House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for HB2141 - Committee on Welfare Reform
Short Title
Requiring custodial and non-custodial parents to cooperate with child support enforcement programs and disqualifying such parents for being delinquent in payments.
Minutes Content for Thu, Feb 9, 2023
Chairman Awerkamp called the meeting to order at 1:32 p.m. and referenced two documents providing background information: clarifications on work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWD) (Attachment 1), and the SNAP time limit for ABAWDs (Attachment 2).
The Chair opened the hearing on HB2141.
Revisor Jessie Pringle briefed the Committee on the bill (Attachment 3). She explained that the bill amends the statute dealing with eligibility for and disqualification from public assistance programs administered by Kansas Department for Children and Families (DCF) to require custodial and non-custodial parents to cooperate with child support enforcement programs. Ms. Pringle responded to members' questions:
- The referenced statute deals with all three assistance programs--TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), and child-care support.
- A similar bill was introduced last year, but did not pass.
- If a parent fails to pay required child support, he/she is deemed non-compliant.
Testifying as a proponent, Steve Greene, Opportunity Solutions Project, noted that under current law a non-custodial parent who is fails to pay required child support is allowed to receive tax-payer-funded food assistance and is exempt from the compliance regulations that affect the custodial parent; such a situation is unfair to the custodial parent and to the tax payers. He referenced the 2015 comprehensive welfare reform which made a custodial parent ineligible for food assistance if he/she refuses to cooperate with child-support enforcement; this bill will extend the same requirement to the non-custodial parent who is obligated to pay child support.
Mr. Greene cited the 40% increase in child-support collections when earlier requirements went into effect, results which allowed many families to move out of poverty He also referenced a USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) memo that urged states to adopt the requirements of this bill in order to provide stability for children and a 2016 Office of Child Support Enforcement statement that child-support enforcement programs have avoided $5.2 billion in public costs (Attachment 4).
Erin Melton, Food Security Policy Advisor, Kansas Action for Children, testified as an opponent of the bill (Attachment 5). She explained how important food assistance is to low-income families and referenced a DCF estimate that 69% of families eligible for child support receive regular payments. She noted that a non-custodial parent may be supporting other children, and denying food assistance for them creates additional hardships for a family. She concluded that the bill will create an additional barrier for struggling low-income families, will be costly to administer, and has no historical evidence that it is effective.
Members raised a question about penalties. Ms. Pringle commented that statutes referring to failure to pay child support include revoking driving privileges and, for those with a professional license, notifying the licensing entity.
Marilyn Harp, Citizen Lobbyist, spoke in opposition to the bill (Attachment 6). She described a hypothetical situation with a foster-care child to show the unintended consequences of the bill to create hardships for a family. She noted the importance of food assistance for such families. She also referenced the fiscal impact of the bill: $800,000 in annual costs and $1 million to integrate technologies.
Haley Kottler, Campaign Chair, Kansas Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, spoke against the provisions of the bill (Attachment 7). She commented on the importance of the food assistance in providing for a family. She said the bill will make it more difficult for families to provide child-care and food for their children.
Rebekah Gaston, Attorney, testified as an opponent of the bill (Attachment 8). She traced how the bill would affect two of her clients, a forty-year-old man and an employed single mother with two children. She outlined how daunting the process is in applying for benefits and that the bill adds further barriers to many Kansas families. Responding to a question, she replied that offering options rather than barriers would serve families better. To another question, she replied that modifying child support through the court requires a minimum of two months.
Karen Siebert, Advocacy and Public Policy Advisor, Harvesters--The Community Food Network, spoke in opposition to the bill (Attachment 9). She said one in seven children in Kansas are food insecure and that there is no evidence that this bill will generate additional child-support payments.
The following written-only opponent testimony was provided:
- Julie Brewer, Executive Director, United Community Services of Johnson County (Attachment 10);
- Shelby Ostrom, Policy Chair, Kansas Public Health Association (Attachment 11);
- Lauren Tice Miller, Director of Government Relations and Elections, KNEA (Attachment 12);
- Jessica Cooney, Food Access Program Manager, Cultivate Kansas City (Attachment 13); and
- Tanya Keys, Deputy Secretary, DCF (Attachment 14).
The Chair closed the hearing on HB2141.
