How People Voted
 |
 |
40% For, 60% Against
Take Action
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
S. 803, The Child Support Protection Act of 2007 (4 comments ↓)
- This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
S. 803 would repeal a provision enacted to end Federal matching of State spending of child support incentive payments.
()
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Ann M. Hetzel
July 19, 2007, 10:33am (report abuse)Without the Federal matching funds, collections, The Congressional Budget Office estimated that if states replace half of the funding gap with new state funds, the provision would result in a net reduction in Federal funds of $4.9 billion (reducing collections by $8.4 billion) over the next ten years.
Child Support Enforcement is highly cost-effective. Nationwide, the Program collects $4.58 for every dollar spent! See, Dept. of Health and Human Services, 2007 Budget in Brief, at 87, available at http://www.hhs.gov/budget/docbudget.htm. In or about March 2004, Office of Management and Budget found that the federal child support enforcement program was the highest rated social services program and block grant/formula program among all reviewed government-wide. See, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/news/press/2004/PARTOCSE.htm
Without regular child support, there will be an increased burden on the welfare systems of all States and more children will be living at or below the poverty line.
Doug Martin
September 17, 2007, 12:12pm (report abuse)I'm not sure the numbers presented by Ms Hetzel add up here. Further, I suspect they include voluntary payments as well as collections... which would not change under the current laws.
In the state of Washington, either parent can request the case be put into collections. Further, DSHS and the courts, to encourage cases being put into collections place the burden of proof of having made the payments on the person making the payments. In the literature I read from DSHS and the courts, even canceled checks were not sufficient. Given my X's behavior, I requested the case be put into collections so that I would have an indisputable record of the payments.
Keith Mochida
September 18, 2007, 7:03am (report abuse)Title IV-D is driven by nothing short of Legislative Deception and lies. There is a truth underlying this continued effort to oppress individuals, specifically the Non Custodial parent, in order to continue programs that funnel huge sums of money to each state.
Below are links which expose the Deception, and the Lies, with all references listed. Go on read it. Stephan King couldn’t write a better horror story.
Part 1 http://www.ifeminists.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.106
Part 2 http://www.ifeminists.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.123
Part 3 http://www.ifeminists.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.124
The truth is alarming, the damage is complete and the horror is real. Argue all you want. The Federal Government, led by deceptive third party agenda, is intruding in all our lives and ultimately is destroying our families, and worse, our children.
Wake up America
Walter Fields
July 21, 2008, 5:42pm (report abuse)Mis-use of children must cease.
IV-mainliners must be brought to light; not further rewarded.