By Jamey Dunn
Illinois became the 19th state to legalize medical marijuana today as Gov. Pat Quinn signed legislation that proponents say are some of the strongest regulations of the drug in the nation.
House Bill 1 creates a four-year pilot program for medical cannabis in the state. The Illinois Department of Public Health will screen patients seeking medical marijuana permits. With the approval of their doctors, patients with one of 35 debilitating illnesses listed in the new law or their caregivers would be able to purchase up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana every 14 days. The new law will take effect on January 1, 2014.
Growers would be licensed by the Illinois Department of Agriculture, and only 22 permits will be issued — one for every state police district. The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation will license 60 dispensary operations. Patients, caregivers, owners and employees of growing operations and dispensaries will all be required to pass background checks. Owners of growing operations or dispensaries will be banned from making campaign contributions.
“This bill is a very carefully drafted bill,” Quinn said in Chicago today. He did not openly support the bill as it moved through the legislature but said he would keep an open mind if it reached his desk. “Our law enforcement will be involved, our Department of Public Health, our Department of Agriculture. And the reason I’m signing the bill is because it is so tightly and properly drafted.”
Last week, New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan signed a medical marijuana bill into law. Medical cannabis is also legal in Washington, D.C.
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang, sponsor of SB 1 and a longtime advocate for medical marijuana, said he has been trying to get a medical cannabis bill passed in Illinois for years because of stories he hears from the patients who are turning to an illegal solution for their pain. “Are we really going to be a state where we’re going to allow a 74-year-old granny with colon cancer to have to search for a remedy for her pain and her nausea? I don’t think that’s the kind of state we want to be,” he said. Lang said he is already getting calls from lawmakers in states that do not have legalized medical marijuana “asking for copies [of the legislation], asking how we did it.” Lang said the drug should be an option for patients who know have to rely on powerful pain killers such as oxycodone, which can leave patients dazed, unresponsive and ultimately addicted. “Those medications, which are designed to help them feel better, actually ruined their lives,” he said.
Marijuana is illegal at the federal level. But Lang said that growers and sellers who follow the rules in Illinois run little risk of getting arrested by the feds. He said that when the federal government has intervened in other states, it was when growers or sellers were “breaking state law,” “selling product out the back door,” or when the “grow sites are way larger than they need to be.”
The bill has the support of several prominent groups in the legal and medical communities, including the Illinois State Bar Association and the Illinois Nurses Association. However, opponents have voiced concerns that the law would send the wrong message to young people about the drug or may open the door to the eventual legalization of marijuana for recreational use. Last year, voters in Colorado and Washington voted to legalize the drug for recreational use.
But Army veteran Jim Champion, who has been advocating for the new law, says that it is a template for other states looking for a way to tightly regulate medical cannabis. “They’re looking at Illinois and saying, ‘That is the right way to conduct a legitimate medical cannabis program,’ and it makes me proud. Illinois gets dissed on a whole lot, but I’m proud to stand here today to say that this isn’t a Cheech and Chong bill. We’re an actual model for the rest of the United States,” said Champion, who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis 25 years ago.
Champion said he is proud of his service in the Army, but he says, “I have always been ashamed that I was criminalized by the actions that I was forced to take for my pain relief.”
It is likely that Champion's story, along with input from other veterans whom Quinn talked to, played a significant role in the governor’s decision to sign the bill. Quinn is known as a passionate advocate for veterans’ issues. Under the new law, patients must have longstanding relationships with the doctors who prescribe them marijuana. However, there is an exception for veterans because presumably they will not be able to obtain prescriptions from doctors working for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Veterans who have been treated by a military doctor for one of the illnesses listed under the law would be able to seek approval from a civilian doctor.
Sandy Champion, Jim's wife, said that at first she was opposed to him using the drug, until she saw how much it helped relieve his pain. She is her husband’s caretaker and also obtains marijuana for his treatment. “When I go out to the streets to get this medicine, I risk my life, I risk my career future and I risk getting him bad product because any of us know that there can be some chemicals put in this stuff and it can be really bad for them,” she said today. “So this bill is going to help me to be able to go into a dispensary legally, walk in and buy it with no fear.”
Showing posts with label Rep. Lou Lang. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rep. Lou Lang. Show all posts
Thursday, August 01, 2013
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Quinn to lawmakers: No pay until you pass pension reform
By Jamey Dunn
After threatening that there would be “consequences” if lawmakers did not pass pension reform this week, Gov. Pat Quinn used his veto pen today to cut the funding for their pay.
“Admittedly, this is a drastic measure, but I think it’s absolutely necessary to get a wake-up call to the members of the General Assembly that the people of Illinois are tired of excuses. They’re impatient with the fact that the taxpayers pay when the General Assembly doesn’t do its pension reform job,” Quinn said at a Chicago news conference today. He used a line item veto to remove the money for legislator’s pay and stipends from a budget bill.
A special committee is working to produce a compromise, and Quinn set yesterday as the deadline for that committee to produce legislation. He wanted lawmakers to vote on a bill while they were in Springfield yesterday to take up concealed carry legislation. Members of the committee say negotiations are going well. However, they are waiting on savings projections from each of the public employee pension systems so they can be sure of the impact of the changes they are considering.
“I think that the conference committee has made good progress. I don’t think that the governor’s actions today are part helpful in achieving the goal,” said Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekrtiz, who serves on the committee. The group expects to get some of the savings projections on Friday and should have them all by next week. In the meantime, she said committee members continue to meet and work together. “The committee has not been shy about being in touch with each other seven days a week.” Nekritz said that Quinn’s move today is counterproductive because it puts the focus on the back and forth between Quinn and lawmakers instead of on the task at hand. “We’re talking about this rather than talking about pension reform.”
But Quinn said today that lawmakers continue to ignore the deadlines he sets for them and that there always seem to be excuses for not agreeing on changes to the state’s underfunded pension systems. “Over and over again, they blew through the deadlines, ignored those deadlines and didn’t put a bill on my desk. Up until now, the only ones who have had to pay when pension reform was not put on my desk by the General Assembly have been the taxpayers of Illinois,” Quinn said. “The state’s credit rating has been downgraded several times, due in part to the fact that there has been no progress on pension reform. These downgrades have led to higher interest rates when the state borrows for things like capital construction projects. They must have that alarm bell ringing in their ears, and the best way to do that is to hit them in the wallet.” Legislators’ next paychecks are scheduled for August 1. Quinn has also volunteered to forgo his own pay until he signs pension reform legislation. Quinn said that once lawmakers eat their vegetables on pension reform, they can have their paycheck desserts. “When they get their pension reform job finished, they’ll have my blessing on getting their pay.”
Because of the failure to pass pension changes, Quinn has accused lawmakers of not doing their jobs, which they take an oath to fulfill. But some lawmakers think that pension proposals that unilaterally cut employee benefits are unconstitutional. “I have voted against bills that I have felt are unconstitutional,” said Rep. Lou Lang — who voted against House Speaker Michael Madigan’s preferred proposal, Senate Bill 1. “One of the very first things you say in your oath of office is that ‘I will uphold the Constitution of the state of Illinois.’ ... We have a responsibility to fix this, but we have a responsibility to fix it credibly and constitutionally.”
Lang, a Democrat from Skokie, has put forth his own bill, which would extend the temporary income tax increase to help pay off the nearly $100 billion unfunded liability. His plan would also increase the retirement age and require employees to contribute more of their salaries to their retirement benefits. The bill has failed to gain any traction in the legislature. Lang agrees with Nekritz that the committee must know what savings any plan they propose would yield. “We can’t just pick a bunch of concepts and throw them together and say we solved the problem without knowing if we solved the problem,” he said.
Lang does not think Quinn’s move will make the process go any faster. “The issue of whether we get paid or not is not going to move to many legislators from point A to point B. I think it’s wrong. I think it’s silly. I think it’s political. But most importantly, I think it will not have the desired impact.” He said that instead of making threats and laying down punishments, Quinn should become more hands-on in the process and more specific about what he wants. Quinn has yet to present his own pension legislation and declined an invitation to appear before the conference committee this week. He instead sent his budget director, Jerry Stermer, who would not go into detail about what sort of proposals the governor would prefer. “You’re left with the impression that he’ll sign any damn bill that comes to his desk, and that’s not good government either,” Lang said. He said Quinn should treat the General Assembly, his coequal branch of government, as a partner with which to solve a problem. “He can be part of the fix, or not part of the fix. So far, he has not been part of the fix.”
Senate President John Cullerton agreed that the pay cut would not help the situation. “Lawmakers have worked hard this session. That work included passing a balanced budget, paying off hundreds of millions of dollars in old bills, cutting their own pay and numerous, serious bipartisan efforts to enact comprehensive pension reform,” Cullerton said in a written statement. “The governor’s actions today are as unproductive as yesterday’s arbitrary deadline. Responsible leaders know that unworkable demands will only delay progress.”
While many lawmakers predictably had a negative reactions the Quinn’s move, he did have some on his side. Oak Park Democratic Sen. Dan Kotowski took to Twitter with his support for Quinn’s action. “What governor in our state's history has ever volunteered to suspend his own pay? Way to lead Gov. Quinn,” he wrote.
Madigan put up no protest to Quinn’s plan. “I have been working for many months to pass real, comprehensive pension reform. During the first Democratic caucus of this General Assembly, I admonished our members that doing nothing or passing only a half measure on pension reform was not an option,” Madigan said in a written statement. “This issue must be solved in order to put Illinois on a more secure financial path. I, along with Rep. Nekritz, [House Minority] Leader [Tom] Cross and the members who supported House Amendment 1 to Senate Bill 1, have been the only lawmakers willing to take a difficult vote that would lead to solvency in our pension systems. The governor’s decision follows my efforts, and I understand his frustration. I am hopeful his strategy works.”
The General Assembly could vote to override Quinn’s veto, but Madigan would have to call the House back for that to happen. Cullerton said yesterday that he would consider overriding any budget vetoes from Quinn.
Cross had a fairly lukewarm response to Quinn's announcement. “We’ve been committed and working on comprehensive pension reform for years. We will continue to work on a solution and to get it accomplished as soon as possible. We’ve filed bills, participated in committees and worked with both sides of the aisle. This session, we helped pass a comprehensive bill out of the House,” said a written statement from Cross’ office. “The governor’s action today is certainly not a traditional approach, but it is a strategy to come to a conclusion on pension reform. We remain committed to get the job done.”
Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka, who is responsible for cutting the state’s checks, said she is concerned about the legality of Quinn’s idea. “This morning, the governor notified my office of his intention to eliminate the salaries and stipends of members of the General Assembly,” she said in a written statement. “While I understand and appreciate the governor’s focus on pension reform, real questions have been raised about the legality of his action. Specifically, Section 11 of our state Constitution states that ‘changes in the salary of a member shall not take effect during the term for which he has been elected.’ Therefore, I have requested a legal review, which should be completed before lawmakers are scheduled to receive their next paychecks on August 1, 2013.”
Whatever the outcome, Nekritz said the committee will continue with business as usual. “My motivation to work on this issue is not tied to my paycheck. And I think I’ve demonstrated my willingness to put in the time and effort necessary to get things done,” she said. The group has agreed on a number of ideas, which they presented to the pension systems for the actuarial savings projections. Nekritz, who has been a key player on the issue for some time, sees this agreement on a framework by members of both chambers and both parties as a milestone. “It does feel different to me because we’ve never had all four caucuses agree on anything,” she said. “That is a place we’ve never been on this issue.”
After threatening that there would be “consequences” if lawmakers did not pass pension reform this week, Gov. Pat Quinn used his veto pen today to cut the funding for their pay.
“Admittedly, this is a drastic measure, but I think it’s absolutely necessary to get a wake-up call to the members of the General Assembly that the people of Illinois are tired of excuses. They’re impatient with the fact that the taxpayers pay when the General Assembly doesn’t do its pension reform job,” Quinn said at a Chicago news conference today. He used a line item veto to remove the money for legislator’s pay and stipends from a budget bill.
A special committee is working to produce a compromise, and Quinn set yesterday as the deadline for that committee to produce legislation. He wanted lawmakers to vote on a bill while they were in Springfield yesterday to take up concealed carry legislation. Members of the committee say negotiations are going well. However, they are waiting on savings projections from each of the public employee pension systems so they can be sure of the impact of the changes they are considering.
“I think that the conference committee has made good progress. I don’t think that the governor’s actions today are part helpful in achieving the goal,” said Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekrtiz, who serves on the committee. The group expects to get some of the savings projections on Friday and should have them all by next week. In the meantime, she said committee members continue to meet and work together. “The committee has not been shy about being in touch with each other seven days a week.” Nekritz said that Quinn’s move today is counterproductive because it puts the focus on the back and forth between Quinn and lawmakers instead of on the task at hand. “We’re talking about this rather than talking about pension reform.”
But Quinn said today that lawmakers continue to ignore the deadlines he sets for them and that there always seem to be excuses for not agreeing on changes to the state’s underfunded pension systems. “Over and over again, they blew through the deadlines, ignored those deadlines and didn’t put a bill on my desk. Up until now, the only ones who have had to pay when pension reform was not put on my desk by the General Assembly have been the taxpayers of Illinois,” Quinn said. “The state’s credit rating has been downgraded several times, due in part to the fact that there has been no progress on pension reform. These downgrades have led to higher interest rates when the state borrows for things like capital construction projects. They must have that alarm bell ringing in their ears, and the best way to do that is to hit them in the wallet.” Legislators’ next paychecks are scheduled for August 1. Quinn has also volunteered to forgo his own pay until he signs pension reform legislation. Quinn said that once lawmakers eat their vegetables on pension reform, they can have their paycheck desserts. “When they get their pension reform job finished, they’ll have my blessing on getting their pay.”
Because of the failure to pass pension changes, Quinn has accused lawmakers of not doing their jobs, which they take an oath to fulfill. But some lawmakers think that pension proposals that unilaterally cut employee benefits are unconstitutional. “I have voted against bills that I have felt are unconstitutional,” said Rep. Lou Lang — who voted against House Speaker Michael Madigan’s preferred proposal, Senate Bill 1. “One of the very first things you say in your oath of office is that ‘I will uphold the Constitution of the state of Illinois.’ ... We have a responsibility to fix this, but we have a responsibility to fix it credibly and constitutionally.”
Lang, a Democrat from Skokie, has put forth his own bill, which would extend the temporary income tax increase to help pay off the nearly $100 billion unfunded liability. His plan would also increase the retirement age and require employees to contribute more of their salaries to their retirement benefits. The bill has failed to gain any traction in the legislature. Lang agrees with Nekritz that the committee must know what savings any plan they propose would yield. “We can’t just pick a bunch of concepts and throw them together and say we solved the problem without knowing if we solved the problem,” he said.
Lang does not think Quinn’s move will make the process go any faster. “The issue of whether we get paid or not is not going to move to many legislators from point A to point B. I think it’s wrong. I think it’s silly. I think it’s political. But most importantly, I think it will not have the desired impact.” He said that instead of making threats and laying down punishments, Quinn should become more hands-on in the process and more specific about what he wants. Quinn has yet to present his own pension legislation and declined an invitation to appear before the conference committee this week. He instead sent his budget director, Jerry Stermer, who would not go into detail about what sort of proposals the governor would prefer. “You’re left with the impression that he’ll sign any damn bill that comes to his desk, and that’s not good government either,” Lang said. He said Quinn should treat the General Assembly, his coequal branch of government, as a partner with which to solve a problem. “He can be part of the fix, or not part of the fix. So far, he has not been part of the fix.”
Senate President John Cullerton agreed that the pay cut would not help the situation. “Lawmakers have worked hard this session. That work included passing a balanced budget, paying off hundreds of millions of dollars in old bills, cutting their own pay and numerous, serious bipartisan efforts to enact comprehensive pension reform,” Cullerton said in a written statement. “The governor’s actions today are as unproductive as yesterday’s arbitrary deadline. Responsible leaders know that unworkable demands will only delay progress.”
While many lawmakers predictably had a negative reactions the Quinn’s move, he did have some on his side. Oak Park Democratic Sen. Dan Kotowski took to Twitter with his support for Quinn’s action. “What governor in our state's history has ever volunteered to suspend his own pay? Way to lead Gov. Quinn,” he wrote.
Madigan put up no protest to Quinn’s plan. “I have been working for many months to pass real, comprehensive pension reform. During the first Democratic caucus of this General Assembly, I admonished our members that doing nothing or passing only a half measure on pension reform was not an option,” Madigan said in a written statement. “This issue must be solved in order to put Illinois on a more secure financial path. I, along with Rep. Nekritz, [House Minority] Leader [Tom] Cross and the members who supported House Amendment 1 to Senate Bill 1, have been the only lawmakers willing to take a difficult vote that would lead to solvency in our pension systems. The governor’s decision follows my efforts, and I understand his frustration. I am hopeful his strategy works.”
The General Assembly could vote to override Quinn’s veto, but Madigan would have to call the House back for that to happen. Cullerton said yesterday that he would consider overriding any budget vetoes from Quinn.
Cross had a fairly lukewarm response to Quinn's announcement. “We’ve been committed and working on comprehensive pension reform for years. We will continue to work on a solution and to get it accomplished as soon as possible. We’ve filed bills, participated in committees and worked with both sides of the aisle. This session, we helped pass a comprehensive bill out of the House,” said a written statement from Cross’ office. “The governor’s action today is certainly not a traditional approach, but it is a strategy to come to a conclusion on pension reform. We remain committed to get the job done.”
Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka, who is responsible for cutting the state’s checks, said she is concerned about the legality of Quinn’s idea. “This morning, the governor notified my office of his intention to eliminate the salaries and stipends of members of the General Assembly,” she said in a written statement. “While I understand and appreciate the governor’s focus on pension reform, real questions have been raised about the legality of his action. Specifically, Section 11 of our state Constitution states that ‘changes in the salary of a member shall not take effect during the term for which he has been elected.’ Therefore, I have requested a legal review, which should be completed before lawmakers are scheduled to receive their next paychecks on August 1, 2013.”
Whatever the outcome, Nekritz said the committee will continue with business as usual. “My motivation to work on this issue is not tied to my paycheck. And I think I’ve demonstrated my willingness to put in the time and effort necessary to get things done,” she said. The group has agreed on a number of ideas, which they presented to the pension systems for the actuarial savings projections. Nekritz, who has been a key player on the issue for some time, sees this agreement on a framework by members of both chambers and both parties as a milestone. “It does feel different to me because we’ve never had all four caucuses agree on anything,” she said. “That is a place we’ve never been on this issue.”
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
House approves medical marijuana after years of rejecting the idea
By Meredith Colias
Patients with debilitating illnesses may soon be allowed to buy medical marijuana legally in Illinois.
After years of rejecting plans to legalize medical marijuana, the House narrowly approved House Bill 1 on a 61-57 vote today. The measure now advances to the Senate. If it passes that chamber, Gov. Pat Quinn said he would be “open minded” but would not commit to signing the bill.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, said stricter restrictions in the current measure helped to persuade some representatives who had not voted for legalization in the past. “This is not about getting high,” Lang said. The measure was designed to “better provide health care to people who desperately need this product,” he said. Lang told the House his priority was to assist patients in chronic pain. “I know every single one of you has compassion in your heart,” he said. “This is the day to show it.”
The measure would implement a four-year pilot program legalizing medical marijuana from 2014 through 2018. Patients at least 18 years old applying for a medical marijuana card through the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) would have to prove they have one of 33 serious or chronic conditions specifically listed in the bill, such as multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, HIV/AIDS, Parkinson’s disease or cancer. IDPH is authorized to add to the list in the future. Applicants must show they have an established relationship with their doctor who approves the use, and they would have to submit medical records for verification. Both patients and their caregivers, who must be 21 or older, would be subject to background checks. If a patient's or caregiver's card is revoked, he or she would not be allowed to reapply for a new one later.
The measure would allow patients 2.5 ounces of loose marijuana per a two-week period, unless a doctor certifies to the state a patient might need more. Each registered patient would have the purchase entered into a database, which would be monitored to prevent a patient or caregiver from obtaining more than the approved quota.
Growing, selling and distributing medical marijuana would only be done by personnel in facilities approved and administered by the state, built away from schools and day care centers. Potential employees would have to be at least 21 and would subject to state and federal background checks and fingerprinting. Twenty-two growing centers would be set up, one in each state police district, with 60 dispensary centers across the state. Dispensaries would be registered with the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, and growers would have with the register with the Illinois Department of Agriculture. Past proposals from Lang would have allowed private individuals to grow marijuana on their own.
The measure also includes everyday restrictions. Marijuana smoking in public would not be allowed. Landlords would have the option to refuse to allow marijuana smoking, employers could punish employees coming to work under the influence and patients would still be subject to DUI laws if pulled over and tested by police during a traffic stop.
Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican, said he was satisfied the bill was regulated “from seed to sale” and voted for it. Several supporters during the floor debate cited people they knew who could have benefited from access to medical marijuana.
Rep. JoAnn Osmond, an Antioch Republican, said with visible emotion that she changed her vote to yes because of a friend with cancer whom she did not allow to use marijuana once when he lived with her. “Sometimes I regret that because I know it might have helped him,” she said.
Opponents were concerned that legalizing medical marijuana would have unintended consequences. “Even if I vote no, I still have compassion. Every state that has implemented this has had problems,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. Bost said marijuana could not be effectively legalized only for its intended medicinal usage. “Don’t try to piecemeal it like this,” he said. Others said the move was the first step in possible future efforts to legalize the drug for recreational use, as Washington and Colorado have done recently.
Lang said his only motivation was to aid people who are critically sick. “Some of these people are going to die. Why would we say to them, 'You can’t have a product your doctor wants you to have?'” As the bill advances to the Senate, Lang said he hoped it would have a “strong vote."
The Senate approved a medical marijuana bill in 2009, but the makeup of the chamber has changed since then.
Patients with debilitating illnesses may soon be allowed to buy medical marijuana legally in Illinois.
After years of rejecting plans to legalize medical marijuana, the House narrowly approved House Bill 1 on a 61-57 vote today. The measure now advances to the Senate. If it passes that chamber, Gov. Pat Quinn said he would be “open minded” but would not commit to signing the bill.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, said stricter restrictions in the current measure helped to persuade some representatives who had not voted for legalization in the past. “This is not about getting high,” Lang said. The measure was designed to “better provide health care to people who desperately need this product,” he said. Lang told the House his priority was to assist patients in chronic pain. “I know every single one of you has compassion in your heart,” he said. “This is the day to show it.”
The measure would implement a four-year pilot program legalizing medical marijuana from 2014 through 2018. Patients at least 18 years old applying for a medical marijuana card through the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) would have to prove they have one of 33 serious or chronic conditions specifically listed in the bill, such as multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, HIV/AIDS, Parkinson’s disease or cancer. IDPH is authorized to add to the list in the future. Applicants must show they have an established relationship with their doctor who approves the use, and they would have to submit medical records for verification. Both patients and their caregivers, who must be 21 or older, would be subject to background checks. If a patient's or caregiver's card is revoked, he or she would not be allowed to reapply for a new one later.
The measure would allow patients 2.5 ounces of loose marijuana per a two-week period, unless a doctor certifies to the state a patient might need more. Each registered patient would have the purchase entered into a database, which would be monitored to prevent a patient or caregiver from obtaining more than the approved quota.
Growing, selling and distributing medical marijuana would only be done by personnel in facilities approved and administered by the state, built away from schools and day care centers. Potential employees would have to be at least 21 and would subject to state and federal background checks and fingerprinting. Twenty-two growing centers would be set up, one in each state police district, with 60 dispensary centers across the state. Dispensaries would be registered with the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, and growers would have with the register with the Illinois Department of Agriculture. Past proposals from Lang would have allowed private individuals to grow marijuana on their own.
The measure also includes everyday restrictions. Marijuana smoking in public would not be allowed. Landlords would have the option to refuse to allow marijuana smoking, employers could punish employees coming to work under the influence and patients would still be subject to DUI laws if pulled over and tested by police during a traffic stop.
Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican, said he was satisfied the bill was regulated “from seed to sale” and voted for it. Several supporters during the floor debate cited people they knew who could have benefited from access to medical marijuana.
Rep. JoAnn Osmond, an Antioch Republican, said with visible emotion that she changed her vote to yes because of a friend with cancer whom she did not allow to use marijuana once when he lived with her. “Sometimes I regret that because I know it might have helped him,” she said.
Opponents were concerned that legalizing medical marijuana would have unintended consequences. “Even if I vote no, I still have compassion. Every state that has implemented this has had problems,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. Bost said marijuana could not be effectively legalized only for its intended medicinal usage. “Don’t try to piecemeal it like this,” he said. Others said the move was the first step in possible future efforts to legalize the drug for recreational use, as Washington and Colorado have done recently.
Lang said his only motivation was to aid people who are critically sick. “Some of these people are going to die. Why would we say to them, 'You can’t have a product your doctor wants you to have?'” As the bill advances to the Senate, Lang said he hoped it would have a “strong vote."
The Senate approved a medical marijuana bill in 2009, but the makeup of the chamber has changed since then.
Wednesday, March 06, 2013
Medical marijuana moves forward
By Meredith Colias
Chronically ill residents would have another option to relieve long-term pain under a plan to legalize medical marijuana, which an Illinois House committee approved today.
The committee approved House Bill 1 on a 11-4 vote. The legislation’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, cited the18 other states, plus Washington, D.C., that already legalize marijuana for medical use in some form. “We can help sick people have a quality of life,” he said. Lang said it was important that there were specific restrictions to the measure to limit participation to those with an actual medical need with “continual pain, nausea and discomfort.” Patients older than 18 afflicted with chronic or terminal ailments specifically listed in the bill, such as multiple sclerosis, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and HIV/AIDS, would qualify to apply for a medical cannabis card issued by the Department of Public Health. Patients issued permits would be limited to possessing 2.5 ounces of marijuana every two weeks.
Opponents said the measure would set a bad example for children. “The law’s a teacher,” Ralph Rivera of the Illinois Family Institute said. He cited a study showing marijuana usage for those 25 and younger increased in states such as Colorado that previously legalized medicinal usage. If the measure becomes law, “the students, the children [will] think it’s OK.” Colorado voters recently approved a measure to legalize the possession of marijuana for recreational use.
Limey Nargelenas, a lobbyist with the Illinois Association of Police, said he was concerned that those who would be approved to use medical marijuana would be allowed to drive under the influence, giving them a “back door to get out of the situation.”
But Lang said the law was not meant to open the door for those who smoke marijuana recreationally, who he says will smoke regardless of the law. “We know teenagers are going to smoke marijuana whether we pass this bill or not,” he said.
Lang said patients would also have to pass background checks, verify they are ill and demonstrate that other possible medical solutions had been tried. Licensed patients would have to prove that they are regularly seeing the doctor who prescribed medical marijuana. Caregivers and state employees overseeing growing and dispensary operations also would be required to pass a background test. Lang said the law would not spare legally impaired drivers: If caught, “the legal system will take its course.” He said that he thinks the committee’s approval of the legislation will help him as he lobbies for votes to pass the bill out of the House. Lang called bills to legalize medical marijuana for three floor votes in the House in 2011. All three times, the measures failed. “I think it will be easier to find the votes on the floor once it’s out of committee. Many members of the floor will say, let me know when it’s out of committee, and then I’ll commit to you,” Lang said before today’s committee vote.
Chronically ill residents would have another option to relieve long-term pain under a plan to legalize medical marijuana, which an Illinois House committee approved today.
The committee approved House Bill 1 on a 11-4 vote. The legislation’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, cited the18 other states, plus Washington, D.C., that already legalize marijuana for medical use in some form. “We can help sick people have a quality of life,” he said. Lang said it was important that there were specific restrictions to the measure to limit participation to those with an actual medical need with “continual pain, nausea and discomfort.” Patients older than 18 afflicted with chronic or terminal ailments specifically listed in the bill, such as multiple sclerosis, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and HIV/AIDS, would qualify to apply for a medical cannabis card issued by the Department of Public Health. Patients issued permits would be limited to possessing 2.5 ounces of marijuana every two weeks.
Opponents said the measure would set a bad example for children. “The law’s a teacher,” Ralph Rivera of the Illinois Family Institute said. He cited a study showing marijuana usage for those 25 and younger increased in states such as Colorado that previously legalized medicinal usage. If the measure becomes law, “the students, the children [will] think it’s OK.” Colorado voters recently approved a measure to legalize the possession of marijuana for recreational use.
Limey Nargelenas, a lobbyist with the Illinois Association of Police, said he was concerned that those who would be approved to use medical marijuana would be allowed to drive under the influence, giving them a “back door to get out of the situation.”
But Lang said the law was not meant to open the door for those who smoke marijuana recreationally, who he says will smoke regardless of the law. “We know teenagers are going to smoke marijuana whether we pass this bill or not,” he said.
Lang said patients would also have to pass background checks, verify they are ill and demonstrate that other possible medical solutions had been tried. Licensed patients would have to prove that they are regularly seeing the doctor who prescribed medical marijuana. Caregivers and state employees overseeing growing and dispensary operations also would be required to pass a background test. Lang said the law would not spare legally impaired drivers: If caught, “the legal system will take its course.” He said that he thinks the committee’s approval of the legislation will help him as he lobbies for votes to pass the bill out of the House. Lang called bills to legalize medical marijuana for three floor votes in the House in 2011. All three times, the measures failed. “I think it will be easier to find the votes on the floor once it’s out of committee. Many members of the floor will say, let me know when it’s out of committee, and then I’ll commit to you,” Lang said before today’s committee vote.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Quinn vetoes gambling expansion, citing ethics concerns
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn shot down a gambling expansion bill today, but supporters hope to revisit the issue after the general election.
The move from Quinn today came as no shock to the bill’s sponsor. Quinn has kept quiet on what he intended to do, but he has been publicly critical of the bill. “The actions of the governor are disappointing, but they’re certainly not surprising,” said Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang.
Senate Bill 1849 would have created licenses for five new casinos statewide: in Chicago, Park City, Danville, Rockford and in the south suburbs of Chicago. The location of the fifth casino would have been up to Illinois Gaming Board. The bill includes slot machines at horse racing tracks and would allow individual casinos to increase their gaming positions from the current limit of 1,200 to 1,600.
Quinn threatened to veto a similar expansion, SB 744, last year, calling it a “massive" gambling expansion. Senate President John Cullerton used a procedural move to block the measure from making it to Quinn’s desk. Quinn has also voiced opposition to allowing slot machines at horse racing tracks. The governor said in today’s veto message that he saw some positive changes in SB 1849, such as reductions in the scale of the gambling expansion from what was proposed in SB 744. However, he said that the newer bill did not have strong enough ethical standards. “The most glaring deficiency of Senate Bill 1849 is the absence of strict ethical standards and comprehensive regulatory oversight. Illinois should never settle for a gaming bill that includes loopholes for mobsters,” he wrote.
“We don’t have any corruption in Illinois gaming. Where is his evidence that there is any mafia in Illinois gaming today? There isn’t any,” Lang said.
Quinn made several suggestions in his veto message for improving the measure, such as banning campaign contributions from gaming licensees and casino managers. Lang said he was willing to include any of the governor’s requested ethics measures and asked Quinn to provide him any provisions he wanted included before the legislation was called for a floor vote. “He wouldn’t give me any language, and so we proceeded and passed a bill,” Lang said. He said that Quinn had another opportunity to add in the ethics measures he wanted with his veto pen but opted not to. “The fact that he vetoed the bill instead of amendatory vetoed the bill tells you everything you need to know.”
Lang added, “I have to draw the conclusion that he was never interested in gaming.”
When asked why he did not make his own changes to the bill, Quinn said: “It just has too many defects. It’s one thing if you had to make some technical changes here and there, but this bill just falls way short of what the people of Illinois need when it comes to ethics in government.” He said he planned to work with lawmakers to craft “a better bill,” which he described as “one that can meet all the requirements of integrity and also make sure the money goes to schools and education.”
However, Lang said that he thinks it is possible to rally enough support for an override in the legislature's November veto session, despite a comment from House Speaker Michael Madigan to the contrary. “Speaker Madigan was only making a prediction,” Lang said.
“I’m very saddened,” said Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who also sponsored the bill. “This is just ridiculous. Again, we have done everything possible to make this work, and again, the goal line has changed.”
An override would have to start in the Senate, and Link said he has not yet made up his mind. He said he plans to decide in the time between the general election and veto session. “We’ve got a three-week window in there, and we’ll be doing a lot of phone calling then,” He said. “People will be either comfortable or happy or sad or whatever they are.”
Link admitted, “It will be in the back of my mind for the next two months.”
Quinn used his veto message to again urge lawmakers to take up the issue of pension reform. A recent special session on pensions produced no substantial results. “Illinois cannot gamble its way out of our fiscal challenges. Even a casino on every street corner cannot repair the state’s $83 billion unfunded pension liability. I urge the members of the Illinois House and Senate to address the most pressing issue of our time — comprehensive public pension reform.”
Gov. Pat Quinn shot down a gambling expansion bill today, but supporters hope to revisit the issue after the general election.
The move from Quinn today came as no shock to the bill’s sponsor. Quinn has kept quiet on what he intended to do, but he has been publicly critical of the bill. “The actions of the governor are disappointing, but they’re certainly not surprising,” said Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang.
Senate Bill 1849 would have created licenses for five new casinos statewide: in Chicago, Park City, Danville, Rockford and in the south suburbs of Chicago. The location of the fifth casino would have been up to Illinois Gaming Board. The bill includes slot machines at horse racing tracks and would allow individual casinos to increase their gaming positions from the current limit of 1,200 to 1,600.
Quinn threatened to veto a similar expansion, SB 744, last year, calling it a “massive" gambling expansion. Senate President John Cullerton used a procedural move to block the measure from making it to Quinn’s desk. Quinn has also voiced opposition to allowing slot machines at horse racing tracks. The governor said in today’s veto message that he saw some positive changes in SB 1849, such as reductions in the scale of the gambling expansion from what was proposed in SB 744. However, he said that the newer bill did not have strong enough ethical standards. “The most glaring deficiency of Senate Bill 1849 is the absence of strict ethical standards and comprehensive regulatory oversight. Illinois should never settle for a gaming bill that includes loopholes for mobsters,” he wrote.
“We don’t have any corruption in Illinois gaming. Where is his evidence that there is any mafia in Illinois gaming today? There isn’t any,” Lang said.
Quinn made several suggestions in his veto message for improving the measure, such as banning campaign contributions from gaming licensees and casino managers. Lang said he was willing to include any of the governor’s requested ethics measures and asked Quinn to provide him any provisions he wanted included before the legislation was called for a floor vote. “He wouldn’t give me any language, and so we proceeded and passed a bill,” Lang said. He said that Quinn had another opportunity to add in the ethics measures he wanted with his veto pen but opted not to. “The fact that he vetoed the bill instead of amendatory vetoed the bill tells you everything you need to know.”
Lang added, “I have to draw the conclusion that he was never interested in gaming.”
When asked why he did not make his own changes to the bill, Quinn said: “It just has too many defects. It’s one thing if you had to make some technical changes here and there, but this bill just falls way short of what the people of Illinois need when it comes to ethics in government.” He said he planned to work with lawmakers to craft “a better bill,” which he described as “one that can meet all the requirements of integrity and also make sure the money goes to schools and education.”
However, Lang said that he thinks it is possible to rally enough support for an override in the legislature's November veto session, despite a comment from House Speaker Michael Madigan to the contrary. “Speaker Madigan was only making a prediction,” Lang said.
“I’m very saddened,” said Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who also sponsored the bill. “This is just ridiculous. Again, we have done everything possible to make this work, and again, the goal line has changed.”
An override would have to start in the Senate, and Link said he has not yet made up his mind. He said he plans to decide in the time between the general election and veto session. “We’ve got a three-week window in there, and we’ll be doing a lot of phone calling then,” He said. “People will be either comfortable or happy or sad or whatever they are.”
Link admitted, “It will be in the back of my mind for the next two months.”
Quinn used his veto message to again urge lawmakers to take up the issue of pension reform. A recent special session on pensions produced no substantial results. “Illinois cannot gamble its way out of our fiscal challenges. Even a casino on every street corner cannot repair the state’s $83 billion unfunded pension liability. I urge the members of the Illinois House and Senate to address the most pressing issue of our time — comprehensive public pension reform.”
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Madigan says there will be no override if Quinn vetoes gambling expansion
Jamey Dunn
House Speaker Michael Madigan said that if Gov. Pat Quinn vetoes a gaming expansion measure passed at the end of the spring legislative session, it may be the end of the line for the bill.
When asked whether he thought that there would be a successful override if Quinn rejects Senate Bill 1849, Madigan simply said, “No.”
Quinn has yet to act on the bill, but he has been publicly critical of it, saying it does not contain ethics provisions that he thinks are necessary. He said earlier this week that he is still weighing his choice.
The expansion would mean five new casinos statewide, in Chicago, Park City, Danville, Rockford and in the south suburbs of Chicago. The exact location of the fifth casino would be up to the Illinois Gaming Board to decide. The bill includes slot machines at horse racing tracks, which Quinn has opposed, but does not allow for slots at the Illinois State Fairgrounds or Chicago airports, which Quinn was very vocal in opposing.
The governor has not been receptive to broad gaming expansions in the past. He proposed a drastic trim back of a gambling bill, which lawmakers approved last year. Supporters of the plan in the Senate used a parliamentary procedure to keep the bill from ever reaching Quinn's desk.
"I think the [House] speaker is wrong. I think we'll have votes in the House and in the Senate to override a gubernatorial veto," said Skokie Democrat Lou Lang, who sponsored both gambling expansion bills. "Now, [Quinn] hasn't vetoed the gaming bill yet. Maybe he'll surprise us and sign it. And if he does, I'll be the most surprised person in the Capitol. But I'm prepared for any eventuality."
Lang said the bill he sponsored has strong ethics provisions, but he also said he is open to the governor's suggestions. "I'm prepared to give the governor virtually anything he wants."
House Speaker Michael Madigan said that if Gov. Pat Quinn vetoes a gaming expansion measure passed at the end of the spring legislative session, it may be the end of the line for the bill.
When asked whether he thought that there would be a successful override if Quinn rejects Senate Bill 1849, Madigan simply said, “No.”
Quinn has yet to act on the bill, but he has been publicly critical of it, saying it does not contain ethics provisions that he thinks are necessary. He said earlier this week that he is still weighing his choice.
The expansion would mean five new casinos statewide, in Chicago, Park City, Danville, Rockford and in the south suburbs of Chicago. The exact location of the fifth casino would be up to the Illinois Gaming Board to decide. The bill includes slot machines at horse racing tracks, which Quinn has opposed, but does not allow for slots at the Illinois State Fairgrounds or Chicago airports, which Quinn was very vocal in opposing.
The governor has not been receptive to broad gaming expansions in the past. He proposed a drastic trim back of a gambling bill, which lawmakers approved last year. Supporters of the plan in the Senate used a parliamentary procedure to keep the bill from ever reaching Quinn's desk.
"I think the [House] speaker is wrong. I think we'll have votes in the House and in the Senate to override a gubernatorial veto," said Skokie Democrat Lou Lang, who sponsored both gambling expansion bills. "Now, [Quinn] hasn't vetoed the gaming bill yet. Maybe he'll surprise us and sign it. And if he does, I'll be the most surprised person in the Capitol. But I'm prepared for any eventuality."
Lang said the bill he sponsored has strong ethics provisions, but he also said he is open to the governor's suggestions. "I'm prepared to give the governor virtually anything he wants."
Governor's Day at the fair turns into loud protest
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn found few allies today in his push to reform the pension systems for retired state workers.
Quinn faced a wall of sound from union protesters as he spoke on Governor’s Day at the Illinois State Fair this afternoon. His speech was barely audible over loud booing and chants of “Respect Illinois workers.” Several protesters shouted out “Keep your promises” as the governor tried to make himself heard over the crowd. A plane circled overhead carrying a banner that read “Gov. Quinn — unfair to workers.”
The event, usually meant to be a sort of pep rally for the party holding the governor’s office, instead served to display deep divides among Illinois Democrats over pension reform, the closure of state facilities and budget cuts that Quinn has said necessitated layoffs of state workers and a freeze on contractual raises.Since lawmakers are scheduled to be in special session on Friday to debate pension reform, it was the issue of the day. House Speaker Michael Madigan laid the success or failure of pension reform in Friday’s special session at the feet of Quinn and House Minority Leader Tom Cross. He said the two are scheduled to meet Friday morning “So hopefully, we’ll get some resolve out of those discussions between Governor Quinn and Leader Cross,” Madigan said at a Democratic party breakfast this morning.
Quinn drew some protesters to the morning event, where union members handed out fliers and called out, “Act like a Democrat, Pat!” But it was little, compared to the pushback at the state fair, where protesters followed him on his way to the event booing and chanting and even crowded around him while he stopped for a snack.
“If you want to be governor of Illinois and you want to step into the arena, you’d better have a tough hide. I have a lot of people who may call me names, but I think there’s a lot of people in Illinois who agree with what I am trying to do, which is to make sure we invest in our children and have good education. And sometimes you have to make reforms like in the pension that are difficult but necessary for everyday people to have a good state,” Quinn said this morning. “We’re going to reform the pensions, and I know some of the state workers don’t like that, but they’re going to have accept what the voters — I think — at large want.”
Skokie Rep. Lou Lang, a member of Democratic leadership in the House, said that he applauds the union members for making their voices heard at the fair. However, Lang said: “I understand their concerns, and in many ways, I agree with them and may be voting with them. That still does not mean that we should not give the governor his due respect as the governor [and] as a person who has supported the things that matter to the men and women of organized labor for a very long time.”
Lang said he was disappointed that the party did not present more of a unified front today. But he also said that the scene was illustrative of the party’s history. “It was a bunch of Democrats getting together. And Democrats are pretty noisy when they get together, and we don’t always agree. I’m sure the Republican rally tomorrow will be a lot more homogenized, and I’m sure the Republican rally tomorrow will be a lot quieter. But having said all that, this is what the Democratic Party is. It’s what it’s about. It’s what it’s always been about. I’m proud of what happened today.”
Madigan, who is also the chair of the Democratic Party in Illinois, brushed off the acrimony over pension reform and other issues, saying he did not think it would do permanent damage to his party in the state. “We’re trying to balance the budget. We’re trying to improve the fiscal condition of the state of Illinois. People from organized labor are representing their people, and they ought to do that. ... It’s just a natural conflict that’s going to be there. I don’t think there’s any long-term adverse implications that are going to come out of it,” he said at the morning event. “Promises were made. But if you don’t have the money to pay the promise, I think you have to step back, bring everybody together, talk reality and look toward how we can restore some fiscal stability to the [pension] systems and to the state of Illinois.”Madigan said that House Bill 1147, which would only apply to state workers and legislators and avoids the issue of shifting pension costs to local school systems and universities, would be progress. He said he presented a comprehensive reform plan during the regular session, but it was not approved by the House.
Quinn supports a plan from Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat, that would apply to all state retirees. Nekritz’s bill would phase in a controversial cost shift to schools and universities more slowly than a plan that failed to gain Republican support at the end of regular session. “I really would like to see both leaders in the House of Representatives put 30 votes on a bill sponsored by Rep. Elaine Nekrtiz,” Quinn said. “It’s a good bill. It’s a reasonable bill. It will reform the pensions and do it once and for all in Illinois.”
Cross supports neither plan. He is opposed to proposals that would ask downstate and suburban schools and universities to assume the retirement costs for their workers. Cross said supporters claim that the cost would be 6 percent to 9 percent of payroll for most schools. However, he said that there are many factors that could make the numbers spike. “That’s a floor, and given the unfunded liability numbers out there, given the potential for market drops, given the potential for change in interest rates assumption, or [if] the General Assembly doesn’t make payments, that number climbs significantly,” Cross said at a Chicago news conference yesterday. Cross and other Republicans say a cost shift could result n increased property taxes and layoffs. Cross said he does not back a proposal that leaves out schools and universities. “If we do that bill, the day it becomes law, we’ll see litigation. It’s inevitable that we’re going to see litigation, and once that litigation starts, it’s our belief that we will cease the discussions on pension reform until the conclusion of a lawsuit.”
Cross said Quinn should keep lawmakers in session until a deal can be reached. “This needs to happen. It doesn’t need to happen after the election. It needs to happen now. ... And so, call us back to special session. And people are going to yell and scream, and they’re going to complain, and it’ll be chaotic down there [in Springfield]. But my approach is.,you put us in a room, lock the key, and when we’re done, you let us out.”
Despite the lack of agreement, Quinn remains optimistic that things could still fall in line to pass a bill on Friday. “I think each of the leaders is waiting for the other to move forward. And I hope we can in the next couple of days get everybody to jump aboard at the same time. Hold hands and let’s go together.”
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
New gaming plan could cut out Quinn
By Jamey Dunn
A sponsor of legislation to expand gambling in the state said he is looking for enough votes to override a potential veto from Gov. Pat Quinn.
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang sponsored Senate Bill 744, which the General Assembly passed last spring. Senate President John Cullerton used a procedural move to hold the bill to try to negotiate with Quinn. However, Lang said the strategy did not work. “Throughout the summer, there were many meeting held with the governor, but none of those meetings are what you would call negotiations. There was never a point in time that the governor chose to negotiate,” Lang said. “And so we were left with trying to figure out how to handle this.”
During a news conference shortly before veto session began, Quinn said he would veto SB 744 if it were sent to his desk. He also detailed some suggestions for rewriting the bill. He said he supported new casinos but would not go along with allowing slot machines at horse racing tracks. He also raised concerns about the oversight included in the original plan.
Sen. Terry Link, sponsor of SB 744 in his chamber, introduced another bill, SB 747, during the first week of veto session that he said was based on Quinn's suggestions. Quinn came out strongly against Link's proposal, and the plan has not been called for a floor vote.
Lang said he tired to take Quinn’s thoughts — as well as criticisms from Illinois Gaming Board Chairman Aaron Jaffe, newspaper editorial boards and others — into account when drafting a new gaming expansion bill, SB1849. A House committee approved Lang's bill today.
The measure includes slots at horse racing tracks but does not allow for slots at the Illinois State Fairgrounds or Chicago airports. It would reduce the number of gaming positions available to casinos from 2,000 in the original bill to 1,600. They currently are allowed 1,200 positions. The Chicago-owned casino proposed in the plan would be allowed 4,000 positions. Lang said any unused positions at a facility could potentially be transferred to another casino that would use them. “It is in the benefit of our citizens to have all of those positions used.” Lang said that it would be up to the Gaming Board to create the procedure for transferring positions.
SB 1849 does not include a controversial provision that called for the Gaming Board to issue temporary licenses within 60 days of application to bars and restaurants seeking video gaming. The proposal was meant to spur the board to implement video gaming, which was approved as part of the funding for the state’s capital construction plan. So far, no licenses have been issued and no revenue from video gambling has come in.
Lang said some lawmakers were uncomfortable with issuing the temporary licenses. His new bill calls for the board to begin implementing video poker before any new casinos can be licensed and before horse tracks can get a license for a permanent location for slots. However, they would be able to operate out of a temporary facility, such as a tent. Lang said he wanted to ensure that the board did not “skip over” video poker to begin work on a gaming expansion. “That could be one machine, it could be 10,000 machines, but they’ve got to get it up and running.”
Lang said the legislation should clear up concerns about oversight of the Chicago casino. He said the ultimate authority would belong to the Gaming Board. Quinn complained that the city would be allowed too much regulatory leeway under SB 744.
But Lang’s stated goal of finding 71 “yes” votes in the House — enough supporters to override a veto from Quinn — indicates that he is less worried about pleasing the governor with his bill and more concerned with getting as much support from his fellow lawmakers as possible. While Quinn has yet to take a position on the plan, Lang's goal shows that he is anticipating a veto. A spokesperson for Quinn said his administration is “reviewing the proposal.” Quinn has said numerous times that he opposes allowing slots at horse racing tracks. He has said that such a proposal allows for too much gambling in the state and would lead to the cannibalization of business from existing casinos.
Current casinos owners oppose Lang’s plan for that very reason. “We’re not opposed to a casino in Danville. We’re not opposed to a casino in Rockford, Chicago, the Waukegan area. … We are opposed to the facilities right next door to existing casinos,” said Tom Swoik, executive director of the Illinois Casino gaming association. Swoik said casino owners are not opposed to expansion as long as it is “reasonable” and in “new market areas.”
He added: “The state isn’t going to get the kind of money that they think they are going to get out of this. We’re just transferring gamblers from one area to another.”
But Lang said the bill would bring in roughly $1 billion in licensing fees in addition to future revenues from taxes paid by casinos and racetracks. “I think we’ve made a very good piece of legislation better; one that will raise billions of dollars for the state, one that will pay our old bills,” Lang said. “At a time when our unemployment rate has reached 10 percent, this is something that we must do.”
He said finding the backing for a veto proof majority is “not going to be easy,” and he is not above exploiting recent rifts between the governor and the legislature to rally the votes he needs. “I will use any legal means to get a veto proof majority to pass this bill.” He said Quinn’s proposal to close state facilities, his comments implying that campaign contributions influenced votes to override his veto on a smart grid plan and his refusal to negotiate about gaming caused some animosity toward the governor among lawmakers. “I think when the governor announced two weeks ago that he was not in favor of slot machines at racetracks, it made some people very angry. … I’m going to go to those legislators, and I’m going to get them angry.”
Lang said he hopes to call his bill for a floor vote tomorrow.
A sponsor of legislation to expand gambling in the state said he is looking for enough votes to override a potential veto from Gov. Pat Quinn.
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang sponsored Senate Bill 744, which the General Assembly passed last spring. Senate President John Cullerton used a procedural move to hold the bill to try to negotiate with Quinn. However, Lang said the strategy did not work. “Throughout the summer, there were many meeting held with the governor, but none of those meetings are what you would call negotiations. There was never a point in time that the governor chose to negotiate,” Lang said. “And so we were left with trying to figure out how to handle this.”
During a news conference shortly before veto session began, Quinn said he would veto SB 744 if it were sent to his desk. He also detailed some suggestions for rewriting the bill. He said he supported new casinos but would not go along with allowing slot machines at horse racing tracks. He also raised concerns about the oversight included in the original plan.
Sen. Terry Link, sponsor of SB 744 in his chamber, introduced another bill, SB 747, during the first week of veto session that he said was based on Quinn's suggestions. Quinn came out strongly against Link's proposal, and the plan has not been called for a floor vote.
Lang said he tired to take Quinn’s thoughts — as well as criticisms from Illinois Gaming Board Chairman Aaron Jaffe, newspaper editorial boards and others — into account when drafting a new gaming expansion bill, SB1849. A House committee approved Lang's bill today.
The measure includes slots at horse racing tracks but does not allow for slots at the Illinois State Fairgrounds or Chicago airports. It would reduce the number of gaming positions available to casinos from 2,000 in the original bill to 1,600. They currently are allowed 1,200 positions. The Chicago-owned casino proposed in the plan would be allowed 4,000 positions. Lang said any unused positions at a facility could potentially be transferred to another casino that would use them. “It is in the benefit of our citizens to have all of those positions used.” Lang said that it would be up to the Gaming Board to create the procedure for transferring positions.
SB 1849 does not include a controversial provision that called for the Gaming Board to issue temporary licenses within 60 days of application to bars and restaurants seeking video gaming. The proposal was meant to spur the board to implement video gaming, which was approved as part of the funding for the state’s capital construction plan. So far, no licenses have been issued and no revenue from video gambling has come in.
Lang said some lawmakers were uncomfortable with issuing the temporary licenses. His new bill calls for the board to begin implementing video poker before any new casinos can be licensed and before horse tracks can get a license for a permanent location for slots. However, they would be able to operate out of a temporary facility, such as a tent. Lang said he wanted to ensure that the board did not “skip over” video poker to begin work on a gaming expansion. “That could be one machine, it could be 10,000 machines, but they’ve got to get it up and running.”
Lang said the legislation should clear up concerns about oversight of the Chicago casino. He said the ultimate authority would belong to the Gaming Board. Quinn complained that the city would be allowed too much regulatory leeway under SB 744.
But Lang’s stated goal of finding 71 “yes” votes in the House — enough supporters to override a veto from Quinn — indicates that he is less worried about pleasing the governor with his bill and more concerned with getting as much support from his fellow lawmakers as possible. While Quinn has yet to take a position on the plan, Lang's goal shows that he is anticipating a veto. A spokesperson for Quinn said his administration is “reviewing the proposal.” Quinn has said numerous times that he opposes allowing slots at horse racing tracks. He has said that such a proposal allows for too much gambling in the state and would lead to the cannibalization of business from existing casinos.
Current casinos owners oppose Lang’s plan for that very reason. “We’re not opposed to a casino in Danville. We’re not opposed to a casino in Rockford, Chicago, the Waukegan area. … We are opposed to the facilities right next door to existing casinos,” said Tom Swoik, executive director of the Illinois Casino gaming association. Swoik said casino owners are not opposed to expansion as long as it is “reasonable” and in “new market areas.”
He added: “The state isn’t going to get the kind of money that they think they are going to get out of this. We’re just transferring gamblers from one area to another.”
But Lang said the bill would bring in roughly $1 billion in licensing fees in addition to future revenues from taxes paid by casinos and racetracks. “I think we’ve made a very good piece of legislation better; one that will raise billions of dollars for the state, one that will pay our old bills,” Lang said. “At a time when our unemployment rate has reached 10 percent, this is something that we must do.”
He said finding the backing for a veto proof majority is “not going to be easy,” and he is not above exploiting recent rifts between the governor and the legislature to rally the votes he needs. “I will use any legal means to get a veto proof majority to pass this bill.” He said Quinn’s proposal to close state facilities, his comments implying that campaign contributions influenced votes to override his veto on a smart grid plan and his refusal to negotiate about gaming caused some animosity toward the governor among lawmakers. “I think when the governor announced two weeks ago that he was not in favor of slot machines at racetracks, it made some people very angry. … I’m going to go to those legislators, and I’m going to get them angry.”
Lang said he hopes to call his bill for a floor vote tomorrow.
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Less good-time credit for DUI offenders
By Rachel Wells
Some DUI offenders could face longer prison times if legislators succeed in limiting their eligibility for good behavior time off.
Under HB 4776, prisoners convicted of aggravated driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol would accumulate no more than 4.5 days of good behavior time off for every month of incarceration. Previously, the 4.5-day limitation applied only to DUI offenders who had caused someone’s death.
“We have to provide significant and severe penalties to people who cause great bodily harm and disfigurement as well,” said the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat. “[This will] strengthen our laws and be just one more tool that we can use out there in our communities to convince people that they should not get into their cars when they’re drunk.”
The measure, approved on Tuesday by the House, stems from northern suburb law enforcement recommendations, Lang said, but a recent early release controversy probably helped it gain momentum. In December, the Associated Press revealed that the Department of Corrections had released offenders, some of them convicted for violent crimes, after they’d spent only a few weeks in prison. The secret program was called Meritorious Good Time Push, or "MGT Push."
“I think, yes, the ‘MGT [Push]’ issues that are out front and center probably helped people realize that we need to do this, but I’m fairly sure that this bill would have passed anyway.” No House members voted against the bill.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Medical marijuana bill advances in the House
By Hilary Russell
The Illinois Senate made history last night by approving a bill that would authorize the limited use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. The measure advanced again tonight when a House committee approved the same measure by a vote of 4-3.
Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, said SB 1381 could be called in the House as early as tomorrow. Lang sponsored another version, HB 2514, which has the same intent but different restrictions. He said he’d try to advance the version sponsored by Sen. Bill Haine, an Alton Democrat, because it already cleared one hurdle by passing the Senate.
Lang said he would only call the bill for a full House debate if he felt sure he had enough votes for it to pass. “I am not a legislator that does test votes,” he said. “I am not going to run this out to the floor and have people vote on this pro and con. If there’s a vote taken on this bill, it will be when I think I can pass it.”
Opponents maintain that marijuana is a gateway drug and will lead to drug addiction and be accessible to children. Republican Rep. Patricia Bellock of Hinsdale said one reason she objects to the bill is because marijuana is an illegal drug. Most law enforcement agencies in the state also oppose this legislation.
Rep. Ron Stephens, a Greenville Republican, said there will be no way to know how many plants patients have in their homes. The bill calls for a 60-day supply of the drug, or two ounces of dried cannabis sativa and three mature flowering plants. See background here.
Haine and Lang maintain that the bill’s language is very strict and clear. Anyone who violated or abused the law would face criminal punishment.
The next step is for the bill to be called on the House floor and debated by the full chamber. We'll have more if that happens.
The Illinois Senate made history last night by approving a bill that would authorize the limited use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. The measure advanced again tonight when a House committee approved the same measure by a vote of 4-3.
Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, said SB 1381 could be called in the House as early as tomorrow. Lang sponsored another version, HB 2514, which has the same intent but different restrictions. He said he’d try to advance the version sponsored by Sen. Bill Haine, an Alton Democrat, because it already cleared one hurdle by passing the Senate.
Lang said he would only call the bill for a full House debate if he felt sure he had enough votes for it to pass. “I am not a legislator that does test votes,” he said. “I am not going to run this out to the floor and have people vote on this pro and con. If there’s a vote taken on this bill, it will be when I think I can pass it.”
Opponents maintain that marijuana is a gateway drug and will lead to drug addiction and be accessible to children. Republican Rep. Patricia Bellock of Hinsdale said one reason she objects to the bill is because marijuana is an illegal drug. Most law enforcement agencies in the state also oppose this legislation.
Rep. Ron Stephens, a Greenville Republican, said there will be no way to know how many plants patients have in their homes. The bill calls for a 60-day supply of the drug, or two ounces of dried cannabis sativa and three mature flowering plants. See background here.
Haine and Lang maintain that the bill’s language is very strict and clear. Anyone who violated or abused the law would face criminal punishment.
The next step is for the bill to be called on the House floor and debated by the full chamber. We'll have more if that happens.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Medical marijuana vote could come tomorrow
By Hilary Russell
Illinois could move one step closer toward becoming the 14th state to authorize the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes tomorrow. Senate sponsor William Haine, an Alton Democrat, is expected to present his version of the bill that allows restricted use of marijuana for specific individuals.
This would be the second time in the Illinois General Assembly's history that a bill proposing the authorization of marijuana use would be called for a floor vote. If signed into law, Haine's measure would allow chronic or terminally ill individuals to use the drug without fear of criminal penalty. It also would afford a primary care physician the ability to authorize use of the drug.
A similar measure is in the House. While Haine's bill proposes an individual be allowed to possess 2 ounces of dried Cannabis Sativa and three mature flowering plants, which are dried and then smoked or vaporized, Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat sponsoring a similar bill. Both bills call for a 60-day supply but deem the Illinois Department of Public Health responsible for determining the number of dried ounces and mature plants capable of producing a 60-day supply.
Lang could call Haine's version or his own if Haine's measure passes out of the Senate tomorrow.
For Haine's bill to move out of the Senate, 30 votes are needed. In a statement Haine released today, he said he was close to getting the necessary votes. Lang needs at least 60 votes for it to go to Gov. Pat Quinn's desk. Check back tomorrow for Senate action.
Lainutis Nargalenes, a Springfield deputy chief of police, said he remained opposed to the bill and was taking a wait-and-see approach to determine if it actually passed the House.
Dann Linn, executive director of the Illinois Chapter of the National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws (NORML), said he was optimistic the bill would pass both chambers. “We've been pushing this legislation for years for patients to get safe and legal access to their medicine,” he said.
The U.S. Supreme Court today refused to hear a case initiated by two counties in California challenging that state's medical marijuana laws. Several opponents of this type of legislation have been unsuccessful in attempts to reverse legislation in states that allow use of the drug by claiming that federal law supersedes state law. In March, U.S. Attorney Eric Holder announced a reversal of the former Bush Administration's policy to target marijuana distributors that worked within their own state's law. Marijuana is classified as a federally illegal drug, but 13 states currently permit its use through voter initiative or state legislation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
