California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: Enacted

SB 646 — Uniform Interstate Family Support Act.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 493, Statutes of 2015.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 27, 2015. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 70% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 8 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) governs the establishment, enforcement, and modification of interstate child and spousal support orders by providing jurisdictional standards and rules for determining which state's order is a controlling order and whether a tribunal of this state may exercise continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a support proceeding. Existing law requires the Department of Child Support Services to administer services relating to the collection and distribution of child support throughout the state. Existing law also requires each county to maintain a local child support agency that is responsible for establishing, modifying, and enforcing child support obligations. This bill would revise and recast UIFSA to provide guidelines for the registration, recognition, enforcement, and modification of foreign support orders from countries that are parties to the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance. The bill would identify the Department of Child Support Services as the agency designated by the United States central authority, as defined, to perform specific functions under the convention. Because the bill would impose new duties on local child support agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Among other things, the bill would clarify how a tribunal retains continuing, exclusive jurisdiction and would revise the procedures for determining which order is the controlling order in an interstate or international support proceeding. Existing law sets forth provisions to implement amendments to UIFSA that were promulgated by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 2001, but makes those provisions inoperative until Congress amends federal law to authorize or require the adoption of the 2001 version of UIFSA or the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement or the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services approves a waiver, exemption, finding, or other indicia of regulatory approval of the 2001 version of UIFSA, whichever occurs first. This bill would delete those provisions. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 493, Statutes of 2015.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:30 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 2468.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 80. Noes 0. Page 2792.) Ordered to the Senate.

  7. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  8. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  9. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (August 27).

  10. July 8 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  11. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (June 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  12. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  13. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  14. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  15. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 1209.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  16. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  17. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 1158.) (May 28).

  18. Set for hearing May 28.

  19. April 20 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  20. Set for hearing April 20.

  21. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 525.) (April 7). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  22. Set for hearing April 7.

  23. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  24. Read first time.

  25. From printer. May be acted upon on or after April 1.

  26. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Jackson · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Jackson

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Unfinished Business SB646 Jackson Concurrence

Passed 39 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 36001
Democratic 3000
Total 39001
% of votes cast 98%0%0%3%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Block — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Monning — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Pan — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Hall — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Allen — Yea
Hill — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Runner — Yea
Bates — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hertzberg — Not Voting
Hueso — Yea
Huff — Yea
Beall — Yea
Roth — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

SB 646 Jackson Senate Third Reading By STONE

Passed 80 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 71000
Democratic 4000
Republican 5000
Total 80000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Brown — Yea
Holden — Yea
Kim — Yea
Linder — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Perea — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Wood — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Salas — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Burke — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Harper — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Campos — Yea
Levine — Yea
Low — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Gray — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Medina — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Chang — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Chu — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Daly — Yea
Dodd — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Weber — Yea
Williams — Yea
Hadley — Yea
Ting — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 17 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 13000
Democratic 2000
Republican 2000
Total 17000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Holden — Yea
Chang — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wood — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 40 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 37000
Democratic 3000
Total 40000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Bates — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leno — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Pan — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Roth — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hill — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Allen — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Runner — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Huff — Yea
Liu — Yea
Monning — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Hall — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Beall — Yea
Hill — Yea
Nielsen — Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Beall — Yea
Nielsen — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights labor
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 646 do?
The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) governs the establishment, enforcement, and modification of interstate child and spousal support orders by providing jurisdictional standards and rules for determining which state's order is a controlling order and whether a tribunal of this state may exercise continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over a support proceeding. Existing law requires the Department of Child Support Services to administer services relating to the collection and distribution of child support throughout the state. Existing law also requires each county to maintain a local child support agency that is responsible for establishing, modifying, and enforcing child support obligations. This bill would revise and recast UIFSA to provide guidelines for the registration, recognition, enforcement, and modification of foreign support orders from countries that are parties to the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance. The bill would identify the Department of Child Support Services as the agency designated by the United States central authority, as defined, to perform specific functions under the convention. Because the bill would impose new duties on local child support agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Among other things, the bill would clarify how a tribunal retains continuing, exclusive jurisdiction and would revise the procedures for determining which order is the controlling order in an interstate or international support proceeding. Existing law sets forth provisions to implement amendments to UIFSA that were promulgated by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 2001, but makes those provisions inoperative until Congress amends federal law to authorize or require the adoption of the 2001 version of UIFSA or the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement or the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services approves a waiver, exemption, finding, or other indicia of regulatory approval of the 2001 version of UIFSA, whichever occurs first. This bill would delete those provisions. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Who sponsors SB 646?
SB 646 is sponsored by Jackson.
What is the current status of SB 646?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 27, 2015. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 646?
Track SB 646 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 646

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 646

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →