|
|
|
 |
|
The Father of Today's Child Support Public Policy, His Personal Exploitation
of The System, And The Fallacy of His "Income Shares" Model
by James R. Johnston* (August 1998)
INTRODUCTION
|
|
Part 1 presents an overview of Dr. Robert Williams’ influence over the development of the child support system across the United States, and his concurrent start up and operation of a company while a key consultant with the government working exclusively in the creation of public policy. A chronology of activity during this time (1983-1990) is included. Williams has been and continues to consult with States regarding child support policy and enforcement.
Part 2 focuses on the "Income Shares" model originated by Williams in the 1980’s, and the underlying national economic data sources that he uses to feed it. As of this writing at least 31 states use this model and the underlying economics. Many of the presumptions used in states using other models come philosophically from the same thinking advocated by him. This section will discuss the fundamental flaws of the model, as well as the failure of the underlying economics that ultimately lead to support obligation numbers.
As you will see, Williams clearly drove the elements of today’s child support system, concurrently creating a company that could exploit the very programs he was helping to establish. The company, Policy Studies, Incorporated of Denver, essentially brags about this in their company promotional material. His model and the underlying economics fall far short in trying to result in equitable and reasonable child support for our nation’s children. Financial considerations are given total weight based on a flawed process, while emotional child support is ignored. The latter is not a "free good",
and by ignoring the reality that there are two parents now in two households, our children suffer.
I want to thank Roger Gay and Greg Palumbo for their contributions and advice on the content of this paper.
*Jim Johnston is a joint custodial parent of two children in Wichita, Kansas. He’s the Chair of a local group called KIDSVIEW, working to maximize dual parent involvement in their children’s lives outside the intact family. They are working hard at changing legislation in Kansas regarding custody and support, and nationally by lobbying their Congressional delegation on the need for gender neutrality in legislation dealing with children. In February of this year Johnston was appointed by the Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court to serve on the Child Support Guidelines Advisory Committee. He can be contacted at (316) 685-6297, or via e-mail at jjohns1043@aol.com.
PART 1: DR. ROBERT WILLIAMS AND HIS INFLUENCE ON TODAY’S CHILD SUPPORT SYSTEM. A QUESTION OF ETHICS?
As anyone familiar with domestic law would know, child support in the United States is a growing multi-billion dollar public policy issue. Much controversy surrounds it, from determination of the amounts owed and by whom, as well as the punitive enforcement measures being undertaken at local, state, and federal levels. Below I detail information about one man’s efforts at influencing, establishing, and ultimately exploiting this lucrative "industry". Dr. Robert Williams, founder and primary owner of a privately held business in Denver, Policy Studies, Inc., has cleverly manipulated and in effect, set up the child support mechanisms throughout the US, working within the federal and various state
governments, creating a market from which he has been and continues to profit. He clearly is the "father" of current US child support public policy. His efforts have cost federal and state taxpayers billions of dollars, without appreciably improving the lot of children in spite of the rhetoric to the contrary. In fact, many would argue that in the process, he is harming children through establishment of an overall approach that is out of control, disables noncustodial parents from meaningful involvement with their children, and overall, misses the reality of what child support should truly be.
1.Williams consulted with the US Health and Human Services (HHS) agency’s Office of Child Support Enforcement from 1983-1990, directing research and technical assistance for the federally funded Child Support Guidelines Project. During this time, a federally-driven approach was developed in Washington that has lead to significantly increased child support obligations owed. (Dramatic new legislation was passed in Washington in 1984 and in 1988 that he clearly influenced). He consulted with many States as well, and continues to do so today.
2.In 1984, one year after establishing his influence with the government, Williams started Policy Studies, Incorporated in Denver with 3 employees.
3.In 1987, for use in consulting with HHS and the various States, Williams developed and introduced a model for child support guidelines called "Income Shares", now used in some form in at least 31 states. It has lead to significantly increased child support obligations (using extremely flawed expenditure data gathered from intact families - SEE PART 2) while providing no built in consideration for "credits" for the expenses related to a child’s time spent with their involved other (noncustodial) parent.
4.Policy Studies’ two biggest lines of business is in general guidelines development consulting with States based upon the Williams model, and the other is to provide child support collections. In mid-1997, his company had some 500 employees, with over $21 million in revenues. While consulting he urges adoption of a model (costing large consulting fees in the process,
5.reimbursed at least 67% by federal tax dollars to the state per US public policy) that leads to dramatically increased child support with little or no credits, thereby creating a hardship on noncustodial parents struggling to remain involved with their children. This results in an increased pool of potential child support obligation owed, and increased arrearage for his collection division to exploit.
It is clear that Williams has not only influenced policy through his involvement with the agency responsible for child support enforcement, but with his inside knowledge has developed a consulting business and collection agency targeting privatization opportunities with those he has consulted. In 1996, his company had the greatest number of child support enforcement contracts, covering numerous counties in seven States, of any of the private companies that held State contracts. Reimbursement to his company for child support enforcement ranges from 10-32% of what
the company collects according to the General Accounting Office (HEHS97-4). And according to company promotional literature, they currently operate 31 privatized service locations in 15 states. The conflict of interest between Williams’ consulting to raise child support guidelines and his company’s private Child Support Enforcement activities should be apparent. It should also be apparent that any raises in the child support guideline he obtains in any State can be used
as leverage for raising the child support guidelines in another State where he has private child support contracts today, or where he may have them tomorrow. He has continued acting as the pied piper for raising child support guidelines nationally, where he and his company profits.
Adding insult to injury, while the "father" of today’s child support public policy continues to profit from his past unique opportunity of influence, the basis of his consulting utilized in most of the Country is statistically, economically, and intellectually flawed. The end result is a much costlier approach to child support enforcement to US taxpayers, but more importantly, it continues to drive an ever-widening wedge between children and the parent obligated to paying financial child support. This will be discussed in substantial detail in Part 2.
A CHRONOLOGY OF WILLIAMS’ EFFORTS ALONG WITH COINCIDENT AND SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL POLICY CHANGE DURING HIS CONSULTING TENURE WITH HHS (1983-1990):
1983-1990: Williams is hired and retained as a consultant by Health and Human Services in Washington, D.C. in order to drive establishment of uniform child support guidelines for the states (federal Child Support Guidelines Project).
1984: Williams starts "Policy Studies, Incorporated", in Denver, Colorado.
1984: The Child Support Enforcement amendments of 1984 (Public Law 98-378) extended the research and demonstration authority in section 1115 of the Social Security Act to the Child Support Enforcement Program. It featured provisions that required improvements in State/local CS Enforcement Programs in 4 major areas:
1.Mandatory Enforcement Practices
2.Improved Interstate Enforcement
3.Equal Services for Welfare and Non-AFDC Families
4.Other Provisions for the States including:
- Collecting spousal support as well where both are due in a case;
- Establishment of State Commissions to study the operation of the State’s child support system and report findings to the State’s Governor;
- Formulate guidelines for determining child support obligation amounts and distribute the guidelines to judges and other individuals who possess authority to establish obligation amounts
1986: The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 passed (Public Law 99-509). It included a child support enforcement amendment prohibiting the retroactive modification of child support awards.
1987: The Williams’ "Income Shares" Model is developed and promoted to various States. It was introduced in his report, "Development of Guidelines for Child Support Orders: Advisory Panel Recommendations and Final Report." for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Child Support Enforcement. According to this report, the intent was to increase "child support" awards dramatically above what existed according to established state child support laws.
1988: The Family Support Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-485) passed. It emphasized the duties of parents to work and support their children and in particular, emphasized child support enforcement as the first line of defense against welfare dependence. The key child support provisions include:
1.Guidelines for Child Support Awards - Judges and other officials are required to use state guidelines for child support unless they rebut the guidelines by a written finding that applying them would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case. States must review the guidelines for awards every four years.
2.Establishment of Paternity - Federal standards are established by formula. The Federal matching rate for laboratory testing to establish paternity is set at 90%.
3.Requirement for Automated Tracking and Monitoring System - Each State is required to have a fully operative statewide system in place by October 1, 1995, and states had 90% matching by the Federal government.
4.Interstate Enforcement - A Commission on Interstate Child Support was created to hold national
conferences by October 1, 1990 to make improvement recommendations.
|
| Back to Top
|
|
|
|
|
Join