0 0 37 56 51 49
Child Support Collections................. 0 0 64 93 124 129
Food Stamps............................... 0 0 -11 -12 -13 -13
TANF...................................... 0 0 26 36 37 27
Medicaid.................................. 0 0 -5 -15 -20 -20
Foster Care............................... 0 0 21 26 26 27
Unemployment Compensation................. 0 -7 -10 -12 -15 -16
Welfare-to-Work Grants.................... 0 -25 -25 0 0 0
Fatherhood Grants......................... 0 0 11 28 39 45
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................... 0 -32 108 200 229 228
=================================================================
Spending Under H.R. 4678:
Child Support Administration.............. 2,844 3,028 3,305 3,577 3,864 4,101
Child Support Collections................. -845 -825 -756 -767 -791 -836
Food Stamps............................... 18,557 19,176 20,053 20,755 21,509 22,247
TANF...................................... 15,700 16,400 17,026 17,436 17,787 18,077
Medicaid.................................. 115,145 124,254 134,113 145,066 158,161 172,398
Foster Care............................... 5,171 5,625 6,095 6,540 6,988 7,463
Unemployment Compensation................. 21,522 22,719 24,248 26,527 28,789 30,571
Welfare-to-Work Grants.................... 660 860 515 0 0 0
Fatherhood Grants......................... 0 0 11 28 39 45
CHANGES IN REVENUES
Estimated Revenues............................ 0 0 -4 -17 -19 -19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R.
4678, by provision, is shown in Table 2. Provisions with no
estimated budgetary effect are excluded from the table. H.R.
4678 would be effective October 1, 2001, except where otherwise
noted.
Distribution of More Child Support to Families.--Section
101 would require the federal and state governments to share
more child support collections with current and former
recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF),
reducing the amount the federal and state governments recoup
from previous TANF benefit payments. The bill would require
states to implement the new policy by October 1, 2005, but
would give states the option of implementing the policy sooner.
CBO estimates that states with 20 percent of child support
collections would adopt the new policy in 2002, states with
another 20 percent of collections would adopt it by 2005, and
the remainder would have the policy in place in 2006.
Collections for Current TANF Recipients.--When a family
applies for TANF, it assigns to the state any rights the family
has to child support collections for the periods before and
during the time it receives assistance. While the family
receives assistance, the state uses any collections it receives
to reimburse itself and the federal government for TANF
payments.
The bill would limit the amount that the family assigns to
the state to the child support payments due during the period
the family receives assistance. CBO projects that under current
law the states will collect $1.2 billion in 2002 and $1.7
billion in 2010 in child support payments on behalf of families
receiving TANF assistance. H.R. 4678 would reduce those
collections by 10 percent when fully implemented. Families
would receive an additional $24 million in 2002, rising to $170
million in 2010.
Collections for Former TANF Recipients.--When a family
ceases to receive public assistance, states continue to enforce
the family's child support order. All amounts of child support
collected on time are sent directly to the family. However,
both the government and the family have a claim on collections
of past-due child support: the government claims the support
owed for the period when the family was on assistance, up to
the amount of the assistance paid, and the family claims all
other support. A set of distribution rules determines which
claim is paid first when a collection is made. That order
matters because, in many cases, past-due child support is never
fully paid.
Under current law, with two exceptions, the state pays the
family all past-due support that was owed to the family before
reimbursing itself for TANF benefits paid. The first exception
is if the support is collected through the federal tax refund
offset program. The second exception is past-due support that
was owed, but not paid, during the time the family was on
assistance, to the extent that the support owed exceeded the
TANF benefits paid. This bill would remove those two exceptions
so that all past-due support owed to the family would be paid
to the family before the government reimburses itself for any
previous benefit payments.
These changes would give families more of the collections
from the federal tax refund offset program. Under that program,
the Internal Revenue Service intercepts tax refunds going to
non-custodial parents who owe past-due child support, and pays
them to custodial parents as child support. CBO projects that
the government will collect $800 million from tax offsets on
behalf of current and former welfare recipients in 2002 and
that those collections will grow at about 7 percent a year.
Based on data provided by federal and state child support
officials, CBO estimates that two-thirds of those collections
are on behalf of former recipients of assistance and that two-
thirds of those collections would go to families, instead of
the government, under the bill. Families would receive an
additional $70 million in 2002, rising to $590 million in 2010.
H.R. 4678 would provide for the payment of other additional
child support collections to certain families. Under current
law, if a family has past-due child support from the period the
family was on assistance that exceeds the total benefits paid
to the family, then the family only receives those collections
after the state has been fully reimbursed for welfare benefits
paid. Giving those collections to families first would result
in a 20 percent decline in the amount of collections the state
retains on behalf of former recipients, after implementation of
the tax offset policy. Based on 1999 report to the Congress by
the Department of Health and Human Services, CBO estimates that
families would receive an additional $30 million in 2002,
rising to $180 million by 2010, as a result of this change.
Federal Share of Collections.--Total new collections to
families from the new distribution policy would be $124 million
in 2002, rising to $940 million by 2010. The federal share of
child support collections is 56 percent on average. Therefore,
CBO estimates that the policies would result in reduced federal
collections of $70 million in 2002, rising to $530 million by
2010.
TABLE 2.--FEDERAL BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF H.R. 4678, BY PROVISION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIRECT SPENDING
Section 101: Distribution of Child Support
Distribution of More Child Support to Families:
Child Support Collections:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 70 110 150 160 415 440 470 500 530
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 70 110 150 160 415 440 470 500 530
Food Stamps:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 -5 -5 -5 -5 -15 -15 -15 -15 -20
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 -5 -5 -5 -5 -15 -15 -15 -15 -20
TANF:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 25 35 35 25 30 20 10 0 0
Subtotal:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 65 105 145 155 400 425 455 485 510
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 90 140 180 180 430 445 465 485 510
Ban on Recovery of Birth Costs:
Medicaid:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 40 42 45 47
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 40 42 45 47
Section 201: Review and Adjustment of Child Support
Orders:
Review of Orders of TANF Recipients:
Child Support Administrative Costs:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 19 24 24 25 26 26 27 28 28
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 19 24 24 25 26 26 27 28 28
Child Support Collections:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 -5 -15 -24 -29 -31 -32 -32 -33 -34
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 -5 -15 -24 -29 -31 -32 -32 -33 -34
Food Stamps:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 -1 -2 -3 -3 -3 -4 -4 -4 -4
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 -1 -2 -3 -3 -3 -4 -4 -4 -4
Medicaid:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 -5 -10 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -20
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 -5 -10 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -20
Subtotal:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 8 -3 -18 -22 -23 -25 -24 -24 -30
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 8 -3 -18 -22 -23 -25 -24 -24 -30
Review of Orders of All Recipients that Leave TANF:
Child Support Administrative Costs:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 16 20 20 22 22 22 22 24 24
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 16 20 20 22 22 22 22 24 24
Food Stamps:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5 -5
Medicaid:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 0 -5 -5 -5 -10 -10 -10 -10 -10
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 0 -5 -5 -5 -10 -10 -10 -10 -10
Subtotal:
Estimated Budget Authority..................... 0 0 11 10 10 12 7 7 7 9 9
Estimated Outlays.............................. 0 0 11 10 10 12 7 7 7 9 9
Section 302: Demonstrations Involving Public Non-IV-D
Child Support Agencies:
Child Support Administrative Costs:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 2 12 7 2 2 2 2 2 2
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 2 12 7 2 2 2 2 2 2
Section 401: Denial of Passports:
Child Support Collections:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 -1 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 -1 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2
Section 501: Fatherhood Grants:
Panels:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 (\1\) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 (\1\) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Grants:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 35 35 35 35 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 10 25 35 40 25 5 0 0 0
Evaluation:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0
Effect of Grant Program on TANF Spending:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0
Subtotal:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 41 35 35 35 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 12 27 38 43 27 7 0 0 0
Section 511: Projects of National Significance:
Estimated Budget Authority......................... 0 0 4 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays.................................. 0 0 1 2 4 4 3 1 0 0 0
Section 603: Use of New Hire Information:
Unemployment Compensation:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 -7 -10 -12 -15 -16 -16 -16 -17 -17 -18
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 -7 -10 -12 -15 -16 -16 -16 -17 -17 -18
Section 606: Elimination of Welfare-to-Work
Performance Bonus:
Welfare-to-Work Grants:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... -50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 -25 -25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Section 607: Foster Care Training:
Foster Care:
Estimated Budget Authority....................... 0 0 25 26 26 27 28 28 29 30 30
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 0 21 26 26 27 27 28 29 30 30
Total:
Estimated Budget Authority......................... -50 -7 144 175 192 195 434 459 492 528 548
Estimated Outlays................................ 0 -32 108 200 229 228 494 487 502 528 548
REVENUES
Section 603: Use of New Hire Information Revenues.... 0 0 -4 -17 -19 -19 -18 -16 -17 -17 -18
NET EFFECT ON SURPLUS
Net Increase or Decrease (-) in Surplus.............. 0 32 -112 -217 -248 -247 -512 -503 -519 -545 -566
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\=Less than $500,000.
Notes: The estimate assumes enactment before October 1, 2000. Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
Food Stamps.--The new collections paid to former TANF
recipients under H.R. 4678 would affect spending in the Food
Stamp program. CBO expects that one-third of the former TANF
recipients with increased child support income would
participate in the Food Stamp program, and that benefits would
be reduced by 30 cents for every extra dollar of income.
Increased income from the tax offset, which is paid as a lump
sum, would not count as income for determining Food Stamp
benefits. For purposes of calculating Food Stamp benefits,
incomes of former recipients would increase by $10 million in
2002, rising to $60 million in 2010. Food Stamp savings would
be about $5 million in 2002, rising to about $20 million by
2010.
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.--H.R. 4678 would
allow states to count any increased state spending stemming
from the new distribution policy towards their maintenance-of-
effort requirement in the TANF program. (States are required to
maintain spending on TANF at the 1994 level in order to receive
federal TANF funding.) Many states have large unspent balances
of federal TANF funds. Those states could reduce the amount of
state money they spend on TANF by the amount that they could
newly count as maintenance-of-effort spending. In order to meet
the need for TANF assistance, those states could then
accelerate spending of federal dollars.
CBO assumes that states with TANF surpluses would cover
half of their additional costs by accelerating the use of
federal TANF funds. Those costs would total $180 million over
the 2001-2010 period.
Ban on the Recovery of Birth Costs.--Effective in 2006,
section 101 would prohibit states from using their child
support programs to recoup costs for the birth of a child that
were paid by Medicaid. Based on a survey of states, CBO
estimates that 40 percent of states now collect something from
non-custodial parents to reimburse Medicaid and that
collections totaled about $50 million in 1999. CBO expects
those collections will grow at about five percent a year, a
slightly slower rate than the average cost of a Medicaid case.
The federal government's share of Medicaid collections is 57
percent on average. As a result, CBO estimates the cost to the
federal government would be $38 million in 2006 and $212
million over the 2006-2010 period.
Review and Adjustment of Child Support Orders.--Section 201
would require states to review child support orders of families
on TANF every three years and when they leave TANF. When a
state reviews a child support order, it obtains current
financial information from the custodial and non-custodial
parents and determines whether any adjustment in the amount of
ordered child support is indicated. The state also may revise
an order to require the non-custodial parent to provide health
insurance. Under current law, states are required to review
orders every three years upon the request of a parent; they may
also do so without such a request. About one-third of states
perform automatic reviews every three years.
CBO estimates that 220,000 more families on TANF and
190,000 families leaving TANF would have their orders reviewed
annually under the proposal and that 18 percent of those orders
would be adjusted. The average cost of a review would be about
$160 in 2002 and would grow each year with inflation. The
federal government pays 66 percent of such administrative
costs. CBO expects the proposal would be 80 percent implemented
in 2002 and fully implemented by 2003. The additional cost to
the federal government would rise from $34 million in 2002 to
$52 million in 2010.
The average adjustments to a child support order of a
family on TANF would be $80 a month in 2002. CBO expects
families leaving TANF would have slightly smaller increases,
about $70 a month, because some of those orders may have been
updated recently while the family was on TANF. Those
adjustments would grow each year with inflation. CBO expects
the increased collections for a family would continue for up to
five years.
While a family remains on TANF, the state would keep all
the increased collections to reimburse itself and the federal
government for welfare payments. CBO estimates that the federal
share of collections, 56 percent, would grow from $5 million in
2002 to $34 million in 2010.
The states would pay an increased collections stemming from
reviews of child support orders to families once they leave
assistance. CBO expects one-third of families leaving TANF
would receive benefits under the Food Stamp program and their
benefits would be reduced by 30 cents for every extra dollar of
income. This would reduce federal payments in the Food Stamp
program by $5 million to $10 million each year. This includes
savings from families whose orders are reviewed while they are
on assistance who subsequently leave assistance.
In addition, CBO expects some children would receive health
insurance coverage from the non-custodial parent as a result of
the new reviews. CBO estimates 40 percent of orders with a
monetary adjustment would also be adjusted to include a
requirement that the non-custodial parent provide health
insurance for their child and that in about half of those cases
such medical insurance would be provided. After the first few
years. We assume newly provided medical insurance would decline
by half, because many families would have already had medical
insurance recently added to their order. We expect the non-
custodial parent would continue to provide health insurance for
up to five years.
CBO expects all of the families still on TANF would
participate in Medicaid. About half of the children in families
that left TANF would still participate in Medicaid six months
later, but only 20 percent would still participate three years
later. When health insurance is provided by a third party,
Medicaid no longer has to provide it, so Medicaid savings would
result. CBO estimates that each medical support order would
cover an average of 1.5 children and that federal savings would
rise from about $1,000 per child in 2002 to about $1,800 per
child in 2010. Based on the federal government's average share
of Medicaid spending (57 percent), federal Medicaid savings
would rise from $5 million in 2002 to $30 million in 2010.
The estimates of the costs of doing reviews and the impact
of a review and adjustment on collections is based on a 1997
report by Meyer and Dworsky, a 1992 study by Caliber and
Associates, and discussions with state officials.
Demonstrations Involving Public Non IV-D Child Support
Agencies.--Section 302 would establish a demonstration program
to determine the extent to which public child support
enforcement agencies other then the IV-D agencies could
contribute effectively to the establishment and enforcement of
child support obligations.
Every state has an agency, designated the IV-D agency, that
operates a child support enforcement program according to
federal guidelines and with federal funding available at a 66-
percent matching rate. Other public agencies in the state--for
example, a county government or clerk of the court--may perform
similar functions to the IV-D agency, but do not necessarily
follow federal guidelines or claim federal funding. These other
public agencies do not have full access to the same enforcement
tools and information databases that are available to the IV-D
agency. A family may choose to have its child support order
enforced by a public agency other than the IV-D agency.
H.R. 4678 would authorize the Secretary of Health and Human
Services to approve up to 10 states to participate in the
demonstration starting in July 2002. Under the demonstration,
the IV-D agency would provide access to enforcement tools and
information in databases to other public child support
agencies, upon request.
Based on information form state officials and the
Department of Health and Human Services, CBO expects the
demonstration program to increase administrative spending in
the child support program. States would be required to hire new
staff and reprogram computers to provide new services to other
public child support agencies. CBO estimates that, on average,
a state would spend $5 million in start-up costs and $500,000
per year in ongoing operational costs. The operational costs
would grow with inflation. CBO expects five states would
participate in the demonstration. Start up costs would be
spread over the 2002-2004 period and the federal government
would pay 66 percent of any administrative costs. Federal costs
would total $33 million over the 2001-2010 period.
Denial of Passports.--Under current law, the State
Department denies a request for a passport for a non-custodial
parent if he or she owes more than $5,000 in past-due child
support. Section 401 would lower that threshold and deny a
passport to a non-custodial parent owing $2,500 or more.
Generally, when a non-custodial parent seeks to restore
eligibility for a passport, he or she will arrange to pay the
past-due amount down to the threshold level.
The State Department is currently denying about 8,750
passport requests annually. If noncustodial parents owing
between $2,500 and $5,000 apply for passports at the same rate,
the proposal would generate an additional 3,700 denials
annually. Data from the Department of Health and Human Services
shows there are 3.1 million non-custodial parents owing more
than $5,000 in pat-due child support and an additional 1.3
million owing between $2,500 and $5,000.
CBO assumes that 50 percent of non-custodial parents who
have a request for a passport denied would make a payment in
order to get their passport rather than just doing without one.
A non-custodial parent owing more than $5,000 would have a pay
an additional $2,500 to receive a passport. The average parent
owing between $2,500 and $5,000 would have to pay $1,250 to
receive a passport. As a result, CBO estimates the policy would
result in new payments of child support of about $13 million
annually. About one-third of those payments would be on behalf
of current and former welfare families and would be retained by
the government as reimbursement for welfare benefits. The
federal share of such collections, 56 percent, would be $2
million a year.
Fatherhood Grants.--Section 501 would establish a new
program to make grants to public and private entities for
projects designed to promote marriage, improve parenting, and
help fathers and their families leave welfare.
An interagency panel, funded at $150,000 in 2001, would
review applications and make recommendations to the Secretary
of Health and Human Services. The Secretary would award $140
million in grants in 2002. The funding would be available to
grantees in four equal annual installments, and grantees would
have to commit $1 for every $5 of federal grant funding.
Grantees could provide services to fathers with incomes below
150 percent of poverty or fathers whose children received funds
from the TANF program within the most recent two-year period.
CBO estimates that spending by grantees would initially be slow
as the programs are phased in, but would speed up gradually in
succeeding years. Spending would total $110 million over the
2001-2005 period and $140 million over the 2001-2010 period.
Evaluations.--The Secretary would conduct an evaluation of
selected fatherhood projects. The bill would make $6 million
available over the 2002-2010 period for that evaluation.
Effect of Grant Program on TANF Spending.--The fatherhood
grant program would affect spending under the TANF program.
Some of the fatherhood grant money would be spent by government
entities on families eligible for TANF. This spending could
count as maintenance-of-effort spending in the TANF program and
would be in addition to TANF spending by those entities under
current law. Consequently, CBO estimates that federal TANF
outlays would increase by $5 for every $100 of fatherhood grant
spending. The estimate assumes that entities contribute the 20-
percent matching funds and that 25 percent of those funds would
qualify as maintenance-of-effort spending. Additional spending
would total $7 million over the 2001-2010 period.
Fatherhood Projects of National Significance.--Section 502
would establish a one-time grant of $5 million for a nonprofit
organization to create a national clearinghouse to develop and
distribute materials supporting marriage and responsible
parenting. In addition, it would establish grants of $5 million
for each of two nonprofits to establish multicity projects to
promote marriage and successful parenting and help fathers and
their families leave welfare. The grants would be awarded in
four equal, annual installments starting in 2002. Spending
would total $15 million over the 2001-2010 period.
Use of New Hire Information.--Section 603 would allow
states to access information in the national database of new
hires in order to help detect fraud in the unemployment
compensation system. Currently, most states may access the
information that they send to the national registry. However,
without access to the national information, a state may not
receive important data regarding recent hires by national
corporations that may report in other states. Only a few states
have examined potential savings that could be realized if they
had access to the national data, and their estimates are
small--about 0.1 percent of total outlays. Nevertheless, states
generally believe that access to the national data would be a
valuable tool in detecting fraud earlier, as the information on
new hires is more current than that contained in quarterly wage
reports, which many states rely on now.
A recent survey by the Interstate Conference of State
Employment Security Agencies indicated that 19 states currently
were using the state-reported information on new hires. Another
20 states reported that they hoped to make use of this
information in the near future. For purposes of this estimate,
CBO assumed that the states currently using their own
information would make use of the national information in the
year that it became available. The other interested states are
assumed to take advantage of the national information within
the next few years. CBO estimates that this proposal would
result in a reduction of $144 million in spending for
unemployment compensation over the 2001-2010 period. Because
this reduction in spending would be fully offset by a reduction
in unemployment taxes, CBO estimates that there would be no net
effect on the federal budget over the 10-year period. The
provision would take effect October 1, 2000.
Elimination of the Welfare-to-Work Performance Bonus.--
Section 606 would eliminate the $50 million set-aside for
Welfare-to-Work performance bonuses. These bonuses were to have
been awarded by the end of fiscal year 2000, but states would
not be able to draw down the funds from these bonuses until the
beginning of fiscal year 2001. If these bonuses are not paid,
CBO estimates that $50 million would be saved over the 2001-
2010 period. The provision would be effective upon enactment of
the bill.
Foster Care Training.--Section 607 of the bill would allow
states to claim more federal money for efforts they undertake
to train staff of private, state-approved child welfare
agencies in ways that provide support and assistance to foster
and adoptive children. Under current law, states may claim $1
of federal funds for every dollar of state money spent on this
type of training. The bill would allow states to receive a
higher federal match of $3 for every dollar of state spending.
Based on information from several states, CBO estimates that
enacting this section would increase federal spending by $21
million in fiscal year 2002 (the first year in which the
enhanced match rate would become effective), and by $244
million over the 2001-2010 period.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures
for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. The net
changes in outlays and governmental receipts that are subject
to pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following table.
For the purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go procedures, only
the effects in the current year, the budget year, and the
succeeding four years are counted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in outlays.............................................. 0 -32 108 200 229 228 494 487 502 528 548
Changes in receipts............................................. 0 0 -4 -17 -19 -19 -18 -16 -17 -17 -18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments:
H.R. 4678 would impose two new requirements on states with
regard to their child support enforcement program that may
constitute intergovernmental mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). The bill would reduce the
amounts that states may retain from child support collections
in order to reimburse themselves for public assistance
spending, in particular for TANF. As a result, state would lose
a total of about $55 million in 2002 and $2.2 billion over the
2002-2010 period. The bill would also require states to review
child support orders of families on TANF every three years and
when they leave TANF. State administrative costs would increase
by $18 million in 2002 and by $220 million over the 2002-2010
period. (Those administrative costs would be alleviated
somewhat by increased collections retained by the state
totaling $4 million in 2002 and $185 million over the 2002-1010
period.) These requirements may be intergovernmental mandates
as defined in UMRA because they would affect a large
entitlement program in which states may not have sufficient
flexibility to alter their financial and programmatic
responsibilities to offset the costs of the requirements.
States vary widely in how they operate and fund their child
support programs, and CBO cannot determine the degree to which
losses of this magnitude could be offset. In total, the annual
losses to states would exceed the threshold established in UMRA
($55 million in 2000, adjusted annually for inflation).
Other provisions of H.R. 4678 would also affect state
budgets, but those provisions would not be mandates as defined
by UMRA, and in some cases, would provide for additional
assistance to states. The bill would prohibit states from using
the state child support program to recoup Medicaid costs for
the birth of a child. This prohibition would result in a loss
of revenues to states of about $30 million in 2006 and $160
million over the 2006-2010 period. In addition, the bill would
eliminate the welfare-to-work performance bonus available to
states for successfully individuals in jobs with income growth
potential for extended periods of time. CBO estimates a
reduction of $50 million in grants to states over the 2001-2010
period as a result of this elimination. However, states would
have sufficient flexibility in their programs to accommodate
these reductions.
Section 302 would allow the Secretary to approve
demonstration projects that would enable states to contract
with public non-IV-D child support agencies for the enforcement
of child support obligations. State participation in
demonstration programs would be voluntary, and if they chose to
participate, states could charge fees to the agencies for
information and services associated with the demonstration
projects. Up to 10 states could qualify for the demonstration
projects, and CBO estimates that state spending for
administrative costs would total $17 million over the 2002-2010
period.
Title V would authorize grants for fatherhood and parenting
programs, particularly those designed to reduce dependence on
welfare and to strengthen parenting skills. State, local, and
tribal entities would be eligible for these grants, though
preference would be given to public entities that pass funds
through to private organizations. Approval of grants would also
depend on the degree to which the prospective grantee could
receive assurances from agencies responsible for enforcing
child support obligations that they would cancel past due
amounts owed by non-custodial parents. Cancellations of those
amounts by those agencies and any participation in the
fatherhood grant program by public entities would be voluntary.
Title VI would allow states to access national information
about new hires to help them detect fraud in the unemployment
compensation system. CBO estimates that states would be able to
reduce spending for unemployment compensation by $144 million
over the 2001-2010 period. Consequently, they would also be
able to reduce state unemployment taxes by the same amount, for
a net budgetary impact of zero.
The bill would increase the amount of federal matching
funds that states could claim for some foster care training
activities. The bill would allow states to claim $3 for every
$1 of state spending rather than the $1 for $1 match under
current law. As a result, CBO estimates that states would
receive an additional $21 million in 2002 and $244 million over
the 2001-2010 period.
Finally, the stricter requirements for child support
payments in order to obtain a passport would result in
additional collections, of which approximately $2 million
annually would be retained by state governments as
reimbursement for prior public assistance payments.
Estimated impact on the private sector: H.R. 4678 contains
no private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Child Support: Sheila
Dacey; Unemployment Compensation, Welfare-to-Work and Foster
Care: Christina Hawley Sadot; Medicaid: Eric Rollins and Jeanne
De Sa; and Food Stamps: Valerie Baxter.
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Leo Lex.
Impact on the Private Sector: Ralph Smith.
Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
V. OTHER MATTERS REQUIRED TO BE DISCUSSED UNDER THE RULES OF THE HOUSE
A. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the
need for this legislation was confirmed by the oversight
hearings of the Subcommittee on Human Resources. The hearings
were as follows:
The Subcommittee on Human Resources held a hearing on May
18, 2000, to receive comments on H.R. 4469, the bill as
originally introduced by Chairman Nancy Johnson. Testimony at
the hearing was presented by the Administration, program
administrators, advocates, researchers, and Members of the U.S.
House of Representatives. The Subcommittee also conducted
hearings on May 19, 1998 (Serial 105-89), September 23, 1999
(Serial 106-31), and October 5, 1999 (Serial 106-30) on child
support enforcement issues, which included testimony from the
Administration, child support administrators, officials of
local child support programs that operate independently of the
Federal-State program, academic witnesses, researchers, and
advocacy groups. Testimony at these hearings concerned State
implementation of the 1996 child support reforms, the current
and potential role of child support enforcement outside the
Federal-State program funded under Title IV-D of the Social
Security Act, and the impact of domestic violence on child
support enforcement. The Subcommittee also held a hearing on
October 5, 1999 (Serial 106-30), to receive comments on H.R.
3073, the fatherhood legislation that is now Title V of H.R.
4678. Testimony at the hearing was presented by scholars,
program administrators, foundation executives, and Members of
the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. The
Subcommittee also conducted hearings on April 27, 1999 and July
30, 1998 (Serial 105-78) on fatherhood programs, which included
testimony from the Administration, researchers, advocates,
individuals who have designed and conducted programs for low-
income fathers, and young fathers whose children are on
welfare.
B. Summary of Findings and Recommendations of the Government Reform
Committee
In compliance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee states that no
oversight findings or recommendations have been submitted to
the Committee on Government Reform regarding the subject of the
bill.
C. Constitutional Authority Statement
In compliance with clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, relating to Constitutional
Authority, the Committee states that the Committee's action in
reporting the bill is derived from Article I of the
Constitution, Section 8 (``The Congress shall have power to lay
and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the
debts and to provide for * * * the general Welfare of the
United States * * * '').
D. Information Relating to Unfunded Mandates
This information is provided in accordance with Section 423
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-4). The
Congressional Budget Office has indicated that this bill may
impose intergovernmental mandates on states but it is not
conclusive in its recommendation. The Committee bill provides
resources to States by allowing States to cover costs incurred
by this bill by either counting those expenditures toward their
required maintenance of effort spending in the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program or by using money
from the TANF program to fund child support activities.
Therefore, the Committee believes the bill is in compliance
with the requirements of the mandates statute.
VI. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change
is proposed is shown in roman):
SOCIAL SECURITY ACT
* * * * * * *
TITLE IV--GRANTS TO STATES FOR AID AND SERVICES TO NEEDY FAMILIES WITH
CHILDREN AND FOR CHILD-WELFARE SERVICES
* * * * * * *
PART A--BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES FOR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY
FAMILIES
* * * * * * *
SEC. 402. ELIGIBLE STATES; STATE PLAN.
(a) In General.--As used in this part, the term ``eligible
State'' means, with respect to a fiscal year, a State that,
during the 27-month period ending with the close of the 1st
quarter of the fiscal year, has submitted to the Secretary a
plan that the Secretary has found includes the following:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(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.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 403. GRANTS TO STATES.
(a) Grants.--
(1) Family assistance grant.--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(E) Appropriation.--Out of any money in the
Treasury of the United States not otherwise
appropriated, there are appropriated for fiscal
years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and
2002 such sums as are necessary for grants
under this paragraph, and for fiscal years 2001
through 2007, such sums as are necessary to
carry out section 403A.
* * * * * * *
(5) Welfare-to-work grants.--
(A) Formula grants.--
(i) Entitlement.--A State shall be
entitled to receive from the Secretary
of Labor a grant for each fiscal year
specified in subparagraph [(I)] (H) of
this paragraph for which the State is a
welfare-to-work State, in an amount
that does not exceed the lesser of--
(I) * * *
* * * * * * *
(iv) Available amount.--As used in
this subparagraph, the term ``available
amount'' means, for a fiscal year, the
sum of--
(I) 75 percent of the sum
of--
(aa) the amount
specified in
subparagraph [(I)] (H)
for the fiscal year,
minus the total of the
amounts reserved
pursuant to
subparagraphs (E), (F),
[(G), and (H)] and (G)
for the fiscal year;
and
(bb) any amount
reserved pursuant to
subparagraph [(F)] (E)
for the immediately
preceding fiscal year
that has not been
obligated; and
* * * * * * *
(B) Competitive grants.--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(v) Funding.--For grants under this
subparagraph for each fiscal year
specified in subparagraph [(I)] (H),
there shall be available to the
Secretary of Labor an amount equal to
the sum of--
(I) 25 percent of the sum
of--
(aa) the amount
specified in
subparagraph [(I)] (H)
for the fiscal year,
minus the total of the
amounts reserved
pursuant to
subparagraphs (E), (F),
[(G), and (H)] and (G)
for the fiscal year;
and
(bb) any amount
reserved pursuant to
subparagraph [(F)] (E)
for the immediately
preceding fiscal year
that has not been
obligated; and
* * * * * * *
[(E) Set-aside for successful performance
bonus.--
[(i) In general.--The Secretary of
Labor shall award a grant in accordance
with this subparagraph to each
successful performance State in fiscal
year 2000, but shall not make any
outlay to pay any such grant before
October 1, 2000.
[(ii) Amount of grant.--The Secretary
of Labor shall determine the amount of
the grant payable under this
subparagraph to a successful
performance State, which shall be based
on the score assigned to the State
under clause (iv)(I)(aa) for such prior
period as the Secretary of Labor deems
appropriate.
[(iii) Formula for measuring state
performance.--Not later than 1 year
after the date of the enactment of this
paragraph, the Secretary of Labor, in
consultation with the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, the National
Governors' Association, and the
American Public Welfare Association,
shall develop a formula for measuring--
[(I) the success of States in
placing individuals in private
sector employment or in any
kind of employment, through
programs operated with funds
provided under subparagraph
(A);
[(II) the duration of such
placements;
[(III) any increase in the
earnings of such individuals;
and
[(IV) such other factors as
the Secretary of Labor deems
appropriate concerning the
activities of the States with
respect to such individuals.
The formula may take into account
general economic conditions on a State-
by-State basis.
[(iv) Scoring of state performance;
setting of performance thresholds.--
[(I) In general.--The
Secretary of Labor shall--
[(aa) use the formula
developed under clause
(iii) to assign a score
to each State that was
a welfare-to-work State
for fiscal years 1998
and 1999; and
[(bb) prescribe a
performance threshold
in such a manner so as
to ensure that the
total amount of grants
to be made under this
paragraph equals
$50,000,000.
[(II) Availability of
welfare-to-work data submitted
to the secretary of hhs.--The
Secretary of Health and Human
Services shall provide the
Secretary of Labor with the
data reported by States under
this part with respect to
programs operated with funds
provided under subparagraph
(A).
[(v) Successful performance state
defined.--As used in this subparagraph,
the term ``successful performance
State'' means a State whose score
assigned pursuant to clause (iv)(I)(aa)
equals or exceeds the performance
threshold prescribed under clause
(iv)(I)(bb).
[(vi) Set-aside.--$50,000,000 of the
amount specified in subparagraph (I)
for fiscal year 1999 shall be reserved
for grants under this subparagraph.]
[(F)] (E) Funding for indian tribes.--1
percent of the amount specified in subparagraph
[(I)] (H) for fiscal year 1998 and $15,000,000
of the amount so specified for fiscal year 1999
shall be reserved for grants to Indian tribes
under section 412(a)(3).
[(G)] (F) Funding for evaluations of welfare-
to-work programs.--0.6 percent of the amount
specified in subparagraph [(I)] (H) for fiscal
year 1998 and $9,000,000 of the amount so
specified for fiscal year 1999 shall be
reserved for use by the Secretary to carry out
section 413(j).
[(H)] (G) Funding for evaluation of
abstinence education programs.--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(iii) Deadline for outlays.--Outlays
from funds used pursuant to clause (i)
for evaluation of programs under
section 510 shall not be made after
fiscal year [2001] 2005.
(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).
[(I)] (H) Appropriations.--
(i) In general.--Out of any money in
the Treasury of the United States not
otherwise appropriated, there are
appropriated for grants under this
paragraph--
(I) $1,500,000,000 for fiscal
year 1998; and
(II) [$1,450,000,000]
$1,400,000,000 for fiscal year
1999.
(ii) Availability.--The amounts made
available pursuant to clause (i) shall
remain available for such period as is
necessary to make the grants provided
for in this paragraph.
[(J)] (I) Worker protections.--
(i) Nondisplacement in work
activities.--
(I) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(K)] (J) Information disclosure.--If a State
to which a grant is made under section 403
establishes safeguards against the use or
disclosure of information about applicants or
recipients of assistance under the State
program funded under this part, the safeguards
shall not prevent the State agency
administering the program from furnishing to a
private industry council the names, addresses,
telephone numbers, and identifying case number
information in the State program funded under
this part, of noncustodial parents residing in
the service delivery area of the private
industry council, for the purpose of
identifying and contacting noncustodial parents
regarding participation in the program under
this paragraph.
* * * * * * *
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, disseminating
information on the causes and treatment of domestic
violence and child abuse, 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 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
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,
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
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 or
living with 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;
(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 projects 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.
(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.
(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 Workforce
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.
SEC. 404. USE OF GRANTS.
(a) General Rules.--Subject to this part, a State to which a
grant is made under section 403 may use the grant--
(1) in any manner that is reasonably calculated to
accomplish the purpose of this part, including to
provide low income households with assistance in
meeting home heating and cooling costs; [or]
(2) in any manner that the State was authorized to
use amounts received under part A or F, as such parts
were in effect on September 30, 1995, or (at the option
of the State) August 21, 1996[.]; or
(3) to fund payment of an amount pursuant to section
457(a)(2)(B)(i), but only to the extent that the State
properly elects under section 457(a)(6) to use the
grant to fund the payment.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 408. PROHIBITIONS; REQUIREMENTS.
(a) In General.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(3) No assistance for families not assigning certain
support rights to the state.--
[(A) In general.--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 accrue (or have accrued) before the date
the family ceases to receive assistance under
the program, which assignment, on and after
such date, shall not apply with respect to any
support (other than support collected pursuant
to section 464) which accrued before the family
received such assistance and which the State
has not collected by--
[(i)(I) September 30, 2000, if the
assignment is executed on or after
October 1, 1997, and before October 1,
2000; or
[(II) the date the family ceases to
receive assistance under the program,
if the assignment is executed on or
after October 1, 2000; or
[(ii) if the State elects to
distribute collections under section
457(a)(6), the date the family ceases
to receive assistance under the
program, if the assignment is executed
on or after October 1, 1998.
[(B) Limitation.--A State to which a grant is
made under section 403 shall not require, as a
condition of providing assistance to any family
under the State program funded under this part,
that a member of the family assign to the State
any rights to support described in subparagraph
(A) which accrue after the date the family
ceases to receive assistance under the
program.]
* * * * * * *
(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.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 409. PENALTIES.
(a) In General.--Subject to this section:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(7) Failure of any state to maintain certain level of
historic effort.--
(A) * * *
(B) Definitions.--As used in this paragraph:
(i) Qualified state expenditures.--
(I) In general.--The term
``qualified State
expenditures'' means, with
respect to a State and a fiscal
year, the total expenditures by
the State during the fiscal
year, under all State programs,
for any of the following with
respect to eligible families:
(aa) Cash assistance,
including any amount
collected by the State
as support pursuant to
a plan approved under
part D, on behalf of a
family receiving
assistance under the
State program funded
under this part, that
is distributed to the
family under section
[457(a)(1)(B)]
457(a)(1) and
disregarded in
determining the
eligibility of the
family for, and the
amount of, such
assistance.
* * * * * * *
(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.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 412. DIRECT FUNDING AND ADMINISTRATION BY INDIAN TRIBES.
(a) Grants for Indian Tribes.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Welfare-to-work grants.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary of Labor shall
award a grant in accordance with this paragraph
to an Indian tribe for each fiscal year
specified in section [403(a)(5)(I)]
403(a)(5)(H) for which the Indian tribe is a
welfare-to-work tribe, in such amount as the
Secretary of Labor deems appropriate, subject
to subparagraph (B) of this paragraph.
* * * * * * *
Part D--Child Support and Establishment of Paternity
* * * * * * *
DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY
Sec. 452. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(k)(1) If the Secretary receives a certification by a State
agency in accordance with the requirements of section 454(31)
that an individual owes arrearages of child support in an
amount exceeding [$5,000] $2,500, the Secretary shall transmit
such certification to the Secretary of State for action (with
respect to denial, revocation, or limitation of passports)
pursuant to paragraph (2).
* * * * * * *
(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.
FEDERAL PARENT LOCATOR SERVICE
Sec. 453. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(j) Information Comparisons and Other Disclosures.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(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).
* * * * * * *
STATE PLAN FOR CHILD AND SPOUSAL SUPPORT
Sec. 454. A State plan for child and spousal support must--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(32)(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) provide that no applications will be required
from, and no costs will be assessed for such services
against, the foreign reciprocating country or foreign
obligee (but costs may at State option be assessed
against the obligor); [and]
(33) provide that a State that receives funding
pursuant to section 428 and that has within its borders
Indian country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18,
United States Code) may enter into cooperative
agreements with an Indian tribe or tribal organization
(as defined in subsections (e) and (l) of section 4 of
the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance
Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)), if the Indian tribe or tribal
organization demonstrates that such tribe or
organization has an established tribal court system or
a Court of Indian Offenses with the authority to
establish paternity, establish, modify, or enforce
support orders, or to enter support orders in
accordance with child support guidelines established or
adopted by such tribe or organization, under which the
State and tribe or organization shall provide for the
cooperative delivery of child support enforcement
services in Indian country and for the forwarding of
all collections pursuant to the functions performed by
the tribe or organization to the State agency, or
conversely, by the State agency to the tribe or
organization, which shall distribute such collections
in accordance with such agreement[.];
(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; and
(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. 457. DISTRIBUTION OF COLLECTED SUPPORT.
[(a) In General.--Subject to subsections (e) and (f), an
amount 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 so collected; and
[(B) retain, or distribute to the family, the
State share of the amount so collected.
In no event shall the total of the amounts paid to the
Federal Government and retained by the State exceed the
total of the amounts that have been paid to the family
as assistance by the State.
[(2) Families that formerly received assistance.--In
the case of a family that formerly received assistance
from the State:
[(A) Current support payments.--To the extent
that the amount so collected does not exceed
the amount required to be paid to the family
for the month in which collected, the State
shall distribute the amount so collected to the
family.
[(B) Payments of arrearages.--To the extent
that the amount so collected exceeds the amount
required to be paid to the family for the month
in which collected, the State shall distribute
the amount so collected as follows:
[(i) Distribution of arrearages that
accrued after the family ceased to
receive assistance.--
[(I) Pre-october 1997.--
Except as provided in subclause
(II), the provisions of this
section as in effect and
applied on the day before the
date of the enactment of
section 302 of the Personal
Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act
of 1996 (other than subsection
(b)(1) (as so in effect)) shall
apply with respect to the
distribution of support
arrearages that--
[(aa) accrued after
the family ceased to
receive assistance, and
[(bb) are collected
before October 1, 1997.
[(II) Post-september 1997.--
With respect to the amount so
collected on or after October
1, 1997 (or before such date,
at the option of the State)--
[(aa) In general.--
The State shall first
distribute the amount
so collected (other
than any amount
described in clause
(iv)) to the family to
the extent necessary to
satisfy any support
arrearages with respect
to the family that
accrued after the
family ceased to
receive assistance from
the State.
[(bb) Reimbursement
of governments for
assistance provided to
the family.--After the
application of division
(aa) and clause
(ii)(II)(aa) with
respect to the amount
so collected, the State
shall retain the State
share of the amount so
collected, and pay to
the Federal Government
the Federal share (as
defined in subsection
(c)(2)) of the amount
so collected, but only
to the extent necessary
to reimburse amounts
paid to the family as
assistance by the
State.
[(cc) Distribution of
the remainder to the
family.--To the extent
that neither division
(aa) nor division (bb)
applies to the amount
so collected, the State
shall distribute the
amount to the family.
[(ii) Distribution of arrearages that
accrued before the family received
assistance.--
[(I) Pre-october 2000.--
Except as provided in subclause
(II), the provisions of this
section as in effect and
applied on the day before the
date of the enactment of
section 302 of the Personal
Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act
of 1996 (other than subsection
(b)(1) (as so in effect)) shall
apply with respect to the
distribution of support
arrearages that--
[(aa) accrued before
the family received
assistance, and
[(bb) are collected
before October 1, 2000.
[(II) Post-september 2000.--
Unless, based on the report
required by paragraph (5), the
Congress determines otherwise,
with respect to the amount so
collected on or after October
1, 2000 (or before such date,
at the option of the State)--
[(aa) In general.--
The State shall first
distribute the amount
so collected (other
than any amount
described in clause
(iv)) to the family to
the extent necessary to
satisfy any support
arrearages with respect
to the family that
accrued before the
family received
assistance from the
State.
[(bb) Reimbursement
of governments for
assistance provided to
the family.--After the
application of clause
(i)(II)(aa) and
division (aa) with
respect to the amount
so collected, the State
shall retain the State
share of the amount so
collected, and pay to
the Federal Government
the Federal share (as
defined in subsection
(c)(2)) of the amount
so collected, but only
to the extent necessary
to reimburse amounts
paid to the family as
assistance by the
State.
[(cc) Distribution of
the remainder to the
family.--To the extent
that neither division
(aa) nor division (bb)
applies to the amount
so collected, the State
shall distribute the
amount to the family.
[(iii) Distribution of arrearages
that accrued while the family received
assistance.--In the case of a family
described in this subparagraph, the
provisions of paragraph (1) shall apply
with respect to the distribution of
support arrearages that accrued while
the family received assistance.
[(iv) Amounts collected pursuant to
section 464.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this section, any amount
of support collected pursuant to
section 464 shall be retained by the
State to the extent past-due support
has been assigned to the State as a
condition of receiving assistance from
the State, up to the amount necessary
to reimburse the State for amounts paid
to the family as assistance by the
State. The State shall pay to the
Federal Government the Federal share of
the amounts so retained. To the extent
the amount collected pursuant to
section 464 exceeds the amount so
retained, the State shall distribute
the excess to the family.
[(v) Ordering rules for
distributions.--For purposes of this
subparagraph, unless an earlier
effective date is required by this
section, effective October 1, 2000, the
State shall treat any support
arrearages collected, except for
amounts collected pursuant to section
464, as accruing in the following
order:
[(I) To the period after the
family ceased to receive
assistance.
[(II) To the period before
the family received assistance.
[(III) To the period while
the family was receiving
assistance.
[(3) Families that never received assistance.--In the
case of any other family, the State shall distribute
the amount so collected to the family.
[(4) Families under certain agreements.--In the case
of an amount collected for a family in accordance with
a cooperative agreement under section 454(33),
distribute the amount so collected pursuant to the
terms of the agreement.
[(5) Study and report.--Not later than October 1,
1999, the Secretary shall report to the Congress the
Secretary's findings with respect to--
[(A) whether the distribution of post-
assistance arrearages to families has been
effective in moving people off of welfare and
keeping them off of welfare;
[(B) whether early implementation of a pre-
assistance arrearage program by some States has
been effective in moving people off of welfare
and keeping them off of welfare;
[(C) what the overall impact has been of the
amendments made by the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996
with respect to child support enforcement in
moving people off of welfare and keeping them
off of welfare; and
[(D) based on the information and data the
Secretary has obtained, what changes, if any,
should be made in the policies related to the
distribution of child support arrearages.
[(6) State option for applicability.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of this subsection, a State may
elect to apply the rules described in clauses (i)(II),
(ii)(II), and (v) of paragraph (2)(B) to support
arrearages collected on and after October 1, 1998, and,
if the State makes such an election, shall apply the
provisions of this section, as in effect and applied on
the day before the date of enactment of section 302 of
the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-193, 110
Stat. 2200), other than subsection (b)(1) (as so in
effect), to amounts collected before October 1, 1998.]
(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 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.
* * * * * * *
(c) Definitions.--As used in subsection (a):
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(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.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 459. CONSENT BY THE UNITED STATES TO INCOME WITHHOLDING,
GARNISHMENT, AND SIMILAR PROCEEDINGS FOR
ENFORCEMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT AND ALIMONY
OBLIGATIONS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(h) Moneys Subject to Process.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), moneys
payable to an individual which are considered to be
based upon remuneration for employment, for purposes of
this section--
(A) consist of--
(i) * * *
(ii) periodic benefits (including a
periodic benefit as defined in section
228(h)(3)) or other payments--
(I) * * *
* * * * * * *
(V) by the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs as
compensation for a service-
connected disability paid by
the Secretary to a former
member of the Armed Forces [who
is in receipt of retired or
retainer pay if the former
member has waived a portion of
the retired or retainer pay in
order to receive such
compensation];
* * * * * * *
(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.
* * * * * * *
COLLECTION OF PAST-DUE SUPPORT FROM FEDERAL TAX REFUNDS
Sec. 464. (a)(1) * * *
(2)(A) Upon receiving notice from a State agency
administering a plan approved under this part that a named
individual owes past-due support [(as that term is defined for
purposes of this paragraph under subsection (c))] which such
State has agreed to collect under section 454(4)(A)(ii), and
that the State agency has sent notice to such individual in
accordance with paragraph (3)(A), the Secretary of the Treasury
shall determine whether any amounts, as refunds of Federal
taxes paid, are payable to such individual (regardless of
whether such individual filed a tax return as a married or
unmarried individual). If the Secretary of the Treasury finds
that any such amount is payable, he shall withhold from such
refunds an amount equal to such past-due support, and shall
concurrently send notice to such individual that the
withholding has been made, including in or with such notice a
notification to any other person who may have filed a joint
return with such individual of the steps which such other
person may take in order to secure his or her proper share of
the refund. The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay the amount
withheld to the State agency, and the State shall pay to the
Secretary of the Treasury any fee imposed by the Secretary of
the Treasury to cover the costs of the withholding and any
required notification. The State agency shall, subject to
paragraph (3)(B), distribute such amount to or on behalf of the
child to whom the support was owed in accordance with section
457. This subsection may be executed by the Secretary of the
Department of the Treasury or his designee.
* * * * * * *
(c)[(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), as used in] In
this part the term ``past-due support'' means the amount of a
delinquency, determined under a court order, or an order of an
administrative process established under State law, for support
and maintenance of a child (whether or not a minor), or of a
child (whether or not a minor) and the parent with whom the
child is living.
[(2) For purposes of subsection (a)(2), the term ``past-due
support'' means only past-due support owed to or on behalf of a
qualified child (or a qualified child and the parent with whom
the child is living if the same support order includes support
for the child and the parent).
[(3) For purposes of paragraph (2), the term ``qualified
child'' means a child--
[(A) who is a minor; or
[(B)(i) who, while a minor, was determined to be
disabled under title II or XVI; and
[(ii) for whom an order of support is in force.]
* * * * * * *
REQUIREMENT OF STATUTORILY PRESCRIBED PROCEDURES TO IMPROVE
EFFECTIVENESS OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
Sec. 466. (a) In order to satisfy section 454(20)(A), each
State must have in effect laws requiring the use of the
following procedures, consistent with this section and with
regulations of the Secretary, to increase the effectiveness of
the program which the State administers under this part:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(10) Review and adjustment of support orders [upon
request].--
(A) 3-year cycle.--
(i) In general.--Procedures under
which every 3 years (or such shorter
cycle as the State may determine), upon
the request of either parent, [or,] or
if there is an assignment under part A,
[upon the request of the State agency
under the State plan or of either
parent,] the State shall with respect
to a support order being enforced under
this part, taking into account the best
interests of the child involved--
(I) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) Notice of right to review.--Procedures
which require the State to provide notice not
less than once every 3 years to the parents
subject to the order informing the parents of
their right to request the State to review and,
if appropriate, adjust the order pursuant to
[this paragraph] subparagraph (A) or (B). The
notice may be included in the order.
(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).
* * * * * * *
Part E--Federal Payments for Foster Care and Adoption Assistance
* * * * * * *
PAYMENTS TO STATES; ALLOTMENTS TO STATES
Sec. 474. (a) For each quarter beginning after September 30,
1980, each State which has a plan approved under this part
shall be entitled to a payment equal to the sum of--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) an amount equal to the sum of the following
proportions of the total amounts expended during such
quarter as found necessary by the Secretary for the
provision of child placement services and for the
proper and efficient administration of the State plan--
(A) * * *
(B) 75 percent of so much of such
expenditures (including travel and per diem
expenses) as are for the short-term training of
current or prospective foster or adoptive
parents and the members of the staff of State-
licensed or State-approved child care
institutions, or State-licensed or State-
approved child welfare agencies providing
services, providing care to foster and adopted
children receiving assistance under this part,
in ways that increase the ability of such
current or prospective parents, staff members,
and institutions to provide support and
assistance to foster and adopted children,
whether incurred directly by the State or by
contract.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 104 OF THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND WORK OPPORTUNITY
RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1996
SEC. 104. SERVICES PROVIDED BY CHARITABLE, RELIGIOUS, OR
PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(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).
----------
IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT
TITLE II--IMMIGRATION
* * * * * * *
Chapter 2--Qualifications for Admission of Aliens; Travel Control of
Citizens and Aliens
* * * * * * *
general classes of aliens ineligible to receive visas and ineligible
for admission; waivers of inadmissibility
Sec. 212. (a) Classes of Aliens Ineligible for Visas or
Admission.--Except as otherwise provided in this Act, aliens
who are inadmissible under the following paragraphs are
ineligible to receive visas and ineligible to be admitted to
the United States:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(10) Miscellaneous.--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(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.
* * * * * * *
Chapter 4--Inspection, Apprehension, Examination, Exclusion, and
Removal
* * * * * * *
inspection by immigration officers; expedited removal of inadmissible
arriving aliens; referral for hearing
Sec. 235. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Authority Relating to Inspections.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(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.
* * * * * * *
VII. LETTER FROM THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, July 21, 2000.
Hon. Bill Archer,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Archer: I am writing to you concerning the
bill H.R. 4678, the ``Child Support Distribution Act of 2000.''
As you know, this bill contains language which falls within
the Rule X jurisdiction of this committee relating to the
Immigration and Nationality Act's ability to deny passports if
one owes $2,500 in child support arrearage, to deny any non-
immigrant alien's admission or visa to the United States for
non-payment of child support, to serve legal process on any
alien who is an applicant for admission to the United States,
and to share child support information to enforce immigration
laws. I understand that you would like to proceed expeditiously
to the floor on this matter. I am willing to waive our
committee's right to mark up this bill. However, this, of
course, does not waive our jurisdiction over the subject matter
on this or similar legislation, or our desire to be conferees
on this bill should it be subject to a House-Senate conference
committee.
I would appreciate your placing this exchange of letters in
the Congressional Record. Thank you for your cooperation on
this matter.
Sincerely,
Henry J. Hyde,
Chairman.