Ladies and gentlemen, step closer and witness Florida's latest attempt at alimony reform! It seems that every time the Big Top opens for a legislative session, some of our supposed champions of family values manage to reintroduce the same bad bill. This year's legislative session promises a similarly dazzling spectacle, as the controversial alimony reform bill (SB 1416 and HB 1409) once again takes center stage.
In previous legislation, the highlight was the retroactive nature of the proposed law. That's right folks, after three governors' vetoes Ron DeSantis And Rick Scottand for the same reason, the ringmasters have come back with another version that would, once again, apply to existing child support agreements. And they say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results…
This time, supporters of this spectacle claim they have struck a delicate balance between alimony payers and alimony recipients, but have they really? Last year, after all, they said something similar. A simple look at the bill shows that judges can still reduce or stop alimony payments, and at least one family court judge argues that this bill is actually as retroactive as the previously rejected alimony laws. Can you imagine the chaos in the courts if thousands of divorce settlements suddenly have to be renegotiated?
But don't worry, folks! That won't happen, we're assured. And besides, supporters argue, this is all being done in the name of “fairness” and the elimination of “permanent” alimony. Never mind that most of the supporters of these radical changes to the law are wealthy professionals with high income potential who simply can't bear the thought of continuing to support their ex-spouses, many of whom made sacrifices during the marriage for the good of their families. Fairness indeed.
What is particularly annoying is that the same Republicans who supposedly support traditional marriage and family values seem to have no qualms about making divorce more financially attractive for primary earners. What a fantastic opportunity to strengthen the institution of marriage! Fortunately, not all Republicans are behind the bill. Credit State Senator Ton Yarborough for the courageous no vote at a recent committee hearing.
Among the most vocal opponents of the retroactive nature of this annual monstrosity is a group called First Wives Advocacy, which includes women who sacrificed their careers and earning potential to raise children or otherwise support their working husbands—sacrifices once considered a virtue in our culture—only to be left to pick up the financial pieces after their marriages ended. As the founder of First Wives Advocacy Jan Killileapoints out that the payment of permanent maintenance may not be necessary in every or even most cases, but in certain, still quite common, situations it undoubtedly serves a crucial purpose.
If the Bill is passed in its current form, abolishing permanent alimony, it effectively ties the hands of judges in situations where one spouse emerges from a long marriage with no current professional skills. It is not difficult to imagine how many modern marriages this could affect, where over the course of the relationship, by mutual decision, one person has made professional sacrifices while the other partner pursued a lucrative career, gaining experience and earning potential, in the firm belief that they would stay together for life and that their partnership benefited both.
If we get to a separation between this couple, there is an immediate imbalance that only permanent alimony can correct – there is simply no way some stay-at-home partners can ever fully make up for the sacrifices they made during the marriage. And without some protections, Republicans are sending a strong message that sacrificing career opportunities as a stay-at-home spouse does not deserve respect or protection, because anyone who makes those sacrifices does not receive adequate protection in our state.
If Republicans value the sacrifices made by stay-at-home dads and moms, and truly want to encourage couples to enter into marriages in which one parent makes those professional sacrifices for the children and family, then Republicans need to make divorce significantly less financially attractive for primary earners to step away from their obligations, period. Rather than jumping right into alimony reform by trying to make divorce “fairer” for primary earners, Republican lawmakers should first ask how the proposed “reform” strengthens the institution of marriage itself.
So as the Florida Legislature — led by some of our state's supposedly most “family-friendly” Republicans — grapples with this issue, we can only hope that sensible lawmakers who care about strengthening marriage will step in and kill this garbage bill. We shouldn't have to rely on Governor DeSantis to invoke his veto power year after year and send this shoddy alimony reform bill to its rightful place in the political graveyard.
Of course, if it goes up in flames again this year, don't worry! We'll no doubt see another round of the absurd entertainment circus next year, and the year after that, and the year after that…
Like this:
Load…
Comments are closed.