TALLAHASSEE – A House committee last week approved a proposal to reform the state's alimony laws by eliminating permanent alimony and establishing a formula based on the length of the marriage and the income of both spouses to determine the amount of payments.
Alan Frisher, founder of Tavares-based Family Law Reform (FLR), who has been fighting for a change in the law for eight years, expressed hope that lawmakers would pass the proposed law reform this year.
“Fortunately, everyone is playing well in the sandbox,” said Frisher after the meeting.
The measure has been in the works for years and has the blessing of child support reform advocates and the Family Law Section of the Florida Bar Association.
A nearly identical bill failed in the final days of the shortened legislative session last spring after the two sides, once at odds over child support reform, reached a compromise.
The measure became embroiled in a bitter dispute last year between two powerful Republican lawmakers, Senate Budget Chief Tom Lee and House Speaker Ritch Workman, over whether the proposal should also address the issue of time-sharing between divorced parents, which Lee wanted. Workman said the time-sharing issue killed the deal, but Lee denied that was the reason the bill failed.
The House Judiciary Committee last week approved its version of this year's measure, which does not include the time-sharing element, in a 14-3 vote after hearing emotional testimony from divorced spouses on both sides.
MP Colleen Burton, who introduced the bill, said the changes were necessary to provide legal certainty when couples divorce.
“This bill creates a framework in our state that will ensure that no matter where you live, you will be treated equally throughout the state,” said Burton, a Lakeland Republican.
Burton's proposal would eliminate certain types of alimony known as bridge alimony, rehabilitative alimony, temporary alimony and permanent alimony. It would also change what is now considered short-term, medium-term and long-term marriages. Under the new plan, the medium-term marriage category would be eliminated and long-term marriages, now defined as 17 years or longer, would apply to unions of 20 years or more.
The formula for the duration of alimony payments would be based on the number of years of marriage, while the amount of payments would depend on the couple's gross income (the salary of the higher-earning spouse minus the income of the spouse seeking alimony) and would determine the duration of the alimony payments.
In the case of divorce, spouses who have been married for less than two years are not entitled to alimony unless the judge issues a written exception.
Frisher's FLR describes itself as the largest advocacy group of its kind, representing more than 13,000 members in Florida.
“The current law does not allow people to go back to work and take responsibility for themselves,” he said previously. “When you're receiving alimony, you don't want to work because you're afraid of losing your alimony. When you're paying alimony, you don't want to work because you're afraid of being taken back to court because you're making more money.”
Tampa attorney Joe Hunt, representing the Florida Bar Association's family law section, said judges across the state or even within the same district make different decisions about child support even when they have the same facts before them.
The proposal “provides guidance that is long overdue,” Hunt said.
Critics, however, argue that the changes would particularly harm older women who stay at home to raise their children and then have difficulty finding a job.
Shelly Moxon Lehman told the panel she was a victim of domestic violence and was married for 18 years before divorcing. Other women may remain in abusive relationships if they do not receive financial support from their ex-husbands, Lehman warned.
Lehman, 56, said she is unemployed despite having a college degree.
“I had to raise our children alone. … And now I'm penniless. I'm on food stamps,” she said.
And Nelson Diaz, a lobbyist for the bar association's family law division, said he believes the proposal will also receive Scott's blessing.
Three of five Democrats on the committee supported the measure, Diaz noted.
“I have not received any assurances from the governor, but I think he can be persuaded to sign the agreement,” Diaz said.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to give its first consideration to that chamber's proposal, which includes a modified version of the time-sharing component, on Tuesday.
Comments are closed.