Missoula County opposes HB 339, Require child support cooperation for food stamp eligibility, up for hearing this afternoon in the Human Services Committee.
This bill requires child support cooperation for SNAP eligibility (from both custodial and non-custodial parents). This eligibility restriction will likely result in the loss of food benefits for low-income families, without substantially increasing child support payments. Cooperation agreements leave parents to make the impossible choice between the food they need and the basic safety of themselves and their children. Similar agreements in other states have not proven to increase child support compliance. Taking food assistance away from low-income parents who struggle to make child support payments will only increase their instability and make them less capable of providing financial support to their children, no matter how much they may want to meet their obligations. The bill would also lead to complications and inefficiencies that would increase the cost of SNAP administration, requiring new technology systems and increased staff capacity.
Further, from the lens of domestic and sexual violence survivors, HB 339 is a problematic bill. While it is intended to ensure that child support is collected (particularly from those who are resistant), functionally coerces vulnerable people into complying with the agency even when that might put them in harm’s way. This bill may further marginalize and punish those who most need help when they have to choose between the demands of a state agency and the risks posed by an abusive partner. The exceptions that the bill proposes are insufficient to address these serious consequences.
Sent Feb. 18:
ReplyDeleteRepresentative Tenenbaum,
Missoula County opposes HB 339, Require child support cooperation for food stamp eligibility, up for hearing this afternoon in the Human Services Committee.
This bill requires child support cooperation for SNAP eligibility (from both custodial and non-custodial parents). This eligibility restriction will likely result in the loss of food benefits for low-income families, without substantially increasing child support payments. Cooperation agreements leave parents to make the impossible choice between the food they need and the basic safety of themselves and their children. Similar agreements in other states have not proven to increase child support compliance. Taking food assistance away from low-income parents who struggle to make child support payments will only increase their instability and make them less capable of providing financial support to their children, no matter how much they may want to meet their obligations. The bill would also lead to complications and inefficiencies that would increase the cost of SNAP administration, requiring new technology systems and increased staff capacity.
Further, from the lens of domestic and sexual violence survivors, HB 339 is a problematic bill. While it is intended to ensure that child support is collected (particularly from those who are resistant), functionally coerces vulnerable people into complying with the agency even when that might put them in harm’s way. This bill may further marginalize and punish those who most need help when they have to choose between the demands of a state agency and the risks posed by an abusive partner. The exceptions that the bill proposes are insufficient to address these serious consequences.
Please oppose HB 339.