AFC's TESTIMONY BEFORE THE U.S. HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 10, 1997


AFC = American Fathers' Coalition
Washington, DC, lobby group supported by
member organizations.

Following is a copy of AFC's testimony on child support incentives to the states, before the House Ways and Means, Human Resources Subcommittee, 9-10-97.

American Fathers Coalition - 2000 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite. 148, Washington, D.C. 20006. E-mail: afc@capaccess.org Worldwide Web: http://www.erols.com/afc



Written testimony of Stuart A. Miller
Senior Legislative Analyst
American Fathers Coalition on
Child Support Incentive Payment Reform,

Mr. Chairman and Subcommittee Members:

The American Fathers Coalition (AFC) has long advocated that the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) be abolished and replaced with the Federal Office of Child Support Compliance. The rationale behind this concept is that we believe a system which encourages and facilitates voluntary compliance is superior to our current system which necessitates enforcement.

The current incentive of "more is better" has had many unintended consequences. Many second families, men, women, and children, have been destroyed because of unrealistically high support orders levied against the primary breadwinner in those families, by bureaucrats and judges who are consciously or subconsciously trying to meet federal incentive criteria.

Recently President Clinton boasted about the record amount of child support collected. This doesn't necessarily mean that children are better off financially or that the Office of Child Support Enforcement is doing a better job. It more likely means that our families are deteriorating at such a rapid rate that there is an unprecedented increase in the number of support orders being issued and hence, more support collected.

It would be prudent to see a child financially supported for the balance of the child's dependent years with realistic support orders than to get the most amount possible for a few months before the obligor is forced to go underground. If an obligor can afford to pay $300 per month but the state orders the obligor to pay $400 per month, the obligor will not be able to afford to live, get to work, support a second family, etc. It will not be long until all support stops flowing. This is one of the unintended consequences of the current incentive plan.

Many states refuse to comply with federal law requiring review and modification of support orders if there is a possibility that it may mean a downward modification of support, even if it is warranted because of injury, illness, unemployment, etc. Why? Because of the current incentive structure.

But most insidious, is the answer to the question "How do you collect more child support money to get the federal incentive?" Get more support orders. How do you get more support orders? Remove all incentives for maintaining two-parent, married, intact families. Remove all obstacles to quick, easy, divorces. Encourage out-of-wedlock births. Eliminate due process and establish child support orders without service, notice, or opportunity to be heard. Give administrative agencies authority to issue support orders bearing the same weight as judicial decrees and make the appeals process practically impossible except for those knowledgeable enough or financially capable enough to make it through the regulatory quagmire of the support enforcement system.

The incentives to the states should be based on percentages of orders where there is compliance. A state with 80% compliance rate would and should receive higher incentives than a state with 70% compliance. Furthermore, states should be rewarded for the percentages of intact families they have, not the reverse! Such incentives would encourage them to support two-parent, married, intact families rather than the existing perverse incentive of only rewarding them for broken families. The focus on families and overall compliance, not just a focus on financial child support enforcement, can only lead the states to start doing things that will have unexpected and wonderful benefits for men, women, children, families, and society in general.

As long as you continue to keep the incentives based on the "more is better" philosophy, you will find the agencies coming back every session asking for bigger and bigger sticks with which to beat the money out of parents, even before they have had a chance to implement or evaluate the effectiveness of the big sticks you gave them the session before. You will also find them asking for more and more waivers of due process rights when it pertains to child support issues. But most importantly, you will see an ever decreasing number of two-parent, married, intact families and a nation full of mostly "at-risk" children. Then you need to ask yourself "is it any surprise we got what we paid for?"

Make the incentives family focused and based on compliance, not the amount collected.

Thank you.

Post script: We must now grant to fathers the same right to be in the family as we have granted to women in the workplace.

If you are using frames, please use the choices presented at your left.

Back to the NCFM text based home page: NCFM

Back to the Public Hearing Room: Public Hearing Room

Send E-Mail to: ncfm@ncfm.org