Should Child Support Collection Be Privatized?
Thursday / September 06, 2007
Should more efficient private companies be given the
state's power to collect child support?
In 1996, President Clinton signed the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation
Act (PRWORA), thus fulfilling his campaign promise to
"end welfare as we know it." More than ten years
later, PRWORA continues to affect us in significant
ways. For example, in a prior blog posting, we wrote that
under PRWORA, passports can be denied to a
person who is in arrears on child support
payments.
One of PRWORA's requirements was that each state designate an agency to be responsible for child support collection. In Texas, that "agency" is the Office of the Attorney General. In fact, the bulk of the AG's staff is engaged in child support collection efforts. The AG's Child Support Division has become a huge bureaucracy with offices throughout the state.
And therein lies the rub. As with any large, bureaucratic organization, efficiency frequently suffers. Private child support collection agencies often do a better job of collecting child support than does the AG's office. In a recent court hearing in Dallas, a judge scolded an assistant AG for allowing a child support obligor to fall tens of thousands of dollars behind. A private agency, the judge observed, would have stayed on top of the matter. In another case, a federal judge remarked that one private child support collection agency "has achieved an undisputed impressive rate of collection."
Private child support collection agencies charge fees, but they tend to produce better results than the AG's office. Why couldn't the AG's office do better? How comfortable would we be with privatizing child support collection altogether? Although the system would probably operate more efficiently, there is something about granting this much government power to a private company that gives me the willies.
One of PRWORA's requirements was that each state designate an agency to be responsible for child support collection. In Texas, that "agency" is the Office of the Attorney General. In fact, the bulk of the AG's staff is engaged in child support collection efforts. The AG's Child Support Division has become a huge bureaucracy with offices throughout the state.
And therein lies the rub. As with any large, bureaucratic organization, efficiency frequently suffers. Private child support collection agencies often do a better job of collecting child support than does the AG's office. In a recent court hearing in Dallas, a judge scolded an assistant AG for allowing a child support obligor to fall tens of thousands of dollars behind. A private agency, the judge observed, would have stayed on top of the matter. In another case, a federal judge remarked that one private child support collection agency "has achieved an undisputed impressive rate of collection."
Private child support collection agencies charge fees, but they tend to produce better results than the AG's office. Why couldn't the AG's office do better? How comfortable would we be with privatizing child support collection altogether? Although the system would probably operate more efficiently, there is something about granting this much government power to a private company that gives me the willies.
|
