From R-KIDS of MN and GPF

Editor’s note: We normally don’t do a newsletter during the legislative session, due to the difficulty of getting out timely news. But we had plenty of material, and the legislative is in full swing.

Call (651) 296-2146 to start your subscription to the House Sessions Weekly. Call (651) 296-0259 to start your subscription to the Senate Briefly weekly publication.

You can also get the publication via e-mail. Go to www.leg.state.mn.us , then on the left-side, click on Publications, and follow the selection trail.

Minnesota's children thank you.

Contents 1 Dawkins and Smith introduce HF 1446 – Child Support Accountability 2 Lobbying efforts 3 Caselaw review 4 Next meeting 5 Judge watching 6 Comments from R-Kids members 7 Dear Ann: Suggestions for divorced parents 8 Michigan Sues the Federal Government 9 ABOUT R-KIDS OF MINNESOTA 9.1 R-KIDS CONCERNS AND ISSUES 9.2 Give to RKIDS Charitable Fund

Dawkins and Smith introduce HF 1446 – Child Support Accountability

Rep. Andy Dawkins and Steve Smith are co-authors of HF 1446, which among other things provides for accounting of child support. The bill also gives a 20% break to obligors who have their kids 10-45% of the time, regardless of the label. This is important, due to the effect of the recent caselaw, cited below. The actual calculation, while a few short steps, is a bit cumbersome to repeat in this newsletter, so the reader is encouraged to review the bill and compare how support would be calculated. It also utilizes children’s actual needs, which the DHS thinks is too difficult. I personally just spent two hours analyzing all checks my household wrote in the year 2000, and came up with a pretty good idea of what our family household budget is. The accounting language is as follows.

The obligee must account for the use or disposition of child support received. The accounting must be on a monthly basis and must be provided to the obligor.

1. The obligee must break down expenditures into the following categories:
   1. housing;
   2. food;
   3. transportation;
   4. clothing;
   5. health care;
   6. child care and education; and
   7. miscellaneous.
2. Expenditures made on behalf of a child, whether in whole or in part, must be made in a manner that documents the transaction. Payments by check are preferred. The obligee must obtain dated receipts for cash payments.
3. If the obligee does not make the accounting required under paragraph (1) or if the obligee does not spend the entire child support payment on behalf of the child, the court may:
   1. hold the obligee in contempt of court;
   2. reduce or eliminate the obligor's child support obligation; or
   3. make any other appropriate order to ensure that the needs of the children are met.

The House Judiciary Committee will have a hearing on HF1446 on Wednesday, March 14, 2001. The committee convenes at 10:10 AM in the Basement Hearing Room of the State Office Building.

Tim Theisen

Here is a copy of the e-mail Knute Gladen received from Assistant Dennis Virden.

Subject: HF1446
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 09:05:43 -0600
From: "Dennis Virden" <Dennis.Virden@house.leg.state.mn.us>
To: kgladen@uswest.net

Dear Knute, Please email me a one sheet summary of any testimony you or your group would like to present on the 14th when we here HF1446. Because of the complexity, we need to coordinate our efforts. Thanks. Dennis

I will respond to him with an e-mail on Sunday evening, so he has it on Monday morning. If anyone is interested in speaking, please contact me and I will put your name on the list of (possible) speakers. So far, we have at least two from Windom, myself, and Diane Anderson.

Otherwise, everyone please attend the hearing as a show of interest. We expect the DHS to be there in force. Let’s have a better showing.

Lobbying efforts

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001
From: "Perrin, Chuck" <cperrin@trane.com>

Hi, Last tuesday (23rd) Dianne Anderson and myself met with Rep. Mary Liz Holberg at her office in the SOB. She gave us an entire hour and was receptive to what we had to say throughout.

We went over the good points and bad points of the DHS proposal and the Smith bill. Since the DHS proposal was just child support, it was all bad. I went over the spreadsheets and charts that Knute had prepared (very helpful) to demonstrate that their proposed levies were totally unfair in many cases. We explained how the federal garnishment law works, and the fact that child support/medical/daycare orders can be set in excess of that and so result in arrearages - she was unaware of this. We did the same thing with your charts and graphs for the Smith bill. We then went over the good points in the Smith bill (accountability, kids preference taken into consideration when deciding custody, etc. etc.). She was receptive to all of this, but did say that the Smith bill still is not "baked" yet. Dianne had other requests, such as was she supportive of an overall cap on payments (e.g. 45% and no award could exceed this). She was receptive to most of Dianne's ideas.

We asked her if she would be willing to try and be the chief author of the DHS bill - specifically so that we could have control over the bill to change or kill it. She understood the strategy and again was OK with it, but she did point out that Matt Entenza had already been talked to about being the author and she was not sure that she could become it, but said that she would try.

I also made sure that she had seen Terry Nyblom's email on the CBS article, she had but did not see the show. I later found the website with the article and emailed her the link (http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,266192-412,00.shtml ) - she responded that she had then read the piece and thanked me.

In general she is very receptive to all of our views, so long as they come off as fair to both sides. She will not support things that she does not perceive as fair. And I think that this is a very workable position for us, as all we have ever wanted is "fair". I think that both Dianne and myself have established a good rapport with her and can continue to work with her throughout the session.

- Chuck

HF1500 has been introduced by Representative Smith and Representative Entenza. The companion bill is SF1364 which was introduced by Senator Berglin.

These bills are the Department of Human Services recommendation on child support and insurance. Senator Berglin was a member of the Guidelines Task Force.

This is important legislation. Get a copy of the bill.

February 28, 2001 LEGISLATURE.

To all R-Kids members:

Professor Robert E. Oliphant, professor of William Mitchell College of Law, spoke at today's House Judiciary Committee meeting. He gave a historical perspective on:

1. Marriage and Divorce
2. Custody
3. Child Support

One major factor that drives the divorce industry is all of the children born to teenage unwed mothers. Minneapolis (35% of all births) is particularly bad. These teenage unwed mothers are on pubic assistance, since the fathers are untrained, unemployed and usually under age. The Divorce Industry thinks that raising child support for all parents will solve the problem of these unwed mothers.

HF0229 appropriates $5,000,000.00 for the problem of teen pregnancy. There is no effort to tell teenage boys about the pitfalls of becoming an unwed father.

Representative Lipman and Representative Hoberg asked why non-custodial parents who pay their support get caught in the system. Representative Lipman said the ratio was 65% vs. 35% on pubic assistance. Professor Oliphant responded that this was because of the historical problem. Representative Smith let me ask a question (as a person from the audience), so I pointed out that the federal bounty was not collected unless the child support payments were routed through the system, then asked Professor Oliphant for his comments. He pointed out other bounties of $50, 100, or $150 of which I was not aware.

One question was on the results of putting non-custodial parents in jail for non-payment of support. Professor Oliphant was not aware of anyone who had been jailed for such contempt. He stated that judges had used jail as a threat, but had hoped they would not have to use jail because the person may find it not too bad, and/or be influenced by others in jail.

Professor Oliphant gave me a copy of his paper. His e-mail address is boliphant@wmitchell.edu.

After the meeting, Diane Anderson was asking Representative Smith about his bill. He plans to introduce it within a week. Diane was trying to help find a Senator to sponsor the bill. Representative Smith said he wanted someone who was interested, preferably a Democrat, not just someone who would put their name on the bill and not help to drive it.

While the House Judiciary Committee was meeting, Bob Carrillo was testifying on domestic abuse at the Senate Crime Committee, chaired by Vice Chair Senator Foley. Bob's point was that abuse is a non-gender issue, and that violence prevention needed to include women as the aggressor and instigator of violence as well as men. From what Bob said about the one-sided thinking of the group, it seems to me that he was the voice of righteousness, crying in the wilderness. We hope that someone on the committee was listening.

January 9, 2001

Representative Joe Mullery

Thank you for HF23 regarding nontraditional career training. This bill modifies 256K.30 which helps children by training their mothers for job skills.

However, you could HELP CHILDREN, even more, by including MEN, as well as women in the non-traditional training. The Federal Government recently changed its law so men need not be excluded in order for the program to qualify for federal funds.

Please amend your bill so section 256K.30 includes MEN as well as WOMEN. Children need fathers that are good wage earners, as well as mothers with good job skills. The program should provide an OUTREACH to men as well as to girls and women. For example, men can relieve the shortage of people trained in the nursing profession, and men make very good medical technicians.

Besides, the existing law needs to be changed because it in discriminates against a gender. Young boys have enough problems without this additional discriminatory law.

Knute Gladen, Secretary R-Kids of Minnesota

Caselaw review

The MN Supreme Court has overruled the Court of Appeals decision in the Rogers case. C2-99-1325. The Court of Appeals had held that a 45% visitation arrangement mandate usage of the Valento cross award, which is the presumptive rule in cases of joint physical custody. The rationale is that the statute provides that a custodial parent is presumptively not an obligor. However, courts still have discretion to deviate from the guidelines, and to make findings that the presumption has been rebutted.

In good news, the Supreme Court also held that courts can order the custodial parent to waive the tax exemption. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time the Supremes have spoken on this subject. There were conflicting Court of Appeals cases on this issue.

The Court of Appeals, in the case of Blonigen, vs. Blonigen, C7-00-1019, http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/archive/ctappub/0101/c7001019.htm held that in cases of joint physical custody, courts must use the Valento cross award, even if it is only a 67-33% split of time, like a more traditional custodial arrangement.

Tim Theisen

Next meeting

We have a Group meeting at the Brookdale Library on March 22.

Judge watching

The board on judicial standards handles complaints against state judges in Minnesota. Any individual may file a complaint. The board investigates allegations that a judge has violated the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct. violations include improper courtroom behavior, gender bias and conflicts of interests. The board does not review rulings or sentences unless the complaint alleges fraud or corruption. A complaint should be in writing. Write a letter specifically describing the judge's conduct. Be sure to include the name of the judge, relevant dates, name of witnesses and source of information.

For More information

The boards office is at

2025 centre pointe Blvd.,
Suite 420,mendota Heights, MN 55120
(651) 296-3999

For long distance use the state relay service call toll free, (800) 627-3529

Comments from R-Kids members

Dear Friends,

I tried the Minnesota State Board on Judicial Standards and found it to be a joke. For anyone interested, I can send you a copy of their final letter regarding the investigation I requested. It stated that the Board was not interested in "law" or "fact".

Apparently all the Board covers are cases of when a judge drops his pants in court!

Joseph Weinstock

From: "HARRY RUDISILL" <HARSUERUD@webtv.net>

Knute: You have done a lot of good work and I really appreciate all the details you are sending to me. I am happy that there are people that are willing to listen and perhaps help this cause. Thank you! Susan Rudisill

From: "Steve McFarland" <mcfarlan@brainerd.net>

Knute, I've been a member of Rkids for about 8 years now and you are the first person that I have noticed that is trying to get something done in a manner that can accomplish anything. It is a very very difficult battle as I am sure you well know. Most of us out here have become so frustrated and overwhelmed that we cannot fight any longer. I really appreciate all that you are doing to help us out legally, and your updates on the web are fantastic. Thank you for all you are doing and your drive helps me to keep trying too, even though we are up against another Iron curtain. Well, that one fell, maybe with can chisel out this one and get it to fall to.

I am in Mexico part of the winter and in Brainerd the rest of the time and this makes it difficult to physically help, but If any letters can, let me know. I really appreciate what you are doing and the info you are posting is the best. Thank you.

Steve McFarland

From: "Michael Seeber" <seeber@winternet.com>

Knute, I read with interest your travels at the capitol. I know John Marty very well and also Randy Kelly. I would like to be involved if possible in the future. Keep me posted.

Michael Seeber

After the divorce, court orders e-visitation

Shelley Emling / Cox News Service

For Tawny Sniderman of Lancaster, Ohio, it was an unexpected blow: A court granted custody of her 10-year-old daughter, Ashton, to her ex-husband in Florida. It eased her pain when the court also ordered both parents to buy computers and a video-conferencing system to let Sniderman "visit" her daughter via the Internet. In an unusual move, the Seminole County (Fla.) Circuit Court ordered the purchase by both Sniderman and her ex-husband, Gary Kaleita, as part of their divorce settlement last October. "It's almost like being there," said Sniderman. "If Ashton gets a new dress or makes something at school, the computer allows me to actually see it. Ashton really likes it because she can show me her room, her new hairstyles, whatever she wants to." But Kaleita, who lives in Orlando, sees the situation differently. He resents being ordered to purchase a $1,200 computer system. Even more, he dislikes that Sniderman can use the computer to visit with Ashton anytime she likes, even when it interrupts family activities. "I've asked that they communicate between 5 and 6" p.m., Kaleita said. "Generally, [Sniderman] calls at 7:30 and they can talk up to 30 minutes. This is disruptive, since Ashton has to have her bath and we have to go over her homework before she goes to bed at 8:15." According to the court order, Ashton is to have "unrestricted" use of the computer and video-conferencing system. The case appears to be one of the first in the United States in which a court has allowed the Internet to be a visitation device in a divorce case. But it probably won't be the last. As more people move for work reasons, courts are struggling to balance a custodial parent's right to relocate with a noncustodial parent's right to maintain ties with his or her child. Experts say technology can help judges strike some balance. They say Internet visitation is a natural next step in a progression that began decades ago with scheduled phone calls. But some children's advocates are not convinced. They say that a troubling trend is beginning in which the Internet is used as a substitute for face-to-face contact. "This stuff is virtual reality, but a child is reality," said David Levy, president of the Children's Rights Council, a Washington, D.C., advocacy group for children of divorce. "You can't hug or kiss your child with virtual reality." So far, there have been only a few court rulings in the United States allowing the Internet to be used as a visitation tool. But experts predict a flood of such cases as people become increasingly comfortable with the Internet. © Copyright 2001 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.

Published Saturday, February 3, 2001

Dear Ann: Suggestions for divorced parents

Dear Ann: My parents were divorced when I was very young. They behaved wonderfully well, in spite of their differences. I have seen children of divorce in less civil circumstances and realize how fortunate I was. I have some suggestions for divorced parents, based on my parents' model of correct behavior, and I hope you will print them.

-- College Student in Champaign, Ill.

Ann says: You have written an extremely valuable letter, and I want to thank you on behalf of all the people you've helped. Here are your suggestions: Never discuss child support with your children. It should not be their concern, regardless of who is right or wrong. Remember that children can hear you when you talk on the phone and you think they aren't listening. Do not discuss anything that makes your ex look bad. Do not ever tell your child negative things about your ex, or give the impression that your ex is a bad person. Let your child come to his or her own conclusions. Work together. If the child needs or requests something, discuss it openly as a family. If the custodial parent has established certain rules in the house, the non-custodial parent should have the same rules. This is especially important for young children who become confused when their parents disagree about what time to go to bed or when to do homework. If there is a special occasion for the non-custodial parent, let the child visit, even if it is not the court-ordered visitation day. It is hurtful to a child if he or she isn't allowed to go to Dad's on Christmas because that's not when he's supposed to see him. Be flexible. Both parents should meet the child's friends, and attend school and sports activities, as well as parent-teacher conferences. It makes the child feel as if both parents are actively involved. Whenever possible, attend functions together. It means more than you think when they see you at graduation or awards ceremonies. If a major disciplinary problem arises, such as smoking or drugs, both parents should be involved. Always discuss an upcoming marriage with your child. This is a big change, and it will have a great impact on his or her life. If stepparents enter the picture, don't expect your child to love them immediately or call them Mom or Dad. This will take time and patience. If the child needs a ride to a friend's house, to school or to the doctor, don't be afraid to call your ex for assistance. And the ex-spouse should do whatever possible to accommodate the request. The child will then see that both parents love him or her enough to help one another out. One parent should not move halfway across the country. It makes the child wonder why one parent doesn't care as much as the other, even if it is not true. Both parents should remain in regular contact to update each other on simple things such as school reports and the child's current interests. Both parents need to tell their children they are loved. Children often blame themselves for the divorce. They need to hear directly from you that it is not their fault and that your love is unconditional.

Michigan Sues the Federal Government

LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- The secretary of state sued the federal government Thursday for requiring Michigan residents to give Social Security numbers to get or renew their driver's licenses. States are required to collect the numbers from licensed drivers to help track deadbeat parents.

Secretary of State Candice Miller said the requirement violates the privacy of Michigan's 6.9 million licensed drivers. I will not sit idly by while residents' privacy is invaded by an intrusive, ineffective and unfunded mandate, Miller said.

Michigan is the only state not complying with the requirement that took effect in October, said Pam Carter of the U.S. Health Department. The state could lose about $900 million annually in federal money if it fails to comply with the requirement. But Miller said the lawsuit will not hurt the state's federal money.

Michigan already has a database system more efficient and effective than one that would use Social Security numbers, the lawsuit says.

Gov. John Engler does not support Miller's lawsuit, spokesman John Truscott said.

ABOUT R-KIDS OF MINNESOTA

• R-KIDS is a non-profit organization dedicated to educating law makers, family law professionals and the public with regard to family law and social services and their effects on children, families, and the consequences to the taxpayer.
• Our main concern is for our community of children of divorced, separated, or unwed families. We believe that children need, want and deserve the love, support and involvement of both parents regardless of marital status.
• Founded in 1985, our membership is comprised of both moms and dads, custodial and non-custodial parents, grandparents, stepparents, and professionals such as social workers, doctors, attorneys, and family law practitioners.
• It is the objective of R-KIDS to develop equitable family law legislation in an effort to improve the lives of all Minnesota children.

"ALL CHILDREN NEED BOTH PARENTS AND ALL GRANDPARENTS IN THEIR LIVES"

• Unless those affected by the current family law system voice an opinion and demand positive change, we and our children will continue to suffer. This change will not occur without your help! Legislators and family law professionals need to hear from; parents, grandparents, and constituents. Until they do, things will not change.

R-KIDS CONCERNS AND ISSUES

1. The needs of children to have frequent and meaningful contact with both parents.
2. The lack of effective consequences for denied visitation or parental interference.
3. Consideration of the financial and emotional responsibility of both parents to provide for their children equally.
4. Dissemination of information to the public about current family law issues and the long term consequences for our children, families and the tax payer.
5. The harmful impact of out-of-state or long distance relocation on the parent- child relationship.
6. Fair and equitable sharing of child support responsibilities which takes into consideration the financial needs of children in second families, as well.
7. The negative impact of the adversarial court system and social services upon divorcing families with children.
8. Removal of the myth perpetuated in our judicial and family law professional systems that only mothers are nurturing and fathers are financial providers.
9. Accountability for the use of child support.
10. The impact of the no-fault divorce system on families with children and the need for effective education for parents considering marriage, separation, or divorce.

R-KIDS website is http://www.rkids.org

Do you want to express your viewpoint or share your story in the newsletter? E-mail to ttheisen@bitstream.net, or mail to Tim Theisen, R-KIDS Newsletter Editor, 229 Jackson Street, Suite 105, , Anoka MN 55303. We reserve the right to edit. We will use your name unless asked not to do so. Obviously, viewpoints expressed by readers do not necessarily reflect the position of R-KIDS.

Give to RKIDS Charitable Fund

R-KIDS Charitable fund is a tax exempt, 501(c )(3) foundation. The proceeds WILL NOT BE USED FOR LOBBYING. The fund currently needs money for various charitable activities of benefit to children of divorce. Send your tax deductible donation of $25, $50, or $100 today! Make checks payable to R-KIDS Charitable Fund. Mail to R-KIDS PO Box 24658, Mpls, MN 55424.

This newsletter is distributed via US mail and e-mail. If you are getting it via regular mail, but you have an e-mail address, let us know your e-mail address. Send a note to Editor Tim Theisen, ttheisen@bitstream.net . Not only will you get the newsletter a couple weeks sooner, but you’ll also get certain bulletins between newsletters, and you’ll save us postage costs as well! Also, the e-mail version of the newsletter sometimes has extra articles that didn’t make the editor’s final cut for the print version.

The R-KIDS newsletter does not purport to give legal advice. The information contained herein is general in nature; individual circumstances will always vary.

Feel free to disseminate this newsletter. We want to spread our message!