In his speech accepting the Democratic presidential nomination, Gov. Bill Clinton warned fathers who abandon their children by failing to pay child support to ”take responsibility for your children or we will force you to do it.”
For years, government-run child-support enforcement programs have been struggling to do just that. However, these programs are sinking beneath ever- increasing caseloads. In Texas alone, 15 to 20,000 cases are added each month to a current base of nearly 780,000.
Since government regulations require agencies to work all the cases equally regardless of financial need, the programs only reach a fraction of the children who need help most-those living in poverty. It is these families who were to be the prime beneficiaries under the original 1975 legislation that are being pushed aside by the demands for free services by non-welfare clients.
The time has come to refocus government-run child-support enforcement programs to reflect their original purpose. With their limited funds, child-support enforcement programs cannot be expected to serve everyone,
regardless of income level. These programs must be permitted to focus their limited resources on individuals struggling to escape poverty-and potentially the welfare rolls.
The crisis we face is a direct result of the federal government`s expansion of free services for all non-welfare parents who apply, regardless of income or net worth. Incredible as it may sound, Ivana Trump would be eligible for free services in 35 of the 50 states and pay only a token fee in the other 15. In 1993, Donald would be eligible for free services from the same agency.
The fact is, child-support programs are sinking fast as non-welfare cases continue to pour in. Instead of providing lifeboats for women and children, Washington policymakers have been sending more children aboard.
This open-door policy traps families in the welfare spiral. It is estimated up to 40 percent of our welfare dollars are paid to support the children of absent parents who can afford to pay. Collecting child support to remove families from welfare and prevent other families from entering the welfare system is sound public policy. If, and only if, a state certifies that effective services were given to these priority cases should a state offer free services to the remaining non-welfare clients.
Statistics in Texas demonstrate the plight of programs nationwide. Our state is worth examining because in the past few years, Texas benefited from some of the most innovative state child-support legislation in the country, as well as increased funding. Furthermore, the Child Support Division of the Texas attorney general`s office, which has now passed all federal audits, was ranked as one of the top 20 in the country and was designated by Congress as the most improved program in the country in 1989 and 1990.
Overwhelmed by a caseload of nearly 800,000, the state collected some child support for 105,000 clients, or about 13 percent. Only 28,000 of the successful cases were for welfare clients. Even with Texas lawmakers providing new tools and increased state funding, Texas has not moved any closer to overcoming its backlogged caseload.
A study by the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found that most state agencies do not systematically pursue delinquent child support, and that welfare collections could increase by up to 20 percent a year if child support were more aggressively pursued.
The fault, however, lies not with the overworked employees of child-support enforcement programs but with the federal policies that have contributed to the backlog.
Free child-support enforcement services for all families was a noble experiment from the 1970s that failed. All entitlement programs will be coming under close scrutiny as federal and state governments struggle to balance their budgets. However, as we moderate our spending, we must not abandon our neediest children.
Ideally, the government should serve all those requiring and requesting child-support services, regardless of their income or net worth. The federal government created such an entitlement program but never properly funded it. Now, it can no longer afford it. When the state programs are able to focus on families struggling to escape poverty then the children of this country who have the greatest needs can be served first and foremost.
