Child support orders; eliminates ability of DSS to order 2.5 percent cash medical support payments. (SB728)

Introduced By

Sen. Fred Quayle (R-Suffolk)


Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law


Child support orders; emergency.  Eliminates the ability of the Department of Social Services to order 2.5 percent cash medical support payments from the noncustodial parent when the child is a recipient of Medicaid or the Family Access to Medical Insurance Security Plan. The bill also terminates existing 2.5 percent payments and requires the Department to repay any 2.5 percent payments received since July 1, 2009. Read the Bill »


Bill Has Passed


01/26/2010Presented and ordered printed 10104399D
01/26/2010Unanimous consent to introduce
01/26/2010Presented and ordered printed with emergency clause 10104399D
01/26/2010Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
02/02/2010Impact statement from DPB (SB728)
02/03/2010Reported from Courts of Justice with amendment (15-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/08/2010Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/09/2010Read second time
02/09/2010Reading of amendment waived
02/09/2010Committee amendment agreed to
02/09/2010Engrossed by Senate as amended SB728E
02/09/2010Printed as engrossed 10104399D-E
02/10/2010Read third time and passed Senate (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/16/2010Placed on Calendar
02/16/2010Read first time
02/16/2010Referred to Committee on Health, Welfare and Institutions
02/19/2010Impact statement from DPB (SB728E)
02/25/2010Reported from Health, Welfare and Institutions (22-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/26/2010Read second time
03/01/2010Passed by for the day
03/02/2010Read third time
03/02/2010Passed House BLOCK VOTE (99-Y 0-N)
03/02/2010VOTE: BLOCK VOTE PASSAGE (99-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
03/10/2010Bill text as passed Senate and House (SB728ER)
03/10/2010Signed by Speaker
03/11/2010Impact statement from DPB (SB728ER)
03/12/2010Signed by President
04/07/2010G Approved by Governor-Chapter 243 (effective 4/7/10)
04/07/2010G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0243)


This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 1 clip in all, totaling 45 seconds.


marshamaines writes:

why should "only" the NCP have his wages garnished? Both the CP and the NCP are EQUALLY, (50/50) liable to care for their own child, just like with MARRIED parents. The code as it has existed, violated the Equal Protection Clause anyways. Good catch, Mr. Quayle. Now, the next question is, why would DSS think they have any right to order any parent to PAY THEM for when that parent NEVER APPLIED FOR ANY ASSISTANCE to begin with, nor even QUALIFIES for any assistance. This is the hole where all the social services money has been leaked out to people "on behalf of the child" whereby the child was NOT EVEN IN NEED.