Website: cpr-mn.org Email: info@cpr-mn.org
September 2003
Legislative Education Notice
Dear
________________________________________ RE: BILL #
- HF 1031/SF 974
Why Would DHS Provide FALSE
and Misleading Testimony?
Are You Aware the Federal Government Gives the State Options?
What was MN
DHS testimony against this bill, which would create eligibility
standards for Title IV-D welfare services?
Answer: “I wanted to inform the committee that we’ve reviewed this bill in
detail and researched the law and it’s the opinion of the department
that the bill violates federal law, violates federal regulations,
and the mandate is very clear that we do have to provide IV-D services to
any individual who completes an application. If the state plan
does not provide for IV-D services to individuals who apply for these services,
the state plan would violate federal law. The state would be ineligible
for IV-D funding which is about 80 million dollars. If the
state’s IV-D plan goes down, then the state’s IV-A plan is in violation of federal
law. The state IV-A plan requires that the state have a child support program
that complies with federal law. So altogether, if the state were to pass
this amendment with this bill, the state would risk losing 350
million dollars; would not have a child support or welfare program
funded by the federal government. I can go into the details of the
statutory language if the committee would like. We feel it’s abundantly
clear.” Testimony
by Mark Fiddler, DHS Legislative Manager,
What
does the Federal Gov.t say about
the states ability to create eligibility standards for Title IV-D
welfare services?
Answer: “Present law gives the States considerable latitude in
providing services to nonwelfare recipients on the
grounds that they are “former or potential” welfare recipients … permit[ing] states to make eligible for services nonwelfare recipients only up to an income limit
which would vary from State to State (in case of a family of 4, the limit would
range from about $12,500 to $18,500 per year).
Answer: “We think it plain that the purpose of the statute is
to make support collection services available when the following
conditions are met: … the applicant must either be eligible for AFDC
or, if not presently eligible, likely to need public welfare assistance
if support collection services are not made available.” S.C. Dept of Social Services
v. Deglman, 341 S.E.2d 638 (S.C.App.
1986)
YOU DECIDE:
Has MN been in violation of federal law by providing IV-D welfare services to
people making $80,000 - $100,000 a year? Please weigh the evidence and decide
for yourself: should
Name:_________________________________(print)
____________________________________(signature)
Address:___________________________________ City:
Phone
Number: ____________________________ Email:
____________________________