Senator Charles E. Grassley April 11, 2007
135 Hart Senate Building
Washington, DC 20510-1501
RE: Your Letter to Hon. Secretary Wade Horn of April 4, 2007
“State Options in implementing Section 7310, Deficit Reduction Act 2005”
Dear Hon. Senator Grassley,
I read with interest your opinion to the now resigned Asst. Secretary Dr. Wade Horn and felt it necessary to present some additional facts to you and to the folks at Iowa Politics that printed your press release. I also wanted to point out that “Consideration will be given to comments received by March 26, 2007” according to the Federal Register’s stated comment period for the proposed rule making that is being discussed.
Aside from your untimely response, you are issuing your concerns without presenting the majority of the facts and are overlooking a key set of points that your constituents should be informed of. Right now the Title IV Part D program (Title IV-D) that Iowa is voluntarily participating in is focusing the program on revenue generation for the state and not focusing the program to assist actual means tested needy families.
The State program suffers tremendous over participation of families that are 150% or higher above the poverty-line. Because of the significant level of over participation from wealthier families receiving services at no cost the failure of collections for lower-income family are going unnoticed while the program is being labeled a success. The only success is the focus on middle and higher income families through the use of income withholding orders that are drowning out the lack of focus on needy families.
After careful review of your opinion to DHHS, you appear to be advocating for the recovery of the $25.00 application fee from the “absent-parent” by “withholding it from child support collections from the absent parent, and then collecting an additional $25.00 in child support to keep the custodial parent whole.” It is important to note that in many cases the person being labeled as absent is forced to a minor role in their children’s lives as a result of the State’s predetermining child custody cases to maximize federal funding received from the Title IV-D program. More importantly the state-labeled “absent parent” is NOT the one requesting the Title IV-D welfare benefit.
Where a benefit recipient is determined to voluntarily request services using an application for Title IV-D services, it would be more than appropriate for the State of Iowa to follow the proposed rule by the Administration for Children and Families stating that “Retaining the annual fee from support collected on behalf of the family may be the least administratively burdensome method when collections in excess of the first $500 are disbursed to the family.” (Federal Register / Vol. 72 No. 15 pg. 3096) This will allow benefit recipients to only pay for services that are successful and is more than fair. To force someone else to pay for services that they have not requested and do not inure any benefit from will result in certain legal action against the State of Iowa and further is simply irresponsible program management.
It’s time to make the taxpayer whole and shift responsibility back to the individuals who are applying for the Title IV-D services where they do not otherwise qualify for other forms of government assistance. Teach positive outcomes where people actually pay for the services they receive the benefits from.
Reigning in the Title IV-D program is good for our tax-payers, good for our parents, and most of all… good for our children.
Sincerely,
Lary Holland
Concerned Citizen
http://www.nationwideblueprint.com
cc: Secretary Mike Leavitt via fax.
Denise Schwartz, Chief of Staff via fax.
Secretary Henry Paulson via fax.
Asst. Secretary Mark Warshawsky via fax.
Regional Director (Region VII) Fred Schuster via fax.
Mike Schramm, Iowapolitics.com News Editor via email.
Paige Hausburg, Policy Specialist via email.