I 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 2409
To amend part D of title IV of the Social Security Act to modify the 
calculation of the child support automation penalty and provide for 
the reinvestment of any such penalty. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MAY 17, 2005
Ms. MATSUI (for herself, Mr. STARK, and Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California) 
introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
Ways and Means 
A BILL 
To amend part D of title IV of the Social Security Act 
to modify the calculation of the child support automation 
penalty and provide for the reinvestment of any such 
penalty.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Child Support Rein-
vestment Act of 2005’’.
SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF CALCULATION OF PENALTY FOR 
FAILURE TO AUTOMATE CHILD SUPPORT IN-
FORMATION SYSTEMS; REINVESTMENT OF 
PENALTY. 
Section 455(a)(4) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 655(a)(4)) is amended—
(1) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ‘‘pre-
ceding fiscal year’’ and inserting ‘‘1st year in which 
the failure occurred’’; and 
(2) in subparagraph (C), by adding at the end 
the following: 
‘‘(iv)(I) The Secretary shall reduce, by the 
amount described in the applicable clause of sub-
paragraph (D) of this paragraph, the amount of any 
reduction that, in the absence of this clause, would 
be required to be made under this paragraph by rea-
son of the failure of a State to achieve compliance 
with a subparagraph of section 454(24) if—
‘‘(aa) the State has submitted, and the 
Secretary has approved, a corrective compliance 
plan under subparagraph (A)(i)(II) of this 
paragraph with respect to the failure; and 
‘‘(bb) the Secretary finds that the State 
has made and is continuing to make a good 
faith effort to comply with the plan.
‘‘(II) The State shall expend for operation of 
the State plan approved under section 454 an 
amount equal to the amount by which any reduction 
that, in the absence of this clause, would be required 
to be made under this paragraph is reduced under 
this clause.’’; and 
(3) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as sub-
paragraph (E) and inserting after subparagraph (C) 
the following: 
‘‘(D)(i) The amount described in this subpara-
graph is—
‘‘(I) 25 percent of the reduction, if the 
State has increased expenditures by more than 
5 but not more than 7 percent; 
‘‘(II) 50 percent of the reduction, if the 
State has increased expenditures by more than 
7 but not more than 9 percent; 
‘‘(III) 75 percent of the reduction, if the 
State has increased expenditures by more than 
9 but not more than 11 percent; or 
‘‘(IV) 100 percent of the reduction, if the 
State has increased expenditures by more than 
11 percent.
‘‘(ii) In clause (i), the term ‘increased expendi-
tures’ means, with respect to a State and a fiscal 
year, the lesser of—
‘‘(I) the average annual increase in the 
State share of expenditures under the State 
plan approved under this part in the 5-year pe-
riod ending with the preceding fiscal year; or 
‘‘(II) the increase in the State share of 
such expenditures in the preceding fiscal year.’’.
Æ