By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn today signed a law that could open up more land to the public for recreation.
Senate Bill 1042 will limit the amount of liability landowners will face if they open up their property to the public. After an Illinois Supreme Court ruling in the early 2000s, the legislature rewrote the law, known as the Recreational Use of Land and Water Act, to specifically protect people who allowed hunters onto their land. However the rewrite left everyone else out. After the change, Illinois was the only state in the country that did not grant some liability protections to property owners as an incentive for them to allow people to enjoy their land. Landowners would potentially be liable for any accident on their property, such as a hiker twisting an ankle.
“We should make it easier for generous people to open their lands to the public — not harder. This new law should create opportunities for rock climbers, hikers, kayakers and other outdoors enthusiasts across the state,” said Oak Park Democratic Sen. Don Harmon, a sponsor of the bill.
Proponents of the new law say the current regulations have a chilling effect on property owners. “There are some private landowners who simply could not afford to continue to allow public access because of rising liability insurance costs or concerns about litigation,” Illinois Department of Natural Resources Director Marc Miller said in a prepared statement.
Landowners will still be liable if they know of dangerous conditions on their property and fail to warn the public. “If you know that there is something on your property that is inherently dangerous, you shouldn’t make your land open without adequately notifying,” Harmon told Illinois Issues. “You don’t want to invite Timmy and Lassie on there with the open well.”
A coalition of environmental groups and advocates for public open spaces have been lobbying lawmakers for years on the issue. “Openlands worked with its partners for seven years to reinstate protections for generous private landowners who open their land to the public for recreation,” said Lenore Beyer-Clow, public policy director for Openlands, a conservation group with a focus on protecting land for public use. “We are excited that this law will offer new opportunities for people to connect to nature and enjoy Illinois’ beautiful open spaces.”
The bill passed through the legislature with no opposing votes. The new law will go into effect on January 1, 2014. “Our state is full of natural treasures, and many of those fall on private land,” Quinn said in a prepared statement. “Increasing landowner protections will boost the confidence of our residents who want to allow public access but have reservations about their own liability. This new law is a win-win for landowners and outdoor enthusiasts.”
For more on the law and what it could mean for those who enjoy the outdoors in Illinois, see the 2013 environmental issue of Illinois Issues.
Showing posts with label public safety. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public safety. Show all posts
Friday, August 23, 2013
Monday, August 19, 2013
Quinn signs bill to increase speed limit to 70 mph
By Jamey Dunn
Despite opposition from members of his own administration, Gov. Pat Quinn approved increasing the speed limit on some state highways to 70 miles per hour.
Senate Bill 2356 will increase the speed limit on divided four-lane highways from 65 to 70 miles per hour. Local officials in Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair and Will counties can vote to opt out of the increase. The new limit will also apply to Illinois tollways. However, the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority will have to power to designate other limits in some areas. The new law will take effect on January 1, 2014.
“This limited five miles-per-hour increase will bring Illinois’ rural interstate speed limits in line with our neighbors and the majority of states across America, while preventing an increase in excessive speeding,” Quinn said today in a prepared statement. “I encourage all motorists to continue to respect our traffic laws, avoid distractions and exercise common sense behind the wheel to protect the safety of themselves and others.”
The Illinois State Police oppose the change, and Quinn’s own transportation secretary lobbied against the legislation when it was up for consideration in the General Assembly. “The higher the speed limit, the more likely you are to be in a crash. And if you’re in a crash, the more likely you are to be killed,” Anne Schneider, secretary of the Illinois Department of Transportation, said when the Illinois House was still considering the bill. Despite her stance, the bill passed both legislative chambers with bipartisan support. The new law will also lower the speed at which drivers can be charged with excessive speeding from 31 miles per hour over the limit to 26 miles per hour.
While Quinn may be swimming against the opposition of some in Illinois, he is going with the national flow — something that is pointed out twice in a news release issued by his office upon his signing of the bill. “Illinois joins 36 other states with speed limits of 70 mph or higher, including Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.”
However, some national experts say the move toward higher speed limits does not necessarily indicate that they are safe. “The politics is that the public wants to go faster; they don't see it as a safety issue, so it's no surprise that legislatures have followed,” Jonathan Adkins, deputy executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association told the Associated Press last week. “Unlike with drunk driving and seat-belt use and even distracted driving ... the public just doesn't see speeding as a safety issue.”
On Friday, Quinn signed another bill that bans talking on hand-held cell phones while driving. The measure allows for the use of hands-free devices. That ban will also go into effect at the start of 2014.
Despite opposition from members of his own administration, Gov. Pat Quinn approved increasing the speed limit on some state highways to 70 miles per hour.
Senate Bill 2356 will increase the speed limit on divided four-lane highways from 65 to 70 miles per hour. Local officials in Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, Madison, McHenry, St. Clair and Will counties can vote to opt out of the increase. The new limit will also apply to Illinois tollways. However, the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority will have to power to designate other limits in some areas. The new law will take effect on January 1, 2014.
“This limited five miles-per-hour increase will bring Illinois’ rural interstate speed limits in line with our neighbors and the majority of states across America, while preventing an increase in excessive speeding,” Quinn said today in a prepared statement. “I encourage all motorists to continue to respect our traffic laws, avoid distractions and exercise common sense behind the wheel to protect the safety of themselves and others.”
The Illinois State Police oppose the change, and Quinn’s own transportation secretary lobbied against the legislation when it was up for consideration in the General Assembly. “The higher the speed limit, the more likely you are to be in a crash. And if you’re in a crash, the more likely you are to be killed,” Anne Schneider, secretary of the Illinois Department of Transportation, said when the Illinois House was still considering the bill. Despite her stance, the bill passed both legislative chambers with bipartisan support. The new law will also lower the speed at which drivers can be charged with excessive speeding from 31 miles per hour over the limit to 26 miles per hour.
While Quinn may be swimming against the opposition of some in Illinois, he is going with the national flow — something that is pointed out twice in a news release issued by his office upon his signing of the bill. “Illinois joins 36 other states with speed limits of 70 mph or higher, including Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.”
However, some national experts say the move toward higher speed limits does not necessarily indicate that they are safe. “The politics is that the public wants to go faster; they don't see it as a safety issue, so it's no surprise that legislatures have followed,” Jonathan Adkins, deputy executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association told the Associated Press last week. “Unlike with drunk driving and seat-belt use and even distracted driving ... the public just doesn't see speeding as a safety issue.”
On Friday, Quinn signed another bill that bans talking on hand-held cell phones while driving. The measure allows for the use of hands-free devices. That ban will also go into effect at the start of 2014.
Friday, August 16, 2013
Quinn signs ban on drivers using handheld cell phones
By Jamey Dunn
Starting next year, drivers will have to put down their cell phones before they get behind the wheel.
Gov. Pat Quinn today signed House Bill 1247, which bans the use of cell phones while driving, unless drivers use hands-free devices to talk. “Distracted driving is not only dangerous — it’s deadly,” Gov. Quinn said in a prepared statement. “Too many Illinois families have suffered because of accidents that could have been prevented. Anyone driving a car should be careful, responsive and alert behind the wheel. These new laws will save lives.”
Illinois joins 11 other states and the District of Columbia in banning phones behind the wheel. The state already prohibits texting while driving. The ban on chatting while driving will go into effect on January 1, 2014. “When people get behind the wheel, they have a responsibility to themselves and to others to drive safely,” Chicago Democratic Sen. John D’Amico, who sponsored the bill, said in a prepared statement. “When motorists are on the phone, they are not giving their full attention to the most important task they have. This law will help reduce traffic accidents and make Illinois roads safer.”
Drivers using hand-held cell phones are four times more likely to get in accidents that cause injuries according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. “We want drivers to keep their eyes on the road and their hands on the wheel,” Sen. John Mulroe, who sponsored the bill, said in a prepared statement. “The phone call can wait.”
Opponents say the ban is an overreach by government into people’s lives. “This kind of stuff is the ultimate, ultimate in Big Brother,” Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican, said when the bill passed in the House. Bost noted that drivers do many other things behind the wheel — such as applying makeup, disciplining children or eating — that can be distracting and dangerous. “I know it is dangerous, but there’s a lot of things that we do every day while driving in our cars that become dangerous. ... Where do we stop [on bans]?”
Starting next year, drivers will have to put down their cell phones before they get behind the wheel.
Gov. Pat Quinn today signed House Bill 1247, which bans the use of cell phones while driving, unless drivers use hands-free devices to talk. “Distracted driving is not only dangerous — it’s deadly,” Gov. Quinn said in a prepared statement. “Too many Illinois families have suffered because of accidents that could have been prevented. Anyone driving a car should be careful, responsive and alert behind the wheel. These new laws will save lives.”
Illinois joins 11 other states and the District of Columbia in banning phones behind the wheel. The state already prohibits texting while driving. The ban on chatting while driving will go into effect on January 1, 2014. “When people get behind the wheel, they have a responsibility to themselves and to others to drive safely,” Chicago Democratic Sen. John D’Amico, who sponsored the bill, said in a prepared statement. “When motorists are on the phone, they are not giving their full attention to the most important task they have. This law will help reduce traffic accidents and make Illinois roads safer.”
Drivers using hand-held cell phones are four times more likely to get in accidents that cause injuries according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. “We want drivers to keep their eyes on the road and their hands on the wheel,” Sen. John Mulroe, who sponsored the bill, said in a prepared statement. “The phone call can wait.”
Opponents say the ban is an overreach by government into people’s lives. “This kind of stuff is the ultimate, ultimate in Big Brother,” Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican, said when the bill passed in the House. Bost noted that drivers do many other things behind the wheel — such as applying makeup, disciplining children or eating — that can be distracting and dangerous. “I know it is dangerous, but there’s a lot of things that we do every day while driving in our cars that become dangerous. ... Where do we stop [on bans]?”
Tuesday, July 02, 2013
Lawmakers to take up Quinn's concealed carry veto on day of court deadline
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn had harsh words for lawmakers today as he revealed his proposed changes to a compromise concealed-carry bill lawmakers approved in May.
“I think this is an example of a situation in Illinois where the legislature passed a bill in a hurried way at the inspiration of the National Rifle Association, contrary to the safety of the people of Illinois,” Quinn said today at a Chicago news conference. “Fortunately our Constitution — adopted by the people in a referendum — gives the governor an opportunity to propose important changes that protect the public safety.”
A federal court overturned the state’s ban on concealed carry of firearms and gave lawmakers until early June to pass a bill regulating carry in the state. Both legislative chambers approved House Bill 183 on the last day of the spring session. Attorney General Lisa Madigan sought an extension of the deadline to give Quinn time to review the bill. Illinois now has until July 9 to put a carry law in place.
House sponsor of the bill Rep. Brandon Phelps has moved to override Quinn’s changes, and the House plans to begin session at 11 a.m. on July 9 to consider the veto. “He just put one more hurdle in there before the July 9 deadline that we’re going to have to overcome,” Phelps said. Supporters of the original House Bill 183 will need the support of three-fifths of the members of both chambers to reject Quinn’s changes. If all those who voted in favor of the bill the first time around also vote to reject the veto, then HB 183 will become law without Quinn's changes.
“There are serious flaws in this bill that jeopardize public safety of the people of Illinois.” Quinn said today after he used his amendatory veto power to make multiple changes to HB 183. Quinn's administration also launched a website that describes his tweaks to the bill. He proposed removing a provision that would bar home rule governments from setting future restrictions on guns, such as assault weapons bans. “Home rule is a very important part of life in Illinois. It allows local communities to adopt laws and ordinances that benefit their community, and that principle ought to be upheld.” Quinn said the provision is unrelated to concealed carry. “This provision was inspired by the National Rifle Association; it has nothing to do with concealed carry. It’s part of their agenda, no doubt about it, but we don’t need the NRA telling us how to keep people safe in the state of Illinois and our local communities.”
Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat, said the prohibition on future ordinances is meant to keep local laws from springing up after carry goes into effect. He said that if that occurs, gun owners would likely not know what each locality had passed and might inadvertently break laws as the travel in Illinois. “We do not believe in a patchwork of laws when you are traveling from town to town in the state. The average, law-abiding gun owner is not going to know when driving through those towns what’s expected of him or her.”
Home rule units that do not have bans on assault weapons would have 10 days after the bill becomes law to enact such a ban. “Those home rule municipalities have had forever to pass some form of assault weapons ban,” Phelps said. He took issue with the governor characterizing the bill as a product of the policy desires of the NRA. Phelps has worked closely with the NRA on previous versions of concealed carry, even sponsoring legislation drafted by the organization in the past. But he says HB 183 is a compromise bill that was worked out by lawmakers without interest groups at the table. “The NRA was never in the meeting. They don’t necessarily like the bill. There’s some things they like in there, and there’s some things they don’t like. There’s some things the city of Chicago likes and some things they don’t like. That’s how you get a compromise.” The NRA was neutral on the legislation and avoided making public comments. However gun control advocates noted that the group is rarely mum on any legislation concerning firearms, let alone one of the most important gun-related measures in recent history.
Quinn’s changes would limit those with a carry license to carrying one gun and one ammunition clip that holds no more than 10 rounds. The bill as written would allow licensees to carry as many guns and rounds as they wanted. Under HB 183, business owners who do not wish to allow guns on their property would be required to post a sign. Quinn wants the law to be the other way around. “The presumption ought to be that no guns are allowed in these places, and if the [property] owner wants to have guns, then they should have to have a sign that says, ‘Guns are welcome here.’ It shouldn’t be a burden on private property owners to put a sign otherwise.” Quinn was critical of wording in the bill that allows for carrying guns that are “mostly” concealed. “This isn’t concealed at all,” he said. He proposed changing the wording to clarify that weapons must be fully hidden from view.
The governor also wants to strike a provision that would allow gun owners to keep their firearms locked in their cars if their employers do not allow guns on site. Quinn said that employers should be allowed to ban guns anywhere on their property to reduce the potential for workplace violence. Quinn’s rewrite would also ban the carry of guns in any establishment that serves alcohol. HB 183 only bans weapons in establishments where alcohol makes up half of the gross sales. “Guns and alcohol don’t mix, and I think it’s very important that the legislature understand that message from the people of Illinois,” he said.
Both of the last two issues were provisions that gun control advocates vocally opposed in HB 183. They applauded Quinn’s move today. Coleen Daley, executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, said her organization accepted the court ruling and tried to work with lawmakers to get “comprehensive” carry regulation. But she said that the process did not result in a satisfactory bill. “A flawed bill was passed. Thankfully, our state’s top elected official, Gov. Quinn has our back.” She said that SB 183 “goes too far,” but Quinn’s proposed changes would alleviate most of her group’s concerns with the bill.
Phelps has already filed the paperwork to override Quinn’s veto, which he dismissed as a political move. “This is 100 percent political pandering to one area of this state, Cook County and Chicago. That’s all he’s doing. He’s totally disregarding the General Assembly.” He said the governor has refused to take his calls since the bill passed. “That just shows you how much he thinks of the General Assembly,” Phelps said. “I thought maybe out of respect of each of the bill’s sponsors [he would] to try to work something out.” Phelps said Quinn should have signed the bill and then presented his own legislation with any changes he thinks are needed.
Both Phelps, and Sen. Gary Forby, the Senate sponsor of the bill, are confident that lawmakers will vote to override Quinn’s veto next week. Quinn has also threatened to call lawmakers back for a special session to take up pension reform, so there may be more than one session day next week. “This doesn’t come as a shock to anyone. We knew this governor was going to make this political. If he had concerns about the bill, maybe he should have been more involved when lawmakers spent months working on it. Instead, he makes major changes to the bill after it passed both the House and Senate with veto-proof majorities. Just doesn’t seem very democratic to me,” said Forby, a Benton Democrat.
Quinn today reiterated his opposition to allowing concealed carry in the state at all. “I felt that [court] ruling was wrong then; I still feel it’s wrong. It’s not been appealed.”
Attorney General Lisa Madigan still has the option to appeal the ruling, but a statement from her office today said that she plans to wait to see what lawmakers do with the veto. “That's the last step in the legislative process after the governor amendatorily vetoes a bill. Our office will continue to monitor the progress on the legislative front before making a final decision about the state’s legal options.”
Chicago Democratic Sen. Kwame Raoul, who worked on the negotiations surrounding concealed carry, said he supports many of the changes that Quinn proposed. However he said they were not politically possible. Raoul in particular supported a ban on guns in all places where alcohol is served, but during negotiations, he acknowledged that he might not be able to get all the components he wanted passed. “I wanted the provision that the governor is suggesting to add through amendatory veto, but it was a deal breaker with regards to negotiations.” He said he has not yet decided how he will vote if the veto override is called in the Senate. He voted "present" on HB 183.
“The governor has within his powers the ability to weigh in. I share some of the sentiment of the governor with regards to some of these public safety issues,” Raoul said. But he said that the end product approved by the legislature had some strong protections, especially when coupled with other gun safety legislation sponsored by Raoul. When lawmakers passed the carry bill, they also approved legislation that requires gun owners to report lost or stolen weapons and gun sellers to confirm that purchasers in private sales can legally own firearms. “I don’t fault him, but we have to realize the reality of the circumstance of what a legislature is and how you negotiate within it,” Raoul said.
Quinn said today in response to critics who have accused him of swooping in with demands at the 11th hour after lawmakers spent months negotiating the bill: “I don’t believe in compromising public safety. I don’t believe in negotiating public safety.”
Gov. Pat Quinn had harsh words for lawmakers today as he revealed his proposed changes to a compromise concealed-carry bill lawmakers approved in May.
“I think this is an example of a situation in Illinois where the legislature passed a bill in a hurried way at the inspiration of the National Rifle Association, contrary to the safety of the people of Illinois,” Quinn said today at a Chicago news conference. “Fortunately our Constitution — adopted by the people in a referendum — gives the governor an opportunity to propose important changes that protect the public safety.”
A federal court overturned the state’s ban on concealed carry of firearms and gave lawmakers until early June to pass a bill regulating carry in the state. Both legislative chambers approved House Bill 183 on the last day of the spring session. Attorney General Lisa Madigan sought an extension of the deadline to give Quinn time to review the bill. Illinois now has until July 9 to put a carry law in place.
House sponsor of the bill Rep. Brandon Phelps has moved to override Quinn’s changes, and the House plans to begin session at 11 a.m. on July 9 to consider the veto. “He just put one more hurdle in there before the July 9 deadline that we’re going to have to overcome,” Phelps said. Supporters of the original House Bill 183 will need the support of three-fifths of the members of both chambers to reject Quinn’s changes. If all those who voted in favor of the bill the first time around also vote to reject the veto, then HB 183 will become law without Quinn's changes.
“There are serious flaws in this bill that jeopardize public safety of the people of Illinois.” Quinn said today after he used his amendatory veto power to make multiple changes to HB 183. Quinn's administration also launched a website that describes his tweaks to the bill. He proposed removing a provision that would bar home rule governments from setting future restrictions on guns, such as assault weapons bans. “Home rule is a very important part of life in Illinois. It allows local communities to adopt laws and ordinances that benefit their community, and that principle ought to be upheld.” Quinn said the provision is unrelated to concealed carry. “This provision was inspired by the National Rifle Association; it has nothing to do with concealed carry. It’s part of their agenda, no doubt about it, but we don’t need the NRA telling us how to keep people safe in the state of Illinois and our local communities.”
Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat, said the prohibition on future ordinances is meant to keep local laws from springing up after carry goes into effect. He said that if that occurs, gun owners would likely not know what each locality had passed and might inadvertently break laws as the travel in Illinois. “We do not believe in a patchwork of laws when you are traveling from town to town in the state. The average, law-abiding gun owner is not going to know when driving through those towns what’s expected of him or her.”
Home rule units that do not have bans on assault weapons would have 10 days after the bill becomes law to enact such a ban. “Those home rule municipalities have had forever to pass some form of assault weapons ban,” Phelps said. He took issue with the governor characterizing the bill as a product of the policy desires of the NRA. Phelps has worked closely with the NRA on previous versions of concealed carry, even sponsoring legislation drafted by the organization in the past. But he says HB 183 is a compromise bill that was worked out by lawmakers without interest groups at the table. “The NRA was never in the meeting. They don’t necessarily like the bill. There’s some things they like in there, and there’s some things they don’t like. There’s some things the city of Chicago likes and some things they don’t like. That’s how you get a compromise.” The NRA was neutral on the legislation and avoided making public comments. However gun control advocates noted that the group is rarely mum on any legislation concerning firearms, let alone one of the most important gun-related measures in recent history.
Quinn’s changes would limit those with a carry license to carrying one gun and one ammunition clip that holds no more than 10 rounds. The bill as written would allow licensees to carry as many guns and rounds as they wanted. Under HB 183, business owners who do not wish to allow guns on their property would be required to post a sign. Quinn wants the law to be the other way around. “The presumption ought to be that no guns are allowed in these places, and if the [property] owner wants to have guns, then they should have to have a sign that says, ‘Guns are welcome here.’ It shouldn’t be a burden on private property owners to put a sign otherwise.” Quinn was critical of wording in the bill that allows for carrying guns that are “mostly” concealed. “This isn’t concealed at all,” he said. He proposed changing the wording to clarify that weapons must be fully hidden from view.
The governor also wants to strike a provision that would allow gun owners to keep their firearms locked in their cars if their employers do not allow guns on site. Quinn said that employers should be allowed to ban guns anywhere on their property to reduce the potential for workplace violence. Quinn’s rewrite would also ban the carry of guns in any establishment that serves alcohol. HB 183 only bans weapons in establishments where alcohol makes up half of the gross sales. “Guns and alcohol don’t mix, and I think it’s very important that the legislature understand that message from the people of Illinois,” he said.
Both of the last two issues were provisions that gun control advocates vocally opposed in HB 183. They applauded Quinn’s move today. Coleen Daley, executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, said her organization accepted the court ruling and tried to work with lawmakers to get “comprehensive” carry regulation. But she said that the process did not result in a satisfactory bill. “A flawed bill was passed. Thankfully, our state’s top elected official, Gov. Quinn has our back.” She said that SB 183 “goes too far,” but Quinn’s proposed changes would alleviate most of her group’s concerns with the bill.
Phelps has already filed the paperwork to override Quinn’s veto, which he dismissed as a political move. “This is 100 percent political pandering to one area of this state, Cook County and Chicago. That’s all he’s doing. He’s totally disregarding the General Assembly.” He said the governor has refused to take his calls since the bill passed. “That just shows you how much he thinks of the General Assembly,” Phelps said. “I thought maybe out of respect of each of the bill’s sponsors [he would] to try to work something out.” Phelps said Quinn should have signed the bill and then presented his own legislation with any changes he thinks are needed.
Both Phelps, and Sen. Gary Forby, the Senate sponsor of the bill, are confident that lawmakers will vote to override Quinn’s veto next week. Quinn has also threatened to call lawmakers back for a special session to take up pension reform, so there may be more than one session day next week. “This doesn’t come as a shock to anyone. We knew this governor was going to make this political. If he had concerns about the bill, maybe he should have been more involved when lawmakers spent months working on it. Instead, he makes major changes to the bill after it passed both the House and Senate with veto-proof majorities. Just doesn’t seem very democratic to me,” said Forby, a Benton Democrat.
Quinn today reiterated his opposition to allowing concealed carry in the state at all. “I felt that [court] ruling was wrong then; I still feel it’s wrong. It’s not been appealed.”
Attorney General Lisa Madigan still has the option to appeal the ruling, but a statement from her office today said that she plans to wait to see what lawmakers do with the veto. “That's the last step in the legislative process after the governor amendatorily vetoes a bill. Our office will continue to monitor the progress on the legislative front before making a final decision about the state’s legal options.”
Chicago Democratic Sen. Kwame Raoul, who worked on the negotiations surrounding concealed carry, said he supports many of the changes that Quinn proposed. However he said they were not politically possible. Raoul in particular supported a ban on guns in all places where alcohol is served, but during negotiations, he acknowledged that he might not be able to get all the components he wanted passed. “I wanted the provision that the governor is suggesting to add through amendatory veto, but it was a deal breaker with regards to negotiations.” He said he has not yet decided how he will vote if the veto override is called in the Senate. He voted "present" on HB 183.
“The governor has within his powers the ability to weigh in. I share some of the sentiment of the governor with regards to some of these public safety issues,” Raoul said. But he said that the end product approved by the legislature had some strong protections, especially when coupled with other gun safety legislation sponsored by Raoul. When lawmakers passed the carry bill, they also approved legislation that requires gun owners to report lost or stolen weapons and gun sellers to confirm that purchasers in private sales can legally own firearms. “I don’t fault him, but we have to realize the reality of the circumstance of what a legislature is and how you negotiate within it,” Raoul said.
Quinn said today in response to critics who have accused him of swooping in with demands at the 11th hour after lawmakers spent months negotiating the bill: “I don’t believe in compromising public safety. I don’t believe in negotiating public safety.”
Monday, July 01, 2013
Quinn signs school safety bill, says he will act on carry bill 'shortly'
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn today signed legislation that requires Illinois schools to conduct safety drills to prepare for the possibility of a shooting.
The December shooting at a school in Newtown, Conn., where 20 children and six adults were killed, began a push in Illinois to ensure that schools are considering security as part of their safety plans. Senate Bill 1625 requires schools to add a drill for a “shooting incident” to their annual safety drills, which currently include evacuations and severe weather preparation. “Unfortunately, today we must prepare not only for acts of nature but acts of violence,” said Chicago Democratic Sen. Jacqueline Collins, who sponsored the bill. Local law enforcement will be involved in the shooting drills.
“I think all of us were horrified by a terrible tragedy that occurred in our country at Sandy Hook school in Newtown, Conn.,” Gov. Pat Quinn said in Oak Park today. “It was a horrific tragedy that we need to take notice of and do something about.” After the Sandy Hook shooting, Quinn held a school safety summit that included law enforcement officials, education representatives and the Illinois Emergency Management Agency. SB 1625 was a product of those discussions. “It’s very sad that we have to have a drill, but I think it is necessary,” said Illinois Education Association president Cinda Klickna, who participated in the summit. Klickna said many schools already have a plan in place for acts of violence. “Sometimes, there are schools that actually have a walk through [for police and emergency responders] so that everybody knows what the school looks like. ... The more that there is that conversation and understanding of that school setting, the better off you are.” She said, however, that some districts have a plan on file but have not conducted drills. The measure does allow flexibility for local districts to work with police and craft their own responses. “It’s a local enterprise between local law enforcement and the local school district,” Quinn said.
Klickna said the new law would bring some consistency across the state by ensuring that each school has a drill that teachers, staff and first responders have practiced. “I think if I were still in the classroom, I would really want to know what I was supposed to do,” she said. “Let’s just hope that we never really have to use the plan, but it’s always better to have a plan.”
Quinn has cited the Sandy Hook shooting several times this year in his calls for gun control measures, such as a ban on assault weapons and a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines. Parents of Sandy Hook victims came to Springfield to lobby for a high-capacity magazine ban, but the bill fell short in the Senate. Some Statehouse observers predict that Quinn will use his veto pen to write one or both provisions into a concealed carry bill that lawmakers approved on the last day of their spring session. A federal court overturned the state’s ban on concealed carry and gave lawmakers until July 9 to approve legislation regulating the carry of firearms in the state. Quinn would not give any details today, but he said he would act on the bill soon. “It’s imminent. I’ll act on that very shortly, so stay tuned.”
Quinn also set July 9 as the deadline for lawmakers to return to Springfield to take up pension reform legislation. A committee that is working to produce a compromise met last week and has another hearing scheduled on Wednesday. If Quinn vetoes the carry bill, legislators could act on his veto next week.
Gov. Pat Quinn today signed legislation that requires Illinois schools to conduct safety drills to prepare for the possibility of a shooting.
The December shooting at a school in Newtown, Conn., where 20 children and six adults were killed, began a push in Illinois to ensure that schools are considering security as part of their safety plans. Senate Bill 1625 requires schools to add a drill for a “shooting incident” to their annual safety drills, which currently include evacuations and severe weather preparation. “Unfortunately, today we must prepare not only for acts of nature but acts of violence,” said Chicago Democratic Sen. Jacqueline Collins, who sponsored the bill. Local law enforcement will be involved in the shooting drills.
“I think all of us were horrified by a terrible tragedy that occurred in our country at Sandy Hook school in Newtown, Conn.,” Gov. Pat Quinn said in Oak Park today. “It was a horrific tragedy that we need to take notice of and do something about.” After the Sandy Hook shooting, Quinn held a school safety summit that included law enforcement officials, education representatives and the Illinois Emergency Management Agency. SB 1625 was a product of those discussions. “It’s very sad that we have to have a drill, but I think it is necessary,” said Illinois Education Association president Cinda Klickna, who participated in the summit. Klickna said many schools already have a plan in place for acts of violence. “Sometimes, there are schools that actually have a walk through [for police and emergency responders] so that everybody knows what the school looks like. ... The more that there is that conversation and understanding of that school setting, the better off you are.” She said, however, that some districts have a plan on file but have not conducted drills. The measure does allow flexibility for local districts to work with police and craft their own responses. “It’s a local enterprise between local law enforcement and the local school district,” Quinn said.
Klickna said the new law would bring some consistency across the state by ensuring that each school has a drill that teachers, staff and first responders have practiced. “I think if I were still in the classroom, I would really want to know what I was supposed to do,” she said. “Let’s just hope that we never really have to use the plan, but it’s always better to have a plan.”
Quinn has cited the Sandy Hook shooting several times this year in his calls for gun control measures, such as a ban on assault weapons and a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines. Parents of Sandy Hook victims came to Springfield to lobby for a high-capacity magazine ban, but the bill fell short in the Senate. Some Statehouse observers predict that Quinn will use his veto pen to write one or both provisions into a concealed carry bill that lawmakers approved on the last day of their spring session. A federal court overturned the state’s ban on concealed carry and gave lawmakers until July 9 to approve legislation regulating the carry of firearms in the state. Quinn would not give any details today, but he said he would act on the bill soon. “It’s imminent. I’ll act on that very shortly, so stay tuned.”
Quinn also set July 9 as the deadline for lawmakers to return to Springfield to take up pension reform legislation. A committee that is working to produce a compromise met last week and has another hearing scheduled on Wednesday. If Quinn vetoes the carry bill, legislators could act on his veto next week.
Friday, May 31, 2013
Final state budget bills sent to governor
By Meredith Colias and Jamey Dunn
The Illinois Senate today approved the last two budget bills that the House sent over. Republicans echoed the same compliant they have had about the other pieces of the budget for Fiscal Year 2014, which was crafted by Democrats from both chambers.
House Bill 214 is general services spending, the General Assembly’s budget and the constitutional officers' budgets. HB 215 is public safety and transportation spending, Illinois Department of Corrections budget, capital construction spending for the next fiscal year, which begins July 1, and the Illinois Department of Natural Resources' budget. “It’s a responsible budget. We live within our means; we fund key programs; we’re paying down our bills,” said Park Ridge Democratic Sen. Dan Kotowski.
Sen. Chapin Rose, a Mahomet Republican, called the budget incomplete because it does not contain funds earmarked to pay back wages owed to state workers. “There’s a $140 million hole in this budget out of the gate,” he said.
“We’ll have to come back in the fall for a supplemental” spending bill to cover the back pay,” said Lake Barrington Republican Sen. Dan Duffy. “We should stay down here as long as we have to — all night and all summer if we have to — to come up with a balanced budget to pay down our bills.”
Meanwhile, Senate Bill 2555 and SB 2556, which contain the funding for K-12 and higher education, passed the House on the final day of the spring session and now go to the governor. K-12 education funding has been cut severely since 2009, and Homewood Democratic Rep. William Davis said that he was pleased that unexpected tax revenues allowed general state aid to be held flat for the next fiscal year because the state has an obligation to fund education. “We have to put our money where our mouths are,” said Davis, who chairs the House education budgeting committee.
Even though the K-12 education budget for Fiscal Year 2014 includes more than $6.6 billion in funding, school districts will still have to make due with an 89 percent proration for general state aid and a 64 percent proration for transportation. Funding for bilingual education and early childhood education will remain flat. Republicans criticized smaller parts of the more than $1.9 billion higher education budget, such as $600,000 for a Quad Cities manufacturing center at Western Illinois University. “If you are going to vote for this budget, I get it. But I am not going to support a budget that is a sham,” Macomb Republican Rep. Norine Hammond said.
The dismal state of funding for universities has forced many to delay maintenance, institute hiring freezes and look for other ways to supplement their budgets, including raising tuition. Rep. Chad Hays, a Republican from Catlin, said he is concerned that tuition increases are pricing Illinois schools out of range for average people. “Public education is getting elbowed off the table,” Hays said. “We are pricing the average family out of the higher education arena. The state can't be everything to everyone. We have to figure out where our priorities are.”
The Illinois Senate today approved the last two budget bills that the House sent over. Republicans echoed the same compliant they have had about the other pieces of the budget for Fiscal Year 2014, which was crafted by Democrats from both chambers.
House Bill 214 is general services spending, the General Assembly’s budget and the constitutional officers' budgets. HB 215 is public safety and transportation spending, Illinois Department of Corrections budget, capital construction spending for the next fiscal year, which begins July 1, and the Illinois Department of Natural Resources' budget. “It’s a responsible budget. We live within our means; we fund key programs; we’re paying down our bills,” said Park Ridge Democratic Sen. Dan Kotowski.
Sen. Chapin Rose, a Mahomet Republican, called the budget incomplete because it does not contain funds earmarked to pay back wages owed to state workers. “There’s a $140 million hole in this budget out of the gate,” he said.
“We’ll have to come back in the fall for a supplemental” spending bill to cover the back pay,” said Lake Barrington Republican Sen. Dan Duffy. “We should stay down here as long as we have to — all night and all summer if we have to — to come up with a balanced budget to pay down our bills.”
Meanwhile, Senate Bill 2555 and SB 2556, which contain the funding for K-12 and higher education, passed the House on the final day of the spring session and now go to the governor. K-12 education funding has been cut severely since 2009, and Homewood Democratic Rep. William Davis said that he was pleased that unexpected tax revenues allowed general state aid to be held flat for the next fiscal year because the state has an obligation to fund education. “We have to put our money where our mouths are,” said Davis, who chairs the House education budgeting committee.
Even though the K-12 education budget for Fiscal Year 2014 includes more than $6.6 billion in funding, school districts will still have to make due with an 89 percent proration for general state aid and a 64 percent proration for transportation. Funding for bilingual education and early childhood education will remain flat. Republicans criticized smaller parts of the more than $1.9 billion higher education budget, such as $600,000 for a Quad Cities manufacturing center at Western Illinois University. “If you are going to vote for this budget, I get it. But I am not going to support a budget that is a sham,” Macomb Republican Rep. Norine Hammond said.
The dismal state of funding for universities has forced many to delay maintenance, institute hiring freezes and look for other ways to supplement their budgets, including raising tuition. Rep. Chad Hays, a Republican from Catlin, said he is concerned that tuition increases are pricing Illinois schools out of range for average people. “Public education is getting elbowed off the table,” Hays said. “We are pricing the average family out of the higher education arena. The state can't be everything to everyone. We have to figure out where our priorities are.”
Senate approves fracking regulations
By Jamey Dunn
A bill to regulate horizontal fracturing is headed to Gov. Pat Quinn, who plans to sign the bill.
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, is a process used to extract oil and natural gas by pumping water, chemicals and sand into the ground. The water fractures a source rock, allowing gas or oil to escape and be collected. Sand is used to hold the cracks in the rock open. Chemicals are added to the water for a variety of reasons, such as disinfection, lubrication and making the water thicker to keep the sand from sinking.
Senate Bill 1715 would set standards for the construction of fracking wells, as well as for the storage and disposal of what is used in the process. If fracking chemicals are found in water, it would assumed that it was the fracking well operator's fault, and the operator would be required to prove otherwise. It also sets fees for permits at $13,500 per well. The measure would set the tax on oil or gas extracted from fracking wells at 3 percent for the first two years of the life of a well and then on a sliding scale based on production.
Senate Bill 1715 has a broad coalition of supporters, including business groups, unions and some environmental organizations, which dubbed it the strictest fracking regulations in the nation. According to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, permits the agency has reviewed indicate that fracking is already taking place in the state. Supporters also tout the economic development that fracking would bring to struggling southern Illinois economies. At present, the state does not have laws specifically regulating fracking. Democratic Sen. Michael Frerichs of Champaign told senators tonight that “the choice is between regulated responsible fracking” or the “wild West.”
But supporters of a moratorium say the state should slow down and wait on the results of some studies, that are under way. “There’s still a lot of questions out there that need to be asked. We’re talking about water contamination,” said Chicago Democratic Sen. Iris Martinez. “These studies are still pending out there. ... I’m just very scared about the environment. I am very worried about what these reports might have to say about what fracking has done in other states. I think we can wait a little bit when it comes to lives and our environment.”
Frerichs responded by saying that lawmakers must move to regulate fracking now. “It is not between a moratorium and fracking. Fracking has already come into the state.”
A bill to regulate horizontal fracturing is headed to Gov. Pat Quinn, who plans to sign the bill.
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, is a process used to extract oil and natural gas by pumping water, chemicals and sand into the ground. The water fractures a source rock, allowing gas or oil to escape and be collected. Sand is used to hold the cracks in the rock open. Chemicals are added to the water for a variety of reasons, such as disinfection, lubrication and making the water thicker to keep the sand from sinking.
Senate Bill 1715 would set standards for the construction of fracking wells, as well as for the storage and disposal of what is used in the process. If fracking chemicals are found in water, it would assumed that it was the fracking well operator's fault, and the operator would be required to prove otherwise. It also sets fees for permits at $13,500 per well. The measure would set the tax on oil or gas extracted from fracking wells at 3 percent for the first two years of the life of a well and then on a sliding scale based on production.
Senate Bill 1715 has a broad coalition of supporters, including business groups, unions and some environmental organizations, which dubbed it the strictest fracking regulations in the nation. According to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, permits the agency has reviewed indicate that fracking is already taking place in the state. Supporters also tout the economic development that fracking would bring to struggling southern Illinois economies. At present, the state does not have laws specifically regulating fracking. Democratic Sen. Michael Frerichs of Champaign told senators tonight that “the choice is between regulated responsible fracking” or the “wild West.”
But supporters of a moratorium say the state should slow down and wait on the results of some studies, that are under way. “There’s still a lot of questions out there that need to be asked. We’re talking about water contamination,” said Chicago Democratic Sen. Iris Martinez. “These studies are still pending out there. ... I’m just very scared about the environment. I am very worried about what these reports might have to say about what fracking has done in other states. I think we can wait a little bit when it comes to lives and our environment.”
Frerichs responded by saying that lawmakers must move to regulate fracking now. “It is not between a moratorium and fracking. Fracking has already come into the state.”
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
House passes the bulk of its budget
By Jamey Dunn and Meredith Colias
Illinois House Democrats passed several pieces of their budget today as Republicans bemoaned being cut out of the process.
Both higher education and K-12 will be funded at essentially flat levels, compared to the current fiscal year. Human services would see cuts under the plan, but the outlook is not nearly as gloomy as it seemed just a few weeks ago. Sponsors of the various budget bills say that the situation would have been much bleaker if a windfall of $1.5 billion in unexpected revenues had not come in. “In April, there was a large surge because people sold a bunch of assets at the end of [Fiscal Year] '12 in anticipation of capital gains rate changes,” said Rep. Greg Harris, who sponsored the human services budget bill.
House Minority Leader Tom Cross said Republicans do not support the $35.6 billion budget proposal, the bulk of which passed today. He said Republicans had been working on the budget, but Democrats stopped inviting his political party to talks in the last few weeks. “When it comes to spending ... the willingness to work with us goes by the wayside, and that is unfortunate,” Cross said. “Clearly we’re not going in the direction that we need to go if we intend to get our bills paid and if we intend to do away with the tax increase.” Republicans said they saw the budget bills for the first time last night.
While Republicans blasted the spending in the proposal, Harris, who took over the human services budgeting committee this year, said this is the first budget in recent years that will fully fund human services. “We’ve made cuts across the board but we’ve retained funding in core community services such as mental health, substance abuse, homelessness programs,” he said. This year and several other times in recent history, human services agencies have had to come back to the General Assembly midway through the fiscal year and ask for more money to avoid the shutdown of programs. “In other years, they’ve not appropriated for a full year, and they’ve always come back for [supplemental spending bills]. ... We wanted to pass something that was fully reflective of the realities of each department’s need,” he said. “I would say woe betide the department that comes back to us with a supplemental [request] this year.”
The budget does not explicitly include the raises promised to state union workers in a new contract. But personnel costs are provided in lump sums, and each agency is left to figure out how to work in the raises. “What we accounted for was their FY 14 raises, and they way we did that was to give our departments maximum flexibility.” A bill that would appropriate back raises, which Gov. Pat Quinn has said he will now give members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union after earlier freezing them, was not called for a vote in committee today.
Some of the unexpected revenue would be used to immediately pay down nearly $600 million in old human services bills. Harris said many of those payments would be eligible for federal matching funds under Medicaid. Some of the additional revenues were incorporated to the revenue estimate for next fiscal year and will be used to defer cuts to education and corrections. Republicans expressed concerns that the additional revenue projected should not automatically be used to increase spending in the budget. “We were conservative a year ago, and it served us well,” Arlington Heights Republican David Harris said.
Chicago Democratic Rep. Louis Arroyo said that the additional money allowed Democrats to funnel $70 million to the Department of Corrections to prevent the potential closure of more state prisons. “I believe there will be no prisons closing,” Arroyo said in a budget committee hearing this morning. “Corrections is going to be OK.” The House approved a public safety budget sponsored by Arroyo today. Higher education is seeing only a slight drop in funding.
Chicago Democratic Rep. Ken Dunkin said that higher education would avoid the 5 percent cuts the governor called for in his March budget proposal. The extra funds would give "additional breathing room for some of our communities," Dunkin said. The House higher education budget, which was also approved today, calls for the Monetary Award Program, which provides scholarships to low-income students, to be funded at a level slightly less than what Quinn presented in his budget. The program has suffered cuts in recent years.
The House did not approve its K-12 budget, but House Democrats who worked on it say a vote is expected tomorrow. The proposal adds more than $150 million to General State Aid for schools to keep the state's proration at 89 percent of the recommended funding level to schools. The bus transportation budget will be kept at 64 percent of recommended levels for schools. The new budget figures will also keep early childhood education and bilingual education at flat funding, compared to last year's budget.
Illinois House Democrats passed several pieces of their budget today as Republicans bemoaned being cut out of the process.
Both higher education and K-12 will be funded at essentially flat levels, compared to the current fiscal year. Human services would see cuts under the plan, but the outlook is not nearly as gloomy as it seemed just a few weeks ago. Sponsors of the various budget bills say that the situation would have been much bleaker if a windfall of $1.5 billion in unexpected revenues had not come in. “In April, there was a large surge because people sold a bunch of assets at the end of [Fiscal Year] '12 in anticipation of capital gains rate changes,” said Rep. Greg Harris, who sponsored the human services budget bill.
House Minority Leader Tom Cross said Republicans do not support the $35.6 billion budget proposal, the bulk of which passed today. He said Republicans had been working on the budget, but Democrats stopped inviting his political party to talks in the last few weeks. “When it comes to spending ... the willingness to work with us goes by the wayside, and that is unfortunate,” Cross said. “Clearly we’re not going in the direction that we need to go if we intend to get our bills paid and if we intend to do away with the tax increase.” Republicans said they saw the budget bills for the first time last night.
While Republicans blasted the spending in the proposal, Harris, who took over the human services budgeting committee this year, said this is the first budget in recent years that will fully fund human services. “We’ve made cuts across the board but we’ve retained funding in core community services such as mental health, substance abuse, homelessness programs,” he said. This year and several other times in recent history, human services agencies have had to come back to the General Assembly midway through the fiscal year and ask for more money to avoid the shutdown of programs. “In other years, they’ve not appropriated for a full year, and they’ve always come back for [supplemental spending bills]. ... We wanted to pass something that was fully reflective of the realities of each department’s need,” he said. “I would say woe betide the department that comes back to us with a supplemental [request] this year.”
The budget does not explicitly include the raises promised to state union workers in a new contract. But personnel costs are provided in lump sums, and each agency is left to figure out how to work in the raises. “What we accounted for was their FY 14 raises, and they way we did that was to give our departments maximum flexibility.” A bill that would appropriate back raises, which Gov. Pat Quinn has said he will now give members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union after earlier freezing them, was not called for a vote in committee today.
Some of the unexpected revenue would be used to immediately pay down nearly $600 million in old human services bills. Harris said many of those payments would be eligible for federal matching funds under Medicaid. Some of the additional revenues were incorporated to the revenue estimate for next fiscal year and will be used to defer cuts to education and corrections. Republicans expressed concerns that the additional revenue projected should not automatically be used to increase spending in the budget. “We were conservative a year ago, and it served us well,” Arlington Heights Republican David Harris said.
Chicago Democratic Rep. Louis Arroyo said that the additional money allowed Democrats to funnel $70 million to the Department of Corrections to prevent the potential closure of more state prisons. “I believe there will be no prisons closing,” Arroyo said in a budget committee hearing this morning. “Corrections is going to be OK.” The House approved a public safety budget sponsored by Arroyo today. Higher education is seeing only a slight drop in funding.
Chicago Democratic Rep. Ken Dunkin said that higher education would avoid the 5 percent cuts the governor called for in his March budget proposal. The extra funds would give "additional breathing room for some of our communities," Dunkin said. The House higher education budget, which was also approved today, calls for the Monetary Award Program, which provides scholarships to low-income students, to be funded at a level slightly less than what Quinn presented in his budget. The program has suffered cuts in recent years.
The House did not approve its K-12 budget, but House Democrats who worked on it say a vote is expected tomorrow. The proposal adds more than $150 million to General State Aid for schools to keep the state's proration at 89 percent of the recommended funding level to schools. The bus transportation budget will be kept at 64 percent of recommended levels for schools. The new budget figures will also keep early childhood education and bilingual education at flat funding, compared to last year's budget.
Senate committee rejects House concealed-carry bill
By Jamey Dunn
An Illinois Senate committee killed the concealed-carry bill supported by House Speaker Michael Madigan and approved another plan that faces push back from the National Rifle Association.
The Senate Executive Committee voted down Senate Bill 2193, which the House approved last week. Under the bill, residents who are eligible to own a gun and are 21 or older could apply for a concealed-carry license. The license would cost $150, and applicants would have to complete 18 hours of training, including live-fire range training. Law enforcement officials at any level could object to applications based on “reasonable suspicion that the applicant is a danger to himself or herself or others or a threat to public safety.” A panel appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate would rule on the objections.
But the proposal would wipe out local gun laws, including those not directly related to concealed carry, such as requirements to report lost or stolen guns and Chicago’s ban on assault weapons. Senate Democrats on the committee say that is where the bill goes too far. “To preempt every local government from enacting any law or ordinance related to firearms is a remarkable ask,” said Sen. Don Harmon, who voted against the measure. But proponents say the preemption of home rule powers on gun laws is needed because gun owners who are carrying concealed firearms throughout the state might accidentally break the law while travelling because they do not know about local ordinances. “We don’t think it’s fair for law-abiding gun owners to travel through this state not knowing from one town to the next what’s expected of them. If we have one law, everybody knows, and you’re not making that law-abiding gun owner a criminal,” Rep. Brandon Phelps, the House sponsor of the bill, told the Senate Committee today.
HB 183, which the committee approved today, would preempt home rule, but only on issues related to concealed carry. Sen. Kwame Raoul, who sponsors the bill, said the measure would allow residents to transport their weapons under a uniform carry law throughout the state. But some Republicans on the panel voiced concerns that the ability to transport guns under the bill is not clear. Raoul said he is open to spelling out that residents with carry licenses can carry their weapons, loaded or unloaded, in their vehicles while they drive through the state. “Perhaps we could be more explicit,” he said. Other than the preemption issue, the two bills are relatively similar.
A lobbyist for the National Rifle Association said the group is neutral on SB 2193 but prefers it to Raoul’s bill, which he said he has been lobbying against. “There’s a lot of junk in this bill that we would not normally accept. ...We’re not for it; we’re not against it. But given some of the other things that are out there, there’s enough bread on this sandwich to make it choke down,” said Todd Vandermyde. He said he has asked senators to consider it as an alternative to Raoul's legislation, which he described as “a sandwich that just isn’t right to swallow.”
Benton Democratic Sen. Gary Forby that if he were allowed to bring the measure he sponsors with Phelps to a floor vote, he thinks it would pass. “I counted the votes last week. I think I’ve got enough votes ... and I think a bill like this should be voted on,” Forby said. Raoul said that he thinks that the broad preemption under Forby’s bill is the reason that the NRA is not opposing it. He said he has not yet counted votes on his bill and that he is still open to making compromises or addressing opponents' concerns. A federal court gave lawmakers until early June to pass legislation regulating carry in the state.
An Illinois Senate committee killed the concealed-carry bill supported by House Speaker Michael Madigan and approved another plan that faces push back from the National Rifle Association.
The Senate Executive Committee voted down Senate Bill 2193, which the House approved last week. Under the bill, residents who are eligible to own a gun and are 21 or older could apply for a concealed-carry license. The license would cost $150, and applicants would have to complete 18 hours of training, including live-fire range training. Law enforcement officials at any level could object to applications based on “reasonable suspicion that the applicant is a danger to himself or herself or others or a threat to public safety.” A panel appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate would rule on the objections.
But the proposal would wipe out local gun laws, including those not directly related to concealed carry, such as requirements to report lost or stolen guns and Chicago’s ban on assault weapons. Senate Democrats on the committee say that is where the bill goes too far. “To preempt every local government from enacting any law or ordinance related to firearms is a remarkable ask,” said Sen. Don Harmon, who voted against the measure. But proponents say the preemption of home rule powers on gun laws is needed because gun owners who are carrying concealed firearms throughout the state might accidentally break the law while travelling because they do not know about local ordinances. “We don’t think it’s fair for law-abiding gun owners to travel through this state not knowing from one town to the next what’s expected of them. If we have one law, everybody knows, and you’re not making that law-abiding gun owner a criminal,” Rep. Brandon Phelps, the House sponsor of the bill, told the Senate Committee today.
HB 183, which the committee approved today, would preempt home rule, but only on issues related to concealed carry. Sen. Kwame Raoul, who sponsors the bill, said the measure would allow residents to transport their weapons under a uniform carry law throughout the state. But some Republicans on the panel voiced concerns that the ability to transport guns under the bill is not clear. Raoul said he is open to spelling out that residents with carry licenses can carry their weapons, loaded or unloaded, in their vehicles while they drive through the state. “Perhaps we could be more explicit,” he said. Other than the preemption issue, the two bills are relatively similar.
A lobbyist for the National Rifle Association said the group is neutral on SB 2193 but prefers it to Raoul’s bill, which he said he has been lobbying against. “There’s a lot of junk in this bill that we would not normally accept. ...We’re not for it; we’re not against it. But given some of the other things that are out there, there’s enough bread on this sandwich to make it choke down,” said Todd Vandermyde. He said he has asked senators to consider it as an alternative to Raoul's legislation, which he described as “a sandwich that just isn’t right to swallow.”
Benton Democratic Sen. Gary Forby that if he were allowed to bring the measure he sponsors with Phelps to a floor vote, he thinks it would pass. “I counted the votes last week. I think I’ve got enough votes ... and I think a bill like this should be voted on,” Forby said. Raoul said that he thinks that the broad preemption under Forby’s bill is the reason that the NRA is not opposing it. He said he has not yet counted votes on his bill and that he is still open to making compromises or addressing opponents' concerns. A federal court gave lawmakers until early June to pass legislation regulating carry in the state.
Ban on cell phones behind the wheel headed to Quinn
By Meredith Colias
Cellphone-loving drivers may soon need to dial down their usage while on the road. Hoping to keep more eyes on the road, the Illinois House is sending legislation to the governor restricting additional types of cellphone usage while driving.
House Bill 1247 would only allow drivers to dial a single button on their phones to call someone. They then would have to use the speaker or a Bluetooth device on a call while they are driving. The state already bans texting while driving.
The House adopted Senate changes giving drivers a break for the first time they are caught using their phone in a prohibited manner before it is added to their driving record and reported to their insurance company. For drivers unable to curb their handheld habits, the fines would gradually increase each time they are caught. The first offense is a $75 fine and it would increase up to $150 fee on the fourth offense.
Opponents have criticized the bill, saying it was an overreach that would go too far in legislating personal habits. They say the bill would be an ineffective way to curb distractions and too difficult to enforce on the road. Marengo Democratic Rep. Jack Franks said that driving with a Wendy’s Frosty is “more distracting than simply being on my cellphone.”
A spokesperson for Gov. Pat Quinn has said Quinn is reviewing the bill.
Cellphone-loving drivers may soon need to dial down their usage while on the road. Hoping to keep more eyes on the road, the Illinois House is sending legislation to the governor restricting additional types of cellphone usage while driving.
House Bill 1247 would only allow drivers to dial a single button on their phones to call someone. They then would have to use the speaker or a Bluetooth device on a call while they are driving. The state already bans texting while driving.
The House adopted Senate changes giving drivers a break for the first time they are caught using their phone in a prohibited manner before it is added to their driving record and reported to their insurance company. For drivers unable to curb their handheld habits, the fines would gradually increase each time they are caught. The first offense is a $75 fine and it would increase up to $150 fee on the fourth offense.
Opponents have criticized the bill, saying it was an overreach that would go too far in legislating personal habits. They say the bill would be an ineffective way to curb distractions and too difficult to enforce on the road. Marengo Democratic Rep. Jack Franks said that driving with a Wendy’s Frosty is “more distracting than simply being on my cellphone.”
A spokesperson for Gov. Pat Quinn has said Quinn is reviewing the bill.
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.
Friday, March 01, 2013
House votes to ban hand-held cell phones while driving
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois House today approved a ban on the use of hand-held cellphones while driving.
House Bill 1247 prohibits the hand-held use of a cell phone while driving. The bill would allow drivers to talk on the phone if they use a speakerphone setting or a device that allows them to chat hands-free. The measure also has an exception for emergency situations. The legislation would allow police to pull over drivers they saw using cell phones.
The House passed a similar ban last year, but it was not called for a floor vote in the Senate. However, Senate President John Cullerton also said last year that he thought a ban on all cell phone use while driving “might be inevitable” in Illinois. “There’s no question it’s a distraction from driving,” Cullerton said at the time. “There’s not a big difference between whether you’re holding a phone or whether you’re not holding a phone. It’s the distraction in talking to someone that’s not in the car with you. It’s not what’s in your hand; it’s what’s in your head.” He said such a ban would probably come incrementally. The state has already banned texting while driving, as well as talking on cell phones in construction zones and school zones. In Illinois, drivers under 18 are prohibited from talking on cell phones while driving. There is also a national ban on drivers of large trucks and buses using phones while on the road.
Opponents of the ban passed today said that they think the end goal of supporters is a complete ban on cell phone use while driving. HB 1247 sponsor Rep. John D’Amico, a Chicago Democrat, said that he is not pushing for a full ban. “That is not where I intend to go,” he said. Some Republicans called the bill an overreach of government into people’s lives. “This kind of stuff is the ultimate, ultimate in Big Brother,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. He said drivers engage in many other activities behind the wheel, such as applying makeup disciplining children or eating, that can be distracting and dangerous. “I know it is dangerous, but there’s a lot of things that we do every day while driving in our cars that become dangerous. ... Where do we stop [on bans]?”
Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican, said “I readily admit” that the legislation has “elements of Big Brother.”
“This is the government telling you what you can and cannot do within the confines of your car while driving.” But Harris said that the intrusion is justified by the public safety benefits. He noted that technology would eventually reach the point where all drivers would use their phones hands-free. “Until that time comes, our job is to try to make the roadways as safe as possible.”
D’Amico said that more than 70 local governments in Illinois already ban the use of hand-held cell phones while driving, and it makes sense to put a consistent statewide policy in place. “People are dying every day, and if we can do something about it, we need to stop it.” The legislation passed on a 64-46 vote and now heads to the Senate.
The Illinois House today approved a ban on the use of hand-held cellphones while driving.
House Bill 1247 prohibits the hand-held use of a cell phone while driving. The bill would allow drivers to talk on the phone if they use a speakerphone setting or a device that allows them to chat hands-free. The measure also has an exception for emergency situations. The legislation would allow police to pull over drivers they saw using cell phones.
The House passed a similar ban last year, but it was not called for a floor vote in the Senate. However, Senate President John Cullerton also said last year that he thought a ban on all cell phone use while driving “might be inevitable” in Illinois. “There’s no question it’s a distraction from driving,” Cullerton said at the time. “There’s not a big difference between whether you’re holding a phone or whether you’re not holding a phone. It’s the distraction in talking to someone that’s not in the car with you. It’s not what’s in your hand; it’s what’s in your head.” He said such a ban would probably come incrementally. The state has already banned texting while driving, as well as talking on cell phones in construction zones and school zones. In Illinois, drivers under 18 are prohibited from talking on cell phones while driving. There is also a national ban on drivers of large trucks and buses using phones while on the road.
Opponents of the ban passed today said that they think the end goal of supporters is a complete ban on cell phone use while driving. HB 1247 sponsor Rep. John D’Amico, a Chicago Democrat, said that he is not pushing for a full ban. “That is not where I intend to go,” he said. Some Republicans called the bill an overreach of government into people’s lives. “This kind of stuff is the ultimate, ultimate in Big Brother,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. He said drivers engage in many other activities behind the wheel, such as applying makeup disciplining children or eating, that can be distracting and dangerous. “I know it is dangerous, but there’s a lot of things that we do every day while driving in our cars that become dangerous. ... Where do we stop [on bans]?”
Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican, said “I readily admit” that the legislation has “elements of Big Brother.”
“This is the government telling you what you can and cannot do within the confines of your car while driving.” But Harris said that the intrusion is justified by the public safety benefits. He noted that technology would eventually reach the point where all drivers would use their phones hands-free. “Until that time comes, our job is to try to make the roadways as safe as possible.”
D’Amico said that more than 70 local governments in Illinois already ban the use of hand-held cell phones while driving, and it makes sense to put a consistent statewide policy in place. “People are dying every day, and if we can do something about it, we need to stop it.” The legislation passed on a 64-46 vote and now heads to the Senate.
Tuesday, January 08, 2013
Quinn to sign bill allowing undocumented immigrants access to driver's licenses
By Meredith Colias
Gov. Pat Quinn has indicated he will sign a bill into law allowing undocumented immigrants to obtain temporary driver's licenses.
The bill's House sponsor, Rep. Edward Acevedo, a Democrat from Chicago, framed the measure as a matter of public safety. “It’s a commonsense bill that seeks to improve the safety of our roads and ensure that all motorists can be trained, tested, licensed and insured,” he said.
Senate Bill 957, which passed the House today, 65-46, and the Senate in December, would allow an estimated 250,000 undocumented immigrants without Social Security numbers living in Illinois to obtain temporary driver’s licenses valid for three years. Applicants would be required to take vision and driving tests and carry valid car insurance. Drivers caught without insurance would have their licenses revoked. To obtain a temporary license, an applicant would need to show a passport or consular identification documents and provide proof that they have lived in the state for at least one year. Opponents said the measure does not contain enough safeguards against fraud because it would not require applicants to be fingerprinted or provide a tax identification number to obtain the license and would reward those already breaking immigration laws. Acevedo acknowledged the fingerprinting concerns and said he would be willing to work with opponents on future legislation.
Rep. Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican, was concerned that undocumented immigrants from outside the state would find a way to falsify documents and skirt the residency requirement. That is something he said has happened in New Mexico, a state that currently offers licenses to immigrants who are in the country illegally. “We have no idea how long they’ve lived here,” he said of potential applicants in Illinois.
Supporters said that they think the residency requirement is stringent enough to keep residents of other states from getting Illinois licenses. However, Nathan Maddox, senior legal advisor for Secretary of State Jesse White, acknowledged the office would not be able to determine at the time of application if an undocumented driver had previously committed an offense, like a DUI, out of state. Applicants who have already been suspended from driving in Illinois would have to start serving their suspension once they obtained a license regardless of when they committed the violation.
Others argued that the state should not address immigration, which is a federal issue. “We are ... engaging in activities the U.S. government should be taking [on] themselves,” said Rep. Dwight Kay, a Republican from Glen Carbon. Rep. Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican, said the state should not “provide privileges for people who are not citizens here.”
While the bill had several Republican detractors, it did receive bipartisan support. House Minority Leader Tom Cross said he believed technical issues cited were not sufficient to oppose the bill. “We have a number of folks in this state ... that are here illegally, and we need to address it,” he said. Rep. Dan Brady, a Bloomington Republican, said he thought the bill was imperfect but voted in favor of the measure. “What I focus on is public safety. … The reality is it’s a start,” he said.
"People come to this country for the American dream. We can offer them that today,” Acevedo said on the House floor. The bill will take effect 10 months after receiving Quinn’s signature. “Illinois roads will be safer if we ensure every driver learns the rules of the road and is trained to drive safely,” he said in a prepared statement.
Gov. Pat Quinn has indicated he will sign a bill into law allowing undocumented immigrants to obtain temporary driver's licenses.
The bill's House sponsor, Rep. Edward Acevedo, a Democrat from Chicago, framed the measure as a matter of public safety. “It’s a commonsense bill that seeks to improve the safety of our roads and ensure that all motorists can be trained, tested, licensed and insured,” he said.
Senate Bill 957, which passed the House today, 65-46, and the Senate in December, would allow an estimated 250,000 undocumented immigrants without Social Security numbers living in Illinois to obtain temporary driver’s licenses valid for three years. Applicants would be required to take vision and driving tests and carry valid car insurance. Drivers caught without insurance would have their licenses revoked. To obtain a temporary license, an applicant would need to show a passport or consular identification documents and provide proof that they have lived in the state for at least one year. Opponents said the measure does not contain enough safeguards against fraud because it would not require applicants to be fingerprinted or provide a tax identification number to obtain the license and would reward those already breaking immigration laws. Acevedo acknowledged the fingerprinting concerns and said he would be willing to work with opponents on future legislation.
Rep. Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican, was concerned that undocumented immigrants from outside the state would find a way to falsify documents and skirt the residency requirement. That is something he said has happened in New Mexico, a state that currently offers licenses to immigrants who are in the country illegally. “We have no idea how long they’ve lived here,” he said of potential applicants in Illinois.
Supporters said that they think the residency requirement is stringent enough to keep residents of other states from getting Illinois licenses. However, Nathan Maddox, senior legal advisor for Secretary of State Jesse White, acknowledged the office would not be able to determine at the time of application if an undocumented driver had previously committed an offense, like a DUI, out of state. Applicants who have already been suspended from driving in Illinois would have to start serving their suspension once they obtained a license regardless of when they committed the violation.
Others argued that the state should not address immigration, which is a federal issue. “We are ... engaging in activities the U.S. government should be taking [on] themselves,” said Rep. Dwight Kay, a Republican from Glen Carbon. Rep. Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican, said the state should not “provide privileges for people who are not citizens here.”
While the bill had several Republican detractors, it did receive bipartisan support. House Minority Leader Tom Cross said he believed technical issues cited were not sufficient to oppose the bill. “We have a number of folks in this state ... that are here illegally, and we need to address it,” he said. Rep. Dan Brady, a Bloomington Republican, said he thought the bill was imperfect but voted in favor of the measure. “What I focus on is public safety. … The reality is it’s a start,” he said.
"People come to this country for the American dream. We can offer them that today,” Acevedo said on the House floor. The bill will take effect 10 months after receiving Quinn’s signature. “Illinois roads will be safer if we ensure every driver learns the rules of the road and is trained to drive safely,” he said in a prepared statement.
Monday, January 07, 2013
Vote on licenses for undocumented drivers pushed to Tuesday
By Meredith Colias
An estimated 250,000 undocumented drivers are one step closer to an opportunity to obtain a temporary driver’s license, but a floor vote on the bill was pushed to the last scheduled day of the current legislative session.
Under Senate Bill 957, which was approved by a House committee today, immigrants lacking Social Security numbers or documents to prove they are in the country legally would have to show a passport or consular identification documents and provide proof of residency for one year. The proposal would require undocumented drivers to take a driving test with the state. Licenses would be revoked for drivers who do not subsequently obtain insurance. Secretary of State Jesse White’s office estimates the measure would cost $800,000 the first year and $250,000 to maintain each year after.
The sponsor of the bill, Rep. Edward Acevedo, told the committee that it would make roads safer by ensuring that undocumented drivers could be “trained, tested, licensed and insured.” Acevedo, a Chicago Democrat, said the licenses could not be used as a form of identification for other purposes such as buying firearms or alcohol or boarding an airplane. Applicants would be required to pay $30 for the temporary license, which would valid for three years and available for renewal.
Hanover Chief of Police David Webb said the proposal is an important safety step but is concerned that its security safeguards would not be strict enough. Webb and other law enforcement officials say applicants should be fingerprinted or required to provide a federal tax identification number before obtaining a license. “Without these basic public safety and homeland security safeguards, this bill is unsafe,” he said.
License holder’s pictures would then be entered into a facial recognition database, but opponents were concerned that facial scan technology could be prone to error. “I think the integrity of the system is compromised if we don’t know who these folks are,” said Rep. Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican.
Fred Tsao, policy director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, said requiring fingerprinting to obtain a temporary driver's license might deter some undocumented drivers from applying for fear of being turned over to the federal immigration service for deportation. “It is a major concern to the community,” he said.
Acevedo said he plans to call the bill on the House floor a floor vote on Tuesday.
An estimated 250,000 undocumented drivers are one step closer to an opportunity to obtain a temporary driver’s license, but a floor vote on the bill was pushed to the last scheduled day of the current legislative session.
Under Senate Bill 957, which was approved by a House committee today, immigrants lacking Social Security numbers or documents to prove they are in the country legally would have to show a passport or consular identification documents and provide proof of residency for one year. The proposal would require undocumented drivers to take a driving test with the state. Licenses would be revoked for drivers who do not subsequently obtain insurance. Secretary of State Jesse White’s office estimates the measure would cost $800,000 the first year and $250,000 to maintain each year after.
The sponsor of the bill, Rep. Edward Acevedo, told the committee that it would make roads safer by ensuring that undocumented drivers could be “trained, tested, licensed and insured.” Acevedo, a Chicago Democrat, said the licenses could not be used as a form of identification for other purposes such as buying firearms or alcohol or boarding an airplane. Applicants would be required to pay $30 for the temporary license, which would valid for three years and available for renewal.
Hanover Chief of Police David Webb said the proposal is an important safety step but is concerned that its security safeguards would not be strict enough. Webb and other law enforcement officials say applicants should be fingerprinted or required to provide a federal tax identification number before obtaining a license. “Without these basic public safety and homeland security safeguards, this bill is unsafe,” he said.
License holder’s pictures would then be entered into a facial recognition database, but opponents were concerned that facial scan technology could be prone to error. “I think the integrity of the system is compromised if we don’t know who these folks are,” said Rep. Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican.
Fred Tsao, policy director for the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, said requiring fingerprinting to obtain a temporary driver's license might deter some undocumented drivers from applying for fear of being turned over to the federal immigration service for deportation. “It is a major concern to the community,” he said.
Acevedo said he plans to call the bill on the House floor a floor vote on Tuesday.
Tuesday, December 04, 2012
Senate approves driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois Senate approved a bill today to give driver’s licenses to immigrants who are in the country illegally, but the House may not vote on it until January.
Senate Bill 957 would give immigrants without documentation a chance to get three-year temporary Illinois driver's licenses, which are already available in Illinois to immigrants who lack a Social Security number but have proof that they are in the country legally. The measure passed today with bipartisan support. It received 41 “yes” votes and 14 votes in opposition. Supporters frame the issue as a public safety initiative. “It seems to me that we are better off having folks tested to make sure they know how to drive, make sure that they get driver’s education, make sure that they have vision so that they can see, make sure that they have insurance rather than having so many of them drive illegally because of necessity,” said Senate President John Cullerton.
“We believe that this is a good public safety issue that ensures that our roads are safe for everyone who drives on our roads,” said Lawrence Benito, chief operating officer of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
Opponents said they have reservations about having to address an issue related to illegal immigration before Congress addresses immigration reform. “I am in favor of legal immigration but oppose illegal immigration. I also support efforts by the national government to finally and equitably solve the illegal immigration problem in America. However, we have the cart before the horse in the case of granting additional legal privileges to people already breaking our country’s law. The national government should act first, which then paves the way for this action,” said Aurora Republican Sen. Chris Lauzen.
But proponents argued that the state can no longer wait for Congress to act. “There’s no perfect solution. It needs to be dealt with federally. So I think this is a good example of states trying to figure out how to handle a problem that we have,” said Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno.
“For me, this has been somewhat of a process of evolution, where a number of years ago I was not supportive of this bill. I think a lot of us felt like the federal government would be more aggressive and proactive on the issue of immigration, and clearly they have not,” said House Minority Leader Tom Cross.
The driver’s licenses would look different from a standard-issue Illinois license, and under the legislation, they could not be used as for identification or commercial driving. Failure to buy the liability insurance required by state law would make such a license invalid.
However, Lauzen said he had doubts about whether those getting the licenses would be concerned with the legal requirement for insurance. “And when folks say to us, 'It’s only one law, the immigration law, that’s being broken,' that is simply not accurate for tens of thousands of people who are also employed illegally, many of them driving to work, therefore breaking the traffic laws. Now we’re expected to believe that folks who are already breaking the immigration law, the employment law, the traffic laws, are now going to follow the insurance law,” he said.
But few from Lauzen’s party back his stance on the bill, which also has bipartisan support in the House. “This will, in my opinion, make our roads safer,” said Cross. Because of procedural requirements, a vote on the bill may not come until the lame-duck session scheduled for early January. Under the standard procedure for passing legislation, a bill must be read three times in each chamber on three separate days. Tomorrow is the second opportunity to read the bill in the House and also the chamber’s last day of scheduled veto session.
The Illinois Senate approved a bill today to give driver’s licenses to immigrants who are in the country illegally, but the House may not vote on it until January.
Senate Bill 957 would give immigrants without documentation a chance to get three-year temporary Illinois driver's licenses, which are already available in Illinois to immigrants who lack a Social Security number but have proof that they are in the country legally. The measure passed today with bipartisan support. It received 41 “yes” votes and 14 votes in opposition. Supporters frame the issue as a public safety initiative. “It seems to me that we are better off having folks tested to make sure they know how to drive, make sure that they get driver’s education, make sure that they have vision so that they can see, make sure that they have insurance rather than having so many of them drive illegally because of necessity,” said Senate President John Cullerton.
“We believe that this is a good public safety issue that ensures that our roads are safe for everyone who drives on our roads,” said Lawrence Benito, chief operating officer of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
Opponents said they have reservations about having to address an issue related to illegal immigration before Congress addresses immigration reform. “I am in favor of legal immigration but oppose illegal immigration. I also support efforts by the national government to finally and equitably solve the illegal immigration problem in America. However, we have the cart before the horse in the case of granting additional legal privileges to people already breaking our country’s law. The national government should act first, which then paves the way for this action,” said Aurora Republican Sen. Chris Lauzen.
But proponents argued that the state can no longer wait for Congress to act. “There’s no perfect solution. It needs to be dealt with federally. So I think this is a good example of states trying to figure out how to handle a problem that we have,” said Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno.
“For me, this has been somewhat of a process of evolution, where a number of years ago I was not supportive of this bill. I think a lot of us felt like the federal government would be more aggressive and proactive on the issue of immigration, and clearly they have not,” said House Minority Leader Tom Cross.
The driver’s licenses would look different from a standard-issue Illinois license, and under the legislation, they could not be used as for identification or commercial driving. Failure to buy the liability insurance required by state law would make such a license invalid.
However, Lauzen said he had doubts about whether those getting the licenses would be concerned with the legal requirement for insurance. “And when folks say to us, 'It’s only one law, the immigration law, that’s being broken,' that is simply not accurate for tens of thousands of people who are also employed illegally, many of them driving to work, therefore breaking the traffic laws. Now we’re expected to believe that folks who are already breaking the immigration law, the employment law, the traffic laws, are now going to follow the insurance law,” he said.
But few from Lauzen’s party back his stance on the bill, which also has bipartisan support in the House. “This will, in my opinion, make our roads safer,” said Cross. Because of procedural requirements, a vote on the bill may not come until the lame-duck session scheduled for early January. Under the standard procedure for passing legislation, a bill must be read three times in each chamber on three separate days. Tomorrow is the second opportunity to read the bill in the House and also the chamber’s last day of scheduled veto session.
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Senate panel OK's bill to give illegal immigrants temporary driver's licenses
By Jamey Dunn
An Illinois Senate committee today approved a bill that would allow undocumented immigrants access to temporary driver's licenses.
Senate Bill 957 would give immigrants who are in the country illegally a chance to get temporary Illinois driver's licenses. Such licenses are already available in Illinois to immigrants who lack a Social Security number but have proof that they are in the country legally. The legislation would extend the licenses, which are valid for three years, to immigrants who cannot provide documentation of legal status. Proponents say the measure would make the state’s roadways safer and allow immigrants to purchase legally required insurance. “I think that while the issue of immigration is being debated on the national level, in the meantime we care about the safety of our highways in the state,” said Senate President John Cullerton, who is sponsoring the bill.
Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran, Jr. said the measure recognizes the reality that an estimated 250,000 immigrants are driving in the state without licenses or insurance. "These people are not going to be deported. They’re here, and they need to get to work.” He said that those drivers would be safer if they are tested on driving skills and given the eye exam required to obtain a license. “All drivers on the road are safer when they are trained, tested, licensed and insured.”
Curran said the bill would “ease the burden on jails and courts” and policy that have to deal with immigrants picked up for driving without a license. “Ultimately, law enforcement would rather go after the bad guys.”
The licenses would only be available to residents who can prove they have lived in Illinois for a year. Sponsors say that provision is meant to prevent immigrants from neighboring states coming to Illinois to obtain licenses. The licenses would have a different appearance than standard driver’s licenses and could not be used for identification or commercial driving. After three years, holders could reapply for another temporary license, and there is no limit on the number of times they could reapply. If a driver with one of the licenses does not have legally required liability insurance, his or her license would no longer be valid.
Esther Corpuz, regional vice president of governmental and community affairs for Vanguard Health Systems in Chicago, says the provision would also help those in the medical community because often, undocumented patients do not have any form of identification. “In the case of first responders, this is a big issue, making sure that we know who we are caring for.”
However, Sen. Dale Righter said Corpuz’s statement highlights a problem with the proposal. While the bill says that the licenses cannot be used as identification, in practice, they likely would be. “The bill specifically states that the permits will not be used to identify who the person is. ... It can’t be used for identification. Period,” said Righter, a Republican from Mattoon. “That’s one of the catch-22s in the bill. You want to use it to find out who you are dealing with, but that document is not supposed to be used to find out who you are dealing with.”’
Corpuz said, “At the end of the day .. .in emergency situations, we need to know who we are caring for.”
Bloomington Republican Sen. Bill Brady, who said he helped draft the identification provision in the bill, said it was intended to keep the licenses from being used for specific transactions that involve government regulation or security concerns. He says the restriction is in the bill “so the document could not be used falsely for the purchase of firearms, boarding airplanes or voting.”
Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno said that if the bill becomes law, legislators should monitor the system and watch for fraud or misuse. However, with the lack of federal immigration reform to guide states, she said the bill is necessary. “We’re placed in this situation because of the inaction of the federal government,” she said. “I think we have taken steps to ensure that there is as little fraud as possible. ... It may not be perfect, but I think the time has come.”
Supporters say they expect the bill to be called for a floor vote in the Senate next week.
An Illinois Senate committee today approved a bill that would allow undocumented immigrants access to temporary driver's licenses.
Senate Bill 957 would give immigrants who are in the country illegally a chance to get temporary Illinois driver's licenses. Such licenses are already available in Illinois to immigrants who lack a Social Security number but have proof that they are in the country legally. The legislation would extend the licenses, which are valid for three years, to immigrants who cannot provide documentation of legal status. Proponents say the measure would make the state’s roadways safer and allow immigrants to purchase legally required insurance. “I think that while the issue of immigration is being debated on the national level, in the meantime we care about the safety of our highways in the state,” said Senate President John Cullerton, who is sponsoring the bill.
Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran, Jr. said the measure recognizes the reality that an estimated 250,000 immigrants are driving in the state without licenses or insurance. "These people are not going to be deported. They’re here, and they need to get to work.” He said that those drivers would be safer if they are tested on driving skills and given the eye exam required to obtain a license. “All drivers on the road are safer when they are trained, tested, licensed and insured.”
Curran said the bill would “ease the burden on jails and courts” and policy that have to deal with immigrants picked up for driving without a license. “Ultimately, law enforcement would rather go after the bad guys.”
The licenses would only be available to residents who can prove they have lived in Illinois for a year. Sponsors say that provision is meant to prevent immigrants from neighboring states coming to Illinois to obtain licenses. The licenses would have a different appearance than standard driver’s licenses and could not be used for identification or commercial driving. After three years, holders could reapply for another temporary license, and there is no limit on the number of times they could reapply. If a driver with one of the licenses does not have legally required liability insurance, his or her license would no longer be valid.
Esther Corpuz, regional vice president of governmental and community affairs for Vanguard Health Systems in Chicago, says the provision would also help those in the medical community because often, undocumented patients do not have any form of identification. “In the case of first responders, this is a big issue, making sure that we know who we are caring for.”
However, Sen. Dale Righter said Corpuz’s statement highlights a problem with the proposal. While the bill says that the licenses cannot be used as identification, in practice, they likely would be. “The bill specifically states that the permits will not be used to identify who the person is. ... It can’t be used for identification. Period,” said Righter, a Republican from Mattoon. “That’s one of the catch-22s in the bill. You want to use it to find out who you are dealing with, but that document is not supposed to be used to find out who you are dealing with.”’
Corpuz said, “At the end of the day .. .in emergency situations, we need to know who we are caring for.”
Bloomington Republican Sen. Bill Brady, who said he helped draft the identification provision in the bill, said it was intended to keep the licenses from being used for specific transactions that involve government regulation or security concerns. He says the restriction is in the bill “so the document could not be used falsely for the purchase of firearms, boarding airplanes or voting.”
Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno said that if the bill becomes law, legislators should monitor the system and watch for fraud or misuse. However, with the lack of federal immigration reform to guide states, she said the bill is necessary. “We’re placed in this situation because of the inaction of the federal government,” she said. “I think we have taken steps to ensure that there is as little fraud as possible. ... It may not be perfect, but I think the time has come.”
Supporters say they expect the bill to be called for a floor vote in the Senate next week.
Wednesday, May 09, 2012
Court bars enforcement of eavesdropping bill, but some say legislation is still needed
By Ashley Griffin
The debate over Illinois’ eavesdropping law has taken yet another turn.
This week, a federal appeals court called for an injunction to block Cook County prosecutors from enforcing a provision in the law that bars citizens from making audio recordings of on-duty police officers. The court reportedly called the provision the “broadest of its kind in the country” and said that it “likely” violates First Amendment rights.
Although a court has ruled on the measure, supporters of Senate Bill 1808, which is sponsored by Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekritz, say the measure is still needed. “We applaud yesterday’s decision by the 7th Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals as it applies to Illinois’ eavesdropping law being unconstitutional,” said Josh Sharp, director of government relations for the Illinois Press Association. “I do make to want clear that the legislative option is certainly something that still remains on the table. We had some questions about the applicability of yesterday’s decision and who exactly it will apply to in the state of Illinois.”
Backers of the bill say they are concerned that the court ruling would only apply to Cook County, leaving downstate residents open to prosecution. Recording a police officer without permission is a felony that carries a sentence of up to 15 years. They say legislation is necessary to clarify the ruling. Nekritz’s bill would allow for the recording of on-duty officers in public places. It would also bar the use of doctored or edited recordings in a complaint against an officer. Law enforcement officials oppose an earlier version of the bill, and it was shot down by the House. But Nekritz hopes that the new version, with its provision to address tampering, will gain more support.
The debate over Illinois’ eavesdropping law has taken yet another turn.
This week, a federal appeals court called for an injunction to block Cook County prosecutors from enforcing a provision in the law that bars citizens from making audio recordings of on-duty police officers. The court reportedly called the provision the “broadest of its kind in the country” and said that it “likely” violates First Amendment rights.
Although a court has ruled on the measure, supporters of Senate Bill 1808, which is sponsored by Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekritz, say the measure is still needed. “We applaud yesterday’s decision by the 7th Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals as it applies to Illinois’ eavesdropping law being unconstitutional,” said Josh Sharp, director of government relations for the Illinois Press Association. “I do make to want clear that the legislative option is certainly something that still remains on the table. We had some questions about the applicability of yesterday’s decision and who exactly it will apply to in the state of Illinois.”
Backers of the bill say they are concerned that the court ruling would only apply to Cook County, leaving downstate residents open to prosecution. Recording a police officer without permission is a felony that carries a sentence of up to 15 years. They say legislation is necessary to clarify the ruling. Nekritz’s bill would allow for the recording of on-duty officers in public places. It would also bar the use of doctored or edited recordings in a complaint against an officer. Law enforcement officials oppose an earlier version of the bill, and it was shot down by the House. But Nekritz hopes that the new version, with its provision to address tampering, will gain more support.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
