Illinois House Floor Debate — May 16, 1985

"The hour of 9:00 having arrived, the House will now be in order. The Chaplain for today will be the Reverend Gary Gilley, Pastor of Southern View Chapel of Springfield. Reverend is a guest of Representative Josephine Oblinger. Will the guests in the gallery please rise and join us for the invocation? Reverend Gilley."

"Let's pray. Our Father, we thank You today for these men and women who have come together today to do business. We pray for them as they are Your representatives as scriptures teach. They're Your ministers. We pray that You'll give them Your heart and Your mind. We pray today, Father, that each of them will realize the responsibilities that they have. We thank You that they're willing to take those responsibilities and headaches that go with it. We pray that You'll give them Your wisdom today that they might do the things that are best for the people of this state. We pray in the name of Jesus, our Lord. Amen."

"Representative Ropp, the Gentleman from McLean, will lead us in the pledge."

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

"Roll Call for Attendance. Clerk, take the record. 117 Members having answered to the call of the quorum, a quorum is present. Mr. Matijevich, are there any... is there an excused absence?"

"No. They're all here."

"Thank you. Mr. Piel."

"No. Everybody's present and accounted for, Sir. Thank you." 1  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day

"Messages from the Senate."

"A Message from the Senate by Mr. Wright, Secretary. Mr. Speaker, I am directed to inform the House of Representatives that the Senate has adopted the following Senate Joint Resolution, the adoption of which I am instructed to ask concurrence of the House of Representatives, to wit; Senate Joint Resolution #359, adopted by the Senate May 15, 1985. Kenneth Wright, Secretary." "A Message from the Senate by Mr. Wright, Mr. Speaker, I'm directed to inform the House of Representatives that the Senate has passed Bills of the following title, and the passage of which I'm instructed to ask concurrence of the House of Representatives, to wit; Senate Bills #733, 741, 743, 753, 754, 755, 758, 771, 782, 790, 798, 799, 824, 825, 854, 859, 860 and 361, passed by the Senate May 15, 1984... 1985. Kenneth Wright, Secretary."

"Agreed Resolutions."

"House Resolution 395, William... offered by Representative Williamson; 396, by Representative Curran; and 397, by Representative Stephens."

"Gentleman from Lake, Mr. Matijevich, on the Agreed Resolutions."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 395, Williamson, congratulates David Byrne for 35 years of service. 396, Curran, congratulates Mr. and Mrs. Roos upon their 40th anniversary. House Resolution 397, Stephens, commemorates Illinois Tourism Week. I move the adoption of the Agreed Resolutions."

"The Gentleman from Lake, Mr. Matijevich, moves for the adoption of the Agreed Resolutions. All those in favor signify by saying "aye", those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and the 2  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Resolutions... Agreed Resolutions are adopted. General Resolutions."

"House Resolution 394, offered by Representative Shaw."

"Committee on Assignment. Death Resolutions."

"House Resolution 390, offered by Representative Vinson, with respect to the memory of Lois D. Forden. House Joint Resolution 49, offered by Representative Washington, with respect to the memory of Joe C. Taylor."

"Gentleman from Lake, Mr. Matijevich, moves for the adoption of the Death Resolutions. All those in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Death Resolutions are adopted. Senate Bills First Reading."

"Senate Bills First Reading. Senate Bill 75, Alexander, a Bill for an Act to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 85, Currie and Christensen, a Bill for an Act to amend the Environmental Protection Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 122, Nash and O'Connell, a Bill for an Act in relation to lost and abandoned boats. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 132, Hicks and Mautino, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the Illinois Development Finance Authority. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 136, Nash, a Bill for an Act relating to the Veterinary Medicine and Surgery Practice Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 143, Oblinger, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 149, Oblinger, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 178, Saltsman, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 223, Terzich and Nash, a Bill for an Act 3  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 to amend an Act in relation to claims under accident and health insurance policies and service plan contracts. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 297, O'Connell, a Bill for an Act to amend the Criminal Code. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 309, Mautino, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Insurance Code. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 401, Levin and Parke, a Bill for an Act in relation to condominium and community associations. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 404, Mautino, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Income Tax Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 429, Richmond, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act concerning state occupation and use tax exemptions of farm machinery and equipment. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 506, Terzich, a Bill for an Act to amend the Election Code. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 531, O'Connell, a Bill for an Act to amend the Unified Code of Corrections. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 533, O'Connell, a Bill for an Act in relation to the administration of probation departments and the delivery of probation service. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 535, O'Connell, a Bill for an Act to amend the Unified Code of Corrections. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 538, O'Connell, a Bill for an Act to amend the Juvenile Court Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 544, O'Connell, a Bill for an Act to amend the Criminal Code. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 609, Didrickson and Steczo, a Bill for an Act to amend the School Code. First Reading of the Bill. Additional Senate Bills First Reading. Senate Bill 219, Kulas, a Bill for an Act in relation to equipment and technical training in Illinois schools. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 375, Bopp, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate 4  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Bill 415, McGann, a Bill for an Act to amend the Revenue Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 498, Preston and Ropp, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Library System Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 527, Preston, a Bill for an Act to amend the Good Samaritan Food Donor Act. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 614, McGann, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. First Reading of the Bill. Senate Bill 577, McGann, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Notary Public Act. First Reading of the Bill. Additional Senate Bill First Reading. Senate Bill 388, Bowman, a Bill for an Act creating the Alzheimer's Disease Assistance Act. First Reading of the Bill."

"For what purpose does the Gentleman from Will, Mr. Van Duyne, seek recognition?"

"Well, Mr. Speaker, thank you for recognizing me so early this morning, but I want you to know..."

"I recognize you all the time."

"Oh, I recognize you, too, whenever I can. I just want everyone in the audience to know that this my 42nd anniversary. So, I expect you all to send my wife notes of condolences and sympathy and treat me very nice today."

"Well, I think more canonization, probably, is more in order than just a mere note after 42 years. On page two of the Calendar, on the Order of House Bills Second Reading, Short Debate, appears House Bill 850. Mr. Davis. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading, Short Debate, appears House Bill 856. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading, Short Debate, appears House Bill.... Stand at ease for a few minutes. Ladies and Gentlemen, we will begin at next Bill at the top of page 13 of the Calendar. That's on the Order of House Bills Second Reading. Accordingly, on the 5  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2261. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2261, a Bill for an Act to amend the Environmental Protection Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative Koehler."

"The Lady from Marshall, Representative Koehler, on Amendment #1."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 2261 affects developmental permits for disposal facilities and places a time limit for the expiration of that permit. Amendment #1 deals with allowing additional time for extenuating court litigation. The Amendment has been discussed with Chairman Kulas, Members of both sides of the aisle, our staffs and there is no known opposition. I move for the adoption of Amendment #1."

"The Lady from Marshall moves for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1261 (sic 2261). And on that, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Cullerton."

"No... No questions."

"Alright. There being no question... there are no discussion. The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 be adopted?' All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2273. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House 6  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Bill 2275. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2275, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the School Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative Weaver."

"The Gentleman from Coles, Mr. Weaver, on Weaver: Amendment #1." "Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. Amendment 1 simply changes the authority and managing ability from the school board... from the State Board of Education to the Secretary of State. I would be willing to answer any questions and move for passage of this Motion. Thank you."

"Gentleman from Coles has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 2275. And on that, the Lady from LaSalle, Ms. Breslin."

"Question of the Sponsor."

"Proceed."

"Representative, could you describe what this Amendment does again, please? It changes something from the State Board of Education to the Secretary of State's Office and what was it?"

"It changes the authority. The... I guess the managing authority... administration authority of the literacy program which many... most of the programs are done through the local library systems currently as it is. This is done in conjunction with the State Board of Education. They have indicated that they would just assume that the Secretary of State's Office do administer the program."

"And it's a literacy program?"

"It's a literacy program. What it does is provide grants for community based literacy program, primarily, in the 7  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 areas of adult education, reading and writing. And basically, it provides grants for community based organizations to pick up the administrative cost of these programs."

"Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Cullerton."

"Will the Sponsor yield? Will the Sponsor yield? Where is the Sponsor? Okay. Representative Weaver, I don't... we don't have any pictures over here. Did you find... Can I ask you a question about this?"

"Certainly."

"Did you find, when you put this Bill in, that it was in conflict with the Governor's proposal to give $2,000,000 to the Secretary of State for distribution to private organizations to expand or develop a literacy program and then somebody talked to you and explained to you that you better amend your Bill so that it conforms with the Governor's program. Is that accurate?"

"I would say that's accurate. Yes, Sir."

"Where did you get the idea for the Bill in the first place, the one that conflicted with the Governor's proposal?"

"Well, we had gotten the idea from the State Board of Education people, who seem to indicate later that they thought the program might be better served by being administered out of the Secretary of State's Office."

"Well, did the Governor's proposal to give this $2,000,000 to the Secretary of State, was that ever incorporated in any legislation? Was that a Senate Bill or... as far as you know?"

"Yes, that is in the Senate Bill."

"Oh, so it's a Senate Bill."

"Yes." 8  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"And how does your Amendment differs from that Senate Bill?"

"It brings this Bill, the House Bill, into conformance with the Senate Bill."

"Your Amendment is identical to the Senate Bill."

"Exactly."

"And who's the Sponsor of the Senate Bill?"

"I'm not really sure."

"Okay. Now, let's get onto the Bill, then, itself. Was this a... Could you describe this as something like a power grab?"

"No. You might describe it that way. I would describe it in terms of finally paying some of the administrative costs of a program that is sorely needed."

"Oh, no. No. No. No. No. No problem with the goals; but, why are we making the Secretary of State the only person to appoint members to the Board. Why not have some input from the Legislature, for example, like... you know, Speaker Madigan, Minority Leader Daniels, Pate Philip, even, could appoint someone to the Literacy Board. That'll be interesting."

"Well... We would certainly put your name at the top of the list for members on this Board, if you're so interested."

"Well, would you be..."

"The reason we're putting it in the hands of the Secretary of State, primarily, is because of the 90 programs that are currently being administered, not all of them are being done through the Secretary of State's Office now."

"How much money will this be by the way, $2,000,000?"

"$2,000,000."

"That's not in this Bill though, right? That's the 9  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 $2,000,000 isn't... isn't mentioned in this Bill? That's a separate Bill?"

"That's correct."

"Okay. Thank you very much for answering the questions."

"Further discussion? There being none, the Gentleman from Coles, Mr. Weaver, to close."

"Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, this is a very sorely needed program that has to be continued to improve the literacy of the people in our towns and villages across the state, and it is most logically administered by the Secretary of State's Office because most of the programs are conducted through local library systems. And I do urge your passage on this Amendment."

"Question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 be adopted? All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed "no". In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. The Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2278. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2278, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Grade A Pasteurize Milk and Milk Products Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2287. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2287, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the School Code. Second Reading of the Bill. 10  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2299. Mr. Vinson. 2299. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. No. Hold it, Mr. Clerk. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2306. Mr. McCracken, do you wish that Bill called? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2306, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Code of Civil Procedure. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2308. 2308. Mr. McCracken. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2308, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of an Act to revise the law in relation to counties. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2328. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2348. Mr. Hoffman. Is Mr. Hoffman in the chamber? Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2362. Ms. Flowers. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2364. Mr. Soliz. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2364, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Public Aid Code. Second Reading 11  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?" May 16, 1985

"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative Soliz,"

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Soliz."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, this is a technical Amendment, really, to meet some of the concerns of the Illinois Department of Public Aid. And I'd ask... I'd ask approval of this Amendment. I'd like to move approval of this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Soliz, moves for the adoption of Amendment 1 to House Bill 2364. Is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Amendment be adopted?' All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed "no". In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2368. Mr. McGann. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2369. Mr. O'Connell. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2387. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2399. Ms. Barnes. Mr... Yes, Ms. Barnes."

"There is going to be an Amendment filed. Has it been filed yet?"

"Well, we'll take it out of the record for the moment."

"Thank you."

"On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2407. Mr. Johnson. Out of the record. 12  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Page 14 of the Calendar, on the Order of Second Reading, appears House Bill 2412. Mr. Mautino. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2412, a Bill for an Act making substantive and technical changes in the Election Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions with respect to Amendment #1?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Mautino."

"Gentleman from Bureau, Mr. Mautino, on Floor Amendment #2."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to have that Amendment corrected. It's Mautino - Olson on Amendment #1... Amendment #2. Basically, that Amendment provides that in all jurisdiction where voters have been suspended or eliminated from the rolls as a result of a canvass but have... who have not moved or died or changed their names be authorized and permitted to vote on election day by the use of the affidavit. It's done on a continuing basis. And downstate, this Amendment was recommended after discussions with Mr. Mike 'LaBelle' of the Chicago Board of Elections, who asked for this additional information as it pertains to who could challenge and how the process of challenging could be provided after door to door canvassing. This registration form and authorization is the result of those discussions. And I move for adoption. Additional questions, Representative Olson, who was involved in those discussions can provide."

"The Gentleman from Bureau has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 2412. And on that, 13  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day is there Alexander." Alexander: a both May 16, 1985 any discussion? The Lady from Cook, Ms. a "Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Amendment was a part of prior Bill and a package of Bills which was gleaned by sides that should go into Interim Study or a Subcommittee. The Bill... The Amendment in question was not posted to the Election Committee till the final day of our hearings which, in fact, caused it to go into Interim Study. It is now, what you say, trying to be a part of a Bill of not having the benefit of the Committee hearing, and I am opposed to this Amendment."

"Further discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Cullerton."

"Yes, will the Sponsor yield?"

"Indicates he'll yield."

"Either Representative Olson or Mautino. I understand the first part dealing with a person showing up on election day who had been stricken and now they want to vote. Now what procedures do they have to go through before they could vote according to this Amendment?"

"Yes, Mr. Mautino, you'd yield for question."

"The affidavit provisions are there at the polling place."

"What are they?"

"It's an affidavit that says you are a residence. You are registered. You live at whatever address it is and you sign that affidavit and present it to the judges of election."

"And that's all you have to do just sign an affidavit? If they show any..."

"If you do not appear on the polling sheets, but you have been removed even though you live there - have not changed your name, et cetera, you were removed from the 14  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 rolls. If you do go there, there is suspension file that is provided by this Amendment that the voters permanent registration record card will be a part of. It's available by this Amendment at the polling place, and it's a suspended file which all those people will be listed in who were removed from the rolls. And if they show up at the polls and they are there and they sign the affidavit, they can be authorized to vote."

"Okay. Now, could you tell me about that part of the Amendment that deals with sending notice to... this would require the election authority to send out to every precinct a list of everyone stricken from that precinct in the last four years. Is that in the Amendment? And I'm wondering if it is, why? Why you'd want to do that for the last four years? The reason why I'm asking this, I live in an area in the city where there is a lot of turnover, a lot of rentals, and, you know, you could have a whole half of a precinct change over a two year period. So, I'm just wondering how this would work if you have to send a list of everyone who's stricken from the polling place or from that precinct over a four year period, it just seems like a lot of work."

"Well, basically, Representative Cullerton, what they do is they send the registration card to all the individuals who are registered in that precinct. In the process, if those cards come back none deliverable or addressee unknown, then those individuals according to the original Bill are removed and placed in a suspended pile at that... for that precinct. It does not stop the Bill itself. The door to door canvass that is provided by the Chicago Board of Elections. What this does, it works exactly this way in downstate Illinois. They send a new registration canvass cards out. When they come back, if they do come back, 15  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day then they take those people off the rolls reregistering every individual once again. May 16, 1985 rather than In your case, if there is a large turnover and those cards come back, they would be removed from the voters list, but they would remain in that suspended file for two years."

"Well, Mr. Speaker..."

"Proceed, Sir."

"I would suggest that if there is an agreement in regard to this Amendment with the Chicago Board of Elections that that agreement has not been communicated to the Chairman of the Elections Committee, and I think that, you know, this is Second Reading. I think perhaps we should either take the Amendment out of the... take the Bill out of the record or defeat the Amendment and hope that we can get some communications going between the people in Chicago. If they say it's okay with them, I'm sure there won't be any problem in passing the Bill, but the way I understand it there is no such agreement at this point and time."

"Mr. Mautino, what is your pleasure?"

"Would you... Mr. Speaker, if you will, Representative Olson was part of those discussions, would you mind going to him for a response on that agreement?"

"Alright. The Chair recognizes Representative Olson, the Gentleman from Lee."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. As Representative Mautino indicated, we are both parties to the House Bill to Amendment #1 which was adopted in Committee, I believe, on a 12 to 3 vote and this Amendment #2. This is a natural Amendment to be added to the substance of the Bill. The substance of the Bill which provides for a mail canvass and this provides an opportunity for those people who have been for one reason 16  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 or another stricken from the rolls to have a suspension file going to the precinct whereby good identification, an affidavit and if necessary, a witness known to the poll judges may have an opportunity to vote. And I would urge adoption of this Amendment."

"Further discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Young."

"Ladies... Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I rise in support of this Amendment. I think it's a good Amendment. This Amendment was taken from a Bill that I introduced. The reason it was not posted until the last day is because of the negotiations that were taking place between the Board of Elections and various Members of this House. This Amendment is the results of those negotiations. I think it'll be good for Cook County on the election day, and I ask that the Amendment be approved."

"Further discussion? There being none, the Gentleman from Bureau, Mr. Mautino, to close. Mr. Mautino..."

"I wholeheartedly agree with Representative Young, Representative Olson and all the individuals who are part of that... negotiations. They informed me that this was an agreed Amendment with the Chicago Board and the person of Mike 'LaBelle', and I move for the adoption. If, in fact, it is not the case there is a problem we move it to Third, I'd be happy to bring it back to resolve whatever."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 be adopted? All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills 17  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Second Reading appears House Bill 2413. Mr. McAuliffe. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2414. Mr. Daniels. Mr. Daniels. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2417. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2417, a Bill for an Act relating to Acts concerning real property conveyances, circuit breaker relief and taxes. First Reading of the... Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions with respect to Amendment #1?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Woodyard."

"The Gentleman from Edgar, Mr. Woodyard, on Amendment #2."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. Amendment #2 adds an effective date to the Bill and the portion that deals with the certified public assessors. The reason for the Amendment is because of a group of meetings that occurred through the winter and early spring of assessing officials in Department of Revenue in which we determine that there are quite of number of assessors who have gone through certain portions of their training but did not meet the requirements in criteria of training within a prescribe deadline thus they could never become certified for this stiffen that is in the Bill and thus this effective date does allow recertification with new testing procedures and schooling. And I move for its adoption."

"The Gentleman from Woodyard has moved... Gentleman from Edgar has moved for the adoption of 18  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 34th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Amendment #2 to House Bill 2417. Is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Amendment be adopted?" All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes" have it. The Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Woodyard."

"Gentleman from Edgar, Mr. Woodyard, on Amendment #3"

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Amendment #3 was requested by the Department of Revenue in that it seems that in the farm land assessment formula, part of that formula is based upon the rolling interest rate of the federal land bank, and that has to be certified by the Internal Revenue Service. Many times, they are late in getting that interest rate figure which is a black and white figure to Department of Revenue for computation of the formula. Thus, this would allow the Department of Revenue to go ahead and make their own certification of that rolling federal land bank interest rate."

"The Gentleman from Edgar has moved for the adoption of Amendment #3 to House Bill 2417. Is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, Shall Amendment #3 be adopted?' All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no". In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?'

"Floor Amendment #4, offered by Representative Woodyard and Keane."

"The Gentleman from Edgar, Mr. Woodyard, on Amendment #4."

"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Amendment #4 is the result of meeting with the Department, Representative Keane 19  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 and myself, in which we delete the provision that would put the amount of money on a real estate sale on the actual deed, and we're deleting that provision. We also are deleting the provision which would eliminate the assumed mortgage exemption under the real estate transferred tax."

"The Gentleman from Edgar has moved for the adoption of Amendment 4 to House Bill 2417. Is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Amendment be adopted?' All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. The Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. With leave of the House, we'll return to House Bill 2414 on the Order of Second Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2414, a Bill for an Act to add an Article to the Illinois Insurance Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions with respect to Amendment #1?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2419. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2419, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code and the Illinois Highway Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills 20  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Second Reading appears House Bill 2425. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2425, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act to create the Real Property Tax Increment Allocation Development and Redevelopment Act. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions with respect to Amendment #1?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 2433. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2433, a Bill for an Act in relation to taxes and their enforcement. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendments #1 and 2 were adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions with respect to Amendment 1 and 2?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Ewing."

"The Gentleman from Livingston, Mr. Ewing, on Amendment #3."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #3 deletes... Thank you. Amendment #3 to House Bill 2433 changes from 3 years to 5 years the carry forward for unused investment replacement tax credit provided in the Bill. And I would ask for the adoption of this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Livingston moves for the adoption of Amendment 3 to House Bill 2433. And on that, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Cullerton."

"The Amendment changes the 3 year carry forward to a 5 21  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day year carry forward?"

"That's correct." May 16, 1985

"And what's the affect of that on the Bill in terms of...?"

"Well it... it doesn't really affect the Bill. It just affects the... it's a benefit to taxpayers that they can carry forward that credit to 5 years. I think the reason the Department did that - the traditional carry forward period for these types of credit is 5 years normally and not 3 years in both our Code and in the Federal IRS Code."

"Okay. Whenever we benefit the taxpayer, it's usually a revenue loss to the state. So, it depends on how you want to phrase it. If you're for the Bill, you say it saves the taxpayers money. If you're against the Bill, you say it's a loss to the state. And I just want to remind you that I've heard you say that before, when you opposed some of our good tax relief Bills. So, I'm just curious if there is a revenue loss."

"Well, Sir... Yes... Representative Cullerton, I learned my consistency from you."

"Right."

"And, the Department indicates that the loss here would be minimal."

"Great. Great."

"That's what I... I think it's a great Amendment."

"So, it'll be a minimal tax game for the taxpayers."

"That's correct, but we will be consistent. And you and I like to be consistent."

"Right. Okay. Thank you."

"Further discussion? The question is, Shall Amendment #3 be adopted?' All those in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Amendment is adopted. 22  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #4, offered by Representative Ewing and Keane."

"The Gentleman from Livingston, Mr. Ewing, on Amendment #4,"

"Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, this is the... this whole Bill is the Department of Revenue's cleanup legislation for this Session. It's been thoroughly gone over by the staffs on both sides of the aisle and by the Revenue Committee Chairman and Spokesman. This Amendment is an Amendment which the Chairman of the Revenue Committee asked for, and it would provide that a surety before he is given notice, the tax... pardon me, I'll regroup on that provides that taxpayers are given sufficient notice, and it's ten days before the Department would notify a surety of any potential liability to their bonds. And this is an Amendment that Representative Keane asked for. We're glad to offer it."

"The Gentleman from Livingston has moved for the adoption of Amendment 4 to House Bill 2433. Is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Amendment be adopted?' All those in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes have it. The Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Representative Breslin in the Chair."

"House Bill 2438, Representative Olson. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2438, a Bill for an Act in relation to the insurance fees and the recovery expenses incurred by the Department of Insurance. Second Reading of the Bill. 23  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 2445, Representative Parcells. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2445, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Health Maintenance Organization Act. Second Reading of the Bill. This Bill has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment... Amendment #1 was tabled previously. Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Parcells."

"Representative Parcells."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen, to refresh your memory, two days ago the Amendment that had been put on in Committee was objected to because we did not have our knowingly clause. So, we tabled that Amendment and Amendment #2 is the same Amendment having the knowingly clause which I showed to Representative Cullerton, and he said that he had no longer had an objection to it. So I move for adoption..."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 2445. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 2445 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments." 24  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

May 16, 1985 "Third Reading. House Bill 2447, Representative Barnes. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2447, a Bill for an Act in relation to the orders to relatives of certain persons to provide support. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative Barnes."

"Representative Barnes."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Amendment #1 to House Bill 2447 is legislation that makes various modification in the income withholding laws of the cleanup nature involving child support payments. Number one, it allows the payer of child support to request an earlier effective date for an income withholding order rather than have the income withholding order go into effect only when the child support payments are delinquent a allows the employer to combine all amounts required to be withheld from employee checks and transmit with the listing of same to the responsible parent or to the public office requiring the holding of income. The payment of withheld income is to be paid at the same time the employee is paid. The withholding of income for child support shall be on first come first serve basis in accord with the new federal child support legislation. This legislation imposes a requirement upon employers with respect to the hiring or refusing to hire a person because of an income withholding obligation. Employer must advise of termination of employment and advise as to his new employer in his last known home address. The Amendment also clears up with concern raised in Committee by further defining the use of the guidelines, and I would like to remind everybody that 25  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 in the first six months of the child support legislation that we pass, we save the taxpayers $70,000,000. I would be happy to answer any questions."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 2447. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Yes, thank you. Will the Sponsor yield?"

"She will."

"I am told that I'm on some kind of a Committee to study this issue. Has the Committee met and decided what we're going to do or is this an interim approach while we study this long term?"

"That is correct, Representative Cullerton. The reason that it's necessary to conform with the federal guidelines is so that we receive the federal monies."

"How much money are we talking about?"

"I think it was... How much money was it? I had it marked down. I had those figures so when I presented this in Committee and I... I don't like to just tell you a figure unless I'm positive."

"Go ahead. Just make up a figure."

"But it was quite a bit of money and it involved several counties throughout the state... and Cook County was one of the largest benefactors of the federal guideline."

"Right. Now, what is the position taken by the various womens' groups that have been concerned about this particular piece of legislation?"

"They are extremely supportive, in fact, they have issued new pamphlets so that the parent that is receiving the custodial funds will be made aware of the changes in the law and the availability of it."

"How about the mens' groups, are they in favor of it?"

"You notice, I did not distinguish his or her, 26  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Representative. There are times when women pay men child support."

"Oh, I know, but are the mens' groups in favor - the organized groups?"

"Well, I haven't heard of... you know, no one has contacted me, and Representative Currie and I were the original Sponsors of this legislation."

"Okay. Thank you very much."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Currie."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. I think this is a good Amendment. Not only will it bring us in compliance with the new federal legislation in the area of child support enforcement, but in terms of public policy. I think this Amendment makes awfully good sense. What this Amendment says is that an employer cannot refuse to hire or cannot fire an individual because he or she is under an automatic wage withholding order. I would think that we would want to make sure that employees in this state are protected against that kind of action and certainly the fact that federal compliance is requisite if we're to continue to receive federal reimbursements for public aid dollars we collect through this program suggest to me, and I hope suggest to all of you that this is a good strong Amendment and deserves our support."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Dunn."

"Will the Sponsor yield for a question?"

"She will."

"As you know the original Bill cause me some concern in Committee about establishing new guidelines for responsible relatives which, as I read the original Bill, would include more than an obligation for child support and could include the reverse obligation from a child to support parents. And I understand that the Amendment intends to clarify this 27  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 legislation to make certain that it applies only to the obligation from a parent to a child. Is that correct."

"That is correct."

"And it is your intent and is the intent of this legislation that it shall be so limited. Is that correct?"

"That is correct."

"Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Will, who's been married for 42 years, Representative Van Duyne."

"Hould the Lady yield for a question?"

"She will."

"Jane, can you tell me what charges are attached to these procedures by the Circuit Clerk's Office, if any, for processing these payments?"

"I... The employer is paid a dollar if he is involved in the process of wage assessments."

"Well, could you briefly explain... I understand..."

"And Representative Didrickson does have a Bill that's going to raise that to four dollars."

"For example, if I paid support for my children through the court... Circuit Clerk's Office whatever the weekly support would be, what would they deduct from my payment to my wife?"

"No charge."

"The Circuit Clerk's Office does it for free?"

"That is correct."

"Thank you. I wanted to bring that out as an example for Representative Breslin and Representative Cullerton and Members of the Judiciary and to show you the disparity in the fines, the $50 fine for speeding where the Circuit Clerk gets ten bucks for just processing your speeding ticket. Are you duly put on notice, Peg?"

"The Gentleman from Jefferson, Representative 28  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Hicks,"

"Yes, question for the Sponsor, please?"

"She will yield for a question." May 16, 1985

"Yes, as I read the analysis on this, it says that, number one, the employer cannot refuse. Is that correct?"

"The employer... That is correct, and he also can't fire the person that is having the wages assessed."

"Okay. Also my analysis says that even if a person is not delinquent in their child support, you can still do this. Is that correct?"

"That is correct. We're trying to make it easier if that's the way that people want to make their payments. We're willing to have them do it that way, Representative,"

"Well, let's say I'm not wanting to make it easier and I'm... I have someone whose in that..."

"Then... then it is... that's your option."

"Okay... But the way my analysis says, even if I'm not delinquent if they wanted to come in and take it, could they do so?"

"No."

"So, as long as I stay on the proper time frame in paying my child support or had a person that would do so, then there is no way they could come in and garnish and take my wages without my consent. Is that correct?"

"That is absolutely correct."

"And how long would I have to be delinquent before they could do so?"

"It's a period of two months, and you would be notified by either personal service or certified mail and then you would have the time to respond like some people, like say, they're laborers and during the winter there is no carpenter work and they don't have the money. Well, you can't get blood out of a turnip. So, they're allowed to 29  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day voice the reasons that they are behind in payments and consideration is given in those circumstances." May 16, 1985

"Okay. And if... then, for instance, let's say I happened to get 60 days behind and you come in and you start taking it and then I'm up to date and I'm current, then how long does it go on that you come and take my wages like that?"

"I believe it's like a period of the year and once you show good faith, then you can have that change."

"Well, good faith meaning you're going to take it every month for a year because then I don't have any option, I mean, you're taking it. So, good faith would be shown in every case as long as I'm employed. Is that correct."

"That is correct."

"Fine. Thank you very much."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 2447. There being no further discussion. The question is, 'Shall this Amendment be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the... Representative Barnes, would you like to close and we'll take a roll call vote on it?"

"Well, in closing, I would like to remind the Members of this Legislature that we did save the taxpayers $70,000,000 in the first six months of this legislation that was enacted. It is necessary to conform to federal guidelines. After all, we're talking about children here that need money for necessities. I would ask an 'aye' vote."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 2447 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 85 voting 'aye', 6 voting 'no', and 2 voting 'present', and this Amendment is adopted. Are there 30  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day any further Amendments?" May 16, 1985

"Floor Amendment #2, Olson Daniels Countryman, amends House Bill 2477."

"Representative Olson."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Amendment #1 to House Bill 2477 is an extension of the Election's Act of two years ago. And it basically provides that the contents of the sealed container must be inventoried by the election authority after the close of the polls before the election judge can be given a receipt. We have reported incidents around the state relative to this issue and as a consequence, we would urge the adoption on this Amendment."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 2447. And on that question, the Lady from... Representative Olson."

"Amendment #1."

"We have already adopted Amendment #1. Representative Barnes, for what reason do your rise?"

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I think where the confusion is, there is another Amendment filed to 2447 as you have it up on the board and it's Amendment #2. It's merely a technical change. Perhaps that's what we're talking about?"

"Is that correct, Representative Olson, is yours a technical change?"

"He's talking about a different Bill. See up there you have 24..."

"2477, I'm sorry."

"2447 is the Bill that we're on."

"I thought I heard 2477 announced. I'm sorry, Madam Speaker, if I'm in the wrong issue. I thought I heard 2477 announced." 31  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"Mr. Clerk, is there an Amendment #2 to House Bill 2447?"

"Amendment #1 was adopted. There are no further Amendments."

"You should change the number. Okay, the number is still wrong on the board. Should be 2447. There being no further Amendments. House Bill 2447 moves to Third Reading. House Bill 2452, Representative Ryder - Daniels. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2452, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relationship to persons with developmental disabilities."

"Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"I have a question about that Bill you just moved to Third Reading. House Bill 2447."

"Okay. What is your question?"

"How many Amendments were adopted?"

"One Amendment was adopted."

"And what happened with Amendment #2?"

"The Clerk advised us that there was not an Amendment #2 filed."

"And... I have one and the Sponsor... The Page distributed it. We just didn't tell the... Tony."

"Okay. Mr. Clerk, keep looking for Amendment #2. We're now... we're now on House Bill 2452. We will come back to House Bill 2447 if there is a need. Thank you for calling it to our attention, Representative Cullerton. House Bill 2452."

"House Bill 2452, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relationship to persons with developmental disabilities. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee." 32  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Now, returning back to House Bill 2447. Representative Barnes, do you wish to bring this Bill back? She does. She indicates that she does. So, we will return with leave of the Body we will return House Bill 2447 to the Order of Second Reading. Mr. Clerk."

"Amendment #2, Barnes, amends House Bill 2447 on page six, line 10 and so forth."

"Representative Barnes."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and also thank you, Representative Cullerton. It's merely a technical change and it corrects the Section reference by deleting Section 1-17.2 and inserting in lieu thereof Section 10-17.2. I would ask for a favorable Roll Call."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 2447. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"For those of you who want to keep this Bill technically incorrect. I would suggest that you vote 'no'."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 2447 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 2472. Representative Daniels. Out of the record. Representative Cullerton, do you wish to... run that Bill. Okay. House 33  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Bill 2472. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2472, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Educational Facilities Authority Act. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Madigan - Daniels, amend House Bill 2472."

"Representative Cullerton, on Amendment #2."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This just clarifies the fact that the term cultural facility... and found in the Bill includes building on the national register of historical places which are owned and operated by a not-for-profit entity. I move for the adoption of Amendment #2."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 2472. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion. The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 2472 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 2477, Representative Olson. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2477, a Bill for an Act to amend the Election Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Daniels Olson - Countryman, 34  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 amends House Bill 2477 on page one and so forth."

"Representative Daniels - Vinson or Countryman. Representative Olson, I should have added you, Sir. Olson: Representative Olson, on the Amendment." "Thank you, again, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I'll reiterate what Amendment #1 to 2477 provides. It provides basically when election judges turn in the materials to the election authority after the close of the polls, this applies to where we have precinct counters, an inventory must be taken of the contents of the sealed container before the judge can issue a receipt to the election judge. It also provides that poll watchers are authorized to be present for the inventory. This will address the concern addressed around the State of Illinois in various and sundry precincts where they have this type of precinct counter where sometime they find empty boxes. So, we would move for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 2477."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 2477. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Myron, I'm really disappointed in you. Will the Sponsor yield?"

"Yes."

"He indicates he will."

"This is another Amendment that didn't get out of Committee, right? This was a Bill that didn't get out of Committee."

"Oh, no, the Bill is out of Committee."

"I know the Bill's out of Committee. The Amendment to Amendment #1... What was the number of the Amendment #1 when it was a House Bill?"

"When it was the House Bill. I'm not sure what it was." 35  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"2170, does that ring a bell?"

"2170, John." May 16, 1985

"Right. And how did that fair in Committee?"

"Not too well, but a number of our Bills didn't fair to well in Committee."

"And, why didn't it do so well? Why don't you give me the arguments of the opponents?"

"Well, I'll let the opponent speak to that. A number of our Bills did very poorly on a given day when you fell short by one vote to pass a Bill of your interest. The number of our Bills went down."

"Was this Bill applied to state... does it apply statewide?"

"Wherever we have in-precinct counters."

"Wherever what?"

"In-precinct counters."

"Well, do they those, for example, in Chicago?"

"I believe that's what you have there."

"Now, is this in response... Is this Bill offered by... this Amendment offered by Representative Daniels, is this in response to the election fraud that occurred in DuPage County over the past two years?"

"I sincerely doubt that, Representative Cullerton. We're not election fraud any place. We're merely suggesting that this would probably be a good procedure to put in place where sometimes boxes show up that are empty."

"Well, but... it's in response to a problem or it's proposed so that we can avoid the problem of election fraud out in DuPage County. That's why Representative Daniels has introduced it, isn't it?"

"I doubt that very sincerely. This is really an extension, Representative Cullerton, of his package of two years ago." 36  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Cullerton:

May 16, 1985 "Yeah, that's right. He had about ten Bills that were in response to election fraud in DuPage County when we had the Governor's race when..." "I hear your mention of DuPage County, but I... you would have to address him and I doubt sincerely if they worry about..."

"My mother used to be an election judge, a Democratic election judge in DuPage County"

"I'm not sure of that."

"And she's very familiar with the fraud out there."

"Well, is she available to give testimony?"

"Won't this slow down the process of getting materials in at a receiving station. Isn't that the reason why it's such a bad Amendment."

"Well, I don't think it's designed to slow anything down, Representative Cullerton, because we realize that you have thousands and thousands of precincts in Chicago. It was merely offered in good faith to provide for a timely and orderly election count."

"I would oppose the Amendment. I think that the Chairman of the Election Committee has indicated that she is opposed to the Amendment. It was defeated in Committee. It will obviously slow down the process of getting materials at a receiving station, and I think it's a very bad Amendment. And I would urge people to vote against it."

"Lady from Cook, Representative Alexander, on the question."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman (sic Madam Speaker), this Bill... Amendment was priorly House Bill 2170 which also is trying to bypass the Committee hearing process, and I would urge a 'no' vote on this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative 37  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Leverenz,"

"Sponsor yield?"

"He will yield for a question." May 16, 1985

"Could you just in two sentences describe what the Amendment does?"

"Amendment basically provides that before an election judge can get a receipt for inventory... container they bring in that it be inventoried in the presence of the poll watchers and the judges. In other words, when they bring them into the area to be counted, they don't except a box which might be empty."

"That is to say that when you go to a collection station and the judges have been working since six in the morning and let us say that the judges maybe have their husband or vice versa run it into the receiving station. You would have some hundred plus people, plus the people working in the transfer station or the collection station and they'd all have to stand there until the box was inventoried. Is that correct?"

"The thought, Representative Leverenz, is not designed to penalize or inhibit anybody's movements. It's designed to have elections where when the boxes are brought in, they actually have ballots as a part of that."

"How many times have we had an empty box come in without ballots?"

"I think we had one in the primary. There maybe a year and a half ago which is still considered significant. It isn't a great number of times, but I think everybody is interested in the best possible vote law as possible."

"And what county was that?"

"Pardon?"

"In what county did we have..."

"I believe that happened in the City of Chicago and the 38  STATE OF ILLINOIS 34th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day County of Cook."

"Of one precinct?"

"There is one that I think the Member of this House is a party to."

"The Bill was killed in Committee because of the amount of time it would take it..."

"The Amendment is taken from another Bill. That's correct."

"And now, you're coming back with it to resurrect it a second time."

"That's... that is correct."

"And breathe life into it again."

"Well, Representative Leverenz, you've breathe a life out a number of my Bills on that day. And so we are, yes, indeed, trying to breathe life into it."

"This is... To the Amendment then. I would hope that the House would reject the Amendment and especially on this side. The testimony that we've heard in Committee would exorbitantly tie up the receiving stations. The people would find that they would be in chaos after working diligently all day. And over just one precinct, I think that could be corrected by just training of the election judges in that precinct. I would hope the Amendment would be defeated."

"The Gentleman from DeKalb, Representative Countryman."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is a good Amendment. It isn't a partisan Amendment. What it does is create a substantial audit trail for the ballot supplies, and all of us could be involved in recounts and want to know that the materials are in that container box when it's delivered to the election authority. It's good practice. I would assume 39  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 every election authority would want to do it. I'm amazed that some don't. I can't believe that the other side of the aisle doesn't believe that this is a good Amendment and know that it's good practice. We wouldn't ask the auditor general not to have an audit trail. He's always asking our departments whether or not they've got appropriate audit trails on their dollars. Ballots are important. And if we don't know those ballots are in that box when it's turned in at the counting station, then we don't know that we've got a good election. This isn't a matter between Cook County and downstate or DuPage County. This can happen in southern Illinois. It can happen anywhere. It can happen by inadvertents. My mother is an election judge and she wants that box inventoried so she knows that when she left that box, that she gave it to them and her responsibility ends. This is a good Amendment and I ask for your favorable vote."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Huff."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman (sic Madam Speaker). I rise to oppose this Amendment. As a practical matter, Ladies and Gentlemen, the personnel that's receiving this material in the receiving station are mere high school students. You have thousands of captains converging on these receiving stations, and this Bill will create undo delay resulting in some cases, I fear, an out... out riot. People will become dishearten and just leave the material in the street, and the purpose of the Amendment will be defeated. This... that's the reason I voted against it in the Election Committee."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Nash."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in opposition to this Amendment. If this Amendment was a good Amendment, we would have passed the 40  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Bill out of Committee. I urge an 'aye'... "no" vote."

"The Gentleman from Lee, Representative Olson, to close."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would like a roll call vote on this... this good election issue. We have heard various and sundry references to why this is not a good issue. I've been asked to take this out of the record for a minute. Would we have an option to get back to it within the short term?"

"We're not planning to come back to these Bills, but we can at the end of this Order."

"At the end of this Order?"

"Very good."

"Thank you, I'll take it out."

"Out of the record. House Bill 2494, Representative Williamson. Representative Williamson, are you ready to go on this Bill. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2494, a Bill for an Act to amend the Criminal Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Cullerton - Williamson, amends House Bill 2494 on page one and so forth."

"Representative Cullerton."

"Yes, thank you, Madam Speaker. I move for the adoption of Amendment #1. It deletes the word "willful negligence' which was found on page one, line 26. And it deletes requirement that equipment must be used with the owner's consent in order to be seized. As a result, police could seize equipment used in the commission of a child pornography immediately and it corrects the spelling word of 'commission' and changes it to 'omission'. I believe it's agreed to by the Sponsor of the Bill, Representative 41  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Williamson, from suburban Cook, and I would move for the adoption of Amendment #1."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 2494. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion. The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 2494 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 2498, Representative Alexander. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2498, a Bill for an Act to provide for public hearing and notice regarding relating to community based youth services. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Alexander - Flowers, amends House Bill 2498 on page one and so forth."

"Representative Alexander."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Amendment #1 to House Bill 2498 corrects the intent of the Bill. The Bill as originally drafted singled out a single state agency. The Amendment merely says that any public or private agency or state agency will be required to give a public notice in regards to the establishment or reorganization of state service areas. I ask for approval of Amendment #1."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 2498. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion. The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 2498 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed 42  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 2521, Representative Ryder. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2521, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act relating to the custody and disposition of certain property possessed by enforcement agencies. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Cullerton - Ryder, amends House Bill 2521."

"Representative Ryder."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. This Amendment was created at the suggestion of Representative Cullerton to clear some problems that he and his staff had concerning that. I believe the Amendment was drafted by Democratic staff. It has been signed off by Department of Law Enforcement. I would urge its adoption."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 2521. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion. The question is, "Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 2521 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Going back now to Representative Olson's Bill. Representative Olson, we'll get back to your Bill now. No, keep it out of the record? Okay. Ladies and Gentlemen, we will now go to the Order of 43  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day House Bills May 16, 1985 Third Reading, Short Debate Calendar. Appearing on the... Page 15 on your Calendar, House Bills Third Reading, Short Debate, House Bill 375. Representative Hicks. Out of the record. House Bill 467, Representative Steczo. Representative Steczo. Out of the record. House Bill 479, Representative McCracken. Out of the record. House Bill 497, Representative Ropp. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 497, a Bill for an Act to amend the Code of Civil Procedure. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Ropp."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. This is an attempt to address a problem that sheriffs throughout the State of Illinois are having in that when they are to... when they have received a warrant for someone's arrest, all too often it is not fully filled out. And we're attempting here to state that there should be more clarity in the issuance of the warrant so that the sheriff goes out and picks up the right person. We also state in here that by chance if one of the items of identification is not placed there, that does not make the warrant illegal because there have been SO many cases where not enough information have been placed on the warrant, and we think that three or four out of five is better than one out of five in terms of identifying who the people are that were to be picked up by the sheriff. I welcome your support."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of House Bill 497. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion. The question is, 'Shall House Bill 497 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final passage. Representative Phelps, would you vote me 'aye', please? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will 44  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 take the record. On this question there are 112 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. This Bill having received the Constitutional Majority, is... Representative Matijevich wishes to be added to the Roll Call as 'aye'. There are, therefore, 113 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. House Bill 578, Representative Madigan Curran Bullock, Madigan Curran Bullock. Out of the record. House Bill 604, Representative Ropp. Out of the record. House Bill 608, Representative McGann. Representative McGann. Out of the record. House Bill 707, Representative Kirkland. Out of the record. House Bill 773, Representative Nash. Out of the record. House Bill 787, Representative Berrios. Out of the record. House Bill 799, Representative DeJaegher. Out of the record. House Bill 816, Representative Levin. Out of the record. House Bill 880, Representative McGann. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 880, a Bill for an Act to amend the Revenue Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative McGann."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the Assembly. This House Bill 880 amends the Revenue Act. It requires that railroad noncarrier real estate be identified by permanent real estate indexed numbers in those counties using indexing. The Bill would place a requirement into the statutes that is already being processed, but we have to urge it along by making it part of the statute. The Bill is not opposed by the Illinois Railroad Association. And the system will help the assessors keep track of the accessible noncarrier real estate, especially that real estate that's being leased. I'd be happy to answer any 45  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 questions, and I'd ask for a favorable vote."

"The Gentleman from Cook has moved for the passage of House Bill 880. And on that question, the Gentleman from Kendall, Representative Hastert."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I just want to reiterate what the Sponsor of this Bill said. It was... went through Revenue Committee unanimously. It's a good idea, and we ask your support."

"There being no further discussion. The question is, 'Shall House Bill 880 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final passage. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 113 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. House Bill 882, Representative Greiman. Out of the record. House Bill 895, Representative Madigan Bowman. Out of the record. House Bill 899, Representative Woodyard. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 899, a Bill for an Act to amend the Revenue Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Woodyard."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. This Bill was proposed by the Township Assessors Association in an attempt to alleviate a problem or correct a problem that occurs when they do not get their assessing books on time and thus cannot make their assessments timely and return the books back to the supervisor of assessments. The Bill actually allows them to have their books 60 days and be returned by April 1st or the 60 day period, which ever is later. And we hope that this does correct the problem, and we think it will. It is supported by the 46  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 supervisor of Assessments Association, Department of Revenue and the Township Assessors Association."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of House Bill 899. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Yes, does this apply statewide, Representative?"

"He will yield for a question."

"I'm sorry. Forgot to ask if he'll yield for a question. A lot of time he doesn't, you know."

"It does not..."

"Will you... Will you yield for a question? Does it apply statewide?"

"Cook County is not in the Bill. Counties of one million or more."

"Okay, thank you. No further questions."

"The Gentleman from Kendall, Representative Hastert."

"Would the Sponsor yield?"

"He will,"

"Representative Woodyard, does this Bill do anything that redefine what workbooks are?"

"No."

"I beg your pardon?"

"Not redefine."

"So, does this say books or workbooks?"

"Yes. The workbook shall not be a substitute."

"I beg your pardon?"

"The workbook shall not be a substitute for the assessing book. And..."

"Now in the past... so you do make another change here. In the past, the law said, books or workbooks. Is that correct?"

"Correct. And the supervisor of Assessments may use 47  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 the workbooks or may present those after the 1st of January when the Board of Review."

"Okay. Now, do you have a definition in this Bill what a book is? I'm seriously... serious as far as the assessments. You know, in some counties such as DuPage, they don't have workbooks. They use, you know, video..."

"Right, and many of the counties do use the computer in lieu of the workbooks. I realize that. No, I do not make a definition of a workbook in the Bill."

"Well, I think that may be a flaw, but I'll let it go."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Representative Wolf."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the Sponsor yield to a question?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Representative Woodyard, I was out of the chamber when this Bill was presented. Would you rough through that again for me, please?"

"Yes, Representative. A problem has occurred in the state in which the supervisor of assessments does not get the assessing books to the township assessor in a timely fashion for various reasons, and this Bill would allow the township assessor to have their books 60 days and be returned within that 60 day period or by April 1, whichever is later, but it does give the township assessor the books for 60 days."

"But does this Bill at the same time remove the provision that the supervisor of assessment can use workbooks, or rather, submit to the township assessor workbooks in place of the originals?"

"The supervisor of assessments may issue workbooks to the township assessor until the board of review completes its work. Now, this sentence is added to the Bill, 'The 48  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 workbook shall not be a substitute for the assessment books.""

"What does this Bill do to the legislation that we passed about a year and a half ago?"

"What legislation there are you referring to?"

"The legislation that set up the provision that a supervisor of assessments, if they did not complete their board of review hearings by the first of January, could issue to the township assessors workbooks in lieu of the originals which the township assessor would post and bring up to date, and then return to the supervisor of assessments who would post the originals for the township assessor."

"It's my understanding, Representative, they can still do that by... by... "

"That this process will not be impaired by this particular Bill."

"Yeah. That's correct, and the supervisors of assessments are completely in agreement with this language."

"Well, the fact that the township assessors are in agreement with this language doesn't influence me one bit, because I think they were opposed to the original concept that we passed, as I said, a year and a half ago."

"That's... I think you are right. But both organizations are in agreement with this Bill."

"Okay. Thank you very much."

"The Gentleman from McHenry, Representative Klemm."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield for a question?"

"He will."

"Representative, when do the books normally come from the 49  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 supervisor of assessments down to the township supervisor, normally speaking?"

"When do the books normally come?"

"Yeah."

"January 1."

"About the first of the year?"

"Or about that time, yeah."

"So presently, now, they would have to get their books back by April 15. Is that current law?"

"No. No. That was... That was in the original Bill. The Department of Revenue wanted to move that back to April 1, and within that cycle, this Bill has no problem with that, because it says, '60 days or April 1', whichever's later."

"When would they normally have to get their books, under current law?"

"They would normally have them January 1, if it's done in a timely fashion."

"When would they have to return their books?"

"By April 1, or within 60 days, whichever is later - by April 1."

"That's current law now?"

"No, that's... that's in the Bill, April 1."

"Forget about the Bill. Let's start all over again. What is current law?"

"April 15."

"Okay. So right now, if they receive their books January 1, they would have the month of January, February, March and half of April."

"No."

"Right? April 15."

"Present law."

"If this Bill were to become law, they would have 60 days 50  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 or April 1 as their deadline, so actually, they're getting, then, two weeks or 15 days less time to get their books to the supervisor of assessments. Is that correct?"

"That's correct. Well, unless they would not get their books until March 15 or something like that."

"Now. I was just curious. I could understand the 60 days if they were to get their books in February 28 or something, they would need those extra days and beyond the April 15. But why are we cutting out two weeks for the normal time since most of the books are returned to them by January 1? It seems to me we're shortening the time for the books. Is there a reason for that?"

"The Bill... The other Bill that was introduced at the same time and the township assessors, quite frankly, wanted 90 days. We felt that was too long. The Department of Revenue felt that was too long. And finally, this April 1 date was posed by the Department of Revenue."

"Just a thought, and I've no problem with the Bill other than, in my township, some of my assessors are ending up having less time to work on their books because of this, if this becomes law. I would think perhaps you may consider, if it's possible on the other side, to go back to April 15 and allow the 60 days, and that way they can continue what they're doing and yet allow them that time, if they get their books late."

"Well, as I say, this language was posed by these organizations."

"Alright. Thank you very much."

"The Gentleman from Livingston, Representative Ewing."

"Would the Sponsor yield?"

"He will."

"Representative Woodyard, the assessors, I assume, support 51  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day this legislation?"

"Correct."

"Yeah. How about the supervisor of assessments?"

"They also support it."

"They all... They all support it. Do you think that this will, in any way, loosen up the process whereby we may end up with the schools and local units of government having to wait for money?"

"No, as a matter of fact, I'm told that this will actually speed up the tax cycle, rather than slow it down."

"Can... Can you explain how that's going to speed it up, if they got more time to get their books in?"

"Well actually, in the townships that had the problem, such as Macon County, Representative Dunn's district, the township assessor would only have his work... his assessment books for a period of maybe three to seven days, and there was just no way that that could be an accurate assessment, and it led to many incorrect assessments. And this will correct that problem."

"Yeah. Well, does he have his workbooks ahead of time?"

"Yes."

"But he can't go ahead and do the work and then, just transfer it to the books?"

"Yes, and this will still allow that to happen."

"Uh huh. So I guess I don't understand why he needs the extra time if he's got the workbooks to begin with."

"Representative, I'll show you what happened in some cases, in some townships, and what has led to this. Sometimes, where we had a situation where a supervisor of assessment didn't really get along with the township assessor, some of those workbooks come out in certain types of coding that the township assessor could not even work with." 52  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"So, he had to May 16, 1985 have his final books before he could understand the coding and the... Maybe we ought to put in the law some standardized coding so they'd all understand it."

"I agree."

"You get a Democratic supervisor of assessments, that could cause a lot of problems."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Terzich."

"I move the previous question on the Short Debate."

"The Gentleman moves the previous question. The question is, 'Shall the main question be put?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the main question is put. Representative Woodyard is recognized to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. For a Bill on Short Debate, I think this one has been pretty fully debated. As I say, it does allow the township assessor to have his assessment book 60 days, returned by April 1 or the 60 day period, whichever is later. I move for the passage of House Bill 899."

"The question is, 'Shall House Bill 899 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final passage. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 99 voting 'aye', 8 voting 'no', and 1 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. With permission of the Body, we would like to go back to two Bills that were passed over. First one is House Bill 799, Representative DeJaegher. Clerk, read the Bill." 53  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"House Bill 799, a May 16, 1985 Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Municipal Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative DeJaegher."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman, Members of the Assembly. 799 basically gives communities of $100,000 (sic - 100,000) the right to choose what type of aldermanic form of government they wish to have. The most important thing that you have to address yourself to, there cannot be a change implemented within that community unless a referendum is held before the implementation of the right of the people to choose what type of aldermanic form of government they have. I will stand ready to answer any questions that anyone has."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of House Bill 799. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall House Bill 799 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final passage. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 115 voting 'aye', 1 voting 'no', and 1 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. The next Bill is House Bill 895, Representative Bowman. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 895, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Public Aid Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Bowman."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. 895 amends the Public Aid Code to require the Department of Public Aid to promulgate rules for the acquisition, repair and replacement of orthotic and prosthetic devices. This Bill was recommended by the 54  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Commission on the Status of Disabled Persons. It was a bipartisan recommendation, and with the Amendment that was adopted in Committee, I believe the Department's objections have been removed. I know of no further opposition. I now move for passage of 895."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of House Bill 895. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"Will the Gentleman yield?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Representative Bowman, what is the current status of the Department's authority to regulate this area? Does it already have this authority."

"Well, what the Bill does, though, is to direct the department to make available such things as loaning loaner devices such as wheelchairs in the event that a wheelchair has to be taken in and repaired. Persons without a wheelchair, they need a loaner. The department now does not provide loaners. We are directing them to do that with this legislation."

"And it's the department's Bill?"

"No, it is not the department's Bill, but they... It has been amended, so they have no objection to it."

"Okay. Thank you."

"There being no further discussion, the question is, Shall House Bill 895 pass?" All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final passage. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 114 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. We'll change the Order of Business at this point, Ladies and Gentlemen, and go to page two on 55  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 your Calendar to House Bills Second Reading, Short Debate Calendar. The first Bill appearing there is House Bill 850, Representative Davis. Out of the Record. House Bill 856, Representative O'Connell. Representative O'Connell. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 856, a Bill for an Act to amend the Probate Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, O'Connell, amends House Bill 856 on page two and so forth."

"Representative O'Connell."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. What Amendment #1 does is that it provides for discretionary authority on behalf of the court, the Judge, to determine whether or not the revocation or amendment of the trust is in the best interest of the ward. I know of no opposition to the Amendment."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 856. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 856 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1057, Representative Richmond and Mautino. Out of the Record. House Bill 1187, Representative Saltsman. Representative Saltsman. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1187, a Bill for an Act to amend the Election Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee 56  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1306, Representative Krska. Out of the Record. House Bill 1530, Representative Hallock. Representative Hallock. Out of the Record. House Bill 1582, Representative Brookins. Representative Brookins. Out of the Record. House Bill 1775, Representative Currie. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1775, a Bill for an Act in relationship to fees for pesticide registration. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Currie, amends House Bill 1775 on page one and so forth."

"Representative Currie."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. I would like to move to table Amendment 1 to House Bill 1775, because the Amendment 2 which is filed, incorporates the provisions that were adopted in Committee but make some additional changes."

"The Lady moves to table Amendment #1 to House Bill 1775. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 1775 be tabled?' All those in favor say 'aye", all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment #1 is tabled. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Currie."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. The Bill itself provides for fees for pesticide usage. The 57  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Amendment that was adopted in Committee is incorporated in Amendment 2 establishes the specificity of those fees. I believe that the environmental community as well as the chemical industry people are comfortable with the Amendment. I'm happy to answer your questions, and I would appreciate your support."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 1775. And on that question, the Gentleman from Adams, Representative Mays."

"Thank you very much. Would the Lady yield to a question?"

"She will yield for a question."

"The portion of your Amendment dealing with the registration fee states that in addition to any company registering a pesticide product at any time during one year shall pay the annual company registration fee of $250. Is that $250 per pesticide product or what? I'm thinking..."

"No, it's per company, Representative Mays."

"Okay. So, what are those companies paying right now? And who do they pay it to in this Amendment?"

"I believe it's $50 at this point. We did work with the chemical companies themselves in drafting the specifics of this proposal."

"Does this apply to the local termite and pest control companies that... around the state?"

"This is the structural pest control people that we're working with. This, in fact, deals only with agricultural use. There is a companion Bill that deals with the structural pest control people, the termite people, and that's House Bill 1776."

"Okay. So, this just applies to the fee that they pay for registration with the Department of Agriculture."

"Right."

"There's a companion Bill that applies to the fee that they 58  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 pay to the Department of Public Health. Is that correct?"

"Right. And that's House Bill 1776, which is next up."

"And in both cases, the fee will be increased from $50 to $250 for your... for local businesses. Is that correct, or no?"

"Well, it certainly... "

"That could be registered under this Act."

"It certainly is from 50 to 250 in this Bill... in House Bill 1775."

"Okay. And then, you also have a $50 per project fee to be registered by that company. Is that not correct?"

"Right."

"What is the current registration fee per product?"

"I believe it's $20."

"Thank you very much. To the Amendment. I'm not exactly clear why we have a delineation of duties between Department of Public Health and Department of Agriculture. I've raised this point with the Department of Public Health in the past. I don't... I don't know how timely this registration fee increase for both product and company is, and as a result, I'll probably vote 'no' on the Amendment, and I would request a Roll Call."

"The Gentleman from McLean, Representative Ropp."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the Sponsor yield?"

"She will."

"Could you tell me what those registration fees are used for?"

"Right now, that money goes to general revenue, but the point of the Bill is to try to make sure that we are hiring more inspectors, that the fees that are charged relate to the reason that we regulate in this area, and that is to make sure that things are done properly. I believe that's 59  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 the reason that the chemical fertilizer people support this Bill, because they would like to see the fees that we charge them, because they are using regulated products are, in fact, used for the purpose of maintaining the monitoring system, rather than just going into general revenue. The important thing here, I think, is that we have a mechanism to increase the number of people who are able to do inspections out in the field, and that's the reason industry supports this Bill."

"Okay. I wasn't opposing the idea of the fees, necessarily, and I also was wanting to know whether or not the industry was in support of a 500 percent increase in those fees, but apparently they are, as you say?"

"Industry worked with us on this Bill, Representative Ropp, and is supporting this program. They are for it."

"Okay. Thank you."

"There being no further discussion, Representative Currie to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. The point here is to make sure that the pesticide usage in the state does have adequate inspectional facilities within the Department of Agriculture. As I've mentioned several times in discussion on this Bill, this Amendment, the Bill is strongly supported by the chemical industry itself, as well as by environmental groups and people in the department. I would appreciate your support for Amendment 2 to House Bill 1775."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 1775 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye' and all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Representative.. Okay. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this Amendment, there are 110 voting 'aye', 1 voting 'no', and none voting 60  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 'present'. This Bill, having received the necessary Majority, is hereby declared adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1776, Representative Currie. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1776, a Bill for an Act to amend the Structural Pest Control Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Currie, amends House Bill 1776."

"Representative Currie."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. The Amendment merely provides for the conduction of an urban pesticide study by the Illinois Department of Public Health. The underlying Bill deals with the Structural Pest Control Act, and like the previous Bill we discussed, has to do with making sure that we have adequate inspectional services to make sure that... that pesticides are not endangering the life and health of the people."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1776. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 1776 be adopted? All those in favor say aye, all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1906, Representative Vinson. Out of the Record. House Bill 1954, Representative Vinson. Clerk, read the Bill." 61  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"House Bill 1954, a Bill for an Act to amend the Collection Agency Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Vinson, amends House Bill 1954 on page one and so forth."

"Representative Vinson."

"Madam Speaker, I withdraw Amendment #1."

"The Gentleman withdraws Amendment #1. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Vinson, amends House Bill..."

"Representative Vinson."

"Madam Speaker, I would move for adoption of Amendment #2. What Amendment #2 does is to allow persons who are 18 years of age to become certified as opposed to 21, currently. It was suggested in the Governor's sunset report. It requires any hearing officer appointed by the Director of the Department of Registration and Education to be an attorney. It grants the Department of Registration and Education general rule-making authority, and it would prohibit assignment of an account by a collection agency to an attorney for collection until the owner of the account had approved litigation."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 1954. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 1954 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Would you like us to go back to 62  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 1906, Representative Vinson. Representative Vinson, would you like us to go back to 1906? We had just taken it out of the record. House Bill 1973, Representative Hoffman. Out of the Record. House Bill 2185, Representative McCracken. Out of the Record. House Bill 2199, Representative Frederick. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2199, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act relating to the supply and distribution of water. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. House Bill 2262, Representative Bullock. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2262, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Public Aid Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading on page three on your Calendar, Ladies and Gentlemen, appears House Bill 54, Representative Preston. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 54, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act concerning unidentified bodies. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. House Bill 73, Representative Rea. Representative Rea. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 73, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendments #1, 2 and 3 were adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?" 63  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?" May 16, 1985

"Floor Amendment #4, Oblinger, amends House Bill 73 as amended."

"Representative Oblinger. Representative Oblinger. The Lady is not on the floor, Representative Rea. What is your pleasure?"

"I would like to move onto Third Reading, please."

"The Gentleman therefore moves to... moves to table.. Π

"To table the Amendment."

"Amendment #4, presented by Representative Oblinger in her absence. All those in favor of tabling Amendment #4 to House Bill 73 say 'aye'. All those opposed? Representative Rea, I understand that Representative Oblinger is very close by, and we think we could get her. So, if the Body would wait just one moment. Representative.. Representative Rea, ve believe ve can find her. Would you mind taking it out of the record just for a moment and coming back?"

"Yes. Yes. Would you please take it out of the record?"

"Very good. Out of the record, with the realization that we'll come back to it as soon as possible. House Bill 94, Representative White. Representative White. Out of the Record. Members should know that we'll not be able to come back to many of these Bills in the future. Representative Oblinger is here now, so we'll go back to House Bill 73. Representative Rea. Clerk, read the Bill." a

"House Bill 73 has been read a second time previously. Amendment #4, Oblinger, amends House Bill 73 as amended."

"Representative Oblinger." 64  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"I thought the pension Bills were discussed in one group."

May 16, 1985 all going to be "Excuse me. Representative Rea, for what reason do you rise?"

"Yes, would you take this Bill out of the record for a while, please?"

"The Gentleman requests that the Bill be taken out of the record again. Members should know that if they have Amendments filed, they must be on the floor to present those Amendments, and Bills must be moved as quickly as possible. We cannot guarantee that we will get back to these Bills again. House Bill 115, Representative Oblinger. Representative Oblinger on House Bill 115. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 115 has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments. Floor Amendment #1, Braun - Bowman, amends House Bill 115 on page 11 and so forth."

"Representative Braun or Bowman. The Members are not in the chamber, Representative Oblinger. What is your pleasure?"

"I'd like to go with the... move it to Third Reading, please."

"You have to make a Motion to table the Amendment."

"I make a Motion to table Amendment #1."

"Representative Oblinger moves to table Amendment #1 to House Bill 115. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 115 be tabled?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed... Representative Young asks for a Roll Call vote. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'." 65  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Voting is open. Young: in debate?" May 16, 1985 Representative Young, do you wish to speak "Yes, I wish to speak in support of the Amendment to House Bill #115."

"This is a Motion to table, Sir. You have to speak to the Motion to table."

"I would just like to say to everyone in the House, particularly my colleagues on this side of the aisle, that this is not an Amendment that should be tabled, that this is an Amendment that should be attached to this Bill and all of the other pension Bills here in the House, that even though there may be good cause to disagree on whether or not funds should be divested from South Africa, there is no cause that I can see for any more Illinois dollars to go into South Africa. The racist regime in South Africa is well known to everyone in this House. The regime in South Africa and its policies are not only destroying the people within the county, they are hurting the Illinois economy. We have a... We have a building built by the state that was built with South African steel that helped close steel mills in Chicago. Ladies and Gentlemen, I ask you, why would anyone want to put another Illinois dollar in South Africa?"

"Representative Young, you have to bring your remarks to a close. You only have one minute, and you have used that."

"And the last thing I would say, as courtesy to the Sponsor, this Amendment should have at least been heard."

"The Gentleman from Will, Representative Davis. Very good. Does anybody else wish to speak to the Motion to table? The Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich."

"Well, I... We tabled an Amendment before because the 66  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Sponsor wasn't here, but the Sponsor's here now. I don't see why we can't go back to this Amendment."

"Representative Oblinger, would you like to withdraw your Motion?"

"Yes."

"Okay. The Lady withdraws her Motion to table. We are on Amendment #1 to House Bill 115. The Sponsor is Representative Braun and Bowman. Representative Braun."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I want to thank Representative Young for his comments, because he said a lot of what I said. There's an article in the news... in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat today about Pepsi-Cola pulling out of South Africa, and that they are doing so in large part because of the economics of the situation. Now, as everyone knows, we have filed these prospective only Amendments. For those of you who say you are against apartheid, for those of you who say you deplore what's happening in South Africa, here is an opportunity for you to show that without actually calling upon our pension funds to divest. This is not a divestiture Amendment. All this says is that we will not put any new dollars in business in South Africa. It does not cause any transaction costs. It does not cause any disruption that might be argued, although I would argue that there is no disruption from divestment. It just causes no disruption at all. It is a prospective only, a foward-looking only kind of proposal that says that we, in the State of Illinois, while we... just as we support pensioners, we support our pensioners to the extent that we don't want to see their pension dollars jeopardized by being embroiled as mortar for apartheid. It's just that simple. I would encourage your support of Amendment #1. I think it is fair to our pensioners. I think it is fair to 67  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 our pension systems. I think it will achieve the result of making a statement regarding our... our disdain for apartheid and that system of government where the question, Ladies and Gentlemen, is not a question of black and white, it is a question of wrong. It is a question of what is right. It is the right thing for us to do, not to send any additional dollars to South Africa, and that is what Amendment #1 seeks to do."

"The Lady from Sangamon, Representative Oblinger."

"Madam Chairman and Members of the General Assembly, I do not object to the substantive matter of this Bill. I do object to it being put on House Bill 115. If Representative Braun will remember what she said yesterday about her own Bill, she said, 'If you want to have a Bill like that, go and do one, but don't put it on my Bill.' This is how I feel. She has 317. She has 330, all of which address this question. I think she has sufficient Bills to work with, and I do not want it on this Bill."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Dunn."

"Will the Sponsor yield for a question?"

"She will yield for a question. Representative Braun."

"Does the Sponsor intend to call House Bill 317 and House Bill 330 for vote on Third Reading?"

"I'm sorry, Representative Do I intend to call the Bills for a vote on Third Reading?"

"That's the question. Yes."

"Yes, I... At this time, I intend to do so, yes."

"Thank you very much."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Brookins."

"Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of this 68  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Assembly, we see all over the south side, southeast side of the City of Chicago, the steel companies, they're suffering. and they're suffering because we're importing steels and other goods from foreign countries, particularly South Africa, and they're putting our people out of work. Not only blacks, are they putting out of work, Hispanics, they're putting out of work, the ethnic groups on the east side of the City of Chicago, which is part of my district, are out of work. So therefore, we want to help the economy. We want to help the small business people in those areas, because their shops are folding, and I think that this will go a long way in helping that situation. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Piel."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I won't get into a long dissertation on this Amendment. I... I'll wait until the Bill comes up, and I wish the Sponsor would wait until the Bill comes up. I noticed we had her Amendment yesterday, and if you look at your Calendar, we can go to House Bill 202. She's put the same Amendment on that. And on 164, she's put the same Amendment on that. Let's see, this is 115, so we'll pass by that one. 94 and on and on and on. I think it's getting a little bit dilatory on the Sponsor's part. Fine. Why doesn't she wait until her Bills are called, because whatever happens to her Bills, you know, it's going to happen to the Amendments also. And let's discuss the issue on the Bills and don't try and screw up somebody else's Bill with your Amendments. Yesterday, the Sponsor went on and on about how she didn't want somebody to tie an Amendment onto her Bill, and what she's trying to do, she's trying to tie it onto every single pension Bill in the House of Representatives. I think it's a little bit ridiculous." 69  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Young."

"Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, it appears to me that there might be some confusion of the Members of the House, because these Amendments do not address the substantive issues addressed in House Bills 317 and 330, known as the South Africa Bills. Those Bills address the issue of divestiture, of taking the pension money out of the country that is already there. These Amendments address the issue of putting future Illinois dollars into South Africa."

"The Gentleman from St. Clair, Representative Flinn."

"Madam Speaker, I move the previous question."

"Representative Flinn moves the previous question. The question is, 'Shall the main question be put?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the main question is put. Representative Braun is recognized to close."

"Thank you very much. To clarify and to expand on Representative Young's remarks, and in response to Representative Piel, the situation yesterday was one in which an individual tried to keep me from tabling my Amendment to my own Bill. That is a very different situation than an Amendment to a piece of legislation which is certainly, in this instance, germane. This is not intended to be hostile to Representative Oblinger's interest in the seniors. Representative Oblinger has labored long and hard in this General Assembly to protect and provide for seniors and retirees in the state, and I applaud her on that, and I have always supported her on that. I intend to continue to support our pensioners and continue to support our retirees, but I cannot in good 70  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day conscience send May 16, 1985 to South Africa to another nickel participate in the slavery of people over there and to participate in the destruction of industries here in the State of Illinois. It is a two way street. We either put our money where our mouth is, and for those of you who say you are against apartheid, this Amendment does not call for us to take a nickel out that's already there. This Amendment says we just won't put any new money in. It's a very different situation than House Bills 317 and 320... 330, rather. It is a situation in which those of you who may have a problem with the issue of pulling money... old money out, will have an opportunity to express your support of the proposition, that apartheid is wrong, that what is going on in South Africa is wrong, and that the retirees of the State of Illinois do not want to be part and parcel of supporting that system."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 115 be adopted?" All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Representative Alexander has one minute to explain her vote."

"I'm in support of this Amendment. Last year, a very illustrious Legislator had a Buy American Bill put out of here. Keeping the money in the United States helps the Buy American theory. I'm asking for a green vote on this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Yes. I just wanted to point out that when we had this same Amendment yesterday on a Cook County pension Bill, the Republicans were voting 'present' so that the Amendment would get on the Bill so that they could kill the Bill. Now that we have Representative Oblinger's Bill, which they theoretically want to pass, they're voting 'no', 71  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 because they don't want the Amendment on the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Bullock. One minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in support of the Lady's Amendment. This Assembly has established, as a matter of public policy, affirmatively, its position on divesiture in South Africa. Distinguished Representative Dan Pierce last year had a Bill. He allowed me to place an Amendment on that Bill which prohibits tax exemption... sales tax exemption for buying kruggerands in the State of Illinois. The Governor of this state, a Republican, signed that Bill. There's bipartisan support for sending a message to South Africa to rescind its apartheid policy. I don't think the issue needs to be one of castigating any Member of this House. I have great affection for Representative Oblinger, a fine lawyer and a fine Representative, and I'm sure she will vote for this measure when it gets to Third Reading, but the State of Illinois has established public policy, and I'm proud to say that Representative Pierce and I sent that to the Governor's desk and he signed it. I think it deserves an 'aye' vote."

"The Gentleman from DeWitt, Representative Vinson."

"I just wanted to compliment Representative Cullerton on his continued fine performance as a standup comedian."

"The Gentleman from St. Clair, Representative Stevens, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman. Lest there be confusion, I have received a lot of mail from retired teachers who are saying that this Amendment and other similar Amendments in the three Bills should be opposed, and I just wanted to point that out. Thank you." 72  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE Speaker Breslin: "The Gentleman from Marion, Representative Friedrich." May 16, 1985

"Well, just echoing what Representative Stephens just said, a lot of people who have... whose pensions are involved do not want this Amendment. I think the significant thing here is that we don't have a similar thing for Ethiopia where the blacks are persecuting the blacks or in Afghanistan where the Russians are persecuting the people there. If we're going to have this, let's just have it for everybody that's got a problem internationally, not just South Africa. That's not the only place in the world where people are being persecuted."

"Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 47 voting 'aye', 53 voting 'no' and 9 voting 'present'. Representative Braun."

"I'd like a Poll of the Absentees."

"Poll of the Absentees, Mr. Clerk."

"Poll of the Absentees. Berrios. Giglio. Krska. Kulas. McGann. Mulcahey. O'Connell. Parke. And Richmond. No further."

"Representative Brookins... rather Representative Bullock asks for a verification of the negative vote. Proceed with the verification of the nega... or Roll... Poll of the Negative Vote, Mr. Clerk."

"Barger. Brunsvold. Capparelli. Churchill. Cowlishaw. Daniels. Davis. Didrickson."

"Excuse me. Representative McGann, for what reason do you rise?"

"Vote me 'aye'."

"The Gentleman asks to be voted 'aye'."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker."

"Continuing with the Poll of the Negative. Ewing. 73  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Flinn. Virginia Frederick. May 16, 1985 Dwight Friedrich. Goforth. Hallock. Hannig. Hartke. Hastert. Hawkinson. Hensel. Hoffman. Johnson. Klemm. Koehler. Kubik. Mays. McAuliffe. McCracken. McMaster. Oblinger."

"Excuse me. Representative Bullock, Representative Olson asks leave to be verified. Proceed."

"Olson. Parcells. Bernard Pedersen. William Peterson. Phelps. Piel."

"Representative McCracken asks leave to be verified also, Representative Bullock. Proceed."

"Pullen. Rea. Regan. Bopp. Ryder. Saltsman. Stange. Stephens."

"Representative Hastert asks leave to be verified, Representative Bullock. Proceed, Mr. Clerk."

"Tate. Terzich. Tuerk. Vinson. Wait. Weaver. Williamson. Wojcik. Wolf. And Woodyard. No further."

"Do you have any questions of... We are starting at 48 voting 'aye' and 53 voting 'no'."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Let's start with Representative Capparelli."

"Representative Capparelli is in his chair."

"Ewing."

"Representative Ewing is not in his chair. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? Representative Ewing. Remove him from the Roll Call. Representative Mays asks leave to be verified, Representative Bullock. Remove Representative Mays from the Roll Call. Excuse me, Representative Ewing from the Roll Call. Representative Hoffman asks leave to be verified. And Representative Didrickson."

"What is the count now? We've... Leave to verify all these people. What are we starting with?"

"We're starting... Now we have 48 voting 'aye' 74  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day and 52 voting "no"."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Flinn."

"Representative Flinn is in his chair."

"Goforth."

"Representative Goforth is in his chair."

"Hannig."

"Representative Hannig is in his chair."

"Hartke."

"Representative Hartke is in his chair."

"Johnson."

"Representative Johnson. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? The Gentleman is in the chamber."

"Kubik."

"Representative Kubik is in his chair."

"McAuliffe."

"Representative McAuliffe is in his chair."

"O'Connell."

"Representative O'Connell. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? Representative O'Connell. The Gentleman is not in the chamber. Remove him."

"Gentleman is not recorded as voting."

"I see. The Gentleman is not recorded as voting..."

"Parcells."

"Representative Parcells is in her chair."

"Phelps."

"Representative Phelps. Representative Phelps. The Gentleman is in his chair. He is in his chair."

"Pullen."

"Representative Pullen is in the chamber."

"Rea."

"Representative Rea is in his chair. Representative Younge asks leave to be verified as a 'yes', 75  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 however, Representative Younge, we are not verifying the negative... or the positive or the affirmative so you cannot have that leave. Proceed, Representative Bullock."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Ropp."

"Representative Ropp..."

"Stange."

"Excuse me. Representative Ropp is in the chamber. Representative Stange is in the chamber."

"I'm trying to get to know my new colleagues."

"Yes, I see that."

"Some of them I don't... Some of them I don't recognize faces, Stange."

"He is in the chamber, right here. Right down here."

"Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. That's my friend, yes. Tate."

"Representative Tate. The Gentleman... is in his chair and Representative Ewing has returned to the floor. Add him to the Roll Call. And he asks leave to be verified, Representative Bullock."

"Yes."

"Yes, you have that."

"Tuerk."

"Representative Tuerk is in his chair."

"Williamson."

"Representative Williamson. Is the Lady in the chamber? She is."

"Wolf."

"Representative Wolf is in the chamber."

"Woodyard."

"Representative Woodyard is in the chamber."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker."

"There are 43 voting 'aye', 53 voting 'no' and 9 voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Are there any 76  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 159, Representative Ronan. Representative Ronan. Out of the Record. House Bill 160, Representative Ronan. Out of the Record. House Bill 164, Representative Capparelli. 164. Out of the Record. With leave of the chamber, we'd like to go back to House Bill 73 that was taken out of the record before. Representative Rea, are you ready to proceed on that Bill? He is. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk."

"House Bill 73. It's been read a second time previously. Next Amendment is Amendment #4, Oblinger, amends House Bill 73 as amended."

"Representative Rea, is there an understanding on what you were going to do with Amendment #4? Okay. Representative Oblinger is on the floor, on Amendment #4. Proceed, Representative Oblinger. Representative Oblinger."

"Madam Speaker and Members of the House, I wish to withdraw Amendment #4."

"The Lady withdraws Amendment #4. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, Braun - Bowman - Younge, amends House Bill 73 as amended."

"Representative Braun."

"Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, you know, I've not... I've been here now for three Sessions. This is my fourth term. I have never undertaken to tinker with another person's legislation out of malice or out of any interest to try to kill the Bill. That is not my intention now, and I say to you in all sincerity that while it may be a painful and... if not tedious exercise for us to go through, it is of critical importance that on each and 77  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 every one of these pension increase Bills, that we attempt by whatever means we have available to us as Legislators, to keep those dollars from going to benefit business in South Africa. Representative Friedrich raised a point in Debate, and maybe I shouldn't have used his name, because I don't mean it in a disparaging way, but he asked the question, "Why not some other country?" And the answer to that is simple, and that is that South Africa is the only country in the world that constitutionally mandates, constitutionally requires not only separation of the races, but unequal treatment of the races. The fact that these dollars go to benefit business in South Africa means simply that these dollars go to ensure that the practical slavery of people there is continued. Workers, in order to work in plants in South Africa, if they are not white, if they are black or if they are colored, are required to have a pass to even go into town, are separated from their families and are, if they find themselves in a situation where they are arrested without charge on the streets, are returned to the Bantustands, which for all intents and purposes, Ladies and Gentlemen, are nothing more than modern day concentration camps in the desert. We cannot continue to use pensioners as an excuse for the unbridled discretion of money managers to pour dollars into that situation. I submit to you that the interest of our pensioners are served when we obey the prudent person rule and when we make certain that our dollars are prudently invested where they will give a return without occasioning the tremendous, the horrendous, social costs that these investments are currently causing. The report from the Auditor General recently demonstrated that our pension funds do very poorly on their return on investments. In 1974, the pension funds returned less than five percent on the investment. Now, if we are going to 78  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 stand here foursquare in favor of the money managers' discretion to get 4.5 percent on our money that is invested, there is something terribly wrong with our interpretation of our obligation to see that these dollars are prudently invested. I submit to you, Ladies and Gentlemen, that this Amendment is the right thing to do. It will only prohibit new dollars from going to South Africa, and I encourage your support on Amendment #5."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #5 to House Bill 73. And on that question, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Franklin, Representative Rea."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman, Members of the House. In all due respect to my seatmate, here, I rise in opposition to this Amendment for the same reasons that was discussed earlier without taking an abundance of time, and I would ask for a 'no' vote on this Amendment."

"There being no further discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #5 to House Bill 73 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 38 voting 'aye', 43 voting 'no', and 26 voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. The next Bill on the regular Order of Call for House Bills Second Reading is House Bill 175, Representative Bullock. Out of the Record. House Bill 202, Representative Satterthwaite. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 202, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill." 79  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Saltsman, amends House Bill 202 as amended."

"Representative Saltsman."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Amendment #2 amends the Municipal Retirement Fund of the Illinois Pension Code to provide up to one year of service credit for certain uncompensated accumulated sick leave earned and covered by employees."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 202. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 202 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, Braun - Bowman, amends House Bill 202 as amended."

"Representative Braun."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Amendment again only applies to any increased pension contributions. I think the case has been made in Debate already on the previous pension Bill. I would encourage your support, and I would encourage your help in making a statement that we don't want these new dollars to go to benefit business in South Africa."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #3 to House Bill 202. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the 80  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 question is, 'Shall Amendment #3 to House Bill 202 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 41 voting 'aye', 28 voting 'no', and 37 voting 'present'. This Bill... This Amendment, receiving the necessary Majority, is hereby declared adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #4, Giglio - Giorgi, amends House Bill 202 as amended."

"Representative Giorgi."

"Madam Speaker, this is a technical Amendment that replaces everything up to now and reinstates everything. How's that?"

"Representative Giorgi..."

"Amendment #4 deletes everything after the enacting clause, then reinstates the provision of House Bill 202, including Amendments 1 and 2, and further provides boards of pension funds organized under the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund Article of the Pension Code with a mechanism for the establishment of a group health insurance program for its employees and retired employees. The Amendment requires any monies collected by the board for the administration of the program to be deposited in a separate account with the State Treasurer. What this does is, it allows the Board of Directors of the IMRF to institute a group health program for employees of the state because it's permissive and it saves them a lot of money, gets everybody covered."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #4 to House Bill 202. And on that question, the Gentleman from DeWitt, Representative Vinson."

"Madam Speaker, I would ask that the Amendment be ruled 81  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 out of order because it's dilatory."

"The Chair rules that the Amendment is not dilatory. The Lady from Cook, Representative Braun."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. A question of the Sponsor."

"Proceed with your question."

"Representative, will Amendment #4... Did you say it deletes everything after the enacting clause?"

"Yes."

"It does not amend the Bill as amended. It just amends the Bill?"

"Does not amend the Bill as amended... "

"So the practical effect of this Amendment would be to defeat Amendment 3, which was just adopted."

"Well, I've been, you know, working on this for about 10 days, and I've got everyone understanding my Amendment. Your Amendment, they understand yours also, but, you know..."

"I'm sorry... sorry. Someone was just talking in my good ear. What did you say?"

"Leader Braun, I've been working on my Amendment for a couple of weeks, and we had taken care of all problems up 'til this morning when you put your Amendment on, but this is a very important Bill in that it creates a health insurance program for state employees under the tutelage of the IMRF. Your Amendment... I didn't know your Amendment was going to be placed on the Bill, so my Amendment enacted everything... deleted everything after the enacting clause. It adopted Amendment 1 and 2 and then my Amendment that reinstates the House Bill. I'm sorry about your Amendment. Your Amendment's off of it now. So..."

"If this Amendment is adopted, the Amendment 3 doesn't go on it."

"Then the Amendment's off. Yeah. But I have another 82  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Bill that you can put it on. I have 717, that you've got it on already."

"It doesn't help with the dollars created in 202, though."

"No, but... We aren't using pension funds to institute a health program for state employees or people that are... that pay into the IMRF. This is not a state funded program. All it is is a state administered program because the people are contributing to the IMRA."

"Thank you."

"I urge the adoption of the Amendment."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #4 to House Bill 202. And on that question, there is no further discussion, so the question is, 'Shall Amendment #4 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"There has been a request for a Roll Call. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 40 voting 'aye', 60 voting 'no', 7 voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Representative Satterthwaite."

"Madam Speaker, I was rising for a verification of the Negative Roll Call on that Amendment."

"On your Amendment?"

"On Amendment #4."

"I'm sorry, Representative Satterthwaite. We've already acted on that Amendment. Would you like to leave 83  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 the Bill on Second Reading."

"We'll hold the Bill on Second Reading."

"That would be fine. House Bill 209, Representative Cullerton. Representative Cullerton. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 209, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Vehicle Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Tate, amends House Bill 209 on page two... page one and so forth."

"Representative Tate."

"Mr. Speake... or Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment 1 simply repeals the seat belt law this General Assembly barely passed last Session. A very significant issue, an issue that all of us have heard from our constituents, received phone calls and letters, and I encourage the entire chamber... If I could have the attention, Speaker... Madam Speaker."

"Is there any further discussion?"

"Okay. Thank you, Madam Speaker. There is additional discussion. This issue obviously is one that's been debated. All of the Members know the issue, know the merits on both sides of the issue. Quite frankly, it's an issue of... one of freedom of choice, one that I personally believe that this is the best illustration of big brother government that we've ever asked... we've ever passed in this chamber. If you truly believe that individuals have the... should have the right and freedom of choice, then you'll vote 'yes' on this Amendment. I encourage a favorable Roll Call."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 209. And on that question, the 84  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Sponsor of House Bill 209, Representative Cullerton."

"Yes, thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Procedurally, I thought I'd explain that since I'm the Sponsor of this Bill and I was also the Sponsor of the mandatory seat belt law, that obviously if the Amendment gets on the Bill, then I would not call the Bill, and this would not ever come into law. There is a Bill - Representative Vinson's the Sponsor that does repeal the seat belt law. I know that that Bill will get a Roll Call, and that's the Bill that, if you're in favor of repealing the seat belt law, that's the Bill you should support. If Representative Vinson chooses not to call that Bill, that's his decision, but I think really to debate this Amendment at this time is really meaningless, because if the Amendment gets on, it will never be called. It also is true that it would kill the Bill, and the Bill is a very, very interesting Bill which is supported by the Medical Society and opposed - wildly opposed by the Trial Lawyers. Just parenthetically mention to you that what the Bill does is to say that if you..."

"I'm sorry, Representative Cullerton. You have to speak to the Amendment."

"Right. Okay. The Amendment that kills the Bill. Right."

"Okay. There being no further discussion, Representative Tate is recognized to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Simply put, this is an issue that's going to put all of us on record of one of freedom of choice and individual rights. I encourage a favorable Roll Call, and if this Amendment goes on, it certainly will improve the substance of the Gentleman's Bill."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House 85  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Bill 209 be adopted?" All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 41 voting 'aye', 59 voting 'no', and none voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Ropp, amends House Bill 209 on page two and so forth."

"Representative Ropp."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I've been in the Legislature several years, now, and I am really... regret that, in this particular Bill handled by this Sponsor, that he has, for some reason, not included the word 'knowingly' in this particular sense. I know of his great concern for the mental state of people, and I'm sure this is an oversight, and I... he's corrected me in the last couple of weeks on some errors that I have appreciated, and I know that he will certainly accept this as a real added plus to strengthening the importance of his Bill, here, and... because I wouldn't want anyone to be caught in violation of the seat belt Bill if they didn't know they were really in violation, and I think it's certainly in the best interest of the citizens of the state, and I know the Sponsor will want to include this in his... "

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 209. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Well, I'm reading the Amendment to see if it makes any sense. If I was going to put a 'knowingly' Amendment in this Bill, I would have done it in a different location, but maybe I can just take this opportunity to explain why we don't need a knowing Amendment on this particular Bill. This is a petty offense. This is a $25 fine, if you don't 86  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 wear your seat belt, and it's going to go into effect in about six weeks, whether we pass a repeal or not, because the Governor's indicated he's not going to sign any repeal. So it's going to go into effect in six weeks. Now, this is a petty offense, and no one can go to jail, SO that it's just like a speeding violation - strict liability we have for petty offenses. So, the difference... The reason why I put knowing Amendments on other Bills is because you can go to jail, you know, like for a year. For example, we had a Bill that Representative Van Duyne's the Sponsor of that doesn't have a 'knowing' Amendment on it that is strict liability for abusing animals. So, you may recall if you saw that movie 'Vacation', some lady tied her dog to the bumper of a car and then she got in the car and she drove to the... drove down the highway, and they forgot that the dog was really tied to the bumper? Well, under that Bill, without a knowing Amendment, they'd go to jail for a year, because they... because they unintentionally abused an animal, but nonetheless, it happens so... But in this Bill, the seat belt law, you only have a $25 fine. You can't go jail, and therefore, there's no reason why it shouldn't be strict liability. So therefore, I'm opposed to the Amendment." to

"The Gentle... The Lady from Cook, Representative Pullen."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to respond to the Gentleman who just spoke and also inform the House that a couple of days ago when he asked me to hold a Bill to put the word 'knowing' into the Section on the fine, of a Bill that I have, he indicated that the word 'knowing' was terribly important to put into that Bill because we have to put a mental state into everything that might have some sort of penalty attached to it, and that Bill related to a 87  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 petty offense for which no one could go to jail. So I think this is the same situation that he was so concerned about the other day, and I think that it's... No, it didn't get on, because I asked you whether you would let me put it onto this Bill if I let you put it onto mine, and that's when you decided you'd rather not have it in this particular law, and you would let it go... my Bill go to Third Reading, which I appreciated. However, I do think that it is nice that the Gentleman has finally recognized, after years, that there are some situations where it isn't appropriate to put the word 'knowing' in, but I think this may be one where it is appropriate to put the word 'knowing' in, and I support the Gentleman's Amendment."

"There being no further discussion, Representative Ropp is recognized to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I might say, in reference to those two dogs that were tied up to the car, maybe they had a couple of hot dogs, there. I stand in support of this Amendment because of the knowledge that I have learned from the spokesman on the other side of the aisle of the importance of having 'knowingly' in so many of these good Bills that I really never supported before, but I think this is a good one, and it ought to be included."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 209 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 49 voting 'aye', 56 voting 'no', and none voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 224, Representative Woodyard. Out of the Record. House Bill 290, 88  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Representative Huff. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 290, a Bill for an Act to revise the public school system in the City of Chicago. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. House Bill 312, Representative Soliz. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 312, a Bill for an Act to provide justice for all citizens and residents of Illinois by providing for the need of non-English speaking persons. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #2 was adopted previously."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, Cullerton and Soliz, amends House Bill 312."

"Representative Cullerton."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. The Bill adds the responsibility of having interpreters in juvenile court. This Amendment directs the Administrative Office of Courts to repay the counties for the cost of providing interpreters in those juvenile proceedings."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #3 to House Bill 312. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #3 to House Bill 312 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?" 89  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE Clerk O'Brien: "No further Amendments." May 16, 1985

"Thank you. Representative Soliz, this Bill cannot move to Third Reading because there has been a request for a fiscal note as amended, and that has not yet been filed. Representative Soliz."

"Madam Speaker, the fiscal note has been filed. I filed it this morning, as a matter of fact."

"However, the request is for a fiscal note as amended. As amended."

"As amended."

"What the Clerk's Office says it has is a State Mandates Act fiscal note. They are different, so the Bill will remain on the Order of Second Reading."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman."

"Surely. House Bill 321, Representative Keane. Out of the Record. House Bill 347, Representative Hawkinson. Out of the Record. House Bill 356, Representative Brunsvold. Out of the Record. House Bill 374, Representative McGann - Capparelli. McGann. Out of the Record. House Bill 338, Representative McGann - Capparelli. Out of the Record. House Bill 3... House Bill 419, Representative Cullerton. Out of the Record. House Bill 464, Representative Terzich. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 464, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Metropolitan Civic Center Support Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None. Third Reading. House Bill 501, Representative Bullock. Representative Bullock, Flinn or Brookins. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 501..."

"Out of the Record. House Bill 504, 90  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Representative Preston. Out of the Record. House Bill 505, Representative Preston. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 505, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Criminal Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative Preston."

"Representative Preston."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Amendment is in keeping with a commitment I made in Committee to amend out the provisions of the Bill that would apply to members of the family of an elected official."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 505. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Has that Amendment been printed and distributed?"

"No, it has not. The Gentleman requests that the Bill be taken out of the record. Is that correct? It is. Out of the Record. House Bill 507, Representative McGann - Capparelli. Out of the Record. House Bill 510, Representative Dunn. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 510, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendments #1 and 2 were adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Giorgi, amends House Bill 510 as amended."

"Representative Giorgi, on Amendment #3 to House Bill 510. Representative Giorgi." 91  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"Would you take it out of the record momentarily? We're working on something now."

"Representative Dunn, do you agree to take the Bill out of the record? Representative Dunn."

"Madam Speaker, could we take this out of the record just momentarily if we could come right back to it?"

"Surely. Out of the Record. Representative Matijevich, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, the next two Bills, 11 and 12, could I have leave to place those in Interim Study?"

"The Gentleman asks leave to place House Bills 511 and House Bill 512 in Interim Study. Hearing no objection, the Gentleman has leave to place these Bills back to the Order of Interim Study. Representative Dunn is ready to go now on House Bill 510. Read the Bill again, Mr. Clerk."

"House Bill 510, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendments #1 and 2 were adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Giorgi."

"Representative Giorgi."

"Madam Speaker, I'd like leave of the House to withdraw Amendment #3. I repeat, Madam Speaker, I'd like leave of the House to withdraw Amendment #3."

"The Gentleman withdraws Amendment #3. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #4, offered by Bepresentative Giorgi."

"Representative Giorgi." 32  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"Mr. Speaker... Madam Speaker, this amends the state employee article of the Pension Code and extends the alternative retirement annuity, provides for state police, firefighters, air pilots, special agents and lie detector operators. I move for the adoption of Amendment #4." May 16, 1985

Speaker Dunn:

Speaker Breslin: "The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Amendment #4 to House Bill 510. And on that question, the Gentleman from Macon, Representative Dunn." "Thank you, Mr. (sic - Madam) Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Bill, in the main, affects downstate teachers, and I'd like to keep the Bill clean, and I would ask the Membership to defeat this Amendment."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #4 to House Bill 510 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'nos' have it, and the Amendment is lost. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, offered by Representative John Dunn."

"Representative Dunn."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Amendment #5 actually becomes the Bill, and what it does is, it adopts the Amendments adopted in Committee and makes various administrative changes to the downstate teachers' article of the Pension Code. The important thing for the Membership at this juncture is that this Bill, with this Amendment on it, would be revenue neutral, so there is no cost."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #5 to House Bill 510. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #5 to House Bill 510 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, 33  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day and the Amendment is adopted. Are there May 16, 1985 any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #6, offered by Representative DeJaegher."

"Representative DeJaegher."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman, Members of the House. Amendment #6 basically does what House Bill 402 did last year. It's the returning of funds that the people already contribute by simply making a request for the return of those particular funds."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #6 to House Bill 510. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Hoffman."

"Yes, will the Sponsor yield to a question?"

"He will yield for a question."

"What happened to House Bill 402?"

"Last year that's the Bill that passed the House, but it got tied up in Senate Rules and didn't get out of Senate."

"Alright, let me ask you a second question. If we... If we allow these kinds of withdrawals to take place, what will that do to the cost of survivor benefit rates?"

"The pension impact note stated that this would be a very minor adjustment."

"How minor?"

"These contributions are used for survivor pension benefits."

"I understand that. But let me... let me help you... Let me point out that one of the reasons that the survivors' benefits is able to be maintained at the level it is is because there is no payback to people who don't collect. You're asking to change the system and allow a payback for those people who are unable to collect. It 94  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 would be like letting people out of... you know, getting money back that they paid into Social Security. Well, we don't allow that, because regardless of whether one uses it or not, it's a form of an insurance program. It is not a form of a pension program."

"I choose to disagree with you, because I don't feel this will have any impact on any other survivors benefit. Because basically, they are using that money for a certain period of time to assist that particular program which basically is to assist those. And all we're doing is basically giving these people the right to withdraw their funds that they've already contributed."

"Your... Dis... Respectfully, I disagree with you on your interpretation of how the survivors benefit program functions. Whether the Amendment is adopted or not Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, to the Amendment I think you need to recognize that we are now dealing with that end of pension and pension related systems which impinge upon... collectively will impinge upon our ability to pay for those programs in the future. The Governor has set up a task force on... on pension funding and has asked me and I've accepted the Chairmanship of that Task Force, which is due to report in November. I happen to be a member of the Downstate Teachers' Retirement System. I have paid into survivors benefit for 27 years. I may or may not collect. But the fact of the matter is that... The fact of the matter is that my payment into that system has made it possible for those who use the system to receive the payment that they do and for us to keep the rate at the level it is at. And for that reason or for those two reasons, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I stand in opposition to the Gentleman's Amendment." 95  41st Legislative Day

"Representative DeJaegher is recognized to close."

"Thank you. Of course, we can find fault with any particular Bill that we want to address ourselves to. This particular Bill and its Amendment, of course, provides for the survivor. There's a possibility that that person that has contributed the funds will outlive the survivor. So basically, this is all it is - returning the money to the person that's contributed, and for that particular reason, I ask support of the House on this particular Amendment."

"The Gentleman has... The question is, 'Shall Amendment #6 to House Bill 510 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 60 voting 'aye', 47 voting 'no' and none voting 'present'. This Amendment, having received the necessary Majority, is hereby declared adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #7, offered by Representative Braun - Bowman and Young (sic)."

"Representative Bowman."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, this Amendment is the same as Amendments that have been proposed to other pension Bills. This, too, deals with the use of pension monies for purposes of making investments in the Republic of South Africa or for doing business with that government. This Amendment would prohibit such activities, and for all the... the reasons that have been previously stated in other floor debate, I will not labor the point. But I do want people to understand that this Amendment is precisely the same Amendment that we adopted to 202 and had been proposed to 96  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 other legislation. I move for its passage."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #7 to House Bill 510. And on that question, the Gentleman from Macon, Representative Dunn."

"Just to make sure the Membership knows this is another South African Amendment."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #7 to House Bill 510 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'nos' have it, and the Amendment is lost. Representative Bowman, do you really want a Roll Call? The Gentleman wants a Roll Call. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 29 voting 'aye', 59 voting 'no' and 14 voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Representative Matijevich in the Chair."

"The Gentleman from Knox, Representative Hawkinson, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask leave of Body to commit House Bill 347 back into Interim Study."

"The Gentleman asks leave that House Bill 347 - was it - 347, of which you are Chief Sponsor - correct - be committed to Interim Study. Does he have leave? Leave, and the Bill will be so committed. House Bill 513, Hicks. Read the Bill."

"House Bill 513, a Bill for an Act to amend the Civil Administrative Code of Illinois. Second... This Bill has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments." 97  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"Amendments from the floor?"

"None."

"Third Reading. House Bill 561, McGann. Out of the record, 56... 567, Daniels. Read... Read the Bill."

"House Bill 567..."

"Out of the record, 568, out of the record. 570, out of the record. Page eight of your Calendar, 5... 717, Representative Giorgi. Read the Bill."

"House Bill 717, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Amendments from the floor?"

"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative Leflore."

"Do you want that out of the record? Out of the record. Be at ease. House Bill 720, read the Bill."

"House Bill 720, a Bill for an Act to create the Citizens Assembly and the Citizens Advocacy Councils. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Amendments... Amendments from the floor? Be at ease. Out of the record with leave to return. Leave. House Bill 722, McGann. Out of the record. 753, Steczo. Out of the record. 781, Keane. Read the Bill."

"House Bill 781, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Retailers' Occupation Tax Act. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed." 98  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"Amendments from the floor?" May 16, 1985

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Keane."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Keane, on Amendment 2."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Has that Amendment been circulated? If it is... If it has been, I'll be happy to run the Bill. I don't know."

"Has this been distributed, Mr. Clerk? No. Out of the record."

"Thank you."

"Excuse me. 819, Ronan. Call the Bill. Read the Bill."

"House Bill 819, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Highway Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions?"

"No Motions filed."

"Amendments from the floor?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Ronan Panayotovich and Kulas."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Ronan, on Amendment #2."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. Amendment #2 is an Amendment that we drafted for the City of Chicago to... to exempt Chicago from the Bill. I move for the adoption of the Amendment."

"Representative Ronan moves for the adoption of Amendment #2. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Piel."

"You say you want to exempt Chicago from the Bill. Well, okay, if this Amendment were adopted what exactly would it do with Chicago out?" 99  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"This... This legislation would not impact the City of Chicago." May 16, 1985

"Alright. So you don't want Chicago to do what, Al?"

"The legislation deals with a situation that's developed downstate involving the use of either road contractors or employees of a municipality in order to do road projects. This Amendment exempts the City of Chicago. When the legislation was introduced, there was no intention to involve the City of Chicago in this legislation, as was incorrectly reported in the press. And we've had this legislation on file, as a request from the City of Chicago. Now just to let you know, I'm in... I'm still not planning on moving this legislation until we can achieve an agreement with some concerns that have been brought to me by Representative Jack Davis. But I do want to put the Bill in the best form possible, so I made an agreement to put this Amendment on. Representative Davis has been meeting with the downstate operating engineers, and unless he can achieve an agreement with them concerning some language, I'm not going to move the Bill. But I do want the Bill in the best form possible."

"Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Will, Representative Davis, Jack Davis."

"Well, Mr. Speaker, I confirm what Representative Ronan has said. I don't think he'd want to touch this with a ten foot pole without an agreed language on Third Reading. So we have no objection to this Amendment although we will oppose it on Third Reading, as he knows, if it's called without further Amendments."

"The Gentleman from Knox, Representative McMaster. Tom McMaster."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm opposed to this 100  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Amendment. I would rather leave the City of Chicago in. I think that would give more protection to our downstate local governments who do quite a bit of their highway work themselves and would require them to farm all of this out. I think the City of Chicago should be kept in the same position as he is intending to put the downstate local governments including counties, and townships and municipalities. So I would suggest we defeat this Amendment and keep a bad Bill bad."

"Representative Ronan to close."

"Yeah, just to respond to Representative McMaster's comments. I've already given a commitment to Representative Davis, who came to me right after the Bill was introduced. I said that I wouldn't move the Bill unless there could be some agreed language between the concerns that Representative Davis voiced for some of the downstate local units of government and the... the unions. We're trying to work out those... those... those discussions. I'm not going to move the legislation, but I feel that this is a good Amendment because it clarifies an erroneous press report, as typical of most press reports involving the General Assembly. We've got reporters who are too lazy to do their job, too lazy to do the research and too lazy to contact the various officials, and that's why we get bad news reporting. But that's typical of the news reporters in this state. I move for the adoption of Amendment #2."

"Representative Ronan moves for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 819. Those in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay'. And the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Alright, the Chair was in 101  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 error when it moved House Bill 510 to Third Reading. The Clerk informs me that there was a request for a pension impact note as amended by Representative Sam Vinson. So with leave of the House, we will return House Bill 510 to the Order of Second Reading. A request for a pension impact note is filed. That's John Dunn's... On the last... There was a request for a Roll Call on that last Amendment. Leave of the House, we'll return back to the Amendment by Representative Ronan. Leave of the House, return to Second Reading the... Representative Ronan moves the Amendment be adopted. Those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed by voting 'no'. Representative Kulas, for what... one minute to explain his vote."

"Just to explain my vote, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I'm a Cosponsor on this Bill and I'm a Cosponsor on the Amendment. It's unfortunate, as Representative Ronan mentioned, that some of the media don't know or are too lazy to find out what's going on. And one of these so called political commentators said that this was a power grab by Representative Ronan, Panayotovich and Kulas against the Mayor of the City of Chicago. Well, we want to just show that We have nothing against the Mayor. We want to take care of a problem downstate. It has nothing to do against the Mayor or the City of Chicago, and I would ask for more 'aye votes."

"Representative Mays, one minute to explain his vote."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I simply oppose this Amendment for two reasons. Number one, it's technically deficient in that on line 12, the very end of it, the word is 'over' rather than 'under', and that applies to the three million inhabitants that they try to exempt from this Bill. And I'm sure that that should have said 'under' 102  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 because if... if it was supposed to be 'over', I can't understand why the Representative from Chicago would have put the Bill in in the first place if he didn't have interest in it applying to his own jurisdiction. So that's the only point I wanted to raise on that, and that's why I'm voting 'no' on this particular Amendment."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Barger, one minute to explain his vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The reason that I am opposing this vote is that it sets a limit of 25 thousand dollars for a maintenance project by a local municipality, the main Bill does. And the rest of us who have... live in communities smaller than Chicago, if we lose Chicago's support on this vote, will end up having to contract every job that's over 25 thousand dollars out, and it will cost us two to three times as much as it would if we did it with our own labor. So I would strongly suggest that we vote 'no' on this Amendment so that the total Bill can be killed."

"Representative Mays, for what purpose do you rise?"

"Well, should this Amendment get the requisite votes to pass, I would request a verification of the vote."

"Representative Panayotovich, one minute to explain his vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just to let everybody know one more time that Representative Ronan, Kulas and myself have agreed not to move this Bill any further until we can have an agreement. If we do not have an agreement, we will not move the Bill. All we're trying to do, as Representative Kulas said, is that we are showing that we are not making this a political football in Chicago also, and I urge more green votes." 103  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"According to the board, there's no agreement yet, Sam. Have all voted? You want to vote Sam? Have all voted? Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 58 'ayes', 52 'nays', and the Amendment is adopted. Representative Mays, do you still pursue in your request for a verification? I think they're going to work out an agreement. Do you still want it?"

"Poll of the Absentees."

"Poll the absentees. Representative Curran, for what purpose do you rise?"

"Leave to be recorded 'aye'."

"Well, we don't know..."

"Verified."

"We don't know if we're going to have one yet. Let's wait a moment. Representative Preston. Preston 'aye'. There are now 59 'ayes'. Representative Mays, for what purpose do you rise?"

"It is my understanding, as has been stated, that there will not be movement on this Bill from Third Reading out of this chamber unless there's an agreement in total on the Bill. So at this point, with... under that condition, I'll withdraw my request for a verification."

"Request for a verification has been withdrawn. On this question, there are 59 'ayes', 52 'nays', and Amendment #2 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Leave of the House, return back to 717, Giorgi. The Clerk will read the Bill."

"House Bill 717, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Amendments from the floor?" 104  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

LeFlore." May 16, 1985 "Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Robert LeFlore, on Amendment #1."

"Yeah, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to have leave from the House to table Amendment #1."

"Leave to withdraw Amendment #1? Leave, Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Giorgi."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago, Representative Giorgi, on Amendment #2."

"Mr. Speaker, it's a technical Amendment to reword the wording of the Bill, and all it says is, "A member of any retirement system covered by this code shall not receive credit towards retirement for time lost during such a dispute unless contributions are paid to the system for the period based upon the wage or salary schedule then in effect.' I move for adoption #2... Amendment #2."

"Representative Giorgi moves the adoption of Amendment #2. Being no discussion, all in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay', and Amendment #2 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Braun - Bowman and Young (sic)."

"Representative... Who wants to handle this?"

"Thank you. I will."

"Representative Braun."

"This Amendment was adopted previously, and I encourage it's adoption now."

"Representative Braun moves the adoption of Amendment #2. All in favor... 3... Representative Cullerton, for what purpose do you rise?" 105  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"The board was wrong." May 16, 1995

"Oh, it's right now. The Lady moves the adoption of Amendment #3. All in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay', and Amendment #3 is adopted. Further Amendments? Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"No further Amendments. Representative Giorgi, I'm please to announce that there's been a request for a pension impact note on House Bill 717, and the Bill will remain on... Representative Giorgi, for what purpose..."

"You have the pension impact note, I think."

"I didn't hear you Representative Giorgi."

"You have the fiscal impact note. There's no change in these Amendments. When was your request, Mr. Speaker? When was the request made for the fiscal impact note?"

"Well, you'll have to file it or else make a Motion."

"The impact note is filed, I understand."

"But the request is as amended."

"When did the request come in for as an amended note? What date? What's the date on it?"

"Today's date."

"Who... Who requested it?"

"Tom McMaster."

"Okay. Good enough."

"Alright. The Bill will remain on Second Reading. I think it was Tom McCracken, not McMaster. House Bill 879, McGann. Out of the record. House Bill 885, Bullock. Out of the record. 932, Laurino. Clerk will read the Bill."

"House Bill 932, a Bill for an Act in relation to the practice of dietetics. Second Reading of the Bill. 106  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Amendments from the floor?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Laurino."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Laurino, on Amendment #2."

"Well, Mr. Speaker, Amendment #2 expands the base of qualified professionals eligible to practice dietetics, basically in a hospital setting, dietary staff or supervised by a registered dietician. It clarifies the definition of dietetics as, services provided to meet therapeutic health care needs and establishes continuing education requirements for those who use the title of registered dietician. I move for the adoption of Amendment #2."

"Representative Laurino moves for the adoption of Amendment #2. There being no discussion, all in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay', and Amendment #2 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Laurino."

"Representative Laurino, on Amendment 3,"

"Amendment #3 is a technical Amendment obviating the word 'any and putting in 'only a', and it's strictly..."

"Representative Laurino moves for the adoption of Amendment #3. All in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay', and Amendment #3 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 935, Hoffman. Read the Bill."

"House Bill 935, a Bill for an Act to provide for 107  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day reorganization of school districts. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions on file?"

"No Motions filed."

"Amendments from the floor?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Hoffman."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Gene Hoffman, on Amendment #2."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #2 consolidates the language in Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of this Bill, consolidates Amendment #1 into the Bill and adds at the request of the Superintendent of the Cook County Educational Service Region the division of Cook County into three subregions for the purpose of considering school district reorganizations. You know, Cook County is large, has a lot of school districts, and this divides them geographically into three regions. And those regions will conform to the regions that are presently used by the Illinois Association of School Boards in their... in their deliberations. That's really the only change that this Amendment makes, and I would ask for your support of Amendment #2."

"Representative Hoffman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2. All in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay', and Amendment #2 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1037, Committee on Education... Elementary Education, Didrickson. Clerk will read the Bill."

"House Bill 1037, a Bill for an Act to provide for excellence..."

"Take that out of the record, please. 1038, 108  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Helen Satterthwaite. May 16, 1985 Are you ready, Helen, on that one? Helen, are you ready on 1038?

Read the Bill." "House Bill 1038, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the School Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions?"

"No Motions filed."

"Amendments from the floor?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Tate."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Michael Tate, on Amendment #2. Mike Tate."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Amendment 1 simply increases minimum teachers salaries from 13,000 to 15,000 a year. With the... To the Amendment, if you would take a chart based upon 1974 salaries and compare it to 1984 salaries, teachers in this state are paid fewer dollars than laboratory technicians, librarians, economists, accountants, radio broadcasters, bus drivers, plumbers and social workers. Teachers salaries in 1974 in this state were competitive with many other of those occupations. By 1984, we have allowed teachers salaries to dip into one of the lowest categories of any occupation around. This truly is an Amendment that addresses the concerns for... that many of us share in terms of the quality of education that we're attracting... quality and caliber of teachers we're attracting to education this year. If you're truly concerned about children and you're truly concerned about a quality education, I think it's only fair that we look at raising the level of... minimum level of compensation in this state for teachers. To attract good quality teachers in this state, you're going to have to pay. That's what this 109  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Amendment simply does. It puts us in a competitive posture in the State of Illinois to attract good caliber, quality people into an occupation that's going to have a direct impact upon the future of this state and this country. I move for its adoption. And I'd like a Roll Call on that."

"Representative Tate moves for the adoption of Amendment #2. On that, the Lady from Champaign, Representative Helen Satterthwaite."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, this Bill is a Committee Bill of which I am simply the person designated to handle the Bill on the House Floor. By very lengthy, deliberative processes, the Committee on Elementary and Secondary Education came out with a package that we felt was a good reform package. In this particular portion of that reform package, we had agreement only to a level of 13,000 dollars for the minimum salary for teachers. Many of our Committee Members, as I am sure many of our Members on the House Floor, support higher salaries for teachers, but we also feel that if we are to mandate additional things for our local school district that the state must provide the funding to carry forth that mandate. We felt that with the resources that we anticipate being available this year, that it was imprudent for us to move a substantial amount of money into guaranteeing a higher beginning salary for teachers. And the Committee agreed that the 13,000 dollar level, which appears in the Bill, is something that we, as a bipartisan Committee, could support. It is my understanding that the cost of Amendment #2 would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 33 million dollars if we are to supply each of the local school districts with the increment necessary to raise their current beginning salary to a 15,000 dollar level and to provide a similar increase for the other employees in each 110  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 of those districts. It is our opinion in the Committee on Elementary and Secondary Education that we should have some movement upward from the current 10,000 dollars, and we can do that by increasing to 13,000 dollars with a very minimal price tag in the neighborhood of 2.5 million. And so this Amendment would, in effect, take 31 to 32 million dollars more to fund. And if we had to do that, we would have to subtract that amount of money from the general aid formula or from other portions of the education budget in order to subsidize this particular change. For that reason and on behalf of the Committee, I would recommend to the Members of the House that we reject Amendment #2 and leave the Bill at the level agreed upon by the Committee."

"The Lady from DuPage, Representative Cowlishaw."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I would like to affirm my agreement with what Representative Satterthwaite has just stated in regard to the, first of all, the long and tedious process by which this Committee Bill was arrived at; and that, as she mentioned, it was the agreement of the Elementary and Secondary Education Committee that we would support these Bills as they had been drafted and approved by the Committee. I would also point out since the time that we established through that Committee Bill process a minimum teachers salary of 13,000 dollars, we have... we have received some updated figures from the State Board of Education which not only take into account the costs to the state for bringing all of those salaries presently below 13,000 dollars up to that, but also take into effect something which the State Board commonly calls the ripple effect. That is, if the minimum teachers salary is below 13,000 dollars now and must be raised to that, other 111  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 salaries in that school district would also have to be raised. Consequently, the most recent figures that we have from the State Board of Education indicate that if this Amendment is defeated and the Bill remains as it came from the Committee, the cost to the state would be two and one-half million dollars. If this Amendment is adopted and the minimum teachers salary is established at 15,000 dollars, the cost to the state, including the ripple effect, would be 30 million dollars. I am opposed to this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Kendall, Representative Hastert."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was going to ask the question of the Sponsor, what would be the impact? I think the previous speaker stated that this Bill would cost 80 million dollars. What's a significant fund... amount of money. I just want to make a comment, if I may speak to the Bill."

"To... To the Amendment."

"The issue... The issue that we see before us is something we talked about in appropriations last week. We're talking about a Bill that passed out of the House Appropriations Committee of about 410 million dollars of new... 410 million of new dollars. We have a Governor's budget before us that's approximately 330 some million new dollars. In order to fund the Governor's level, we have to raise taxes in the State of Illinois; whether those taxes are going to be cigarette taxes that may be there or may not be there, those taxes could be a messages tax on long distance telephones, those taxes could be an income tax. All I'm saying, if you're prepared to vote for this Amendment, you have to be responsible as far as finding the funding that's going to fund the cost of this Amendment. 112  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 I'm certainly in favor of seeing a decent wage for beginning teachers, but... I also think it's responsible, and something that we have to do and something that we have to find and make sure when we do that that the funding's there. And I would warn those people who vote for this Bill without making a commitment to vote for a tax that, you can't have your cake and eat it too."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Hoffman. Gene... Gene Hoffman."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I had my light on early on, and everything I was going to say has been said by Representative Satterthwaite, Cowlishaw and Hastert. And with all due respect to the Sponsor of the Amendment, I would trust we would follow the lead of those people who have been working on this on a day to day basis."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson, Loleta."

"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. In all deference to my colleague on this side, I also would just like to remind the Members of this Body that right now the statewide average for beginning teachers is 14,700 dollars approximately. What we are doing with this Amendment is basically nothing, which is the same thing that we're doing by putting the 13,000 minimum in. Actually, it would be my belief that we shouldn't even have a minimum teachers salary. We're not sending the right message back to the professional teachers, nor the people back in our district who would want to be supporting and paying for a higher minimum teachers salary. That should be done at the local level. Thank you."

"Representative Tate to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I have to disagree with my colleagues on both sides 113  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 of the aisle. If we want to see... send a clear message to the citizens of this state, to the young people of this state that are... that are considering a profession in education today in the teaching field, I think we need to make a statement today that we should have a minimum level of compensation of 15,000 - at a minimum. Already we've had different educational groups throughout this state that have recommended far beyond just 15,000. The Maitland - Berman report recommended 20,000. The Governor recommended 15,000. Today... Teachers today make less than janitors. They make less than bus drivers. They make less than technicians. And all we're trying to say if we really want to save money for this state, and we talk about the cost that we will incur for spending money, these additional dollars, on teachers, I suggest to all of you that are concerned about that cost that we will, in fact, save money. Because if we have a better quality of teacher in the classroom, then we will, in fact, keep students in the classroom where they belong, and keep them off the public aid rolls and keep them out of the prisons in this state. And we will save tax dollars, and we will save money for this state. And I encourage a favorable Roll Call. Thank you."

"Representative Tate has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2. Those in favor say 'aye', opposed 'no'. And the 'nos' have it, and the Amendment is adopted (sic fails). Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, Satterthwaite."

"The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite, on Amendment #3."

"Amendment #3, Mr. Speaker, deals with a Section of the Bill relating to areas of shortage for teachers and scholarships for those teachers. The Bill, as it came out 114  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 of Committee, would provide..."

"One moment, Helen. Let me correct myself. When I said on a last Amendment, the 'nos' have it. The Amendment is defeated is what I meant, and I'm sorry about that. Representative Tate, for what purpose do you rise?"

"Mr. Speaker, when I originally made the statement, I did ask for a Roll Call, when I opened on that issue. I did say... If you will check the record, I specifically requested a Roll Call."

"Well, you... I'll give you one. I don't think you said that, but I'll give you one anyway."

"If you'll check the records..."

"On... On the last... last Amendment, let us return with leave of the House, Representative Tate's Amendment. Those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed by voting 'no'. Have all voted? Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 26 'ayes', 75 'nays', and Amendment #2 is defeated. Further Amendments? Now, we'll revert back to Helen Satterthwaite on Amendment #3."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, Amendment #3 deals with a portion of the Bill that relates to scholarships for teachers in areas of shortage. The Bill, as it was drafted in Committee, would limit those scholarships to people who already have teaching certificates. And the intent, I believe, of the Commission, which is where the original proposal came from, was to have those scholarships open either for teachers returning for additional training or for those entering the teacher education programs to begin with. And so the Amendment #3 would simply open those scholarships to both categories, and I would move for the adoption of Amendment #3." 115  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day

"Representative Satterthwaite has moved for the adoption of Amendment #3. On that, Representative Mary Lou Cowlishaw."

"Thank... Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, the content of Amendment #3 simply brings this Bill into accord with the wishes of the Committee that dealt with it. It is basically more technical than otherwise, and I urge its adoption."

"Satterthwaite has moved the adoption of Amendment #3. All in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay', and Amendment #3 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #4, offered by Representative Didrickson."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson, on Amendment #4."

"Yeah, I'm going to withdraw this Amendment."

"Leave to withdraw Amendment #4? Leave. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, offered by Representative Braun and LeFlore."

"The Lady from Cook, is Representative Braun on the floor? Representative LeFlore on Amendment #5. Representative Robert LeFlore."

"Mr. Speaker, I would like to withdraw Amendment #5."

"Leave to withdraw Amendment #5? Leave, and that Amendment is withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"There are no further Amendments; however, there is a request for a State Mandates Act impact note and a fiscal note request. The Mandates is filed, but the fiscal note request has not been complied with. The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite."

"Mr. Speaker, I thought that the staff had filed 116  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 both of those. The only difference is in the title. The... The money sums are the same for both."

"We're checking out to see if it's been filed. Under the State Mandates Act... One moment. Alright, I understand it will take about two minutes, and the fiscal note request... Oh, we've got it now, and it's been filed. Third Reading. Leave of the House, we will return to House Bill 1037, House Committee on Elementary... Secondary Education, Loleta Didrickson. Clerk will read the Bill, 1037."

"House Bill 1037, a Bill for an Act to provide for excellence in education. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Have only... Have any Motions been filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Amendments from the floor?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Hoffman and Currie."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Hoffman."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I move the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 1037. Amendment #2 deals with the question of additional personnel and provides for teachers aides K-3, reading specialists K-6. The other... The rest of the language in the Amendment provides that the state will support either the aides actual salary or a third of the school districts starting teaching salary, and with reading specialists, we will reimburse two-thirds of the minimum teachers salary in that district. An appropriation for basic skills, which is involved... which this involves, is included in the... in the appropriation Bill. I've discussed this with all parties involved, and 117  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Representative Currie has joined me in the Amendment. We believe that this will meet some of the major goals of school district reform, which is to emphasize the role of grades K-3 as prime time, and to adequately meet the needs as established by the research on time-on-task and a providing of effective schools. And I would move the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 1037."

"Representative Hoffman and Currie have moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 1037. The Gentleman from Will, Representative Van Duyne."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the Sponsor yield for a question?"

"He indicates he will. Proceed."

"There... Thank you. Representative, there's a scenario being sold around here this year, especially this year, about mandating K... K-12, whether it's universal or whether it's in chosen districts or not, I don't know. And I would like to know and my interest in asking you the question is this, is this any way, shape or form or could you elaborate on it enough to satisfy my curiousity as to mandating a standardized kindergarten program - full five day a week? And I may even give you a little bit of a hint. I oppose that. I don't believe that fathers and mothers should be subjected to, if they don't desire to, to force their children into a full scale kindergarten program, much less have to support it financially. So with all of that, you can answer."

"I think that was a question, Representative Hoffman."

"The answer is 'no'."

"And that was in answer. Representative Hoffman Currie have moved the adoption of Amendment #2. All in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay', and Amendment #2 is 119  41st Legislative Day adopted. STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE Further Amendments?" May 16, 1985

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Didrickson."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson, on Amendment #3."

"Yes, the language here is okay, and so I do move to withdraw this Amendment."

"Leave to withdraw Amendment #3. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #4, offered by Representative Brunsvold."

"Representative Brunsvold on Amendment #4."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Amendment #4 was actually Amendment presented to Subcommittee in Elementary and Secondary. It was adopted... It really wasn't adopted onto the Bill, because we didn't adopt any Amendments on to Bills in Subcommittee. It was supposed to be part of the package of 1037, was omitted. And the Bill... the Amendment actually does is say that when the State Board is expanding vocational programs they are not to have any students suffer because of the increase in the size of the vocational districts or that no teachers should lose contractual services because of the expansion of the district. And I would ask for the adoption of the Amendment."

"Representative Brunsvold has moved for the adoption of Amendment #4. On that, the Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, what Representative Brunsvold has said is absolutely correct. As Minority Spokesman of that Subcommittee on Instructional Standards, indeed, this was to be part of the package. In the flurry at the end, it was not incorporated, and I would 119  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 ask for your support."

"The Gentleman from McLean, Representative Ropp."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the Sponsor yield?"

"Yes, proceed."

"Could you explain just a little bit more? Does this... What impact does this have on the student who is interested in vocational training? Does this deal with... more with the teacher, the instructor, or does this give more liberty or freedom for the person who wants vocational training?"

"This Amendment says... The School Board right now is positioned to expanding vocational districts, and this Bill... this Amendment simply states that no child shall suffer because of the expanded size of the district and also states that no teacher shall lose contractual services because they're making bigger districts."

"Okay. In other words, this...it still protects the student as well as the instructor."

"Right. It protects the people involved in vocational education."

"Very good. Thank you."

"There being no further discussion, those in favor of Amendment #4 say 'aye', opposed 'nay', and Amendment #4 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, offered by Representative Berrios - Krska and Capparelli."

"I don't see any... Representative Capparelli is here. Are you ready on Amendment #5? Representative Satterthwaite, for what purpose do you rise?"

"Mr. Speaker, I don't really understand the Amendment, and I guess I would ask whether it is technically correct. When I tried to find where it would be placed in the Bill, I could not find an appropriate 120  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day placement."

"Let's find out if anybody's pursuing the Amendment first. Are you going with it Ralph? No? The ruling of the Chair, the Amendment is not in proper form. The Amendment, therefore, is defective and out of order. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #6, offered by Representative Brunsvold."

"Representative Brunsvold on Amendment #6."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #6 addresses the conflict I had in Committee with driver's ed program."

"The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite, for what purpose do you rise?"

"Mr. Speaker, again I would question the form of this Amendment."

"Be at ease for a moment. Amendment #6 is in order. Proceed, Representative Brunsvold."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Amendment #6 deals with the driver's ed behind the wheel portion of the training of the children. The Committee had recommended that the portion behind the wheel training should be... can be farmed out, so to speak, to private agencies in the community. Right now, the present law states that that can be done with certified personnel anyway. I would like to again put the Bill back in its present form which says that you must have qualified, certified people in the classroom and you must also have qualified, certified people training the children behind the wheel. And I am afraid what's going to happen if we don't do this is that we're going to have the certified people in the classroom, and then we're going to farm it out to some agency in the community that doesn't have certified people and that won't do the proper training 121  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 of the children in the behind the wheel phase of the driver's ed. And I would ask for the adoption of Amendment #6."

"Representative Brunsvold has moved for the adoption of Amendment #6. The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of The House, I regretfully rise to oppose one of my companions Amendments, but the package that we have before us, as we said before, is the process of long deliberation. It is... has been known to many of us that our local school districts are seeking some relief from the mandated programs that have been placed upon them by the state. This is a very, very small change in the mandate being suggested in the Bill, simply providing discretion at the local district level to determine whether or not they wish to contract out for the behind the wheel portion of their driver's ed program. It is a result of the Commission on the improvement of Elementary and Secondary Education and several other groups and is consistent with the Committee activity as the Bill stands without Amendment #6. And so I would oppose the adoption of Amendment #6."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson."

"Yes, I, too, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, rise in opposition to this Amendment. This is an Amendment that really deals with, as Representative Satterthwaite said, the Commission's language and also the Subcommittee's language with regards to giving some flexibility to our local school districts. We're not talking about demandating behind the wheel. And, in fact, we're not even referencing the classroom portion. What we are simply saying is that school districts need some flexibility with 122  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4 1st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 regards to offering behind the wheel, which is an extremely expensive portion of the driver's ed program. If we want to maintain that and allow our schools to keep it, we need that flexibility. I would only remind you, I think we're one of two states in the country who require this to begin with. We have over 135 high schools in the State of Illinois whose per capita cost for behind the wheel are well over 200 dollars, and what the reimbursement rate is is something approximately... in fact, it's exactly 76 dollars per capita. If we're talking about giving our school districts some money for educationally sound programs that aren't personal service courses and we're talking about paying for our teachers salaries, I think this Amendment should be defeated."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative LeFlore."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also oppose this Amendment because this Amendment is not in line with the recommendation that was made by the Instructional Standards Committee. And I... I support Representative Didrickson and Representative... Satterthwaite request. So I feel that we should go with the recommendation of the total Committee."

"The Lady from DuPage, Representative Cowlishaw."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I am in accord with the positions of the prior three speakers, and I would point out just two things that may be helpful to you. If this Amendment is defeated and the Bill, as it was proposed by the Subcommittee is left intact, no school district is required to contract out its behind the wheel driver training. It is only permitted to do so. I would also add that only the contract for behind 123  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 the wheel training that is engaged in by a high school driver education program would be through a driver training school that is licensed by the Secretary of State under the Illinois Vehicle Code, so that we are not talking about a reduction in the quality of that training. I urge that this Amendment be defeated."

"Representative Brunsvold to close," Brunsvold; "Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In closing, I would just say that I would like to keep quality in the classroom, as well as quality training behind the wheel. And I think we've seen the reduction in accident rates in this state because of this quality training of our children in the driver's ed program, and I would ask for a green vote for quality behind the wheel training. Thank you."

"Representative Brunsvold has moved for the adoption of Amendment #6. Those in favor say 'aye', those opposed say 'no'. The 'nos' have it, and the Amendment is defeated. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #7, offered by Representative Dunn and Stern."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative John Dunn, on Amendment #7."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #7 would provide for a new program that would be a development program to assist the State Board of Education in providing grants to individual school districts for the purpose of developing programs in the arts - in the area of music, dance, drama and visual arts. We need this for the well-being and future of our state and for the quality of life. It's something that should be included in the educational reform program, and I urge an 'aye' vote on this Amendment."

"Representative Dunn has moved for the 124  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day adoption of May 16, 1985 Amendment #7. There being no discussion, all in favor say 'aye, opposed... What a minute. There is... Representative Cowlishaw is seeking recognition. The Lady from DuPage."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Amendment is not something which was agreed to in the Subcommittee and then Committee process by which this comprehensive education reform Bill was produced. It was my understanding that when any Amendments were going to be introduced that would alter that comprehensive package, which the Subcommittee and then entire Committee on Elementary and Secondary Education SO very carefully crafted, that that Amendment would be opposed. I would add that this is a costly type of item and that it is a matter of the state saying what curriculum the local schools will have. I am opposed to this Amendment, and it deserves to be defeated."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson."

"Yes, would the Gentleman yield for a question, please?"

"Proceed."

"Representative Dunn, what is the estimated... or what is the exact appropriation that you plan to track through on this grant for the arts?"

"There will be a requested appropriation of 500 thousand dollars which will cap grant applications in this program so that there can be no more than that expenditure on the statewide basis. Individual districts will have to apply for grants, and to the extent they are awarded, the 500 thousand dollar appropriation will be expended. In... The General Assembly, in its wisdom, will decide whether that level of appropriation or a lesser amount is appropriate. 125  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Only appropriated funds can be spent, so the cost of this program will depend upon the level of appropriation."

"And I also would understand that each year this appropriation request would have to come back and school districts would also have to put through their grants."

"AS... As you know, no state dollars can be expended unless they are appropriated, so each year would be a new ballgame with this program. That's correct."

"Okay. To the Amendment, Mr. Speaker. I'm in support of this Amendment for the arts. I think for too long we have ignored what is going on with regards to the quality of art education in our classrooms. In fact, many teachers are asked to be providing art programs and, indeed, do not wish to do this. This is a 500 thousand dollar grant. We can track the successfulness of it and come back next year if, indeed, it doesn't prove to be profitable. Thank you."

"The Lady from Lake, Representative Grace Mary Stern."

"Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, I would just add that studies have shown that where there are art studies available to students there is considerably less truancy and dropping out, and I think that alone is a reason to consider seriously this grant... this appropriation."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Hoffman."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor of the Amendment yield for a question?"

"Proceed."

"What is the genesis of this proposal?"

"The genesis, I think, is a recognition of the importance of an overall education, narrow... narrowly confined educational processes produce monolithic results. We're 126  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 all different. Some of us are more creative than others. Those who are creative need to be exposed to the music, drama, dance, the visual arts and encourage them to discover their talents and let them grow and prosper and flourish. The Illinois Alliance for Art Education is supporting this proposal on a statewide basis, and that group recognizes among others that there is a real need if we are going to 'doubt' ourselves in the State of Illinois as a place to come into from the outside to raise your children. We want to be able to tell outsiders, 'Come here. Your children will receive a quality education, and a broad based quality education because they'll be exposed to the arts.' And we all know the quality of life is important. These are the kind of things that outsiders look for when they come into our state. So even beyond the educational aspect of this, this is a, I think you could call it a business climate Amendment."

"Second question. Was this issue considered by the Subcommittee?"

"A previous speaker said not. I am not on that Subcommittee, so... so I really don't know."

"Did you bring it to the... to the Committee."

"I did not. No."

"Then this... this issue has not been considered by the Subcommittee or the Committee as far as you know."

"I don't know. I... I thought it was my right and privilege to present the issue here and now, no matter what was considered earlier."

"I... I... I don't question that. I merely am asking the sequence. And your plan then is to propose some kind of... some Amendment to the appropriation Bill to cover the cost."

"The... The Amendment... The General Assembly has, at this 127  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 stage, already indicated its tentative support for this program, because the 500 thousand dollar Amendment is already on the appropriation Bill for this program, House Bill 1070."

"Alright, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, with all due respect to the Sponsor of this Amendment, let me suggest that I'm not questioning the issue or the content, only questioning the idea of... of starting a program and providing state support. Those of us who have been around a while recognize that once a program like this gets on line, it's very, very difficult to take it off line ala the mandated programs that we've come through with. Once you start funding a program then you're going to recognize that that program, whatever it may be, is going to have to continue to receive state support. I remember many years ago before the Sponsor of this Amendment came to this Body, we had a program on gifted education. We provided seed money in the idea that we were gradually going to withdraw seed money from the gifted program because the local districts would recognize the significance of it and come on board and support it themselves. Well, all you have to do is look at the appropriation Bill now and to know that that hope did not... did not materialize. So with all due respect to the Sponsor and all due respect to the content of the Amendment, I think for the long-term welfare of the people interested in this particular area and the General Assembly itself that we should not embark on this kind of a program at this time. And for that reason and that reason alone, I stand in opposition."

"The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, it is true 128  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 that this issue was not discussed in the Education Committee as such, but we have certainly had much testimony along the way indicating the need for comprehensive programs that will develop students in any aspect of their development. And while there is not a Committee position on this Bill, it would be in concert it seems to me with the intent of the Committee to provide a comprehensive program. Certainly we have said many things in regard to enhancing programs in science and mathematics. And many of our educators feel that an overemphasis on those particular subjects at the expense of the arts might not provide a balanced program. So I reiterate, there is not a Committee position. I would hope that Members will vote their conscience on this in regard to whether or not they feel there should be additional monies available for arts programs in the schools."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Barb Currie: Flynn Currie." "Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members of the House, this issue may not have been given complete consideration by the Elementary and Secondary Education Committee of this House, but it was given full consideration, full discussion and full debate in the House Appropriations II Committee. There isn't only one Committee that deals with education issues in this Assembly. There is, in fact, as well, an Appropriations Committee that last week considered in detail the State Board budget. At that time, the Appropriations II Committee decided to put 500 thousand dollars into that budget a small sum of money given the total size of the budget for planning grants for arts education in elementary schools in this state. I think it's a strong position, one strongly supported by the Members of that Committee. And it seems to me if our 129  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 business today is to make sure that we give appropriate deference to Committee decisions, then certainly the substantive language that goes with that 500 thousand dollar commitment needs full support by the... Membership of this House. Amendment 7 to House Bill 1037 makes good sense for the school children of Illinois. The Appropriations Committee has already said that it makes good fiscal sense for the taxpayers of the state. I urge adoption of the Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Coles, Representative Weaver. Mike Weaver."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?"

"Proceed."

"Representative, I need a little clarification. How is the grant money to be distributed? On what basis?"

"Applications by individual school districts."

"Will it be on a first come, first serve basis, or is it by some qualitative judgment?"

"Not necessarily. These grants will be distributed by the State Board, and they will distribute them in the same manner and fashion they have worked with other grant programs."

"Well, with nearly a thousand school districts across the state, I'm wondering how far 500 thousand dollars is going to go and exactly what an individual school district can do with 500 dollars."

"Well, what... what happened many years ago when we had authorization for public school textbooks was that one year it was funded at a dollar, and I think after that it was funded at about 500 thousand and then a million. And the School Board just sat back and waited to see who applied and then did the best they could to be equitable and fair in the allocation of the resources. That's all we ask 130  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 here. These are planning grant funds. Not every district will apply for them. Those who do will be in a competitive process, and I'm sure it will depend upon the... the nature of the proposed program, the nature of the... of the details of the program. These are... These are grant application programs that are capable of evaluation, and I'm confident that the State Board can... can make an equitable determination. We'd be happy to suggest to them that the Charleston area ought to have some... some important consideration."

"We'd love to have it, but I'm... I'm just wondering if... if this is to be somewhat of a seed program, what are the projections for the cost down the road, say in a year or two?"

"You can't tell. The... The program may prosper and flourish, and it may not. You know and I know that when money is tight in elementary and secondary education one of the first things to go is the arts program, the music program. Most schools don't have a dance program. And we know that we're in tough times, So a lot of school districts are struggling with... with things like vocational ed and P.E., and we feel that there are going to be school districts which will feel they cannot afford to... to get into this and won't. So we just have to wait and see. And one thing is for sure though, if we don't offer this program, по one can participate. By... By getting into this, we can find out exactly where the interest is, the nature, depth, breadth and scope of the interest, and... and then we can come back to the General Assembly and... and later suggest to the General Assembly what policy should be adopted for the future."

"Well, perhaps, in your school district the first programs to go are art, but in a lot of our smaller schools 131  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 the first programs that tend to be cut are the football and athletic programs. And if we could get football declared as... as part of the Arts Council, I think we might be able to go with it, but otherwise, I thank you for your comment."

"Representative Dunn to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is an important program. We're talking about educational reform. Everyone knows that it's good to have some art programs in your schools. We want all of our children to be creative. We want the best education for our own children. Children flourish in a creative atmosphere. This program is designed to authorize planning grants for individual school districts to develop creative curricula in the area of the arts. And I would urge the adoption of this Amendment and a favorable vote thereon."

"Representative Dunn has moved for the adoption of Amendment #7. Those in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay'. Those in favor vote 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted? Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 66 'aye', 39 'nays', 1 answering 'present'. Amendment #7 is adopted. With leave of the House, although it is not ordinary that - in fact against the rules to make introductions - because this Gentleman is from a long ways away, it is the Chair's honor to introduce Dr. Louis Alvarado Ramos, President of the University of Oporto and President Counsel of Portuguese University. This University, Josephine Oblinger attended there this summer. And by the way, that's where they make port wine. So let's give a good round of applause to Dr. Ramos. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #8, offered by Representative 132  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Peterson." May 16, 1985

"Representative Peterson on Amendment #8, the Gentleman from Lake."

"Mr. Speaker, I move to table Amendment 8... withdraw Amendment 8."

"The Gentleman asks leave to withdraw Amendment #9. Leave, and #8 is withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #9, offered by Representative W. Peterson."

"Representative Peterson on Amendment 9."

"Mr. Speaker, I ask leave to withdraw Amendment #9."

"Leave to withdraw Amendment #9. Leave, and Amendment 9 is withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #10, offered by Representative W. Peterson."

"Representative Peterson on Amendment 10."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. Amendment 10 removes the new provision that expands requirements for bilingual education programs. Presently school districts must establish a program in bilingual education for 20 or more children of limited English speaking ability in any language classification. Schools may establish a program in any language classification with less than 20 children. The new language provides that should a school district decide not to establish such a program, the school district shall provide a locally determined transitional program of specific instruction based upon an individual student's language assessment which provides content area instruction in a language other than English. It appears that the man... this mandates an individual program for each student. It is not clear what the fiscal impact will be on whether there are sufficient 133  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 bilingual teachers or whether there are sufficient bilingual teachers to accomplish the requirement. This certainly is a major change in bilingual education. I think we should delay consideration of this change until all involved can understand the extent of the impact for local school districts of the state. The present cost of existing bilingual programs have been prorated over the years. The State Board of Education FY '86 budget request of over 10 million increases will hopefully provide full reimbursement for excess costs of such programs. What I would like to point out to this Body is that the new requirement would affect between 13,000 and 19,000 students. At approximately 500 a student, the cost would range from six-and-one-half to nine million dollars in additional funds. It also is my understanding that this would only effect downstate districts, since Chicago already provides programs to less than the 20 students. And I move for adoption of Amendment 10."

"Representative Peterson has moved for the adoption of Amendment #10. On that, the Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, if the Sponsor of this Amendment had had the advantage of sitting in Committee where we heard discussion of the issue, he might think more kindly on the issue. What we have learned in Committee is that the State Board of Education is recommending this change because of the problems that arise when a child who does not speak English cannot be assimilated into the school program. And so, it was also made clear that this does not necessarily mean that you have to have a teacher who is proficient in the language of the child; that there will be resources such as tapes or other kinds of materials made available that will help the 134  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 school districts to provide the program that would be required without necessarily producing a full-time teacher or even a part-time teacher for a few children within that district. As the testimony was presented to us, it was clear that we are, in fact, doing a disservice to the children of the State of Illinois who cannot understand English well enough to assimilate any learning from their classroom activities. And so, I would urge the House to retain the language of the Bill as it came from Committee and reject Amendment #10."

"Gentleman from Cook, Representative Berrios."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would also ask all the House... all the Members of the House to vote against this Amendment. We, as a Body, cannot stand here and allow one child to go without an education. It is our responsibility to make sure that each child in the State of Illinois gets a proper education. How can we stand here and say that we're trying to get all our children to finish high school when we have a dropout rate of over 40 percent, 20 percent in the state, and turn our backs on them? I would ask everyone in this House to vote against this Amendment for the children who cannot be here to speak for themselves. Thank you."

"Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, I, too, oppose this Amendment for the reasons that have already been cited, most specifically because we can't ignore that certain population that can't get together within certain downstate school districts 20 kids to provide and ESL or English as a second language course. There's enough flexibility put into this program, as Representative Satterthwaite mentioned, and, in fact and indeed, I almost 135  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 dispute some of the factors... some of the points that the Sponsor has made with regards to dollars and students who would be served. If you look at the Chicago metropolitan area, outside of the City of Chicago, many of the suburban areas are already providing classes with regards to English as a second language for one student, two students, three students, etcetera. I think the downstate students deserve the same."

"Gentleman from Cook, Representative Soliz, Juan Soliz."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in opposition to this Amendment. This Amendment would... would limit considerably the effectiveness of bilingual education in the State of Illinois. Non-English speaking children, whether it's one or fifty in a classroom, deserves some kind of special education, some kind of attention. This particular Bill does not require that a bilingual education teacher be hired in a given classroom for one student. It simply requires that some kind of attention be given to the educational needs of that particular student. It is a red herring to suggest that we are requiring the employment of bilingual education teachers throughout the State of Illinois. That is not what this Bill requires. This Bill simply says that when a student requires special attention because they can't speak the English language, that the educational institutions of this state provide that attention necessary so that equal educational opportunity be provided to that one student, or that ten students, as the law would require. Bilingual education in this state and in this country is not a luxury. It's a constitutionally mandated educational requirement to provide equal educational opportunity for the non-English 136  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 speaking students of this state. I would ask and implore that we oppose this Amendment in the interest of equal educational opportunity for all citizens and all children of the state. Thank you."

"Gentleman from Cook, Representative Jesse White."

"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in opposition to this piece of legislation. If we can allow fewer than 20 kids to make up a special education class, I think it's wrong for us to allow less than 20 to be a part of a bilingual education program. What I'm really trying to say, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen, we're talking about parity. Treat the special ed kids and the bilingual education kids the same. I oppose this Amendment."

"Representative Peterson, to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to point out that, as some of the people who spoke against this Amendment have stated, that there are certain options that school districts can take advantage of. I believe this Bill does not make that clear. That's why I've asked for this to be studied further. No one has a handle on what the costs will be to districts downstate, also, if, in fact, they will be reimbursed for their funds, which they use for bilingual education which the State Board has not done in the past. We don't know if there will be sufficient teachers available to instruct these children. And, therefore, I move that we adopt this Amendment."

"Representative Peterson moves the adoption of Amendment #10 to House Bill 1037. Those in favor say 'aye', those opposed say 'no'. The 'nos' have it. The Amendment fails. Are there further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #11, Berrios, amends House Bill..." 137  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

May 16, 1985 "Gentleman from Cook, Representative Berrios, on Amendment #11."

"Simply... Amendment #11 would simply allow students in private schools to participate in any program that are set up by the district for bilingual education. This would allow basically students who are not proficient in the English speaking language to participate in the programs that are already being set up within the Bill. And I would ask for a favorable Roll Call."

"Representative Berrios has moved the adoption of Amendment #11. The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, I would oppose this Amendment. We have no idea really what the fiscal impact would be if we had to extend the program to all private school students. In addition to that, I believe there are already available routes through the School Code where joint educational programs can be made available where children may attend part of the day in private school and part of the day in a public school. And if it is the desire of the local school district to cooperate in a program, I believe that is a appropriate route, rather than broadening this legislation to mandate the programs being available to private school students." Speaker a more

Im Matijevich: "Representative Berrios, to close. sorry, Representative Didrickson's light just flashed. Loleta Didrickson.' Didrickson; "Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. While I supported the previous Amend... or opposed the previous Amendment because I think it's important that ve provide these services downstate and across the state, unilaterally, in the public schools, I think it is rushing 138  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 into an additional mandate with regards to doing the same for the private. Let's see how it goes with regards to the public schools right now, Representative Berrios. Thank you."

"Representative Berrios, to close."

"I would just ask for a favorable Roll Call and just remember that what we're really just doing is allowing the private school students, if they wish to participate in a program that is already set up by the subdistricts within the Bill, to participate. And I would ask for a favorable Roll Call."

"Representative Berrios has moved the adoption of Amendment #11 to House Bill 1037. Those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those by voting... opposed by voting 'no'. Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 29 'ayes', 69 'mays', 3 answering 'present'. Amendment #11 fails. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #12, Didrickson Breslin Ropp, amends House Bill..."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson, on Amendment 12."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, it's hyphenated Sponsors Breslin Ropp and Didrickson, and Representative Ropp is going to handle it."

"Alright. Representative Ropp, the Gentleman from McLean."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. Amendment #12 to 1037 is a Bill... is an Amendment that addresses a situation that a lot of people have felt needs addressing. It states that... It grants an exemption. It allows school boards to excuse pupils who are enrolled in P.E. who are involved in athletic sports to be excused, 139  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 particularly to attend or to get involved in expanded academic classes that will be preparing them for college interests, or it will allow them to be involved in vocational educational programs, or it will allow them to devote additional time to remediation and study or for ongoing participation in school athletic programs. Having been the parent of a couple of young men who were involved in sports, certainly it was my feeling that their abilities to acquire sufficient amount of athletic development was certainly taken up on the football field, or on the wrestling mat, or on the basketball court or wherever, and there are many times that these young men and young ladies need additional time in order to prepare themselves for either a vocational skill or for training or additional classes in order to enter a college. And this gives school boards that opportunity to grant exemptions from certain P.E. classes and so indicated. I welcome your support. Be happy to answer any questions."

"Representative Ropp moves the adoption of Amendment #12. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative White, Jesse White."

"Mr. Speaker, will the Sponsor respond to a question?"

"He will. Proceed."

"Representative Ropp, does this Amendment deal with the last two years, like, you know, senior... junior-senior years?"

"Representative Ropp."

"Representative White, it deals with the junior and senior years in high school."

"Are we saying that just because an individual is a part of an athletic team that he should be exempt from going through the normal... attending the normal P.E. classes?"

"This gives the authority to school boards to grant that 140  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 authority, correct."

"Are we... Are you actually saying to this Body that if the football season lasts from September to November, January, February, March, April, May and June this young man is exempt from physical education classes? Is that what you're saying, Representative?"

"This would give the authority for the school board to exempt them, yes. As you may well know, being involved in a number of athletic programs, it certainly requires a considerable amount of time in preparation for that athletic event. And lots of that time then being taken away from a student who needs additional study in a number of the courses that he or she is already involved in, and it really... it's almost a necessity now to give them this kind of leeway so that they can prepare themselves to receive sufficient credit hours to go onto college or even to take up a vocational skill or even some other athletic sport."

"Representative Ropp, on the front page of the Sun-Times there is an article that addresses itself to proper exercise and proper diet. And I think that if an individual is exempt from his last two years of physical education, he will miss a very valuable part of his education as well as physical educational development. I urge that this Body to resist this Amendment because I think it's anti-children. I believe that these young people need and deserve a vigorous physical educational program. And I would like for you to stand with me and oppose this Amendment."

"Chairman of the Elementary and Education Committee, Representative Richard Mulcahey."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. I rise in support of this particular Amendment. I think what 141  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 we all have to keep in mind here is the really small number of kids that this is going to affect. If you look at the provisions of the Amendment which is also, incidentally, a recommendation of the Commission, you'll find that the only people that will be permitted to be excused from physical education will be those who need the extra time slot for remedial work, those who want to take additional advanced college courses and those who are participating in athletics. And I think you'll see that this will really, in the final analysis, be a very, very small amount of kids, and I rise in wholehearted support of Amendment #12."

"Lady from Cook, Representative Didrickson."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, I, too, rise in support of this very important Amendment. Indeed, this is not anti-kids. This is pro-kids. This is pro-education. This is also pro-reform. If we're down here talking about what we're going to do with regards to education reform, this should be part of the package. It's been recommended by the State Board of Education. It's also been part of the Commission package. It's a waiver, and that's what I would like you all to understand. It's a waiver in the 11th and 12th grades of P.E. They have to get approval from the school board. We're not demandating. It's a waiver for those kids who choose an academic course or who are participating on an athletic team, spending three hours or two hours before school on that swimming team and two or three hours after school on that swimming team. I urge its adoption."

"Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, you've already heard that this issue has been approved by the Commission on the improvement of elementary and secondary 142  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 education, and I recall seeing a chart of the time that students spend in various kinds of activities in their school life, and even though I knew it, it was somewhat of a shock to me that the chart indicated that a student spends more of their time in physical education than they do in any other area of study while they are in school. Certainly, it is an advantage to have physical activity. We are not demandating it. We are simply saying that on an individual student basis where there is a need to use the time for some other productive activity, the school board should have the flexibility of determining when that child may be excused. The Amendment deserves your support."

"Gentleman from Rock Island, Representative Brunsvold."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The previous speakers and my Chairman, Representative Mulcahey, and Representative Didrickson support the Amendment. That, however, is not the case of the Committee. The Committee does not support this Amendment. It did not come from the Committee. They support no change in the mandated P.E. program as it now exists. This would be the first step in demandating P.E. Forty-five minutes a day, one-sixth of a class day, is required for P.E. instruction. That's a small part of a day for a child to learn physical activities which will benefit him for the rest of his life. I was a member of committee of eight which interviewed the teacher in space candidates in this state. One of those candidates made a statement. He was a small gentleman, made a statement that the only purpose for his body was... for his body was to carry his mind around. We got a chuckle out of that. But if you think about that, it's true. His body should be in the shape that it's going to carry his mind around for the rest of his life. And through participation in athletics, 143  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 gym classes, etcetera, you do have a very much better chance of living a longer life. So I would ask for a negative vote and a Roll Call vote, Mr. Speaker, on this Amendment."

"Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Hoffman."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I kind of resent... I kind of resent that last statement referring to mind as it relates to the body. But I'm going to overlook that and ask Representative Hensel to respond to that comment. And Mr. Greiman will cover that issue for your side. Oh, there he is. Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I would... I would make one observation and that is that the school where... where I teach we have 55 minute periods, and I'm sure that statistics that Representative Satterthwaite has shared with you is... are accurate. Let me also suggest that the proponents of this issue are on the wrong side of the issue and so are the opponents. And the reason for that is we put 40 to 45... 35, 40, 45 students in a physical education class and, if you give them options to go out, you're going to have to have more teachers rather than less teachers. So, it's not a... you know, it's not a... not really a jobs... a jobs issue. I would also suggest to you that the exemptions that are provided in this Bill are very reasonable... this Amendment are very reasonable. And if you've had the opportunity, as I have had, to look at requirements in this area in all fifty states, you will find that Illinois leads the pack in terms of the number of hours and the requirement in physical education. I think that we should give local school districts and students in particular more options. And this Amendment provides only for more options in four 144  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 circumstances. I agree with Representative Mulcahey. I think it will affect as many students as it probably should. However, I do rise in support of Amendment #12."

"I notice some in the gallery were nodding yes also, Gene. Representative Van Duyne, the Gentleman from Will."

"Would the Gentleman yield for a question?"

"Indicates he will."

"It's ironic that on today's front page and also on page 16 that the headlines says diet, exercise - question - experts say relax and live longer. And it likens some of the things that we've been talking about today to medical quackery and he advises, quote, 'Take a vacation. Go to a good restaurant or do anything else that helps you relax'. How do they feel about that?"

"Question vas, how do you feel about that, Gordon?"

"Mr. Speaker, sounds alright."

"Gentleman from Cook, Representative LeFlore. Wind it up."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On this particular issue, physical education, we had quite a lengthy discussion in the Instruction and Standards Subcommittee, and it was agreed by the Committee Members, in finalizing our discussion, that we would not demandate physical education. And I would have to support the recommendation of Representative Brunsvold, and I feel that we should go ahead, as we have agreed on, and leave physical education as it is."

"Representative Ropp, to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. Let me first of all say that this is no way a demandation of P.E. 145  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 If anything, it's providing a greater opportunity for those young boys and girls who are participating in a varsity sport who spend more and more time than any other student going to school in a school activity involved with a physical kind of activity which involves certaily a lot of concerns for their health, particularly if you're a wrestler, and the kinds of food that you eat, or if you're a swimmer, or if you're a track person, or if you're a football player. It creates a greater opportunity for learning cooperation in teamwork, being involved in those competitive sports, and I wholeheartedly support them. Now, those students, because of the fact they put in so much more time and, frankly, if any of you have had children who have been involved in varsity sports, those young people come home and they're pretty darn tired. They need additional time to do some studying. This will grant them that opportunity through this waiver to forego, at the request, individually, case by case, by the school board, to allow them to get involved in extracurriculur courses that they need in order to brush up for preparation for college interests or vocational programs, should that student not choose to go onto college, or even the college, or do even become more involved in another particular athletic program. It's a good approach. It provides the opportunity for really expanding the educational opportunities that those people really need because of their contribution in competitive sports representing that school in any kind of conferences all over their particular area. I urge your support. It's a good Amendment and one that is well needed in providing the educational expansion of those people who are involved in competitive varsity sports, and I urge a favorable vote."

"Representative Ropp has moved for the 146  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 adoption of Amendment #12. Those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed by voting 'no'. Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Clerk will take the record. Jesse White, one minute to explain his vote."

"No, I was going to ask for a verification, but it's... I'll cancel."

"You're sure? Take the record. On this question there are 59 'ayes', 48 'nays', and Amendment #12 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #13, William Peterson, amends House Bill 1037 as amended."

"Representative Peterson, on Amendment 13."

"Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the House to withdraw Amendment 13."

"Leave to withdraw. Amendment 13 is withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #14, Didrickson, amends House Bill 1037..."

"Representative Didrickson, on Amendment 14."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would like to withdraw Amendment #..."

"Leave to withdraw. Amendment 14 is withdrawn. Are there further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #15, Didrickson, amends House Bill..."

"Representative Didrickson, on Amendment 15."

"Mr. Speaker, I ask to withdraw Amendment 15."

"Leave to withdraw. Leave. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #16, Satterthwaite, amends House Bill 1037 as amended."

"Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite, on Amendment 16." 147  STATE OF ILLINOIS 64th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

May 16, 1985 "Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, Amendment #16 calls for a program of reading and library materials to be supplied to our schools. The issue was addressed in Committee and was approved by Committee. It did not happen to get amended into this Bill, but it appears to me that if we are going to have a reform package, it should be included here, rather than standing on its own. This is a proposal that had support through the Governor's message on education in recognition of the fact that reading skills are very fundamental to providing a basic education, regardless of what field of specialty one goes into later in life. And in order to enhance the materials available within our classrooms and our media centers, I would move for adoption of Amendment #16."

"Representative Satterthwaite has moved for the adoption of Amendment #16. All in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay'. And Amendment 16 is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #17, White, amends House Bill 1037..."

"Gentleman from Cook, Representative White, Amendment 17."

"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #17 deletes certain Sections of the Act, and this is basically the Bill that deals with consumer education. And it tends to delete consumer education from the Bill. First of all, I find it very difficult to provide a proficiency test for consumer education and think that it's important for a young person who is a part of a consumer education class to be a part of this class throughout the entire semester. To give a person an examination in lieu of going through the course, I think, is ill conceived. It would be very difficult for a young person who knows 148  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 absolutely nothing about labor law to take an examination and yet be expected to pass such a test. The second part of the Amendment deals with the health education. I think it's important for a young person to go through the entire... participate in the entire class. It, again, will be difficult to come up with a test dealing with health education that will allow a young person to, number one, pass the test, and with the current lifestyles of our society, I think it would be just totally impossible for a youngster to be required to take the test, pass it and in lieu of taking the course. So, what I'm actually trying to do with this Amendment is to delete some language in the Bill."

"Representative White has moved for the adoption of Amendment 17. The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Hoffman."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I... I stand in opposition to the Gentleman's Amendment. I teach consumer ed as part of a program at the senior level. I would suggest to you that the provision of a proficiency exam in consumer education would not be difficult to prepare and to allow those people to go on and to work in other areas. In fact, the ability to provide a proficiency exam would allow us, in our particular program, to stream students into other areas. Those who could pass the consumer exam... proficiency exam on consumer economics could move on into economics as a discipline to a much greater degree than it would be possible for some of the other students to do who need to have that time on what we might consider to be the basics on the day-to-day kind of operation. I would also suggest to you that it is logical that health fit into the physical education program. The whole scheduling problems for 149  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 schools in terms of setting up semester courses is very difficult, and what it does, it takes away from the programs that Representative Dunn was talking about when we talk about the arts, music, choir, drama, because we have to... they have to take an additional semester out of their sophomore year. And that, I'll tell you, folks, can cut the heart out of the... particularly the arts programs and the music and dance. I think this is a perfectly reasonable way to go and would ask that you resist the Gentleman's Amendment. And I know... he does this in all seriousness and is well intentioned."

"The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite, with Representative Alan Greiman in the Chair."

"Lady from Champaign. Ms. Satterthwaite, on Amendment 17."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, this Amendment, again, deletes a provision that was agreed upon by the Committee in regard to trying to list some of the mandates and allow some additional flexibility within our school program. The idea of a proficiency exam can be utilized by schools under the Bill as it currently stands, if they determine that that is enough to judge whether the student already knows the material that would be covered in that course. And so, again, in response to the school districts who have asked us to provide some flexibility in scheduling, I would urge a rejection of this Amendment."

"Further discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. LeFlore. Yes, Mr. LeFlore."

"Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, this is an issue that was discussed in the Subcommittee of Instruction and Standards and also before the full Committee, and the Committee agreed to leave the proficiency tests...to 150  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 administrate the tests instead of giving the course. Often the course is... So, I would go along with the recommendation of the full Committee. I'm sorry that Representative White wasn't there the day that this was discussed, and I can understand what he is saying and what he is trying to get into the mandate."

"Lady from DuPage, Ms. Cowlishaw."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would like to expand upon the information that was just provided to you by the last speaker who is in accord with my position of opposition to this Amendment. I would like to make some explanation of what the Bill, if this Amendment is defeated, will do. The Bill, as drafted by the Subcommittee and approved by the full Committee, would provide that those students who chose to take a proficiency test in consumer education would be entitled to do so. The test would be standardized. It would be the same given throughout the state. It would be available to be taken only once a year. The provisions of the exact questions and the score that would be required in order to proficiency out of consumer education would be determined by the State Board of Education. The intent is not to let students with a minimal knowledge of the content of that course pass this proficiency test. The intent is that the test should be very comprehensive. But we all know that there are some students, particularly very gifted students, who are already familiar with the course material in any number of courses that are presently taught at the high school level. These proficiency tests, if retained in the original Bill and not removed by this Amendment, would enable those truly gifted students who could pass this test to demonstrate that they already have an adequate grasp of the content of this course and would free those students to 151  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 then take other subject materials such as advanced math, advanced chemistry, dance, drama, art or whatever might be the area of their greatest interest. This is a Bill that is good for students who are very, very bright. We need to help them, too. I urge that we reject this Amendment."

"Further discussion? The Gentleman from Rock Island, Mr. Brunsvold."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would support Representative White's Amendment on the basis of proficiency tests in courses should not opt a student out of that course because of the interaction that that student would receive in class. For example, in health education, in family living, the response and the interaction between the students is something that you can't opt out of. And if we're going to proficiency test out of these courses, maybe we shouldn't have these courses. And I would support Representative White's Amendment."

"There being no further discussion, the Gentleman from Cook, Br. White, to close."

"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, earlier today we demandated behind the wheel as a part of the drivers' education program. We've watered down physical education, and I just think it's high time for us to stand up and work in the best interest of these young people and do what we can to help them to get a quality-type program in the area of consumer ed and physical education. I ask for an 'aye' vote on this measure."

"Question is, 'Shall Amendment 17 be adopted?' All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it... What a cacophony of sound. In the opinion of the Chair, we'll have a Roll Call. All those in favor signify by voting 152  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 'aye', those opposed vote 'no". Voting is now open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 34 voting 'aye', 75 voting 'no", 2 voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Further Amendments."

"Floor Amendment #18, Didrickson, amends House Bill 1037..."

"Lady from Cook, Ms. Didrickson, on Floor Amendment #18."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, Amendment #18 is a cleanup Amendment. It was inadvertenly left out of the package that came out of Education Committee with regards to charging a reasonable fee and a waiver in which case the fee... the child cannot afford to pay for the course with regards to behind the wheel drivers' education."

"Lady from Cook, Ms. Didrickson, moves for the adoption of Amendment #18 to House Bill 1037. Is there any discussion? The Lady from DuPage, Ms. Cowlishaw."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, as the prior speaker has mentioned, this Amendment 18 simply puts into this Bill a portion that was intended to be included in the Bill in the first place; but, because of the large number of pieces to the puzzle that became House Bill 1037, this one somehow did not get included when the final drafting was done. Consequently, it's just a matter of putting it into the position of the accord of the Committee to begin with. I urge its adoption. Thank you."

"Lady from Champaign, Ms. Satterthwaite."

"Simply to reiterate what the two previous speakers have said. It is as agreed upon in Committee, and I would approve the Amendment."

"Mr. Dunn. Gentleman from Macon, Mr. Dunn. The 153  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Gentleman from Cook, Mr. LeFlore."

"Mr. Speaker, I would like to know, will the Sponsor yield for a question?"

"Yes, I will." May 16, 1985

"What about the youngster who cannot afford to pay the fee? I think... I know we discussed this, but I just think all the Members should... this should be explained to all the Members."

"Okay. I will again reiterate the fact that the reasonable fee for the student who cannot afford or is unable to pay for such a course, the fee shall be waived, shall be waived."

"How will you determine that?"

"The school board, I would assume, but it is a shall LeFlore: versus may. It shall be waived." "Okay. No further questions."

"Further discussion? Question is, 'Shall Amendment #18 be adopted?' All those in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Amendment's adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of... House Bill 1038 appears on page nine of the Calendar on Second Reading has been previously moved to the Order of Third Reading. Ms. Satterthwaite asks leave of the House to return the Bill to the Order of Second Reading. Mr. LeFlore has an Amendment that was withdrawn and asks leave of the House to have consideration of that Amendment. What number is that Amendment, Mr. Clerk?"

"Amendment #5."

"Asks leave of the House to consider Amendment #5. Does the Gentleman have leave? Gentleman has leave? 154  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Μг. Clerk, #5." May 16, 1985 read the Bill on Second Reading and Amendment

"House Bill 1038, a Bill for an Act to amend the School Code together with Senate... together with House Amendment #5.

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. LeFlore, on Amendment #5."

"Thank you, ΜΕ. Chairman. Amendment #5 is concerning grants for staff development. This Amendment would allow the State Board of Education to to award grants to local school districts to other non-profit entities provide staff development programs. I'd like to... that this Amendment be accepted... as Amendment,"

"Gentleman from 'Cook, Mr. LeFlore, moves for the adoption of House... of Amendment #5 to House Bill 1038. Is there any discussion? The Gentleman from DuPage, Mr. Hoffman: Hoffman," "Yes, would the Sponsor yield for an Amendment... yield for a question?"

"Yes, I will yield. Yes."

"Yes, proceed. Proceed. Indicates he will."

"Cannot the school district now or the school district now contract with a non-for-profit agency if it SO desires?"

"Not in the area of teachers' evaluation."

"Not in the area of teacher evaluation."

"Teacher evaluation, right."

"Are you..." LeFlore:

"That's what I understand it to be." "Where... What is the source of your information on that, Representative?"

"Well, Caгol?"

"Lady from... Excuse me." 155  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"Okay, Mr. Chairman."

"Proceed," May 16, 1985

"I... Actually what we are doing here is making the language more clear, more or less clarifying the language."

"Alright. There is some discussion here at the desk on the issue. I have some reservations in terms of moving money... moving state money for schools directly to non-profit organizations as opposed to running those state monies through the schools themselves. And it seems to me that with the resources that are available we have to be very careful that we're not opening this up for entities beyond the school districts. In other words, if state monies for schools go to schools and then the schools contract for teacher evaluation or whatever else they want, that's, you know... that's their business. If they want to contract for staff development just like they contract for teachers, that's their business. I don't think, however, that... I think we have to be careful we're not, you know, opening this up further than we really intended, and apparently this will be explained."

"Lady from Champaign, Ms. Satterthwaite."

"MI. Speaker and Members of the House, my understanding of the Amendment simply is to allow the school... the State School Board, at their choice, to be able to provide money to a not-for-profit organization for programs such as training teachers in additional reading or writing skills. One example might be, for instance, the Illinois Humanities Council has a program where they take teachers and give them additional skills in writing and composition. And So, my understanding is that this Amendment simply gives more flexibility to the State Board so that funds appropriated for this purpose could either be utilized directly for training programs within the local 156  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 schools or a program such as this could be funded so that teachers from local school districts could participate in ongoing programs. And I would urge the adoption of the Amendment."

"Further discussion? The Lady from Cook, Ms. Braun."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, In response to Representative Hoffman, I think Representative Satterthwaite has very well explained what's involved here. This is really almost just on the level of a technical Amendment in that this... only in this Section pertaining to teacher evaluations was the... was the authority of the State Board limited. It was felt that there was an Amendment needed to clarify that the State Board could do that which the State Board already does in a lot of other areas that we're funding, and that's the only reason for this Amendment. It's not opening any door. It's only closing, if you will, a loophole that would have prohibited some activity that I think all of us want to support which is further training and evaluation for teachers."

"Lady from DuPage, Ms. Cowlishaw."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield to a question?"

"Indicates that he will."

"He? Pardon me? Who is the Sponsor of this Amendment?"

"There's two of us."

"Mr. LeFlore."

"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought it was Representative Braun. Let me make sure that I understand how this sentence will read precisely if this Amendment is adopted. Would you be willing to confirm or deny what... Let me 157  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day read it and see if I have it correct." May 16, 1985

"Yes, why don't you read it, and I'll verify it."

"If this Amendment were adopted, that sentence in this legislative proposal would read: 'The State Board of Education shall approve school district staff development plans developed under this Section and provide state funds appropriated for this purpose to school districts or other not-for-profit entities to aid in conducting programs'."

"Yes, you're absolutely right."

"So, if that is the correct wording of what the Bill would say if this Amendment is adopted, then it is my understanding that the control of whether those state funds are going to be provided through local public school districts or through some other entity that is going to provide this program, that control is with the State Board of Education. Is that correct?"

"Exactly. Exactly. Exactly."

"I think that makes it a lot clearer. Thank you very much."

"Further discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #5 be adopted?' All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Yes, Mr. McCracken.... Mr. McCracken has his light on. For what purpose do you seek recognition, Mr. McCracken?"

"You didn't know I had such long arms, did you? Parliamentary inquiry regarding House Bill 202."

"Yes."

"Has Amendment #3 been adopted?"

"Yes, it has been." 158  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"And was a pension impact note request made?"

"Yes. Yes, there is a...."

"We will withdraw that with leave of the House or..."

"Alright. In that case, with respect... then let's... as long as we're on this and we're hearing a Motion on that... Yes, who seeks... Well, alright, as long as we're on that subject, then let's return to House Bill 202. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 202, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendments 1, 2 and 3 were adopted previously. Amendment #4 lost."

"Are there any Motions with respect to them?"

"No Motions filed."

"Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Yes, Mr. Young, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, in regard to House Bill 202, Amendment #4, having voted on the prevailing side of that Amendment which failed, I move to reconsider the action."

"The Bill has been moved to the Order of Third Reading, Mr. Young. That's where it is on the Order of Third Reading. Yes, Mr. McCracken."

"Parliamentary inquiry regarding House Bill 717."

"Yes, excuse me. Yes, Mr. Giorgi."

"Mr. Speaker, Mr. McCracken was going to remove his... the impediment of a fiscal note request on House Bill 717. Inasmuch as he brought out House Bill 202, my Amendment #4 failed and he was going to reconsider it so we could take... put the Amendment #4 back on 202. But I think McCracken all he wanted to do was remove the impediment of 159  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day asking for a fiscal note. He was satisfied with.. the May 16, 1985 original fiscal note was correct on 717. So that..."

"Well, no. wait. No, wait. Wait. Mr. Giorgi.."

"I'm involved in both Bills."

"We'd like to consider these Bills separately if we could."

"Let's go with McCracken."

"Now, Amendment... Mr. McCracken moved... or requested to withdraw his fiscal... request for a fiscal note. Okay? At that point there was nothing that stopped the Bill from moving to the Order of Third Reading, and the Bill was taken to Third Reading."

"Except you didn't announce it."

"Well, I asked if there were any further Amendments."

"No, you went to 202."

"Yes, Mr. Giorgi."

"Mr. Speaker, House Bill 717, at the request of the IFT, has Representative Braun's Amendment on it. And Mr. McCracken had asked for a fiscal note. He's satisfied that the original fiscal note applies. He wants to withdraw his request for a fiscal note as amended so that the Bill can go to Third, and then we want to go back to 202 to reconsider it because he brought the Bill number up so that we can adopt Amendment #4, which meets with Mrs. Braun's approval."

"What's Amendment 4, Mr. Giorgi? Mr. Giorgi."

"It has to do with creating a statewide medical group program under the tutorage of the IMRF. It's an innocuous Bill."

"Nothing is innocuous on the floor of this House, Mr. Giorgi. Well, Mr. Giorgi, we're going to take 160  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 these Bills separately if we may. Mr. McCracken has been seeking recognition patiently. Mr. McCracken, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Amendment #3 was adopted on House Bill 717. I filed a fiscal note request. I withdraw the fiscal note request."

"Alright. Mr. McCracken withdraws the fiscal note request on 717. We will then consider House Bill 717, which is on page eight on the Order of Second Reading. Mr. Clerk."

"House Bill 717, on the Order of Second Reading. Amendment #1 was withdrawn. Amendments #2 and 3 were adopted."

"Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Well, Mr. Giorgi... Mr. Young or Mr. Giorgi - I don't know which one - I think that we don't want to compound any confusion here. So, why don't we just proceed on the general Order of Business, allow you all to read the Amendments and perhaps have a discussion and perhaps seek recognition later on? So, therefore, we return to page nine of the Calendar... Mr. Young, for what purpose do you seek recognition now or just... blinking from the past. Alright. So, on the Order of House Bills Second Reading, on page nine of the Calendar, appears House Bill 1062. 1062. Mr. Clerk. Mr. Ropp, would you like to proceed with 1062? Mr. Ropp. Excuse me. If we can excuse you from your business. Alright, thank you. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1062, a Bill for an Act to require the State of Illinois to pay five percent of the contract price to certain Illinois companies that enter into contracts with foreign countries or foreign businesses. Second 161  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"No... Well, Mr. Ropp, we're going to have to keep the Bill on the Order of Second Reading because a fiscal note has been requested. So the Bill will remain on the Order of Second Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1090. Mr. Hannig, 1090? Out of the record. Alright. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1136. Mr.Clerk, read that Bill,"

"House Bill 1136, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Lottery Law. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1143, Mr. Laurino. Mr. Clerk, read the... Mr. Laurino, are you seeking recognition or do you wish the Bill called?"

"Mr. Speaker, I'd like to have that Bill put in Interim Study."

"Gentleman asks leave of the House... You're the Chief Sponsor of the Bill, correct? Gentleman asks leave of the House to place the Bill in the Interim Study Calendar. Gentleman have leave? Leave is granted, and House Bill 1143 will be placed in the Order... in the Interim Study Calendar. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1143, Mr. McGann. Mr. McGann. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1161, Mr. Pangle. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill,"

"House Bill 1161, a Bill for an Act to amend the 162  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Illinois Manufactured Housing and Mobile Home Safety Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1198. 1998. Mr. Kirkland, 1198? Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1250. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1250, a Bill for an Act to award state contracts in targetted areas. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Soliz, amends House Bill 1250 on page three and so forth."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Soliz, on Amendment #1."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #1 is simply a technical Amendment which changes the numbering on one of the Subsections of the Bill."

"Gentleman from Cook has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1250. On that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Amendment be adopted?' All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1252. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1279. Out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1291. Mr. Bowman? Mr. 163  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1291, a Bill for an Act in relationship to acute and subacute medical care. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendments #1 and 2 were adopted previously."

"Any Motions with respect to Amendments 1 and 2?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"A fiscal note has been requested. Has the fiscal note been filed?"

"Fiscal note has been filed."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading, on page ten of the Calendar, appears House Bill 1317. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1317, a Bill for an Act to amend the Use Tax Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"On the Order of... I'm sorry. Committee Amendments. Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Richmond - Hartke, amends House Bill 1317 on page one and so forth."

"The Gentleman from Jackson, Mr. Richmond, on Amendment #1."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Amendment #1 to House Bill 1317 amends the State Sales Tax Act, and it would now, with this enacted, it could completely exempt the sale and use of farm machinery and equipment, including replacement parts, from the tax. The present statutes, which we enacted in 1980, exempted sales tax on farm production equipment with except... but it left a thousand dollar threshold. This Amendment would remove that threshold and make our agribusinesses around 164  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 the state competitive with our neighboring states so that the farmers will not be crossing the state line to spend their thousand dollars in Indiana or the other neighboring states. So I would ask for the approval of this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Jackson has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1317. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Amendment be adopted?' All in favor signify by saying 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments."

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1468. Mr. Giorgi? Mr. Zeke Giorgi? Alright. Mr. Giorgi, 1468. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill, slowly."

"House Bill 1468, a Bill for an Act to amend the Metropolitan Civic Center Support Act. It's been read a second time previously. Amendment #1 was adopted."

"Are there any further Amendments."

"No further Amendments."

"And the fiscal note has been filed."

"Fiscal note has been filed as amended by Amendment #1."

"Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1475. Mr. Giorgi, 1475? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.

"House Bill 1475, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Public Aid Code. It's been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments." 165  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"A fiscal note has been requested?"

"Fiscal note has been filed."

"It has been furnished. Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1529. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. I'm sorry. 1475, Third Reading. Now, on the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1529. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1529, a Bill for an Act to amend the School Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Has the fiscal... Yes, Mr. Matijevich, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, as you know better than anybody, this is a vehicle Bill, and I just talked to Fred Tuerk who has filed that fiscal note request, and he said he will withdraw that so that we have a vehicle Bill in operation just in case we can finalize those negotiations. So..."

"Alright. Mr. Tuerk is there and indicates he desires to withdraw the fiscal note request to House Bill 1529. The note request will be withdrawn and the Bill will be moved to the Order of Third Reading. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1567, Mr. Steczo."

"House Bill 1567, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act relating to surcharges collected..."

"Well, wait. Excuse me, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Steczo? Let's take it out of the record. On the Order of House Bills Second Reading appears House Bill 1598. Ms. Breslin, would you come to the Chair. Ms. Pullen, 1598? Ms. Pullen, you wish that to be taken out of the record? Alright. You want to take that out of the 166  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day record...actually out of the record. take it out of the record. Alright. May 16, 1985 Alright. Then let's We'll just back up for a second. Mr. Clerk, 1567. Read the Bill."

"House Bill 1567, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act relating to surcharges collected by the Circuit Court. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading."

"House Bill 1596. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill." Clerk O'Brien; "House Bill 1596, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Citizens' Utility Board Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments,"

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1604, Representative Ronan. Clerk, read the Bill." Clerk O'Brien; "House Bill 1604, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Code of Civil Procedure. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative Didrickson Ewing and Ronan."

"Representative Didrickson."

"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. Amendment #1 is the structured verdicts Amendment to 1604. It provides for structured payments for future payments for; one, medical or health treatment; number two, care or custody; number three, loss of future earnings; number four, loss of bodily function; number five, future pain and suffering; six, future physical impairment and inconvenience. If future damages exceed 50,000 dollars, they shall be structured on a monthly basis until the death 167  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 of the injured person, or, and I would like to underline or, even after death, if actuarial tables would have predicted a longer life with regards to medical and health care costs and noneconomic loss. Payments for economic loss would continue until death of the injured person or the time the actuarial tables predict he or she would have lived, whichever is later. This concept guarantees that survivors would receive payments for economic support that they could reasonably expect from the injured party. I also would like to mention the fact that the California Supreme Court in a recent decision upheld structured verdicts with regards to awards over 50,000 dollars. I would also like to explain that inflation is provided for here and tracked by the treasury bill rate. This method of structured verdicts provides that the way they will be paid, not whether or not they have a right to be paid."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1604. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Greiman."

"Yes, I wonder if the Lady would yield for a question?"

"The Lady will yield for a question."

"Now, is it my understanding, Ms. Didrickson, that a jury has to make a finding? First they have to decide how much the medical expenses are in the past up to the time of trial? That's one calculation you have to make?"

"That is covered for...."

"They have to make that calculation, is that right?"

"That's correct."

"And then they have to calculate how much the medicals would be in the future, is that right?"

"That is correct."

"And then they have to calculate how much the pain and suffering would be, that the person has experienced up till 168  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day the time of trial?"

"That is correct."

"And then they have to decide on a separate computation somehow? How much the man or woman is going to suffer in the future, is that right?"

"That is correct."

"And then they've got to decide how much economic loss he's lost in the past and how much in the future, is that right?"

"That is correct."

"So that's a six complicated computations that that jury has to make right off the bat, is that right?"

"Yes, Representative Greiman, that is not unlike what juries have to do right now."

"Well, I'm just asking what they have to do under this. Now, there's no... there's no... if right now if you get a judgement or a verdict, you get the entire amount, is that right?"

"Sometimes."

"Well, if you get the... you're right. If you can't collect it, you don't get it. But if you can... if you get the verdict and without any agreement to the contrary, you get the entire amount, right?"

"As I understand it, Representative, there is a discount factor that is on a judgmental factor figured in."

"Now? Under the law now?"

"Not under the law, but the juries are asked to consider that."

"No, no. I'm asking you if they're... Wait, now wait. If someone gets a verdict today for a million dollars because both their legs have been cut off, they get the entire amount, right?"

"It is my understanding that the million dollars... 169  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 the jury is asked to discount, take into consideration, which is frequently very difficult for them to do, but they are asked to take in that discount presently. So, whereby they may have had a million dollar verdict award, they would not necessarily be guaranteed that they would receive that, and that's presently..."

"I don't think that. I think you want to talk to you counsel, you'll find that's not at all the case. I think that just is not the case. The juries don't provide a discount rate for verdicts. Now, I think you want to probably tell the folks that that's the case."

"It reflects..."

"Well, I don't know if it reflects or not. I'm just telling you if a jury gives a verdict for a million dollars, it's a million dollar verdict, is that right?"

"Okay, that is true."

"Is that right? Just say yes or no, okay? Thanks. Thank you very much."

"Yes, but there's another consideration that you have to take in with regards to that."

"Alright. So, that person who's injured then would have an economic advantage in that they could put that money at interest. They could invest it. Is that right?"

"Yes, or they could blow it."

"Or they could blow it, but under the structured verdict, the insurance company gets the amount of the investment, isn't that right?"

"Yes, they do, which then reduces the costs of health care."

"Now, health care... are health care costs shown in the cost of living index? Do you know if they are?"

"I'm not a hundred percent certain. They are reflected to the best that they can." 170  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"Well so, then why wouldn't your Bill..." May 16, 1985

"Excuse me. Excuse me, Representative Greiman. Excuse me. Could the Gentleman in front of Representative Didrickson sit down or move? The Members are having difficulty watching. Proceed."

"Health care, Representative Greiman, yes, I believe health care costs are reflected, but not on a perfect measurement, no."

"What's perfect in our lives?"

"You're right."

"So if indeed we... if indeed we do have a calculation of cost of living increase for medical expenses, why would you tag this then to the bond market? I mean, if I need a new iron lung or whatever the state of the art might be, it has nothing to do, does it, with the bond market? My hospital costs... As a matter of fact, hospital costs have significantly risen in a different numbers than the bond market has so that why do you peg my future hospital costs into the bond market? Why wouldn't you plug it into the cost of living?"

"It's not unlike the Lottery, at present. You may win 40 million dollars, but you don't get that immediately."

"No, no, but we're... No, no, I understand that. But we're providing someone for their future health costs, future health care."

"That's right. That's correct."

"And when we provide him with future health care, we say... you say generously and we plug in inflation to the bond market. Why not plug it into the costs... increased costs of health care which is much higher than the bond market? Doesn't that make more sense? Isn't that a more sensible way of doing it?" 171  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"Representative Greiman, as I understand it right now, if you ... an annuity company can take 130,000 dollars, okay?"

"No, no. These are forced annuity. You can't compare it. You see, this is a mandatory structured settlement."

"Is this a later Amendment if this doesn't get on that you're referring to?"

"I'm asking... no. I'm merely asking you - you're the author of this Amendment - why in the world you would tag... you would plug in health care costs and the increase in health care costs to a bond market when there is available a cost of living index on health care? Why wouldn't you... Why would you compare apples and oranges when you have a perfectly good 'indicia' to compare apples and apples?"

"We're simply being reasonable with this and consistent."

"Well, I think you're being inconsistent. But okay."

"And it's one of the standards that's recognized universally."

"Now, let me ask you this. If a young child is injured by a doctor's negligence, how do we ensure, over the span of 50 years, that that child may live or 60 years or whatever the solvency of the payor? How do we do that?"

"Well, there are provisions in this Amendment and the defendant, number one, is liable."

"Well..."

"There's a posting of security. And the bonding company or the insurance company is licensed. And they're normally large companies that we are talking about. And the Director of the State of Illinois' Department of Insurance would be monitoring this."

"Alright. Now if I told you that Section 2-1718 172  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 provided that indeed the judgement is satisfied by the... by the preparation and entry of a mandatory structured verdict, you would have to retract what you just said that the defendant is liable, right? The defendant is not liable."

"Representative Greiman, I am missing the last page of my Amendment. And while I am indeed one of the Sponsors..."

"Perhaps we could could discuss it intelligently..."

"... we also have another Sponsor with regards to Representative Ewing."

"Perhaps Representative Ewing could tell us whether Section 2-1718 would not indeed show that what you originally said was incorrect; that, in fact, the defendant is no longer liable once the mandatory structured verdict is put in. Amazing. Amazing. The only time when a defendant has not paid, not paid the judgement and yet he is let off the hook. The defendant is no longer liable on that judgement once the mandatory structured verdict is in."

"It is my understanding that he has to satisfy Section 2-1718."

"Section... That merely means that if security is posted. So the defendant is no longer liable once there has been entered a mandatory structured verdict. That's what the Section says, and I think you'll have to at least go back a little bit..."

"This has to be read in context with the rest of the Amendment."

"Pardon?"

"This has to be read in context with the rest of the Amendment."

"Indeed, and I'm saying to you read it in context then 173  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 before we lose our audience. I think you have to go back. You have to say that you were in error, right?"

"I believe we are."

"You were in error. That's not against the law. You can be in error."

"Yes, I can and so can you, Representative."

"Alright. So the next issue is, have any insurance companies gone under in Illinois or in the country that you know of?"

"Sure."

"Okay. So..."

"We're talking about large insurance companies."

"Well, large ones. We have some large banks that have had some troubles over the years. We're talking about a period of 40, 50 years. Does this Bill have any provision for an injured person to go in, if it shows that the security is not as good 20 years later, if the security is impaired because the company looks like they're going to go under? Is that person just out of luck?"

"Basically, Representative, we're talking about large insurance companies."

"We're talking about any insurance company that they'll approve."

"And we're going to be spreading this law, as I understand it, across the state with other insurance companies also with regards to liability."

"Well, why don't you look at the provision, then, instead of... and not just talk about large insurance companies. You know, the Continental was a large bank, but they were down here sweating plenty. So... and had to be bailed out by the government. So, largeness doesn't impress me. We're talking about a 50 year period."

"Well, Representative, what would happen if, let's 174  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 say. an injured party received a judgement verdict of, let's say, 27 million dollars. Okay? They could put it in the bank and the bank could go under or the savings and loan could go under, couldn't they?"

"It's their judgement to make. This is not their judgement to make. All I'm asking you is if there's any device..."

"And they could blow it."

"... in this Bill that would allow a court to come in if the payment of this structured verdict were impaired. And there is not. There is nothing in here that would allow that."

"Would you repeat that please?"

"Excuse me. Representative Harris, for what reason do you rise?"

"Thank you, Madam... Thank you, Madam Speaker. I apologize for interrupting the debate, but something seems to be being passed out on the floor which I believe is in violation of Rule 66."

"Could you show it to the Clerk, please?"

"Yes, thank you."

"Proceed, Representative Greiman."

"Pooh-pooh-pooh-doop. Thank you. Well, alright. I think... I think that I would like to address the Bill... the Amendment if I might. Firstly, I want you to know that mandatory structured settlements is not really a total no-no in my vocabulary. From an economics standpoint, it may have some advantages. And if, in fact, we wanted to protect the medical malpractice insurance company from being hit by a huge, unexpected, incredible, excessive verdict, then I might indeed entertain supporting such a verdict... such a proposal. For example, there is no way for an insurance company in truth to plan for a 10 million 175  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day dollar verdict, for a 15 million dollar verdict, because those sums are so astronomical. And so if we had a structured mandatory verdict for large amounts, for verdicts over three million dollars, amounts that the insurance company might not be able to really plan for, I might indeed join with members of the Medical Society across the aisle on this kind of proposal, as long as we provided for a fair, fair consideration of the future economy, future increase in medical costs, a fair return for the person who has invested... who essentially it's his verdict. It's his verdict but the insurance company is holding the funds and taking the property. There is no question about the difference in health care costs. Indeed, one year the health care costs could be very little. The next year they could be incredible. They could be five times that, but there's no provision here to go into court and say, 'Judge, last year it was 10,000 dollars. This year we're having the operation that maybe will make me see again or whatever, and so I need 50,000 dollars this year.' There's no provision for that kind of... of thing. Now, you may say, indeed, "What if that plaintiff takes all this money and blows it?" Well, then if he does, he does. That's... That's not something we can quite control. But shall we give it to the insurance carriers? That's the question. Who shall we give it to. Again, I would support a structured verdict if it made sense to carry out the purposes for which it is intended. The threshold, my friends, is 50 thousand dollars. Under our inflationary economy, that's a, I guess, a hangnail, you know. So that's... that's not a hugh verdict. That's not a verdict that's going to set an insurance company on its pins. "Oh, my God, 50 thousand dollar verdict.' It's the million and million, million dollar verdict that's 176  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 blowing the insurance companies out... out of their... out of the economy. And I say we should do something in those cases. And I say I'm prepared to stand with the... to stand with the Medical Society on those issues and try... and to try to work out an economic... a sensible way. But 50 thousand dollars means every single verdict, every single verdict is... is going to be a structured... mandatory structured verdict. Also, strange as it may seem, people are using structured settlements. This will end structured settlements - end them forever - because this kind of Bill has a chilling effect on a structured settlement. Why in the world would a... would an insurance company sit down and develop a structured settlement when they know they've got the structured verdict anyhow. There's no inducement at all for them. This... This is a bad Amendment. This... And I don't want to take too long. The parties have worked long and hard, I will say this. We see it as the lawyers versus the doctors. It shouldn't be. You know, we have a lot of this industry versus that industry. It's... Standard of medical care is a concern. It's the health care that we all have. It's the cost of health care. It's the cost of litigation. It's also providing for injured people. This structured verdict Amendment - this is the linchpin of a settlement, I believe, between the lawyers and the doctors, if we wanted to call them the parties. This is really the issue that's the cutting edge. If we defeat this, I believe that there will be a settlement. If we do not, then we will... then the doctors will dig in and the five thousand doctors will come on a bus, and they will yell. And they'll be up here, and they'll be screaming. I think we can settle this. I think we can settle... medical malpractice package if we can defeat this Amendment and sit down tomorrow or the next 177  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 day and the next day and develop it. I'm prepared. I was part of the summit group that's been meeting. I'm prepared to stay now, today, tomorrow, over the weekend to hold both the lawyers. The lawyers have... have taken... have literally agreed and acquiesced to the issue of frivolous, so called frivolous law suits. The lawyers have said, 'We will give that issue to you.' And I say, this is the linchpin of a settlement. Defeat this. I'll stay today, tomorrow, over the weekend, and we'll settle the medical malpractice crisis in Illinois. I say defeat Amendment #1. Thank you."

"Ladies and Gentlemen, it has been called to the Chair's attention that literature has been distributed on the House floor. That is in violation of this House's rules. No literature is permitted to be distributed on the House floor. Members and staff should keep that... that rule in mind. The next person to speak on this issue is the Gentleman from Livingston, Representative Ewing."

"Madam Speaker, I'm a Cosponsor. My light was on to answer questions, and I'll be closing on the Bill."

"Very good. The Gentleman from DeKalb, Representative Countryman."

"Madam Speaker, will the Sponsor yield?"

"The Lady indicates that she will yield for a question. Excuse me. Representative Ewing. Direct your questions to Representative Ewing."

"Representative, are you familiar with what are structured settlements?"

"Am I familiar with structured settlements? Yes."

"And under... Are you familiar with the income tax consequences of the money earned after the money's once invested in structured settlements?"

"My understanding that there... this does not change the 178  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day income tax consequences."

"Well, in fact, isn't there an amount determined by a jury which would have to exceed 50 thousand dollars for this to come to place? Isn't there, in fact, an ascertainable amount?"

"The amount of the structured settlement has to be in excess of 50 thousand dollars. There are provided for here certain lump sum payments up... an advance. The amount to be paid out in the structured settlement has to be 50 thousand or more.

"Well, it's my understanding that under the federal income tax law, with regard to structured... structured settlements, that the plaintiff not become aware of the amount that's being paid for the annuity. Is that correct?"

"Not become avare?"

"Yes. Yes."

"You'll have to repeat the question."

"It's my understanding that in order for the plaintiff, or the person recovering, not to suffer the income tax consequences under a structured settlement that he not become aware of the amount paid for the annuity contract."

"Well, I think that might be the law. I can't say, Representative Countryman. But in this case, I don't... we don't require that the person receiving it become aware of what was paid for the annuity contract."

"Well, isn't he going to become aware of that fact by virtue of the court's order?"

"NO, the value of the contract and the amount that the contract... the person... selling the contract is obligated to pay out, he will be aware of. But the actual cost of that contract by the defendant, I do not think that 179  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE he would have to be aware of that."

"How did you come up with a dollars?" May 16, 1985 figure of 50 thousand

"I think that was considered to be an amount that would be worthy of being spread over periodic payments."

"Well, isn't it a fact that there are many verdicts in the range of 50 to 100 thousand dollars in just all kinds of cases?"

"Yes, and I believe that you would have to have a verdict probably close to excess of 100 thousand before it would even qualify for periodic."

"Why?"

"Because of the lump sums that are provided for in the Bill attorney's fees, up front costs, a number of things are provided to be paid out in lump sums at the beginning."

"If, in fact, you had three plaintiffs and the verdict was... for future damages was for 100 thousand dollars, then you would have structured settlements for less than 50. Is that correct?"

"We're talking about the total verdict."

"Pardon? I didn't hear you."

"We're talking about the total verdict, yes, the judgment."

"So, in fact, this Bill could apply to verdicts for future damages in less than the amount of 50 thousand dollars. Is that right?"

"Could, but probably wouldn't, because of the provisions for payment in lump sums."

"What say does the plaintiff have in the companies in which the annuities or the other forms of securities are placed?"

"The plaintiff wouldn't and I wouldn't think anybody would expect them to have a veto power over that. The court 180  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day does, and those companies have to be May 16, 1985 approved by the court."

"Why not give total discretion to the court with regard to all of this?"

"Would you explain... total discretion in what regard?"

"Why not make a provision... Obviously I don't with your agree threshold limit, but gives the court discretion to view the best possible alternatives for a plaintiff after a verdict, say in excess of three million dollars, and then let them decide what would be the best possible annuity contracts, so forth."

"You're saying that you want to give the court the discretion to decide when we'll have a structured settlement?"

"No, I'm not going to give them the discretion. I'm going to give them the discretion how to structure the settlement. What's the best way? And I'll give you an example. I worked on one of these in a miner's case about a year ago. We went through several people and we got different quotations depending upon what company we worked with. And my concern is that we have flexibility and whatever ultimate outcome we come here that we give somebody the ability to determine if Company 'X' will give a better annuity contract than Company "Y", if there are better reasons to take Company 'X' over 'Y', if they have more security and so forth."

"Well, I don't believe that the court... we're taking that away from the court here now. The court is going to approve the... whoever is going have the annuity contract. They're going to approve the company. That all has to be approved by the court, John." to

"Why would you eliminate the need for supersedeas bond?" 181  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 41st Legislative Day

"I can't answer that."

"Madam Speaker, to the Bill."

"Proceed."

"I... I would like to echo what Representative Greiman has said. I think that a reasonable structured settlement Bill can be achieved, but I don't think that this one is it. And I think that shortsightedness and shortcomings have been set forth by some of the questions that I have asked. I don't think that the people who sponsored this legislation have looked at the income tax consequences of the monies that are going to be earned over the future years. That's a major concern to everybody involved in this sorts of things. I don't think that they've taken enough interest and concerns in the cases of minors, which are particularly different than the cases of adults. And likewise, I don't think that they've really looked at a realistic amount of a threshold. I don't think it's the 50 thousand or 100 thousand dollar verdicts that are causing what they claim to be the medical malpractice crisis in this state, and I think that they're really trying to put a bunch of overkill in this... in this Amendment. And I think it's a bad Amendment, and I'm going to vote against it."

"The Gentleman from DeWitt, Representative Vinson,"

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly. Probably no subject has more occupied Members concern and attention so far in this General Assembly Session than the issue of medical malpractice. We have heard speeches today about how the trial attorneys are now willing to give in on the subject of frivolous law suits. And I can confirm to you that that is, in fact, true. But Members of the Assembly consider this, what enormous 182  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 concession is it for lawyers to say that we won't file frivolous suits any more, but we'll put something in the law to reduce the number of frivolous suits filed. Is that a major concession? I would submit to you that it's not. That's something that should have been cured and could have been cured a long time ago if the Bar was willing be more... more forthcoming on this issue. Members, there is to a real world issue..."

Speaker Breslin: "Excuse me, Representative Vinson. Representative Preston, for what reason do you rise?"

"I rise on a... on a point of order, Madam Speaker. don't think the Gentleman is speaking He is speaking to other matters." to I this Amendment.

"Your point is well taken, Representative Preston. Confine your remarks to the Amendment proposed, Representative Vinson."

"Certainly, Madam Speaker. There is a real world issue that occasions the need for this Amendment. That real world issue is the fact that just yesterday the largest medical malpractice insurer in the State of Illinois had to make their quarterly filing with the Department of Insurance and report on their losses for the first quarter. for the first quarter of this year, that insurer reported a loss almost as large as for all of last year. There is a skyrocketing cost problem in this field that is driving the cost of medical... medical malpractice insurance through the ceiling. And, in fact, actuaries presented by the Bar Associations admit to that fact and recognize that terrible reality. That is occasioning a terrible cost increase in a variety of ways on health consumers - not on doctors - on health consumers. And that is what we have to address. And one of the most important levers for addressing that issue is this Amendment #1. What Amendment #1 provides is 183  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 no cap, no reduction in the amount of rewards... the award for an injured party who's a victim of medical malpractice. What it does say is that it schedules out in reasonable fashion the payments that are made for that over the person's lifetime. And what that could accomplish is much more predictable losses for the insurance carriers who are dealing with this issue. And if the insurance carriers can't get to predictable losses in this thing, there's not going to be any medical malpractice coverage available for doctors in this state. And that means, #1, no injured plaintiff is going to get anything; and, #2, it means that the potential costs are going to be enormous. Ladies and Gentlemen, ve have heard an argument that we ought to defeat this Amendment because we ought to return to negotiations. I submit to you that the place to resolve this issue is in the people's chamber, in the people's floor, with the people who have the constitutional obligation to pass on what the laws of this state should be. This is not a guilt issue that ought to be transferred back to doctors and lawyers. It's a public issue - a pressing public problem - a pressing public problem for health consumers in this state. And if you want to discharge your constitutional obligation, then your constitutional obligation is to vote 'yes' or 'no' on this Amendment based on the merits of this Amendment, not on some desire to return to back room negotiations. We ought to adopt this Amendment. It ought to be part of the law. It is a good Amendment for health consumers in the State of Illinois because it'll lower their costs."

"The Gentleman from Knox, Representative Hawkinson."

"Thank you Madam Speaker. I think if there's one Amendment in this package that's discriminatory, this is 184  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 it. If you have an elderly victim of malpractice, that award, under this Amendment, is going to be cut off at the later of death or life expenctancy. There's no way that the full recovery of what ought to be due that elderly victim can be recovered under this scheme, and I would urge a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Preston."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the Gentleman yield for a question, Representative Ewing?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Representative, under the proposals encompassed in this Amendment, the threshold amount is at what level in order to require a... a structured verdict?"

"50... 50 thousand after the payment of lump sums."

"Well, if an individual is injured and a jury awards 60 thousand dollars, what would happen... how would that be structured under this proposal?"

"I would say it would not be structured."

"Then at what level would there be a structured verdict?"

"When the amount left to be paid after... after damages... past damages and attorney's fees, costs, these types of things had all been paid out, there's 50 thousand left then it can be structured. For instance, if you get... an award is 60 thousand and the plaintiff feels that he needs a 20 thousand dollar van and they authorize that, there would be no structured settlement. So... Or if you need even a several hundred thousand dollar verdict, if the plaintiff becomes incapacitated, has to have a new modern home which he can get around..."

"Well, Representative, your... your... I'm trying to get at the majority. the vast majority of the cases, not the 185  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 extreme where a person is catastrophically destroyed SO that they need a specially made vehicle and special home. That's... That's so rare that we're... we can't and should not be legislating for that one in a million instances. What we're trying to do to attack the malpractice problem is to attack the vast majority of situations. So let me... let me ask you this. If... If I'm injured because through some negligent error on the part of a physician, my leg was amputated at the thigh when I went in for some other test and it was a chart that was misread, and let's say the jury returns a verdict of 110 thousand dollars, as an example. How would that be structured under the proposal encompassed in this Amendment?"

"You would be paid for your past damages in a lump sum. Your attorney would be paid. Your costs would be paid. After all of these payments have been made and any others you might request of the court and be approved by the court, if they're within..."

"Within... Within what guidelines?"

"You didn't wait for me to answer the question. If 50 thousand dollars of future damages are yet to accrued then it would be structured."

"And what guidelines does the court have when you say, 'You can get anything else you ask for that is approved by the court.' Under what guidelines would the court grant or deny their approval of your request for further amounts?"

"On the needs of the plaintiff."

"Okay. If I may speak to the Bill, Madam Speaker."

"Proceed."

"I... Or to this Amendment. I am vehemently in opposition to this Amendment. I think that the Medical Society and their proponents have been very successful in characterizing this package and these Amendments as, 'Are 186  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 you with the doctors or are you with the lawyers? And, indeed, when we've all worked Roll Calls, and most of the people here have worked Roll Calls on the House floor, the answers that you get 90% of the time is, "I'm with the doctors on this or I'm with the lawyers on this.' And, in fact, this Amendment is not a lawyers versus a doctors proposal. I would more legitimately characterize this as a proposal of negligence in one profession that is not greater than negligence in any other profession, but it's also no less. And it's that negligence, that malpractice, versus the rights of victims. It has nothing to do with... with lawyers - the representatives of victims. You know, I'm a lawyer. I've never represented anyone in malpractice nor will I ever represent anyone in a malpractice suit. But I am familiar with people, and I am familiar with some people who have regrettably been the victims of malpractice. And in some instances, in fact probably in many instances, those victims were victimized by the negligence of a physician who happens to be an excellent, even outstanding, physician, but in a single isolated instance was guilty of negligent performance of... of his art, and that's the art of healing. That doesn't mean that physicians are bad people, but they are no more human than the rest of us and, of course, they're no less human than the rest of us. What this structured verdict would end up doing to people, to the victim, is to require that victim to take a payment and forget the catastrophic payments of the millions of dollars because those are the ones that we read in the newspaper about, but they come down extremely rarely in real life - almost never. Very rarely do we have those catastrophic enormous type verdicts. But what is more common is the lesser, more reasonable verdicts that go to serious injury that is less than the catastrophic life 187  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 changing, life threatening injuries that make a person completely disabled for the rest of their lives. In those cases, a victim would be required to take the compensation that the court would otherwise give to that victim to get started on fixing up his or her life and, instead, require that person to take that verdict, that amount of money over the rest of their life. And the... this proposal says, 'But, well, your attorney's fees will be paid. Well, that's great, but that doesn't bring any money to the victim whose been injured. "And you're medical bills will be compensated for.. And that's great, but that doesn't make the person whole. What is not compensated for is the pain, the suffering, the... the loss that the person occasioned where you can't get that in a lump sum with that money what you will. Instead of that, we, by law, will be saying you have to take that at thousand dollars a year for the rest of your life or two thousand dollars a year. Well, let me tell you, there's a giant difference in the compensation that you're able to gleam if you get a lump sum of 50 thousand dollars in your hand for some injury that you suffered or whether or not you have to take that if you're a 20 year old person and you have a 50 year life expectancy at the rate of a thousand dollars a year over the next 50 years. The difference between those is absurd. One is compensation. The other is... is far, far less than just compensation. So I... I'm asking you not to look when you're voting on this Amendment at who cares about whether the doctors are right or the lawyers are right, because in the end, the doctors and lawyers will all earn fat livings - with your vote, without your vote. But you should concern yourselves only with the rights of the victims who will be injured by this Amendment. This Amendment will stop victims from getting just compensation 188  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 for a grievous injury that they've suffered. So I'd ask you to vote 'no' on this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from St. Clair, Representative Flinn."

"Madam Speaker, I just saw Amendment #26 get on our desk, so, therefore, I move the previous question."

"The Gentleman has moved the previous question. The question is, 'Shall the main question be put?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the... the previous question is put. Representative Ewing to close."

"Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, we do have a lot of Amendments on this Bill. This is very important piece of legislation, maybe one of the most important that we will consider this Session. And, as always, we spend more time, maybe, on the early parts of the Amendment than we do on the later ones. But this is a very important Amendment. And I would like to answer a few of the challenges and the questions raised during the debate. First of all, the first questioner would have you believe that this Bill will require complicated calculations that are not currently required by a jury in a personal injury or malpractice case. That is not the case. The computations will not be more difficult in this case than in regular cases. In fact, some of the computations will be made by the Judge, someone who should be much more able to make these calculations than a jury. We also address the fact... the factor of inflation, and we, in this Amendment, call for it to be based on the bond rate. Now we all know that it's difficult to judge inflation, but without structured verdicts, the jury must again judge inflation on whatever evidence... Can I have some order, 189  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Madam Chairman (sic - Speaker)."

"The Gentleman is closing on Proceed, Representative Ewing." Ewing: May 16, 1985 Amendment #1. "Thank you. The inflation factor should not be considered as detrimental to this Amendment because whether it's a jury, whether it's a lump sum payment or whether it's structured, the inflation factor must be taken into consideration. Currently we have structured verdicts by agreement. In fact, recently the Supreme Court or the Court in California upheld structured verdicts such as we are asking for in this Amendment. What we aim for is to make the injured party whole. All of us, all of us who are citizens of this state are faced with the problem of malpractice and the cost of malpractice in our own insurance costs. It is a very real cost to all of us. The aim of this Amendment is to make every injured party whole, but to do it at the most reasonable cost to society. All of you, who represent taxpayers and constituents and those who have to pay for medical costs at home, know that it's important that we hold down those medical costs. One of the most important things we can do is find a way to address the malpractice problem in this state. The opponents of this Bill would have us believe that they have done everything to reach a settlement. That is as far from the truth as anything I have heard here today. Only when this House addresses that problem, when this House takes some concrete action and says to the lawyers and to the doctors, 'We want this problem solved,' will they come to the table and negotiate in all honesty and earnestness. I think it is important that this Amendment be added to this Bill. 1604 is a sham without the needed Amendments to address the malpractice problem in this state, and I would ask for a favorable vote on the 1st Amendment." 190  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 1604 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Huff, one minute to explain your vote."

"Yes, very simply, Madam Chairman (sic - Speaker), my 'no' vote explains that I feel that this Amendment 1 is a sham. It will absolutely evaporate before it will do any good for the recipient, because what the lawyers don't get, the IRS will get the rest. So it's a sham. Put a red vote..."

"Have all voted who wish? The Gentleman from Livingston, one minute to explain your vote."

"Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I am, of course, disappointed that we don't have some more green votes up there, but I'm pleased that we're ahead of the red votes. I hope that everyone will earnestly give this Amendment their strong consideration. Let's bring an end or let's get started with solving the malpractice problem in this state."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Younge."

"Madam Chairman (sic - Speaker), Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I'd just like to say that of all these Amendments this is absolutely the worst one. Representative Vinson pointed out that this is the people's chamber. Well, this Amendment hurts the people of this state, and I urge 'no' votes."

"Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite."

"Madam Speaker and Members of the House, it was my understanding when House Bill 1604 was brought out of Committee that this was an indication that the trial 191  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 lawyers and the people from the Medical Society were going to sit down and present us sith an agreed package of legislation that we could vote on. I don't believe that we are capable here on the House floor of sorting through these very complicated issues and knowing whether, in fact, we are doing anybody a favor except, perhaps, the insurance companies in allowing these measures to come to a direct vote. I think that we should be urging more negotiations on these issues, rather than having to deal with them one by one. Many of us, who have not heard the issues in Committee and are not familiar enough with this area of legislation to make good decisions... If it is of any help for this Amendment to be defeated, then I am willing to add my vote to the 'no' column to help to do that to force people back to the bargaining table. And so I will vote 'no', not so much on the basis of whether this Amendment is good or bad, but on the basis of the fact that the process seems to have broken down by which I understood a resolution was going to come forth."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Greiman, one minute to explain his vote."

"Yes. No. I spoke in debate, Madam Speaker..."

"Very good."

"But I just wanted to suggest that if this should appear to carry, I would like to verify the Roll... the Affirmative Roll Call."

"Very good. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 60 voting 'aye', 56 voting 'no' and 1 voting 'present'. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Greiman, has asked for a... a verification of the Affirmative Roll Call. Representative Ewing, for what reason do you rise?" 192  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"Well, we'll poll the absentees, of course." May 16, 1985

"Very good. Representative Ewing would like to poll the absentees first, Mr. Clerk. Representative Piel, for what reason do you rise?"

"Leave to be verified."

"Representative Piel asks leave to be verified, Representative Greiman."

"A Poll of the Absentee. Krska. No further."

"Poll the affirmative vote, please."

"Poll of the Affirmative. Barger. Barnes. Brookins. Capparelli. Churchill. Cowlishaw. Daniels. Davis. Deuchler."

"Representative Steczo wishes to change his vote from 'present' to 'no'. Proceed, Mr. Clerk."

"Continuing the Poll of the Affirmative. Deuchler. Didrickson. Ewing. Farley. Flinn. Virginia Frederick. Dwight Friedrich. Goforth. Hallock. Hannig. Harris. Hastert. Hensel. Hicks. Hoffman. Keane. Klemm. Koehler. Kubik. Mays. McAuliffe. McCracken. McNaster. Oblinger. Olson. Parcells. Parke. B. Pedersen. W. Peterson. Piel. Pullen. Rea. Regan. Rice. Richmond. Ronan. Ropp. Ryder. Shaw. Stange. Stephens. Tate. Terzich. Tuerk. Vinson. Wait. Washington. Weaver. White. Williamson. Wojcik. Woodyard. No further."

"Do you have any questions of the Affirmative Roll Call, Representative Greiman."

"Yes, Mr. Goforth, please."

"The Gentleman is in the back of the chamber."

"Mr. Hallock."

"Representative Hallock. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? He is."

"Okay. Mr. Harris." 193  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

May 16, 1985 "Representative Harris. The Gentleman is in the back of the chamber."

"Mr. Wait."

"Representative Wait. The Gentleman is in the back of the chamber."

"Mr. Richmond."

"Representative Richmond. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? Remove him."

"Mr. McAuliffe."

"Representative McAuliffe. The Gentleman if in the back of the chamber, and Representative Richmond has returned to the chamber. Add him to the Roll Call."

"Mr... Mr. Hoffman."

"Representative Hoffman. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? Remove him."

"Yes, Mr. Parke."

"Representative Parke. The Gentleman is in the chamber."

"I have no further challenges."

"Mr. Clerk, what is... the Roll Call. Representative Hoffman has returned to the chamber. Add him to the Roll Call. On this Amendment, there are 60 voting 'aye', 57 voting 'no' and 1 voting 'present'... none voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Excuse me. The Amendment is adopted. Excuse me. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Leverenz Ronan and Mautino."

"Representative Leverenz. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, I believe that Amendment is out of order."

"Would you give me a copy of the Amendment, Mr. 194  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Clerk? Representative Johnson, for what reason do you rise?"

"Just making sure that I can talk on the issue."

"Very good."

"Advanced preparation."

"Representative Leverenz, why don't you tell us what the Amendment does while we look at the Amendment, please?"

"I'd be delighted. Amendment #2 would provide a limitation on noneconomical loss. It would set that at 200 thousand in medical malpractice actions."

"Representative Leverenz, Representative Cullerton's point is well taken. You're Amendment is out of order."

"I don't think he's well taken at all in that case, Madam Speaker."

"Do yo wish to withdraw the Amendment? It is out of order."

"What other choices do I have?"

"You don't have any other choice. Okay. Amendment #2 is out of order. Are there any further Amendments? Representative Vinson, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, would the Chair specify why the Amendment's out of order?"

"Yes. The Amendment provides for a Section 2 and proceeds on with Section 2. We have just adopted Amendment #1 that provides for an addition... additional language which is Section 2. So we can't have two Section 2's in the Amendment. So the Amendment... Two Section 2's in the Bill, I guess you would say, so the Amendment is out of order. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative 195  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE Churchill and Ronan."

"Representative Churchill. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"Yes, apparently the Medical Society didn't trust the lawyers down in the Reference Bureau to draft this Amendment either, and I believe it also is out of order."

"Could I see the Amendment, Mr. Clerk, please? Mr. Churchill, your Amendment is out of order, again for the same reason. You provide for a Section 2. A Section 2 has already been adopted in Amendment #1. This Amendment is out of order. Are there any further Amendments, Mr. Clerk?"

"Floor Amendment #4, offered by Representative Bullock and Ronan."

"Representative Bullock. Representative Ronan. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"Yes, I believe the Amendment is out of order."

"Representative Cullerton, you are correct. Amendment... This Amendment also contains a Section 2, so the Amendment is out of order. And are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, offered by Representative McCracken and Ronan."

"Representative McCracken. Representative Ronan, Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"I'm not sure, but I believe Amendment #5 is out of order."

"Could I see the Amendment, please? Representative McCracken, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, I believe when he refers to a Section 2, he's not talking about a duplicative Section 2. The Act and the 1st Amendment purports to amend two different Acts 196  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 - the Medical Practice Act and the Code of Civil Procedure - so that the Section 2 referred to in the succeeding Amendments is not a duplicative Section 2. It is a Section 2 to an Act that was not amended by the first Amendment, so that none of these has been out of order. They have not been duplicative of the previously amended Act."

"Mr. McCracken, you are incorrect, because this Amendment provides for a Section 2 in the Bill. It specifically says, 'By inserting at the end of the Bill the following: Section 2.' We already have a Section 2 in the Bill, so the Amendment is out of order as we cannot have two Sections 2's. Representative McCracken."

"The Section 2 does not relate to the Bill. It relates to the Code of Civil Procedure to create a new Section 2."

"That may be your intent, Sir, but that is not the language of the Amendment, and the Amendment is out of order. Are there any further Amendments?"

Floor Amendment #6, offered by Representative Wait and Ronan."

"Representative Wait. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"I believe the Amendment #6 is out of order."

"Let me see the Amendment, please? Representative Cullerton's point is well taken, Representative Wait. Your Amendment is out of order for the same reason. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #7, offered by Representative Leverenz - Ronan and Mautino."

"Representative Leverenz on Amendment #7. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"I believe Amendment #7 is out of order."

"Could I see Amendment #7, please? 197  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 Representative Leverenz, Representative Cullerton is correct. Amendment #7 is out of order for the same reason. Are there any further Amendments? Excuse me. Representative Huff, for what reason do you rise?"

"Yes, just on a point of inquiry, Madam Chairman (sic Speaker). In light of the Amendment #2 not going on because it's been ruled out of order, wouldn't it follow that all the other Amendments, and I believe there's 24 some Amendments, wouldn't they also be out of order?"

"No, that is not correct, Representative Huff. They may not provide for Sections 2's. We have to look at each one individually. Representative Leverenz, for what reason do you rise?"

"An inquiry of the Chair. Could you provide all of the LRB numbers on Amendments 1 through as far as they go? Can the Clerk provide that for us in writing?"

"We understand that the first 14 do not have LRB numbers on them at all, Representative Leverenz. We will look at the others and try to give you that kind of a list when we get there. Are there any further Amendments... Mr. Clerk?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Tate and Ronan."

"Representative Tate on Amendment #8. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"Amendment #8 is definitely out of order."

"Please show me the Amendment, please. Representative Tate, Representative Cullerton's point is well taken. Your Amendment is out of order for the same reason. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #9, offered by Representative Oblinger and Ronan."

"Representative Oblinger on Amendment #9." 198  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"Madam Speaker and Members of the General Assembly, Amendment #9..."

"Represent... Excuse me. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"Amendment #9 is out of order."

"Representative Oblinger, Representative Cullerton's point is well taken. Your Amendment is out of order for the same reason as the previous ones. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #10, offered by Representative Churchill and Ronan."

"Representative Churchill on Amendment #10. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"Amendment is out of order. Amendment #10 is out of order."

"Representative Churchill, the Gentleman's point is well taken. For the same reasons given on the previous Amendments, this Amendment is out of order. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #11, offered by Representative Shaw and Ronan."

"Representative Shaw on Amendment #11. Representative Shaw on Amendment #11. Do you wish to withdraw this Amendment, Representative Shaw? Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"I believe Amendment #11 is out of order."

"Could I see the Amendment, please? Representative Shaw, Representative Cullerton is correct. Your Amendment is out of order. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #12, offered by Representative Ryder and Ronan."

"Representative Ryder on Amendment #12. 199  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"They turned my light on before I even had a chance to... I believe that Amendment #12 is out of order."

"Representative Ryder, Representative Cullerton is correct. Your Amendment is improperly drawn and is out of order. Representative Ryder, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam... Madam Speaker, I would just wish a clarification so that I understand, as well as the rest of the Members of the House, the exact reason that this particular Amendment was ruled out of order."

Speaker Breslin "It is out of order for the same reasons as given as the previous other 11 Amendments."

"Fine. I appreciate that, but I just wished to state the reason, not saying the others. If you'll just please tell me the particular reason."

"It provides for two Section 2's in the Bill if it should be adopted and is, thus, out of order. Representative Ewing, for what reason..."

"Excuse me."

"Yes."

"I apologize for continuing the clarification, but it's my understanding that that came about as a result of the adoption of Amendment 1."

"That's correct. Representative Ewing, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, as the Sponsor of this Bill, I move to table the 1st Amendment."

"The Gentleman moves to table Amendment #1 of House Bill 1604. And on that question, is there any discussion? Representative Johnson, for what reason do you rise?" Johnson; "Inquiry of the Chair. Since we're not... we weren't on 200  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 the Order of Amendment #1 is it appropriate to make that Motion?

"I think it can be made at any time, Sir."

"Okay."

"The Gentleman has been recognized for a Motion, and he is making it."

"Thank you."

"Representative Greiman, for what reason do you rise?"

"Yes, an inquiry of the Chair. When a... an Amendment has been ruled out of order and the... a subsequent Amendment or an earlier Amendment is tabled, are the... are we allowed to... are we... do we then consider the Amendments that have been ruled out of order or are they still out of order? Have they... Are they before the Body, in fact?"

"I'll have to look at the rules, Representative Greiman."

"Thanks."

"Representative Greiman, the answer to your inquiry is that should an... a previous Amendment be tabled that has made these other Amendments out of order, those other Amendments having not been withdrawn can still be considered by this Body if the Members wish to present those Amendments. There... The Motion pending before us, Ladies and Gentlemen, is a Motion to table Amendment #1 to House Bill 1604. That Motion is debatable. Does anyone wish to speak to the issue of the tabling of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1604? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 1604 be tabled?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have 201  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 59 voting 'aye', 50 voting 'no' and none voting 'present', and the Motion to table carries. Are there any further Amendments, Mr. Clerk?"

"Floor Amendment #13, offered by Representative Ryder and Ronan."

"Representative Ryder."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman (sic - Speaker). Amendment 13 is the omnibus Amendment that carries with it each of the Amendments, other than Amendment 1, that had previously been ruled out of order by the Chair. I will state to this Body the same that I stated to anyone else that asked me that in the event that we had received a hearing on those Amendments that we would have proceeded with tabling #13."

"Representative Ryder, it should be pointed out by the Chair that should any Member wish to present any of those previous Amendments, they will be considered."

"I appreciate the ruling of the Chair; however, it would be my understanding that the ruling of the Chair would also be consistent that in the event that any one of those Amendments were to be accepted that the remainder of those Amendments would, therefore, be out of order."

"It would have to be consistent, of course; however, you must realize that the Amendments were prepared not by the LRB, which is generally in order. In addition to that the... you have control of this Bill. You are the Sponsor of this Bill, and you can hold this Bill on Second Reading in order to prepare your Amendments in the proper fashion if you so desire."

"Thank you. I understand the ruling of the Chair, and we are abiding by that. However, it is our intention at this point to proceed with Amendment #13, which is the omnibus Amendment to this Bill. It contains within it all of those 202  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Amendments which May 16, 1985 presented to the have previously been House and to the Judiciary Committee. We have discussed Amendment #1 which is the part of this Bill which concerns the structured settlements. #2 is a cap on noneconomic loss which after discussion has been increased. #3, which is part of this... I am, by the way, referring to the numbers simply for purposes of discussion. Those numbers are not part of the Bill, but rather refer to the other separate Amendments which could have been considered individually, and that would bar punitive damaged in a similar case. There is provisions for a panel to file an affidavit of meritorious cause. This is similar to but not exactly the same as another Bill which we will consider and which there is required to be evidence shown that the plaintiffs counsel has obtained competent information by experts indicating that a meritorious suit would be appropriate. It requires itemization of economic loss of all personal injury cases. The collateral source rule is also effected by this. There are items concerning an affidavit which would... the affidavit would be by one of the defendants indicating that the defendant was not involved and, therefore, would be not part of the suit. The affidavit would allow that person, that plaintiff, to have... to be dismissed from the case prior to the pleading stage. In the event, however, that the plaintiff would be able to prove to the Judge of the... jurisdiction a decision that the defendant was, indeed, involved the defendant would remain part of the suit. These are part and very brief the Amendments to this most important Bill. I believe that the Amendments, as a package, have to be now considered as to their... their ability to meet the overwhelming crisis which is before us - that crisis which is one of affordability, one that goes into the care and 203  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 the pocketbook of each and every person in the State of Illinois. I will do y best to answer those questions which the Members may wish to pose."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Greiman."

"Thank you, Speaker. I have no questions of the Sponsor of this Bill, and I do not intend for a moment to address the many issues that one could talk about in this Bill. There is but a single issue that I will address. This Bill contains a cap of 200 thousand dollars for noneconomic loss. That's pain and suffering. That's what that means. That means that if I'm a singer and you blind me, if I can keep singing, I don't have to keep seeing, and I haven't lost anything if it's not economic. It means that the pain of blindness isn't compensated unless I can show an economic gain. And eye for one... this 100 thousand and maybe this is the other 100 thousand. It means that my anguish, even if I'm a singer and lose my voice, that the anguish that I go through, the suffering would not be compensated. But most people aren't singers, but they're just people. And if they lose a leg or if they lose both their legs through medical malpractice - we're talking negligence... We're talking about malpractice. You know, this isn't just an economic issue. This is a negligence issue. This is some doctor has done something. This is not frivolous stuff. This is the serious errors that doctors make. We all make mistakes. If you drive your car... If the doctor drives, and he hits me, and he's negligent, and I'm injured, and I lose my... and I'll never walk again, and I spend the rest of my life in a wheelchair, I can be compensated. But if he does the same thing in the operating room, because he's drunk, because he's incompetent, because he's not able to do the job ΟΙ 204  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 because he's not paying attention, then he limits pain and suffering for the rest of my life to 200 thousand dollars. I don't know what... You know, I read the verdicts like you do. I see in the paper, you know, a million, two million, 12 million, and I don't know how juries get to that point. That seems like a lot of money for an individual. I don't know how they do. But I know that the pain, and the suffering and the anguish, that the kind of negligence that happens, 200 thousand dollars is an outrage. And whoever dreamed up that 200 thousand dollars shows a callousness, shows an uncaring lack of concern, lack of feeling. You think I don't have doctors in my district. In my district, every boy thinks he can grow up to be a doctor. I understand, but we have to turn our ear, our deaf ear... Mr. Vinson, the Gentleman from DeWitt, told us about how we are here doing public policy. I ask you to do public policy. I ask you to think about what the costs are for serious permanent injury. These are not frivolous law suits. These are not law suits brought by some sharp lawyer that wants to throw it in and see if he can settle it. These are serious permanent injuries that you would sell them out for, sell them out for, 200 thousand dollars and a pat on the butt from the Medical Society. I say, and I address no other issue in Amendment 13, but if you ever voted with a sense of compassion, a sense of understanding, a sense of caring about anything, you'll vote 'no' on Amendment 13."

"The Gentleman from Champaign, Representative Johnson."

"I wasn't... wasn't prepared initially anyway to discuss this issue in its biggest sense because I thought that we'd be able to consider individual issues, because I know there's a legitimate difference of opinion. Forgive me if 205  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSENBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 I'm a little emotional, but I... I can't think of a subject matter in the nine years that I've been here that if Legislators did more than just say, "I'm for the doctors; I'm for the lawyers, that they'd see how really cruel this package is, how unbelievably inhumane and unfeeling this proposal, as a package, is. You know, for years I've had and still do the highest regard for the medical profession and the Sponsor of this Bill. And I've heard him talk for years about the free enterprise system. We have too much legislation. Don't socialize medicine. Beat the Kennedy proposal and so forth. And yet, one of these Bills, maybe with good reason, puts the cap on attorneys' fees. Now that's okay because they say they want to... they want to have more money for the patients, for the people who are legitimately injured as a result of malpractice. If they'd be willing to consider an Amendment later on to put a cap on doctors' fees at some reasonable limit, the same way as we're willing to accept something on legal fees, I'd be willing to accept them at their... at their face value. I don't think they'd be willing to do that. Indeed, I'm certain that they wouldn't be willing to do that. And I don't begrudge any physician the fact that outside of Lotto winners, they're the most high... highly paid profession in our society today by vast amounts. And through this crisis, quote, unquote, that their incomes have gone up dramatically - the bottom line. I don't begrudge them that. But how can they tell us that... that there's a crisis and that we ought to cut off the rights of dead people, and paraplegics, and quadraplegics and people without arms or legs when they're at that status in society. They tell us they want more money for the victims. That's why we have a limitation on lawyer fees. And I'll even forget the doctor fees and agree with them. 206.  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 That's a legitimate objective. But how can they turn around in the same voice to say that they want more money for victims and tell a quadraplegic or tell a human vegetable that they're worth 200 thousand dollars, or to tell a housewife, who's 21 years old, who has children, and who has no economic loss per se that's all that's worth for the rest of the 60 years of their life expectancy is 200 thousand dollars. Three thousand dollars a year to lie on their back and look at the ceiling as a vegetable. Three thousand dollars a year never to be able to play with their children, to be able to throw a ball with their children, to have relations with... with their spouses. That is worth 200 thousand dollars? Or to tell a father or a mother that the loss of their seven year old child is presumptively worth 25 thousand dollars or less. That's what we're all about in this chamber? Is that what kind of price we have on society. Is that what kind of price we have on our votes I don't think so. I have a higher regard for the Members of the General Assembly than to look at this as a lawyer issue or a doctor issue. I don't think either one of those people other than being simply members of society and their deserve... and they ought to receive consideration in that regard ought to receive special consideration. What we're talking about is people. And we're talking not about the... the beneficiaries or the victims of frivolous suits because other Bills and parts of this Bill address that. We're talking about people that legitimately have lost their limbs, have lost their genital parts, have lost their brain and will never move, or talk or walk again, and tell, in the one case if they're dead, that's 25 thousand dollars, and in the case of somebody who's simply injured and won't walk, or talk, or move or see again, that that's worth 200 thousand dollars. And on 207  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 the other hand, another part of this Bill for the Medical Society that's so concerned about individual victims, listen to this. You all have state paid medical insurance. For 15 years, or 10 years or however long you've been, you've paid 12 hundred dollars or 15 hundred dollars a year into a medical... into insurance, and you never have any occasion to use it other then for maybe minor expenses. And then you happen to be maybe the unfortunate victim or a member of your family of a castastrophic result of medical malpractice. It only happens in one case out of 100 thousand, but it happens. And as result of that your parent, or your child or your spouse is victimized and will' never move again. What this Bill wants to say is, that if there's 100 thousand dollars in medical expenses that are paid by your privately paid, privately contracted health insurance people that the negligent doctor or hospital get credit for what you've paid in for 15 years. Now they are, I think with one of these Amendments, going to give you credit for two years of premiums. So if you have 100 thousand dollars in medical expenses, they'll reduce it to 97 thousand, and we appreciate that generousity. I don't want to... I don't want to go on. I don't do medical malpractice cases. This isn't going to cost me a dime one way or the other. All I'm saying is, look inside your hearts; look inside your souls. This Amendment, if enacted, would do the most catastrophic results for the little people, the people who aren't here lobbying with the medical society. They're not here lobbying with the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, or the Hospital Association or the Bar Association cause they can't, Ladies and Gentlemen. They're lying on their backs as vegetables. They're in a wheelchair because they'll never move again. They're blind. They can't see. They can't get here 208  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Without a seeing eye dog. And you're going to tell them as an elected Representative of the people that that's worth over your life expectancy for noneconomic loss about three thousand dollars a year. Is that why we're here? I don't... It's difficult for me. And I... And I say that to talk rationally about this subject. I hope I'm being rational. I think I'm being rational. They can't be here, some of them, because they can't be here, and a lot of them can't be here because they haven't been the victim yet. They're the person who three years from now is going to have their intestine taken out, rather than their liver, and they'll never be able to use their urinary tract or bowel tract again. And this Bill says that's worth three thousand dollars a year, if you're only 20 years of age. Maybe some of the individual elements of this package are okay. Maybe we ought to have itemized verdicts in all cases. We've introduced legislation into House Bill 1787 that addresses frivolous law suits. But what this package does is that it puts this House of Representatives on... on record as supporting a series of measures that if enacted and signed into law would totally and absolutely strip a legitimately injured person of his or her right to compensation in our society. I'll take the limitation on lawyer fees if the medical profession will do their part at addressing the problem of spiraling costs. I agree it's a problem. I agree we ought to address the problem of frivolous suits. But this Bill is the most cruel, inhumane, across the board abrogration of everything that everybody in here in their heart believes that will enact. Now, just leave you with one question. If your spouse, or your son or your daughter can't walk tomorrow as a result of medical malpractice, or a year from now they die, or a year from now they'll never see again, or they'll never be 209  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 able to play ball with you, they'll never be able to recognize you, they'll never be able to recognize those things that make this world a decent place to live in, and you're going to tell them by your vote today that in the case that they're dead that's worth 25 thousand dollars and in the case that they'll never do anything as a normal human being again that that's worth a maximum of 200 thousand dollars, then more power to you. If you can say that to your constituents because you get all kinds of letters on the issue, then that's fine. But if you talk to your doctors and you talk to your doctors families, individually, not just a form letter in response and ask them if they think their child, or their arms and legs or their brain is worth 25 or 200 thousand dollars, I think they'll give you the same answer that you ought to give this Amendment and that is a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Keane."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I believe we ought to put this Bill and the other medical malpractice Bills in perspective. We now have a lawyers' Bill on the floor. This is the Medical Association's Bill. We shouldn't get excited about it because it's going to come back on a Conference Committee Report. We've got a lawyers' Bill coming over from the Senate. In order to continue negotiations that have been started by our Leadership between the medical and the legal profession, I think we ought to just pass this Bill out. I don't... I agree that we need a change and look hard at the... the caps that are on this Amendment. I don't think that these are the caps that will come out of the Conference Committee. I agree with many things that the previous speaker has said, but I don't see that we can get all excited about this because we all know that it's going to go into a Conference Committee, 210  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 and this will be worked out."

"The Gentleman from DeKalb, Representative Countryman."

"The Sponsor yield?"

"The Gentleman will yield for a question."

"Representative Ryder, does this Bill contain a cap for a death case?"

"I'm sorry. I didn't understand the question."

"Does the Bill contain a 25 thousand dollar... the Amendment contain a 25 thousand dollar cap in the event somebody dies?"

"I think that's correct."

"So, in essence, the victim of a medical malpractice is better... the doctor's better off with him dead than he is alive."

"Representative Countryman, you are a... respected Member of this House, and I will respond to that question in the same way that I hope that it was intended, as a friend and person who firmly believes in the positions that you espouse. That dollar amount is a presumption in the event that a death occurs. That is a presumption that can be overcome. But that is correct. It is 25 thousand dollars."

"How would you go about overcoming that presumption?"

"I don't practice that kind of law. I am not experienced in that, and I don't intend to tell someone how they would be able to try their case, but I believe that it would be possible."

"Well, why did you want to put that presumption in this Amendment?"

"I wanted a presumption in here so that it could be overcome. Because in those... situations in which the future earning capacity or other circumstances that could 211  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 be considered to overcome that presumption could then be used to overcome it in that circumstance. I did not want to put in this Amendment something that was absolute and could not be overcome."

"Why is there... I still don't understand why there's a need for any presumption at all."

"The need is there based on the philosophy of caps, Representative. One that's on noneconomic loss, as we're indicating now, and that's the reason that it's there. I am not going to be able to stand here after the kinds of very appropriate comments that have been made and indicate that one dollar amount is appropriate or not appropriate. We were not allowed, because of the rulings of the Chair, which I have not appealed, nor do I argue at this point, to talk about this individually. We are now looking at a... an Amendment to put this into the perspective requested by the Sponsors."

"I have no further questions. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative O'Connell."

"A question of the Sponsor."

"Proceed."

"Representative Ryder, using the example of the 21 year old housewife, that Representative Johnson alluded to in his comments, who is not an income producer. In the event that she went for an operation and due to medical negligence she died, what would her total award be? Now, mind you, there are no medical costs because she's dead. There's no income because she has no income producing occupation. But she dies. What is her total award?"

"The presumption is 25 thousand."

"So this 21 year old housewife, who has two children, with a lifetime ahead of her, who due to a tragic negligent 212  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day act, her total award is 25 thousand dollars. Madam Speaker."

"Proceed." May 16, 1985 To the Bill,

"I think that example is something that everyone should keep in mind. We have bantered about words of legal and medical terminology throughout this whole package. Many of the issues that the Medical Society in their package have raised are valid issues and should be considered. Hopefully, they will be considered primarily on the frivolous law suit issue. In this case, however, in the wrongful death action and the cap on injuries for pain And and suffering, you've got to look at a living example. the example that was just given by Representative Johnson and the questions answered by Representative Ryder were the total award for a 21 year old housewife who dies due to a negligent act is 25 thousand, is tragic and catastrophic. And I would ask you to vote against this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Livingston, Representative Ewing."

"Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, ve debated long on the first Amendment, and I felt very strongly on that Amendment. I realize that all of the proposals are included in this Amendment, but I think that one of the previous speakers said it well, and we've had lot of emotional speeches here. This is not final passage of this Bill. This is only a step as it winds it way through the a legislative process. We all know there's a problem out there. I can talk emotionally about the little people that are being hurt by high costs, too. We can talk about how much any of us are worth 27 million. How high are they going to go? Yes, we need to take some action in this area. This Bill is not going to the Governor's desk today. This is only a beginning. Let's put this Amendment 213  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 on there. Let's get the doctors and the lawyers to the table, and let's do what is right for the people of this state, the injured people and the people paying the costs of medical care. Let's put something out that's good. This is a step to do that. Vote 'yes' on this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from McDonough, Representative

"Slater."

"Speaker."

"Proceed."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr. Ewing says, 'Let's put something out that's good.' This is not good. This is the most blatant example of special interest legislation that this chamber will see all year. Consider... Consider if you will what Mr. Johnson said and why we're here. And we're not here for special interests groups, but we're here for the people. I urge a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from St. Clair, Representative Stephens."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman (sic - Speaker). As I sit and listen to the debate, I hear some very good points on both sides. And I think that the issue might have been forgotten when we hear the emotional pleas, that if we just listen to the emotional pleas, we don't get to the point. The point is that something has to be done about medical malpractice and just awards for those who are hurt by medical malpractice. And I think that this Body should take a correct step and move this Bill on. The point was made that the... it will be discussed in Conference Committee. The two groups need to come together. And we need to remember that it's not just those victims that have been described so far in this Body, but the victims, the young families, who have to pay the price of the high cost of medical malpractice insurance, in order to address that 214  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 issue we need to move this Bill... this Amendment and the Bill out of this Body so that the compromise can be made. I urge a 'yes' vote on this Amendment, so that that very procedure can take place. Thank you, Madam Chairman (sic Speaker)."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"No phone calls. I echo the remarks of Representative Keane (sic - Stephens). You know, it seems that every speaker has admitted there's some problem to beaddressed out there, and the Medical Society attempted to address that issue in a series of 12 Bills. You could have voted up or down on the merits of each Bill, and you could have passed out a few good ones, killed a few bad ones. But instead, you put a... you put their position in a posture where you come back to us now and say, 'This is a crummy Bill. It's a terrible Bill. It's an unconscionable Bill.' You didn't have to rule those Bills out of order. You didn't have to make the Motion. You could have voted the Bills on the merits, and now you come back to us and say that we're the bad guys. The lawyers' Bill is on the table. We didn't ask for any Amendments on Second Reading, Representative Cullerton. We're not looking to this as a final stage. Let's put the issue on the table, and... There are parts of this I don't like. There are parts of this that I think everybody doesn't like. But you forced us into Amendment 13. We could have voted on the merits, as to each individual issue. You chose not to conduct the debate in that way. So let's put it on the table. It's going to come back in a Conference Committee, and it's going to be in a form which, I hope, resolves the problem fairly."

"The Gentleman from Fulton, Representative 215  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4 ist Legislative Day Homer: Homer." May 16, 1985 "Thank you. Madam... Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen. As one who is an attorney and as one who has never had occasion to be involved in a medical malpractice suit, I can tell you that there are times where I, and I'm sure some of my lawyer colleagues resent the idea that's expressed, that somehow this has become an issue with the lawyers versus the doctors, and that somehow I, by virtue of my profession, have a vested interest in voting against these Bills. In fact, I brought this matter to the attention of my own Fulton County Bar Association some few weeks ago, and out of the 32 attorneys, who attended that meeting, we found that none of them had ever taken a medical malpractice suit and none of them had an intention to. Why? Because often times in the smaller counties, the doctors and lawyers are friendly with each other, and lawyers choose, for one reason or another, not to get involved in particular areas of the law. And so there are just a very select few attorneys in the Peoria area, where I'm from, who actually handle medical malpractice suits and who have an actual vested interest in these Bills as an attorney. The vast overwhelming majority of attorneys, including myself, have no financial vested pecuniary interest in these Bills. And I think it's necessary that we set the record straight on that fact. Now I have, nonetheless, become convinced in talking to doctors, and in talking to the Medical Society and in talking to others, I become convinced that there is a crisis in the medical malpractice insurance field and that it's incumbent upon us to do all that is reasonable to attempt to address and remedy that problem. And I came here today prepared to vote in favor of many of the Bills... many of the Amendments, which I feel certainly 216  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 would go toward accomplishing that purpose without... without unduly impairing the right of... of the legitimate case where we have an injured party at the hand of a negligent medical attention without denying their access to the courts and their redress in the courts. Because after all, I think that's our duty as Legislators is to strike the fair course, weigh the various competing interests and try to come down on the side of what is right and what is proper for our constituents, not for any particular set of professionals. Now one of the Amendments, which is incorporated into the comprehensive Amendment #13 is this Amendment #2. And that Amendment, I believe, to be the most objectionable. We've heard objections to others. But let me just briefly touch on Amendment #2, so that all of you who are going to be voting upon this comprehensive Amendment know what you're voting for. Now Amendment #2 would place a cap of 200 thousand dollars on noneconomic loss. And in discussing that concept with some of the other Representatives here, I think there's some confusion as to what that term means. Some of them think it means punitive damages, which I, perhaps, and some others are prepared to vote to abolish. It does not mean punitive damages. Punitive damages is an entirely different concept. Punitive damages are damages that are awarded by a court against a defendant, not because of the negligence, not because of the damaged caused to the plaintiff, but because the defendant was willful and wanton in his or her conduct, and; therefore, the jury or the court determines that some special penalty in addition to compensation ought to be awarded to the plaintiff. Now, I think those are rare cases where doctors are willful and wanton. I don't think there are very many cases where it can be honestly shown that that has really taken place. And for that 217  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 reason, I think it may be reasonable for us to say, 'Yes, let's eliminate punitive damages.' Because I think there have been cases where abuses by juries and getting emotional in cases in awarding punitive damages. But that's not the issue with Amendment #2 that's now in this Amendment #13, which has to do with noneconomic loss. That's a whole different thing. That's not... That's not punitive damage. Economic loss has to do with the out-of-pocket expenses, the medical costs that someone suffers or their loss of wages. Those actually identifiable costs out of their pocket. Noneconomic loss has to do with some other factors. And let me just... because the Amendment is very brief, noneconomic loss, as defined in this Amendment, means loss of consortium for one thing. What's loss of consortium? That's loss of marital relationship with one's spouse because of the injury. It also means damages such as pain and suffering. For example, if someone were to have a ruptured disc or some sort of a... some sort of an injury as a result of malpractice, where... where it was a continually painful experience for them to the extent that they couldn't sleep, they couldn't function, they couldn't work, they couldn't do so many things. That would be a noneconomic loss. Another example would be, where someone, perhaps, is confined to a wheelchair for life, where someone is blinded for life, where someone is disfigured, someone who has been badly scarred, or burned or disfigured, where any kind of physical impairment takes places. These are what we're talking about when we talk about noneconomic loss. Now this Amendment says that juries or Judges should be limited to 200 thousand dollars. There's other Amendments I see coming across my desk in the 30 numbers that say that that should be a 500 thousand dollars limit. Ladies and 218  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Gentleman, Ι... I don't know what that limit should be, And that's why we have court cases. That's why cases are decided on a case by case basis by juries after hearing the particular circumstances of an individual's case. Are they blinded? What was their profession? What is the extent of their pain and suffering? And maybe 100 thousand or 200 thousand is too much in a case. Maybe it's not nearly enough. What we're doing here today is putting in some arbitrary figure - here 200 thousand, down the road someone's got an idea that it should be 500 thousand - when we don't even know what the case is we're talking about. This is a function that should be left to the court, to the jury, to the trier of fact and to the party who has to... who has to actually consider the merits of the case. So, I would say to you that I'm prepared to vote for many of these proposals. I'm not prepared to vote for that one. I'm not prepared to vote for a couple of the others; and, therefore, I'm going to vote against this proposal. And I would urge all of you, as many of you as can, to join with me in doing just that. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from DeWitt, Representative Vinson."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly. The fact of the matter is that this Amendment is only before the Body because of the rulings of the Chair that prevented us from, on an orderly, Amendment by Amendment, idea by idea, process, voting each one up or down. We could have done that, and we sought to do that... "

"Representative Vinson. Representative Vinson, it has been pointed out to the Sponsors of this Bill, in previous occasions... "

"Are you speaking from the Chair, Madam Speaker?" 219  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"Yes, I am. On behalf of the Chair... "

"Are you going to give your speech from the Chair?"

"On behalf of the Chair, and you mentioned the Chair, Sir, the rulings of the Chair still allow for consideration of all of these Amendments. That has been made clear previously. Proceed, Sir."

"Madam Speaker and Members of the Assembly, the fact of the matter is, as Representative McCracken, somebody who is a trial lawyer and somebody who practices every day, pointed out, in Committee, individual Bills were killed that were not permitted to come to this floor. And now, on the floor, ve have been denied the opportunity to debate these issues on an idea by idea, Amendment by Amendment basis. The consequence is that we must go to the omnibus Amendment to have anymore than one concept in this Bill. Now, when you do that, you mix things together that perhaps ought not be mixed together. But we were compelled by the rulings of the Chair to mix those things together. Let's talk about what is mixed together, to see just how bad it is. Number one, some people say that by putting limits on awards, that you're doing something terrible to injured victims of malpractice. That piece of literature that I distributed to you earlier today and is on your desks, if you care to look at it, is a study from the Rand Corporation of jury verdicts in Cook County. Now, what you will see in that study is that on an individual injury basis, awards vary dramatically by who the defendant is. If it's a negligent defendant in an automobile case, the fractured arm is worth $6,000, but if the fractured arm is to a victim of medical malpractice - again, a negligence case the fractured arm is worth $24,000."

"Representative Vinson, are you referring to Table 4.6 that was passed out in violation of the rules of 220  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day this House?"

May 16, 1985 "That is precisely the table I am referring to."

"Representative, it should be noted that the Chair has noted that it is improper and a violation of these rules to pass out such material."

"That's the table I'm referring to, and I hope everybody can see it. It's on most of your desks. I know there's a conspiracy to try to deny knowledge to the Members of this Assembly on this issue."

"Representative Vinson, are you responsible for the circulation of this material?"

"Yes, I am." "Thank you." Speaker Breslin: referred of

"Now, if you look at the quadriplegic that has been to, in malpractice, it's for $754,000, but in an automobile case, it's under $200,000, the limit in this Bill. That is not justice, equal justice for equally negligent defendants, and that is why we have a problem and why we have to address something in terms of the severity malpractice awards. They are unjust at this point. They are too high. They are not equal to the awards for other negligence cases. And all we seek to do is to make the tort feasor, if he is a doctor, equal and liable with the tort feasor who is an automobile driver. It's equal justice for defendants. Now, why do we do that? It's not to benefit doctors, nor do I believe that the attorneys who oppose this Bill are doing so to benefit attorneys. In both cases, it's a concept of the public good, and people who charge on this issue that there are ulterior purposes at work, whether they charge that against attorneys or against doctors, are doing a drastic disservice to the debate on this issue and to the Membership of this chamber, wherever the Membership votes on this issue. This is an 221  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 issue as to how available we want to make the health care system or whether we want to get to the point where, by driving up malpractice insurance premiums sky high and the cost of health care sky high, we want to begin to preclude people from having access to the health care system. I don't believe that that is what this chamber ought to do, and I believe that for that reason, enacting Amendment #13 will precipitate a real decision on this issue that honestly begins to reform the tort system in this state, so that health care is truly available to people. Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm an attorney, and I wouldn't do something that I thought violated fundamental justice, nor do I believe that the attorneys who oppose this are doing something to violate fundamental justice, and they have often dealt with cases, not in this field, generally, in this chamber, but cases where people have to have access to the legal system, too, and I understand their concern on that. But Ladies and Gentlemen, I want to call your attention to something that happened just five and a half years ago. Five and a half years ago, I had a very serious stroke, was taken to the emergency center at St. John's Hospital, and at that time, the doctors who handled the case told my parents - my parents told me afterward - that they expected to lose me that night. Now, I understand what you're talking about when you're talking about the injured person. That is something that strikes home closely to me, too. I am for this, and I am for reform in this area, not to hurt injured persons, but because I believe that the availability of that health care system that night is what saved my life. I would ask you to vote 'yes' on Amendment #13, because I believe that it will precipitate a true solution to this problem that will be equitable for everyone." 222  41st Legislative Day

"The Gentleman from Cook, Preston." STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985

Representative Preston: "Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I've heard so many outrageous statements concerning this Bill here today that I almost don't know where to begin. I would like to just mention a few of them. I heard repeatedly, by more than one speaker, statements that it is somehow the ruling of the Chair that made the negligent drafting of these Amendments fail to be presented to this Body. The Chair didn't draft these Amendments that were ruled out of order. The Chair simply followed the rules. Following that, the previous speaker talked about his belief in fundamental justice immediately on the heels of his arrogant statement that, 'Yes, again I violated the rules, and I'm happy to violate the rules, and let me hold up my piece of paper that violates the rules on disseminating information on the floor of the House in violation of those rules.' And says it with an arrogant smile on his face, as if he's proud of it. And then I hear previous speakers talk about this Bill - and this is perhaps the most outrageous - talk about this Bill as being one of those 'merely' Bills. This Bill doesn't do anything. It just changes the course of jurisprudence in this state. It's a 'merely' Bill. This Bill, that's been debated in Committee and has been the subject of meeting after meeting after meeting, is a 'merely' Bill. We're going to solve this problem in Conference Committee. Well, if you wanted to solve this problem in Conference Committee, when you got your first Amendment on this Bill, in that form, the Bill could have gone to the Senate, and in that form you could have worried about it in Conference Committee, but instead of doing that, this Amendment here attaches to it... to this Bill, every grievous portion that 223  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 was thrown out. There's no one, no one in this room except the Medical Society's staunchest soldiers that agrees with every one of the points in this Amendment. I haven't heard anyone who can stand up here and say that I'm in favor of putting a $25,000 presumed cap on wrongful death. Which one of you are worth only $25,000? Which one of your children are? Which one of your spouses or brothers or sisters are? Which one of your family members who was made into a paraplegic or a quadriplegic should be restricted to a lifetime, as Representative Johnson stated, $3,000 a year recovery for that kind of an injury? There is no one who can agree with all these points in this omnibus Christmas tree Amendment. There is no way that we can take the chance that, at the last minute, all of a sudden, this Medical Society is going to all of a sudden be... become an ameliorating type organization that will say, after they win in this House, 'Well, let's give out some gifts, now.' Who are you kidding? They won't give away snow in winter once they've won the whole ball game, and this is the whole ball game. And it has nothing to do, as previously has been said, with lawyers. The hell with lawyers. We're talking about victims. We're talking about the people that Representative Johnson referred to. This is a terrible Amendment. I can't believe anyone could support this Amendment, and I... I pray for a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from Knox, Representative Hawkinson."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would also like to address the previous speakers that have suggested, none of them. I believe, that this is a totally good Bill, and yet have suggested that somehow we should pass this on to Conference Committee and that it will all work out into some Bill that we can all support in the end and make 224  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 everybody happy. I think the previous speaker has aptly pointed out that this Bill, taken as a package, is a horrible Bill. In Committee, I supported parts of it. On individual Bills, I opposed parts of it, but not a single speaker here today, even the staunchest proponents, have agreed that the Bill is entirely good. I submit that not one of us can go back to our constituents, doctors, lawyers or other citizens, and say that we have done well by passing this Amendment. I would also submit to you that with negotiations breaking down yesterday, that this is the effort of one side to jam through the entire proposal and to get their will, and if that happens, there will be no further negotiations. The only way to get people back to the bargaining table is to do as Representative Satterthwaite suggested in explaining her vote on Amendment 1, is to do what was initially intended by letting this Bill out, to let it become a vehicle. Let's put 118 red votes on this Amendment and let them go on with their negotiations."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Braun."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I believe there is a crisis in medical malpractice, and two weeks ago, I helped to get this Bill on the floor so that both sides would have a vehicle pursuant to which negotiations could continue. We've seen today, however, that Amendments proposed to this Body that are just as bad as anything we ever saw in Committee, indeed, are worse. In fact, if anything, there seems to be a pattern developing that the Amendments that have been put before this Body, before us as Members, have been worse and worse and worse. Every single reincarnation on this... of this issue via Amendment has reached a... has reached a step that is to the point now, as Representative Preston says, 225  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 no one in good conscience could support this. I don't understand why the negotiations have broken down. I do hope the parties will go back, but I think it is really unconscionable to call upon this membership to ask it to stand foursquare in support of a $25,000 cap on wrongful death, a $200,000 cap on permanent injury, at a time when this is a serious issue. This, it seems to me, insults the Members of this General Assembly. I hope that my friends in the Medical Society and my friends in the Trial Lawyers get together and work out a compromise that does not take it out on the victims. If anything, we have an obligation here, not as professionals, but as people who are given a sacred trust to protect the public interest not to have legislation looking like this coming out of the House of Representatives. I urge a 'no' vote on Amendment 13."

"The Gentleman from Will, Representative Van Duyne."

"Yes, Madam Speaker. Before we all get irreparable ear damage, I move the previous question."

"The Gentleman has moved the previous question. The question is, 'Shall the main question be put?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the main question is put. Representative Ryder is recognized to close. Or is it Representative Ronan? Representative Ronan will close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. We've obviously had a thorough debate on this Amendment. I don't think any Member expects that this would have been the final version of the Bill. Obviously, the Bill would have been called if this Amendment stopped it. I think we've got a dialogue started. I think it's important that the Medical Society and the Trial Lawyers continue 226  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 negotiations, hopefully with... coming up with a solution to this very serious problem. The issue that we have to face as Members of the General Assembly is providing services for our constituencies, protecting our constituencies, but at the same time trying to limit health care costs to the best of our ability. I urge an 'aye', vote on this Amendment, and that's it."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #13 to House Bill 1604 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. The Gentleman from Marion, Representative Friedrich, to explain his vote."

"Madam Speaker and Members of the House, in explaining my vote, I would like to respond to one of the opponents of this Amendment, who suggested that we shouldn't be fooling around with numbers on this, just leave it up to the courts. Frankly, and I hate to say this, but I think you're getting at the problem right there. If the courts would throw out on the Motion to dismiss a lot of the frivolous cases, if they would limit the awards to where they're reasonable in many cases, we wouldn't be discussing this here today. But that's the problem. A lot of the cost of malpractice is for the protection and defense on frivolous suits, and a lot of the problem is the unbelievable awards that are given in some cases. We do have malpractice in Illinois, and the people who are the victims of it have a right to some recovery, but I think that the courts, if it's turned over to the courts with no limit, then I think we're right back to square one."

"The Gentleman from Bureau, Representative Mautino."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I think that in the six terms I've served in this great Body, history was 227  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 made today. I saw a very important issue that was near and dear to the Medical Society being presented as Amendment #1 and being adopted. I saw the artful opposition present their views, and then a unique thing happened here today. I saw a Gentleman table a winning Amendment that put Legislators in a very precarious position. Two very powerful special interest groups have Legislators shooting themselves in the hip and in the foot and in the head. I've never seen this before. I don't know if it's greed, or what possessed a winning Amendment to be tabled, and then put the rest of the Members of this General Assembly, who support portions of what's in 13 and oppose portions of what is in 13, in a ridiculous situation. Members who have made commitments to both the Medical Society and the attorneys and the patients and clients of this state, are going to have one hell of a time trying to explain how Amendment #1, which did what some people wanted it to do, got tabled for... excuse me... for what I think was a ridiculous position, because now you're not going to have anything completed, and probably Amendment 13 will be defeated."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Washington, one minute to explain your vote."

"Yes, Madam Speaker, Members of the House, tonight... this evening I've heard much. I listened to some doctors in my district, and their cry was simply that what is and what is happening to those people who least can afford to pay for medical coverage... medical costs, what will happen to them if the doctors packed up and left? They would be left like they have left right now. I had a commitment, and I fulfilled that commitment, because to me, your word is your bond. My vote in this matter now is only to go back to what I had agreed with and have negotiation, and I 228  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 feel as though that that would bring that about. And for that reason, my vote will reflect for them to get together, the doctors and certainly the lawyers to get together and negotiate this thing out in a fair and equitable way."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Brookins."

"I rise to echo what our previous Legislator said. I know the cost and the high cost of not only living, but the high cost of dying. There has to be something done in this area. I know that we must... I know that we must have some control and some sense of fairness involved in these negotiation. So therefore, I must vote 'no', when I was prepared to support many, many of the Amendments that would have been presented."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Shaw."

"Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I supported the Amendment #1, and I supported some of the other Amendments that are in this... that have been filed here today, but 13, there is some things in there that I can't support, and back some three months ago, I did file a Resolution in the House to investigate the high cost of malpractice insurance. I think it's a matter that should be investigated. I think that something should be done about it, and I would like to see the doctors and the trial lawyers get together and work out the problems that... work out some compromise that we all, as Members of the House, can vote on where that we would be in a position to protect the public interest. That's why we are down here. It's to protect the public interest. You and I know, if you talk... if you go to a hospital or visit a doctor's office, you know that the cost of visiting that doctor or that hospital, you can hardly afford to pay it. So therefore, I would hope, as a result of this vote here this afternoon, I 229  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 would hope that the trial lawyers and the doctors would get together and think in terms of the public interest, the little people out there in the street, and I don't mean Representative Cullerton. The little people. Protect their interests."

"The Gentleman from Lee, Representative Olson, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is, indeed, as many people have described, a very serious issue. I'm going to cast a very tenative 'yes' vote for this measure in this Amendment stage with the strong assurance that unless the issues that have been raised relative to caps, contingency fees and some other things that are addressed in the final passage, and I make that a charge to Leadership on both sides of the aisle."

"Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 55 voting 'aye', 60 voting 'no', and none voting 'present', and the Amendment... Representative.. There's no one seeking recognition here. Representative Vinson, for what reason do you rise?"

"To request a verification of the Negative Roll Call."

"Representative Johnson, for what reason do you rise?"

"In the event that the result of that verification would be to reverse the result, I would move to verify the 'yes' votes."

"Very good. The... Representative Washington asks leave to be verified as voting 'no'. Representative.. Mr. Clerk, would you poll the negative votes. Representative Turner asks leave to be verified, Mr. Vinson. And Washington had leave to be verified, yes. That's two. Proceed, Mr. Clerk." 230  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"Poll of the Negative. Bowman. Braun. Breslin. Christensen. Countryman. DeJaegher. DeLeo. Dunn." May 16, 1985 Alexander. Berrios. Brookins. Brunsvold. Bullock.

Cullerton. Curran. Currie. Speaker Breslin: "Representative Matijevich asks leave to be verified. Mr. Vinson, Matijevich? And Representative Stange, you're voting verifying the negative." Representative.. green. We're

"Continuing the Poll of the Negative. Flowers. Giglio. Giorgi. Greiman. Harris. Hartke. Hawkinson. Hicks. Homer. Johnson. Kirkland. Kulas. Laurino. LeFlore. Levin. Matijevich. Mautino. McGann. McNamara. McPike. Mulcahey. Nash. O'Connell. Panayotovich. Phelps. Preston. Rice. Saltsman. Satterthwaite. Shaw. Slater. Soliz. Steczo. Stern. Sutker. Turner. Van Duyne. Vitek. Washington. Wolf. Anthony Young. Hyvetter Younge. Zwick and Mr. Speaker."

"Representative Vinson, do you have any questions of the Negative Roll Call?"

"Yes, Madam Speaker, I do. Representative Berrios."

"Representative Berrios is in his chair."

"Representative Brunsvold."

"Representative Brunsvold is by his chair."

"Representative Giglio."

"Representative Giglio. Representative Giglio. Is the Gentleman in the Chamber? Remove him. Representative Giglio is in the chamber. Excuse me. Add him to the Roll Call."

"Representative Hicks."

"Representative Hicks is in his chair."

"Representative Hartke."

"Representative Hartke is in the chamber."

"Representative Laurino." 231  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"Rep Laurino is in his chair."

"Representative Mulcahey." May 16, 1985

"Representative Mulcahey is in the rear."

"Representative Panayotovich."

"Representative Panayotovich is in his chair."

"Representative McNamara."

"Representative McNamara is in the back of the chamber."

"Representative Phelps."

"Representative Phelps is by his seat."

"Representative Shaw."

"Representative Shaw is in the chamber."

"Representative Steczo."

"Representative Steczo is in his chair."

"Representative Sutker."

"Representative Sutker is by his chair."

"Representative Van Duyne."

"Representative Van Duyne is in his chair."

"Representative Anthony Young."

"Representative Young is in his seat."

"Representative DeLeo."

"Representative DeLeo is in the back of the chamber."

"Representative Bullock."

"Representative Bullock. Representative Bullock. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? He is not in the chamber. Remove him."

"Representative Nash."

"Representative Nash is in his seat."

"Representative Madigan."

"Representative Madigan is in his seat."

"Representative Harris."

"Representative Harris. Representative Harris 232  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Vinson: is in the chamber." "No further questions, Madam Speaker." May 16, 1985

"Mr. Clerk, can you give us the count? On this question, there are 55 voting 'aye', 59 voting 'no', and none voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Are there any further Amendments?"

Zwick." "Floor Amendment #14, offered by Representative

"Excuse reason do you rise?" Ronan: Speaker me. Representative Ronan, for what "Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'd like to take the Bill out of the record."

"Out of the record. House Bill 1665, Representative Panayotovich. Clerk, read the Bill." Clerk O'Brien; "House Bill 1665, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act concerning public purchases. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Representative Panayotovich, there is a fiscal note requested, and it is not filed. Representative Panayotovich."

"Madam Speaker, I presented that fiscal note about a half hour ago up at the Clerk's table."

"Would the Clerks do a search of the fiscal You are note? You are indeed correct. correct, Representative Panayotovich. The fiscal note has been filed, and this Bill now moves to Third Reading. House Bill 1667, Representative Terzich. Clerk, read the Bill." "House Bill 1667, a Bill for an Act to amend

Sections of the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?" 233  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Braun and Bowman."

"Representative Braun."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would very much like your support for this friendly Amendment to House Bill 1667. It again is the prospective Amendment with regard to the deposit of pension funds or the use of pension funds to support South African business operations. It is not intended to be hostile to the Gentleman's Bill but simply to make clear that any of the pension increases that we would be voting here will not go to benefit the operation of business in South Africa. And I encourage your support."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 1667. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Terzich."

"Well, two things. One is, I'm against the Amendment as previously stated, and the other one, that the Bill already had the Second Reading. The only reason it was on Second Reading was for the impact statement, which has been filed, and whether or not that this would even be in order. I, you know, that's the only reason the Bill was held from being moved to Third was because of the filing of an impact statement."

"Are you making a parliamentary inquiry, Representative Terzich?"

"Yes, I am."

"Please give us the Bill, Mr. Clerk. While we're looking at the Bill, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Shaw, to speak to the Amendment."

"Yes, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, 234  41st Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE May 16, 1985 I believe that Amendment #2 is a good Amendment, and I think that this Amendment should be adopted. You know, we... we've talked about, as I said a little while ago, the Great Emancipator in Illinois was a fellow by the name of Abe Lincoln, and what we are talking about here is what's right by the people of this state and fair play by people of South Africa. There's no way that we, the Members of this House, should vote to continuously spend money in South Africa. We're not talking about taking all of the money out. We're talking about new money. Don't spend any additional money. And I think, and the record will show, that you can get the same return on the pension benefits that you... same type of return on investments elsewhere that you get in South Africa. I think that was pointed out this morning, but yet, those of us who go back and talk about how liberal we are and how much we want to do the right thing, and many of the people that's voting against this will vote to kill this Amendment. You know they represent black constituencies in their district, and come election time, they appeal to the black constituency in their district, talk about how good and what programs they have been for for blacks. This is the program that you can go and tell the people about in your district, if you have any people of color in those districts. But I think today is the day that you should stand up and be counted, whether you can truly go back to your respective district and tell those people of color that you really stood up for them and that you believe in the right thing, and that you voted to stop spending the pensioners' money in South Africa to finance the apartheid government there in South Africa."

"In answer to Representative Terzich's question, his question was whether or not this Amendment was in order when it was placed on the Bill while the Bill was being 235  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 held for the purposes of a fiscal note. The ruling of the Chair is, Amendments can be filed and entertained by this House at any time that the Bill is on Second Reading, for whatever reason. There being no further discussion on the Amendment, therefore the Amendment is in order. There being no further discussion on the Amendment, Representative Braun to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is an issue... This issue... "

"Excuse me, Representative Braun. Representative Terzich indicates that now he wishes to speak to the substance of the Amendment, so it you will wait, could we hear Representative Terzich's response? Proceed, Representative Terzich."

"Well, you know, there are other Members in the House, but I have my point as well on that Amendment. I asked the question whether or not, just because someone puts a fiscal note request or something that the Bill already had a Second Reading, and it was all set to be moved to Third because someone requests an impact statement or a fiscal note, that that thing comes back for Second Reading to be heard once again."

"And the ruling of the Chair is that that is correct."

"And that's the way it's going to be."

"That is correct. And it has always been for all previous Bills, and it has hapened many other times this Session, Sir."

"Well, with regard to the Amendment, I previously spoke on the Amendment. I am definitely against this type of an Amendment. I do not care to have anybody messing around with the pension funds, that the fiduciary responsibility 236  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 is up to the Board of Trustees of that pension system, and if they want to invest their money in South Africa or Ethiopia or any where else, that they have the right to do it, and we in the General Assembly have no right to tell them how to invest their money in a fiduciarial manner, and therefore, that's the reason I oppose this Amendment, and I wish I'd get the support of the House to defeat the Amendment."

"Representative Braun, to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is not just an issue of color. This is not an issue of black and white. This is an issue of wrong versus right. The right thing to do is to take our state dollars, be they pension dollars, development dollars, whatever dollars, from the taxpayers, from the retirees or from whatever source derived, to make certain that those dollars do not go to continue to support apartheid. I say to you, Ladies and Gentlemen, this is consistent with our fiduciary responsibility, with our responsibility that these investments be made prudently and be made properly. The fact of the matter is that our pensioners stand to lose everything if, indeed, that country goes the way of violent overthrow of the government. I think there's another way. I think that we can begin to take a position strongly against apartheid and in so doing, encourage non-violent, sensible change in that troubled country. I believe that this Amendment is appropriate and proper, and I encourage your support."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 1667 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. Does the Lady desire a Roll Call? She does. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? The 237  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 32 voting 'aye', 54 voting 'no', 15 voting 'present', and the Amendment loses. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1694, Representative Turner. Representative Turner. Out of the Record. House Bill 1722, Representative O'Connell. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1722, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Pension Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Braun - Bowman, amends House Bill 1722."

"Representative Braun."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. You know, I just... it's very difficult for me, as it probably is for all of you, to hear us talk about South Africa and the horrors of that country on every single pension Bill. And it's probably going to be very difficult as we go through the remainder of this Session to hear us talk about South Africa on every single spending Bill, but I have to tell you, Ladies and Gentlemen, that there is no way that we can, in conscience, stand by and watch us continually appropriate money, continually spend dollars, knowing, in all conscience, that those dollars are simply going to go to provide support for apartheid. I believe that... I've already gone through it on some of the others. I would encourage this... the adoption of this Amendment, so again, we can make a statement that future dollars future dollars only - not go to support the apartheid racist government in South Africa."

"The Gentleman from... The Lady has moved for 238  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 the adoption of Amendment #1. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative O'Connell."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I, along with, I'm certain, other Members in the chamber are impressed with the sincerity of Representative Braun's commitment to doing something about apartheid, but unfortunately, we're talking about a very pragmatic piece of legislation which addressed a pension fund affecting hundreds of people. And for that reason, I think that the issue of the MSD pension fund is better left without the apartheid Amendment on it, and I would request a Sponsor of the substantive Bill to oppose this Amendment."

"There being no further discussion, the... the Gentleman from Cook does wish to discuss it. Do you wish to close, Sir? Representative Bowman will close on the issue."

"I will close on the issue. It does distress me to hear the statements in opposition, because they speak as if their pension funds will not be increased. This Amendment does not prevent or preclude any increase in pension funding or pension benefits. All it does is to direct the trustees of the system in their discharge of their duties as to how the pension funds shall be invested. The pensioners will be unaffected by this Amendment, and this Amendment indeed affects the lives of thousands and hundreds of thousands of people, even as the underlying Bill does. I believe that we have to look at this Amendment on it's merits and consider it for what it is. It is a restatement of the prudent man rule, or the prudent person rule, which is to govern fiduciary responsibility. and our position is, it is not prudent to make investments in the Republic of South Africa or to support the... the policies of that country. It is not prudent. Any 239  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 investments in that country are sorely in jeopardy, and I think the sooner the trustees of our respective pension systems recognize that, the better off all of us will be. I urge support for this Amendment."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 1722 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Representative Terzich, one minute to explain your vote."

"I had a question of the Sponsor, is what I wanted to do. I've been trying to get attention. Could I ask a question of the Sponsor of the Amendment?"

"Representative Terzich, you did not turn on your light until after the Gentleman had..."

"I had my light on since he was speaking, Madam Speaker. You even recognize me."

"But the Gentleman had been recognized to close, Sir, and once..."

"You recognized me before he closed."

"He is... He was the Sponsor, Sir, of the Amendment."

"And I had my light on for... so I could speak. You seen me. You've looked at me. I told you I wanted to ask a question. Can I ask the Sponsor?"

"But the Gentleman was closing, Sir. He was in the middle of his close. Now, you've been in this Assembly a long time, so I think you know the procedure. If you wish to explain your vote, you may. There being no further discussion, have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 26 voting 'aye', 34 voting 'no', and 36 voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, O'Connell, amends House Bill 240  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day 1722."

May 16, 1985 "Representative O'Connell, on Amendment #2."

"Madam Speaker, Amendment #2 increases by... from three-fifths to four-fifths, the Extraordinary Majority which would increase pension rates. It... I would simply ask for its adoption."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 1722. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 1722 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1741, Representative Satterthwaite. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1741, a Bill for an Act to amend the School Code. Second Reading of the Bill. was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?" Amendment #1

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, McNamara."

"Representative McNamara."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman. This Amendment merely returns the language of the original package as it was originally presented, and I urge for its adoption."

"The Gentleman... The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to House Bill 1741. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"Will the Gentleman yield?" 241  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985

"He will yield for a question."

"Representative McNamara, were you present in the Committee when Amendment #1 was adopted? Are you a Member? I don't know if you're a Member of the Committee."

"I am a Member of the Committee, and I was not present when that Amendment was adopted."

"Well then, may... With leave of the Chair, may I address some questions about Amendment #1 to Representative Satterthwaite?"

"I'm sorry. We are on Amendment #2."

"Does this... Representative McNamara, does this render Amendment #1 meaningless? Does it return it to the original Bill?"

"It returns it to the state of the original Bill."

"Okay. To the Amendment."

"Proceed."

"In my file, I do not have an indication of who the Sponsor of the Amendment was. However, Amendment #1 deleted from the Bill the requirement that this allocation of funds be made pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Federal Education and Consolidation Improvement Act. The practical effect of Amendment #1 was to allow allocation on a basis to be decided by this General Assembly and not on a basis already dictated by the Federal Government. That Amendment obviously was important, because it was adopted in Committee, and for the Sponsor of Amendment #2 to essentially gut the Bill, I think, is something we should not be agreeing with. I'd ask that the Amendment be opposed."

"The Lady from Champaign, Representative Satterthwaite."

"Madam Speaker and Members of the House, I regret having to oppose one of my colleagues with the Amendment, 242  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 but the discussion in the Committee and the reason for adopting Amendment #1 was to leave it open for the Board of Education to determine the distribution of these funds. I think that there is some confusion in regard to what the distribution would actually be if it were by the method suggested in Amendment #2, and it also, I think, would be difficult for us to know whether it gives access to public schools by other students if there were, in fact, materials distributed under the language in Amendment #2. And so, for sake of clarity and for sake of going back to the Committee action, I would respectfully suggest a 'no' on Amendment #2."

"There being no further discussion, Representative McNamara is recognized to close."

"Thank you. Just a slight clarification. This does not gut the Bill. What this really does is return the Bill to the original language, which is under the provisions of Chapter II of the Federal Education and Consolidation Improvement Act of 1981. So, it actually brings it back to the original state that the Bill was, and I urge that you adopt the Amendment. Thank you."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to House Bill 1741 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 83 voting 'aye', 14 voting 'no', and 3 voting 'present', and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Representative Satterthwaite, do you want this Bill moved to Third Reading?"

"Yes, please."

"She does. This Bill moves to Third Reading. 243  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day House Bill 1778. Representative Out of the Record. May 16, 1985 House Bill 1814, Hastert. Clerk, read the Bill. No. Yes, Clerk, read the Bill. Out of the Record. House Bill 1828, Representative Steczo. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1828, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relationship to the regulation of underground petroleum storage tanks. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Steczo, amends House Bill 1828."

"Representative Steczo."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. Amendment #1 to House Bill 1828 is an attempt to conform the Bill to the memorandum of understanding by the Governor between the Environmental Protection Agency and the State Fire Marshall's Office. What it does is to provide for an orphan underground storage tank fund to be established and a fee of five dollars per tank that will be paid as of July 1, 1986, to go into the fund once a registry of tanks in the State of Illinois is completed by May 1, 1986. I would move, Madam Speaker, for the adoption of Amendment #1."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1828. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield for a question?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Representative, the Bill, that is the Amendment, which deletes everything after the enacting clause, makes a cross-reference to a Section which does not yet exist, but which will be added if House Bill 2250 passes. Are you... Do you know anything about House Bill 2250?" 244  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day

"Representative Cullerton, I'm afraid anything about House Bill 2250." I May 16, 1985 do not know

"Well then, I think you might want to... Well... This Amendment was the subject matter of another Bill, wasn't Steczo: it?" "I believe there were other Bills introduced relative to the subject matter. This... House Bill 1828 was one of three, I believe."

"I think maybe this Amendment was House Bill 2250, and I just think we might want to take it out of the record so we can clear this up to see if it's proper. Or you might want to nove it to Third, and we can... without the Amendment, and then we can see if you want to bring it back for an Amendment later. But I don't think it's the way you want it to be right now."

"What is your pleasure, Representative Steczo?" "Madam Speaker, would it be possible to take it out of the record now and come back with it this evening."

"I will try to do that, Representative Steczo. I'm not sure that it's possible to do this evening. We want to get all the way through Second Readings, but we will try to do that."

"Madam Speaker, if it would be permissible, I would like to withdraw Amendment #1, then, and move the Bill to Third."

"The Gentleman withdraws Amendment #1. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1841, Representative McCracken. Out of the Record. House Bill 1848, Representative Currie. Excuse me, Representative McCracken. Did you want to call that Bill? Okay. House Bill 1848, Representative Currie. Representative Currie. 245  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Out of the Record. Excuse me. The Lady is here. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk. Okay. House Bill 1848 is out of the record. House Bill 1849, Representative Currie. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1849, a Bill for an Act relating to joint land resource management programs. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1850, Representative Currie. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1850, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Municipal Code and in relationship to county zoning. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1869, Representative McGann. Representative McGann. Out of the Record. House Bill 1884, Representative Vinson. Out of the Record. House Bill 1885, Representative Vinson - Greiman. Out of the Record. House Bill 1885. Did you wish to move that Bill, Representative Greiman? Okay. It's out of the record. House Bill 1900, Representative Keane. Out of the Record. House Bill 1902, Representative Vinson - Madigan. Out of the Record. House Bill 1918, Representative Davis. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1918, a Bill for an Act to amend the Unified Code of Corrections and the State Printing Contracts Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Davis, amends House Bill 18... 246  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 1918 on page two and so forth."

"Representative Davis."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Amendment offered to House Bill 1918 was agreed upon between the Department of Central Management Services and the Department of Corrections that creates language that authorizes the Department of Corrections Industrial Operations Program to provide printing for state agencies without requirements of the Act only when authorized by the Department of Central Management Services and when they can't do it. And that's Amendment #1, Madam Speaker. And I would move for its adoption."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1918. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion... There being... The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton does wish to discuss it. Representative Cullerton."

"Yes, I just want to add my support to this Amendment."

"There being no further discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 1918 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 1922, Representative Vinson. Out of the Record. House Bill 1950, Representative Hensel. Representative Hensel. Out of the Record. House Bill 1999, Representative Currie. Representative Currie. Out of the Record. House Bill 2009, Representative Parcells. Out of the Record. Representative Currie is now back in the chamber. With leave of the Body, we will go back to House Bill 1999. 247  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day May 16, 1985 Representative Currie. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 1999, a Bill for an Act to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Currie, amends House Bill 1999 on page two and so forth."

"Representative Currie."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. The Amendment is basically a clarification. The underlying Bill is a response to a recent United States Supreme Court decision with respect to provision of psychiatric and psychological support for indigent defendants. I move adoption of the Amendment, and I'm happy to answer any questions."

"The Lady moves for the adoption of Amendment #1 to House Bill 1999. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to House Bill 1999 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes have it, and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. House Bill 2032, Representative Tate. Representative Tate. Clerk, read the Bill."

"House Bill 2032, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Insurance Code. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. House Bill 2036, Representative Daniels. Daniels - Hallock. Out of the Record. Excuse me. Representative Hallock wishes to call 2036. Mr. 248  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 41st Legislative Day Clerk, read the Bill." May 16, 1985

"House Bill 2036, a Bill for an Act to amend the Environmental Protection Act. No Committee Amendments."

Second Reading of the Bill. Speaker Breslin: "Representative Hallock. Are there any Amendments from the floor?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Daniels - Hallock - Churchill et al, amends House Bill 2036."

"Representative Hallock."