Referred to the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 25, 1994
Child Security Act of 1994 - Prescribes guidelines for an entitlement program under which the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) shall pay monthly child support assurance benefits to eligible individuals. (Sec. 3) Directs the Secretary to establish a national registry of child support orders issued or modified by any State court or State administrative process. Grants the Secretary of the Treasury access to such registry. (Sec. 4) Amends the Internal Revenue Code to prescribe guidelines for the mandatory: (1) inclusion of child support obligations on each employee's tax withholding certificate; (2) withholding of such obligations from employee wages; and (3) payment of a child support obligation with the taxpayer's income tax return. Establishes the Office of the Child Advocate in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). (Sec. 5) Prescribes guidelines for: (1) distribution by HHS of child support payments collected by the IRS; and (2) the State's role in collection and distribution of child support. (Sec. 7) Instructs the Secretary to establish the National Child Support Guideline Commission to develop recommendations for uniform national child support guidelines. (Sec. 8) Amends the Social Security Act to: (1) require that a State plan for child and spousal support provide that the State have in effect a law providing for the uniform termination of child support obligations; (2) prescribe guidelines for the reallocation of staffing resources by the Secretary; (3) increase the Federal financial participation in a State plan for child and spousal support; (4) set a minimum State AFDC standard of need; (5) expand from 19 to 21 years of age AFDC coverage for needy students; and (6) require that a State plan for medical assistance provide for an operative child support and AFDC program. (Sec. 11) Instructs the Secretary to authorize five States to conduct five-year demonstration projects under which States are to give priority in the provision of Federal job training, education, and child care services to parents unable to support their children financially.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4494 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4494 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4494 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4494 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.