The transformation of child support enforcement programs over the past decade has been profound.

Used to be they'd come knock on your door, hand you the order. Cold and formal—you got served. Pay up, or pay the price.

That was the old way. Now, more programs look like Baltimore's Center for Fathers, Families and Workforce Development, one of many across that country that are giving child support enforcement a kinder, gentler face. The Center uses federal funds to help young, low-income men become better fathers—emotionally and financially.

Here, the first contact isn't legal or judicial—it's a simple letter, inviting the parent (usually a father) to come in and discuss arrangements for supporting his children. During these visits, parents can often opt to get swabbed for a genetic paternity test, make arrangements to pay support, and also access other services designed to support their employment (and by extension increase their ability to pay). CFWD offers parenting classes and support groups, as well as training and job search help for the men it serves, most of whom are unemployed.

"We've learned that when Dads are dealt with gently, and their rights are explained, they're more consistent payers," says Paula Roberts, senior family policy staff attorney at the Washington, DC-based Center for Law and Social Policy.

Although the federal child support program may not get as much press as its better-known cousin Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), it's a critical program that serves roughly five times as many children as TANF. In fact, after public education, it's the largest public system supporting children in the country—involving 15.8 million non-custodial parents and helping some 21 million children, according to the Administration for Children and Families' Office of Child Support Enforcement.

The program identifies non-custodial parents and encourages them to pay child support to their children. The federal government provides funds to states to run the program; states use a mix of federal and state funds to defray the costs of the program.

For three decades, it's been heralded by Republicans and Democrats alike for its focus on encouraging personal responsibility and for the millions of families it helps lift out of poverty or off other public assistance programs.

Yet two weeks ago, the House of Representatives' Ways and Means Committee shocked the child support advocacy community by approving phased-in changes to the program that would result in a reduction in federal support of nearly 40 percent by 2010—a blow that has been called both "bone-headed" (in an October 25, 2005 New York Times op-ed) and potentially devastating.

According to Congressional Budget Office estimates, the changes, which would take the form of a reduced level of federal matching for state dollars and fewer financial incentives for states that run successful programs, would result in $24 billion in child support going uncollected over the next 10 years.

That's a big hit for families. "This is money right out of the pockets of hard-working parents who are owed these dollars and need them to provide food, clothing, shelter, child care, medical care, and the myriad other needs of their children. Scaling back enforcement efforts means more non-custodial parents won't meet their financial obligations to their children and children will be the ones who suffer for it," says Sharon Parrott, director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities' Welfare Reform and Income Support Division.

The cuts are part of the House's effort to trim $50 billion from the federal budget, to offset the costs of the war, planned tax cuts, and hurricane recovery. The Senate's budget proposal trims about $35 billion and does not include any cuts to child support. When both houses finalize their bills, a conference committee will work to create the final fiscal year 2006 federal budget.

A Popular Program on Both Sides of the Aisle

For much of the recent budget process, child support was considered fairly safe. For years, it has enjoyed bipartisan support. While it may still carry some stigma in the broader public, in Congress it's a popular program—evidence that reforms can work.

Created in 1975, the federal child support program had two goals: recover the costs of supporting children on what was then the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program, and help families stay off the welfare rolls to begin with. Initially, the program imposed few regulations and requirements on states; as a result, many designed programs putting a priority on recovering state money from non-custodial parents, with little direct benefit to children. The federal government launched a series of reforms in the 1980s and 1990s that culminated in the 1998 establishment of standards for state programs, complete with incentives for meeting them and penalties for failure to do so.

State programs are judged on five standards: establishing paternity, issuing child support orders, collecting current support, collected arrears, and overall cost-effectiveness. Some of these carry penalties, others don't.

The clarity has led to vast improvements in performance. In a span of roughly twenty years, the program has gone from 10 percent paternity establishment in its cases to 80 to 90 percent across the country. For every $1 of federal funds, the program collects more than $4 from non-custodial parents.

"Now, it's this great success story, where [the government learned], not surprisingly, that if you tell states what they've got to do, and use rewards and penalties, you can get better performance out of the program," says Paula Roberts.

The introduction of voluntary paternity establishment in hospitals has made a big difference in the program. Now, when a child is born to unmarried parents, a birth clerk comes by with a specific set of forms for both parents to sign. Fathers have 60 days to reverse their signature before they're legally considered the parent. After that date, it becomes harder for a man to challenge paternity, though it is still possible. Some states also offer forms for paternity establishment through Head Start and public child care programs, Medicaid offices, and other venues.

Because the program is more successful at establishing paternity, and because successful collection efforts benefit families directly, the program is popular. And the kinder, gentler approach to non-custodial parents helps.

So Why the Cuts?

Why Congress has chosen this moment to propose such deep cuts to the program remains unclear.

"That's got us all scratching our heads," says Roberts. "It's been evaluated under the Government Performance Review Standards and gets the highest rating at HHS in terms of efficiency and effectiveness. The administration's rhetoric that we're going to better fund services that work and eliminate the bad ones doesn't seem to be in play here. This is clearly not a program you'd cut using the criteria the government says are important."

Some policy analysts suggest that the House proposal may be an effort to force the Senate to compromise and make at least some cuts in the program – either by directly reducing funding, or adding fees for families. Until now, the Senate has refused to include any cuts to this program in its budget.

Advocates Are Taking Action

Many groups—from the National Governors Association to Voices for America's Children—have publicly opposed the cuts. Local and national organizations have launched phone banks, set up media events, and issued action alerts to spur members to contact House Republicans and urge them to refuse the cuts. Several state Attorneys General have sent letters to House leaders voiced strong opposition to the cuts, saying they would hurt children and families and reverse decades of progress.

Groups are also targeting the Senate, urging them to stand firm on their refusal to cut the program. On Thursday, November 3, 2005, the senate issued a Sense of the Senate amendment, by voice vote, that officially states their backing of the child support program and opposition to cuts in its funding.

The full House is expected to vote on their budget package by November 10, 2005, and the House and Senate are set to finalize the official fY2006 federal budget by mid-November, but advocates say it may be as late as December before the process is finished. Whether child support will be among the programs that will absorb big cuts remains to be seen.

For More Information:

• Center for Law and Social Policy
• CBPP
• ACES, the Association for Children for Enforcement of Support

Caitlin Johnson is senior contributing writer for Connect for Kids and a freelance writer covering social policy, as well as communications coordinator for the Center for Law and Social Policy.