Congressman Joe Walsh has filed his reply to the accusation by his ex-wife Laura that he owes $110,000 in back child support.
You can read it for yourself below. To make a page larger, click on it.
Copies of cashed checks follow, plus Laura Walsh’s income tax form for 2009.
If you bathe a cat, you are going to get scratched.
If you owed child support and didn’t pay it, you are a deadbeat. And in Walsh’s case, a hypocrite.
Why did he not request a modification when his income and circumstances changed, as the law requires?
One motion, a hearing before a hearing officer in most cases, and an order.
Not huge courtroom proceedings involved. In child support matters, one doesn’t get to make informal agreements or arrangements between parties concerning the CHILDRENS’ rights to support without court approval once court has jurisdiction.
Disingenuous of a law maker to assert that one can. Part of court oversight in these matters is to ensure that the rights of the children to support are upheld.
I’m sorry, I really don’t believe a word he says. He may be right.
But his long history of non-payment of his obligations makes one wonder.
Sure he’s voting the right way for many of us; but as Glenn Beck said at TeaCon recently, “do not just look at your congressman’s votes; look at their character, how they live their lives…. ”
Yes indeed.
Rocky,
If you read the very long pleading, you’ll see that he claims to have paid his obligations, with appropriate supporting documents like canceled checks as proof. Read the document.
Toni,
Yes, it was a mistake to not officially document every verbal agreement, but 1) that costs money, 2) it is inconvenient if one’s employment situation and childcare arrangements are changing frequently, and 3) one (sometimes mistakenly) assumes the ex-spouse will be trustworthy. I have a friend who went through a nasty divorce, and it took a lot of my coaxing for him to make ensuing verbal arrangements legal. He trusted his ex-wife much more than I did.
Apply common sense.
Being a lawyer, Laura knew her rights.
If he failed to pay that much money, why didn’t she charge him earlier with failure to pay child support?
And why receive child support when there is no child to support, since Joe claims the youngest lived full time with him for one year, and half time for 2 years?
Common sense says they obviously had some verbal agreements.