Florida Alimony Reform-State Economic Disaster

     Tomorrow is "D-Day." Will Governor Scott veto the Alimony Reform Bill or not? So, for today, rather than summarize and highlight the very scary parts of this bill, I’d rather set out for you a likely scenario in a "typical" case, where, although the bill is beneficial to a potential "permanent alimony payor" in turn, it creates an adverse effect as an economic drain on Florida’s social welfare system.

      Let’s assume Bill and Barbara marry at age 25. For three years Barbara uses her college degree in marketing, and works for a small company. Bill finishes his masters and becomes a CPA, working for an international accounting firm. In the fourth year Bill and Barbara start a family and Billy is born. Bill and Barbara jointly decide Barbara should become a full-time stay at home mom, as Bill is excelling in his career and they don’t need a second income. Moreover, Barbara takes on the role of perfect corporate wife by entertaining in their home and tending to everyday details of the household, freeing up Bill to concentrate on his career. Two years later, little Betsy comes along. Over the next 18 years, Barbara becomes the perfect PTA mom, soccer mom, corporate entertainer and house organizer. Bill is pulling in the big bucks and life is wonderful...until Betsy goes off to college and Bill decides to trade Barbara in for a newer model, just over 25 years after their wedding.

      Barbara is now over 50. She has not worked outside the home in 22 years. Her marketing skills are obsolete. Under the new alimony law here’s the maximum of what Barbara gets in alimony:
*12 ½ years of alimony (half the length of the marriage)
* A maximum of 38% of Bill’s gross income (presumably not bad for those 12 ½ years)      Now, what does Barbara do? At age 50+ it is unlikely she can rehabilitate herself into a new career (and who really has the strength and fortitude to do this at that age?) If she has some sense she will understand that, even though the alimony she receives now may be sufficient (maybe?) It will come to an abrupt end as she nears 63. So she gets a job paying $10 an hour? And she works at about that rate (maybe a little more or less) as she ages and becomes less marketable (affirmative action aside, let’s face it, a young, newly educated person with more longevity is more likely than not to get the job over Barbara). If Barbara is frugal she can "save" a little. If Barbara had her husband take care of all the finances, she might not even have a clue...

      So 12 ½ years go by, and Barbara nears retirement...What do you think she will get from social security with 12 ½ years of wages under her belt (assuming we still have a fund to pay this from)? Answer: not a lot...! Okay, I realize that Barbara can get benefits of up to 50% under her ex-husband’s social security benefits while he is still alive (provided she did not remarry and provided that these benefits would eclipse those she would receive on her own) but he still gets it all.

      What does all this mean? Well, it means there are going to be a lot more people down the road who, as they enter their senior years, can no longer live on what they have available. So guess who is going to foot the bill.... Yup, you got it- our state, which translates into you and me. Glad the legislature can serve those special interests...the sour grape suckers who have no taken their personal financial problems in paying alimony to their former spouses, into a pending statewide tsunami.



・