Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Family Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances revised child-support guidelines after extended floor debate
Summary
The Senate uncircled and advanced the second substitute of SB23 (child-support guidelines), approving it for third reading by a 23–6 vote after debate over income tables, populations affected and safeguards for unusual cases.
Senators debated and moved forward a second substitute to Senate Bill 23, which updates the state’s child-support guidelines and revises the income tables used to calculate obligations.
Senator Bell, sponsor of the measure, walked colleagues through side-by-side charts to illustrate where the proposed tables change support obligations and stressed the proposal does not uniformly increase every schedule by 25%. "We are not changing these schedules by 25%," Bell said on the floor, noting that adjustments were concentrated in specific low-income brackets. The proposed schedule extends the table up to $100,000 a month to reduce the need for costly litigation in high-income outlier cases.
Floor debate included legal and practical concerns. Senator Jenkins asked why the schedule was extended to $100,000 rather than a lower cap; Bell and others said the change was designed to reduce expensive and time-consuming court litigation once incomes exceed bracketed tables. Senator Wadhams and other senators raised scenarios—for example, two-income households and second families—where the schedule may not reflect practical affordability, asking for clarifying language and safeguards.
Senator Cindy Hilliard, who has legal and appropriations experience, responded with examples and calculations to show how the new tables would affect typical support outcomes; she emphasized the bill is designed to add predictability and keep many matters out of court. "Because I've heard one judge say, I can't make gold out of straw," Hilliard said, arguing that predictability is valuable for litigants who cannot afford protracted court battles.
After extended debate and multiple technical clarifications, the Senate reported that the second substitute had received 23 yes votes and 6 no votes and would be read for the third time.
Next steps: The bill will proceed to third reading; sponsors pledged additional panel and interim study work to refine underlying assumptions and to review implementation and visitation-related policy in subsequent sessions.
