Friday, May 11, 2001 | 10:41 a.m.
CARSON CITY -- A Senate committee listened Thursday to clashing testimony over a bill that would increase child support incrementally for wealthy Nevada parents.
Myra Sheehan of the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association told the Senate Judiciary Committee that Assembly Bill 37 would replace a $500 monthly cap with a sliding-scale system.
"If this bill isn't passed, a billionaire in Nevada will pay $500 for child support while the average Nevadan wage earner will pay $455," Sheehan said, adding that the average Nevadan earns about $23,000 year.
A similar bill failed to pass during the 1997 legislative session, and the cap hasn't been raised since 1987.
Sheehan said $500 in 1987 amounts to $758 today when the consumer price index is taken into account. Under the Assembly bill, the highest amount -- for those with an annual income higher than $175,000 -- would be $800 a month. Noncustodial parents earning less than $50,000 wouldn't see an increase.
"It's not the parent's right to have child support," Sheehan said. "It's the right of the child to get child support. Let's not get hung up on 'him paying her.' "
Judiciary members also were told that judges may award child support over the $500 cap, but rarely do.
Opponents of AB37 included Ron Pacheco, a state worker and father from Fallon, who said the bill unfairly increases child support payments based on the CPI -- without pegging state workers' salaries to the index.
"Or am I reading this wrong and you intend to give state workers and teachers annual raises according to the CPI?" he asked the committee.
Brian Hutchins of Carson City, a divorced father of two daughters, said the increases are unjustified because they weren't properly researched.
Hutchins said he pays the $500 maximum to his ex-wife for support of their two children, has his daughters nearly half the time, pays their medical insurance and helps to cover various other expenses.
"We haven't heard any testimony of what it actually costs to raise a kid today," he said.
Critics also said the bill is unfair because it doesn't consider what the custodial parents earn or hold them accountable for what they spend.
That prompted Sen. Jon Porter, R-Las Vegas, to say lawmakers can't legislate how people spend their money.
archive
