Shriver Center: March 2005

Medicaid Funding: U.S. Senate Makes It a Ballgame

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

The U.S. Senate rebuked its Republican leaders and the Bush administration by voting earlier this month to reject all proposed Medicaid cuts in the bill outlining the federal budget for the next five years. Seven Republican senators joined all the Democrats, including Illinois Senators Richard Durbin and Barack Obama, and one independent to constitute the 52-vote majority. Sen. Gordon Smith (R–Ore.), joined by Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D–N.M.) drafted the amendment to delete the Medicaid cuts from the Senate budget bill.

President Bush announced last month that he wanted Congress to cut $60 billion from Medicaid over the next 10 years (he proposed $15 billion in expanding certain aspects of Medicaid-funded health care for a net cut of $45 billion). Senate Republican leaders, following the president’s blueprint, proposed $14 billion in cuts for the next five years (under the president’s proposal, larger cuts would follow in the following five years to reach the $60 billion target). That proposal was included in the committee bill that went to the floor.

Due to very strong public outcry in support of Medicaid and against cuts, and due to a similarly strong position taken by the National Governors Association, the Medicaid cuts quickly became controversial. Gov. Rod Blagojevich played a strong role in the National Governors Association on this issue. Governors of both parties, beset by state fiscal crises, strongly opposed cuts in federal Medicaid spending, which would only exacerbate state problems without helping states in any way whatsoever. Health care in Illinois would be especially harmed by the president’s proposals because those proposals would eliminate important funding mechanisms that Illinois uses more than most other states to bring federal dollars to the health care systems of Cook County and other high-poverty areas of the state. These cuts threaten not only Medicaid beneficiaries and providers but also the entire indigent care system that helps the uninsured.

Because the Senate passed the Smith-Bingaman amendment deleting all Medicaid cuts from the Senate’s budget bill, a confrontation with the House is next. The House of Representatives has dutifully passed a budget that not only follows the president’s blueprint for cuts in Medicaid but also proposes even higher cuts: $20 billion over the next five years. The two chambers will try to negotiate a budget bill that reconciles all of the inconsistencies between their bills. The House and Senate will appoint conferees to attempt to reach an agreement in April. Those who care about Medicaid will want the Senate to hold fast to its position—no cuts.

Many of the people in Congress and the Bush administration see the possible Medicaid cuts as a crucial aspect of the administration’s attempt to slow down the growth of the deficit—without Medicaid cuts (and without a cessation of the tax cuts for higher-income families), the deficit will continue to spiral upward. The confrontation over the budget bill is therefore one of the most important budget fights this year and perhaps one of the highest-priority battlegrounds for the president’s domestic agenda.

A new campaign for people concerned with protecting Medicaid is “Medicaid Matters for Someone You Know,” a title reflecting that over 50 million Americans get their health coverage from Medicaid. The campaign has produced a fact sheet and other advocacy materials found at its website, www.medicaidmatters2005.org. Those concerned with the issue should contact their representatives and senators starting now and until the budget is finalized to insist that Medicaid not be cut.

Shriver Center, Chicago Lawyers' Committee Settle Voucher Segregation Lawsuit

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

In a settlement preliminarily approved on March 15, in Wallace v. CHA , the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law and the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law agree with the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) that the CHA’s current programs for families making the initial move from public housing and its modified program for residents who have moved represent “best and reasonable efforts” to assist the residents in exercising their own choices to relocate to economically and racially integrated communities.

In January 2003 a group of current and former public housing residents, represented by the Shriver Center and the Lawyers’ Committee, sued the CHA for failing to develop a program to assist them in relocating to racially integrated communities in the private market. Thousands of families living in public housing had been or would be relocated temporarily or permanently to subsidized private housing with Housing Choice Vouchers (formerly known as Section 8 Vouchers) as part of the CHA’s Plan for Transformation.

Throughout the litigation, the parties engaged in cooperative settlement negotiations regarding the CHA’s current programs and plans to assist in relocating residents.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the CHA retains the authority to change existing or future programs, subject to its commitment to use “best and reasonable efforts” to provide programs to assist class members in exercising their own choices to move to economically and racially integrated neighborhoods. The CHA will give plaintiffs’ counsel ongoing access to information regarding relocation and social service programs for public housing families available through CHA, CHAC Inc. (the administrator of the Housing Choice Voucher program in Chicago), and the Chicago Department of Human Services. Although the case will be voluntarily dismissed as a result of the settlement, the plaintiffs retain the right to apply to the court to reinstate the lawsuit within three years of the effective date of the settlement agreement if they believe that the CHA is breaching the settlement agreement.

CHA and CHAC Inc. will also modify CHAC’s Housing Opportunity Program for CHA residents who have moved. The current program helps families who already live in private housing with Housing Choice Vouchers to move from high-poverty to low-poverty neighborhoods. The modified program available to former public housing residents focuses on the benefits of racially diverse neighborhoods.

Sharon Legenza, director of the Fair Housing Project at the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee and cocounsel on the case from its inception, expressed optimism on the settlement. “We are pleased that these families now have additional tools for moving to neighborhoods where they really want to live,” she said.

The federal court for the Northern District of Illinois will hold a hearing on May 31, 2005, at 9:00 a.m. to determine whether to approve the settlement. Class members will receive notice of the hearing and will have an opportunity to submit written objections and appear at the hearing if they choose.

For more information, contact William Wilen , Kate Walz , or Raj Nayak at the Shriver Center.

Don't Believe the Hype: Bankruptcy Bill Will Harm Low- and Moderate-Income Debtors

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

by David Yen

By the time you read this, there may be a new law that severely curtails the effectiveness of bankruptcy as a solution for the honest but unfortunate low-income debtor.

Wait a minute, you say to yourself. I hear from prominent politicians and the media that the bankruptcy bill affects only affluent deadbeats who file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy even though they can afford to pay their debts. They tell me that the only thing that the new law is going to do is to stop “them” from abusing the bankruptcy system. Bankruptcy will still be there for anyone who really needs it, won’t it?

Unfortunately the answer is “No!” The bankruptcy bill which was passed by the Senate and which is likely to become law is packed with provisions favoring creditors. Many provisions will affect any individual who is thinking of filing for bankruptcy. Some will fall especially hard on low- and moderate-income households.

Over the next few months we will be explaining how the new world of bankruptcy affects the low- and moderate-income debtor (unless by some miracle the proposed changes do not become law).

Here are some major changes that would affect low- and moderate-income households.

Those who file will have to complete additional paperwork to determine whether they are subject to the much-discussed “means test.” The means test is supposed to prevent people from abusing the system. Although the means test applies only to households whose income exceeds the state median income, who have excess income, and are filing under Chapter 7, debtors whose income has been at the poverty level for years must complete this paperwork, as must debtors who are filing for Chapter 13. (In 1999 the median income in Illinois for a family of four was $64,042, while the poverty level for a family of four was $16,700.)
Individuals will be forced to go to credit counseling in the six months before filing for bankruptcy. This is required even though the credit counseling industry is rife with companies providing inadequate services to their clients. It is even required for individuals who are filing Chapter 13 repayment plans and therefore do not need credit counseling.
As a result of the new law, the fees that private attorneys will charge to file even a “simple” bankruptcy will go up substantially. Why? In addition to the increased paperwork, bankruptcy attorneys will be held liable for inaccuracies in the papers signed by the debtor; they will raise their fees to cover the cost of investigating their own clients.
Chapter 13—the kind of bankruptcy where you propose a plan to pay back as much as you can afford and keep property that you need—will cost more and accomplish less. Debtors who paid more than a car was worth will have to pay the inflated value of the car in order to keep it. Under current law the debtor has to pay only what the car is really worth and a reasonable rate of interest.
To encourage people to file Chapter 13, current law provides that some debts which are not discharged if you file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy are discharged in a Chapter 13. In order to get this benefit you must devote all of your disposable income to the Chapter 13 case and successfully complete a repayment plan that is at least three years long. The new law would eliminate this incentive. Many more debts would still be owed after a Chapter 13 is completed. Since interest would continue to accrue, debtors could end up owing just as much at the end of the repayment plan as they did when the case was filed.
The law would make it easier for landlords to evict tenants who file for bankruptcy, even if the tenant pays the rent that is owed after the bankruptcy is filed.

Does this mean that if you have been thinking of filing for bankruptcy, you should hurry up and file before the law changes? Not necessarily.

First, if you live in Illinois, nothing in the bill as currently written is going to affect you until 180 days after the president signs the bill. Unless there is an emergency, you have time to get advice from an attorney who has studied the new law.

Second, the bill would impose much stricter limits on filing for a second bankruptcy. Under current law, if you file for bankruptcy, get back on course, and then suffer an unforeseen hardship, you may usually file for a Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Under the new law this option may not be there when you need it; be very sure that you really need to file bankruptcy now because it may not be available later, when you really do need it.

David Yen is the bankruptcy specialist at the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago. Contact him at 312.347.8372.

Campaign Seeks State Funding Increase for Legal Aid Programs

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

Led by cochairs James R. Thompson and Philip J. Rock, the Equal Justice Illinois Campaign is calling on the General Assembly to increase the appropriation for the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation to $2 million from the current level of $472,000. The Illinois Equal Justice Foundation distributes the state’s annual funding for civil legal aid, which comes through a line item in the Department of Human Services’ budget. For 2005, the foundation awarded grants across the state to 12 legal aid programs, including the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago, Prairie State Legal Services, and Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation . Gov. Rod Blagojevich did not include any funding for the Equal Justice Foundation in his proposed budget for the next fiscal year, which starts on July 1, 2005 .

Currently Illinois ranks last among the 10 most populous states in terms of annual civil legal aid appropriations; Illinois spends just $472,000 compared to those states’ average of $6.8 million. Civil legal aid programs desperately need increases in state funding due to cuts in federal funds. Federal funding from the Legal Services Corporation, which is the largest source of support for legal aid, dropped by 38 percent over the past 15 years when adjusted for inflation.

In calling for increased state funding, the Equal Justice Campaign cites the following facts:

Legal aid is a critical social service that helps prevent problems such as domestic violence, predatory lending, foreclosure, and child support difficulties from spiraling into crises.
According to a major new study, The Legal Aid Safety Net: A Report on the Legal Needs of Low-Income Illinoisans, low-income residents in Illinois are able to get legal help for only one out of every six problems they face.
Only the equivalent of 280 full-time legal aid lawyers are in the entire state—a ratio of one legal aid lawyer for every 4,752 problems faced by the poor.
An appropriation of $2 million from the state could give meaningful access to the justice system to well over 30,000 additional low-income Illinoisans.

The campaign is asking Illinois residents to urge their local legislators to support increasing the appropriation for the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation to $2 million. Log onto www.elections.state.il.us for contact information on your local legislators.

For more information, call Leslie Corbett at 312.499.4752 or visit www.equaljusticeillinois.org.

Funding and Partnership Opportunities for Nonprofit Organizations and Banks to Offer Financial Education

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

Northern Illinois nonprofit organizations and banks and credit unions interested in offering financial education classes for low-income adults are invited to attend one of two events for funding and partnership opportunities.

At a free one-day bidders’ conference on May 3, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. in Sycamore, Illinois, for nonprofit organizations, a request for proposals will be issued to fund up to five nonprofit organizations in northern Illinois at $8,000 to $10,000 per site. Only nonprofit organizations attending the conference will be eligible to apply for the grants.

The conference will be held at the University of Illinois Extension DeKalb Office at 1350 West Prairie Drive. Continental breakfast and lunch will be served.

Participants will learn about the Financial Links for Low-Income People (FLLIP) coalition’s Financial Education Program, how to write a proposal to receive funding for the program, and how to form partnerships to teach financial education to low-income adults. Participants will also learn how to write proposals for support from private financial institutions from an experienced grant writer and foundation consultant.

Participants at a bankers’ luncheon for bank and credit union officers, on May 4 from 11:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., will learn how to develop knowledgeable customers and new business by supporting free financial education classes for low-income adults. The financial institutions will be encouraged to partner with local nonprofit organizations to develop proposals and implement programs. The place for the luncheon will be announced shortly.

If you are interested in attending either the bidders’ conference or the bankers’ luncheon, contact Hannah Avellone by April 19 at 312.368.8575.

Governor Poised Again to Raid Affordable Housing Trust Fund

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

Housing advocates learned earlier this month that Gov. Rod Blagojevich will once again “sweep” various dedicated funds, including the Illinois Housing Trust Fund, to fund the governor’s new $140 million school endowment fund. The Housing Trust Fund, which is the only dedicated source of state funding for affordable housing, is desperately needed to curb Illinois’s severe shortage of affordable housing. Yet it could face the largest raid of any other dedicated fund.

With a rise in the amount of real estate transfer taxes over the last two years, the fund currently contains approximately $31 million, although advocates note that many of the dollars are earmarked for affordable-housing projects. Advocates were able to avoid a proposed $3.8 million cut in the fund last year but could not avoid a $5 million sweep the year before, when the legislation allowing the governor to take such action became law. This year’s projected raid could be up to $10 million.

Even education advocates are not supportive of the school endowment fund. They note that the $140 million would not be enough to raise the state’s minimum amount currently spent per pupil.

The courts, however, may ultimately decide if the governor has the power to raid the trust fund or other special-purpose funds. Two separate court actions have been filed challenging the constitutionality of the law allowing the governor to raid dedicated funding sources and put them into general revenue. In an action brought in Cook County Chancery Court last fall, Judge Patrick McGann ruled that the law violated the uniformity clause and the due process clause of the Illinois Constitution. The case is on appeal.

Since its creation in 1989, the Housing Trust Fund has helped finance nearly 13,505 housing units in addition to furthering state economic growth and stability through new high-wage construction jobs, increased public safety, and educational security.

For more information, contact Kate Walz at 312.263.3830 ext. 232.

President's Proposed FY 2006 Housing Budget Cuts Hurt Illinois Families

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

In a time of rising housing costs, declining wages, and high unemployment, providing affordable and stable housing for those in need should be the hallmark of any sound national agenda. Instead President Bush’s proposed 2006 fiscal year budget for federal housing programs, combined with the deep cuts those programs suffered in the 2005 fiscal year, may signal the end of the Housing Choice Voucher Program as a reliable anchor for needy families.

The struggles faced by Illinois families and the agencies trying to provide decent, affordable housing to them are emblematic of the housing difficulties nationally. According to a study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 3,415 Housing Choice Vouchers in Illinois will be lost because of federal cuts this year. By 2010 nearly 16,000 eligible Illinois families will be without housing assistance. Nationally approximately 80,000 vouchers were eliminated with the 2005 budget cuts. By 2010 as many as 370,000 vouchers, of the two million total, could be eliminated with the 2006 cuts.

In light of the 2005–2006 cuts, large and small housing authorities are struggling with the loss of funding. Nearly all of the Illinois housing authorities will shelve their waiting lists for now. According to a study conducted two years ago by the Mid-American Institute on Poverty, 133,458 families are on the Housing Choice Voucher and Public Housing waiting lists in Illinois, and nearly one-third of the waiting lists were already closed.

Some housing authorities may have to make the ultimate decision—whether to terminate families from the program. The McClean County Housing Authority plans to terminate 64 families from the program by April 30, 2005. Until last year, the housing authority managed only 22 Housing Choice Vouchers and no public housing. When the subsidized property Landcaster Heights in Normal, Illinois, opted out of its contract, 198 vouchers were added to McClean’s supply in December 2003. Many of the same families who lost their housing at Landcaster Heights will now lose the only thing that the end of the Project-based Section 8 contract gave them—a Housing Choice Voucher.

The Ford County Housing Authority will terminate five families from its voucher program but is offering apartments in the county’s public housing as an alternative. Woodford County Housing Authority will decrease by 4 vouchers to 236.

The Oak Park Housing Authority estimates that it will have to terminate 14 families from the program unless it can avail of local or private resources. It has requested $150,000 in emergency funding from the Oak Park Village Board.

Some authorities are trying to reduce cost with measures other than voucher termination. Like many other housing authorities in Illinois, the Elgin Housing Authority has reduced its payment standard, from 110 percent to 90 percent, making it next to impossible for families to compete for rental units with private market renters. The Springfield Housing Authority announced plans to reduce the number of vouchers available by more than 100, but likely through attrition and not termination of current program participants. Other housing authorities will deny all landlord requests for rent increases and increase tenant rent burdens where appropriate.

The Chicago Housing Authority, the largest Housing Choice Voucher administrator in the state, has already imposed a minimum rent for voucher recipients and has increased its criminal histories review of participants and applicants from two to three years.

Other Illinois housing authorities say that they will deny portability moves, often the main way families access economically thriving, job-rich areas of the state, as well as moves within the housing authority jurisdiction, if they do not have enough money to subsidize families who want to move to a higher-cost area or unit. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is allowing housing authorities to deny these moves if based on insufficient funding from 2005 and after they confirm that the receiving housing authority will not absorb the voucher. HUD will not require the denying public housing authority to seek a waiver from HUD.

Senate Rejects Community Development Block Grant Cuts

Earlier this month the U.S. Senate rejected efforts by the Bush administration to cut the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program by $2 billion and move it to the Commerce Department. The Senate amendment would maintain CDBG spending levels and keep the program with HUD. Advocates are still concerned that other needed programs would be cut to make up the difference.

The program, aimed primarily at assisting low-income neighborhoods, also indirectly funds nonprofit institutions working on behalf of families in those neighborhoods. In Chicago low-income renter and fair housing advocacy organizations such as the Lawyers’ Committee for Better Housing, the Metropolitan Tenants Organization, and the Leadership Council for Metropolitan Open Communities could be affected by the projected cuts.

For more information, contact Kate Walz at 312.263.3830 ext. 232.

Source of Income Bill Moves to Full House

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

The Source of Income Amendment to the Illinois Human Rights Act (House Bill 45 and Senate Bill 167) has passed out of committee in both chambers of the Illinois legislature. The bill would amend the Illinois Human Rights Act to prevent discrimination based on legal source of income in residential rental real estate transactions. If enacted, it would prohibit landlords from solely refusing to rent to people based on where they derive their legal income, such as Supplemental Security Income and Supplemental Security Disability Insurance, child support, and rental income supports. Landlords would still be free to use legitimate screening criteria, such as credit checks and landlord references.

The bill comes amid Illinois’s affordable-housing crisis. Studies show that 39 percent of renters are unable to obtain affordable housing and that approximately 400,000 families spend over half of their income on rent. These renters rely heavily on some form of nonwage, legal income to secure decent and safe housing, including housing subsidies, such as Housing Choice (Section 8) Vouchers.

When these renters are protected from discrimination based on their legal source of income, they are more likely to acquire affordable, stable housing. In a 2001 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development study, voucher holders had a 12 percent higher placement rate in areas that have laws protecting against source of income discrimination. The source of income legislation could improve the chances of seniors, people with disabilities, migrant farm workers, and families with children in finding decent and safe housing.

The advocacy community has been working to make the legislation more acceptable for property owners since the sole opponent continues to be the Illinois Association of Realtors. Several amendments to the bill have been passed in the spirit of compromise and cooperation:

Landlords whose properties fail to meet Housing Quality Standards—the minimum housing standards requirement of the Housing Choice Voucher Program—do not have to rent to people with vouchers and will not be charged with source of income discrimination.
When landlords are found guilty of source of income discrimination, the Illinois Department of Human Rights may ask them to attend training sessions in order to avoid future violations. Training would serve as a possible remedy for violations, especially first-time offenses.
To give the Department of Human Rights time to educate the public, the effective date of the bill is delayed for six months. The extended time will be used to teach the public, especially rental property owners, how to comply with the new law.

In the Housing and Urban Development Committee in the House, H.B. 45 received 14 votes in support of the legislation, with one representative voting present and one voting in opposition. In the Senate’s Housing and Community Affairs Committee, S.B. 167 passed with a 6-to-4 vote. The House bill is expected to be called at the beginning of April.

For more information, contact Kate Walz at 312.263.3830 ext. 232.

Annual Federal Poverty Guidelines Updated

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services last month issued its annual update of the federal poverty guidelines. Used as eligibility criteria in many federal programs, the updated guidelines reflect changes in last year’s Consumer Price Index. See Federal Register, Feb. 18, 2005, pp. 8373–75. Information on the federal poverty guidelines is available at http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/05poverty.shtml.

The attached eligibility chart sets forth income guidelines for several public benefit programs based on the federal poverty guidelines. David Yen, an attorney at the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago, prepared the chart.

2005 Poverty Guidelines

2006-07-13T16:23:46Z

Chart prepared by David Yen of the Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago.

Six Organizations Become FLLIP Contracted Sites

2006-07-13T16:23:47Z

Six organizations in southern Illinois and Chicago received funds to conduct training in the financial education curricula of the Financial Links for Low-Income People (FLLIP). They are North Side Community Federal Credit Union, Sierra Leone Community Association of Chicago, Southern Illinois Coalition for the Homeless, Emerson Park Development Corporation, Shawnee Development Council, and Shawnee Community College. The organizations will be offering classes as soon as this May.

For more information on financial education classes or the FLLIP grant opportunities, contact Hannah Avellone at 312.368.8575.

Support Urged on Vote for Bill to Ensure Success in School

2006-07-13T16:23:47Z

House Bill 3615, the Ensuring Success in School Act, is scheduled for a vote by the Illinois House of Representatives, and the vote must be taken no later than April 15. Please urge your state representatives to vote "Yes" on the bill.

The Illinois House Elementary and Secondary Education Committee unanimously voted House Bill 3615, the Ensuring Success in School Act, out of committee earlier this month. Committee members heard testimony on the importance of the bill, which addresses the needs of students who are expectant parents, parents, or victims of domestic or sexual violence. A recent high school graduate described her struggle to complete school safely after she was raped by a classmate. School administrators told her that they could do nothing for her when she asked to transfer to another school or at least to a different bus from that of her perpetrator. To ensure her safety, her family had to have her home-schooled for the rest of the school year.

Carmen Abrego of the Southwest Youth Collaborative, a member of the Ensuring Success in School Act (ESSA) coalition, also testified on how H.B. 3615 addresses the needs of expectant and parenting students by guiding school administrators on how to support the students’ efforts to remain in school. Abrego’s testimony resonated with legislators eager to help connect schools to community resources that can support the efforts of expectant and parenting students to remain in school.

H.B. 3615, sponsored by Rep. Karen A. Yarbrough (D), is now poised to move forward in the House pending negotiations of its final version. Currently the bill promotes school success and safety for youth who are expectant parents, parents, or the victims of domestic or sexual violence by

adding to the list of valid causes for absences by recognizing absences related to pregnancy, parenting, and domestic or sexual violence;
promoting safety despite domestic or sexual violence by allowing students to transfer between schools when necessary;
holding schools accountable for connecting the students with existing resources in school and in the community; and
encouraging parental involvement in the students’ efforts to perform well in school when such involvement is healthy and safe.

Be sure to contact your state representatives during the week of March 28 or April 4 to let them know that you support H.B. 3615. Until April 1, you can contact your representatives in their home-district offices while the state legislature is on break. After April 1, you can contact them in Springfield. If you are unsure of who your legislators are or how to contact them, go to www.elections.state.il.us/dls/pages/SelectOfficialSearch.asp and search by your address.

When you contact your representatives, tell them:

Please vote “Yes” on H.B. 3615, the Ensuring Success in School Act. This Act is extremely important for Illinois students who are expectant parents, parents, or the victims of domestic or sexual violence and who are trying to perform well in school and complete their high school education.

Please ensure that students who are expectant parents, parents, or the victims of domestic or sexual violence will get the support that they need to succeed in school.

To learn more about H.B. 3615, click here , where you may find fact sheets about the bill and view a growing list of the bill’s supporters. A copy of the H.B. 3615 endorsement form is also available in this issue of Illinois Welfare News.

The Shriver Center thanks everyone (including the Southwest Youth Collaborative, Freedom House in Princeton, Illinois, and the Illinois Coalition Against Sexual Assault) who helped give written or oral testimony on behalf of H.B. 3615.

For more information, contact Wendy Pollack (312.263.3830 ext.238) or Aleeza Strubel (312.263.3830 ext.229).

Let's Get It Right! Failure to Apply Good Cause Exception for Noncooperation with Child Support Collection and Enforcement Endangers Victims of Domestic Violence and Their Families

2006-07-13T16:23:47Z

Advocates at Rainbow House, a shelter for domestic violence victims and their families in Chicago, report that several of their clients have recently experienced difficulties in establishing that they have good cause for noncooperation with child support collection and enforcement efforts on the basis of domestic violence. The pursuit of child support from an abuser unnecessarily exposes these families to danger. The Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law has successfully intervened on behalf of these families but remains concerned that other public benefit recipients and their children may be endangered because of a misunderstanding of how the pursuit of child support poses a safety risk for some families with a history of abuse.

Recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Medicaid are required to assist the Illinois Department of Public Aid (IDPA) and the Illinois Department of Human Services (IDHS) in their efforts to establish paternity and collect child support. However, a TANF or Medicaid recipient may claim that cooperating in child support enforcement activities is not within her or her child’s best interest if doing so would be harmful or dangerous (IDHS Policy Manual 24-02-04).The recipient does not have to reveal the noncustodial parent’s identity prior to a determination of good cause (IDHS Policy Manual 24-02-04-b).

TANF and Medicaid recipients may claim good cause for noncooperation when (1) the child on whose behalf support is sought was conceived as a result of incest or rape; (2) there is a possibility that the child is going to be adopted; (3) there may be emotional harm to the recipient or her child; or (4) there is a fear of domestic violence (IDHS Policy Manual 24-02-04). Child support collection and enforcement efforts are not pursued as long as good cause for noncooperation exists. Proof of domestic violence is needed to establish their good-cause claim and may be proven by verification, circumstances, or client reliability (IDHS Policy Manual 24-02-04-a).

Clients have 20 days to submit proof of domestic violence in support of their good-cause claim. Under IDHS policy, acceptable proof of domestic violence includes

court, medical, criminal, child protective services, psychological, or police records showing that the noncustodial parent might physically or emotionally harm the child or the client; or
sworn notarized statements from persons other than the client, with knowledge of the events showing the basis for the good-cause claim (IDHS Policy Manual 24-02-04-a).

Several residents of Rainbow House recently experienced difficulties at the IDHS Western Local Office in their efforts to establish good cause for noncooperation with child support collection and enforcement efforts due to domestic violence. One woman reported that after she presented from her advocate at the shelter a letter documenting the need for the good-cause exception in her case, her IDHS caseworker nevertheless tried to pressure her to agree to cooperate with child support collection efforts. The caseworker asked the woman to speculate about what her estranged husband might do in the event child support was pursued, and then pressured her to divulge information about her abusive husband’s identity and whereabouts. Following this interview, the client received from the Division of Child Support Enforcement at the IDPA a letter scheduling an appointment to begin the process of collecting child support and threatening to sanction her by withholding cash assistance if she failed to attend or reschedule the appointment. It took a call from the client’s advocate at Rainbow House and a subsequent call from a Shriver Center lawyer to a supervisor at the Western Local Office before this appointment was cancelled and the woman’s case was properly coded to show good cause for noncooperation with child support collection and enforcement.

A second Rainbow House resident also experienced difficulties in establishing the good-cause exception at the Western Local Office. This client fled an abusive boyfriend and was living at Rainbow House with her children from a prior relationship. Both her ex-boyfriend and the father of her children had been very abusive, and so, when asked to cooperate with child support collection and enforcement efforts, the woman presented from her advocate at the shelter a letter indicating that the pursuit of child support from the father of her children would be unsafe. The IDHS caseworker insisted that the client was ineligible for the good-cause exception because she and her children were currently living in a domestic violence shelter to escape the dangers posed by her ex-boyfriend, who was not the father of her children. When the client explained that her children’s father had been extremely abusive toward her in the past, the caseworker discounted this information and referred the case for child support collection. This client then received a letter setting up a meeting with the Division of Child Support Enforcement to begin the child support collection process. The Shriver Center intervened in this case, and child support is not being pursued at this time.

The Shriver Center is concerned that, even with a letter from a domestic violence advocate, these two clients were improperly pressured to cooperate with child support efforts despite the safety risk that doing so posed to them and their children.

If you have had or someone you know has had difficulty obtaining a good-cause exception for noncooperation with child support enforcement efforts, please contact Shriver Center Attorney Aleeza Strubel at 312.263.3830 ext. 229.

Save Our Security Campaign Heats Up

2006-07-13T16:23:47Z

What kind of power can overcome the Bush administration’s $200 million propaganda campaign to convince people to privatize social security? People power!

Join Illinois United to Protect Social Security, a coalition formed to combat the privatization of social security, on April 2, for a 12:00 noon rally at Rep. Dennis Hastert’s Batavia office, located at 27 North River Street in Batavia, Illinois. The coalition, of which the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law is a member, will have two charter buses for elderly Chicago residents.

Speakers at the rally include Margaret Blackshere, president of the Illinois AFL-CIO, and William McNary, codirector of Citizen Action Illinois and president of USAction.

Speaker Hastert needs to hear that Illinoisans are not behind the Bush administration’s drive to privatize social security. “President Bush and his congressional allies like Speaker Hastert are using exaggerated claims and scare tactics to sell their scheme to replace social security with a privatized system which will cut the guaranteed benefit by as much as 50 percent and explode the national debt by nearly $5 trillion over the next twenty years,” said McNary.

The coalition asks that attendees bring a picture of a friend or family member who relies on social security. During the rally, a collage will be created to show the many faces of social security recipients.

The Illinois AFL-CIO, the Chicago Federation of Labor, and the Illinois Alliance for Retired Americans are also organizing a rally in front of Charles Schwab on Thursday, March 31, at noon, as part of the national day of action against Charles Schwab and social security privatization. This will take place at 150 South Wacker Drive in Chicago.

For more information, or to find out about transportation options, contact Yuri Gottesman at 312.368.1033.