Jim Rosica
A bill that could end “forever alimony” is heading to the desk of Gov. Rick Scott after passing the Florida Legislature Tuesday.
The House passed the Senate family-law bill (SB 668) by a vote of 74-38 after Democrats tried but failed to tack on a last-minute amendment to ensure the bill can’t be applied retroactively to old divorce judgments.
The bill’s sponsor, Republican state Rep. Colleen Burton of Lakeland, said the bill was not retroactive, but Democratic critics said the bill’s language was “unclear” at best.
House Rules Chair Ritch Workman spoke against the amendment, saying he had spoken with Scott’s staff, who assured him they understood the measure would not be applied retroactively – suggesting the bill may find favor with Scott this year.
In 2013, Scott vetoed a previous attempt – carried by Workman – to modify alimony law “because it applies retroactively and thus tampers with the settled economic expectations of many Floridians who have experienced divorce,” the governor wrote in his veto letter, adding that the “retroactive adjustment of alimony could result in unfair, unanticipated results.”
Lawmakers have tried for years to change the way Florida’s courts award alimony. On one side, former spouses who wrote the checks said permanent alimony wasn’t fair to them. Their exes shot back that they shouldn’t be penalized for having trouble re-entering the workplace after staying home to raise the couple’s children.
In the debate, Democrats inveighed against the bill. State Rep. Cynthia Stafford of Miami, called it “one-sided and unfairly benefits the payor,” the person writing the alimony check.
Among other things, the bill allows the court to modify alimony payments if the person paying has a substantial “change in circumstances,” including unemployment or retirement. The bill provides guidelines for how to award alimony, but gives judges the last say, and asks them to prepare written findings to explain their decisions.
One guideline is that “for marriages of two years or less, there is a rebuttable presumption that no alimony shall be awarded.” Another is “whether a party could become better able to support himself or herself and reduce the need for alimony by pursuing additional educational or vocational training.”
State Rep. Lori Berman, a Lantana Democrat, castigated the guidelines, saying they will lead to a “cookie-cutter divorce” process.
Workman gave a personal debate about another section of the bill that encourages judges to let parents get their kids on a 50-50 basis. The bill calls on judges to begin with a “premise” that children should spend equal time with each parent when awarding child custody.
Certain evidence can still sway judges; for instance, if one spouse stayed home for years to raise children and tend to the home if both spouses agreed to it.
Workman, a Melbourne Republican who divorced in 2010, said the only thing he cared about was spending time with his two daughters.
“There is no perfect language out there when it comes to alimony and child custody,” he told the chamber. “Just look to the parents of Florida and give them this reform that is so overdue.”
12 comments
Observer
March 8, 2016 at 1:14 pm
This bill is #greasedFORpassage https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=188278238209773&set=a.163521450685452.1073741833.100010827941448&type=3
Ariel
March 9, 2016 at 10:31 am
Wow, nice selective interpretation of a Facebook comment.
I wonder, do you have any substantial basis to oppose this bill? You know that shared prenting is empirically demonstrated to be better for kids right? Why do you oppose legislation that’s good for kids? Why do you favor a status quo that alienates parents? I’m genuinely interested in what prompts one to adopt such frankly vile positions.
Shelley
March 16, 2016 at 2:45 am
I just read an pretty thorough article debunking 90% of the research used to support these bills…soooo..I oppose.
FLR is Fictitious
March 8, 2016 at 4:31 pm
Yes, SB668 is Retroactive. Family Law Reform, Inc. LIES. Here is PROOF:
http://familylawreformusa.com/proposed-alimony-reform-will-help-current-alimony-payers-latest/
“They are wrong! This bill will help current alimony payers. Let me repeat that. This bill will help current alimony payers”
Bad legislation, Bad for women, Bad for families, Bad for Florida!
CitizensForAlimonyReform
March 8, 2016 at 8:43 pm
The bill codifies existing law on retirement and clarifies a change in circumstances for modifying alimony. It does not change existing contracts. And a judge still has discretion to make timesharing decisions based on the best interest of the child. To say otherwise is untrue.
soon to be divorced
April 2, 2016 at 10:03 am
I thought it would have been interesting to note in your article that it is the senate that is withholding the bill from the governor. SB 668 was passed by the senate on March 8th along with 41 other bills and was ordered enrolled in SJ 836. 40 of the 41 bills ordered enrolled that day have been presented to the Governor for his consideration. SB 668 is the only one the Senate President has not presented to the Governor. Once presented the Governor has 15 to sign or veto or the bill automatically becomes law. However even though the bill passed the Senate, if the president does not present it nothing will happen. There appears to be no guidance on how long the Senate President can sit on a bill he/she personally doesn’t agree with. Currently this is the oldest bill ordered enrolled that has not been presented.
I have contacted the Governor’s office, Senate President’s office and Senator Stargel’s offices several times and no one has a comment.
Joe
March 9, 2016 at 12:01 am
Bad for women? Good for men….
Gloria
April 7, 2016 at 8:51 am
Not bad for women, bad for women who take advantage of the court systems outdated perspective 🙂
Elizabeth Pille
March 9, 2016 at 9:30 am
I support this bill. It’s long overdue. The governor should sign it.
Nora
March 9, 2016 at 9:25 pm
Even a convicted felon sees an end to his sentence. Our own children, people we truly are responsible for, we are no longer financially responsible for once their adults. The present alimony laws are outdated, when society was in favor of the woman staying at home. In our society today there are plenty of opportunities for women to better themselves
If they choose. No one should have to pay for their freedom from another.
Mike Mc
March 11, 2016 at 2:18 pm
SB 668 should be signed into law. No one, I repeat, no one, should ever have to pay alimony for “life”.
Peter
March 22, 2016 at 3:01 pm
SB 668 should be signed into law. No one, I repeat, no one, should ever have to pay alimony for “life”.
Comments are closed.