By Jamey Dunn
Champaign County Clerk Gordy Hulten has begun issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples after a federal judge ordered Cook County to begin issuing licenses last week.
When state lawmakers approved the bill allowing same sex marriage last year, there were not enough votes to put it into effect immediately under the state's constitutional requirements, so the law’s effective date is June 1. U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin ruled in December that couples could wed if one of them had a life-threatening illness. U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman took things a step further with her ruling last week that allows all couples to get married in Cook County. Coleman said that “there is no reason to delay further” on allowing gay couples to marry. Cook County Clerk David Orr began issuing licenses on Friday.
“On Friday, federal Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman held that the Illinois statute banning marriage for same-sex couples is unconstitutional and violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause,” Hulten, who is a Republican, said in a written statement. “The Illinois Attorney General and the Cook County Clerk were parties to the suit. The precise effect of the ruling on other Illinois counties is unclear. However, after consulting with State’s Attorney Julia Rietz, I have come to the conclusion that the rationale of the case applies to all citizens of Illinois and that Champaign County residents should have no fewer constitutional rights than those in Cook County. Furthermore, given the ruling, denying a license to a same sex couple would provide no benefit to the county and would likely result in litigation at taxpayer expense. Therefore, effective immediately, the Champaign County clerk’s office will issue marriage licenses to same sex applicants, in accordance with the 14th Amendment, and the Illinois and United States constitutions.”
Hulten told reporters in Urbana today that the office had received inquiries from same-sex couples since the ruling last week. He said that no couples had yet threatened to sue to try to get a license. “What I realized was that if somebody came into our office and asked for a same-sex marriage license in the wake of the Friday court decision in Chicago, we had two choices. We could either issue it or we could turn them away, in which their only recourse was to sue us, with the facts that would have been nearly identical to the case in Chicago. We figured going through litigation with a nearly foregone conclusion was a disservice to everyone.”
Advocates for same sex marriage applauded the move. “Clerk Hulten recognized both the humanity of helping gay and lesbian couples to fulfill their dreams and the legal soundness of following the decision of a federal court that denying marriage licenses was unconstitutional,” said Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois. “It is simply time for the other county clerks to follow suit,” Cherkasov added. “As we saw in the immediate rush to the Cook County clerk's marriage bureau after Friday's ruling, gay and lesbian couples are eager and ready to take the step that not only grants them and their family the legal benefits and rights of marriage but also bestows society's recognition that their love is equal.” He said that his organization is encouraging other county clerks in the state to begin issuing licenses.
Showing posts with label same-sex marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label same-sex marriage. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Friday, February 21, 2014
Cook County clerk begins issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples
By Jamey Dunn
A federal judge ruled today that same sex couples can now wed in Cook County.
When lawmakers approved the bill allowing same sex marriage last year, there were not enough votes to put it into effect immediately under the state's constitutional requirements, so the law’s effective date is June 1. U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin ruled in December that couples could wed if one of them had a life-threatening illness. U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman took things a step further with her ruling allowing all couples to get married in Cook County starting today. Coleman said that “there is no reason to delay further” on allowing gay couples to marry.
Cook County Clerk David Orr announced that his office would begin issuing marriage licenses and that the downtown Bureau of Vital Records, in the lower level of the Daley Center, will remain open until 7 p.m. today. “I’m thrilled same-sex couples who want to get married won’t have to wait any longer,” Orr said in a written statement. “We are very excited to celebrate this historic milestone with every loving couple from today onward.” Licenses cost $60 and are valid for 60 days from the day they are issued.
Orr warned that couples who had planned to have their wedding after the June effective date of the bill should not rush to get a license now because it would expire before their wedding. The fee will be waived for couples who wish to convert their civil unions into marriages. However, Orr said those couples would have to wait until June because the court ruling did not address couples who are already in civil unions. “Tens of thousands of Illinois couples have been waiting for a long time, some for decades, for their love, commitment and marriage to be recognized. This day — and the opportunity to finally get married — could not have come sooner,” Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois, said in a written statement. “We congratulate all of the couples and their families, and the people of Illinois, on this significant day.”
Gov. Pat Quinn said in a written statement in response to the ruling: “Many couples in Illinois have waited long enough for marriage equality, and today’s ruling means thousands of Illinois couples no longer have to wait. Our law is a victory for equal rights in America and shows that citizens and lawmakers can come together on issues of fairness and human rights. ... Every county across the state should enjoy the same freedom without having to wait until June.”
A federal judge ruled today that same sex couples can now wed in Cook County.
When lawmakers approved the bill allowing same sex marriage last year, there were not enough votes to put it into effect immediately under the state's constitutional requirements, so the law’s effective date is June 1. U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin ruled in December that couples could wed if one of them had a life-threatening illness. U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman took things a step further with her ruling allowing all couples to get married in Cook County starting today. Coleman said that “there is no reason to delay further” on allowing gay couples to marry.
Cook County Clerk David Orr announced that his office would begin issuing marriage licenses and that the downtown Bureau of Vital Records, in the lower level of the Daley Center, will remain open until 7 p.m. today. “I’m thrilled same-sex couples who want to get married won’t have to wait any longer,” Orr said in a written statement. “We are very excited to celebrate this historic milestone with every loving couple from today onward.” Licenses cost $60 and are valid for 60 days from the day they are issued.
Orr warned that couples who had planned to have their wedding after the June effective date of the bill should not rush to get a license now because it would expire before their wedding. The fee will be waived for couples who wish to convert their civil unions into marriages. However, Orr said those couples would have to wait until June because the court ruling did not address couples who are already in civil unions. “Tens of thousands of Illinois couples have been waiting for a long time, some for decades, for their love, commitment and marriage to be recognized. This day — and the opportunity to finally get married — could not have come sooner,” Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois, said in a written statement. “We congratulate all of the couples and their families, and the people of Illinois, on this significant day.”
Gov. Pat Quinn said in a written statement in response to the ruling: “Many couples in Illinois have waited long enough for marriage equality, and today’s ruling means thousands of Illinois couples no longer have to wait. Our law is a victory for equal rights in America and shows that citizens and lawmakers can come together on issues of fairness and human rights. ... Every county across the state should enjoy the same freedom without having to wait until June.”
Monday, December 16, 2013
Judge's order allows same-sex couples facing illness to marry
By Jamey Dunn
A ruling issued today will allow some couples to wed before the new same-sex marriage law goes into effect next year.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin last month ordered Cook County Clerk David Orr to issue a marriage license to Patricia Ewert and Vernita Gray, who is battling terminal cancer. The couple’s lawyer argued that they deserved the license because Gray’s prognosis means she may not survive to marry when the law goes into effect. Orr, who supports same sex marriage, opted not to defend his office against the suit.
Today, U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman issued a ruling that will allow all same-sex couples facing life-threatening illness to apply for marriage licenses before the law kicks in on June 1, 2014. As part of the lawsuit, two couples — Elvie Jordan and Challis Gibbs, and Ronald Dorfman and Ken Ilio — were specifically granted license applications. Dorfman has been diagnosed with a heart condition, and Gibbs has cancer. The ruling creates a legal “subclass” of couples, who have an “urgent need” to marry before the effective date.
“Given the Illinois General Assembly’s enactment of Senate Bill 10, any erroneous decision here would only result in allowing a relatively few people to marry a short period of time sooner,” Johnson Coleman wrote in her ruling. “The harm to the putative subclass of medically critical plaintiffs, on the other hand, would be far weightier since a denial of relief could effectively deny them the right to marry at all if one member of the couple passes away before June 1, 2014.” Couples in the state seeking to marry immediately because one or both have a life-threatening illness must get a recommendation from a doctor. Couples must have a doctor complete this certification form, available on the Cook County clerk’s website. Once couples get a certification, they can continue through the standard process of obtaining a marriage license.
The lawsuit was filed by Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. “When you have a terminal illness, every day is significant. Even though we know the freedom to marry is coming to Illinois, the default implementation date of the new law is too far away for these couples,” Camilla Taylor, Marriage Project director for Lambda Legal, said in a written statement. “While no one should be told that they cannot marry for a period of months, for couples who are dealing with a life-threatening medical condition, the delay in implementing Illinois' marriage law could turn out to be an absolute bar to being married at all. We thank the court and the clerk's office for their swift response to ensure that Illinois couples who are struggling with the challenges of a life-threatening illness will have a chance to be married.”
A ruling issued today will allow some couples to wed before the new same-sex marriage law goes into effect next year.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin last month ordered Cook County Clerk David Orr to issue a marriage license to Patricia Ewert and Vernita Gray, who is battling terminal cancer. The couple’s lawyer argued that they deserved the license because Gray’s prognosis means she may not survive to marry when the law goes into effect. Orr, who supports same sex marriage, opted not to defend his office against the suit.
Today, U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman issued a ruling that will allow all same-sex couples facing life-threatening illness to apply for marriage licenses before the law kicks in on June 1, 2014. As part of the lawsuit, two couples — Elvie Jordan and Challis Gibbs, and Ronald Dorfman and Ken Ilio — were specifically granted license applications. Dorfman has been diagnosed with a heart condition, and Gibbs has cancer. The ruling creates a legal “subclass” of couples, who have an “urgent need” to marry before the effective date.
“Given the Illinois General Assembly’s enactment of Senate Bill 10, any erroneous decision here would only result in allowing a relatively few people to marry a short period of time sooner,” Johnson Coleman wrote in her ruling. “The harm to the putative subclass of medically critical plaintiffs, on the other hand, would be far weightier since a denial of relief could effectively deny them the right to marry at all if one member of the couple passes away before June 1, 2014.” Couples in the state seeking to marry immediately because one or both have a life-threatening illness must get a recommendation from a doctor. Couples must have a doctor complete this certification form, available on the Cook County clerk’s website. Once couples get a certification, they can continue through the standard process of obtaining a marriage license.
The lawsuit was filed by Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. “When you have a terminal illness, every day is significant. Even though we know the freedom to marry is coming to Illinois, the default implementation date of the new law is too far away for these couples,” Camilla Taylor, Marriage Project director for Lambda Legal, said in a written statement. “While no one should be told that they cannot marry for a period of months, for couples who are dealing with a life-threatening medical condition, the delay in implementing Illinois' marriage law could turn out to be an absolute bar to being married at all. We thank the court and the clerk's office for their swift response to ensure that Illinois couples who are struggling with the challenges of a life-threatening illness will have a chance to be married.”
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Quinn signs same-sex marriage bill into law
By Jamey Dunn
As Gov. Pat Quinn signed the law legalizing same sex-marriage in Illinois today, supporters clapped, waved rainbow flags, a symbol of the gay rights movement, and cheered in celebration.
“It’s time to stop planning rallies and start planning weddings. Congratulations,” Lt. Gov. Sheila Simon said at the Chicago event.
“Today we’re here to celebrate family, commitment, love, courage and community,” said Rep. Greg Harris, the sponsor of Senate Bill 10. “This was a labor of love, and it was a mammoth undertaking.” The Illinois Senate approved the legislation in February, and the House voted in favor earlier this month.
Republican state Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka said that voting for the bill was politically difficult for many, especially those in her own party. Four Republican lawmakers, including former House Minority Leader Tom Cross, voted in favor of the law. “History, I think, will show that we got it right on this one.” She said the new law means that the state will not discriminate against loving couples who want to start a family, which she said is “a beautiful thing.” Topinka added, “I am available to be a flower girl, and I’ll even waive the fee.”
Speakers at the event acknowledged the historic nature of the day and used the opportunity to call on other states to follow suit. “This new law is an epic victory for equal rights in America. Illinois is moving forward. We are a model for our country. If the Land of [President Abraham] Lincoln can achieve marriage equality, so can every other state in the nation,” said Gov. Pat Quinn. The governor signed the bill on a desk that belonged to the 16th president, who is a favorite source of quotations for Quinn.
“We’ve realized that to have a forward-moving state, you can’t have backward-looking laws,” said Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. “I hope that the leaders across the county follow the lead that we are taking here in Illinois.”
While the day was historic, it was also personal for many. Jim Darby is a Korean War veteran. He and his partner, Patrick Bova, want to be buried next to each other in the Lincoln Memorial Cemetery, and Bova said the new law will allow them to be. “We have been together for over 50 years. I can remember so many times when I was celebrating family’s and friends’ anniversaries and thinking how wonderful it would be to celebrate my marriage to Jim. Finally that day has come,” Bova said. “Today is the day when we can look back on our five decades together and say, 'We can finally be newlyweds.'”
As usual, House Speaker Michael Madigan kept his comments short. He thanked those lawmakers who were involved in the passage of the bill and simply said, “I’m very happy to join with everyone in the celebration.”
While it was a time of celebration for many, some opponents also recognized the day. The head of Springfield’s Roman Catholic Diocese, Bishop Thomas John Paprocki, presided over “prayers of supplication and exorcism” at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception in Springfield today. In a statement issues last week, Paprocki called political supporters of same-sex marriage “morally complicit as co-operators in facilitating this grave sin.”
But supporters of the new law say they are moving on. Harris said, paraphrasing Lincoln, “Sometimes we walk slowly, but we never walk back.” The new law will go into effect on June 1. However there is a bill filed that could potentially move up the effective date. Lawmakers will not be able to take action on that bill until after January 1.
As Gov. Pat Quinn signed the law legalizing same sex-marriage in Illinois today, supporters clapped, waved rainbow flags, a symbol of the gay rights movement, and cheered in celebration.
“It’s time to stop planning rallies and start planning weddings. Congratulations,” Lt. Gov. Sheila Simon said at the Chicago event.
“Today we’re here to celebrate family, commitment, love, courage and community,” said Rep. Greg Harris, the sponsor of Senate Bill 10. “This was a labor of love, and it was a mammoth undertaking.” The Illinois Senate approved the legislation in February, and the House voted in favor earlier this month.
Republican state Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka said that voting for the bill was politically difficult for many, especially those in her own party. Four Republican lawmakers, including former House Minority Leader Tom Cross, voted in favor of the law. “History, I think, will show that we got it right on this one.” She said the new law means that the state will not discriminate against loving couples who want to start a family, which she said is “a beautiful thing.” Topinka added, “I am available to be a flower girl, and I’ll even waive the fee.”
Speakers at the event acknowledged the historic nature of the day and used the opportunity to call on other states to follow suit. “This new law is an epic victory for equal rights in America. Illinois is moving forward. We are a model for our country. If the Land of [President Abraham] Lincoln can achieve marriage equality, so can every other state in the nation,” said Gov. Pat Quinn. The governor signed the bill on a desk that belonged to the 16th president, who is a favorite source of quotations for Quinn.
“We’ve realized that to have a forward-moving state, you can’t have backward-looking laws,” said Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. “I hope that the leaders across the county follow the lead that we are taking here in Illinois.”
While the day was historic, it was also personal for many. Jim Darby is a Korean War veteran. He and his partner, Patrick Bova, want to be buried next to each other in the Lincoln Memorial Cemetery, and Bova said the new law will allow them to be. “We have been together for over 50 years. I can remember so many times when I was celebrating family’s and friends’ anniversaries and thinking how wonderful it would be to celebrate my marriage to Jim. Finally that day has come,” Bova said. “Today is the day when we can look back on our five decades together and say, 'We can finally be newlyweds.'”
As usual, House Speaker Michael Madigan kept his comments short. He thanked those lawmakers who were involved in the passage of the bill and simply said, “I’m very happy to join with everyone in the celebration.”
While it was a time of celebration for many, some opponents also recognized the day. The head of Springfield’s Roman Catholic Diocese, Bishop Thomas John Paprocki, presided over “prayers of supplication and exorcism” at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception in Springfield today. In a statement issues last week, Paprocki called political supporters of same-sex marriage “morally complicit as co-operators in facilitating this grave sin.”
But supporters of the new law say they are moving on. Harris said, paraphrasing Lincoln, “Sometimes we walk slowly, but we never walk back.” The new law will go into effect on June 1. However there is a bill filed that could potentially move up the effective date. Lawmakers will not be able to take action on that bill until after January 1.
Wednesday, November 06, 2013
Tuesday, November 05, 2013
House approves same-sex marriage, but couples will have to wait until next year
By Jamey Dunn
After weeks of speculation about whether lawmakers would vote to legalize same-sex marriage during the fall legislative session, the Illinois House approved the bill today, and it now goes to Gov. Pat Quinn for his signature.
“Loving same sex-couples will be able to publicly confirm their commitment to each other and join their friends and neighbors in being treated equally in the eyes of the law,” Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, sponsor of Senate Bill 10, said during floor debate today. Harris, who is gay, gave a tearful speech to disappointed supporters after he opted not to call the bill at the end of the regular spring session. “I apologize to families who were hoping to wake up tomorrow as full and equal citizens of this state,” he said at the time.
Even though Senate Bill 10 was approved today, those families will have to wait a little longer. The law will not go into effect until June 1, 2014. Harris removed the immediate effective date on the bill so that it could pass with 60 votes instead of the 71 that would have been needed for an immediate effective date. The Senate originally passed the bill on Valentine's Day and moved quickly today to approve the changes made in the House and send the bill to Quinn. The governor held a celebration with supporters this evening and plans to sign the bill later this month. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia already allow same-sex couples to marry.
Today’s events were more subdued than that last day of the session in May when supporters chanted for the sponsor to call the bill. Harris has been quiet about his intent, and fewer advocates and opponents turned out at the Statehouse. Still, the House public galleries were full, and supporters broke into applause at several points during the debate. Opponents argued today that the measure would infringe upon the liberties of Illinoisans who are opposed to same-sex marriage because of their religious beliefs. “This country was built on freedom of religion, not freedom from religion,” said Wheaton Republican Rep. Jeanne Ives. She said that citizens who do not want to provide services, such as photography or floral arrangements, should not have to cater to same-sex weddings. “There’s not protections for people who make their livings by providing the goods and services for weddings.”
Others argued that the rights of county clerks who did not want to issue same-sex marriage licenses because of their religious convictions would be violated. “My conviction happens to be that this is wrong. My conviction is that the scripture is right,” said Rep. Dwight Kay, a Glen Carbon Republican. “Whatever you do with wrong, I think we’ve all known since we were children that you can’t change it. You can’t paint it. You can’t put glitter on it. You can’t dress it up. In fact, you can’t do anything to something that’s wrong to make it right.” But Harris noted that the bill has specific carve-outs for churches and religious groups, and business are already prohibited from discriminating against customers on the basis of sexual orientation under the state’s Human Rights Act.
The holdup on the vote has long been blamed at least partially on members of the Black Caucus who were reluctant to support the measure. Observers speculated that African-American lawmakers feared backlash from some local church figures opposed to the bill. However, the majority of the caucus voted in favor of the bill today. “Jesus loved everyone. He hung out with the prostitutes. He hung out with the common worker, the vagabond, the people who were sick, wealthy individuals. He loved everybody,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Kenneth Dunkin, an early African-American supporter of the bill. “So there is nothing in the Bible or the Quran that I believe speaks toward the opposite of that — love.” Several younger African-American lawmakers drew parallels between the civil rights of gay people and the black civil rights movement. “I am voting with a strong sense of confidence because I know that enhancing the civil rights of others does not diminish the civil rights of anyone in this room or anyone in this state,” said Jehan Gordon-Booth, a Peoria Democrat. “Separate but equal in Illinois and in this land is un-American.”
But at least one black opponent to the bill said she was offended by the comparisons. Chicago Democratic Rep. Mary Flowers said that her focus as a lawmakers has been on children’s issues and making sure that people have access to health care. “This is not my issue,” she said of same-sex marriage. “What you do and who you love is your business. It’s your business; I really don’t care. I know about discrimination. I know all about that.” But she said she was upset by those who “injected race” into the debate. “When I was discriminated against, it wasn’t because of who I am, it was because of the color of my skin. But nobody ever asks, and if you don’t ask and don’t tell, no one would care about who you sleep with. That’s your business. ... And I just want to say that homosexuality has noting to do with race.”
She said same-sex couples should instead seek rights and benefits at the federal level. “Here in the state of Illinois, we have given you everything, everything. Quite frankly this is a joke. This debate is a joke here in the state of Illinois because what you want, it’s up to the federal government to give it to you, not the state of Illinois.”
Others said the issue was about the societal benefits of protecting the traditional family structure. “Everyone is free to live how they wish, and this state has no interest in interfering with that. But the state does not have an obligation to sanction every form of living arrangement that is demanding a sanction,” Palatine Republican Rep. Thomas Morrison said. He argued that opening the door to same sex-marriage could result in eventual further changes to marriage, such as allowing polygamy. He argued that the state should have a nonbinding referendum on the issue to determine what voters want. Recent poling has indicated that the majority of Illinois residents support same-sex marriage. However, Morrison said he was uncertain about the “veracity” of those polls. “Real marriage is the building block for humanity,” he said. “This is not a vote about people but about policy. It’s not about individuals or even groups of people. It’s not about those who are homosexual or straight because not even all gays support this bill.”
But the vote was personal for many members, including the three openly gay Democrats in the chamber and one of the three Republicans who voted in favor. Rep. Ed Sullivan, a Republican from Mundelein whose mother in-law is a lesbian, said he was casting his vote, in part, for his kids. “When I think of marriage equality, I also think about them. You see, I believe in voting for marriage equality as the right thing to do. If I vote against this bill, the bill I believe in — I believe it’s the right thing to do — how do I face my children? How do I tell them that there’s something wrong with their grandma? Well, I can’t. And I won’t.” Former House Minority Leader Tom Cross, who is from Oswego, also cast a “yes” vote, along with Downers Grove Republican Rep. Ron Sandack.
Rep. Sam Yingling, a Democrat from Round Lake Beach, talked about his own family before casting his vote. “This issue is simply about family and family values. It’s about your family and about my family,” he said. Yingling has three children with his partner, Lowell. “Lowell and I feel pain when our kids feel pain. We celebrate our kids’ accomplishments and rejoice in their achievements. We strive to make sure that they have every opportunity that your kids have, but we are a family that is treated differently under the eyes of the law. We are a family that does not have the same protections that your family has.”
Chicago Democratic Rep. Kelly Cassidy recounted a time when her partner, Kelley Quinn, went to the hospital with a medical emergency, and she considered driving an extra hour to make sure she had the proper paperwork to be admitted to see Quinn. “I worried if I would be allowed to see her when I got there,” she said. “I was weighing the risks of going straight to her side or spending another hour in transit to get a piece of paper to prove that we were real.”
Harris said that he and other lawmakers have heard from gay couples whose rights have been questioned under civil unions, and that is why they are not a fair alternative to marriage. “Particularly in times of emergency and crisis, families have been kept apart. Parents have not been allowed to be with their children in emergency rooms or intensive care units. ... Civil unions have proven to be separate and unequal.”
Advocates for same-sex marriage celebrated the vote. “Today's historic marriage vote was a victory for all families and their children,” Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois, said in a prepared statement. “It was a victory for hundreds of clergy who joined forces in support of the law, and for scores of major employers who made the business case for equality, and for parents who just wanted all their children to be treated the same.”
Opponents continued to voice concerns about religious freedoms. “Today’s decision by Illinois lawmakers to change the definition of marriage not only goes against the common consensus of the human race — which understands that nature tells us that marriage is the union of one man and one woman — but it also undermines an institution that is the cornerstone of a healthy society. The optimal condition in which to raise children is a home that includes both a mother and father, since women and men are not interchangeable,” said a written statement from the Catholic Conference of Illinois. “We remain concerned about the very real threats to religious liberty that are at stake with the passage of this bill.”
After weeks of speculation about whether lawmakers would vote to legalize same-sex marriage during the fall legislative session, the Illinois House approved the bill today, and it now goes to Gov. Pat Quinn for his signature.
“Loving same sex-couples will be able to publicly confirm their commitment to each other and join their friends and neighbors in being treated equally in the eyes of the law,” Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, sponsor of Senate Bill 10, said during floor debate today. Harris, who is gay, gave a tearful speech to disappointed supporters after he opted not to call the bill at the end of the regular spring session. “I apologize to families who were hoping to wake up tomorrow as full and equal citizens of this state,” he said at the time.
Even though Senate Bill 10 was approved today, those families will have to wait a little longer. The law will not go into effect until June 1, 2014. Harris removed the immediate effective date on the bill so that it could pass with 60 votes instead of the 71 that would have been needed for an immediate effective date. The Senate originally passed the bill on Valentine's Day and moved quickly today to approve the changes made in the House and send the bill to Quinn. The governor held a celebration with supporters this evening and plans to sign the bill later this month. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia already allow same-sex couples to marry.
Today’s events were more subdued than that last day of the session in May when supporters chanted for the sponsor to call the bill. Harris has been quiet about his intent, and fewer advocates and opponents turned out at the Statehouse. Still, the House public galleries were full, and supporters broke into applause at several points during the debate. Opponents argued today that the measure would infringe upon the liberties of Illinoisans who are opposed to same-sex marriage because of their religious beliefs. “This country was built on freedom of religion, not freedom from religion,” said Wheaton Republican Rep. Jeanne Ives. She said that citizens who do not want to provide services, such as photography or floral arrangements, should not have to cater to same-sex weddings. “There’s not protections for people who make their livings by providing the goods and services for weddings.”
Others argued that the rights of county clerks who did not want to issue same-sex marriage licenses because of their religious convictions would be violated. “My conviction happens to be that this is wrong. My conviction is that the scripture is right,” said Rep. Dwight Kay, a Glen Carbon Republican. “Whatever you do with wrong, I think we’ve all known since we were children that you can’t change it. You can’t paint it. You can’t put glitter on it. You can’t dress it up. In fact, you can’t do anything to something that’s wrong to make it right.” But Harris noted that the bill has specific carve-outs for churches and religious groups, and business are already prohibited from discriminating against customers on the basis of sexual orientation under the state’s Human Rights Act.
The holdup on the vote has long been blamed at least partially on members of the Black Caucus who were reluctant to support the measure. Observers speculated that African-American lawmakers feared backlash from some local church figures opposed to the bill. However, the majority of the caucus voted in favor of the bill today. “Jesus loved everyone. He hung out with the prostitutes. He hung out with the common worker, the vagabond, the people who were sick, wealthy individuals. He loved everybody,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Kenneth Dunkin, an early African-American supporter of the bill. “So there is nothing in the Bible or the Quran that I believe speaks toward the opposite of that — love.” Several younger African-American lawmakers drew parallels between the civil rights of gay people and the black civil rights movement. “I am voting with a strong sense of confidence because I know that enhancing the civil rights of others does not diminish the civil rights of anyone in this room or anyone in this state,” said Jehan Gordon-Booth, a Peoria Democrat. “Separate but equal in Illinois and in this land is un-American.”
But at least one black opponent to the bill said she was offended by the comparisons. Chicago Democratic Rep. Mary Flowers said that her focus as a lawmakers has been on children’s issues and making sure that people have access to health care. “This is not my issue,” she said of same-sex marriage. “What you do and who you love is your business. It’s your business; I really don’t care. I know about discrimination. I know all about that.” But she said she was upset by those who “injected race” into the debate. “When I was discriminated against, it wasn’t because of who I am, it was because of the color of my skin. But nobody ever asks, and if you don’t ask and don’t tell, no one would care about who you sleep with. That’s your business. ... And I just want to say that homosexuality has noting to do with race.”
She said same-sex couples should instead seek rights and benefits at the federal level. “Here in the state of Illinois, we have given you everything, everything. Quite frankly this is a joke. This debate is a joke here in the state of Illinois because what you want, it’s up to the federal government to give it to you, not the state of Illinois.”
Others said the issue was about the societal benefits of protecting the traditional family structure. “Everyone is free to live how they wish, and this state has no interest in interfering with that. But the state does not have an obligation to sanction every form of living arrangement that is demanding a sanction,” Palatine Republican Rep. Thomas Morrison said. He argued that opening the door to same sex-marriage could result in eventual further changes to marriage, such as allowing polygamy. He argued that the state should have a nonbinding referendum on the issue to determine what voters want. Recent poling has indicated that the majority of Illinois residents support same-sex marriage. However, Morrison said he was uncertain about the “veracity” of those polls. “Real marriage is the building block for humanity,” he said. “This is not a vote about people but about policy. It’s not about individuals or even groups of people. It’s not about those who are homosexual or straight because not even all gays support this bill.”
But the vote was personal for many members, including the three openly gay Democrats in the chamber and one of the three Republicans who voted in favor. Rep. Ed Sullivan, a Republican from Mundelein whose mother in-law is a lesbian, said he was casting his vote, in part, for his kids. “When I think of marriage equality, I also think about them. You see, I believe in voting for marriage equality as the right thing to do. If I vote against this bill, the bill I believe in — I believe it’s the right thing to do — how do I face my children? How do I tell them that there’s something wrong with their grandma? Well, I can’t. And I won’t.” Former House Minority Leader Tom Cross, who is from Oswego, also cast a “yes” vote, along with Downers Grove Republican Rep. Ron Sandack.
Rep. Sam Yingling, a Democrat from Round Lake Beach, talked about his own family before casting his vote. “This issue is simply about family and family values. It’s about your family and about my family,” he said. Yingling has three children with his partner, Lowell. “Lowell and I feel pain when our kids feel pain. We celebrate our kids’ accomplishments and rejoice in their achievements. We strive to make sure that they have every opportunity that your kids have, but we are a family that is treated differently under the eyes of the law. We are a family that does not have the same protections that your family has.”
Chicago Democratic Rep. Kelly Cassidy recounted a time when her partner, Kelley Quinn, went to the hospital with a medical emergency, and she considered driving an extra hour to make sure she had the proper paperwork to be admitted to see Quinn. “I worried if I would be allowed to see her when I got there,” she said. “I was weighing the risks of going straight to her side or spending another hour in transit to get a piece of paper to prove that we were real.”
Harris said that he and other lawmakers have heard from gay couples whose rights have been questioned under civil unions, and that is why they are not a fair alternative to marriage. “Particularly in times of emergency and crisis, families have been kept apart. Parents have not been allowed to be with their children in emergency rooms or intensive care units. ... Civil unions have proven to be separate and unequal.”
Advocates for same-sex marriage celebrated the vote. “Today's historic marriage vote was a victory for all families and their children,” Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois, said in a prepared statement. “It was a victory for hundreds of clergy who joined forces in support of the law, and for scores of major employers who made the business case for equality, and for parents who just wanted all their children to be treated the same.”
Opponents continued to voice concerns about religious freedoms. “Today’s decision by Illinois lawmakers to change the definition of marriage not only goes against the common consensus of the human race — which understands that nature tells us that marriage is the union of one man and one woman — but it also undermines an institution that is the cornerstone of a healthy society. The optimal condition in which to raise children is a home that includes both a mother and father, since women and men are not interchangeable,” said a written statement from the Catholic Conference of Illinois. “We remain concerned about the very real threats to religious liberty that are at stake with the passage of this bill.”
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Veto session roundup
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois General Assembly's fall veto session was scheduled to continue through tomorrow, but both chambers canceled their Thursday sessions and hit the road after little legislative action this week. Here’s a rundown of what did happen:
Veto stands
The House voted not to override Gov. Pat Quinn’s veto of House Bill 1200. The measure would have cut the number of free days museums are required to offer from 52 to 26. Rep. Joe Sosnowski argued that lawmakers should give museums a break because the state has not given them an operating subsidy in more than a decade. He said that low-income residents would still have plenty of opportunities to attend on free days or through school and library programs. Sosnowski said that by allowing museums to offer fewer free days, they would have more money to spend on education and outreach programs. “It will enhance and increase what museums can do.” The measure passed in the House in April with 79 “yes” votes and 36 “no” votes. Today, only 49 members voted in favor of an override, while 67 voted to uphold the governor’s veto.
Several legislators rose during debate to argue that the change would cut off opportunities for many families. “The governor is correct. The purpose of a museum is to educate, to provide culture. And when we deny that, limit access, we really hurt all of us in this state,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Monique Davis. Quinn reportedly lobbied aggressively for support of the veto. “It’s always important to ensure that our residents with modest incomes have equal access to our world-class museums and cultural institutions,” he said in a written statement. “I commend members of the House for their vote today. They did the right thing.”
Budget issues
Today, committees continued to debate adding additional spending to the current fiscal year’s budget. Gov. Pat Quinn is seeking about $200 million in additional spending. The money would cover back wages for state employees, which a judge ordered the state to pay with interest, set-up costs for the state’s concealed carry licensing system and operational costs in the Department of Corrections. The money would come from revenues that Quinn’s budget office said will come in higher than originally estimated. Budget committees held hearings today and yesterday but have yet to vote on any of it. Lawmakers said they plan to continue considering the new spending over the next week while they are out of session.
Same-sex marriage opposition rally
After thousands of supporters of same-sex marriage held a rally and march yesterday, their opponents packed the Capitol today. Republican Sen. Kirk Dillard, who is running for governor, was one of several speakers who addressed the crowd. “I have said that I would veto the gay marriage bill,” Dillard said. “I believe that government which governs least governs best. But there are times when government has a solemn duty to stand up and protect its citizens.” Dillard emphasized his belief that children need both a mother and a father to thrive. “Every child in this state deserves to have a mom and dad.” Republican Sen. Jim Oberweis also spoke. He was at the rally collecting signatures to challenge U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin. He said he plans to run against Durbin if he can get the signatures required to get onto the ballot.
State retiree health care
The state is shifting many retirees from traditional Medicare plans to privately managed Medicare Advantage plans. Some lawmakers are unhappy that one provider did not qualify for the bidding process. The Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability held a hearing on the issue today. You can read all about it in this post.
The House officially voted in Western Springs Republican Jim Durkin as the new minority leader yesterday. Illinois Issues interviewed him before he was sworn in. You can read that story here.
Lawmakers are scheduled to return for three more days of veto session starting on November 5.
The Illinois General Assembly's fall veto session was scheduled to continue through tomorrow, but both chambers canceled their Thursday sessions and hit the road after little legislative action this week. Here’s a rundown of what did happen:
Veto stands
The House voted not to override Gov. Pat Quinn’s veto of House Bill 1200. The measure would have cut the number of free days museums are required to offer from 52 to 26. Rep. Joe Sosnowski argued that lawmakers should give museums a break because the state has not given them an operating subsidy in more than a decade. He said that low-income residents would still have plenty of opportunities to attend on free days or through school and library programs. Sosnowski said that by allowing museums to offer fewer free days, they would have more money to spend on education and outreach programs. “It will enhance and increase what museums can do.” The measure passed in the House in April with 79 “yes” votes and 36 “no” votes. Today, only 49 members voted in favor of an override, while 67 voted to uphold the governor’s veto.
Several legislators rose during debate to argue that the change would cut off opportunities for many families. “The governor is correct. The purpose of a museum is to educate, to provide culture. And when we deny that, limit access, we really hurt all of us in this state,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Monique Davis. Quinn reportedly lobbied aggressively for support of the veto. “It’s always important to ensure that our residents with modest incomes have equal access to our world-class museums and cultural institutions,” he said in a written statement. “I commend members of the House for their vote today. They did the right thing.”
Budget issues
Today, committees continued to debate adding additional spending to the current fiscal year’s budget. Gov. Pat Quinn is seeking about $200 million in additional spending. The money would cover back wages for state employees, which a judge ordered the state to pay with interest, set-up costs for the state’s concealed carry licensing system and operational costs in the Department of Corrections. The money would come from revenues that Quinn’s budget office said will come in higher than originally estimated. Budget committees held hearings today and yesterday but have yet to vote on any of it. Lawmakers said they plan to continue considering the new spending over the next week while they are out of session.
Same-sex marriage opposition rally
After thousands of supporters of same-sex marriage held a rally and march yesterday, their opponents packed the Capitol today. Republican Sen. Kirk Dillard, who is running for governor, was one of several speakers who addressed the crowd. “I have said that I would veto the gay marriage bill,” Dillard said. “I believe that government which governs least governs best. But there are times when government has a solemn duty to stand up and protect its citizens.” Dillard emphasized his belief that children need both a mother and a father to thrive. “Every child in this state deserves to have a mom and dad.” Republican Sen. Jim Oberweis also spoke. He was at the rally collecting signatures to challenge U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin. He said he plans to run against Durbin if he can get the signatures required to get onto the ballot.
State retiree health care
The state is shifting many retirees from traditional Medicare plans to privately managed Medicare Advantage plans. Some lawmakers are unhappy that one provider did not qualify for the bidding process. The Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability held a hearing on the issue today. You can read all about it in this post.
The House officially voted in Western Springs Republican Jim Durkin as the new minority leader yesterday. Illinois Issues interviewed him before he was sworn in. You can read that story here.
Lawmakers are scheduled to return for three more days of veto session starting on November 5.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
First week of veto session shaping up to be a bust
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois General Assembly's fall veto session was off to an anticlimactic start today, as hearings on some of the most closely watched issues were canceled.
The House Revenue and Finance Committee did not take up a proposed tax break for Archer Daniels Midland. Committee chair Marion Democratic Rep. John Bradley had few details to share about the proposal, which supporters hope would persuade ADM to put its corporate headquarters in Chicago. ADM announced earlier this month that it plans move its headquarters out of Decatur. The company would leave most of the current jobs in Decatur, but about 100 positions would go with the transfer. “They’re under consideration at this point,” Bradley said of several tax breaks being pitched to lawmakers. OfficeMax and Office Depot are planning a merger and have approached lawmakers for a tax break. OfficeMax is based in Naperville and Office Depot is headquartered in Florida. So the two states are now in competition for the headquarters of the final merged company. The two office supply companies area seeking a tax break similar to the one ADM is looking for. In the end, a tax break omnibus bill may emerge.
However, Gov. Pat Quinn has said that he will not sign “special” tax breaks for businesses until lawmakers approve changes to the state’s public pension systems. But Bradley did not seem phased by Quinn’s statements. “We’re used to rhetoric like that coming out of the governor’s office.”
A hearing on a proposal, backed by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, to increase penalties from some gun crimes also did not occur today. The sponsor, Chicago Democratic Rep. Michael Zalewski, is reportedly in talks with the National Rifle Association. If the negotiations are productive, a compromise bill could emerge as early as tomorrow.
Several budget hearings were held today, and a picture of what Quinn’s office would like to see in a supplemental appropriation became clearer. Ben Winick with the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget told a House committee that $97 million in unexpected revenues have been transferred into the General Revenues fund, and the budget office expects an additional $262 million in sales tax revenues that were originally underestimated. However, he said that telecommunications tax receipts would likely come in $46 million shy of estimates. Still, by Quinn’s budget staff’s count, there is about $313 million in funds to potentially spread around. The governor is asking lawmakers to approve about $112 million to pay back wages to state workers. A judge ordered the state to pay the wages with interest. Quinn’s staff is urging lawmakers to pay them sooner, so less interest is piled on. Some agencies have already been able to find the money for back pay in their budgets. Senate Bill 2603 would fund back wages for the Department of Human Services, the Department of Public Health, the Department of Corrections, the Department of Juvenile Justice and the Department of Natural Resources. Other supplemental appropriations bills have not been filed, meaning that the details are likely not worked out yet. The governor’s office is also looking at spending some of the money on setup costs for the state’s licensing system for concealed carry of firearms.
Meanwhile, Quinn and several other elected officials spoke at a rally at the Statehouse for same-sex marriage. Quinn has called on lawmakers not to be distracted from pension reform by other issues, but he said today that same-sex marriage is an exception. “I think this is a civil rights issue, and anytime there is an issue about rights of people, that deserves important consideration.” Opponents to same-sex marriage are scheduled to hold a rally tomorrow. It is not clear if same-sex marriage supporters will be able to find the votes needed to pass a bill during veto session.
House Minority Leader Jim Durkin was officially sworn into his new leadership role today. His statement to Illinois Issues earlier today that veto session is "generally overhyped" seems to be proving true at this point. The House and Senate have already canceled their Thursday sessions, indicating that little is likely to happen this week. Lawmakers are scheduled to return for the last week of the veto session on November 5.
The Illinois General Assembly's fall veto session was off to an anticlimactic start today, as hearings on some of the most closely watched issues were canceled.
The House Revenue and Finance Committee did not take up a proposed tax break for Archer Daniels Midland. Committee chair Marion Democratic Rep. John Bradley had few details to share about the proposal, which supporters hope would persuade ADM to put its corporate headquarters in Chicago. ADM announced earlier this month that it plans move its headquarters out of Decatur. The company would leave most of the current jobs in Decatur, but about 100 positions would go with the transfer. “They’re under consideration at this point,” Bradley said of several tax breaks being pitched to lawmakers. OfficeMax and Office Depot are planning a merger and have approached lawmakers for a tax break. OfficeMax is based in Naperville and Office Depot is headquartered in Florida. So the two states are now in competition for the headquarters of the final merged company. The two office supply companies area seeking a tax break similar to the one ADM is looking for. In the end, a tax break omnibus bill may emerge.
However, Gov. Pat Quinn has said that he will not sign “special” tax breaks for businesses until lawmakers approve changes to the state’s public pension systems. But Bradley did not seem phased by Quinn’s statements. “We’re used to rhetoric like that coming out of the governor’s office.”
A hearing on a proposal, backed by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, to increase penalties from some gun crimes also did not occur today. The sponsor, Chicago Democratic Rep. Michael Zalewski, is reportedly in talks with the National Rifle Association. If the negotiations are productive, a compromise bill could emerge as early as tomorrow.
Several budget hearings were held today, and a picture of what Quinn’s office would like to see in a supplemental appropriation became clearer. Ben Winick with the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget told a House committee that $97 million in unexpected revenues have been transferred into the General Revenues fund, and the budget office expects an additional $262 million in sales tax revenues that were originally underestimated. However, he said that telecommunications tax receipts would likely come in $46 million shy of estimates. Still, by Quinn’s budget staff’s count, there is about $313 million in funds to potentially spread around. The governor is asking lawmakers to approve about $112 million to pay back wages to state workers. A judge ordered the state to pay the wages with interest. Quinn’s staff is urging lawmakers to pay them sooner, so less interest is piled on. Some agencies have already been able to find the money for back pay in their budgets. Senate Bill 2603 would fund back wages for the Department of Human Services, the Department of Public Health, the Department of Corrections, the Department of Juvenile Justice and the Department of Natural Resources. Other supplemental appropriations bills have not been filed, meaning that the details are likely not worked out yet. The governor’s office is also looking at spending some of the money on setup costs for the state’s licensing system for concealed carry of firearms.
Meanwhile, Quinn and several other elected officials spoke at a rally at the Statehouse for same-sex marriage. Quinn has called on lawmakers not to be distracted from pension reform by other issues, but he said today that same-sex marriage is an exception. “I think this is a civil rights issue, and anytime there is an issue about rights of people, that deserves important consideration.” Opponents to same-sex marriage are scheduled to hold a rally tomorrow. It is not clear if same-sex marriage supporters will be able to find the votes needed to pass a bill during veto session.
House Minority Leader Jim Durkin was officially sworn into his new leadership role today. His statement to Illinois Issues earlier today that veto session is "generally overhyped" seems to be proving true at this point. The House and Senate have already canceled their Thursday sessions, indicating that little is likely to happen this week. Lawmakers are scheduled to return for the last week of the veto session on November 5.
Durkin: Pension reform plan must include GOP ideas to get GOP votes
By Jamey Dunn
New House Minority Leader Jim Durkin said today that if Democratic leaders want Republican votes on pension changes, they will have to include some proposals from Republicans in the final bill.
“I think it’s interesting that the Democrats have said there has to be Republican participation in a vote, but they need to take our suggestions as well. This isn’t a matter of Senate Democrats and House Democrats negotiating amongst themselves. If they want our participation — they want our votes — they will need to take our considerations and incorporate them in a bill,” Durkin said in an interview with Illinois Issues. He added: “Otherwise, they’ve got 71 in the House, and they’ve got 40 in the Senate. They can pass a bill on their own. Good luck. Go do it.”
Durkin said he thinks the work of a conference committee on pensions has moved the process forward on finding legislation that could pass in both chambers. But he and other Republicans want to see some tweaks made to cut pension costs further. “I think what is promising is that there has been progress made. There needs to be more progress, and there needs to be an additional uptick in the savings. But that’s still open for negotiation.” He said that annual cost of living adjustments (COLAs) would likely have to be the target for more savings. The committee has been considering a proposal that would tie the COLAs to inflation. Employees currently receive a 3 percent annually compounded COLA. “The COLA, I think, is the most important part of the pension reform. I would say the most strain on the system has been through the 3 percent compounded COLA. To me, that is where a majority of the savings are going to be made.”
Durkin said he thinks it “may be a bit lofty” to expect that the issue will be tackled in the six session days that are scheduled for veto session. “I’ve been down here for a few terms, and one thing that I know about veto sessions is that they are generally overhyped,” he said. “This issue has such a profound impact on the state of Illinois — its residents, its employers — to just arbitrarily say that we have to get this thing done within six days in October and the first week of November, I’m not sure if that’s the right thing to do. I want to do it right, and I want to do it once. If it takes us a little bit more time to get there, so be it.” But he said he does not want to see the issue go to far into the spring legislative session without a resolution because he said that next year’s elections could create a political climate that would make it difficult to get a bill passed. He said he is also concerned that the state could face another downgrade of its credit rating if lawmakers take too long to approve a plan.
The minority leader said he has met with House Speaker Michael Madigan and hopes to work with him. “My job is not to be someone who is the minority blocker or the minority agitator. The issues are too profound and too robust and too challenging for people in Illinois for the Republicans just to be the party of no. I want to work with the Democrats, whether it’s the Senate president or the speaker, to get the issues done,” he said. Durkin said he and Madigan have always had a “cordial” relationship. “I’ve met with him. And right now, I think we’re just trying to get to know each other a little bit more. It’s different when you’re a member and on the other side. But I look forward to working with him on the right issues.”
In his own party, Durkin said, he plans to be a flexible leader and does not expect members of his caucus to vote in lockstep with him. For instance, he does not support same-sex marriage. However, he said: “It’s up to the individual members to make a decision of how it plays out in their district, and that’s all I ask them to do. It’s a deeply personal [and] very emotional issue. And I think that each member needs to make a decision about how it best works and fits in their district, and I just advise them to vote their conscience.” Durkin, a Catholic, said he has received calls from church leaders in the state asking him not to support the bill. He said that the state already has provisions, such as civil unions, that protect same sex couples.
But Durkin said he plans to back incumbents in primaries next year, regardless of how they vote on the issue. “I’m supporting every one of my colleagues who’s here, no matter how they vote on this issue, or any other issue. We are a caucus that is diverse, and we’re not going to agree on every issue. But my pledge to every one of them when I was elected two months ago was that I want each and every one of them to be returning with me when we get sworn in. ... I will support every one of my incumbents who have a primary challenge, no matter what [side of an] issue they take or whatever vote may prompt a primary.”
For more on the veto session, which begins today, see our preview here.
New House Minority Leader Jim Durkin said today that if Democratic leaders want Republican votes on pension changes, they will have to include some proposals from Republicans in the final bill.
“I think it’s interesting that the Democrats have said there has to be Republican participation in a vote, but they need to take our suggestions as well. This isn’t a matter of Senate Democrats and House Democrats negotiating amongst themselves. If they want our participation — they want our votes — they will need to take our considerations and incorporate them in a bill,” Durkin said in an interview with Illinois Issues. He added: “Otherwise, they’ve got 71 in the House, and they’ve got 40 in the Senate. They can pass a bill on their own. Good luck. Go do it.”
Durkin said he thinks the work of a conference committee on pensions has moved the process forward on finding legislation that could pass in both chambers. But he and other Republicans want to see some tweaks made to cut pension costs further. “I think what is promising is that there has been progress made. There needs to be more progress, and there needs to be an additional uptick in the savings. But that’s still open for negotiation.” He said that annual cost of living adjustments (COLAs) would likely have to be the target for more savings. The committee has been considering a proposal that would tie the COLAs to inflation. Employees currently receive a 3 percent annually compounded COLA. “The COLA, I think, is the most important part of the pension reform. I would say the most strain on the system has been through the 3 percent compounded COLA. To me, that is where a majority of the savings are going to be made.”
Durkin said he thinks it “may be a bit lofty” to expect that the issue will be tackled in the six session days that are scheduled for veto session. “I’ve been down here for a few terms, and one thing that I know about veto sessions is that they are generally overhyped,” he said. “This issue has such a profound impact on the state of Illinois — its residents, its employers — to just arbitrarily say that we have to get this thing done within six days in October and the first week of November, I’m not sure if that’s the right thing to do. I want to do it right, and I want to do it once. If it takes us a little bit more time to get there, so be it.” But he said he does not want to see the issue go to far into the spring legislative session without a resolution because he said that next year’s elections could create a political climate that would make it difficult to get a bill passed. He said he is also concerned that the state could face another downgrade of its credit rating if lawmakers take too long to approve a plan.
The minority leader said he has met with House Speaker Michael Madigan and hopes to work with him. “My job is not to be someone who is the minority blocker or the minority agitator. The issues are too profound and too robust and too challenging for people in Illinois for the Republicans just to be the party of no. I want to work with the Democrats, whether it’s the Senate president or the speaker, to get the issues done,” he said. Durkin said he and Madigan have always had a “cordial” relationship. “I’ve met with him. And right now, I think we’re just trying to get to know each other a little bit more. It’s different when you’re a member and on the other side. But I look forward to working with him on the right issues.”
In his own party, Durkin said, he plans to be a flexible leader and does not expect members of his caucus to vote in lockstep with him. For instance, he does not support same-sex marriage. However, he said: “It’s up to the individual members to make a decision of how it plays out in their district, and that’s all I ask them to do. It’s a deeply personal [and] very emotional issue. And I think that each member needs to make a decision about how it best works and fits in their district, and I just advise them to vote their conscience.” Durkin, a Catholic, said he has received calls from church leaders in the state asking him not to support the bill. He said that the state already has provisions, such as civil unions, that protect same sex couples.
But Durkin said he plans to back incumbents in primaries next year, regardless of how they vote on the issue. “I’m supporting every one of my colleagues who’s here, no matter how they vote on this issue, or any other issue. We are a caucus that is diverse, and we’re not going to agree on every issue. But my pledge to every one of them when I was elected two months ago was that I want each and every one of them to be returning with me when we get sworn in. ... I will support every one of my incumbents who have a primary challenge, no matter what [side of an] issue they take or whatever vote may prompt a primary.”
For more on the veto session, which begins today, see our preview here.
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Veto session preview
By Jamey Dunn
Our October issue has a helpful preview of the Illinois General Assembly's fall veto session. (It is only available in the print edition until Nov. 1, when it will become available online.) Many of the issues that could crop up are the same ones left unresolved at the end of the spring legislative session. But there have been some developments and changes since that story was published. Here are some things to watch for as lawmakers return to the Statehouse for veto session this week:
Public pension changes
Don’t expect much to happen this week on the most highly anticipated issue. Lawmakers working on a committee to propose changes to the state’s pension systems say they will not have legislation drafted in time for a vote in the first week of veto session. Details of a plan that they were considering went public in August. The plan would toss out the 3 percent annual compounded cost-of-living adjustment retirees currently receive. Instead, cost-of-living adjustments would be half the rate of inflation. The rates would have a base level and cap set. The change would likely result in smaller COLAs for retirees, but if inflation goes up, so will the COLAs. Employees would contribute 1 percent less to their retirement benefits. The retirement age would not change. The proposal is estimated to reduce the almost $100 billion unfunded pension liability by $18.1 billion and save the state $145 billion over 30 years.
But some Republicans say the plan would not save enough money. They want to see some tweaks made, including decreasing the base guaranteed COLA, making the cut to employee contributions smaller, increasing the retirement age and offering an optional 401(k)-style plan to employees in all the pension systems. Right now, such a plan is only offered to university employees. The Republican members of the committee had these ideas scored by actuaries to estimate their potential savings and just got the numbers back at the end of last week. “We don’t have a bill that’s written yet. I don’t see us doing anything on pensions in veto next week,” said Naperville Republican Darlene Senger.
Aurora Democratic Sen. Linda Holmes said Democrats on the committee are open to the Republicans suggestions. However, ideas such as adding a 401(k) component or changing the retirement age could be non-starters. “I don’t think that our side really wants to touch retirement age,” she said. Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekritz said that while there will not be a lot of outward action on pensions, there will likely be a lot of behind-closed-doors meetings taking place this week among legislative leaders and members of the legislature. She says of the Republican proposals: “Personally I supported a bill that had a larger level of savings, so I don’t object to moving in that direction. But we have to find something that will meet everybody’s needs.” She said she hopes the committee will have a final plan to present to the General Assembly by the last week of veto session, which is scheduled to begin on November 5. “That is my fervent hope.” Lawmakers are not in session the last week of October. Nekritz said she thinks it is likely such a plan would get a hearing before a floor vote, but she said it might not be a procedural requirement. She said she would prefer a hearing. But she notes, “I don’t control the gavel.” Senate President John Cullerton told the Associated Press that a bill could be called in the Senate even if the committee cannot come to an agreement, but it could be harder to pass something in both chambers without a bipartisan stamp of approval from the committee.
Gov. Pat Quinn will likely talk about little else in the coming weeks as he has made pension reform his top priority. He vetoed lawmakers’ pay this summer, saying they should not get it until a bill was passed. However a judge ruled against his veto, and they started getting their checks again in September. The Illinois Supreme Court has agreed to take up the case and will likely hear arguments in the spring. Quinn is voluntarily not taking a paycheck. He says he will not take his pay until a bill is sent to his desk.
Same-sex marriage
Proponents are optimistic about passing same-sex marriage in the near future, but whether it will happen in the veto session is unclear. Some advocates say they have the votes but are not willing to indicate whom they have brought on board in the House. That makes sense because Republicans who have made their support public have faced protests and are now likely to have primary challengers. To pass as is, the bill would need 71 votes now. But if the bill’s sponsor, Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, waits until January, the deadline to file petitions to run in the primary will have passed, and the bill would only need 60 votes. He opted not to call the bill at the end of the regular session because he said he did not have the votes, and some House members wanted time to poll their constituents. Harris, as always, will not share his vote count. But he told the Chicago Tribune that now is the time to legalize same-sex marriage. “It's the right time, and it's the right thing to do” he said. “Momentum is in the direction of this vote.” Supporters and opponents have rallies at the Statehouse scheduled this week.
ADM tax breaks
Archer Daniels Midland announced earlier this month that it plans to move its headquarters from Decatur, where it has been based for more than 40 years. The company says it would keep jobs that are in Decatur now but would move about 100 positions to the new headquarters. It appears that Chicago is on ADM’s short list of potential locations for its headquarters, but ADM is seeking up to $24 million in tax breaks from state government during the next 20 years. The legislation is scheduled for a House committee hearing on Tuesday. Few lawmakers are vocally supporting the proposal, and there are plenty of critics. But if it seems that ADM might really leave the state, votes could line up behind the legislation. However, Quinn has said he will not sign legislation with tax breaks for ADM before changes to the pension systems are approved. “Our number one way to help business is to get pension reform. We need ADM and all of our big businesses to band together, put pressure on the legislature — the House and the Senate, Democrats and Republicans — to get a vote on the pension reform. That helps everybody. That helps every business. That helps every taxpayer,” Quinn told reporters in Chicago earlier this month. “I think we need to have a moratorium on any special legislation for tax breaks for corporations. We have to focus on pension reform.” But Quinn’s relationship with the legislature after he cut off their pay may be frosty enough that his opposition on any issue could potentially give it a boost.
Gun crime sentencing
Some Chicago leaders, including Mayor Rahm Emanuel, are calling for the legislature to pass tougher sentencing laws in the hopes of quelling the deadly gun violence taking place in parts of the city. The push comes after a shooting in a park injured 13 people, including a 3-year-old, last month. The National Rifle Association and prison watchdog groups oppose the measure. The watchdog groups worry that longer sentences would strain the state’s already crowded corrections system.
The NRA has illustrated its ability to stop a bill in its tracks many times in the General Assembly. So unless the sponsor, Chicago Democratic Rep. Michael Zalewski, can work out a deal with the group, it could be a tough battle. The legislation is scheduled for a House committee hearing on Tuesday.
Committee Hearings
Several issues are scheduled for “subject matter only” hearings during the veto session. That means witnesses will likely come in to testify and lawmakers can ask questions, but no committee vote is taken on legislation.
Our October issue has a helpful preview of the Illinois General Assembly's fall veto session. (It is only available in the print edition until Nov. 1, when it will become available online.) Many of the issues that could crop up are the same ones left unresolved at the end of the spring legislative session. But there have been some developments and changes since that story was published. Here are some things to watch for as lawmakers return to the Statehouse for veto session this week:
Public pension changes
Don’t expect much to happen this week on the most highly anticipated issue. Lawmakers working on a committee to propose changes to the state’s pension systems say they will not have legislation drafted in time for a vote in the first week of veto session. Details of a plan that they were considering went public in August. The plan would toss out the 3 percent annual compounded cost-of-living adjustment retirees currently receive. Instead, cost-of-living adjustments would be half the rate of inflation. The rates would have a base level and cap set. The change would likely result in smaller COLAs for retirees, but if inflation goes up, so will the COLAs. Employees would contribute 1 percent less to their retirement benefits. The retirement age would not change. The proposal is estimated to reduce the almost $100 billion unfunded pension liability by $18.1 billion and save the state $145 billion over 30 years.
But some Republicans say the plan would not save enough money. They want to see some tweaks made, including decreasing the base guaranteed COLA, making the cut to employee contributions smaller, increasing the retirement age and offering an optional 401(k)-style plan to employees in all the pension systems. Right now, such a plan is only offered to university employees. The Republican members of the committee had these ideas scored by actuaries to estimate their potential savings and just got the numbers back at the end of last week. “We don’t have a bill that’s written yet. I don’t see us doing anything on pensions in veto next week,” said Naperville Republican Darlene Senger.
Aurora Democratic Sen. Linda Holmes said Democrats on the committee are open to the Republicans suggestions. However, ideas such as adding a 401(k) component or changing the retirement age could be non-starters. “I don’t think that our side really wants to touch retirement age,” she said. Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekritz said that while there will not be a lot of outward action on pensions, there will likely be a lot of behind-closed-doors meetings taking place this week among legislative leaders and members of the legislature. She says of the Republican proposals: “Personally I supported a bill that had a larger level of savings, so I don’t object to moving in that direction. But we have to find something that will meet everybody’s needs.” She said she hopes the committee will have a final plan to present to the General Assembly by the last week of veto session, which is scheduled to begin on November 5. “That is my fervent hope.” Lawmakers are not in session the last week of October. Nekritz said she thinks it is likely such a plan would get a hearing before a floor vote, but she said it might not be a procedural requirement. She said she would prefer a hearing. But she notes, “I don’t control the gavel.” Senate President John Cullerton told the Associated Press that a bill could be called in the Senate even if the committee cannot come to an agreement, but it could be harder to pass something in both chambers without a bipartisan stamp of approval from the committee.
Gov. Pat Quinn will likely talk about little else in the coming weeks as he has made pension reform his top priority. He vetoed lawmakers’ pay this summer, saying they should not get it until a bill was passed. However a judge ruled against his veto, and they started getting their checks again in September. The Illinois Supreme Court has agreed to take up the case and will likely hear arguments in the spring. Quinn is voluntarily not taking a paycheck. He says he will not take his pay until a bill is sent to his desk.
Same-sex marriage
Proponents are optimistic about passing same-sex marriage in the near future, but whether it will happen in the veto session is unclear. Some advocates say they have the votes but are not willing to indicate whom they have brought on board in the House. That makes sense because Republicans who have made their support public have faced protests and are now likely to have primary challengers. To pass as is, the bill would need 71 votes now. But if the bill’s sponsor, Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, waits until January, the deadline to file petitions to run in the primary will have passed, and the bill would only need 60 votes. He opted not to call the bill at the end of the regular session because he said he did not have the votes, and some House members wanted time to poll their constituents. Harris, as always, will not share his vote count. But he told the Chicago Tribune that now is the time to legalize same-sex marriage. “It's the right time, and it's the right thing to do” he said. “Momentum is in the direction of this vote.” Supporters and opponents have rallies at the Statehouse scheduled this week.
ADM tax breaks
Archer Daniels Midland announced earlier this month that it plans to move its headquarters from Decatur, where it has been based for more than 40 years. The company says it would keep jobs that are in Decatur now but would move about 100 positions to the new headquarters. It appears that Chicago is on ADM’s short list of potential locations for its headquarters, but ADM is seeking up to $24 million in tax breaks from state government during the next 20 years. The legislation is scheduled for a House committee hearing on Tuesday. Few lawmakers are vocally supporting the proposal, and there are plenty of critics. But if it seems that ADM might really leave the state, votes could line up behind the legislation. However, Quinn has said he will not sign legislation with tax breaks for ADM before changes to the pension systems are approved. “Our number one way to help business is to get pension reform. We need ADM and all of our big businesses to band together, put pressure on the legislature — the House and the Senate, Democrats and Republicans — to get a vote on the pension reform. That helps everybody. That helps every business. That helps every taxpayer,” Quinn told reporters in Chicago earlier this month. “I think we need to have a moratorium on any special legislation for tax breaks for corporations. We have to focus on pension reform.” But Quinn’s relationship with the legislature after he cut off their pay may be frosty enough that his opposition on any issue could potentially give it a boost.
Gun crime sentencing
Some Chicago leaders, including Mayor Rahm Emanuel, are calling for the legislature to pass tougher sentencing laws in the hopes of quelling the deadly gun violence taking place in parts of the city. The push comes after a shooting in a park injured 13 people, including a 3-year-old, last month. The National Rifle Association and prison watchdog groups oppose the measure. The watchdog groups worry that longer sentences would strain the state’s already crowded corrections system.
The NRA has illustrated its ability to stop a bill in its tracks many times in the General Assembly. So unless the sponsor, Chicago Democratic Rep. Michael Zalewski, can work out a deal with the group, it could be a tough battle. The legislation is scheduled for a House committee hearing on Tuesday.
Committee Hearings
Several issues are scheduled for “subject matter only” hearings during the veto session. That means witnesses will likely come in to testify and lawmakers can ask questions, but no committee vote is taken on legislation.
- Gambling expansion It seems unlikely that lawmakers will vote on a gaming bill during the veto session, but there is a House hearing on the topic scheduled for Wednesday. Quinn has not said that he would give a gaming bill the same treatment as an ADM tax break if it landed on his desk before pension reform. However, he has warned lawmakers in the past not get distracted by the “shiny object” of a gambling expansion when he feels they should be working to get pension changes passed. He has vetoed two gambling bills in the past and said last year that he could only approve one if it had strict regulations and the money went to education.
- Budgetary issues Several House budget committees are holding hearings on potential supplemental appropriations. It is the time of year when agencies tend to come to lawmakers looking to patch budget holes. Union leaders may also be seeking an appropriation for workers’ back pay from raises there were promised but did not receive. Quinn’s budget staff has said that workers should get the money under a new deal the state made with the unions. However, House Speaker Michael Madigan seems less than warm to the idea. Since there are no bills drafted and in committee, it seems more likely that such budget issues might be tackled in January. Quinn may also be reluctant to sign more spending unless pension changes pass. UPDATE: There is a bill for employee back pay, Senate Bill 2603. It had not been posted to an appropriations hearing as of Monday. Union officials are working to lobby lawmakers. “A circuit court judge has already ruled that the money must be paid. Now Gov. Quinn has agreed, too. But it is up to the state legislature to appropriate the funds that are needed,” says a call to action to its members from the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees Council 31.
- Paint disposal One hearing that may lead to legislation down the road is scheduled for November 4. Lawmakers are looking to create a program to ensure that paint is properly disposed of in the state. Holmes, who sponsors the Paint Stewardship Act, said the committee is seeking input and hopes to get an end product that sellers and industry can agree to. Under such a plan, a small fee would be added to the cost of paint, and the money would be used to set up the program. Holmes cautions that the idea is still in a very early stage and could see major changes as the process continues. “What we want to do is have everyone on board with it,” she said.
- Retiree health care The Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability is scheduled to hold a hearing on state retiree health benefits on Wednesday morning. We will have coverage on the blog.
Thursday, June 06, 2013
After two credit downgrades in a week, Quinn calls special session
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn has called a special legislative session later this month after Moody’s Investor Services made good on its threat to downgrade the state’s credit rating.
Quinn is calling for a special session starting on June 19. “Here we go again. Will two downgrades in one week be enough to convince the General Assembly that our pension crisis can't be ignored anymore? Time and time again over the past two years, I have proposed, asked and pushed members of the General Assembly to send me a comprehensive pension reform bill. Time and time again, failure to act by deadlines has resulted in the bond rating agencies lowering our credit rating, which hurts our economy, wastes taxpayer money and shortchanges the education of our children,” Quinn said in a written statement this afternoon. “Legislators and their leaders know what they need to do to return Illinois to sound financial footing.”
Today, Moody’s knocked the state’s rating for general obligation bonds down to A3 from A2 and gave the state a negative future outlook. Before the downgrade, Illinois already had the lowest rating of any state in the nation. Fitch Ratings dropped the state’s bond rating earlier this week. Both rating downgrades were spurred in part by the legislature’s failure to pass comprehensive changes to the state’s pension systems for public employees before the spring session adjourned last week. Lower bond ratings means the state may pay more interest for future borrowing.
Moody’s does not expect that a pension solution will be approved soon and doubts the General Assembly’s ability to make fiscal reforms in preparation of the scheduled roll back of the temporary income tax increase, which will begin in 2015 unless a vote is taken to stop it. “The Illinois General Assembly on May 31 concluded its session without addressing the severe pension liabilities that are the state's greatest credit challenge. Our rating now assumes the government will not take action to reduce the state's pension liabilities any time soon,” said an analysis from Moody’s. “The legislature's political paralysis to date shows not only the magnitude of Illinois' unfunded benefit liabilities but also the legal and political hurdles to legislation that would make pensions more manageable long term. Without significant reforms, substantial growth in both unfunded liabilities and in annual funding burden are likely in coming years. This trend may coincide with the expiration of most of the income tax increases the state imposed in fiscal 2011 to help cover pension costs.”
Moody’s announcement of the rating decrease was especially harsh on Illinois lawmakers. “An A3 rating, while very low for a U.S. state, is consistent with the General Assembly's inability to steer the state from a path to fiscal distress.”
Quinn’s call for special session comes with no indication that leaders have reached a compromise on pension reform. House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton fundamentally disagree on how to go about changing the pension systems for public employees. Madigan’s Senate Bill 1 was soundly rejected by the Senate during the last week of session, and the House did not take a vote on Cullerton’s SB 2404 before adjournment. Supporters of Cullerton’s plan say that model, which offers employees a choice in their benefits reduction, is constitutional. They argue that Madigan’s plan, which would unilaterally cut benefits, is not. Backers of SB 1 say Cullerton’s plan would not save enough to stabilize the pension systems, which have an estimated $100 billion unfunded liability. The House also approved a bill to gradually shift future pension costs to universities and community colleges, which the institutions agreed to. But the proposal failed in the Senate on the last day of session.
Republican legislative leaders are generally on board with Quinn’s call for a special session. “Our pension crisis is so severe that Illinois’ credit rating has been downgraded twice in one week,” House Minority Leader Tom Cross said in a prepared statement. “The sooner the Illinois General Assembly returns to Springfield to get the job done on pension reform, the better,” Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno said she “appreciates” the call for session, but she has some reservations. “The governor did call today to tell me his intentions to call a special session. I appreciate the call — but I’m not sure what dynamics have changed in this pension reform discussion. Clearly there is a rift amongst Democrat leaders. Despite their supermajority status, they missed a prime opportunity to enact comprehensive pension reform. We hope that opportunity will still be there now that it will take a supermajority vote in each chamber to pass. Senate Republicans remain willing to work on advancing a pension reform plan that substantially solves the problem.”
When Quinn called a special session on pensions last summer, lawmakers came to the capital for one day, and no compromise pension reform plan materialized. Quinn then vowed to launch a “grassroots” campaign for pensions changes that produced an Internet ad campaign and the much-derided pension reform mascot, Squeezy the pension python.
Democratic legislative leaders had less to say about the announcement. “The Senate president’s office is notifying members of the governor’s request to return to Springfield on June 19th,” said a statement from Senate President John Cullerton’s office. “Moody’s provides more damning evidence that we can’t afford a continual stalemate on pensions. It’s time to identify a reasonable compromise that can pass both chambers with a three-fifths vote.” Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said he has seen nothing that points to a new development on pensions. Madigan did not attend a meeting on pensions held by Quinn earlier this week. “The House will convene,” Brown said. “The House has passed two pretty decent bills: one that has pretty significant [pension] saving and one that ends the free lunch [of the state picking up pension costs for schools].” He said that it would be unlikely that the House would consider legislation that “does anything less” than the bills the chamber has already passed.
Union officials are pushing for Cullerton’s bill. “Moody's rating downgrade makes clear that the House of Representatives must act swiftly to finish the work of sound pension reform the Senate has initiated. Moody's has concerns over ‘legal and political hurdles’ and calls for a ‘credible, comprehensive long-term pension funding plan’ to be implemented. They have laid out the path that should be followed, and it clearly leads to SB 2404. SB 2404 is the only legal, comprehensive, and responsible pension funding solution. It will restore fiscal stability and solvency to the state’s pension systems,” said a statement from the We Are One Coalition.
During the special session, lawmakers may also address concealed carry legislation if Quinn decides to veto House Bill 183, which was approved last week. It is possible the governor would use his veto pen to write in gun control measures that were not passed, such as a high-capacity magazine ban or a ban on assault weapons. Legislators would likely vote to override such a veto. And of course, as happens with many special session, the specters of a host of issues that did not pass during the regular session will likely be raised. Keep an eye out for a renewed push for the legalization of same-sex marriage and a new version of a gaming expansion proposal. However, Quinn could limit the session to a specific topic. Any legislation passed at this point would require a three-fifths majority in both chambers to go into effect before next year.
Gov. Pat Quinn has called a special legislative session later this month after Moody’s Investor Services made good on its threat to downgrade the state’s credit rating.
Quinn is calling for a special session starting on June 19. “Here we go again. Will two downgrades in one week be enough to convince the General Assembly that our pension crisis can't be ignored anymore? Time and time again over the past two years, I have proposed, asked and pushed members of the General Assembly to send me a comprehensive pension reform bill. Time and time again, failure to act by deadlines has resulted in the bond rating agencies lowering our credit rating, which hurts our economy, wastes taxpayer money and shortchanges the education of our children,” Quinn said in a written statement this afternoon. “Legislators and their leaders know what they need to do to return Illinois to sound financial footing.”
Today, Moody’s knocked the state’s rating for general obligation bonds down to A3 from A2 and gave the state a negative future outlook. Before the downgrade, Illinois already had the lowest rating of any state in the nation. Fitch Ratings dropped the state’s bond rating earlier this week. Both rating downgrades were spurred in part by the legislature’s failure to pass comprehensive changes to the state’s pension systems for public employees before the spring session adjourned last week. Lower bond ratings means the state may pay more interest for future borrowing.
Moody’s does not expect that a pension solution will be approved soon and doubts the General Assembly’s ability to make fiscal reforms in preparation of the scheduled roll back of the temporary income tax increase, which will begin in 2015 unless a vote is taken to stop it. “The Illinois General Assembly on May 31 concluded its session without addressing the severe pension liabilities that are the state's greatest credit challenge. Our rating now assumes the government will not take action to reduce the state's pension liabilities any time soon,” said an analysis from Moody’s. “The legislature's political paralysis to date shows not only the magnitude of Illinois' unfunded benefit liabilities but also the legal and political hurdles to legislation that would make pensions more manageable long term. Without significant reforms, substantial growth in both unfunded liabilities and in annual funding burden are likely in coming years. This trend may coincide with the expiration of most of the income tax increases the state imposed in fiscal 2011 to help cover pension costs.”
Moody’s announcement of the rating decrease was especially harsh on Illinois lawmakers. “An A3 rating, while very low for a U.S. state, is consistent with the General Assembly's inability to steer the state from a path to fiscal distress.”
Quinn’s call for special session comes with no indication that leaders have reached a compromise on pension reform. House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton fundamentally disagree on how to go about changing the pension systems for public employees. Madigan’s Senate Bill 1 was soundly rejected by the Senate during the last week of session, and the House did not take a vote on Cullerton’s SB 2404 before adjournment. Supporters of Cullerton’s plan say that model, which offers employees a choice in their benefits reduction, is constitutional. They argue that Madigan’s plan, which would unilaterally cut benefits, is not. Backers of SB 1 say Cullerton’s plan would not save enough to stabilize the pension systems, which have an estimated $100 billion unfunded liability. The House also approved a bill to gradually shift future pension costs to universities and community colleges, which the institutions agreed to. But the proposal failed in the Senate on the last day of session.
Republican legislative leaders are generally on board with Quinn’s call for a special session. “Our pension crisis is so severe that Illinois’ credit rating has been downgraded twice in one week,” House Minority Leader Tom Cross said in a prepared statement. “The sooner the Illinois General Assembly returns to Springfield to get the job done on pension reform, the better,” Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno said she “appreciates” the call for session, but she has some reservations. “The governor did call today to tell me his intentions to call a special session. I appreciate the call — but I’m not sure what dynamics have changed in this pension reform discussion. Clearly there is a rift amongst Democrat leaders. Despite their supermajority status, they missed a prime opportunity to enact comprehensive pension reform. We hope that opportunity will still be there now that it will take a supermajority vote in each chamber to pass. Senate Republicans remain willing to work on advancing a pension reform plan that substantially solves the problem.”
When Quinn called a special session on pensions last summer, lawmakers came to the capital for one day, and no compromise pension reform plan materialized. Quinn then vowed to launch a “grassroots” campaign for pensions changes that produced an Internet ad campaign and the much-derided pension reform mascot, Squeezy the pension python.
Democratic legislative leaders had less to say about the announcement. “The Senate president’s office is notifying members of the governor’s request to return to Springfield on June 19th,” said a statement from Senate President John Cullerton’s office. “Moody’s provides more damning evidence that we can’t afford a continual stalemate on pensions. It’s time to identify a reasonable compromise that can pass both chambers with a three-fifths vote.” Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said he has seen nothing that points to a new development on pensions. Madigan did not attend a meeting on pensions held by Quinn earlier this week. “The House will convene,” Brown said. “The House has passed two pretty decent bills: one that has pretty significant [pension] saving and one that ends the free lunch [of the state picking up pension costs for schools].” He said that it would be unlikely that the House would consider legislation that “does anything less” than the bills the chamber has already passed.
Union officials are pushing for Cullerton’s bill. “Moody's rating downgrade makes clear that the House of Representatives must act swiftly to finish the work of sound pension reform the Senate has initiated. Moody's has concerns over ‘legal and political hurdles’ and calls for a ‘credible, comprehensive long-term pension funding plan’ to be implemented. They have laid out the path that should be followed, and it clearly leads to SB 2404. SB 2404 is the only legal, comprehensive, and responsible pension funding solution. It will restore fiscal stability and solvency to the state’s pension systems,” said a statement from the We Are One Coalition.
During the special session, lawmakers may also address concealed carry legislation if Quinn decides to veto House Bill 183, which was approved last week. It is possible the governor would use his veto pen to write in gun control measures that were not passed, such as a high-capacity magazine ban or a ban on assault weapons. Legislators would likely vote to override such a veto. And of course, as happens with many special session, the specters of a host of issues that did not pass during the regular session will likely be raised. Keep an eye out for a renewed push for the legalization of same-sex marriage and a new version of a gaming expansion proposal. However, Quinn could limit the session to a specific topic. Any legislation passed at this point would require a three-fifths majority in both chambers to go into effect before next year.
Saturday, June 01, 2013
Same-sex marriage isn't called for a House vote
By Meredith Colias
The spring legislative session ended in disappointment for gay rights advocates when the House failed to take a vote on same-sex marriage.
Illinois was poised to become the 13th state to legalize gay marriage, but it appears the measure did not yet have enough strongly committed support to pass. Gov. Pat Quinn was supportive of the legislation and pledged to sign the bill. Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, who sponsors Senate Bill 10, choked up as he told those in the galleries he was sorry he could not risk the vote. “I apologize to families who were hoping to wake up tomorrow as full and equal citizens of this state,” he said. Advocates reacted with emotion and deep disappointment as Harris took to the House floor to announce he did not want to risk the bill’s failure. Spectators in the gallery shouted out for Harris to call the bill for a vote. Equality Illinois CEO Bernard Cherkasov said the lack of a vote was “very painful and disgusting.”
Less than two years after Illinois legalized same-sex civil unions, public opinion polling indicates that residents are more supportive of granting full marriage rights, but a majority of House members apparently did not agree. A centerpiece of Equality Illinois’ push to legalize same-sex marriage was highlighting the public’s shifting stance on the issue. President Barack Obama also publicly supported the push when he made a visit to Chicago this week. “They looked at all of that and waved their hands and walked away,” Cherkasov said.
Sources familiar with negotiations estimated the vote count for months to be just under the 60 required to pass, and Harris was tight-lipped on lobbying efforts for much of that time. Harris said that he was uncertain that he had the backing to pass the bill, and he wanted to wait for a floor vote because some members said they would consider voting “yes” in the fall. Harris would not name names as to who was sitting on the fence. But lobbyists on both sides have been battling over the votes of the members of the House’s black caucus. With a potential roll call constantly shifting since the bill's passage in the Senate on Valentine's Day, it was uncertain if Harris had enough solid support to push the measure through the House. Even some lawmakers who that said they were open-minded to supporting the legislation would not publicly commit before a floor vote.
Seemingly, Illinois would be able to pass same-sex marriage without a problem because Democrats hold a veto-proof majority in the legislature. But the votes of many members of the caucus could not be guaranteed because of the state's regional and cultural diversity. Theories on what factors were to blame for the lack of a vote followed Harris’ announcement, but he simply said he wanted to give the bill the time he hoped it needed to pass. Some lawmakers said they wanted more time to talk with their constituents before they would come back to support the bill. “I take my colleagues at their word that they shall,” he said.
Longtime gay rights advocate Rick Garcia, political director of the Civil Rights Agenda, criticized Harris for failing to share his estimated roll calls. He said community and minority groups that had a real life stake in the bill’s passage were not effectively employed, and Harris relied too heavily on House Speaker Michael Madigan to secure the vote. “That is why we lost,” he said. “This is a textbook case of how other states shouldn’t do it,” he said.
Harris’ fellow sponsor, Chicago Democrat Rep. Ken Dunkin, said the 20-member black caucus should not be blamed for the failure for a vote. He said other Democrats in the 71-member majority could have stepped up to support the legislation. He said he would still be an outspoken advocate for the bill, but he thought it may have been an a mistake for supporters to equate the ability to marry with the long struggle by African-Americans against racism and discrimination. “That may have actually offended African-American legislators, for that to be equated,” he said.
If same-sex marriage is brought back up in the legislature's fall veto session, it is not known how more time will help lobbying efforts. At least one representative, Chicago Democratic Rep. William Davis, who supported civil unions as a compromise in 2010, said he was not sure if he was ready to support full same-sex marriage rights.
The religious aspect of same-sex marriage is also underlying the debate. The bill protects religious institutions if they refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies or lend their halls for receptions. Aurora Democratic Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia said she thought Harris genuinely wanted to include religious exemptions in the bill. “His intentions are not to impose this on anybody, and I take him for his word,” she said. Only one lawmaker during the Senate debate said its inclusion swayed his decision to vote for the bill.
Chicago Democratic Rep. Deborah Mell spoke of her life with her partner, whom she traveled with to Iowa to marry. She vowed the issue would reemerge. “This vote will be taken,” she said.
The spring legislative session ended in disappointment for gay rights advocates when the House failed to take a vote on same-sex marriage.
Illinois was poised to become the 13th state to legalize gay marriage, but it appears the measure did not yet have enough strongly committed support to pass. Gov. Pat Quinn was supportive of the legislation and pledged to sign the bill. Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, who sponsors Senate Bill 10, choked up as he told those in the galleries he was sorry he could not risk the vote. “I apologize to families who were hoping to wake up tomorrow as full and equal citizens of this state,” he said. Advocates reacted with emotion and deep disappointment as Harris took to the House floor to announce he did not want to risk the bill’s failure. Spectators in the gallery shouted out for Harris to call the bill for a vote. Equality Illinois CEO Bernard Cherkasov said the lack of a vote was “very painful and disgusting.”
Less than two years after Illinois legalized same-sex civil unions, public opinion polling indicates that residents are more supportive of granting full marriage rights, but a majority of House members apparently did not agree. A centerpiece of Equality Illinois’ push to legalize same-sex marriage was highlighting the public’s shifting stance on the issue. President Barack Obama also publicly supported the push when he made a visit to Chicago this week. “They looked at all of that and waved their hands and walked away,” Cherkasov said.
Sources familiar with negotiations estimated the vote count for months to be just under the 60 required to pass, and Harris was tight-lipped on lobbying efforts for much of that time. Harris said that he was uncertain that he had the backing to pass the bill, and he wanted to wait for a floor vote because some members said they would consider voting “yes” in the fall. Harris would not name names as to who was sitting on the fence. But lobbyists on both sides have been battling over the votes of the members of the House’s black caucus. With a potential roll call constantly shifting since the bill's passage in the Senate on Valentine's Day, it was uncertain if Harris had enough solid support to push the measure through the House. Even some lawmakers who that said they were open-minded to supporting the legislation would not publicly commit before a floor vote.
Seemingly, Illinois would be able to pass same-sex marriage without a problem because Democrats hold a veto-proof majority in the legislature. But the votes of many members of the caucus could not be guaranteed because of the state's regional and cultural diversity. Theories on what factors were to blame for the lack of a vote followed Harris’ announcement, but he simply said he wanted to give the bill the time he hoped it needed to pass. Some lawmakers said they wanted more time to talk with their constituents before they would come back to support the bill. “I take my colleagues at their word that they shall,” he said.
Longtime gay rights advocate Rick Garcia, political director of the Civil Rights Agenda, criticized Harris for failing to share his estimated roll calls. He said community and minority groups that had a real life stake in the bill’s passage were not effectively employed, and Harris relied too heavily on House Speaker Michael Madigan to secure the vote. “That is why we lost,” he said. “This is a textbook case of how other states shouldn’t do it,” he said.
Harris’ fellow sponsor, Chicago Democrat Rep. Ken Dunkin, said the 20-member black caucus should not be blamed for the failure for a vote. He said other Democrats in the 71-member majority could have stepped up to support the legislation. He said he would still be an outspoken advocate for the bill, but he thought it may have been an a mistake for supporters to equate the ability to marry with the long struggle by African-Americans against racism and discrimination. “That may have actually offended African-American legislators, for that to be equated,” he said.
If same-sex marriage is brought back up in the legislature's fall veto session, it is not known how more time will help lobbying efforts. At least one representative, Chicago Democratic Rep. William Davis, who supported civil unions as a compromise in 2010, said he was not sure if he was ready to support full same-sex marriage rights.
The religious aspect of same-sex marriage is also underlying the debate. The bill protects religious institutions if they refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies or lend their halls for receptions. Aurora Democratic Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia said she thought Harris genuinely wanted to include religious exemptions in the bill. “His intentions are not to impose this on anybody, and I take him for his word,” she said. Only one lawmaker during the Senate debate said its inclusion swayed his decision to vote for the bill.
Chicago Democratic Rep. Deborah Mell spoke of her life with her partner, whom she traveled with to Iowa to marry. She vowed the issue would reemerge. “This vote will be taken,” she said.
Thursday, May 02, 2013
Madigan: Same-sex marriage picking up some votes
By Meredith Colias
After the Illinois House took up a major pension vote today, Speaker Michael Madigan told reporters that a bill to legalize same-sex marriage has gained some ground on its way to a final vote.
Last month Madigan said that Senate Bill 10 was about a dozen votes short of the 60 votes required to pass the bill. “We’re a little closer, but we’re not yet there. But we’re a little closer,” he said.
The Senate passed the bill on Valentine’s Day. Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, who sponsors the bill in the House, says he is waiting to know for certain that it will pass before bringing it up for a final vote. Gov. Pat Quinn has been supportive of the legislation and said he will sign it when it gets to his desk. If the bill passes, Illinois will join 10 other states that have legalized gay marriage in recent years. Rhode Island recently became the latest state, joining all other New England states that had already said "I do" to legalization of same-sex marriage. Harris said he is working to explain the legislation and to address the concerns of those who are opposed or undecided.
Under the legislation, religious institutions would be exempt from performing same-sex ceremonies. Protections were added to the Senate version to allow churches to also refuse to host wedding receptions on church property. “We’re talking about what the bill does,” Harris said. “It’s very clear, and it says it in black and white. I think there are a lot of red herrings being thrown out there. You’ve seen this in every state that this has come up. ... Scare tactics are scare tactics, but they are not true.” One Republican, Sen. Jason Barickman, a Champaign Republican voted for the bill when it passed the Senate. Two House Republicans, Rep. Ronald Sendack from Downers Grove and Rep. Ed Sullivan from Mundelein, have publicly said they would vote for the bill.
Persistent opposition remains to the bill. Ralph Rivera, a lobbyist for the Illinois Family Institute, said he is willing to wait out the push because he believes supporters do not have enough votes for the bill to ultimately pass. “It’s a lot to overcome,” he said.
But Harris is optimistic he will gain enough votes for the bill to pass. “Everyone I’ve talked to is very mindful of the fact in the past two years, public opinion has shifted so dramatically on this issue,” he said. “The shift has come from people saying, the time is right, we just need to get this done.”
After the Illinois House took up a major pension vote today, Speaker Michael Madigan told reporters that a bill to legalize same-sex marriage has gained some ground on its way to a final vote.
Last month Madigan said that Senate Bill 10 was about a dozen votes short of the 60 votes required to pass the bill. “We’re a little closer, but we’re not yet there. But we’re a little closer,” he said.
The Senate passed the bill on Valentine’s Day. Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, who sponsors the bill in the House, says he is waiting to know for certain that it will pass before bringing it up for a final vote. Gov. Pat Quinn has been supportive of the legislation and said he will sign it when it gets to his desk. If the bill passes, Illinois will join 10 other states that have legalized gay marriage in recent years. Rhode Island recently became the latest state, joining all other New England states that had already said "I do" to legalization of same-sex marriage. Harris said he is working to explain the legislation and to address the concerns of those who are opposed or undecided.
Under the legislation, religious institutions would be exempt from performing same-sex ceremonies. Protections were added to the Senate version to allow churches to also refuse to host wedding receptions on church property. “We’re talking about what the bill does,” Harris said. “It’s very clear, and it says it in black and white. I think there are a lot of red herrings being thrown out there. You’ve seen this in every state that this has come up. ... Scare tactics are scare tactics, but they are not true.” One Republican, Sen. Jason Barickman, a Champaign Republican voted for the bill when it passed the Senate. Two House Republicans, Rep. Ronald Sendack from Downers Grove and Rep. Ed Sullivan from Mundelein, have publicly said they would vote for the bill.
Persistent opposition remains to the bill. Ralph Rivera, a lobbyist for the Illinois Family Institute, said he is willing to wait out the push because he believes supporters do not have enough votes for the bill to ultimately pass. “It’s a lot to overcome,” he said.
But Harris is optimistic he will gain enough votes for the bill to pass. “Everyone I’ve talked to is very mindful of the fact in the past two years, public opinion has shifted so dramatically on this issue,” he said. “The shift has come from people saying, the time is right, we just need to get this done.”
Friday, April 05, 2013
Return-to-session preview
By Jamey Dunn
Lawmakers return from a two-week break in the legislative session to begin the slog through the final two months before the May 31 adjournment date. They have plenty to consider in the coming weeks:
Pension changes
Before the House went on break, the chamber took an important vote on changes to state employees’ retirement benefits. They approved House Bill 1165 on a vote of 66 to 50. The bill would cap the amount of salary on which retirees could earn the compounded 3 percent cost of living adjustment [COLA] at $25,000. Anyone earning more pension income would receive a flat COLA of $750 annually. Under the proposal, retirees would not be eligible for a COLA until they have been retired for five years or they reach age 67, whichever comes first. The bill also would apply to current retirees who are now receiving COLAs. Supporters of pension changes said this was perhaps the most difficult vote on the issue taken so far. The House has already approved legislation that would cap pensionable salary at the Social Security wage base, which is $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater, and a bill that would increase the retirement age for employees younger than 46. Employees from 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase.
House Speaker Michael Madigan said those components, potentially along with some other provisions that have been up for debate recently, would likely be part of comprehensive legislation yet to come. “I think we’re in a position to finalize the preparation of the bill and then move a bill from the House to the Senate that treats all aspects of the problem,” he said.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who has been leading the push for pension changes in the House, said she and Evanston Democratic Sen. Daniel Biss, her counterpart on the issue in the other chamber, have spent the two-week break trying to form a picture of what might be in the final plan. “When we last voted to changes to the COLA, the speaker talked about how the next step would be to put together a comprehensive package,” she said. “So I have put together a list of things that I think we need to be considering.” But Nekritz said it is too soon for her to pin down what may actually end up in that final plan or when it may be up for a committee hearing or floor vote. “At this point, I don’t anticipate that that would happened in the next two weeks, but I've been wrong before.”
Same sex marriage
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments related to same sex marriage last week, and longtime observers say the court may opt to rule portions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. If that happens, couples in states that have same sex marriage could become eligible for the federal benefits currently available only to heterosexual married couples.
Illinois U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican, announced his support of same sex marriage this week. Kirk, who suffered from a debilitating stroke last year and has been working hard at recovery, said his personal experience paved the way for his stance. “Same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage. Our time on this Earth is limited, I know that better than most. Life comes down to who you love and who loves you back — government has no place in the middle,” Kirk said in a prepared statement.
Legislation to legalize same sex marriage in Illinois has passed in the Senate, but Madigan said it is about a dozen votes shy of the support needed for it to clear the House. (Go here to read selected Illinois Issues coverage of the issue on the state and federal level.)
Concealed carry
A federal court ruled the state’s ban on the concealed carrying of firearms unconstitutional and gave Illinois a deadline for approving legislation to regulate it. The House has followed a similar process on this issue as it has on pensions. However, the chamber does not yet seem close to agreement on any final comprehensive plan for concealed carry. Expect to see more debate on the topic, as well as other gun related issues, such as bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines, in the coming weeks.
Medical marijuana
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang thinks this might be the session that a bill to legalize the use of marijuana to treat chronic medical conditions might gain the needed backing to pass in the House. A House committee approved House Bill 1 in March, and Lang said the legislation is gaining support. He says the measure is just a couple votes shy of being passed. Lang has said many times that if every lawmaker who told him they supported the idea would cast a vote in favor of the plan, he would have far more support than the majority he needs. He has called medical marijuana bills for three separate floor votes in the House, only to watch them fail. But he is dealing with many new lawmakers this time around, so perhaps it is Lang’s year. The Senate has approved medical marijuana legislation in the past.
Gaming expansion
Expect efforts to pass another gaming expansion plan in the final months of the scheduled spring session. Lang and Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who have backed other expansion plans, say they would like to try again. Lawmakers approved two gambling bills in recent years, only to have them vetoed by Gov. Pat Quinn. The newest proposal contains many of the provisions that were in those two bills, but it also has stricter regulations and a ban on campaign contributions from casino owners, which Quinn has called for many times. But the bill has a wild card provision: It would legalize some forms of online gambling, which would fall under the supervision of the Illinois Lottery. The lottery currently sells tickets online, but allowing online gaming such as Internet poker would be a huge gambling expansion. Residents would be able to place bets from their computers or even their smart phones. Two other states, Nevada and New Jersey, have approved such online gambling. The idea is new, and Quinn has been careful not to be too critical of the legislation in public. However, as the negotiations move in, it is possible this component could make him shy away because he has said he opposes “top heavy” bills that would make gambling in the state too readily available. At one point, the governor was even shying away from putting slot machines at horse racing tracks, an idea he seems to have softened to if the state revenues earned are spent on education.
Budget
As lawmakers debate these and other issues, they will also be working to craft a budget for the next fiscal year. That plan will likely contain some controversial cuts. Spending pressures such as pension costs and health care expenses are growing, and competing interests will be vigorously battling over resources for Fiscal Year 2014.
Lawmakers return from a two-week break in the legislative session to begin the slog through the final two months before the May 31 adjournment date. They have plenty to consider in the coming weeks:
Pension changes
Before the House went on break, the chamber took an important vote on changes to state employees’ retirement benefits. They approved House Bill 1165 on a vote of 66 to 50. The bill would cap the amount of salary on which retirees could earn the compounded 3 percent cost of living adjustment [COLA] at $25,000. Anyone earning more pension income would receive a flat COLA of $750 annually. Under the proposal, retirees would not be eligible for a COLA until they have been retired for five years or they reach age 67, whichever comes first. The bill also would apply to current retirees who are now receiving COLAs. Supporters of pension changes said this was perhaps the most difficult vote on the issue taken so far. The House has already approved legislation that would cap pensionable salary at the Social Security wage base, which is $113,700 in 2013, or the employee's current salary, whichever is greater, and a bill that would increase the retirement age for employees younger than 46. Employees from 40 to 45 would see a one-year increase, employees 35 to 39 would see a three-year increase and employees 34 and younger would see a five-year increase.
House Speaker Michael Madigan said those components, potentially along with some other provisions that have been up for debate recently, would likely be part of comprehensive legislation yet to come. “I think we’re in a position to finalize the preparation of the bill and then move a bill from the House to the Senate that treats all aspects of the problem,” he said.
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who has been leading the push for pension changes in the House, said she and Evanston Democratic Sen. Daniel Biss, her counterpart on the issue in the other chamber, have spent the two-week break trying to form a picture of what might be in the final plan. “When we last voted to changes to the COLA, the speaker talked about how the next step would be to put together a comprehensive package,” she said. “So I have put together a list of things that I think we need to be considering.” But Nekritz said it is too soon for her to pin down what may actually end up in that final plan or when it may be up for a committee hearing or floor vote. “At this point, I don’t anticipate that that would happened in the next two weeks, but I've been wrong before.”
Same sex marriage
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments related to same sex marriage last week, and longtime observers say the court may opt to rule portions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. If that happens, couples in states that have same sex marriage could become eligible for the federal benefits currently available only to heterosexual married couples.
Illinois U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican, announced his support of same sex marriage this week. Kirk, who suffered from a debilitating stroke last year and has been working hard at recovery, said his personal experience paved the way for his stance. “Same-sex couples should have the right to civil marriage. Our time on this Earth is limited, I know that better than most. Life comes down to who you love and who loves you back — government has no place in the middle,” Kirk said in a prepared statement.
Legislation to legalize same sex marriage in Illinois has passed in the Senate, but Madigan said it is about a dozen votes shy of the support needed for it to clear the House. (Go here to read selected Illinois Issues coverage of the issue on the state and federal level.)
Concealed carry
A federal court ruled the state’s ban on the concealed carrying of firearms unconstitutional and gave Illinois a deadline for approving legislation to regulate it. The House has followed a similar process on this issue as it has on pensions. However, the chamber does not yet seem close to agreement on any final comprehensive plan for concealed carry. Expect to see more debate on the topic, as well as other gun related issues, such as bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines, in the coming weeks.
Medical marijuana
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang thinks this might be the session that a bill to legalize the use of marijuana to treat chronic medical conditions might gain the needed backing to pass in the House. A House committee approved House Bill 1 in March, and Lang said the legislation is gaining support. He says the measure is just a couple votes shy of being passed. Lang has said many times that if every lawmaker who told him they supported the idea would cast a vote in favor of the plan, he would have far more support than the majority he needs. He has called medical marijuana bills for three separate floor votes in the House, only to watch them fail. But he is dealing with many new lawmakers this time around, so perhaps it is Lang’s year. The Senate has approved medical marijuana legislation in the past.
Gaming expansion
Expect efforts to pass another gaming expansion plan in the final months of the scheduled spring session. Lang and Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who have backed other expansion plans, say they would like to try again. Lawmakers approved two gambling bills in recent years, only to have them vetoed by Gov. Pat Quinn. The newest proposal contains many of the provisions that were in those two bills, but it also has stricter regulations and a ban on campaign contributions from casino owners, which Quinn has called for many times. But the bill has a wild card provision: It would legalize some forms of online gambling, which would fall under the supervision of the Illinois Lottery. The lottery currently sells tickets online, but allowing online gaming such as Internet poker would be a huge gambling expansion. Residents would be able to place bets from their computers or even their smart phones. Two other states, Nevada and New Jersey, have approved such online gambling. The idea is new, and Quinn has been careful not to be too critical of the legislation in public. However, as the negotiations move in, it is possible this component could make him shy away because he has said he opposes “top heavy” bills that would make gambling in the state too readily available. At one point, the governor was even shying away from putting slot machines at horse racing tracks, an idea he seems to have softened to if the state revenues earned are spent on education.
Budget
As lawmakers debate these and other issues, they will also be working to craft a budget for the next fiscal year. That plan will likely contain some controversial cuts. Spending pressures such as pension costs and health care expenses are growing, and competing interests will be vigorously battling over resources for Fiscal Year 2014.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Lobbying battle over same sex marriage heats up in the House
By Meredith Colias
An Illinois House committee advanced a same-sex marriage proposal late this evening, but its sponsor said he would not call the bill for a floor vote this week.
The House Executive Committee approved Senate Bill 10 on a 6-5 vote.
Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, the bill’s sponsor, said he was upbeat about its chances for passage, even though the bill may face a tougher challenge than it did in the Senate. “I think it will look very good on the full floor,” he said. Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois, said he was optimistic and he thinks growing public opinion for same-sex marriage statewide would play an important role in pushing the final vote. "Every day that goes by, there's more and more support for this issue,” he said. “If they vote against the freedom to marry, they are going to be on the wrong side of history." Public opinion for support on same-sex marriage has been growing steadily in the state. A poll by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute between taken between January 27 and February 8 showed 45.5 percent of Illinoisans favored legalizing same-sex marriage, up from 33.6 three years prior.
Opponents testifying, however, took a notably sharper tone than they did during Senate debates, citing religious objections and the possible detrimental effects on children with same-sex parents. Ralph Rivera of the Illinois Family Institute said before the hearing that members of both parties opposed the bill, and he was confident the measure did not have enough support to reach that point. “I don't see the votes. ... The numbers aren't there for them,” he said.
No Republican committee members voted in favor of the bill. East St. Louis Democratic Rep. Eddie Lee Jackson Sr. voted against it, and Rep. Luis Arroyo, a Chicago Democrat, said he may not vote in favor of the proposal when Harris calls it in the House because of his religious objections and feedback from his district. The measure needs a minimum of 60 votes to pass the House. Senate Bill 10 passed the Senate on Valentine’s Day, 34-21, but with only one Republican vote. Democratic Governor Pat Quinn has said he would sign the measure into law if it passes the General Assembly.
An Illinois House committee advanced a same-sex marriage proposal late this evening, but its sponsor said he would not call the bill for a floor vote this week.
The House Executive Committee approved Senate Bill 10 on a 6-5 vote.
Chicago Democratic Rep. Greg Harris, the bill’s sponsor, said he was upbeat about its chances for passage, even though the bill may face a tougher challenge than it did in the Senate. “I think it will look very good on the full floor,” he said. Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois, said he was optimistic and he thinks growing public opinion for same-sex marriage statewide would play an important role in pushing the final vote. "Every day that goes by, there's more and more support for this issue,” he said. “If they vote against the freedom to marry, they are going to be on the wrong side of history." Public opinion for support on same-sex marriage has been growing steadily in the state. A poll by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute between taken between January 27 and February 8 showed 45.5 percent of Illinoisans favored legalizing same-sex marriage, up from 33.6 three years prior.
Opponents testifying, however, took a notably sharper tone than they did during Senate debates, citing religious objections and the possible detrimental effects on children with same-sex parents. Ralph Rivera of the Illinois Family Institute said before the hearing that members of both parties opposed the bill, and he was confident the measure did not have enough support to reach that point. “I don't see the votes. ... The numbers aren't there for them,” he said.
No Republican committee members voted in favor of the bill. East St. Louis Democratic Rep. Eddie Lee Jackson Sr. voted against it, and Rep. Luis Arroyo, a Chicago Democrat, said he may not vote in favor of the proposal when Harris calls it in the House because of his religious objections and feedback from his district. The measure needs a minimum of 60 votes to pass the House. Senate Bill 10 passed the Senate on Valentine’s Day, 34-21, but with only one Republican vote. Democratic Governor Pat Quinn has said he would sign the measure into law if it passes the General Assembly.
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Same-sex marriage legislation heads to the House
By Meredith Colias
The Illinois Senate gave same-sex marriage proponents something else to celebrate on Valentine’s Day, approving a measure to legalize gay marriage.
The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Heather Steans, a Chicago Democrat, said, “The freedom to marry for all same-sex couples is a fundamental right.” Senate Bill 10 passed with 34 senators voting yes, 21 voting no and 2 voting present. Two senators did not cast votes.
Opponents argued the measure would not do enough to protect religious institutions if it is signed into law. The prior version of the bill already exempted religious institutions such as churches, mosques, synagogues and non-denominational ministries from being required to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. In an effort to address their complaints, Steans added an amendment today that said that “sanctuaries, parish halls, fellowship halls and similar facilities” also would not be required to open their doors to same-sex marriage ceremonies or celebrations, such as receptions. The bill still requires businesses, health care facilities, educational organizations and social service agencies to follow the state’s existing anti-discrimination laws. Steans said that under such laws, private parochial schools and private clubs have “total control” over their own property. She called arguments that churches may still somehow be forced to participate in same-sex marriage a “red herring.”
Sen. Dale Righter, a Mattoon Republican, voted against the measure, saying the bill was too confusing for religious institutions to know how they would be exempt from its requirements, especially for facilities used for multiple purposes. He said religious leaders would ask the questions that Steans called a “red herring.” “Fear of what may happen will cause churches to one degree or another to pull back” from community outreach, Righter said.
Other critics centered their opposition directly on the issue of granting marriage rights to same-sex couples. “They don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us,” said Sen. Kyle McCarter, a Lebanon Republican. Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, noted how he “personally evolved” on gay marriage, saying the sky would not fall with passage of the measure. “We are going to go about our ways in the same way we are now,” he said.
Opponents also called the bill a distraction from the state’s continuing pension crisis. “You have spent months [considering this] while the ship is sinking,” said Sen. Tim Bivins, a Dixon Republican. Steans responded to critics, saying the General Assembly was capable at looking at both issues.
One Republican voted for the measure. Sen. Jason Barickman, a Champaign Republican, said he voted for the measure once he was satisfied it adequately protected religious organizations. “What I was concerned about was doing the right thing,” he said.
Opponents said they were not surprised by today’s vote, but they see the House as the real battleground. “We had expectations it could pass the Senate. The House is always our stronger suit, and we are going to work on that,” said Ralph Rivera, legislative liaison for the Illinois Family Institute. Steans said today’s vote “sends hopefully a lot of momentum over to the House.” The House bill’s main sponsor, Rep. Greg Harris, a Chicago Democrat, said the successful Senate vote was a sign there would be support for passage in the House. “Now is the time to get it done,” he said. The legislation will need at least 60 votes to pass the House.
Gov. Pat Quinn praised its passage in a prepared statement and urged a successful vote in the House. “Full equality for all people is right for Illinois,” he said.
The Illinois Senate gave same-sex marriage proponents something else to celebrate on Valentine’s Day, approving a measure to legalize gay marriage.
The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Heather Steans, a Chicago Democrat, said, “The freedom to marry for all same-sex couples is a fundamental right.” Senate Bill 10 passed with 34 senators voting yes, 21 voting no and 2 voting present. Two senators did not cast votes.
Opponents argued the measure would not do enough to protect religious institutions if it is signed into law. The prior version of the bill already exempted religious institutions such as churches, mosques, synagogues and non-denominational ministries from being required to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. In an effort to address their complaints, Steans added an amendment today that said that “sanctuaries, parish halls, fellowship halls and similar facilities” also would not be required to open their doors to same-sex marriage ceremonies or celebrations, such as receptions. The bill still requires businesses, health care facilities, educational organizations and social service agencies to follow the state’s existing anti-discrimination laws. Steans said that under such laws, private parochial schools and private clubs have “total control” over their own property. She called arguments that churches may still somehow be forced to participate in same-sex marriage a “red herring.”
Sen. Dale Righter, a Mattoon Republican, voted against the measure, saying the bill was too confusing for religious institutions to know how they would be exempt from its requirements, especially for facilities used for multiple purposes. He said religious leaders would ask the questions that Steans called a “red herring.” “Fear of what may happen will cause churches to one degree or another to pull back” from community outreach, Righter said.
Other critics centered their opposition directly on the issue of granting marriage rights to same-sex couples. “They don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us,” said Sen. Kyle McCarter, a Lebanon Republican. Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, noted how he “personally evolved” on gay marriage, saying the sky would not fall with passage of the measure. “We are going to go about our ways in the same way we are now,” he said.
Opponents also called the bill a distraction from the state’s continuing pension crisis. “You have spent months [considering this] while the ship is sinking,” said Sen. Tim Bivins, a Dixon Republican. Steans responded to critics, saying the General Assembly was capable at looking at both issues.
One Republican voted for the measure. Sen. Jason Barickman, a Champaign Republican, said he voted for the measure once he was satisfied it adequately protected religious organizations. “What I was concerned about was doing the right thing,” he said.
Opponents said they were not surprised by today’s vote, but they see the House as the real battleground. “We had expectations it could pass the Senate. The House is always our stronger suit, and we are going to work on that,” said Ralph Rivera, legislative liaison for the Illinois Family Institute. Steans said today’s vote “sends hopefully a lot of momentum over to the House.” The House bill’s main sponsor, Rep. Greg Harris, a Chicago Democrat, said the successful Senate vote was a sign there would be support for passage in the House. “Now is the time to get it done,” he said. The legislation will need at least 60 votes to pass the House.
Gov. Pat Quinn praised its passage in a prepared statement and urged a successful vote in the House. “Full equality for all people is right for Illinois,” he said.
Wednesday, February 06, 2013
Quinn lays out challenging legislative agenda in State of the State address
By Jamey Dunn and Meredith Colias
Illinois lawmakers hope to tackle a number of complicated and controversial issues in the new legislative session. In today’s State of the State address, Gov. Pat Quinn weighed in on several of the topics on their agenda.
Gun issues
Quinn renewed his call for a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. “Today, we all weep over the senseless violence in our communities. But as elected officials, we’re in a position to do something about it. We have life-saving work to do. We cannot wait for another tragedy to happen before we take action,” he said. While the governor did not describe all the provisions he would like to see in a concealed-carry bill, he did make it clear that he wants limits on where residents carry guns. “We must ensure that guns are kept out of everyday public places because guns don’t belong in our schools, shopping malls or sports stadiums. And we must make Illinois safer by strengthening background checks and requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen guns.”
In December, a federal court gave Illinois 180 days to approve concealed-carry legislation. Attorney General Lisa Madigan appealed the ruling, but for now the deadline looms. “He does want a limited bill. But he needs to start getting specific because the clock is still ticking on the 180 days,” Rep. Brandon Phelps said of Quinn. Phelps introduced House Bill 997 last week. His legislation would bar guns from certain places, such as government buildings and schools. But he said Quinn’s limitations go to far. “I just don’t see us agreeing to just a sidewalk-carry bill as he wants. I just don’t see that.”
Quinn called on counties to submit mental health records to the Illinois State Police for Firearm Owner Identification Card background checks. “For years, counties across our state have not been reporting their mental health records to the Illinois State Police. This year, we need every county to step up and do its part to ensure mental health records are updated in real time.” A recent audit found that the state police were struggling with issuing FOID cards in a timely manner. Phelps said that the FOID system must be repaired to properly administer concealed-carry in the state. “They need to get that corrected, and we need to help with that.” Under his bill, those wishing to carry would apply for a permit that would cost $25. However, he said the permit fee may increase to help cover the costs of the permitting system. “We started somewhere because we didn’t want anybody not to be able to afford it because of their Second Amendment right to carry. but we can negotiate that. I think it will be moved up. I really do.”
Phelps is working with Chicago Democratic Sen. Kwame Raoul to try to negotiate a concealed-carry proposal that can pass through both legislative chambers. “We’ve agreed to gather parties in the room and have a discussion where we can have a respect for the Second Amendment as it has been interpreted by the [U.S.] Supreme Court and other courts below it, and at the same time recognize that we have a problem with gun violence,” Raoul said. “I think the two things are not inconsistent: wanting to protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners, who mean no harm to anybody [and] who want to participate in sportsmen activities or own a weapon for self protection, and trying to stop a flow of guns to people who we all know will do harm with them.” Raoul said that polarizing rhetoric has stood in the way of compromise on gun issues in the past, but he said that he and Phelps hope to “start the discussion without vilifying anybody on either side of the debate.”
Chicago Democratic Rep. Edward Acevedo, who sponsors a ban on assault weapons, said that he hopes to link concealed carry and an assault weapons ban into an overarching approach to gun control. But both Phelps and Raoul said they are not interested in taking that approach. “Those are two separate issues, and that’s what we want to treat them like,” Phelps said. Quinn and Acevedo share similar views on assault weapons. “Of course, we must abide with the Second Amendment. But there is no place in our state for military-style assault weapons designed for rapid fire at human targets at close range,” Quinn said in his speech today. “It’s not about hurting the average sportsman or hunter, or its not about trying to take away the Second Amendment; it’s an issue of public safety,” Acevedo said. “These are weapons that are made for war.”
Minimum wage increase
Quinn urged lawmakers to increase the minimum wage from the current $8.25 hourly rate to $10 an hour over the next four years. Maywood Democratic Sen. Kimberly Lightford, who sponsored a bill last session to increase the minimum wage, said she has been in talks with supporters and opponents since last spring. She said she hopes to bring a bill to a Senate committee next month. “We have a lot of new members, so I’ll be sitting down talking to my colleagues and finding out what they can support,” she said.
Lightford said she is glad that Quinn highlighted the issue in his address. “It’s wonderful to have the governor’s support. Hopefully, that can also help our efforts.” But business groups are adamantly opposed to the increase and vow to rally a strong opposition effort. “We think it’s just a disastrous proposal,” said Todd Maisch, vice president of government relations for the Illinois Chamber of Commerce. He said that a minimum wage increase could hurt job growth in the state. “They’re two issues that are really related. Employers simply don’t have stashes of cash that they have got in the back of a vault somewhere that they’re ready to hand out to people. This is more money that goes to wages for employees they now have and make[s] it that much harder to add any more employees or reinvest in the business and create more jobs on down the road.”
Both Quinn and Lightford argued that those working full-time jobs should make enough to support themselves. “We need this because we need families to thrive. We need to not have people work 40 hours a week and still live in poverty,” Lightford said.
Same-sex marriage
“Today, civil unions are the law of our state. And nearly 5,200 couples across 94 counties have joined in a civil union. Now, it’s time to take that next step in achieving full equality. Marriage equality is coming to Illinois,” Quinn said.
Of all the issues the governor mentioned in his speech, this one has the most momentum. A Senate Committee approved same-sex marriage Tuesday, and supporters hope to pass it in the chamber by Valentine's Day. “The time for marriage is now,” said Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois.
Pension costs
Quinn called pension reform the “toughest of issues” and called on lawmakers to pass pension changes to keep the costs from cutting into other areas of spending, such as education. “The pension squeeze is draining our ability to teach our students. Our children are being shortchanged. And in the end, that shortchanges our economy, too.” Union leaders said Quinn was presenting a false choice between pension costs and other state services. They argue that there are other options for addressing the state’s unfunded liability than the current plans up for debate, which they believe are unconstitutional. “The governor's claim that the choice is pensions-or-pencils is deeply unfair. We must work together to adequately fund public education and solve the state’s funding crisis. Teachers and other education professionals share no fault in the problem but are willing to share in the sacrifice, and to simply balance the budget on their backs is wrong. Finding a fair and constitutional solution will take courage from everyone involved, including the governor,” said Dan Montgomery, president of the Illinois Federation of Teachers.
Quinn again threw his support behind Senate Bill 1, which is sponsored by Senate President John Cullerton. “I urge all of you to be part of the solution. And while refinements may come, Senate Bill 1 is the best vehicle to get the job done. Hard is not impossible,” Quinn said. Cullerton believes that some consideration must be given to workers for any reduction in their benefits. A plan that passed in the Senate would have asked employees to choose between their compounded-interest cost-of-living adjustments or state-subsidized retiree health care. SB 1 contains a version of a pension reform plan that was up for consideration in the House during the lame-duck session at the end of the last General Assembly and the measure that passed in the Senate. Cullerton has said he wants the Senate plan tacked on in case the Illinois Supreme Court rejects the House proposal, which he believes is unconstitutional. If that happened, the court could instead consider the Senate proposal.
House members on both sides of the aisle voiced concerns about the SB 1. Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekrtiz, who has sponsored several pension reform bills in the House, said that the savings are uncertain under that proposal, which allows employees a choice, because there is no way to know which they will pick. “The pension problem is driven by math and by numbers, and a solution has to also be driven by math or by numbers,” she said. Nekritz called for an actuarial analysis of the potential savings under the measure. “I think members deserve that before they would vote on something.” House Republican Leader Tom Cross brushed off Quinn’s backing of SB 1. “He’s endorsed, I think, just about every pension bill that’s been out there. He’s been pretty outspoken on the need to do pension reform. ... The fact that he’s talking about that [bill] doesn’t mean that other ideas are not on the table because he’s embraced a bunch of different ideas.” Cross is working with Nekritz to try to find a compromise that can pass in the House. He said it is the job of lawmakers to pass the plan they think is best instead of sending multiple options to the courts. “[Our] first obligation ought to be: Pass a bill that [we] think solves the problem, and then the courts will decide.”
Some lawmakers said they were not impressed with Quinn’s speech. They said it lacked details and did not place enough emphasis on the state’s budget problems. “He didn’t even hardly mention the budget. He needs to get focused. We’re in a fiscal crisis,” said Rep. John Bradley, a Marion Democrat. “I don’t think his speech was very well-received, but we’ll see.” A House committee chaired by Bradley has already begun the process of creating revenue estimates. The House has based its budget on those types of estimates in recent years. “We’re not talking about it. We’re actually doing it. So we’re going to continue down that process. To the extent that to the governor’s office wants to take part in our bipartisan efforts to do that, then we welcome the help. But we’re moving forward.” Several legislators accused Quinn of using the State of the State as an informal launch for a 2014 reelection bid. “You can tell he’s running for governor again because that was nothing but a political speech,” Phelps said.
Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno agreed. “By and large, I think it was more of a campaign kick-off speech than anything else.” But in a news conference after the address, Cross and Radogno demurred on several issues, including gun control and same-sex marriage. “There are going to be some things in here you like; there are going to be some things you don’t like,” Cross said of Quinn’s speech. “I think we need to focus on the big issues like the pensions so we have a vibrant — someday — a vibrant economy and businesses that want to stay here and come here and expand here. The elephant in the room, the only issue that matters right now -- everything flows from it -- is the pension debate.”
Other legislators said Quinn did well, giving what is basically a ceremonial speech meant to set the tone for the session, but they hope he will provide more decisive leadership in the coming months. “I thought the governor spoke well and from the heart about a lot of issues that are on his mind,” said Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang. “I’m not sure I heard a lot of specifics. I’m not sure we heard a lot of specific plans on how he proposes to move Illinois forward in these areas. And I am not sure that he provided the leadership in this speech that I hope he will later provide. I do know this: He’s and honest man. His heart is in the right place. He wants to succeed. But he’s going to have to grab on a little stronger to the reins of government if he wants to lead this General Assembly to where he wants us to go.”
Illinois lawmakers hope to tackle a number of complicated and controversial issues in the new legislative session. In today’s State of the State address, Gov. Pat Quinn weighed in on several of the topics on their agenda.
Gun issues
Quinn renewed his call for a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. “Today, we all weep over the senseless violence in our communities. But as elected officials, we’re in a position to do something about it. We have life-saving work to do. We cannot wait for another tragedy to happen before we take action,” he said. While the governor did not describe all the provisions he would like to see in a concealed-carry bill, he did make it clear that he wants limits on where residents carry guns. “We must ensure that guns are kept out of everyday public places because guns don’t belong in our schools, shopping malls or sports stadiums. And we must make Illinois safer by strengthening background checks and requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen guns.”
In December, a federal court gave Illinois 180 days to approve concealed-carry legislation. Attorney General Lisa Madigan appealed the ruling, but for now the deadline looms. “He does want a limited bill. But he needs to start getting specific because the clock is still ticking on the 180 days,” Rep. Brandon Phelps said of Quinn. Phelps introduced House Bill 997 last week. His legislation would bar guns from certain places, such as government buildings and schools. But he said Quinn’s limitations go to far. “I just don’t see us agreeing to just a sidewalk-carry bill as he wants. I just don’t see that.”
Quinn called on counties to submit mental health records to the Illinois State Police for Firearm Owner Identification Card background checks. “For years, counties across our state have not been reporting their mental health records to the Illinois State Police. This year, we need every county to step up and do its part to ensure mental health records are updated in real time.” A recent audit found that the state police were struggling with issuing FOID cards in a timely manner. Phelps said that the FOID system must be repaired to properly administer concealed-carry in the state. “They need to get that corrected, and we need to help with that.” Under his bill, those wishing to carry would apply for a permit that would cost $25. However, he said the permit fee may increase to help cover the costs of the permitting system. “We started somewhere because we didn’t want anybody not to be able to afford it because of their Second Amendment right to carry. but we can negotiate that. I think it will be moved up. I really do.”
Phelps is working with Chicago Democratic Sen. Kwame Raoul to try to negotiate a concealed-carry proposal that can pass through both legislative chambers. “We’ve agreed to gather parties in the room and have a discussion where we can have a respect for the Second Amendment as it has been interpreted by the [U.S.] Supreme Court and other courts below it, and at the same time recognize that we have a problem with gun violence,” Raoul said. “I think the two things are not inconsistent: wanting to protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners, who mean no harm to anybody [and] who want to participate in sportsmen activities or own a weapon for self protection, and trying to stop a flow of guns to people who we all know will do harm with them.” Raoul said that polarizing rhetoric has stood in the way of compromise on gun issues in the past, but he said that he and Phelps hope to “start the discussion without vilifying anybody on either side of the debate.”
Chicago Democratic Rep. Edward Acevedo, who sponsors a ban on assault weapons, said that he hopes to link concealed carry and an assault weapons ban into an overarching approach to gun control. But both Phelps and Raoul said they are not interested in taking that approach. “Those are two separate issues, and that’s what we want to treat them like,” Phelps said. Quinn and Acevedo share similar views on assault weapons. “Of course, we must abide with the Second Amendment. But there is no place in our state for military-style assault weapons designed for rapid fire at human targets at close range,” Quinn said in his speech today. “It’s not about hurting the average sportsman or hunter, or its not about trying to take away the Second Amendment; it’s an issue of public safety,” Acevedo said. “These are weapons that are made for war.”
Minimum wage increase
Quinn urged lawmakers to increase the minimum wage from the current $8.25 hourly rate to $10 an hour over the next four years. Maywood Democratic Sen. Kimberly Lightford, who sponsored a bill last session to increase the minimum wage, said she has been in talks with supporters and opponents since last spring. She said she hopes to bring a bill to a Senate committee next month. “We have a lot of new members, so I’ll be sitting down talking to my colleagues and finding out what they can support,” she said.
Lightford said she is glad that Quinn highlighted the issue in his address. “It’s wonderful to have the governor’s support. Hopefully, that can also help our efforts.” But business groups are adamantly opposed to the increase and vow to rally a strong opposition effort. “We think it’s just a disastrous proposal,” said Todd Maisch, vice president of government relations for the Illinois Chamber of Commerce. He said that a minimum wage increase could hurt job growth in the state. “They’re two issues that are really related. Employers simply don’t have stashes of cash that they have got in the back of a vault somewhere that they’re ready to hand out to people. This is more money that goes to wages for employees they now have and make[s] it that much harder to add any more employees or reinvest in the business and create more jobs on down the road.”
Both Quinn and Lightford argued that those working full-time jobs should make enough to support themselves. “We need this because we need families to thrive. We need to not have people work 40 hours a week and still live in poverty,” Lightford said.
Same-sex marriage
“Today, civil unions are the law of our state. And nearly 5,200 couples across 94 counties have joined in a civil union. Now, it’s time to take that next step in achieving full equality. Marriage equality is coming to Illinois,” Quinn said.
Of all the issues the governor mentioned in his speech, this one has the most momentum. A Senate Committee approved same-sex marriage Tuesday, and supporters hope to pass it in the chamber by Valentine's Day. “The time for marriage is now,” said Bernard Cherkasov, chief executive officer of Equality Illinois.
Pension costs
Quinn called pension reform the “toughest of issues” and called on lawmakers to pass pension changes to keep the costs from cutting into other areas of spending, such as education. “The pension squeeze is draining our ability to teach our students. Our children are being shortchanged. And in the end, that shortchanges our economy, too.” Union leaders said Quinn was presenting a false choice between pension costs and other state services. They argue that there are other options for addressing the state’s unfunded liability than the current plans up for debate, which they believe are unconstitutional. “The governor's claim that the choice is pensions-or-pencils is deeply unfair. We must work together to adequately fund public education and solve the state’s funding crisis. Teachers and other education professionals share no fault in the problem but are willing to share in the sacrifice, and to simply balance the budget on their backs is wrong. Finding a fair and constitutional solution will take courage from everyone involved, including the governor,” said Dan Montgomery, president of the Illinois Federation of Teachers.
Quinn again threw his support behind Senate Bill 1, which is sponsored by Senate President John Cullerton. “I urge all of you to be part of the solution. And while refinements may come, Senate Bill 1 is the best vehicle to get the job done. Hard is not impossible,” Quinn said. Cullerton believes that some consideration must be given to workers for any reduction in their benefits. A plan that passed in the Senate would have asked employees to choose between their compounded-interest cost-of-living adjustments or state-subsidized retiree health care. SB 1 contains a version of a pension reform plan that was up for consideration in the House during the lame-duck session at the end of the last General Assembly and the measure that passed in the Senate. Cullerton has said he wants the Senate plan tacked on in case the Illinois Supreme Court rejects the House proposal, which he believes is unconstitutional. If that happened, the court could instead consider the Senate proposal.
House members on both sides of the aisle voiced concerns about the SB 1. Northbrook Democratic Rep. Elaine Nekrtiz, who has sponsored several pension reform bills in the House, said that the savings are uncertain under that proposal, which allows employees a choice, because there is no way to know which they will pick. “The pension problem is driven by math and by numbers, and a solution has to also be driven by math or by numbers,” she said. Nekritz called for an actuarial analysis of the potential savings under the measure. “I think members deserve that before they would vote on something.” House Republican Leader Tom Cross brushed off Quinn’s backing of SB 1. “He’s endorsed, I think, just about every pension bill that’s been out there. He’s been pretty outspoken on the need to do pension reform. ... The fact that he’s talking about that [bill] doesn’t mean that other ideas are not on the table because he’s embraced a bunch of different ideas.” Cross is working with Nekritz to try to find a compromise that can pass in the House. He said it is the job of lawmakers to pass the plan they think is best instead of sending multiple options to the courts. “[Our] first obligation ought to be: Pass a bill that [we] think solves the problem, and then the courts will decide.”
Some lawmakers said they were not impressed with Quinn’s speech. They said it lacked details and did not place enough emphasis on the state’s budget problems. “He didn’t even hardly mention the budget. He needs to get focused. We’re in a fiscal crisis,” said Rep. John Bradley, a Marion Democrat. “I don’t think his speech was very well-received, but we’ll see.” A House committee chaired by Bradley has already begun the process of creating revenue estimates. The House has based its budget on those types of estimates in recent years. “We’re not talking about it. We’re actually doing it. So we’re going to continue down that process. To the extent that to the governor’s office wants to take part in our bipartisan efforts to do that, then we welcome the help. But we’re moving forward.” Several legislators accused Quinn of using the State of the State as an informal launch for a 2014 reelection bid. “You can tell he’s running for governor again because that was nothing but a political speech,” Phelps said.
Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno agreed. “By and large, I think it was more of a campaign kick-off speech than anything else.” But in a news conference after the address, Cross and Radogno demurred on several issues, including gun control and same-sex marriage. “There are going to be some things in here you like; there are going to be some things you don’t like,” Cross said of Quinn’s speech. “I think we need to focus on the big issues like the pensions so we have a vibrant — someday — a vibrant economy and businesses that want to stay here and come here and expand here. The elephant in the room, the only issue that matters right now -- everything flows from it -- is the pension debate.”
Other legislators said Quinn did well, giving what is basically a ceremonial speech meant to set the tone for the session, but they hope he will provide more decisive leadership in the coming months. “I thought the governor spoke well and from the heart about a lot of issues that are on his mind,” said Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang. “I’m not sure I heard a lot of specifics. I’m not sure we heard a lot of specific plans on how he proposes to move Illinois forward in these areas. And I am not sure that he provided the leadership in this speech that I hope he will later provide. I do know this: He’s and honest man. His heart is in the right place. He wants to succeed. But he’s going to have to grab on a little stronger to the reins of government if he wants to lead this General Assembly to where he wants us to go.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
