Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Support License Suspension topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel advances bill to move child-support license-exemption rule into statute, removes TANF exemption
Summary
Senate Bill 1051, presented by Sen. Brandon Shippey, would codify an existing administrative rule on good-cause exemptions to driver/occupational license suspension for unpaid child support and eliminate a rarely used exemption for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families recipients; the committee sent the bill to the floor with a due-pass vote.
The Senate Health and Welfare Committee voted to send Senate Bill 1051 to the Senate floor with a due-pass recommendation after Senator Brandon Shippey presented the measure to move a provision from administrative rule into statute and to remove a Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) exemption from the list of good-cause exceptions.
Senator Shippey said SB 1051 transfers section 302 from IDAPA child support services rules (cited in testimony as IDAPA rule 16.03.00.03) into statute to place the rule’s long-standing good-cause exemptions under legislative authority. The senator described the change as part of a broader effort this session to move agency rules into statute where appropriate.
Shippey told the committee the bill removes recipients of TANF from the list of exemptions that prevent suspension of a driver’s or occupational license for nonpayment of child support because the TANF exemption was “rarely used” — accounting for less than 0.1% of good-cause exemptions in 2024, according to his testimony. He said other exemptions for disability, inability to work, incarceration, student status and receipt of Supplemental Security Income would remain.
Senator Harris moved to send SB 1051 to the floor with a due-pass recommendation; Senator Keiser seconded. The motion carried by voice vote with no recorded opposition. No public testimony was recorded during the committee hearing.
Senator Shippey said the department had been consulted and that the rule chapter in question had appeared before the legislature previously and was scheduled for future regulatory review.
