From: larry
To: David Lifferth, Brad Wilson,
Date: Tue Mar 01 14:24:47 MST 2016
This bill seems to be nothing but total punishment for one of the parties in the divorce.  Is that the intent - it is vicious and totally unrealistic and is in no way fair to either party.  One - the alimony payments designated by a court should be for the former spouse, child support is for the support of the child or children.  They should not be combined.  Two - to use the last tax return is not realistic because it does not limit the income base to just the base income of the person paying but can also include overtime (this is not a guaranteed income) and it can also include bonuses (this is not guaranteed income).  The alimony payments should be based strictly on the monthly salary or income exclusive of bonuses or overtime and should not include income from a second job.  The primary employment is the only one that should be considered. Three - to specify "at least one half" means that it could and probably will exceed one half and the person paying the alimony could actually end up living on less than half of what he earns not to mention there is a strong possibility that the non-custodial parent is going to be paying a hefty sum for child support. 
Enough of the State Legislature trying to punish people (usually men) that get divorced.  This is a bill that never should be brought for vote.
Thank You,

Larry Clark 
3551 So. 550 West
Syracuse, UT  84075
801-444-7133 (home)
801-540-6483 (mobile)