MA: Child Support Act (Statute)

[afleitch]

Just to repost my reasoning behind this bill.#

I note that the 'Abortion Reduction' Act is not yet law as a regional budget has not been passed. As I explained (and I am willing to regurgitate) the bill is not only unworkable but makes assumptions about the reasons why child support is not made. While it presumes that such people like to gamble it all away in casinos (I'd have thought it more likely they waste it down the pub myself if we're resorting to sterotypes...), it also seems to infer that people won't be able to pay a $25,000 fine so will be probably end up in prison either instead of the fine or due to non-payment. Where of course they will not have access to their child and will not have the opportunity to work to support the child. Indeed the child gets nothing of any material or financial value out of this part of the Act.

The $1000 health care reduction and associated funds have been removed. This is uneccesary; the Atlasian Health Care Act provides universal healthcare. Instead I have included a provision that the court may, through it's discretion allow the payment of any fine go directly to the child or the main parent/guardian for their benefit.

[afleitch]

Can we get the section in there that bans the deadbeat parents from gambling or hunting until they pay their child support payments?

Part of the reason Governor, why I removed that whole section was because of how arbitary it was; it makes assumptions about the people who don't make child maintenance payments. Many people who hold down a good well paid job and lead a 'clean' life also fail to pay maintenance. Why single out 'gambling and hunting'; why not betting on greyhounds, drinking at bars, buying liquor or buying cigarettes? It seems a bizzare thing to single out.

That's why I replaced it with the power to suspend a persons driving license; that's a bigger and far more effective hit.

[afleitch]

I'm against legislating a different status for the employed vs. unemployed in the criminal law.

It is a preface to allow the courts to suspend social security payments. I don't mind amending this part.

The amount of a fine should be related to ability to pay, but this needs to be done on a case by case basis anyway because that is not the same as employment status.

I quite agree. The courts will be allowed to set the fine as they see fit. It just reduces the proposed fine maximum from $25,000 as it now stands.

What is the point of the drivers license suspension ? That seems in most cases counterproductive to future child support payments if a person cannot drive to a job.

It does. But the effects of a 60 day max suspension are far less than the effect of 3 years imprisonment which is in the original legislation.

[afleitch]

We discussed suspending drivers' licenses the first time we did this, and agreed that that would probably dod more harm than good, as it greatly reduces people's ability to get to their place of employment (if they have one), especially in areas that lack public transportation.

But you were happy to give them up to 3 years in the slammer? So instead of restricted access to getting to work they were in a position to loose their job? I'm happy to re-instate limitations to the 'gambling' part though I really have no idea why any bill should resort to stereotype. Again I ask the Governor; why make this assumption restrict gambling but not restrict access to liquor which can also drain the wallet?

[afleitch]

So who wants what amended?

I'll put the casino thing in despite it not making the slightest bit of sense. I can get rid the differentiation between employed and unemployed. I'm very reluctant to remove the drivers license suspension. To deem it 'too harsh' when it replaces a maximum 3 year prison sentence and a maximum fine higher than the average annual wage is head scratching to say the least.

[afleitch]

Accepted as friendly. It's a good amendment.

[afleitch]

Aye

[afleitch]

Aye