|
This Just In...
Kevin Fischer is an award-winning veteran broadcaster who has been seen and heard on Milwaukee TV and radio stations for nearly three decades.
Kevin, who is a legislative aide to state Sen. Mary Lazich (R-New Berlin), can be seen offering his views on the news on the public affairs program, “InterCHANGE,” on Milwaukee Public Television Channel 10, and heard filling in on Newstalk 1130 WISN. He lives with his wife, Jennifer, and their baby daughter, Kyla Audrey, in Franklin.
More great ideas from Madison Democrats
By Kevin Fischer
Wednesday, Dec 17 2008, 09:56 PM
Here are some bills being proposed by the Democrat-controlled state Assembly. The analysis of each bill by the Legislative Reference Bureau is provided.
The first bill relates to requirements for ordering maintenance (emphasis mine).
Under current law, in an annulment, divorce, or legal separation, the court may order one party to pay maintenance (formerly known as alimony) to the other party. The statutes set out factors that a court must consider in ordering maintenance, such as the length of the marriage, the educational level of the parties at the time of the marriage and at the commencement of the action, the age and physical and emotional health of each party, and the contribution that a party has made to the increased earning power of the other party. The amount of maintenance and the length of time that it must be paid are in the court’s discretion.
This bill provides, as an overall guiding principle, that maintenance is a rehabilitative measure to enable the party for whom it is ordered to acquire the education or skills to become self-supporting and sets out more specific standards for courts to use in ordering maintenance. Under the bill, a court may not order maintenance unless the parties have been married for at least 15 years, which eliminates the availability of maintenance in most annulment actions, and the party seeking maintenance shows either: 1) that because of the marriage he or she lacks sufficient resources to provide for his or her minimal, reasonable needs; or 2) that employment is difficult for the party to obtain or maintain because of a physical or mental disability that was incurred during the marriage.
The bill, for the most part, retains the factors under current law for the court to consider when ordering maintenance, but eliminates some of the factors under current law, such as the tax consequences to each party and any mutual agreements made before or during marriage concerning any arrangement for the financial support of the parties. The bill adds as factors to consider all financial resources of the party seeking maintenance in addition to the property division, the contributions and sacrifices of each of the parties during the marriage, and the efforts of the party seeking maintenance to obtain suitable employment before and during the pendency of the action. The bill provides that, regardless of the court’s findings after considering the other factors, the court may deny maintenance if the party seeking maintenance engaged in extramarital activities during the marriage or has not made reasonable efforts to obtain employment or develop skills to become self-supporting.
The bill limits the length of maintenance to the shortest time necessary for the payee to become employed at a level that provides for minimal, reasonable needs, but not more than three years, with two exceptions. If the payee contributed to the education of the payer, maintenance may continue until it equals the amount that the payee contributed; if the payee became disabled during the marriage, maintenance may continue for the shorter of: 1) as long as the disability continues but not past the age at which a person the same age as the payee would be eligible for unreduced social security benefits; or 2) until the payee receives or is eligible to receive disability payments or other benefits on account of the disability. The bill limits the amount of maintenance to the amount necessary to meet minimal, reasonable needs, but not more than 20 percent of the payer’s monthly income, based on a 40−hour work week or the payer’s base pay.
Under current law, the court is required to terminate maintenance, upon application by the payer, if the payee remarries. The bill adds that the court must also terminate maintenance, upon application by the payer, if the payee cohabits with another adult person of the opposite sex.
The second bill relates to domestic abuse identification training. (emphasis mine).
This bill requires the Barbering and Cosmetology Examining Board to require all licensed cosmetologists, barbers, aestheticians, electrologists, and manicurists (licensees) to attend a course in recognizing victims of domestic abuse or violence and referring the victims to appropriate agencies for assistance. The bill requires the board to design a course, determine how often the licensees must attend, and design a training program that would allow licensees who have attended the course to train others.
Who pays for this mandated course? What if the workers, for whatever reason, feel uncomfortable about taking the course or simply don’t want to?
This is just the beginning. The wacky ideas will just keep coming and coming. That’s what happens when the Democrats are in control.
|
|
