By Jamey Dunn
Union officials say the attempted sexual assault of a corrections officer in the Danville Correctional Center illustrates the dangers associated with the state’s overcrowded prison system.
According the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31, which represents corrections employees statewide, an inmate who was housed in a gym at the medium security prison was in a separate housing unit doing laundry for other inmates housed in the gym. He allegedly lured a corrections officer into a laundry facility by claiming a machine was broken, punched her in the jaw and attempted to rape her. The union’s account says the guard was saved when another inmate responded to her screams and halted the attack.
The Department of Corrections denies that the officer was alone at the time of the attack. “The corrections officer who was assaulted was absolutely not the only officer with the inmates at the time. IDoC procedure calls for three: two officers and a control officer. That proven effective level of staffing was in place during the shift covering this assault,” Tom Shaer, a spokesman for the department, said in a written statement.
The department acknowledges an attack occurred but gives few details. “Danville Correctional Center is on lockdown after an assault on an officer early this morning. No serious injuries were sustained, and a thorough investigation is under way. Any physical contact with a guard is unacceptable, but again, fortunately, the officer was not seriously injured,” said a written statement from the department. “The Illinois Department of Corrections takes all incidents very seriously, as safety and security are our constant priorities. We have interviewed the officer, who is at home, other staff and inmate witnesses as we gather all the facts. Director [Tony] Godinez has also talked to the officer and extended his continued thanks for the fine work being done by this experienced individual and all DOC personnel.”
Gov. Pat Quinn has closed several corrections facilities including halfway houses, juvenile detention centers, a super-maximum security prison in Tamms and a women’s prison in Dwight. Quinn said that the state’s budget woes made the closures necessary. Women from Dwight were moved to the Logan Correctional Center in Lincoln. Men from Logan swapped places with women at the Lincoln Correctional Center. As part of the transition, an estimated 600 male prisoners were bused to six other prisons to be housed in gymnasiums filled with bunk beds. The department describes the situation as temporary, but it has yet to give specifics on its plan to stop putting prisoners in gyms. “It’s a temporary dorm setting. Obviously, we have no control over the inmates that we receive into the system,” corrections spokeswomen Stacey Solano told Illinois Issues last month when asked about the prisoners in gyms. Similar conditions existed at other low level security facilities before the closures. However, inmates are housed on large wings instead of in gyms.
AFSCME sued to try to block the closures, arguing that they would create an unsafe environment for its members. But the Illinois Supreme Court sided with Quinn. “The men and women who work in our prisons provide for the safety of the public, and they deserve the safest possible working conditions,” AFSCME executive director Henry Bayer said in a written statement today. “Their job is difficult, but the choices of politicians have made it worse. The state has ignored its responsibility to provide the resources needed to maintain safety, and now workers are bearing the terrible consequences.”
The Danville Correctional Center was designed to hold 900 inmates in single cells. By putting more than one prisoner in each cell, the department pegs the prison’s operational capacity at 1,862. According to the union’s count, at 1,931 the prison is currently over operational capacity.
AFSCME says that the prison is also understaffed. The union’s account of the attack says that the officer was alone in the housing unit. “Although prison directives require that two officers be posted on each unit at all times, they are routinely circumvented by management on the overnight shift, leaving a single officer alone. The union has repeatedly objected to this practice at Danville and elsewhere, fearing just this sort of opportunistic and predatory violence.”
However, a spokesman for DoC said that the department does not leave mandatory guard positions open. “In every correctional facility, there are mandatory posts. The Department of Corrections covers every mandatory post and does not leave them vacant,” Shaer said.
The most recent report on the Danville facility from the prison watchdog group The John Howard Association is from 2011. The report says that like many DoC facilities, Danville was “plagued by staff vacancies.” The report predicted that understaffing could be an issue for the prison. “As more staff near retirement age, vacancies may cause problems in the near future.”
The Danville attack comes after recent reports of violent incidents at maximum security facilities, including the murders of three inmates at the Menard Correctional Center. But Anders Lindall, a spokesperson for AFSCME Council 31, said problems are not exclusive to the higher security facilities. “The dangers of crowding and violence are not only at the max security level. Every facility in the system is interdependent on others,” Lindall said.
Despite the department’s statement, Lindall said it is “on going practice” at some facilities to cover staffing gaps by having officers from mandatory posts cover other duties on the night shift. He said the union has “repeatedly” raised concerns about it. “You have an inmate who is housed in a gym and an officer who was left alone on a housing unit — all circumstances about which we have sounded the alarm in the past. This shouldn’t have happened.”
Saturday, May 04, 2013
Thursday, May 02, 2013
House passes comprehensive pension changes
The Illinois House approved changes to the state’s pension systems today that supporters say will likely be the plan that makes it to the governor’s desk.
“Obviously, it does not meet every request. Obviously, it does not make everybody happy. But I think we’re all familiar with the severe fiscal problems of our state. The fiscal problems of the pension systems are a large large part of that broader problem,” said House Speaker Michael Madigan, sponsor of Senate Bill 1. “In my judgment, this is a critical action that must be taken now. It must be taken for future budget making. It must be taken for the fiscal well-being and reputation for the state of Illinois.”
The bill would cap pensionable salary at $109,000, increase retirement ages for employers younger than 36 and increase employee contributions by 2 percent of their salaries over two years. Compounded cost of living adjustments would be capped based on the amount of time worked. For each year on the job, the cap would increase by $1,000. For example, if an employee worked for 30 years but received less than $30,000 of annual pensions benefits, he or she would receive a compounded COLA until the pension benefit caught up with that cap. Then the COLA would be flat amount going forward. Madigan said that it was the House’s affirmative vote a few weeks ago on capping COLA benefits that indicated a comprehensive plan could make it through the chamber. “I think that told the tale, and then we put the bill together,” he said.
Senate Bill 1, which passed 62-51 with two representatives voting “present,” is expected to save almost $2 billion up front and aims to fully fund pension benefits by 2044. The proposal also contains a guarantee that the state makes its annual required payments. When the state pays off bonds that were used to cover previous pension payments, $1 billion of that money will go toward the unfunded liability annually. House Leader Tom Cross, who a co-sponsor of SB 1, warned that lawmakers must become more fiscally prudent if they hope to live up to the funding guarantee in the bill. “I think we all need to keep in mind ... we can put anything we want in the law, and we can talk about the guarantees. But if the General Assembly, either the House or the Senate, doesn’t have the capacity or the willingness or the understanding to not spend more than we have, then it really doesn’t matter what we put in the law.”
 |
| House members listening to pension floor debate. |
Rep. Thomas Morrison, a Palatine Republican, argued that the proposal would not go far enough. He said public employees should get all their benefits earned to date but should then be moved into 401(k)-like plans. “Other states have gone down this road. ... There are huge, huge problems with defined benefits systems,” he said. “I think there are some good reforms in this bill. I wish it would go significantly farther. I think we owe it even to the members of these pension systems to go significantly farther because I still am not confident that passing this bill is going to fulfill a promise to those workers who are counting on (pensions).”
However, Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a key player in the push for pension changes, and others noted the significance of today’s vote. “Today, we are very much taking an historic step to getting Illinois back in fiscal order,” said Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat. “It’s historic in two ways. It’s historic because of the dramatic nature of the legislation itself. These are steps none of us relish taking, but we know we should. It’s also historic because we as a body today are sending a very clear message. We are putting necessity ahead of political expediency and doing the right things instead of the easy thing.”
Union leaders have the opposite view of today’s vote. They believe that cutting the benefits of workers who never failed to make their required payments toward their pensions is unconstitutional and just plain wrong. “Senate Bill 1 is unfair to the active and retired teachers, nurses, police and other employees who paid out of every paycheck to fund their pensions, even as the state shorted its share. On top of that, it is blatantly unconstitutional and thus saves nothing. It simply exacerbates Illinois' fiscal problems. In contrast, our coalition had a productive meeting today with [Senate] President John Cullerton, and we hope to be able to continue the dialogue,” said a statement from the We Are One Coalition. Cullerton has said he believes that the House plan is unconstitutional. He is working with union officials to try and craft a plan.
Madigan today dismissed the talks as a stalling tactic from the unions. He pointed to the negotiations of the union’s contract, which took more than a year. “I think this is a continuation of what we experienced a year ago. Henry Bayer [executive director of the American Federation of State County, and Municipal Employees Council 31] and the We Are One Coalition—where day to day they simply want to delay, delay, delay because maybe the problem will go away. Precisely what they did on the collective bargaining. And they only came to the conclusion on the collective bargaining because they knew there would be action in the legislature.” Madigan called Bayer an “expert at delay.”
However, the unions and Cullerton say they are making an earnest effort. Cullerton said Wednesday that the coalition presented him with a “credible constitutional plan.” But Madigan said that even if that is the case, it is unlikely that members of his chamber would go for a different bill that, all other things being equal, Cullerton admits would save less money. “I don’t expect that they’ll be able to come to an agreement such that people will be prepared to back away from this bill. There’s two chambers here, and both chambers have to pass the same bill. The House has passed a bill, and so whatever the Senate does, I don’t think it would achieve the cost savings that the House bill does.”
Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno said she expects Republicans to support SB 1 if it is called for a vote in the Senate. “I am pleased the House will be sending over a comprehensive pension reform bill. These are substantial reforms that take a huge step forward in stabilizing the state’s finances,” she said in a written statement. She urged Cullerton to move ahead with the legislation. “A significant number of Senate Republicans supported similar legislation earlier this session. I anticipate they will join with me again to try to pass this bill to the governor’s desk. I’m appreciative of the Senate president’s efforts on a different framework, but the momentum may be building on this bill. Illinois desperately needs pension reform—we can’t afford to wait any longer.”
Gov. Pat Quinn congratulated the House on its vote in a written statement. “Today the Illinois House of Representatives took the biggest step to date towards restoring fiscal stability to Illinois. With the passage of this comprehensive pension reform solution, Illinois is closer than ever to addressing a decades-long problem that is plaguing our economy, our bond rating and the future of our children.”
Before the vote, Quinn said he does not want to dismiss the talks going on in the Senate. “I want to make sure that everybody has their say in both houses of the legislature,” Quinn said this morning. “We have to do it. The sooner it’s done, the better. I do think it’s important that both houses of the legislature know that it’s imperative this month that we pass a bill through both houses that comes to me so I can sign it into law. I want to make that point very clear to all the members of the legislature. We cannot delay. We cannot postpone. Our moment in history to get new pension reform is right now.”
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.”
Wednesday, May 01, 2013
Senate hopes to woo Quinn with new gambling plan
By Meredith Colias
The Illinois Senate passed yet another gambling expansion, and supporters hope newly added ethical guidelines will persuade Gov. Pat Quinn to sign it.
In the last two years, the legislature has approved two gaming expansion bills, and Quinn has vetoed both. The Senate today approved Senate Bill 1739 on a 32-20-1 vote, with six members not voting.
The new bill is similar to previous proposals. It includes slot machines at horse racing tracks and new casinos for Chicago, Rockford, Danville, the southern suburbs of Chicago and Lake County. Existing casinos could get more gaming positions. Chicago could use some its new gaming positions at its airports.
Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who sponsored all three of the gaming bills, said he made the changes in response to the governor's criticism of past plans. The latest version of the bill bans casino license-holders from contributing to political campaigns, something the governor has pushed for in the past. It also gives the Illinois Gaming Board the last word in oversight on the proposed Chicago casino. A body would be created to own the casino, so it would not be directly owned by the city. Under the plan, the Chicago Casino Development Authority would contract with an operator that would actually run the facility. However, Quinn said he was worried that the authority might try to circumvent the regulatory power of the Gaming Board.
Sen. Dale Righter, a Mattoon Republican who voted against the bill, said the legislation would potentially penalize people who owned establishments such as small bars that were licensed for video poker and made private contributions to a political campaign on their own. “What we don’t want is those people back home [writing small checks to campaigns], and the next thing you know someone on the gaming board is knocking on their door,” he said.
Link said the bill would provide a financial windfall for the state. The Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability estimated revenues from licensing fees for the slot machines at racetracks, new casinos and new gaming positions at existing casinos would bring in $1.2 billion initially, and $268 million annually after that. “It not only will save thousands of jobs, it will create thousands of jobs, and it will help our educational system for the future,” he said. Representatives from existing casinos say they think the revenue potential is not that large.
Tom Swoik, executive director of the Illinois Casino Gaming Association, said most of the existing operators are not interested in new gaming positions and believe the expansion would cannibalize the 10 already-existing casinos in the state. Swoik said a lot of the money estimated to come from the expansion was already spoken for and would not be available to go to schools. “We believe that this is going to leave very little money for education,” he said.
Link said that according to the COGFA report, of the $268 million projected proceeds, about $128.7 million is slated to go to education. He said he hoped Quinn would recognize the “huge effort” made to incorporate the governor’s suggestions into the current bill.
Quinn said in his February budget address that he could support gaming only with a proposal that had ethical protections, with the money taken in by the state going to education. A spokeswoman for Quinn said today that the governor is not taking a stance on the bill, but she said she does see some improvements. “It appears to be moving in the right direction. We’re reviewing it in detail. We’re pleased to see a number of our proposals included,” Brooke Anderson said.
The Illinois Senate passed yet another gambling expansion, and supporters hope newly added ethical guidelines will persuade Gov. Pat Quinn to sign it.
In the last two years, the legislature has approved two gaming expansion bills, and Quinn has vetoed both. The Senate today approved Senate Bill 1739 on a 32-20-1 vote, with six members not voting.
The new bill is similar to previous proposals. It includes slot machines at horse racing tracks and new casinos for Chicago, Rockford, Danville, the southern suburbs of Chicago and Lake County. Existing casinos could get more gaming positions. Chicago could use some its new gaming positions at its airports.
Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who sponsored all three of the gaming bills, said he made the changes in response to the governor's criticism of past plans. The latest version of the bill bans casino license-holders from contributing to political campaigns, something the governor has pushed for in the past. It also gives the Illinois Gaming Board the last word in oversight on the proposed Chicago casino. A body would be created to own the casino, so it would not be directly owned by the city. Under the plan, the Chicago Casino Development Authority would contract with an operator that would actually run the facility. However, Quinn said he was worried that the authority might try to circumvent the regulatory power of the Gaming Board.
Sen. Dale Righter, a Mattoon Republican who voted against the bill, said the legislation would potentially penalize people who owned establishments such as small bars that were licensed for video poker and made private contributions to a political campaign on their own. “What we don’t want is those people back home [writing small checks to campaigns], and the next thing you know someone on the gaming board is knocking on their door,” he said.
Link said the bill would provide a financial windfall for the state. The Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability estimated revenues from licensing fees for the slot machines at racetracks, new casinos and new gaming positions at existing casinos would bring in $1.2 billion initially, and $268 million annually after that. “It not only will save thousands of jobs, it will create thousands of jobs, and it will help our educational system for the future,” he said. Representatives from existing casinos say they think the revenue potential is not that large.
Tom Swoik, executive director of the Illinois Casino Gaming Association, said most of the existing operators are not interested in new gaming positions and believe the expansion would cannibalize the 10 already-existing casinos in the state. Swoik said a lot of the money estimated to come from the expansion was already spoken for and would not be available to go to schools. “We believe that this is going to leave very little money for education,” he said.
Link said that according to the COGFA report, of the $268 million projected proceeds, about $128.7 million is slated to go to education. He said he hoped Quinn would recognize the “huge effort” made to incorporate the governor’s suggestions into the current bill.
Quinn said in his February budget address that he could support gaming only with a proposal that had ethical protections, with the money taken in by the state going to education. A spokeswoman for Quinn said today that the governor is not taking a stance on the bill, but she said she does see some improvements. “It appears to be moving in the right direction. We’re reviewing it in detail. We’re pleased to see a number of our proposals included,” Brooke Anderson said.
Cullerton to Madigan: Consider union plan
Senate President John Cullerton said today that his negotiations with union leaders have produced a pension proposal that lawmakers in both chambers should consider.
Giving no details of the plan, Cullerton released a statement announcing a deal this afternoon.
UPDATE: Cullerton said this afternoon that he has not yet reached a final agreement with union leaders. But he says they have presented him a “substantial proposal” that his caucus will consider along with House Speaker Michael Madigan's plan, if it passes Thursday.
“We're not finished talking to them. We might want to make some proposed changes to their proposal. We just got it today,” Cullerton told reporters. “What's significant is that they're supportive of a major bill that saves billions of dollars, which I would say they've never been before. So that's a major move. There's still some details to work out.” Cullerton said the union's plan is based on the concept that workers must be offered something in exchange for pension cuts. He has maintained that without such a trade, any bill that reduces retirement benefits would be unconstitutional. “Since it's not unilateral cuts, it doesn't save as much money, but it's billions of dollars,” he said of the union proposal.
When asked if he would call Madigan's bill, Cullerton said he would consult his members. “We’re going to hopefully see what the caucus wants to do, whether they want to support that bill, or the bill that the unions are supportive [of] or a combination thereof.” He noted that the Senate has already rejected a bill similar to the one the House plans to vote on Thursday. “We’ll see if this has any differences that get more people to be supportive, but you know, it’s not like we haven’t voted on this already," Cullerton said.
“Since the beginning of session, I have made it clear that enacting constitutional pension reform is my top priority. Illinois faces a crisis; we owe it to our children and grandchildren to take action,” Cullerton said in a written statement about the union proposal. “I have worked to build consensus for reform within my caucus and across the diverse factions on both sides of the aisle. In these pension discussions, I have expressed a preference for the framework that, in my view, has the best chance of holding up in court. I have also worked to include labor in these conversations. Today, I concluded a series of meetings with representatives of teachers, nurses, police officers and other public employees. This coalition of labor leaders offered a credible and constitutional plan for consideration.”
The House is expected to vote on a pension plan tomorrow. Cullerton believes that proposal is unconstitutional. Both Madigan and the bill’s other sponsor, House Minority Leader Tom Cross, were optimistic about the possibility of the bill passing in the House tomorrow.
However, Cullerton urged lawmakers in both chambers to consider the plan he says he has worked out with the unions. “Because inaction is not an option, I believe that it is appropriate to begin discussing this plan with the members of my caucus and with the speaker of the House. It’s important that we advance a credible solution to our pension problems.”
Giving no details of the plan, Cullerton released a statement announcing a deal this afternoon.
UPDATE: Cullerton said this afternoon that he has not yet reached a final agreement with union leaders. But he says they have presented him a “substantial proposal” that his caucus will consider along with House Speaker Michael Madigan's plan, if it passes Thursday.
“We're not finished talking to them. We might want to make some proposed changes to their proposal. We just got it today,” Cullerton told reporters. “What's significant is that they're supportive of a major bill that saves billions of dollars, which I would say they've never been before. So that's a major move. There's still some details to work out.” Cullerton said the union's plan is based on the concept that workers must be offered something in exchange for pension cuts. He has maintained that without such a trade, any bill that reduces retirement benefits would be unconstitutional. “Since it's not unilateral cuts, it doesn't save as much money, but it's billions of dollars,” he said of the union proposal.
When asked if he would call Madigan's bill, Cullerton said he would consult his members. “We’re going to hopefully see what the caucus wants to do, whether they want to support that bill, or the bill that the unions are supportive [of] or a combination thereof.” He noted that the Senate has already rejected a bill similar to the one the House plans to vote on Thursday. “We’ll see if this has any differences that get more people to be supportive, but you know, it’s not like we haven’t voted on this already," Cullerton said.
“Since the beginning of session, I have made it clear that enacting constitutional pension reform is my top priority. Illinois faces a crisis; we owe it to our children and grandchildren to take action,” Cullerton said in a written statement about the union proposal. “I have worked to build consensus for reform within my caucus and across the diverse factions on both sides of the aisle. In these pension discussions, I have expressed a preference for the framework that, in my view, has the best chance of holding up in court. I have also worked to include labor in these conversations. Today, I concluded a series of meetings with representatives of teachers, nurses, police officers and other public employees. This coalition of labor leaders offered a credible and constitutional plan for consideration.”
The House is expected to vote on a pension plan tomorrow. Cullerton believes that proposal is unconstitutional. Both Madigan and the bill’s other sponsor, House Minority Leader Tom Cross, were optimistic about the possibility of the bill passing in the House tomorrow.
However, Cullerton urged lawmakers in both chambers to consider the plan he says he has worked out with the unions. “Because inaction is not an option, I believe that it is appropriate to begin discussing this plan with the members of my caucus and with the speaker of the House. It’s important that we advance a credible solution to our pension problems.”
House leaders hopeful about pension vote
By Jamey Dunn
An Illinois House vote on changes to the state’s pension systems is planned for Thursday, and legislative leaders from both parties are optimistic that the newest iteration of pension reform can pass.
A House committee this morning approved an amendment to Senate Bill 1 presented by House Speaker Michael Madigan. “This amendment would offer a comprehensive reform of the Illinois pension systems. It would bring solvency and stability to the four systems,” Madigan told the committee. The measure contains several provisions pulled from other bills, including ideas that have already been approved by the House.
The new version of SB 1 would:
Chicago pays most of the employer cost for its teachers’ pensions, and Chicago Democrats have argued that it is unfair that the state chips in for benefits for teachers outside of the city. Madigan said he plans to move some kind of cost shift separately from SB 1. “I plan to do that on a different bill,” he said. “We haven’t begun that process.” However, he said he wants to pass it this session. Republicans, who oppose the cost shift, argue that Chicago makes out better than the rest of the state when it comes to overall education funding.
SB 1 aims to fully fund pension benefits by 2044. However, Madigan said there has not been an actuarial analysis of this new plan. “The only thing we can do today is to work off of the numbers that were generated from the other bills. So there’s a certain amount of speculation.” He said that if the bill were approved and signed into law, legislators should not count on any savings until the Illinois Supreme Court weighs in. “I just think that it would be prudent not to spend the anticipated savings in the next budget.” Madigan said he is confident that at least four members of the court would find the bill constitutional. However, he said that he had not talked with any of the justices about the legislation and did not plan to in the future. “It’s just my judgment,” he said. “I’ve had no conversations with any member of the court.”
The changes in SB 1 would apply to teachers outside of Chicago, state employees, legislators and university and community college employees. The state’s judges are not included in the plan. “That’s a practical judgment,” Madigan said about leaving out the judges. When pressed on the issue, he said he had “no further comment.”
Union leaders panned the bill, calling it blatantly unconstitutional and unfair to workers who made their required contributions while the state skipped payments. “The problem with this amendment is there is no shared sacrifice. While we ... have been willing to work collaboratively toward a fair and constitutional solution, this amendment represents a diminishment of benefits clearly prohibited by the Illinois Constitution,” said Michael Carrigan, president of the Illinois AFL-CIO. “Fixing a funding issue on the backs of public-sector workers, hard-working Illinois workers, by slashing their retirement benefits is not good public policy and will result in a legal challenge [that is] certain to be successful.”
Cinda Klickna, president of the Illinois Education Association, said the benefit cuts in the bill would make it difficult for some retirees on fixed incomes to make ends meet. She said that cuts to their incomes, which would likely result in them spending less, could hurt local economies. “Every public employee will be hurt. Every community will feel the impact, and it is about people,” Klickna said. “We can talk about numbers, we can talk about the state budget. We can talk about what something saves, but I think it’s a sad state of affairs when the state ignores its people.” Klickna added that increasing the retirement age means teachers would stay in their positions longer, making it more difficult for aspiring young teachers to find jobs.
But the unions’ complaints did little to dampen the optimism of those who see this bill as the culmination of work on the issue in the House. “My guess is this thing will pass out of the House. The question is what’s going to happen in the Senate,” said House Minority Leader Tom Cross, who has signed on as a cosponsor of the bill with Madigan. He said about the two partnering on the bill, “I think it puts a lot of pressure on the Senate and creates some momentum, where you’ve got a bipartisan effort coming out of the House.” Senate President John Cullerton said yesterday that he is still trying to work with union leaders to reach a compromise. Cullerton has said that he believes proposals such as the new SB 1 that unilaterally reduce benefits are unconstitutional.
Gov. Pat Quinn urged lawmakers to approve the legislation. “Illinois' economy will not fully recover until the General Assembly passes this comprehensive pension reform and sends the bill to my desk. Now is the time to take this major step to restore fiscal stability to Illinois,” he said in a written statement.
Cross said lawmakers should pass legislation that would reduce pension costs and stabilize the system instead of trying to predict what the courts will do with the final product. “No one knows. And we can all opine and give our theories on it. There are a number of folks in the legal community who have said this is constitutional,” Cross said. “But at the end of the day, whatever we pass is going to end up in the courts, and we will need to wait for the courts to give us their opinion. And we can all speculate, but until that happens, nobody’s going to know.”
An Illinois House vote on changes to the state’s pension systems is planned for Thursday, and legislative leaders from both parties are optimistic that the newest iteration of pension reform can pass.
A House committee this morning approved an amendment to Senate Bill 1 presented by House Speaker Michael Madigan. “This amendment would offer a comprehensive reform of the Illinois pension systems. It would bring solvency and stability to the four systems,” Madigan told the committee. The measure contains several provisions pulled from other bills, including ideas that have already been approved by the House.
The new version of SB 1 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.
- Require employees to contribute 2 percent more of their salaries. The increased contribution would be phased in over two years.
- Cap pensionable salary at $109,000, the limit that is currently used for Tier Two employees. The cap would increase at the rate of one half of the Consumer Price Index that is set for urban consumers.
- Base the amount of pension benefits that would be eligible for cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) on the amount of time employees worked. For each year of employment, $1,000 (or $800 for employees who receive Social Security benefits) of pension income would be eligible for a COLA. For example, if an employee worked for 30 years, then $30,000 of his or her retirement benefit would see an annual COLA. Before employees reached their cap, they would receive a compounding COLA. After they reached the cap, they would get a flat annual increase.
Chicago pays most of the employer cost for its teachers’ pensions, and Chicago Democrats have argued that it is unfair that the state chips in for benefits for teachers outside of the city. Madigan said he plans to move some kind of cost shift separately from SB 1. “I plan to do that on a different bill,” he said. “We haven’t begun that process.” However, he said he wants to pass it this session. Republicans, who oppose the cost shift, argue that Chicago makes out better than the rest of the state when it comes to overall education funding.
SB 1 aims to fully fund pension benefits by 2044. However, Madigan said there has not been an actuarial analysis of this new plan. “The only thing we can do today is to work off of the numbers that were generated from the other bills. So there’s a certain amount of speculation.” He said that if the bill were approved and signed into law, legislators should not count on any savings until the Illinois Supreme Court weighs in. “I just think that it would be prudent not to spend the anticipated savings in the next budget.” Madigan said he is confident that at least four members of the court would find the bill constitutional. However, he said that he had not talked with any of the justices about the legislation and did not plan to in the future. “It’s just my judgment,” he said. “I’ve had no conversations with any member of the court.”
The changes in SB 1 would apply to teachers outside of Chicago, state employees, legislators and university and community college employees. The state’s judges are not included in the plan. “That’s a practical judgment,” Madigan said about leaving out the judges. When pressed on the issue, he said he had “no further comment.”
Union leaders panned the bill, calling it blatantly unconstitutional and unfair to workers who made their required contributions while the state skipped payments. “The problem with this amendment is there is no shared sacrifice. While we ... have been willing to work collaboratively toward a fair and constitutional solution, this amendment represents a diminishment of benefits clearly prohibited by the Illinois Constitution,” said Michael Carrigan, president of the Illinois AFL-CIO. “Fixing a funding issue on the backs of public-sector workers, hard-working Illinois workers, by slashing their retirement benefits is not good public policy and will result in a legal challenge [that is] certain to be successful.”
Cinda Klickna, president of the Illinois Education Association, said the benefit cuts in the bill would make it difficult for some retirees on fixed incomes to make ends meet. She said that cuts to their incomes, which would likely result in them spending less, could hurt local economies. “Every public employee will be hurt. Every community will feel the impact, and it is about people,” Klickna said. “We can talk about numbers, we can talk about the state budget. We can talk about what something saves, but I think it’s a sad state of affairs when the state ignores its people.” Klickna added that increasing the retirement age means teachers would stay in their positions longer, making it more difficult for aspiring young teachers to find jobs.
But the unions’ complaints did little to dampen the optimism of those who see this bill as the culmination of work on the issue in the House. “My guess is this thing will pass out of the House. The question is what’s going to happen in the Senate,” said House Minority Leader Tom Cross, who has signed on as a cosponsor of the bill with Madigan. He said about the two partnering on the bill, “I think it puts a lot of pressure on the Senate and creates some momentum, where you’ve got a bipartisan effort coming out of the House.” Senate President John Cullerton said yesterday that he is still trying to work with union leaders to reach a compromise. Cullerton has said that he believes proposals such as the new SB 1 that unilaterally reduce benefits are unconstitutional.
Gov. Pat Quinn urged lawmakers to approve the legislation. “Illinois' economy will not fully recover until the General Assembly passes this comprehensive pension reform and sends the bill to my desk. Now is the time to take this major step to restore fiscal stability to Illinois,” he said in a written statement.
Cross said lawmakers should pass legislation that would reduce pension costs and stabilize the system instead of trying to predict what the courts will do with the final product. “No one knows. And we can all opine and give our theories on it. There are a number of folks in the legal community who have said this is constitutional,” Cross said. “But at the end of the day, whatever we pass is going to end up in the courts, and we will need to wait for the courts to give us their opinion. And we can all speculate, but until that happens, nobody’s going to know.”
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Rep. Nekritz: "This feels like this could be it" for pension changes
By Jamey Dunn
A key player in the Illinois House said a new proposal from Speaker Michael Madigan could be the pension change legislation that goes the distance in the House.
“This feels like this could be it,” said Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who has sponsored several pension bills and has been at the center of the push to change public employee retirement benefits and cut costs in the system that is underfunded by about $100 billion. The newest pension proposal is presented in an amendment to Senate Bill 1, which was Senate President John Cullerton’s preferred plan. The amendment would replace Cullerton’s plan with a language that is similar to House Bill 3411, a proposal from Nekritz that has bipartisan report. Among other things, HB 3411 would have capped the amount of salary used to calculate benefits and limited the amount of pension income considered for Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs).
Madigan plans to present the amendment in the House pension committee scheduled for 8 a.m. Wednesday. Nekritz, a Democrat from Northbrook, said Madigan’s hands-on approach is one of the reasons that she thinks this plan could pass in the House. “It’s a Speaker Madigan bill, and he is the sponsor, which I think is an important statement about his engagement in this,” she said. Nekritz said that because of procedural constraints, the bill would not come up for a floor vote Wednesday, but a committee vote is expected.
Some of the components of the new proposal are the same as the previous plan. The amendment to SB 1 would:
The amendment to SB 1 also includes an eight-page preamble that lays out the case for the need to reduce retirement benefits, which are protected by the state’s Constitution. Nekritz and others have argued that the situation is so bad that the courts should give the state special powers to cut benefits and make other changes to save the systems. Those interested in predicting some of the points the state might make in a legal argument to defend unilateral pension changes could take their hints from the language, which describes the state’s budgetary turmoil and the steps that have been taken to try to reach fiscal stability. “The state's credit rating has consistently worsened in the assessment of all three major ratings agencies, the state's backlog of unpaid bills has not grown smaller, and the various non-discretionary and formula-driven expenses whose growth has created the lion's share of the problem are projected to continue unabated. Under the current payment schedule set in Public Act 88-593, the pension payment especially is expected to grow extremely rapidly until Fiscal Year 2045,” the bill says. “Consequently, the coming months and years will necessarily see much more action by the State to achieve fiscal stabilization. If these steps toward fiscal stabilization do not include pension reform to restrain the growth of the annual pension payment, the result will be devastating and dramatic cuts to education, public safety, and transportation.”
The legislation goes on to say that without such changes to pensions, the state would struggle with meeting other obligations described in the Constitution. “The impact of such actions on the Illinois economy, and on the health, safety, welfare, and educational development of the people would likely be extremely severe. This harm could include significant economic contraction, which would in turn exacerbate the underlying fiscal challenge, resulting in a downward spiral of standard of living and likely leading to an eventual inability of the state to meet its short term statutory and Constitutional responsibilities.
Unions leaders say the proposal is clearly unconstitutional. “Our coalition has said time and again that we oppose unfair, unconstitutional pension cuts. Public workers and retirees should not be punished for a problem politicians created,” said a statement from the We Are One Coalition, which includes public employee unions and teachers' unions. “While we want to work together to solve the pension problem, the amendment filed today by the House speaker represents the same illegal approach to slashing hard-earned life savings protected by the Illinois Constitution. Should it become law, we believe a successful legal challenge is all but certain, with the bill saving nothing and the state’s budget problems made worse.”
While the House is considering Madigan’s plan, Cullerton says he is still negotiating with union leaders to craft a compromise in the Senate. “We’re still negotiation with the unions to try to get the unions to be for a bill. That would be very helpful. We are prepared, I would say, [to] soon -- in the next week or so -- to move ahead with votes. ... It’s all about getting something passed,” Cullerton said. He noted that the Senate rejected a proposal from Evanston Democratic Sen. Daniel Biss, who has partnered with Nekritz on the efforts to pass pensions changes. That bill is similar to Madigan’s proposal. However, it would have sifted pension costs for future employees to schools.
Cullerton believes that lawmakers cannot change pension benefits unilaterally without offering them something in exchange. His version of SB 1 contained a proposal similar to HB 3411, but it also contained a backup plan that Cullerton said would kick in if the courts find the House proposal unconstitutional. Cullerton’s proposal would offer employees a choice, sometimes referred to as consideration, between access to retiree health care or a compounded COLA. Cullerton said that any plan resulting from negotiations with the unions would also have some sort of consideration. He noted that having union support of any plan would not necessarily make it constitutional, and individual employees would still be free to challenge it in court. “That just makes it easier to pass it. There still could be a lawsuit, sure. Anybody could sue.”
A key player in the Illinois House said a new proposal from Speaker Michael Madigan could be the pension change legislation that goes the distance in the House.
“This feels like this could be it,” said Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who has sponsored several pension bills and has been at the center of the push to change public employee retirement benefits and cut costs in the system that is underfunded by about $100 billion. The newest pension proposal is presented in an amendment to Senate Bill 1, which was Senate President John Cullerton’s preferred plan. The amendment would replace Cullerton’s plan with a language that is similar to House Bill 3411, a proposal from Nekritz that has bipartisan report. Among other things, HB 3411 would have capped the amount of salary used to calculate benefits and limited the amount of pension income considered for Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs).
Madigan plans to present the amendment in the House pension committee scheduled for 8 a.m. Wednesday. Nekritz, a Democrat from Northbrook, said Madigan’s hands-on approach is one of the reasons that she thinks this plan could pass in the House. “It’s a Speaker Madigan bill, and he is the sponsor, which I think is an important statement about his engagement in this,” she said. Nekritz said that because of procedural constraints, the bill would not come up for a floor vote Wednesday, but a committee vote is expected.
Some of the components of the new proposal are the same as the previous plan. The amendment to SB 1 would:
- Increase the retirement age for employees younger than age 46. Employees from age 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.
- Require employees to contribute 2 percent more of their salaries. The increased contribution would be phased in over two years.
- Pensionable salary would be capped at $109,000, the limit that is currently used for Tier Two employees. HB 3411 called for a higher cap at $113,700. The cap would increase at the rate of one half of the Consumer Price Index that is set for urban consumers.
- The amount of pensionable salary that would be eligible for COLAs would be based on the amount of time employees worked. For each year of employment, $1,000 (or $800 for employees who receive Social Security benefits) of pension income would be eligible for COLA. For example, if an employee worked for 30 years, then $30,000 of their retirement benefit would see an annual COLA.
The amendment to SB 1 also includes an eight-page preamble that lays out the case for the need to reduce retirement benefits, which are protected by the state’s Constitution. Nekritz and others have argued that the situation is so bad that the courts should give the state special powers to cut benefits and make other changes to save the systems. Those interested in predicting some of the points the state might make in a legal argument to defend unilateral pension changes could take their hints from the language, which describes the state’s budgetary turmoil and the steps that have been taken to try to reach fiscal stability. “The state's credit rating has consistently worsened in the assessment of all three major ratings agencies, the state's backlog of unpaid bills has not grown smaller, and the various non-discretionary and formula-driven expenses whose growth has created the lion's share of the problem are projected to continue unabated. Under the current payment schedule set in Public Act 88-593, the pension payment especially is expected to grow extremely rapidly until Fiscal Year 2045,” the bill says. “Consequently, the coming months and years will necessarily see much more action by the State to achieve fiscal stabilization. If these steps toward fiscal stabilization do not include pension reform to restrain the growth of the annual pension payment, the result will be devastating and dramatic cuts to education, public safety, and transportation.”
The legislation goes on to say that without such changes to pensions, the state would struggle with meeting other obligations described in the Constitution. “The impact of such actions on the Illinois economy, and on the health, safety, welfare, and educational development of the people would likely be extremely severe. This harm could include significant economic contraction, which would in turn exacerbate the underlying fiscal challenge, resulting in a downward spiral of standard of living and likely leading to an eventual inability of the state to meet its short term statutory and Constitutional responsibilities.
Unions leaders say the proposal is clearly unconstitutional. “Our coalition has said time and again that we oppose unfair, unconstitutional pension cuts. Public workers and retirees should not be punished for a problem politicians created,” said a statement from the We Are One Coalition, which includes public employee unions and teachers' unions. “While we want to work together to solve the pension problem, the amendment filed today by the House speaker represents the same illegal approach to slashing hard-earned life savings protected by the Illinois Constitution. Should it become law, we believe a successful legal challenge is all but certain, with the bill saving nothing and the state’s budget problems made worse.”
While the House is considering Madigan’s plan, Cullerton says he is still negotiating with union leaders to craft a compromise in the Senate. “We’re still negotiation with the unions to try to get the unions to be for a bill. That would be very helpful. We are prepared, I would say, [to] soon -- in the next week or so -- to move ahead with votes. ... It’s all about getting something passed,” Cullerton said. He noted that the Senate rejected a proposal from Evanston Democratic Sen. Daniel Biss, who has partnered with Nekritz on the efforts to pass pensions changes. That bill is similar to Madigan’s proposal. However, it would have sifted pension costs for future employees to schools.
Cullerton believes that lawmakers cannot change pension benefits unilaterally without offering them something in exchange. His version of SB 1 contained a proposal similar to HB 3411, but it also contained a backup plan that Cullerton said would kick in if the courts find the House proposal unconstitutional. Cullerton’s proposal would offer employees a choice, sometimes referred to as consideration, between access to retiree health care or a compounded COLA. Cullerton said that any plan resulting from negotiations with the unions would also have some sort of consideration. He noted that having union support of any plan would not necessarily make it constitutional, and individual employees would still be free to challenge it in court. “That just makes it easier to pass it. There still could be a lawsuit, sure. Anybody could sue.”
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Quinn plans to sign off on funding for home health care
By Meredith Colias
Seniors will be able to rely on funding to continue to pay for state approved in-home care through June 30.
The Senate passed House Bill 207 and HB 2275, twin measures to provide an influx of $173 million needed for the Illinois Department of Aging to cover costs for its Community Care Program for the remainder of the fiscal year and streamline costs as the number of seniors covered by the program continues to grow. Both bills passed the Senate unanimously on 54-0 votes, with five members not voting. The bills now go to Gov. Pat Quinn for his signature. His office said he would sign both into law.
The Community Care Program provides funding to service providers that dispatch caretakers for qualified seniors to take care of everyday tasks such as laundry, groceries, bathing and dressing. The 85,000 seniors enrolled in the program have to qualify under economic guidelines. Some are also of varying nationalities who do not speak English as a first language, and in-home care workers provide a cultural touchstone for them. About 70 percent of those in the program are enrolled in Medicaid. Changes to the Medicaid system approved by lawmakers last year would have tightened requirements for the program and reduced costs, but the federal government denied the state’s request to alter eligibility for Community Care.
Chicago Democratic Sen. Heather Steans, who sponsors the bills, said the program “takes care of elderly residents in their homes rather than institutions,” which are much more expensive. The Department of Aging estimates it pays about $8,000 for a caregiver to check in with seniors in their homes but would pay about $32,000 for round-the-clock care at a nursing home. HB 207 provides $173 million the Department of Aging says it needs to continue to pay service providers who care for qualified elderly within their homes.
Without the funding, department officials have effectively been unable to pay service providers since mid-March. Advocates told the General Assembly that smaller providers likely would not be able to operate without resuming payments from the state. The department said the extra money was needed because it was under-appropriated in the current fiscal year. After FY 2014, which begins July 1, the state will not allow the department to push off expenses into the following fiscal year. Rep. Chapin Rose, a Mahomet Republican, applauded the move and said the Senate should “not allow these bills to accumulate under the radar.” HB 2275 puts restrictions on workers by using GPS devices to track them to ensure they are properly going to clients’ homes and sets limits for the amount of time workers can claim they took to perform individual tasks.
Scott Vogel, a spokesman for the Service Employees International Union, said the union restrictions in HB 2275 are reasonable to obtain funding for caregivers.
Seniors will be able to rely on funding to continue to pay for state approved in-home care through June 30.
The Senate passed House Bill 207 and HB 2275, twin measures to provide an influx of $173 million needed for the Illinois Department of Aging to cover costs for its Community Care Program for the remainder of the fiscal year and streamline costs as the number of seniors covered by the program continues to grow. Both bills passed the Senate unanimously on 54-0 votes, with five members not voting. The bills now go to Gov. Pat Quinn for his signature. His office said he would sign both into law.
The Community Care Program provides funding to service providers that dispatch caretakers for qualified seniors to take care of everyday tasks such as laundry, groceries, bathing and dressing. The 85,000 seniors enrolled in the program have to qualify under economic guidelines. Some are also of varying nationalities who do not speak English as a first language, and in-home care workers provide a cultural touchstone for them. About 70 percent of those in the program are enrolled in Medicaid. Changes to the Medicaid system approved by lawmakers last year would have tightened requirements for the program and reduced costs, but the federal government denied the state’s request to alter eligibility for Community Care.
Chicago Democratic Sen. Heather Steans, who sponsors the bills, said the program “takes care of elderly residents in their homes rather than institutions,” which are much more expensive. The Department of Aging estimates it pays about $8,000 for a caregiver to check in with seniors in their homes but would pay about $32,000 for round-the-clock care at a nursing home. HB 207 provides $173 million the Department of Aging says it needs to continue to pay service providers who care for qualified elderly within their homes.
Without the funding, department officials have effectively been unable to pay service providers since mid-March. Advocates told the General Assembly that smaller providers likely would not be able to operate without resuming payments from the state. The department said the extra money was needed because it was under-appropriated in the current fiscal year. After FY 2014, which begins July 1, the state will not allow the department to push off expenses into the following fiscal year. Rep. Chapin Rose, a Mahomet Republican, applauded the move and said the Senate should “not allow these bills to accumulate under the radar.” HB 2275 puts restrictions on workers by using GPS devices to track them to ensure they are properly going to clients’ homes and sets limits for the amount of time workers can claim they took to perform individual tasks.
Scott Vogel, a spokesman for the Service Employees International Union, said the union restrictions in HB 2275 are reasonable to obtain funding for caregivers.
Gun control advocates zero in on priorities
By Jamey Dunn
As the debate over concealed carry continues in Illinois, gun control advocates are setting their priorities.
Last week, the Illinois House rejected two concealed carry proposals — one restrictive plan favored by some gun control advocates and one more permissive proposal backed by the National Rifle Association. The Senate is still working to reach a bipartisan agreement, but negotiations have reportedly hit some snags. A federal court gave lawmakers until early June to pass legislation regulating the carry of firearms in the state.
Those lobbying for gun control hope to see a more restrictive carry law. “We call on lawmakers to use this opportunity to pass the strongest possible gun laws in this country. A law that limits guns in paces like schools and stadiums and government buildings and public transportation for heaven’s sake — a law that mandates strong training requirements and for permit holders to have an awfully good cause for being issued one,” said Bishop Christopher Epting of the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago. “We must balance the Second Amendment with the rights we have to live in peace and free from fear of another life lost to gun violence.”
But many also see the court’s order as an opportunity to put in place some restrictions that they call “common sense” safety measures, which they say would make it easier for law enforcement to track guns and could help to quell the rampant violence in Chicago. The city had more than 500 murders last year, and 87 percent of the victims died from gunshot wounds. “Every time I talk to a legislator, the number one question I get is Chicago. How is this going to stop what’s happening in the city of Chicago?” said Colleen Daley, executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. “That’s the reason we’ve put together an anti-trafficking proposal looking at things like universal background checks, reporting of lost or stolen firearms, dealer licensing and titling guns like cars or some point of sale reporting, so we actually know where that gun is supposed to be.”
Oak Park Democratic Sen. Don Harmon said the focus of gun control advocates must be on measures they believe will do the most to make neighborhoods safe. “We’re not ready to back down. We have a long list of things that we want, and I’m going to ask you to remember just one thing: Let’s always focus on our ultimate objective. We want our neighborhood to be safer; we want our kids and our families to be safe. Anything we do has to make sure we make progress on that front. We might not get everything we want, but we’re going to get safer neighborhoods. We’re going to get safer communities. Our families will be safe; our children will be safe,” Harmon said as he addressed a crowd that had come to Springfield to lobby lawmakers.
Sen. Dan Kotowski, former executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, said he is focused on three provisions he thinks can find broad support. He said that this spring, he is most interested in passing legislation that would require background checks for all gun sales — currently they are not required for private sales — and would require gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms. He also said he wants to work to fix systemic problems with the reporting of mental health records to the Illinois State Police, which licenses gun owners. “If we were to move forward on those three basic initiatives, I think that would be a positive step forward,” he said. “If we’re making the determination to allow people to carry loaded, concealed handguns in public places, when the vast majority of the public is clamoring for reasonable measures which prevent people from getting access to guns who are criminals, who are mentally ill or who are threats to the community, we need to have a proper balance.”
Gov. Pat Quinn supports all three of those measures. The governor has also been vocal about his desire for bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines since a mass shooting in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater last summer. “The legislature needs to get significant reforms adopted into bill form that come to my desk beyond just concealed carry. That’s not enough,” Quinn said. During a recent gun control rally, which drew family and friends of victims of Chicago gun violence to the Statehouse, Quinn recalled several high-profile shootings. “We're here to save lives. We don’t want people being shot down in a movie theater or a church or a political rally in Tucson, Arizona, or going to first grade in Newtown, Connecticut. Or, or even in our own state. In DeKalb, Illinois, on Valentine's Day five years ago, a gunman [came] into a classroom and killed five students. Five good men and women. I went to each of their funerals. We’re tired of going to funerals.”
Quinn failed to mention the violence in the city, but Daley said that was all right. “We talk about mass shootings all the time and pointing to Connecticut and pointing to Colorado because we have that actually happening in the city on a weekend,” she said. “So paralleling the two of them actually makes a lot of sense in trying to explain it.”
Kotowski, a Park Ridge Democrat, said he appreciates Quinn’s relentless public support for gun control, even if some of the things the governor wants are not at the top of his list this year. “Yes. I think we have to pick what’s feasible to get passed right now. As you know, I’ve advocated for the limitations of high capacity ammunition magazines in the past,” he said. Kotowski sponsored a ban that passed in the Senate in 2007, but the bill languished in the House. “I think those are more long- term,” he said of the magazine ban and assault weapons ban. “But right now, what can we do immediately?”
Mary Kay Mace, mother of Northern Illinois University shooting victim Ryanne Mace, said she hopes that the debate on concealed carry sheds light on the problems with safety measures that are already in place. “What I hope happens is that people become aware of how shoddy our background check system is,” she says. “I think that people just assume that the laws that we have already on the books are working well, and they are not.”
Some lawmakers who advocate for gun owners’ rights also support a few of Kotowoski’s priorities. Harrisburg Democratic Rep. Brandon Phelps, who sponsors the NRA-backed concealed carry proposal, called the mental health records reporting system a “travesty” that he says he wants to help fix. He said increasing the fees for concealed carry permits in his bill to $100 could help address the problems. He also supports universal background checks for all gun sales. However, Phelps does not favor requiring gun owners to report firearms that are lost or stolen. He also does not think that gun control measures should be tacked onto concealed carry legislation. “Now’s not the time to reinvent the wheel,” he said.
Daley said that as advocates focus on their priorities, they should remember that no single change will stop the violence. “One thing we like to make clear is that we don’t [work] under the notion that all of these laws are suddenly going to stop all the violence. Gun violence is a very complex issue, and there are a lot of factors that go into it — economy, where people live, all of that — but what we can do is, we can enact laws that are going to help law enforcement and that are going to cut back on crime that’s taking place — gun violence that is taking place.”
Mace said that she is hopeful about the potential for compromise. “I think that we have more common ground than a lot of people realize. I think that the extremists are loudest on both sides.”
As the debate over concealed carry continues in Illinois, gun control advocates are setting their priorities.
Last week, the Illinois House rejected two concealed carry proposals — one restrictive plan favored by some gun control advocates and one more permissive proposal backed by the National Rifle Association. The Senate is still working to reach a bipartisan agreement, but negotiations have reportedly hit some snags. A federal court gave lawmakers until early June to pass legislation regulating the carry of firearms in the state.
Those lobbying for gun control hope to see a more restrictive carry law. “We call on lawmakers to use this opportunity to pass the strongest possible gun laws in this country. A law that limits guns in paces like schools and stadiums and government buildings and public transportation for heaven’s sake — a law that mandates strong training requirements and for permit holders to have an awfully good cause for being issued one,” said Bishop Christopher Epting of the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago. “We must balance the Second Amendment with the rights we have to live in peace and free from fear of another life lost to gun violence.”
But many also see the court’s order as an opportunity to put in place some restrictions that they call “common sense” safety measures, which they say would make it easier for law enforcement to track guns and could help to quell the rampant violence in Chicago. The city had more than 500 murders last year, and 87 percent of the victims died from gunshot wounds. “Every time I talk to a legislator, the number one question I get is Chicago. How is this going to stop what’s happening in the city of Chicago?” said Colleen Daley, executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. “That’s the reason we’ve put together an anti-trafficking proposal looking at things like universal background checks, reporting of lost or stolen firearms, dealer licensing and titling guns like cars or some point of sale reporting, so we actually know where that gun is supposed to be.”
Oak Park Democratic Sen. Don Harmon said the focus of gun control advocates must be on measures they believe will do the most to make neighborhoods safe. “We’re not ready to back down. We have a long list of things that we want, and I’m going to ask you to remember just one thing: Let’s always focus on our ultimate objective. We want our neighborhood to be safer; we want our kids and our families to be safe. Anything we do has to make sure we make progress on that front. We might not get everything we want, but we’re going to get safer neighborhoods. We’re going to get safer communities. Our families will be safe; our children will be safe,” Harmon said as he addressed a crowd that had come to Springfield to lobby lawmakers.
Sen. Dan Kotowski, former executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, said he is focused on three provisions he thinks can find broad support. He said that this spring, he is most interested in passing legislation that would require background checks for all gun sales — currently they are not required for private sales — and would require gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms. He also said he wants to work to fix systemic problems with the reporting of mental health records to the Illinois State Police, which licenses gun owners. “If we were to move forward on those three basic initiatives, I think that would be a positive step forward,” he said. “If we’re making the determination to allow people to carry loaded, concealed handguns in public places, when the vast majority of the public is clamoring for reasonable measures which prevent people from getting access to guns who are criminals, who are mentally ill or who are threats to the community, we need to have a proper balance.”
Gov. Pat Quinn supports all three of those measures. The governor has also been vocal about his desire for bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines since a mass shooting in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater last summer. “The legislature needs to get significant reforms adopted into bill form that come to my desk beyond just concealed carry. That’s not enough,” Quinn said. During a recent gun control rally, which drew family and friends of victims of Chicago gun violence to the Statehouse, Quinn recalled several high-profile shootings. “We're here to save lives. We don’t want people being shot down in a movie theater or a church or a political rally in Tucson, Arizona, or going to first grade in Newtown, Connecticut. Or, or even in our own state. In DeKalb, Illinois, on Valentine's Day five years ago, a gunman [came] into a classroom and killed five students. Five good men and women. I went to each of their funerals. We’re tired of going to funerals.”
Quinn failed to mention the violence in the city, but Daley said that was all right. “We talk about mass shootings all the time and pointing to Connecticut and pointing to Colorado because we have that actually happening in the city on a weekend,” she said. “So paralleling the two of them actually makes a lot of sense in trying to explain it.”
Kotowski, a Park Ridge Democrat, said he appreciates Quinn’s relentless public support for gun control, even if some of the things the governor wants are not at the top of his list this year. “Yes. I think we have to pick what’s feasible to get passed right now. As you know, I’ve advocated for the limitations of high capacity ammunition magazines in the past,” he said. Kotowski sponsored a ban that passed in the Senate in 2007, but the bill languished in the House. “I think those are more long- term,” he said of the magazine ban and assault weapons ban. “But right now, what can we do immediately?”
Mary Kay Mace, mother of Northern Illinois University shooting victim Ryanne Mace, said she hopes that the debate on concealed carry sheds light on the problems with safety measures that are already in place. “What I hope happens is that people become aware of how shoddy our background check system is,” she says. “I think that people just assume that the laws that we have already on the books are working well, and they are not.”
Some lawmakers who advocate for gun owners’ rights also support a few of Kotowoski’s priorities. Harrisburg Democratic Rep. Brandon Phelps, who sponsors the NRA-backed concealed carry proposal, called the mental health records reporting system a “travesty” that he says he wants to help fix. He said increasing the fees for concealed carry permits in his bill to $100 could help address the problems. He also supports universal background checks for all gun sales. However, Phelps does not favor requiring gun owners to report firearms that are lost or stolen. He also does not think that gun control measures should be tacked onto concealed carry legislation. “Now’s not the time to reinvent the wheel,” he said.
Daley said that as advocates focus on their priorities, they should remember that no single change will stop the violence. “One thing we like to make clear is that we don’t [work] under the notion that all of these laws are suddenly going to stop all the violence. Gun violence is a very complex issue, and there are a lot of factors that go into it — economy, where people live, all of that — but what we can do is, we can enact laws that are going to help law enforcement and that are going to cut back on crime that’s taking place — gun violence that is taking place.”
Mace said that she is hopeful about the potential for compromise. “I think that we have more common ground than a lot of people realize. I think that the extremists are loudest on both sides.”
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Department of Corrections seeks more funding for current fiscal year
By Meredith Colias
After projected savings from prison closures fell short, the Illinois Department of Corrections is asking for more funding for the current fiscal year.
The department is seeking $41.8 million in supplemental appropriations to cover its costs for FY 13, which ends June 30. According to Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget office, the department had to spend $30 million it had not included in its budget to keep the Dwight and Tamms Correctional Centers open through a legal fight with public employee unions. Agency officials estimate that running the two prisons cost the state about $62 million per year and that the department did not save the full amount projected from prison closures because court challenges delayed the closings for several months. Both prisons are now closed.
The department also prematurely estimated it could save $19.2 million by stopping guards from collecting 15 minutes of overtime while they stood through the morning roll call. Department officials said during a budget hearing today that they were unable to realize those savings, and they now need to reconcile how to cover that cost.
Other problems, such as overcrowding, continue to plague the prison system. Inmates at minimum-security prisons are being housed in bunks in prison gymnasiums. A department spokeswoman said the agency is doing the best it can under difficult circumstances. “It’s a temporary dorm setting. Obviously, we have no control over the inmates that we receive into the system,” said Stacy Solano.
Anders Lindall, spokesmen for Council 31 of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, said the prison closures only added to the problem, with 49,000 inmates in prisons built for 32,000. “I don’t think from the beginning it was credible to claim that closures would save money,” he said. “They didn’t turn those thousands of inmates loose. They transferred them to other facilities, and they had to transfer staff [and still pay] to safely incarcerate them,” he said.
Three inmates have been murdered in the Menard Correctional Facility this year. A report released today from the prison watchdog group the John Howard Association says that inmates complained about the dangers of putting multiple prisoners in one cell. “Several older inmates reported that they had trouble with younger and aggressive cellmates. Additionally, housing inmates with long-term sentences alongside inmates with short-term sentences can be problematic. This was the situation of the inmate who was allegedly murdered by his cellmate in January 2013,” said the report. The authors of the report noted some positive developments at Menard since the association’s 2011 monitoring visit. “Menard has made several improvements, including reducing its segregation population, notably of inmates suffering from mental illnesses; attempting to isolate and reduce lock downs by housing inmates by aggression levels; and working with staff to strengthen communication and accountability.”
“We take every assault as seriously, no matter to what degree, extremely seriously,” Solano said. The department has reviewed security procedures and is aiding prosecution efforts, she said. “That sends a message to staff and inmates that we are not going to stand for this.”
After projected savings from prison closures fell short, the Illinois Department of Corrections is asking for more funding for the current fiscal year.
The department is seeking $41.8 million in supplemental appropriations to cover its costs for FY 13, which ends June 30. According to Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget office, the department had to spend $30 million it had not included in its budget to keep the Dwight and Tamms Correctional Centers open through a legal fight with public employee unions. Agency officials estimate that running the two prisons cost the state about $62 million per year and that the department did not save the full amount projected from prison closures because court challenges delayed the closings for several months. Both prisons are now closed.
The department also prematurely estimated it could save $19.2 million by stopping guards from collecting 15 minutes of overtime while they stood through the morning roll call. Department officials said during a budget hearing today that they were unable to realize those savings, and they now need to reconcile how to cover that cost.
Other problems, such as overcrowding, continue to plague the prison system. Inmates at minimum-security prisons are being housed in bunks in prison gymnasiums. A department spokeswoman said the agency is doing the best it can under difficult circumstances. “It’s a temporary dorm setting. Obviously, we have no control over the inmates that we receive into the system,” said Stacy Solano.
Anders Lindall, spokesmen for Council 31 of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, said the prison closures only added to the problem, with 49,000 inmates in prisons built for 32,000. “I don’t think from the beginning it was credible to claim that closures would save money,” he said. “They didn’t turn those thousands of inmates loose. They transferred them to other facilities, and they had to transfer staff [and still pay] to safely incarcerate them,” he said.
Three inmates have been murdered in the Menard Correctional Facility this year. A report released today from the prison watchdog group the John Howard Association says that inmates complained about the dangers of putting multiple prisoners in one cell. “Several older inmates reported that they had trouble with younger and aggressive cellmates. Additionally, housing inmates with long-term sentences alongside inmates with short-term sentences can be problematic. This was the situation of the inmate who was allegedly murdered by his cellmate in January 2013,” said the report. The authors of the report noted some positive developments at Menard since the association’s 2011 monitoring visit. “Menard has made several improvements, including reducing its segregation population, notably of inmates suffering from mental illnesses; attempting to isolate and reduce lock downs by housing inmates by aggression levels; and working with staff to strengthen communication and accountability.”
“We take every assault as seriously, no matter to what degree, extremely seriously,” Solano said. The department has reviewed security procedures and is aiding prosecution efforts, she said. “That sends a message to staff and inmates that we are not going to stand for this.”
Friday, April 19, 2013
Legislative roundup
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois General Assembly had a busy week, as the House worked toward its Friday deadline for final votes on bills that originated from the chamber.
Sex Education
The House approved House Bill 2675, which calls for curriculum standards for sexual education that would emphasize abstinence but also teach students about contraceptives and using condoms to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. The curricula would be for middle schools and high schools, but local districts would not be obligated to use it. Parents could also opt not to allow their kids to attend sex education classes.
Abuse and neglect reporting
Lawmakers voted in favor of HB 948, which is an effort to address problems in the system for reporting abuse and neglect of disabled adults. The Belleville News-Democrat uncovered problems with the system and found that the Office of the Inspector General Department of Human Services did not follow up on reports connected to the deaths of more than 50 people. The office claimed that “the dead are ineligible for services.” (George Pawlaczyk and Beth Hundsdorfer, the reporters who uncovered the department’s practices penned an overview of their findings for the October 2012 Illinois Issues.) Under HB 948, the Department of Aging will create a system and standards for responding to allegations of abuse and neglect. The legislation creates a multi-disciplinary advisory panel that would assist with response.
Workplace violence
The House voted in favor of HB 2590, which allows employers to obtain orders of protection against employees who commit an act of violence at work or threaten individuals in the workplace. The order would bar the person from returning to the workplace.
Child Support
Under HB2843, which the House approved, parents who get lucky at Illinois casinos or racetracks and owe child support could see their debt deducted from their winnings. The racetrack or casino would be required to hold out the child support owed and send the money to the Department of Healthcare and Family Services. In exchange, the casino or racetrack would be paid a fee of the lesser of either 4 percent of the winnings or $150.
Guns and pensions
The House voted down HB 1296, which would have barred the state’s pension systems from investing in firearm manufactures.
Drones
The Senate approved Senate Bill 1587, which would regulate the use of unmanned aerial drones in the state. The bill would require law enforcement agencies to obtain warrants to use drones over private property and would ban them from using drones equipped with weapons. The legislation contains exemptions for emergency situations. Drones could also be used to photograph traffic accidents and crime scenes.
Concealed carry
The House rejected two bills this week to regulate concealed carrying of firearms. Supporters of concealed carry in Illinois are pushing for a “shall issue” licensing system that would require the state to give permits to applicants who meet the requirements set out in the law. But earlier this week the U.S. Supreme Court opted not to hear a challenge to New York’s “may issue” law. That statute allows law enforcement officials to deny applicants who may be qualified on paper for a license if they think the applicants present a danger. A “may issue” amendment came before the House on Wednesday, and members voted 31 to 76 against adopting it to a bill. On Thursday, HB 997, a more permissive “shall issue” bill, fell seven votes short of passage. Those who are working on concealed carry in the Senate expect to present legislation in the coming weeks. A federal court overturned the state’s ban on carrying firearms in public and gave lawmakers until June to pass legislation regulating carry.
The House is not scheduled for session next week. The Senate is scheduled for session from Tuesday through Thursday, which is the deadline for passing bills that originate from that chamber. Senate President John Cullerton warned there will probably be long hours next week. While lawmakers are trying to get their legislation out of each chamber before the voting deadlines, there are always ways around those deadlines for more controversial bills, such as employee pension changes, concealed carry and same sex marriage. As the adage goes, no legislation under the dome is every truly “dead.”
The Illinois General Assembly had a busy week, as the House worked toward its Friday deadline for final votes on bills that originated from the chamber.
Sex Education
The House approved House Bill 2675, which calls for curriculum standards for sexual education that would emphasize abstinence but also teach students about contraceptives and using condoms to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. The curricula would be for middle schools and high schools, but local districts would not be obligated to use it. Parents could also opt not to allow their kids to attend sex education classes.
Abuse and neglect reporting
Lawmakers voted in favor of HB 948, which is an effort to address problems in the system for reporting abuse and neglect of disabled adults. The Belleville News-Democrat uncovered problems with the system and found that the Office of the Inspector General Department of Human Services did not follow up on reports connected to the deaths of more than 50 people. The office claimed that “the dead are ineligible for services.” (George Pawlaczyk and Beth Hundsdorfer, the reporters who uncovered the department’s practices penned an overview of their findings for the October 2012 Illinois Issues.) Under HB 948, the Department of Aging will create a system and standards for responding to allegations of abuse and neglect. The legislation creates a multi-disciplinary advisory panel that would assist with response.
Workplace violence
The House voted in favor of HB 2590, which allows employers to obtain orders of protection against employees who commit an act of violence at work or threaten individuals in the workplace. The order would bar the person from returning to the workplace.
Child Support
Under HB2843, which the House approved, parents who get lucky at Illinois casinos or racetracks and owe child support could see their debt deducted from their winnings. The racetrack or casino would be required to hold out the child support owed and send the money to the Department of Healthcare and Family Services. In exchange, the casino or racetrack would be paid a fee of the lesser of either 4 percent of the winnings or $150.
Guns and pensions
The House voted down HB 1296, which would have barred the state’s pension systems from investing in firearm manufactures.
Drones
The Senate approved Senate Bill 1587, which would regulate the use of unmanned aerial drones in the state. The bill would require law enforcement agencies to obtain warrants to use drones over private property and would ban them from using drones equipped with weapons. The legislation contains exemptions for emergency situations. Drones could also be used to photograph traffic accidents and crime scenes.
Concealed carry
The House rejected two bills this week to regulate concealed carrying of firearms. Supporters of concealed carry in Illinois are pushing for a “shall issue” licensing system that would require the state to give permits to applicants who meet the requirements set out in the law. But earlier this week the U.S. Supreme Court opted not to hear a challenge to New York’s “may issue” law. That statute allows law enforcement officials to deny applicants who may be qualified on paper for a license if they think the applicants present a danger. A “may issue” amendment came before the House on Wednesday, and members voted 31 to 76 against adopting it to a bill. On Thursday, HB 997, a more permissive “shall issue” bill, fell seven votes short of passage. Those who are working on concealed carry in the Senate expect to present legislation in the coming weeks. A federal court overturned the state’s ban on carrying firearms in public and gave lawmakers until June to pass legislation regulating carry.
The House is not scheduled for session next week. The Senate is scheduled for session from Tuesday through Thursday, which is the deadline for passing bills that originate from that chamber. Senate President John Cullerton warned there will probably be long hours next week. While lawmakers are trying to get their legislation out of each chamber before the voting deadlines, there are always ways around those deadlines for more controversial bills, such as employee pension changes, concealed carry and same sex marriage. As the adage goes, no legislation under the dome is every truly “dead.”
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Another concealed carry plan fails in the House
By Jamey Dunn
For the second time in two days, the Illinois House voted down a concealed carry bill.
A federal court struck down the state’s ban on concealed carry of firearms and gave the state a June 9 deadline to pass legislation to regulate carry. If there is no law regulating carry when that deadline hits, the court could opt to allow what many are calling constitutional carry, which would let anyone with a Firearm Owners Identification Card carry a gun anywhere in the state.
House Bill 997 (Amendment 9) needed 71 votes to pass because it would supersede the control of local home rule governments. It received only 64 “yes” votes.
The measure is a “shall-issue” bill that would require the Illinois State Police to issue concealed carry licenses to all qualified applicants. However, the legislation would allow local law enforcement to contest an application if they can demonstrate that applicants are a danger to themselves or others.
“A lot of people probably don’t want to hear this, but this is probably the strictest shall-issue bill in the country,” said Rep. Brandon Phelps, who sponsors the legislation. Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat, said he tried to compromise with those who are concerned about concealed carry by increasing the amount of time that permit applicants would have to spend in training and upping the fees of the permits. Under his proposal, $30 out of every $100 permit fee would be dedicated to fix the state’s troubled Firearm Owner Identification (FOID) system, which does not receive most mental health records from county officials. Phelps called the current system a “travesty.” The measure also would increase penalties for violating the restrictions in the legislation.
But those tweaks could not bridge the deep divides on gun issues, which many lawmakers acknowledge are driven by regional differences.
“Clearly, we do simply come at this from different perspectives,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Kelly Cassidy. On Wednesday, the House soundly rejected Cassidy’s more restrictive “may issue” bill, which would have required applicants for permits to demonstrate a need to carry a firearm. It also would have let sheriffs, who would issue the permits under her proposal, use their discretion when deciding who could and could not carry. Opponents of such a model say it allows for unequal treatment and could let some counties essential opt out of concealed carry by denying the bulk of applications received.
Cassidy said she respects the desires of people in more rural communities who view guns as tools for hunting and protection. But she said lawmakers must also consider gun violence in some parts of Chicago, where young people are shooting each other in the streets. “The only hunting that’s happen in my neighborhood is of young men. More guns are not the answer to our gun problem in Chicago. Please. Let’s get to the table. Let’s get a solution that respects the differences between our communities. There is a solution, and there is time. This isn’t soup yet.”
Proponents of Phelps' bill said concealed carry could help protect residents of high crime areas, where criminals already have guns. “Wouldn’t it be nice for them to wonder if everybody had a gun? That’s the real deterrent,” said Rep. David Reis. He said of criminals who already illegally use guns: “You’re never going to control them. You control them by having an armed society.” Reis, a Willow Hill Republican, said people in other parts of the state need to carry guns to ensure their safety when the police cannot come quickly enough. “For us in rural areas, [it is] 20 or 30 minutes before a sheriff can get to our house or to our fields where we’re working.”
When the bill failed Rep. Will Davis, a Chicago Democrat who voted against it, called out a similar sentiment to Cassidy’s remarks. “It’s not soup yet; not yet,” he said, and was met by calls of “it’s close” from supporters.
But Phelps was not so optimistic. “It might be the last chance. I don’t know what else we can give on.” His bill would preempt local control, which would bar local governments from putting their own carry laws in place. He said he does not plan to compromise on that issue. “There should be one uniform law that everybody knows about,” he said. Phelps said it would be too much to ask traveling gun owners to keep track of different laws across counties and cities throughout the state. “We think that you could make law abiding gun owners criminals.”
Phelps said lawmakers need to wake up to the reality of the court ordered deadline. “It better get real here soon because that's June 9th,” he said. If he and others on his side decide to leave the negotiations, he said, there would not be enough votes to pass legislation in the House. “If we walk, there’s not going to be a bill.
For the second time in two days, the Illinois House voted down a concealed carry bill.
A federal court struck down the state’s ban on concealed carry of firearms and gave the state a June 9 deadline to pass legislation to regulate carry. If there is no law regulating carry when that deadline hits, the court could opt to allow what many are calling constitutional carry, which would let anyone with a Firearm Owners Identification Card carry a gun anywhere in the state.
House Bill 997 (Amendment 9) needed 71 votes to pass because it would supersede the control of local home rule governments. It received only 64 “yes” votes.
The measure is a “shall-issue” bill that would require the Illinois State Police to issue concealed carry licenses to all qualified applicants. However, the legislation would allow local law enforcement to contest an application if they can demonstrate that applicants are a danger to themselves or others.
“A lot of people probably don’t want to hear this, but this is probably the strictest shall-issue bill in the country,” said Rep. Brandon Phelps, who sponsors the legislation. Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat, said he tried to compromise with those who are concerned about concealed carry by increasing the amount of time that permit applicants would have to spend in training and upping the fees of the permits. Under his proposal, $30 out of every $100 permit fee would be dedicated to fix the state’s troubled Firearm Owner Identification (FOID) system, which does not receive most mental health records from county officials. Phelps called the current system a “travesty.” The measure also would increase penalties for violating the restrictions in the legislation.
But those tweaks could not bridge the deep divides on gun issues, which many lawmakers acknowledge are driven by regional differences.
“Clearly, we do simply come at this from different perspectives,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Kelly Cassidy. On Wednesday, the House soundly rejected Cassidy’s more restrictive “may issue” bill, which would have required applicants for permits to demonstrate a need to carry a firearm. It also would have let sheriffs, who would issue the permits under her proposal, use their discretion when deciding who could and could not carry. Opponents of such a model say it allows for unequal treatment and could let some counties essential opt out of concealed carry by denying the bulk of applications received.
Cassidy said she respects the desires of people in more rural communities who view guns as tools for hunting and protection. But she said lawmakers must also consider gun violence in some parts of Chicago, where young people are shooting each other in the streets. “The only hunting that’s happen in my neighborhood is of young men. More guns are not the answer to our gun problem in Chicago. Please. Let’s get to the table. Let’s get a solution that respects the differences between our communities. There is a solution, and there is time. This isn’t soup yet.”
Proponents of Phelps' bill said concealed carry could help protect residents of high crime areas, where criminals already have guns. “Wouldn’t it be nice for them to wonder if everybody had a gun? That’s the real deterrent,” said Rep. David Reis. He said of criminals who already illegally use guns: “You’re never going to control them. You control them by having an armed society.” Reis, a Willow Hill Republican, said people in other parts of the state need to carry guns to ensure their safety when the police cannot come quickly enough. “For us in rural areas, [it is] 20 or 30 minutes before a sheriff can get to our house or to our fields where we’re working.”
When the bill failed Rep. Will Davis, a Chicago Democrat who voted against it, called out a similar sentiment to Cassidy’s remarks. “It’s not soup yet; not yet,” he said, and was met by calls of “it’s close” from supporters.
But Phelps was not so optimistic. “It might be the last chance. I don’t know what else we can give on.” His bill would preempt local control, which would bar local governments from putting their own carry laws in place. He said he does not plan to compromise on that issue. “There should be one uniform law that everybody knows about,” he said. Phelps said it would be too much to ask traveling gun owners to keep track of different laws across counties and cities throughout the state. “We think that you could make law abiding gun owners criminals.”
Phelps said lawmakers need to wake up to the reality of the court ordered deadline. “It better get real here soon because that's June 9th,” he said. If he and others on his side decide to leave the negotiations, he said, there would not be enough votes to pass legislation in the House. “If we walk, there’s not going to be a bill.
House approves additional funds for home health care for seniors
By Meredith Colias
The Illinois House approved a temporary fix in an attempt to solve a $173 million funding shortfall for a program that provides in-home services for the elderly.
The Community Care Program in the state Department of Aging administers services including adult day care and pays providers to help its elderly clients at home with everyday tasks such as errands, groceries and bathing. It is estimated the yearly costs to care for elderly in their homes are about one-fourth the cost of paying for someone living in a nursing home.
Pending the potential influx of money, Department of Aging Director John Holton confirmed that the agency does not have the funding in its budget to pay providers until next fiscal year’s budget funds become available on July 1. To cover that shortfall, the House approved a supplemental appropriation that will keep the program operating through the remainder of this fiscal year.
Jacquie Algee, director of relations for Service Employees International Union health care, said the House vote was a positive development, since 85,000 people depend on services paid for by the state. “We’re really pleased that [they] did the right thing, in our opinion,” she said. If the measure passes the Senate and is signed into law, she said, providers dependent on payments from the state “should be in a good place.” A similar issue could also arise in Fiscal Year 2014 because the department is scheduled to use about $142 million of that year’s budget to pay off expenses from FY 2013.
Rep. Patricia Bellock, a Hinsdale Republican, said dealing with unbudgeted expenses was less than ideal because the state was forced to divert money from a plan to pay past Medicaid bills that were matched by the federal government. “Those are all pressures above the line. How are you going to pay for that?”
Because demand for the Community Care Program is expected to grow in the years to come as the elderly population grows, other lawmakers are looking for ways for the program to cut its future costs. House Bill 2275, sponsored by Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, a Chicago Democrat, hopes to avoid a similar situation in the future by prohibiting the department from pushing off bills onto the next year’s budget unless approved by the comptroller and governor.
The legislation would also restrict the amount of hours that employees are allowed to claim for tasks such as doing laundry and be subject to GPS tracking to make sure they are actually going to homes to take care of clients. “All of the levers in the bill need to be pulled in order for this to work,” she said of the efforts to cut costs. It is necessary to make sure the services can still be provided, she said. “If we don’t pay these bills, what is going to end up happening is the doors of community care providers around the state of Illinois are going to close, and seniors will have nowhere to go except for a nursing home,” she said.
The Illinois House approved a temporary fix in an attempt to solve a $173 million funding shortfall for a program that provides in-home services for the elderly.
The Community Care Program in the state Department of Aging administers services including adult day care and pays providers to help its elderly clients at home with everyday tasks such as errands, groceries and bathing. It is estimated the yearly costs to care for elderly in their homes are about one-fourth the cost of paying for someone living in a nursing home.
Pending the potential influx of money, Department of Aging Director John Holton confirmed that the agency does not have the funding in its budget to pay providers until next fiscal year’s budget funds become available on July 1. To cover that shortfall, the House approved a supplemental appropriation that will keep the program operating through the remainder of this fiscal year.
Jacquie Algee, director of relations for Service Employees International Union health care, said the House vote was a positive development, since 85,000 people depend on services paid for by the state. “We’re really pleased that [they] did the right thing, in our opinion,” she said. If the measure passes the Senate and is signed into law, she said, providers dependent on payments from the state “should be in a good place.” A similar issue could also arise in Fiscal Year 2014 because the department is scheduled to use about $142 million of that year’s budget to pay off expenses from FY 2013.
Rep. Patricia Bellock, a Hinsdale Republican, said dealing with unbudgeted expenses was less than ideal because the state was forced to divert money from a plan to pay past Medicaid bills that were matched by the federal government. “Those are all pressures above the line. How are you going to pay for that?”
Because demand for the Community Care Program is expected to grow in the years to come as the elderly population grows, other lawmakers are looking for ways for the program to cut its future costs. House Bill 2275, sponsored by Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, a Chicago Democrat, hopes to avoid a similar situation in the future by prohibiting the department from pushing off bills onto the next year’s budget unless approved by the comptroller and governor.
The legislation would also restrict the amount of hours that employees are allowed to claim for tasks such as doing laundry and be subject to GPS tracking to make sure they are actually going to homes to take care of clients. “All of the levers in the bill need to be pulled in order for this to work,” she said of the efforts to cut costs. It is necessary to make sure the services can still be provided, she said. “If we don’t pay these bills, what is going to end up happening is the doors of community care providers around the state of Illinois are going to close, and seniors will have nowhere to go except for a nursing home,” she said.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Concealed-carry supporters hope for vote on Thursday
By Jamey Dunn
Supporters of concealed carry of firearms hope to pass a bill on Thursday after the House today rejected a proposal similar to a more restrictive system used in New York state.
The chamber voted 31 to 76 today against adopting an amendment to House Bill 831 that would give local law enforcement officials discretion when issuing licenses to carry firearms in public. Supporters of concealed carry in Illinois are pushing for a “shall issue” licensing system that would require the state to give permits to applicants who meet the requirements set out in the law. But earlier this week the U.S. Supreme Court opted not to hear a challenge to New York’s “may issue” law. That statute allows law enforcement officials to deny applicants who may be qualified on paper for a license if they think the applicant presents a danger. Those who would like a stricter law took the court’s action as a sign that Illinois should go for a “may issue” model. But today’s vote encouraged gun rights advocates. “Now more than ever, the ‘may issue’ should be completely off the table because it was really evident that they are a long way from passing a ‘may issue,’” said Rep. Brandon Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat.
He said he plans to call legislation for a floor vote tomorrow that is similar to House Bill 997, a concealed carry bill he introduced earlier this legislative session. “We’ve got to have something done,” he said, citing the June deadline a federal court gave lawmakers to pass concealed carry. If there is no law regulating carry when that deadline hits, the court could opt to allow what many are calling constitutional carry, which would let anyone with a Firearm Owners Identification Card carry a gun anywhere in the state.
The New York law also requires applicants to provide a reason for their need to carry in public. Such a provision was in the proposal voted down in the Illinois House today. “Our communities are different. Since you’re establishing danger distinct from other members of your community, it would be unique to your community,” said Rep. Kelly Cassidy, the sponsor of HB831. Under the legislation, sheriffs would determine whether an applicant made the case for needing to carry a firearm. “In each community, the sheriff is going the have the best understanding of the questions of personal safety in the community.” After a sheriff signed off on an application, it would then go the Illinois State Police for another round of scrutiny.
Cassidy, a Chicago Democrat, said the bill was an effort to balance constitutional rights with public safety and recognize that geographic areas of the state have different issues with guns. Supporters agreed. “The court said that it was legitimate for us to impose a balancing act to set the rights of people to be safe from guns that are out of control against the rights of people to be able to protect themselves,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie. She said the measure that the House considered today “does exactly that.” Currie said during floor debate, “If you want Illinois to be the wild West, I invite you to vote against” the amendment.
But opponents say the proposal would be a way to effectively exempt Chicago from concealed carry. “Downstate will probably be more liberal with their concealed carry permit, versus Chicago and Cook County,” said Elmhurst Republican Rep. Dennis Reboletti. “I believe this is just really an end (run) around what the 7th Circuit [Court of Appeals] has stated we should do.”
Phelps said he has worked compromise into his legislation, which was being drafted late tonight. Under his previous proposal, the state police would issue concealed carry licenses, but sheriffs could contest applications. Phelps said he also plans to give that option to Chicago city police. Phelps said he also plans to increase the fee for licenses from the $25 fee in his first iteration of the plan to $100 and call for $30 from each license to go to a special fund dedicated to repairing the state’s troubled FOID card system and ensuring that county mental health records are reported to the state police. He said training requirements would also be increased from four hours in the original bill to 10 hours and would include a live ammunition test. “We’re offering a lot of things,” he said. “This version of what we’re going to try to run tomorrow is a combination of about four bills that we have had in the time that I have been here.”
Phelps said supporters of his plan believe it is a “last chance” to get a compromise before the deadline runs out. “I don’t know if there’s another chance to pass anything. I think that there’s a lot of people who are going to say, ‘Look, we tried. Let’s just go off the cliff. Let’s do constitutional carry.’” He said a lot of House members who have never voted in favor of a concealed-carry bill are afraid of that happening. “I’ve got a lot of people who are interested in voting for this that never have before because they don’t want constitutional carry.”
But gun control advocates cautioned not to read too much into today’s vote. They said they knew the support wasn’t there yet, but they think they can find backing for a bill that allows Chicago some local control. While lawmakers must get something done, they say, it isn’t crunch time yet.
“I don’t think we should just rush to do something because we’ve got a deadline,” said Coleen Daley, executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. “We need to make sure that whatever we’re going to do will respect people’s 2nd Amendment rights, while also keeping people safe.” She said gun control groups have not had “true negotiations” in the House but are working with lawmakers in the Senate on a proposal. “I do think there’s promise that we’ll find something that will end up working,” she says. “We’ve been willing to negotiate from day one.”
Phelps said he would spend the evening lobbying House members. He thinks he is very close to having the 71 votes he needs to pass his bill tomorrow. “This is the closest we’ve ever been.”
Supporters of concealed carry of firearms hope to pass a bill on Thursday after the House today rejected a proposal similar to a more restrictive system used in New York state.
The chamber voted 31 to 76 today against adopting an amendment to House Bill 831 that would give local law enforcement officials discretion when issuing licenses to carry firearms in public. Supporters of concealed carry in Illinois are pushing for a “shall issue” licensing system that would require the state to give permits to applicants who meet the requirements set out in the law. But earlier this week the U.S. Supreme Court opted not to hear a challenge to New York’s “may issue” law. That statute allows law enforcement officials to deny applicants who may be qualified on paper for a license if they think the applicant presents a danger. Those who would like a stricter law took the court’s action as a sign that Illinois should go for a “may issue” model. But today’s vote encouraged gun rights advocates. “Now more than ever, the ‘may issue’ should be completely off the table because it was really evident that they are a long way from passing a ‘may issue,’” said Rep. Brandon Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat.
He said he plans to call legislation for a floor vote tomorrow that is similar to House Bill 997, a concealed carry bill he introduced earlier this legislative session. “We’ve got to have something done,” he said, citing the June deadline a federal court gave lawmakers to pass concealed carry. If there is no law regulating carry when that deadline hits, the court could opt to allow what many are calling constitutional carry, which would let anyone with a Firearm Owners Identification Card carry a gun anywhere in the state.
The New York law also requires applicants to provide a reason for their need to carry in public. Such a provision was in the proposal voted down in the Illinois House today. “Our communities are different. Since you’re establishing danger distinct from other members of your community, it would be unique to your community,” said Rep. Kelly Cassidy, the sponsor of HB831. Under the legislation, sheriffs would determine whether an applicant made the case for needing to carry a firearm. “In each community, the sheriff is going the have the best understanding of the questions of personal safety in the community.” After a sheriff signed off on an application, it would then go the Illinois State Police for another round of scrutiny.
Cassidy, a Chicago Democrat, said the bill was an effort to balance constitutional rights with public safety and recognize that geographic areas of the state have different issues with guns. Supporters agreed. “The court said that it was legitimate for us to impose a balancing act to set the rights of people to be safe from guns that are out of control against the rights of people to be able to protect themselves,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie. She said the measure that the House considered today “does exactly that.” Currie said during floor debate, “If you want Illinois to be the wild West, I invite you to vote against” the amendment.
But opponents say the proposal would be a way to effectively exempt Chicago from concealed carry. “Downstate will probably be more liberal with their concealed carry permit, versus Chicago and Cook County,” said Elmhurst Republican Rep. Dennis Reboletti. “I believe this is just really an end (run) around what the 7th Circuit [Court of Appeals] has stated we should do.”
Phelps said he has worked compromise into his legislation, which was being drafted late tonight. Under his previous proposal, the state police would issue concealed carry licenses, but sheriffs could contest applications. Phelps said he also plans to give that option to Chicago city police. Phelps said he also plans to increase the fee for licenses from the $25 fee in his first iteration of the plan to $100 and call for $30 from each license to go to a special fund dedicated to repairing the state’s troubled FOID card system and ensuring that county mental health records are reported to the state police. He said training requirements would also be increased from four hours in the original bill to 10 hours and would include a live ammunition test. “We’re offering a lot of things,” he said. “This version of what we’re going to try to run tomorrow is a combination of about four bills that we have had in the time that I have been here.”
Phelps said supporters of his plan believe it is a “last chance” to get a compromise before the deadline runs out. “I don’t know if there’s another chance to pass anything. I think that there’s a lot of people who are going to say, ‘Look, we tried. Let’s just go off the cliff. Let’s do constitutional carry.’” He said a lot of House members who have never voted in favor of a concealed-carry bill are afraid of that happening. “I’ve got a lot of people who are interested in voting for this that never have before because they don’t want constitutional carry.”
But gun control advocates cautioned not to read too much into today’s vote. They said they knew the support wasn’t there yet, but they think they can find backing for a bill that allows Chicago some local control. While lawmakers must get something done, they say, it isn’t crunch time yet.
“I don’t think we should just rush to do something because we’ve got a deadline,” said Coleen Daley, executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. “We need to make sure that whatever we’re going to do will respect people’s 2nd Amendment rights, while also keeping people safe.” She said gun control groups have not had “true negotiations” in the House but are working with lawmakers in the Senate on a proposal. “I do think there’s promise that we’ll find something that will end up working,” she says. “We’ve been willing to negotiate from day one.”
Phelps said he would spend the evening lobbying House members. He thinks he is very close to having the 71 votes he needs to pass his bill tomorrow. “This is the closest we’ve ever been.”
House approves medical marijuana after years of rejecting the idea
By Meredith Colias
Patients with debilitating illnesses may soon be allowed to buy medical marijuana legally in Illinois.
After years of rejecting plans to legalize medical marijuana, the House narrowly approved House Bill 1 on a 61-57 vote today. The measure now advances to the Senate. If it passes that chamber, Gov. Pat Quinn said he would be “open minded” but would not commit to signing the bill.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, said stricter restrictions in the current measure helped to persuade some representatives who had not voted for legalization in the past. “This is not about getting high,” Lang said. The measure was designed to “better provide health care to people who desperately need this product,” he said. Lang told the House his priority was to assist patients in chronic pain. “I know every single one of you has compassion in your heart,” he said. “This is the day to show it.”
The measure would implement a four-year pilot program legalizing medical marijuana from 2014 through 2018. Patients at least 18 years old applying for a medical marijuana card through the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) would have to prove they have one of 33 serious or chronic conditions specifically listed in the bill, such as multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, HIV/AIDS, Parkinson’s disease or cancer. IDPH is authorized to add to the list in the future. Applicants must show they have an established relationship with their doctor who approves the use, and they would have to submit medical records for verification. Both patients and their caregivers, who must be 21 or older, would be subject to background checks. If a patient's or caregiver's card is revoked, he or she would not be allowed to reapply for a new one later.
The measure would allow patients 2.5 ounces of loose marijuana per a two-week period, unless a doctor certifies to the state a patient might need more. Each registered patient would have the purchase entered into a database, which would be monitored to prevent a patient or caregiver from obtaining more than the approved quota.
Growing, selling and distributing medical marijuana would only be done by personnel in facilities approved and administered by the state, built away from schools and day care centers. Potential employees would have to be at least 21 and would subject to state and federal background checks and fingerprinting. Twenty-two growing centers would be set up, one in each state police district, with 60 dispensary centers across the state. Dispensaries would be registered with the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, and growers would have with the register with the Illinois Department of Agriculture. Past proposals from Lang would have allowed private individuals to grow marijuana on their own.
The measure also includes everyday restrictions. Marijuana smoking in public would not be allowed. Landlords would have the option to refuse to allow marijuana smoking, employers could punish employees coming to work under the influence and patients would still be subject to DUI laws if pulled over and tested by police during a traffic stop.
Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican, said he was satisfied the bill was regulated “from seed to sale” and voted for it. Several supporters during the floor debate cited people they knew who could have benefited from access to medical marijuana.
Rep. JoAnn Osmond, an Antioch Republican, said with visible emotion that she changed her vote to yes because of a friend with cancer whom she did not allow to use marijuana once when he lived with her. “Sometimes I regret that because I know it might have helped him,” she said.
Opponents were concerned that legalizing medical marijuana would have unintended consequences. “Even if I vote no, I still have compassion. Every state that has implemented this has had problems,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. Bost said marijuana could not be effectively legalized only for its intended medicinal usage. “Don’t try to piecemeal it like this,” he said. Others said the move was the first step in possible future efforts to legalize the drug for recreational use, as Washington and Colorado have done recently.
Lang said his only motivation was to aid people who are critically sick. “Some of these people are going to die. Why would we say to them, 'You can’t have a product your doctor wants you to have?'” As the bill advances to the Senate, Lang said he hoped it would have a “strong vote."
The Senate approved a medical marijuana bill in 2009, but the makeup of the chamber has changed since then.
Patients with debilitating illnesses may soon be allowed to buy medical marijuana legally in Illinois.
After years of rejecting plans to legalize medical marijuana, the House narrowly approved House Bill 1 on a 61-57 vote today. The measure now advances to the Senate. If it passes that chamber, Gov. Pat Quinn said he would be “open minded” but would not commit to signing the bill.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat, said stricter restrictions in the current measure helped to persuade some representatives who had not voted for legalization in the past. “This is not about getting high,” Lang said. The measure was designed to “better provide health care to people who desperately need this product,” he said. Lang told the House his priority was to assist patients in chronic pain. “I know every single one of you has compassion in your heart,” he said. “This is the day to show it.”
The measure would implement a four-year pilot program legalizing medical marijuana from 2014 through 2018. Patients at least 18 years old applying for a medical marijuana card through the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) would have to prove they have one of 33 serious or chronic conditions specifically listed in the bill, such as multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, HIV/AIDS, Parkinson’s disease or cancer. IDPH is authorized to add to the list in the future. Applicants must show they have an established relationship with their doctor who approves the use, and they would have to submit medical records for verification. Both patients and their caregivers, who must be 21 or older, would be subject to background checks. If a patient's or caregiver's card is revoked, he or she would not be allowed to reapply for a new one later.
The measure would allow patients 2.5 ounces of loose marijuana per a two-week period, unless a doctor certifies to the state a patient might need more. Each registered patient would have the purchase entered into a database, which would be monitored to prevent a patient or caregiver from obtaining more than the approved quota.
Growing, selling and distributing medical marijuana would only be done by personnel in facilities approved and administered by the state, built away from schools and day care centers. Potential employees would have to be at least 21 and would subject to state and federal background checks and fingerprinting. Twenty-two growing centers would be set up, one in each state police district, with 60 dispensary centers across the state. Dispensaries would be registered with the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, and growers would have with the register with the Illinois Department of Agriculture. Past proposals from Lang would have allowed private individuals to grow marijuana on their own.
The measure also includes everyday restrictions. Marijuana smoking in public would not be allowed. Landlords would have the option to refuse to allow marijuana smoking, employers could punish employees coming to work under the influence and patients would still be subject to DUI laws if pulled over and tested by police during a traffic stop.
Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican, said he was satisfied the bill was regulated “from seed to sale” and voted for it. Several supporters during the floor debate cited people they knew who could have benefited from access to medical marijuana.
Rep. JoAnn Osmond, an Antioch Republican, said with visible emotion that she changed her vote to yes because of a friend with cancer whom she did not allow to use marijuana once when he lived with her. “Sometimes I regret that because I know it might have helped him,” she said.
Opponents were concerned that legalizing medical marijuana would have unintended consequences. “Even if I vote no, I still have compassion. Every state that has implemented this has had problems,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. Bost said marijuana could not be effectively legalized only for its intended medicinal usage. “Don’t try to piecemeal it like this,” he said. Others said the move was the first step in possible future efforts to legalize the drug for recreational use, as Washington and Colorado have done recently.
Lang said his only motivation was to aid people who are critically sick. “Some of these people are going to die. Why would we say to them, 'You can’t have a product your doctor wants you to have?'” As the bill advances to the Senate, Lang said he hoped it would have a “strong vote."
The Senate approved a medical marijuana bill in 2009, but the makeup of the chamber has changed since then.
House considers early childhood education
By Meredith Colias
The Illinois House today considered legislation that could shape the early childhood education of some students in the state.
The chamber approved House Bill 2762, which would require children to start school if they are going to turn 7 any time during the school year. The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Sue Scherer, a Decatur Democrat, said clarifying the starting time for school-age children would help elementary schools enforce truancy laws in cases where parents take advantage of the fact that the state technically does not require their soon-to-be 7-year-old child to attend school. Scherer said parents sometimes tell truancy officers that their children are not “really truant.”
Opponents of the bill said a parent should have the final say about when they believe their child is ready to attend school. “At this point in the child’s life, the parent can make a very wise decision based upon what they know on the maturity of the child,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. Bost said the measure is “forcing the situation where we, the state, feel that we are better than the parents themselves.” Scherer said the cost of the change would be difficult to estimate because it is uncertain how many affected children are not attending school. “There’s just no way of knowing until we actually we do it,” she said. Senate Bill 1307, which would move the school age from 7 to 5, could also soon come up for a vote in that chamber.
A House committee today considered the pros and cons of requiring kindergarten for all school-age children. House Bill 2405 would require all districts to provide kindergarten classes for the entire school day. More than 85 percent of school districts already offer full-day kindergarten classes to students, according to the Illinois Federation of Teachers. Paula Corrigan-Halpern from Voices for Illinois Children said that because the Common Core curriculum being introduced in Illinois schools will require children to show a broader array of learning as they progress, it is important for them to be better academically prepared early on. “There are going to be skills that kids have to master in kindergarten,” she said.
Low-income and disadvantaged children would potentially benefit the most from the proposal because they tend to be most affected academically if they do not start school at an early age. They can enter school less ready to begin subjects such as reading and math because they typically have lower vocabularies and less developed cognitive skills than their peers from higher-income homes. Better-educated parents are usually more prepared to know how to encourage their children’s early cognitive development, giving them an academic advantage when they actually enter school. The State Board of Education (ISBE) estimates that 49 percent of Illinois students live in poverty, according to a recent analysis.
A main issue with the proposal for full-day kindergarten is the potential cost. An ISBE spokeswoman said the board does not have an estimate on the cost of extending full-time kindergarten statewide, although she said the money to implement it would potentially come from General State Aid. Laura Farr of Chicago Public Schools, which is beginning a similar initiative, estimated the citywide program would cost about $15 million and affect 30,700 children. Farr said providing early childhood education is “an essential part of getting kids a learning base.”
Mike Chamness of the Illinois Association of School Administrators said the decision to offer kindergarten classes should rest with local districts. Because the state is prorating General State Aid further from 89 percent in FY2013 to 82 percent in FY2014, he said districts could not afford to pick up the cost. “There are a lot of good ideas out there, and those good ideas cost money,” he said. Chamness said districts are already struggling with how to deal with budget cuts from the state, and many are in the process of cutting further programs and potentially laying off staff. “It’s like holding a dam: You plug a hole and another one bursts open,” he said. “That’s what local districts are facing right now.”
The committee chairwoman, Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia, an Aurora Democrat, said she supports the idea, but said lawmakers would have to resolve the money question. “It’s almost child abuse if we don’t do it,” she said. “It’s just a question of money.”
The Illinois House today considered legislation that could shape the early childhood education of some students in the state.
The chamber approved House Bill 2762, which would require children to start school if they are going to turn 7 any time during the school year. The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Sue Scherer, a Decatur Democrat, said clarifying the starting time for school-age children would help elementary schools enforce truancy laws in cases where parents take advantage of the fact that the state technically does not require their soon-to-be 7-year-old child to attend school. Scherer said parents sometimes tell truancy officers that their children are not “really truant.”
Opponents of the bill said a parent should have the final say about when they believe their child is ready to attend school. “At this point in the child’s life, the parent can make a very wise decision based upon what they know on the maturity of the child,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. Bost said the measure is “forcing the situation where we, the state, feel that we are better than the parents themselves.” Scherer said the cost of the change would be difficult to estimate because it is uncertain how many affected children are not attending school. “There’s just no way of knowing until we actually we do it,” she said. Senate Bill 1307, which would move the school age from 7 to 5, could also soon come up for a vote in that chamber.
A House committee today considered the pros and cons of requiring kindergarten for all school-age children. House Bill 2405 would require all districts to provide kindergarten classes for the entire school day. More than 85 percent of school districts already offer full-day kindergarten classes to students, according to the Illinois Federation of Teachers. Paula Corrigan-Halpern from Voices for Illinois Children said that because the Common Core curriculum being introduced in Illinois schools will require children to show a broader array of learning as they progress, it is important for them to be better academically prepared early on. “There are going to be skills that kids have to master in kindergarten,” she said.
Low-income and disadvantaged children would potentially benefit the most from the proposal because they tend to be most affected academically if they do not start school at an early age. They can enter school less ready to begin subjects such as reading and math because they typically have lower vocabularies and less developed cognitive skills than their peers from higher-income homes. Better-educated parents are usually more prepared to know how to encourage their children’s early cognitive development, giving them an academic advantage when they actually enter school. The State Board of Education (ISBE) estimates that 49 percent of Illinois students live in poverty, according to a recent analysis.
A main issue with the proposal for full-day kindergarten is the potential cost. An ISBE spokeswoman said the board does not have an estimate on the cost of extending full-time kindergarten statewide, although she said the money to implement it would potentially come from General State Aid. Laura Farr of Chicago Public Schools, which is beginning a similar initiative, estimated the citywide program would cost about $15 million and affect 30,700 children. Farr said providing early childhood education is “an essential part of getting kids a learning base.”
Mike Chamness of the Illinois Association of School Administrators said the decision to offer kindergarten classes should rest with local districts. Because the state is prorating General State Aid further from 89 percent in FY2013 to 82 percent in FY2014, he said districts could not afford to pick up the cost. “There are a lot of good ideas out there, and those good ideas cost money,” he said. Chamness said districts are already struggling with how to deal with budget cuts from the state, and many are in the process of cutting further programs and potentially laying off staff. “It’s like holding a dam: You plug a hole and another one bursts open,” he said. “That’s what local districts are facing right now.”
The committee chairwoman, Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia, an Aurora Democrat, said she supports the idea, but said lawmakers would have to resolve the money question. “It’s almost child abuse if we don’t do it,” she said. “It’s just a question of money.”
Quinn looks to lawmakers for construction borrowing
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn is pushing lawmakers to approve more borrowing for capital construction projects before the legislative session is scheduled to end next month.
Quinn hopes to roll out a $12.62 billion capital construction program over the next six years. “We’ve got to make sure we invest in these important assets that we have. We have major railroads criss-crossing Illinois, major highways, and we also have local roads that are very very important to our commerce and to the people of Illinois to get to school, to shop, to go on vacation. We want to make sure we have a 21st century transportation program,” Quinn said. Projects include revamping the Circle Interchange in Chicago, repairs to I-74 in eastern Illinois and two new bridges over the Mississippi River — one from East St. Louis to St. Louis and one to connect the Illinois Quad Cities with Iowa. The proposal also calls for construction on the Illiana Expressway connecting northern Illinois and northern Indiana. The plan would also make upgrades to mass transit across the state and includes projects to help unsnarl congested freight traffic.
According to IDOT, $9.5 billion would be spent on highways over the next six years. More than 70 percent of that would go toward maintenance work on existing infrastructure “That’s important because our system is aging. We built the system in the late '50s early '60s for the most part. Some of it’s even older than that,” said Anne Schneider, secretary of the Illinois Department of Transportation. Schneider said more than $2 billion would be spent next fiscal year under the plan.
While some of the projects will be administered on a pay-as-you-go basis, Quinn also needs the General Assembly to sign off on some borrowing. For the plan to move forward, legislators must authorize $2.7 billion in bonding. Quinn is looking for lawmakers to approve borrowing for projects associated with the capital plan known as Illinois Jobs Now, which was originally approved in 2009, but he also wants to add new projects. “We need to get the legislature to approve the final segment of our Illinois Jobs Now program that covers our transportation,” Quinn said. It would be the last round of borrowing associated with the capital bill, but Quinn said he would like to see more construction in the future. “I’ve talked to our legislature leaders and I think they understand how important it is that we complete that. But we also, I think, need to have a debate between now and the end of May about more capital, more investment in capital, more opportunity to issue bonds to continue the program. We’d like to have more financing so that we can do this program and more like it.”
But Quinn cautioned that lawmakers should first approve changes to the state’s pension systems to try to address the more than $90 billion unfunded liability. “Pension reform is paramount. This is the issue that we must address and resolve between now and May 31, and we can,” he said. “I think we can get this done and done in a way that resolves it so that we can address ... gaming or more capital in order to build more jobs. Those are things that need to be done as well. But we’ve got to do pensions first.”
Gov. Pat Quinn is pushing lawmakers to approve more borrowing for capital construction projects before the legislative session is scheduled to end next month.
Quinn hopes to roll out a $12.62 billion capital construction program over the next six years. “We’ve got to make sure we invest in these important assets that we have. We have major railroads criss-crossing Illinois, major highways, and we also have local roads that are very very important to our commerce and to the people of Illinois to get to school, to shop, to go on vacation. We want to make sure we have a 21st century transportation program,” Quinn said. Projects include revamping the Circle Interchange in Chicago, repairs to I-74 in eastern Illinois and two new bridges over the Mississippi River — one from East St. Louis to St. Louis and one to connect the Illinois Quad Cities with Iowa. The proposal also calls for construction on the Illiana Expressway connecting northern Illinois and northern Indiana. The plan would also make upgrades to mass transit across the state and includes projects to help unsnarl congested freight traffic.
According to IDOT, $9.5 billion would be spent on highways over the next six years. More than 70 percent of that would go toward maintenance work on existing infrastructure “That’s important because our system is aging. We built the system in the late '50s early '60s for the most part. Some of it’s even older than that,” said Anne Schneider, secretary of the Illinois Department of Transportation. Schneider said more than $2 billion would be spent next fiscal year under the plan.
While some of the projects will be administered on a pay-as-you-go basis, Quinn also needs the General Assembly to sign off on some borrowing. For the plan to move forward, legislators must authorize $2.7 billion in bonding. Quinn is looking for lawmakers to approve borrowing for projects associated with the capital plan known as Illinois Jobs Now, which was originally approved in 2009, but he also wants to add new projects. “We need to get the legislature to approve the final segment of our Illinois Jobs Now program that covers our transportation,” Quinn said. It would be the last round of borrowing associated with the capital bill, but Quinn said he would like to see more construction in the future. “I’ve talked to our legislature leaders and I think they understand how important it is that we complete that. But we also, I think, need to have a debate between now and the end of May about more capital, more investment in capital, more opportunity to issue bonds to continue the program. We’d like to have more financing so that we can do this program and more like it.”
But Quinn cautioned that lawmakers should first approve changes to the state’s pension systems to try to address the more than $90 billion unfunded liability. “Pension reform is paramount. This is the issue that we must address and resolve between now and May 31, and we can,” he said. “I think we can get this done and done in a way that resolves it so that we can address ... gaming or more capital in order to build more jobs. Those are things that need to be done as well. But we’ve got to do pensions first.”
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
House votes to treat most 17-year-old felons as juveniles
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois House voted today to allow some 17-year-olds charged with felonies to remain in the juvenile justice system, where they could have access to more rehabilitative services.
Lawmakers already had opted to move 17-year-olds who commit misdemeanors into the juvenile system. Juvenile justice advocates wanted all 17-year-old offenders, except those who commit felonies that are automatically transferred to adult court, to fall under the jurisdiction of the juvenile system, but they met resistance from some legislators. The change that applied only to misdemeanors, which went into effect in 2010, was the compromise that lawmakers settled on. Now many of the same players are trying to get the law changed to include felonies.
“Several years ago, we said that youngsters accused of misdemeanors would stay in juvenile court. The effect of that act has been to reduce the number of young people in state detention facilities and local detention facilities, as well,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, sponsor of House Bill 2404. Under the bill, crimes that are automatically transferred out of the juvenile system, such as murder and many gun violations, would still go to adult court. “I think it’s time for us to treat young people as young people because as we know they really are young, and their minds aren’t fully formed and their judgment is not always as mature as we would like it to be.”
The move was recommended by the Juvenile Justice Commission, which was tasked with studying the potential change under the law that moved 17-year-olds who commit misdemeanors into the juvenile system. “It is counterproductive and cruel to impose the lifelong collateral consequences of felony convictions on minors who are likely to be rehabilitated. Illinois can achieve better long-term outcomes for 17-year-olds, public safety and the state economy by expanding juvenile jurisdiction,” the commission’s report stated. “In doing so, it is critical to ensure the juvenile justice system is robust by adequately funding and supporting diversion, probation and community-based services, as well as the public educational, health and human service infrastructure upon which many at-risk youth must rely.”
Opponents argued that 17-year-olds are grown up enough to face the current penalties if they commit felonies. “I think it sends the wrong message. There are a lot of sophisticated 17-year-olds out on the street, and I know that because I’ve prosecuted them. They’re not children,” said Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican. Reboletti said that if the Senate approved the amendment and it is signed into law, gangs would use teenagers to commit felonies, knowing that they would end up in juvenile court. “As soon as this bill passes, gangs will use 17-year-olds to do more of the dirty work,” he said.
Others voiced concerns about the outcomes from the state’s juvenile justice system, citing the large number of offenders who are released from custody and end up back in juvenile detention centers. “Our juvenile justice system here in the state of Illinois is failing miserably,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. A 2011 report from the Juvenile Justice Commission found that more than half of youth imprisoned by the Department of Juvenile Justice would eventually end up back behind bars in either the juvenile or adult system.
The bill now goes to the Senate for consideration. For an in-depth look at the issue, see the upcoming May Illinois Issues.
The Illinois House voted today to allow some 17-year-olds charged with felonies to remain in the juvenile justice system, where they could have access to more rehabilitative services.
Lawmakers already had opted to move 17-year-olds who commit misdemeanors into the juvenile system. Juvenile justice advocates wanted all 17-year-old offenders, except those who commit felonies that are automatically transferred to adult court, to fall under the jurisdiction of the juvenile system, but they met resistance from some legislators. The change that applied only to misdemeanors, which went into effect in 2010, was the compromise that lawmakers settled on. Now many of the same players are trying to get the law changed to include felonies.
“Several years ago, we said that youngsters accused of misdemeanors would stay in juvenile court. The effect of that act has been to reduce the number of young people in state detention facilities and local detention facilities, as well,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, sponsor of House Bill 2404. Under the bill, crimes that are automatically transferred out of the juvenile system, such as murder and many gun violations, would still go to adult court. “I think it’s time for us to treat young people as young people because as we know they really are young, and their minds aren’t fully formed and their judgment is not always as mature as we would like it to be.”
The move was recommended by the Juvenile Justice Commission, which was tasked with studying the potential change under the law that moved 17-year-olds who commit misdemeanors into the juvenile system. “It is counterproductive and cruel to impose the lifelong collateral consequences of felony convictions on minors who are likely to be rehabilitated. Illinois can achieve better long-term outcomes for 17-year-olds, public safety and the state economy by expanding juvenile jurisdiction,” the commission’s report stated. “In doing so, it is critical to ensure the juvenile justice system is robust by adequately funding and supporting diversion, probation and community-based services, as well as the public educational, health and human service infrastructure upon which many at-risk youth must rely.”
Opponents argued that 17-year-olds are grown up enough to face the current penalties if they commit felonies. “I think it sends the wrong message. There are a lot of sophisticated 17-year-olds out on the street, and I know that because I’ve prosecuted them. They’re not children,” said Dennis Reboletti, an Elmhurst Republican. Reboletti said that if the Senate approved the amendment and it is signed into law, gangs would use teenagers to commit felonies, knowing that they would end up in juvenile court. “As soon as this bill passes, gangs will use 17-year-olds to do more of the dirty work,” he said.
Others voiced concerns about the outcomes from the state’s juvenile justice system, citing the large number of offenders who are released from custody and end up back in juvenile detention centers. “Our juvenile justice system here in the state of Illinois is failing miserably,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican. A 2011 report from the Juvenile Justice Commission found that more than half of youth imprisoned by the Department of Juvenile Justice would eventually end up back behind bars in either the juvenile or adult system.
The bill now goes to the Senate for consideration. For an in-depth look at the issue, see the upcoming May Illinois Issues.
Monday, April 15, 2013
Supreme Court inaction on concealed-carry limits could affect Illinois legislation
By Jamey Dunn
Top Illinois Democrats say lawmakers should look to New York’s strict concealed carry law as a model when working on the issue in Illinois.
The U.S. Supreme Court today opted not to hear a challenge to New York’s law, which gives law enforcement officials broad discretion when issuing concealed carry licenses and requires applicants for licenses to provide a reason for their need to carry in public. The New York law says the state “may issue” a license to qualified applicants.
Supporters of concealed carry in Illinois are pushing for a “shall issue” licensing system that would require the state to give permits to applicants who meet the requirements set out in the law. But those in Illinois who support a more restrictive approach say lawmakers should take note of the court’s decision today.
“The New York law dealing with concealed carry is, I think, a model for other states like ours, and that’s something I think that the legislature should take to heart as they go through his process right now of dealing with this issue,” said Gov. Pat Quinn.
A federal appeals court ruled the state’s ban on the carry of firearms in public unconstitutional and gave lawmakers until early June to pass concealed carry legislation. Quinn is calling for bill that would allow for very limited carry. “I think that we need to have very tight restrictions on any kind of concealed carry law in our state. Concealed carry is having a loaded weapon concealed on your person in a public place, and obviously that can be very dangerous. And so, we have to make sure that we have the proper restrictions and limits similar to what New York or some other states like Massachusetts and California have enacted.” He again urged Attorney General Lisa Madigan to appeal the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling on concealed carry.
Madigan said she is still considering an appeal, but that lawmakers should note that the clock is ticking on the court-ordered deadline. “It will obviously influence our continued review of the situation here in Illinois, but everybody who is in the legislature, as well as the governor, should recognize that they’re still under the 180-day deadline imposed by the court, and they need to continue to work on this. If they can come to a compromise on some sort of bill, they should because otherwise, you have this situation where we really don’t know what’s going to happen.”
Madigan said that no matter when she were to file an appeal, there would not be enough time for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. But she said legislators should pay attention to what the Supreme Court did today. “The legislature now can look up and say a ‘may issue status’ is something that at this point is constitutional, and so that should have an impact on the discussions and debates that are going on under the dome,” Madigan said. “What we have now are at least some parameters of what that might be. So we know it can be a ‘may issue.' We’re obviously hopeful that the legislature listens to the court.”
Lawmakers who support fewer restrictions on carry disagree. “It has no bearing on us,” Harrisburg Democrat Rep. Brandon Phelps said of the Supreme Court opting not to hear the New York case. He said he is two or three votes away from the support he needs to pass a bill with a “shall issue” permit requirement,and expects a vote on such a bill in the next few weeks. Phelps, who has sponsored concealed carry bills in recent years, said he is still negotiating some components of the plan, such as how many hours of training would be required for a carry license. “I just don’t think that they have the votes for ‘may issue.’ A lot of people in Chicago, the anti-gun groups, would like to have a ‘may issue’ because it’s more restrictive. But I don’t think a lot people want a bureaucrat or the governor or somebody like that to dictate who gets permits or not.”
Top Illinois Democrats say lawmakers should look to New York’s strict concealed carry law as a model when working on the issue in Illinois.
The U.S. Supreme Court today opted not to hear a challenge to New York’s law, which gives law enforcement officials broad discretion when issuing concealed carry licenses and requires applicants for licenses to provide a reason for their need to carry in public. The New York law says the state “may issue” a license to qualified applicants.
Supporters of concealed carry in Illinois are pushing for a “shall issue” licensing system that would require the state to give permits to applicants who meet the requirements set out in the law. But those in Illinois who support a more restrictive approach say lawmakers should take note of the court’s decision today.
“The New York law dealing with concealed carry is, I think, a model for other states like ours, and that’s something I think that the legislature should take to heart as they go through his process right now of dealing with this issue,” said Gov. Pat Quinn.
A federal appeals court ruled the state’s ban on the carry of firearms in public unconstitutional and gave lawmakers until early June to pass concealed carry legislation. Quinn is calling for bill that would allow for very limited carry. “I think that we need to have very tight restrictions on any kind of concealed carry law in our state. Concealed carry is having a loaded weapon concealed on your person in a public place, and obviously that can be very dangerous. And so, we have to make sure that we have the proper restrictions and limits similar to what New York or some other states like Massachusetts and California have enacted.” He again urged Attorney General Lisa Madigan to appeal the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling on concealed carry.
Madigan said she is still considering an appeal, but that lawmakers should note that the clock is ticking on the court-ordered deadline. “It will obviously influence our continued review of the situation here in Illinois, but everybody who is in the legislature, as well as the governor, should recognize that they’re still under the 180-day deadline imposed by the court, and they need to continue to work on this. If they can come to a compromise on some sort of bill, they should because otherwise, you have this situation where we really don’t know what’s going to happen.”
Madigan said that no matter when she were to file an appeal, there would not be enough time for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. But she said legislators should pay attention to what the Supreme Court did today. “The legislature now can look up and say a ‘may issue status’ is something that at this point is constitutional, and so that should have an impact on the discussions and debates that are going on under the dome,” Madigan said. “What we have now are at least some parameters of what that might be. So we know it can be a ‘may issue.' We’re obviously hopeful that the legislature listens to the court.”
Lawmakers who support fewer restrictions on carry disagree. “It has no bearing on us,” Harrisburg Democrat Rep. Brandon Phelps said of the Supreme Court opting not to hear the New York case. He said he is two or three votes away from the support he needs to pass a bill with a “shall issue” permit requirement,and expects a vote on such a bill in the next few weeks. Phelps, who has sponsored concealed carry bills in recent years, said he is still negotiating some components of the plan, such as how many hours of training would be required for a carry license. “I just don’t think that they have the votes for ‘may issue.’ A lot of people in Chicago, the anti-gun groups, would like to have a ‘may issue’ because it’s more restrictive. But I don’t think a lot people want a bureaucrat or the governor or somebody like that to dictate who gets permits or not.”
Thursday, April 11, 2013
DHS bogged down by big caseloads
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois Department of Human Services is struggling to provide services as some workers face caseloads of more than a thousand people.
Michelle Saddler, the agency's director, said that the department is understaffed. “Many of you have probably heard DHS is behind or DHS has a backlog,” she told a House human services budget committee today. “We at DHS overall need more realistic staffing.” The department is asking for $3.6 billion for fiscal year 2014, the same amount proposed under Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget. DHS is expected to spend more than $3.2 billion this fiscal year. The department was cut by almost $150 million under the current fiscal year’s budget.
Linda Saterfield, director of the division of family and community services at DHS, said some of her caseworkers have caseloads as big as 2,600. “If you calculate that out, that leaves that worker less than 45 minutes over the course of a year to serve that family.” The average caseload in the division, which administers such core safety net programs as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program, averages more than 900 cases per worker. That compares with the year 2000, when the average was just under 250 cases per worker. Saterfield said that one in four residents are served through one of the division’s programs. “Our caseload has grown dramatically, but our staffing levels have reduced so much that we are unable to adequately meet the needs for services,” she said.
Kevin Casey, director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities at DHS, said there are about 11,000 people with developmental disabilities waiting for services in Illinois. He said the wait time can be up to four years. “It really is a struggle to understand how they get from one day to another at times,” Casey told the committee. He said the department does have a plan to reduce the number of people on the wait list over the next few years. Casey told committee members that he would later calculate what it would cost to address the wait list immediately. “It’s a choker of a number. It would take a good deal of money to serve everyone on that waiting list.”
Theodora Binion, acting director of the Division of Mental Health at DHS, said that more than 80 percent of people in need of mental health services are not receiving them. “Eighty percent of the people who need mental health services aren’t getting them? Something fundamentally is wrong with that system,” said Rep. David Leitch, who serves on the committee. Leitch said that he thinks lawmakers should prioritize mental health funding over other requests the department might have. “To overlook this, to me, is quite a crisis. I think we should as a committee take a very hard look [at it] before we add a lot of new employees at DHS and do some of the other things.” Binion said steps are being taken to serve more people through managed care programs. “I think that there are plans afoot to increase the capacity.” (For more on the lack of funding for mental health care in the state, see Illinois Issues March 2013.
One factor in the department’s struggle to administer services to people in need is increased demand. “One in three people in Illinois are living in poverty or teetering on the edge of poverty,” said Samantha Tuttle, the director of policy for the Heartland Alliance for Human Needs and Human Rights. The alliance is an anti-poverty organization that tracks statistics across the state. Tuttle said the state is not doing enough to combat poverty growth. “Illinois has taken steps backwards in addressing poverty, and it shows.” She said recent cuts in virtually every area of human services have given the poor few places to turn. “Taken together, they’re really a dismantling of our safety net system that helps mitigate the experiences of people living in poverty and moves people out of poverty.”
While the DHS is asking for a funding increase, in part to pay for additional staffing, Saddler said she is aware that lawmakers are facing big budget issues. “We understand that we are all under the pressure of the large pension crisis and that that must be dealt with.” Saddler said the department is doing its best during a difficult time to care for Illinoisans. “If DHS cannot be run on a culture of caring, then who can? Every time that we find that we’ve done something that’s not caring, we pick ourselves up and try again.”
The Illinois Department of Human Services is struggling to provide services as some workers face caseloads of more than a thousand people.
Michelle Saddler, the agency's director, said that the department is understaffed. “Many of you have probably heard DHS is behind or DHS has a backlog,” she told a House human services budget committee today. “We at DHS overall need more realistic staffing.” The department is asking for $3.6 billion for fiscal year 2014, the same amount proposed under Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget. DHS is expected to spend more than $3.2 billion this fiscal year. The department was cut by almost $150 million under the current fiscal year’s budget.
Linda Saterfield, director of the division of family and community services at DHS, said some of her caseworkers have caseloads as big as 2,600. “If you calculate that out, that leaves that worker less than 45 minutes over the course of a year to serve that family.” The average caseload in the division, which administers such core safety net programs as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program, averages more than 900 cases per worker. That compares with the year 2000, when the average was just under 250 cases per worker. Saterfield said that one in four residents are served through one of the division’s programs. “Our caseload has grown dramatically, but our staffing levels have reduced so much that we are unable to adequately meet the needs for services,” she said.
Kevin Casey, director of the Division of Developmental Disabilities at DHS, said there are about 11,000 people with developmental disabilities waiting for services in Illinois. He said the wait time can be up to four years. “It really is a struggle to understand how they get from one day to another at times,” Casey told the committee. He said the department does have a plan to reduce the number of people on the wait list over the next few years. Casey told committee members that he would later calculate what it would cost to address the wait list immediately. “It’s a choker of a number. It would take a good deal of money to serve everyone on that waiting list.”
Theodora Binion, acting director of the Division of Mental Health at DHS, said that more than 80 percent of people in need of mental health services are not receiving them. “Eighty percent of the people who need mental health services aren’t getting them? Something fundamentally is wrong with that system,” said Rep. David Leitch, who serves on the committee. Leitch said that he thinks lawmakers should prioritize mental health funding over other requests the department might have. “To overlook this, to me, is quite a crisis. I think we should as a committee take a very hard look [at it] before we add a lot of new employees at DHS and do some of the other things.” Binion said steps are being taken to serve more people through managed care programs. “I think that there are plans afoot to increase the capacity.” (For more on the lack of funding for mental health care in the state, see Illinois Issues March 2013.
One factor in the department’s struggle to administer services to people in need is increased demand. “One in three people in Illinois are living in poverty or teetering on the edge of poverty,” said Samantha Tuttle, the director of policy for the Heartland Alliance for Human Needs and Human Rights. The alliance is an anti-poverty organization that tracks statistics across the state. Tuttle said the state is not doing enough to combat poverty growth. “Illinois has taken steps backwards in addressing poverty, and it shows.” She said recent cuts in virtually every area of human services have given the poor few places to turn. “Taken together, they’re really a dismantling of our safety net system that helps mitigate the experiences of people living in poverty and moves people out of poverty.”
While the DHS is asking for a funding increase, in part to pay for additional staffing, Saddler said she is aware that lawmakers are facing big budget issues. “We understand that we are all under the pressure of the large pension crisis and that that must be dealt with.” Saddler said the department is doing its best during a difficult time to care for Illinoisans. “If DHS cannot be run on a culture of caring, then who can? Every time that we find that we’ve done something that’s not caring, we pick ourselves up and try again.”
Home health care providers lobby for funding to cover shortfall
By Meredith Colias
Social service advocates say agencies providing in-home care for seniors could be at risk if additional state money is not set aside to pay them.
The Illinois Department of Aging notified service providers in a letter March 7 that it would soon run out of money to fund the Community Care Program for the current fiscal year, which ends on June 30. Providers say that $173 million is needed to properly fund service through the end of Fiscal Year 2013. Kimberly Parker, the Department of Aging's spokeswoman, said in an email it was “common knowledge” the legislature did not give the agency enough money to continue to pay providers through the entire fiscal year and that administrators are hopeful additional money could be found. She said that so far, providers have continued to administer services, but without more funding, payment would likely be delayed until the start of next fiscal year.
The program serves mainly lower-income seniors who apply for assistance through the state for home-based long-term care assistance, with everyday needs ranging from preparing meals and running errands to dressing and bathing, according to the agency's website. The program helps to care for an estimated 80,000 senior citizens in the state. Aside from at-home providers, it also helps to pay for background checks for at-home caregivers, adult day centers that watch elderly clients during the day and a program designed to preventing elderly spouses from being burdened by their spouses in-home care and falling into poverty. To qualify, Illinois residents must be at least 60 years old, the state must determine that they need long-term care and they must have less than $17,500 in assets aside from their home, car and furniture.
Helping senior citizens remain in their homes is preferable for the state from a financial standpoint, since the Department of Aging estimates the costs would be as much as four times higher to pay for an individual placed in round-the-clock care in a nursing home. The Department of Aging estimates 96 percent of the money it receives from the General Revenue Fund goes to the program. The department says the program was underfunded last fiscal year, as well. Part of the reason why the program is facing a shortfall is because it had to use some of the money it received this year to cover last year's costs.
Jacquie Algee, executive director of relations for Service Employees International Union health care, said smaller providers that primarily rely on the state for their operations are most at-risk if the additional funding is not found. “It’s been a problem because it happens every year,” she said. The Illinois Association of Community Care Program Homecare Providers estimates that one-third of its members depend heavily on funding from the Department of Aging and would not be able to continue operations for more than 30 days without it.
Abdon Pallasch, a spokesman for Gov. Pat Quinn, said the governor supports restoring the funds to the department, although Pallasch was unsure where money would be diverted from in the current budget to continue funding. “It’s up to the legislature,” he said.
Social service advocates say agencies providing in-home care for seniors could be at risk if additional state money is not set aside to pay them.
The Illinois Department of Aging notified service providers in a letter March 7 that it would soon run out of money to fund the Community Care Program for the current fiscal year, which ends on June 30. Providers say that $173 million is needed to properly fund service through the end of Fiscal Year 2013. Kimberly Parker, the Department of Aging's spokeswoman, said in an email it was “common knowledge” the legislature did not give the agency enough money to continue to pay providers through the entire fiscal year and that administrators are hopeful additional money could be found. She said that so far, providers have continued to administer services, but without more funding, payment would likely be delayed until the start of next fiscal year.
The program serves mainly lower-income seniors who apply for assistance through the state for home-based long-term care assistance, with everyday needs ranging from preparing meals and running errands to dressing and bathing, according to the agency's website. The program helps to care for an estimated 80,000 senior citizens in the state. Aside from at-home providers, it also helps to pay for background checks for at-home caregivers, adult day centers that watch elderly clients during the day and a program designed to preventing elderly spouses from being burdened by their spouses in-home care and falling into poverty. To qualify, Illinois residents must be at least 60 years old, the state must determine that they need long-term care and they must have less than $17,500 in assets aside from their home, car and furniture.
Helping senior citizens remain in their homes is preferable for the state from a financial standpoint, since the Department of Aging estimates the costs would be as much as four times higher to pay for an individual placed in round-the-clock care in a nursing home. The Department of Aging estimates 96 percent of the money it receives from the General Revenue Fund goes to the program. The department says the program was underfunded last fiscal year, as well. Part of the reason why the program is facing a shortfall is because it had to use some of the money it received this year to cover last year's costs.
Jacquie Algee, executive director of relations for Service Employees International Union health care, said smaller providers that primarily rely on the state for their operations are most at-risk if the additional funding is not found. “It’s been a problem because it happens every year,” she said. The Illinois Association of Community Care Program Homecare Providers estimates that one-third of its members depend heavily on funding from the Department of Aging and would not be able to continue operations for more than 30 days without it.
Abdon Pallasch, a spokesman for Gov. Pat Quinn, said the governor supports restoring the funds to the department, although Pallasch was unsure where money would be diverted from in the current budget to continue funding. “It’s up to the legislature,” he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
