Being Part of a Solution...

It is that time of year again where it seems much easier to talk down ideas and solutions without coming to the table with ideas to resolve issues at the same time.

"Potholes over people"... I wonder how many meetings it took to come up with that slogan? Playing defense has become a way of life for the Democrats in the legislature where throwing up roadblocks seems to be the strategy of the day.

Only when pressed does it seem that they will unite to offer alternative solutions to bills already on the table. As an example, last session where 5 of us Republicans on the Transportation committee worked weeks on end to find ways to fund our transportation shortfalls. When the bills made it to committee, the usual road blocks were thrown down, I challenged the blockers by suggesting they also had equal opportunity to offer their own solutions.

I was pleased that a group of Democrats from the committee took some time to put some alternative methods of funding bills together... new ideas and ways to get there is what we needed to see, it added to the choice of options for us all last year. That's how the system should work, not continuing to just throw out roadblocks to what's offered by the Republicans. This is not an "us against them" situation, Idaho citizens expect more from us than that, they want solutions to their issues, not catchy phrases.

Many of us would much rather see ideas offered as solutions to budget and road issues. Drawing more out of our rainy day funds is a no-brainer, but we can't spend all of our savings at seeing the first drop of rain... you don't do that at home, we won't do that with the state savings either, it's past time to tighten the belts of state government. I have heard many creative solutions from our department heads in finding great and unique ways to do more with less. Had we not had a downturn, would we have seen these types of innovative efforts? I think not likely...

Being part of the solution is what the people of Idaho expect of us, but I guess it's easier to add to the problem by just opening your mouth and letting catchy slogans and empty words fall out... but that doesn't solve any of the issues facing our citizens.

$25 Child Support Fee Re-targeted...

This spring Idaho received a mandate from the Federal government that those that are using the Child Support Payment administration program within Health and Welfare needed to pay $25 for it's use. This money would be used back in Washington D.C. to reduce the Federal deficit (yes, that deficit that was caused by overspending of the folks back east).

Options for paying for this program were to charge the users; custodial parent, non-custodial parent or State general funds used to operate the Department of H&W. The department determined after consideration of all fees and taxes paid by everyone, that the custodial parent receiving child support payments should be required to pay the $25 annual fee.

As one would imagine, there was quite an outcry from those custodial parents about having to not only raise their children on child support payments, but also have to pay a $25 fee to boot. Many calls, letters and emails were sent to the Department as well as the Governor's office.

It appears that there has now been a reversal of this issue, the charges will now be borne by the non-custodial parent. I received the following letter from the Governor and the Dir. of H&W this week:

"You received a letter in September from the Department of Health and Welfare about Idaho's implementation of the federally mandated $25 annual child support fee to aid in reducing the federal deficit. The department decided at the time to charge the fee to custodial parents.

Health and Welfare began collecting fees on October 1, 2007. After implementing the federal mandate, the department and the Governor's Office received considerable feedback from the public and custodial parents. Upon further review, we feel it is in the best interest of children and the State to reverse the previous decision and collect the $25 fee from non-custodial parents.

The temporary proposed rule assessing the fee to custodial parents is being rescinded and vacated effective December 6, 2007, and will publish in the January 2, 2008, Administrative Bulletin. This rule will be presented for approval during the 2008 legislative session.

Health and Welfare stopped collecting the fee from custodial parents effective December 7, 2007. The department is coordinating refunds to all custodial parents who had already paid the fee. Although this proposed change in rule add an additional cost to non-custodial parents, the rule change helps ensure children received full child support.

We realize the negative impact the $25 fee has, regardless of who pays the fee imposed by congressional action; however, the department must comply with federal law. As Governor, I have written Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt expressing concern about the action taken to balance the budget on the backs of states and children receiving child support. We hope our decision to assess the fee to non-custodial parents will minimize the impact to Idaho children.

If you have question that this letter does not address, please don't hesitate to contact Russ Barron (barronr@dhw.idaho.gov) or Kandee Yearsley (yearslek@dhw.idaho.gov) by email or by telephone (208-334-5815). "

It frustrates me that any citizen of Idaho is being "charged" to pay for a deficit caused by overspending at the federal level in the first place. Idaho citizens should not approve of this happening at all and I will be interested to find out what kind of response Gov. Otter receives back from Secretary Leavitt. Putting this kind of burden on family members that are already in a stressful situation (either custodial or non-custodial) does not help them get themselves back on track to a normal life.

This type of governmental regulation is exactly what the Family Task Force looked for during our hearings this summer and we will be focused on abating. Any government regulation that puts further burden upon already stressed families is not appropriate and should be avoided if at all possible. In the long run, policies such as this not only cost families (in Dollars and increased stress) but puts further burden on the state tax payer as well.

Your thoughts?....