AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 75-76-3, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO DECLARE AS PUBLIC POLICY THAT CHILDREN ARE ADVERSELY AFFECTED WHEN A PARENT WHO HAS AN OUTSTANDING CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGE DIVERTS CHILD SUPPORT TO GAMING; TO CODIFY SECTION 75-76-58, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR THE MISSISSIPPI GAMING COMMISSION, THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND LICENSEES UNDER CHAPTER 76 OF TITLE 75, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO CARRY OUT THE INTERCEPTION AND SEIZURE OF GAME WINNINGS OF PARENTS WITH A CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGE; TO AMEND SECTION 75-76-33, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO REQUIRE THE MISSISSIPPI GAMING COMMISSION TO PRESCRIBE THE MANNER AND PROCEDURE IN WHICH CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGES MAY BE COLLECTED FROM GAMING WINNINGS AND SLOT MACHINE ANNUITIES; TO AMEND SECTION 93-11-71, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO CLARIFY THAT CHILD SUPPORT MAY BE COLLECTED FROM ALL GAMING WINNINGS; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
Impact
The bill significantly modifies the state's approach to child support enforcement by allowing the gaming industry to play a role in ensuring that child support obligations are met. Specifically, it outlines that gaming establishments must withhold a portion of winnings from players who are found to have outstanding child support arrearages, thus enabling quicker recovery of these debts. This change is expected to improve the financial support for children and assist the state in enforcing child support payments from parents who may otherwise default.
Summary
House Bill 620 aims to amend existing sections of the Mississippi Code to address the issue of child support arrearages in relation to gaming winnings. The bill establishes public policy indicating that children are adversely affected when parents with outstanding child support obligations divert their financial resources to gaming. It seeks to incorporate procedures for intercepting and seizing gaming winnings from parents who owe child support. This includes a mandate for the Mississippi Gaming Commission and the Department of Human Services to implement the interception of winnings efficiently.
Contention
There may be points of contention surrounding the bill's approach, particularly regarding privacy concerns and the efficacy of implementing such measures across gaming establishments. Opposition could arise from those who argue that this could deter individuals from participating in legitimate gaming activities or unfairly penalize those who might not have the financial means to pay child support but have had some luck in gaming. Additionally, questions about the administrative burden on gaming establishments to comply with this new requirement may be raised.