01/25/2001 04:30 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES
STANDING COMMITTEE
January 25, 2001
4:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Fred Dyson, Chair
Representative Peggy Wilson, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Gary Stevens
Representative Vic Kohring
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Reggie Joule
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 41
"An Act repealing the termination date of changes made by ch.
87, SLA 1997 and ch. 132, SLA 1998 regarding child support
enforcement and related programs; repealing the nonseverability
provision of ch. 132, SLA 1998; repealing certain requirements
for applicants for hunting and sport fishing licenses or tags,
and for certain hunting permits, to provide social security
numbers for child support enforcement purposes; and providing
for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 41
SHORT TITLE:CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT/SOC SEC. #
SPONSOR(S): RLS BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/10/01 0046 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/10/01 0046 (H) HES, JUD, FIN
01/10/01 0047 (H) FN1: ZERO (REV)
01/10/01 0047 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
01/10/01 0047 (H) REFERRED TO HES
01/25/01 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
BARBARA MIKLOS, Director
Central Office
Child Support Enforcement Division
Department of Revenue
550 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 310
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 41.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-6, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR FRED DYSON reconvened the House Health, Education and
Social Services Standing Committee meeting at 4:30 p.m. [The
minutes for the Child Support Enforcement Division overview are
found in the 3:08 p.m. cover sheet for the same date.]
HB 41 - CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT/SOC SEC. #
CHAIR DYSON announced the next order of business as HOUSE BILL
NO. 41, "An Act repealing the termination date of changes made
by ch. 87, SLA 1997 and ch. 132, SLA 1998 regarding child
support enforcement and related programs; repealing the
nonseverability provision of ch. 132, SLA 1998; repealing
certain requirements for applicants for hunting and sport
fishing licenses or tags, and for certain hunting permits, to
provide social security numbers for child support enforcement
purposes; and providing for an effective date."
Number 0055
BARBARA MIKLOS, Director, Central Office, Child Support
Enforcement Division (CSED), Department of Revenue, came forward
to present HB 41. She explained that when federal welfare
reform legislation was passed in 1996 by Congress and amended in
1997, both those laws affected the CSED. The theory behind
welfare reform was to figure out ways to help those families
going off welfare to stay off welfare and not get into trouble,
especially families with children. In order to help those
families, the CSED has to make sure that both parents are
supporting the children. A great deal of the welfare reform
legislation addressed child support. The State of Alaska
legislature passed laws to comply with the requirements of
welfare reform in 1996, 1997, and 1998. It is a very complex
piece of legislation.
MS. MIKLOS explained that the 1997 and 1998 pieces of the Alaska
statutes, which are riddled all over through child support
statutes, were set to sunset in 2001, and HB 41 is a repealer of
those sunset provisions. The bill itself is fairly simple.
Section 1 is the Findings; Purpose; Intent; Section 2 repeals
the sunset and nonseverability provisions; Section 3 repeals the
social security number requirements on hunting and sport fishing
licenses, which has to do with the waiver; and Section 4 and 5
provide for an effective date. It is a simple piece of
legislation, but behind it is a lot of programs and complex
legislation.
MS. MIKLOS noted that many of the programs have been very
effective because of some of the tools like the driver's license
program and the new hire reporting program. Some programs have
given more protection for the public; others have given the CSED
more tools to collect money. In FY [fiscal year] 99 the CSED
collected $81 million, and in FY 2000 it collected $85 million,
and in FY 2001 it expects to collect $90 million, which
primarily is going to families. Although there are concerns
about child support, within the last three years the concerns
have lessened, not increased. She asked the committee to pass
this bill that would repeal those sunset provisions.
MS. MIKLOS cited a recent study done by the Department of Health
and Social Services of 694 families in which a very small
percentage of them had received child support. She doesn't know
why, but 42 percent of the money being brought in now is for
people who used to be on public assistance at some point, and
now they are being helped with child support. It makes a big
difference.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the nonseverability provision and
explained that it was added in 1998 legislation. It says if any
part of the law is found to be unconstitutional, the entire law
is found to be unconstitutional. The CSED prefers that that be
taken out. So far it has withstood the biggest test because the
supreme court found the driver's license program constitutional,
but the CSED would hate to have everything thrown out because of
that clause.
MS. MIKLOS went through the Child Support Enforcement "Sunset"
Summary included in the packets section by section. The CSED
took a summary of all the bills that include a lot of
legislation. When the CSED worked on the 1997 and 1998
legislation, it really tried hard to make sure at minimum that
the federal requirements were met; that was the focus. All of
these things were required by the federal welfare reform
legislation. One of the reasons that this legislation passed
was the federal government included a sanction: if states do
not pass this legislation, then there is a chance of losing all
the child support and public assistance money, which for the
State of Alaska was $80 million. That was the biggest impetus
to pass the legislation. Now she would like to say the CSED
really believes that some of programs really helped.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section "Availability of
Records/Access to Information" and explained that it requires
various agencies like Vital Statistics and the licensing
agencies to give the CSED information. Prior to this those
agencies were doing it primarily voluntarily, but now it is in
state law. She referred to the section "'Best Efforts'
Language" and explained that the driver's license and
occupational licensing program isn't part of this legislation at
all because it was passed in 1996, so it does not sunset. The
part that would sunset is the requirement that the CSED must
consider that someone is making the best effort.
Number 0634
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked Ms. Miklos if she has a place where
the SLA [Session Laws of Alaska] provision is going to be tied
to what she is describing.
MS. MIKLOS answered no, but she has another document that was
recently developed and would be happy to make a copy for him.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the "Central Registry" section and
explained that whether CSED enforces the order or not, the
orders are supposed to come through the CSED, so the court has
always been doing that. The CSED now keeps a list of the court
orders, so it is available and keeps track of things. She noted
that Diane Wendlandt already talked [in the previous overview]
about due process in terms of the section on "Credit Bureau
Reporting."
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section on "Definitions: Duty of
support, earnings, tribunal, arrearages" and explained that all
the states needed to have consistent definitions, so the CSED
adopted those definitions. She said she wouldn't go over the
"Due Process" section because Diane Wendlandt already reviewed
that in the overview.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section "Financial Institution Data
Match and Immunity from Liability" as one of the bigger programs
that is part of this law, one that is just in the process of
implementation. The CSED could always do bank matches and could
attach money in bank accounts, but this program will allow the
CSED to actually send the list of people in arrears to various
banks, and they will send the CSED names of people they have in
accounts. That program is almost ready but is not quite
implemented yet.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section on "Income Withholding" and
said a couple things changed in the law. One change gave seven
days for the employer to start taking the actions, and the
second change requires CSED to get the payments out within two
days. Prior to that the CSED had a 15-day requirement.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section on "Liens." Once someone
owes child support then that sort of becomes a lien on his/her
property. She understands that that was always part of Alaska's
law and hadn't changed because of welfare reform. What did
change in the law is CSED gives full faith and credit to other
state's liens. She referred to the section called
"Miscellaneous." It lists things that are not as big as some of
the other programs: exchange information, application for
services, payments to the agency, audit of collections, notice
of public assistance, order establishment, service of paper,
regulations, fees for services, and state registry information.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section on "Modification." It
requires the CSED to give the parties notice that they are able
to modify the orders every three years.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section on "New Hire Reporting" and
noted that it has helped the most in terms of collections. It
requires all employers in the state to report hires and rehires
to the CSED within 20 days. There is now an automated holding
order in the new computer system. The minute the CSED knows
that someone has a new employer, a new withholding order is sent
out. That helps both parties; it helps collect the child
support sooner, and it helps the obligor, so arrears are not
accumulating.
Number 0997
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked how that works.
MS. MIKLOS said the employers give the CSED the same information
they have on a W4 form, which includes name, address, social
security number, and maybe one other piece of datum. The CSED
matches it, and then those that don't match are not part of the
system.
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE asked if this could be done electronically
utilizing new technology.
MS. MIKLOS replied that the larger employers send tapes. She
also noted that Alaska was one of the first states to have new
hire reporting but prior to welfare reform, only the larger
employers reported. The CSED is trying to set up a web site so
people can send it electronically.
MS. MIKLOS noted that in a six-month study of the collections,
12 percent of the collections came directly from the information
received from the new hire reporting. She said the CSED
believes that it is very effective.
Number 1121
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section on "Non-cooperation." If
someone is on public assistance, unless there is good reason and
good reason would be that he/she or the children are not safe,
then he/she must cooperate with the CSED. If someone doesn't
cooperate and there is no good reason to cooperate, then there
are sanctions within the public assistance system.
CHAIR DYSON asked Ms. Miklos how the safety issue is verified.
MS. MIKLOS answered that it depends when it comes to the CSED.
If it comes through public assistance, then the Division of
Public Assistance verifies that. She doesn't know what process
is used.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked for an example of what she is
talking about.
MS. MIKLOS explained that if someone is on public assistance,
the CSED is collecting child support on behalf of the state.
The impetus is it would want to collect that money to reimburse
the state for the public assistance. The state and the federal
government have agreed that it is not worth it to even try to go
after this money if it would put the parent's life or children's
lives in danger, so he/she would not have to cooperate with the
CSED. It is not that the family wouldn't be getting child
support for themselves; the CSED wouldn't be collecting it on
behalf of the state. For example, take a case of domestic
violence where things are stable now but something else could
trigger more violence, and maybe the trigger would be collection
of child support.
Number 1270
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked if once someone is released from
his/her child support obligation, is he/she notified of the
release.
MS. MIKLOS replied that the CSED closes the case and notifies
both parties by First-Class Mail. If someone does send too much
money, that money is sent back.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section on "Nondisclosure of
Information" and said it also addresses domestic violence.
Under the original law, the CSED only gave the noncustodial
parent the address of a custodial parent if the payments were
caught up. The federal government said it wanted child support
agencies to give noncustodial parents the address of the
custodial parents in case they don't know where their children
are. The federal government opened that up in a way that was
different than Alaska had it, but it said not in cases of
domestic violence. That information will not be given out if
there is evidence of violence.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked what kind of violence or is there a
discretionary judgment on the part of CSED.
MS. MIKLOS answered it can be that or the CSED will accept a
sworn affidavit. There has never been a challenge to that.
There would also be an appeal process on the other side if the
noncustodial parent said it wasn't true, and then he/she would
have a right to appeal.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the "Paternity Section" and noted that
Diane Wendlandt went through that in the CSED overview. She
reviewed the next section "Seek Work Orders." This gives CSED
the authority if someone is not working and can't pay child
support, he/she can be ordered to work. The CSED has chosen to
go through the court, and that has been successful.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the "Social Security Numbers" section.
The issue of the hunting and fishing licenses was addressed, but
there are still requirements for social security numbers on
state licenses including applications for professional licenses,
business licenses, marriage licenses, and driver's licenses.
Those are still required by the federal government. The only
one that got a waiver was for recreational licenses.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the section on "Subpoenas" and explained
that is a requirement that the CSED be able to do subpoenas. It
changed in law but in practice it is pretty much the way it has
been because the CSED could subpoena that information through
the authority of the commissioner of the Department of Revenue.
Now the CSED has direct authority.
MS. MIKLOS referred to the "UIFSA" [Uniform Interstate Family
Support Act] section and explained there were just some minor
changes to make it clearer and more consistent. She concluded
her review of the programs that were in the changes in the law.
She noted that every time a child support law is changed, it has
to be changed in four or five places, so that is why so many
things are listed. She urged the committee to pass HB 41.
Number 1552
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked for an explanation on the sunset
summary. She wondered if it is based on federal requirements.
MS. MIKLOS replied absolutely.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked what happens if the bill isn't
passed.
MS. MIKLOS answered that Congress placed a sanction on the law
that the states would lose all the money that funds child
support. In Alaska this amounts to about $12 million in federal
money for the CSED and about $63 million for public assistance
for a total of about $80 million.
CHAIR DYSON pointed out that there is a companion bill in the
Senate and Representative Coghill has a bill. It is important
for the committee to get whatever information it needs to make
amendments. He asked the committee members what additional
information they need in order to take action on this bill
probably late next week.
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE asked what the time frame is on HB 41.
MS. MIKLOS answered that it sunsets July 1, 2001, which is this
session.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked Ms. Miklos for help on framing the
discussion on nonseverability. He asked for the rationale and
the impact on nonseverability.
CHAIR DYSON announced that HB 41 would be held over to give
people time to get more information and have their questions
answered. He will notify people when he expects to hear this
bill again.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1861
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting
was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|