TALLAHASSEE — The Florida Senate on Wednesday approved a plan to overhaul the state’s child support laws, in another attempt to address a contentious issue that has led to vetoes of three similar bills over the past decade.
After years of wrangling, the Florida Bar’s family law department and advocates for an overhaul of the child support system have given their blessing to this year’s proposal. The bill would eliminate what is known as alimony and create a formula for alimony based on the length of marriages.
But one group that could be badly affected by the proposed changes — mostly older women who worked at home, raised children and boosted their ex-spouses’ careers before they divorced — have been left out of the months-long negotiations.
“Gosh, we’re a group of 3,000 women,” Camille Fiveash, a Milton woman who receives permanent child support, told the News Service of Florida in a phone interview just before the Senate voted 34-6 to pass it on Thursday the measure was correct. “It’s a handful of men (calling for an overhaul) and they’ve caved in to them, the rich, and locked us out of the negotiations. We have something to say because it affects us. It may be worded very carefully so as not to be unconstitutional, but it applies retrospectively.”
Fiveash is among members of the First Wives Advocacy group, which has been traveling to Tallahassee for a decade to try to thwart the legislation. Persistent alimony is their main source of income, and without it, many women would be impoverished and, in some cases, homeless, according to Fiveash.
But law supporter Joe Gruters, a Sarasota Republican who has also pushed similar legislation in the past, has claimed the measure would not have any unconstitutional effects on existing child support rules, a concern Gov. Ron DeSantis voiced when he last year vetoed a maintenance scheme. Former Gov. Rick Scott twice vetoed similar bills.
“As you know, it has been a long journey. I think it was rejected three times. I think it’s up 10-fold in the last 15 years,” Gruters, an accountant, told senators Thursday. “The goal was to achieve two things: get rid of permanent alimony and also try to streamline the process and make it more predictable and create a formulaic thing that allows families to keep more of their wealth accumulated over the years .”
Proponents said the bill (SB 1416) would convert a court decision in a 1992 divorce case into law, which would guide judges when making decisions about retirement.
Gruters thanked lobbyists Lisa Hurley, who represents the Bar Association’s family law division, and Nelson Diaz, who represents Florida Family Fairness, a group that has spearheaded efforts to change the child support system.
“When we finally sat down and worked out every single point of this bill, we finally had a bill that I think everyone, 95 percent of the population, agrees with,” Gruters said.
This proposal still requires approval by the House of Representatives. While permanent alimony would be abolished, restrictions on other types of alimony would be introduced. For example, the measure would limit “rehabilitation” maintenance to five years.
In addition, alimony payments would be based on the length of the marriage and, with some exceptions, could not exceed the lesser of the alimony recipient’s “reasonable need” or 35 percent of the difference between the parties’ net incomes. Permanent maintenance could not be granted for marriages lasting less than three years.
The bill also says that people paying child support can apply for amendments if “they have or have had a supportive relationship with their ex-spouses in the past year.” Critics argue that the provision is vague and could apply to temporary housemates who help dependents cover housing costs for a short period of time.
Sue Savage, a 62-year-old Naples woman on permanent child support, said she was concerned that the proposed abolition of child support and limits on the duration of child support would deprive her of income if her ex-husband requests a change and also granted to their settlement agreement.
When asked how she would handle it if her alimony was removed, Savage told the News Service, “That’s a good question. I guess I’ll sell my house and live in my car. I hope there is a veto.”
Sen. Lori Berman, a Boca Raton Democrat who voted against the bill, questioned Gruters about the bill’s retirement provisions and retroactivity.
During Wednesday’s plenary debate, Gruters told her, “Here’s the deal: If you have an agreement that can be changed, it will still be changeable whether we pass this law or not.” If it’s not changeable and even if we pass this law, it will still not be changeable.”
Berman said in a phone interview Thursday that the changes could result in “some bad repercussions.”
“I asked the sponsor if there was an age limit for retirement and they said ‘no’ so that’s where you’ll see the changes. Then the whole question of living with and being supported by someone else. It’s very vague, very unclear,” said Berman, an attorney.
The bill would also allow judges to “consider the adultery of either spouse and any resulting economic implications in determining the amount of alimony, if any, to be awarded.”
Savage referenced this proposal while criticizing the bill.
“We’ve been a no-fault divorce state for a quarter century now and will we burn people at the stake again for cheating on their spouse? That’s crazy,” she said.
This year’s version of the bill does not contain a controversial proposal that would have required judges to start with the “assumption” that children should divide their time evenly between parents. Scott largely justified his veto of a 2016 child support bill with a similar child sharing provision. The Family Law Department strongly opposed the inclusion of the child sharing provision in previous bills.
Copyright 2023 WWSB. All rights reserved.
Comments are closed.