FW: Report on Jan. 15 action in House Courts of Justice Civil Subcommittee and January 20.
D'Arcy L McGreer
Below is the report by Kenneth Skilling when he and others attended the subcommittee and HB 933 was voted in favor of, therefore HB 933 will be sent to the full committee in the near future. If you want to communicate with Kenneth about this event you can email him at nim...@verizon.net.
I and Kenneth and others will be in Richmond on the 20th. We hope to reverse this bad news by meeting with key legislatures. We plan to meet with all those who wish to work with us at 10 AM in the cafeteria of the legislature’s office building. If you are coming and will be late you can call me on my cell phone 703-389-4496. If we are late and you arrive before us give me a call. We are coming from Northern VA so if there is anyone else from NVA and want to carpool it down contact me. Those from other parts of the state, if you want me to send out a broadcast to see if anyone is coming from your area contact me by email with your contact information and location. See below.
Sender of this message: D’Arcy L McGreer, Cell: 703-389-4496. 2200 Wilsom Blvd, Ste 102 – 271, Arlington, VA 22201-3324. FFV website: http://www.virginiafathers.org/. reply to fathe...@gmail.com
House Subcommittee Endorses Child Support Increases
The outcome of the Jan. 15 subcommittee consideration of HB 933, a bill that would increase the child support amounts in the statutory CS guideline, is very disappointing to fathers. By a substantial majority, the House Courts of Justice Civil Subcommittee in Richmond voted to approve the bill and send it on to the full Courts of Justice Committee.
The subcommittee made their decision despite testimony against the bill by FFV's Kenneth Skilling and by Virginia Beach mediator Diane Poljacik. The official record of the subcommittee's decision is below. Subcommittee members had no comments on the testimony of those who opposed the bill, although these opponents raised significant objections to HB 933. By contrast, there was significant interaction between subcommittee members and those who supported the bill.
FFV is now trying to discover from sources in Richmond what will happen next. Specifically, we want to know when the bill will be taken up in the main Courts of Justice Committee, chaired by Del. Dave Albo (R-Springfield). As yet, it is unclear whether the full committee will simply rubber-stamp the subcommittee's decision, or conduct a comprehensive re-examination of HB 933. At the moment, FFV is thinking of a lobbying campaign that would focus on individual members of the full committee. Jan. 20 ("lobby day" in Richmond) seems to be a suitable day for conducting this campaign. However, much depends on the timing of the full committee's consideration of the bill.
On Jan. 15 HB 933 was introduced in the subcommittee by Del. Vivian Watts (D-Fairfax County), who participated in the Child Support Guideline Review Panel, and is a member of the House Courts of Justice Committee. In mid-December, the panel produced a report that was the basis of HB 933.
In her introduction of the bill, Watts focused on the fact that the Virginia guideline had not been changed for many years. She claimed that the changes in HB 933 were based on a carefully conducted study of the costs of raising children. She was questioned by panel members about some aspects of this study, and asked about the treatment of CS for mothers who had several children by several different fathers (an issue that was left for later consideration by the review panel, and not included in HB 933). Watts said the CS guideline was considered "tremendously helpful" by divorce lawyers.
Craig Burshem, a senior official of the Division of Child Support Enforcement and also a member of the review panel, supported the adoption of the new CS schedule. So too did representatives of the Virginia Bar and the Virginia Poverty Law Center, in very brief statements to the subcommittee.
Diane Poljacik criticized the CS guideline as insufficiently flexible and as encouraging a one-size-fits all mentality. In addition, she said, some elements of the guideline embody double counting of child-rearing expenses, and custodial parents benefit from this.
Kenneth Skilling told the panel that the present CS schedule is self-updating, because the CS amounts are related to income, and as income rises so too does the amount of money payable to the custodial parent. In addition, he said, the panel had been told that other states (many advised by the same consultant who had advised Virginia) had raised their CS amounts. However, the CS review panel did not consider Massachusetts, a state roughly comparable to Virginia, which recently significantly reduced the CS amounts in its CS schedules.
Skilling also noted that the CS review panel had decided to extend its work into 2014 and beyond -- an unprecedented decision, since all previous CS review panels had gone out of existence after they submitted their reports. In the panel's report to the General Assembly, there was no mention of its decision to extend its life.
In addition, Skilling said, there is no recommendation in the panel's report for any change to the "cliff effect," the feature that specifies that a noncustodial parent's visitation time is not reflected in the CS he pays until after the children have been with him for more than 90 days each year. In this context, Skilling stressed that the CS review panel acknowledged that it had not finished its work. So, he said, it's premature to act on a panel report that covers only some of the issues under examination -- particularly since all the actions proposed in HB 933 are disadvantageous to noncustodial parents, whereas those that might benefit noncustodial parents (such as ending the cliff effect) have been left for later consideration.
Subcommittee members commented on the views of those who supported enactment of HB 933 and questioned some aspects of their testimony. However, there was no interaction with those who opposed the bill. Their statements were simply listened to without comment, before the subcommittee proceeded to a vote.
1/10/14 House: Assigned Courts sub: Civil
01/15/14 House: Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendment(s) (8-Y 1-N)
YEAS--Habeeb, Loupassi, Minchew, Leftwich, Chafin, Campbell, Toscano, Keam--8.
NAYS--Kilgore--1.
ABSTENTIONS--0.
NOT VOTING--McClellan--1.