Program may be good, but let the states choose.

• Position: Revoking the driver's license of deadbeat parents

Nineteen states say it's working, but state legislators are telling Congress to back off - they will decide for themselves if a program that pressures deadbeat parents to pay child support is right for their states.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) told Congress in March that the federal government could increase child support payments and cut welfare spending by following the states' lead of revoking the drivers' licenses of deadbeat parents. It's an idea Congress is seriously considering.

That spurred state Representative Norma Anderson to remind Colorado congressmen that "they had just passed a bill saying there would be no more federal mandates. Then, on this issue, they want to pass another mandate. Isn't there a dichotomy there?"

She also cited the potential cost to states of implementing another federal program as well as stressing that such programs should be state, not national, decisions. "I still don't think Congress knows best about what works in individual states," she says.

In this case, Anderson says, "There are some states that prefer to let individuals continue to drive to work so that their wages can be garnished for child support payments."

Alabama Representative Michael Box says his state revokes licenses for drug convictions, but prefers "other means for enforcing child support payments." He also points out that Illinois laws that revoke drivers' licenses for offenses unrelated to driving have been struck down by the courts.

When adopted by individual states, however, the driver's license revocation does seem to work. Child support payments increased by $35 million in the nine states that kept data on...