Why does the state push child support so much??

[texasdad2012]

It's obvious to me from the state's (Texas in my case) incredible efforts to promote, administer, and enforce child support payments that something must be in it for them. Someone clue me in, please. It can't all be in the interests of the kids.

[Fatheroffour]

Matching federal funds for the collection of child support.

[BubbaGumpShrimp]

In many cases, it's either Dad's child support money or the states money from 'x' public assistance program. In many cases, child support is going to keep a woman's income above the need level for programs like WIC and "food stamps" (just to name a couple examples). That's likely why, given today's fiscally tight environment, greater emphasis has been placed by states on catching so-called "deadbeat Dad's" that don't pay their child support.

[KeepingMyKids]

I wish they were as on the ball at catching deadbeat moms. Had a couple of different lawyers and people in law enforcement flat out tell me that if I was doing what NJ is doing now, I'd be under a jail somewhere. Wheee.

[texasdad2012]

I had no idea they got matching funds from the feds. That makes sense about it taking some of the need off the social welfare system, too. I'm guessing they also make a fortune off the interest as it sits in a fund for even a few days before they cut the checks (I used to work for a very large insurance carrier, and we did this). It's obvious from the zeal they have about it that there's a lot more in it for the state than just trying to make sure kids are provided for.

Personally, I have paid mine faithfully every month, and I'm more than happy to take care of my children (twice, since I do when they're with me as well, without any help from her). But of course I know that's NOT where all of those payments go, as I can see reflected by her lifestyle. The whole system is based on some antiquated 50's mindset where women were reliant on their men, couldn't hold jobs of their own, and that men did most of the "leaving." Obviously that's no longer the case.

[Trevor]

I'm guessing they also make a fortune off the interest as it sits in a fund for even a few days before they cut the checks.

You haven't been watching the interest rates lately. No one makes a fortune on interest. [Rhet.]

[texasdad2012]

Good point.

[coscrewed]

Matching federal funds for the collection of child support.

^^^^ This ^^^^^

Child support is the most egregious example of a botched attempt at social engineering in all of American society. It is absolutely the biggest clusterfork in US law. There are literally thousands of state and federal statues affecting CS, and it touches criminal, civil and family law. It is hard to imagine it being more convoluted and screwed up than it is already, but wait a year and it will be even more screwed up, because congress changes the funding for HHS every year, which changes the amount of matching funds the states get, which changes how they approach CS.

There is a long list of federal mandates that each state must satisfy to get their cut of the federal pie. For example, if you are more than $5K in arrears, the state *must* notify the feds to revoke your passport. So, there are individual rules, procedures and computer systems in every state to accomplish this. There are legions of state and federal employees assigned to this one task, and this is just one example of the dozens of ridiculous mandates and rules that some soapboxing congressman or woman decided would be a feather in their cap, so they used the "its for the children" argument to attach the new mandate to some obscure, unrelated bill, and Voila! we have yet another costly, basically useless segment of federal bureaucracy. And once a mandate is implemented, it will *never* be removed. At this point, anyone ordered to pay CS is essentially a criminal who is out on parole. One misstep and you are hammered for the crime of having a child, not being married, and not having 50% custody. That is your crime.

[coscrewed]

I'm guessing they also make a fortune off the interest as it sits in a fund for even a few days before they cut the checks.

You haven't been watching the interest rates lately. No one makes a fortune on interest. [Rhet.]

The states don't make much on the payments sitting in accounts waiting to be disbursed, but the states *AND* the lawyers *AND* the collection agencies make a huge amount on the interest levied on missed CS payments. Most states charge 8-20% interest on arrears, and allow lawyers and collection agencies to siphon off that money. A lawyer or agency is not allowed to collect a percentage on actual child support, so the "Family Law" critters have lobbied for usurious penalties and interest on back child support, then convinced states that they should be allowed to take THAT money. An entire industry has grown up around CS collections based on the ability to siphon off the interest and penalties:

http://www.supportcollectors.com

Prepare to puke when you read that site and realize what it really is....

[texasdad2012]

^^^ Yes! That last sentence sums up exactly how I feel! Despite my ex being the one who cheated and filed and who has subjected our kids to a long list of unwise and hurtful changes and emotional turmoil, I am the one who feels like I'm always just one missed payment away from being on the Most Wanted list and being hunted-down by Tommy Lee Jones.

The other information you posted is so interesting to me. That makes sense. It's all about politics, job creation, and money. I'll bet the Child Support system is chok-full of underperforming minimum-wage types who surf the net on company time (oops, guilty!) while dutifully processing drivers license and passport suspensions against loving, stable dads who lost a job or got behind on their payments for any number of valid reasons.

So this system will not be changed in the foreseeable future then, will it.