Illinois House Floor Debate — June 25, 1985

"The House will come to order. Members will be in their seats. The Chaplain for today will be the Reverend Harry Meyer, Pastor of First Christian Church of Hillsboro. Reverend Meyer is a guest of Representative Josephine Oblinger. Will the guests in the balcony please rise and join us in the invocation?"

"Omnipotent Creator, before You, we come this day responding to Your beckoning and everlasting arms. To You, God of love, we give thanks for our night's rest. We rejoice at the dawn's brightness and the gladness of this morning. We beseech You to hear our prayers. May courage and faith be with those persons who are held against their will upon foreign shores. Bless this the great State of Illinois and its people who are of various... and numerous ethnic and racial heritage. Touch Your spirit of wisdom upon those who are gathered in these hallowed walls as the chosen Representatives of the people. May love, justice, service and brotherhood be reflected in the laws guiding our land. In Your eternal love and grace, we pray. Amen."

"Be led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Representative Ropp."

"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. Take the record. Representative Matijevich."

"Mr. Speaker, let the record reflect the excused absence of Cal Sutker."

"Thank you. 117 Members answering the Roll Call, a quorum is present. A Message from the Senate. Representative Greiman in the Chair." 1  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"A Message from the Senate by Mr. Wright, Secretary. 'Mr. Speaker, I'm directed to inform the House of Representatives that the Senate has concurred with the House of Representatives in passage of Bills of the following title, to wit; Senate Bills #48, 49, 52, 60, 62, 90, 123, 131, 157, 202, 231, 243, 257, and 265, together with Amendments, and the adoption of which I'm instructed to ask concurrence of the House of Representatives. Kenneth Wright, Secretary.' That message from the Senate referred to Senate Bills that passed the Senate."

"Excuse me."

"Okay, the Message is in error. It should be House Bills that passed the Senate."

"Excuse me. Mr. Ryder, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Mr. Speaker, I wanted to compliment you on your resplendent attire today. I take it from the manner in which you're dressed that we're probably going to be talking about the banking Bill and I wanted you to know that I'm also similarly attired. However, in the event that we don't have time for the banking Bill, I'm also prepared on the funeral directors' Bill if you'd like to proceed there. In any event, I'm very glad that whatever electronic problem that we were experiencing yesterday that prohibited you from recognizing me at that time has now been cleared up and we're starting off nicely. Thank you."

"Mr. Ryder, I... I'm also glad to see that you're resplendently attired. I am wearing my lawyer clothes from Chicago. Unfortunately, vests don't fit me well. So, I usually dispense with them. In fact, I have a lot of large size vests that I can let anybody have if they want, but we also could do insurance stuff in these uniforms. So, there is... insurance, or for downstaters, 2  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 it's insurance. We could do that and we will probably have a lot of financial measures today since we're both dressed for it and Representative Vinson is also dressed in that same manner. McCracken from DuPage is putting on his gray flannel suit and even Ms. Koehler is dressed appropriately with tie and shirt and... It's nice. It's good. It's good. Mr. Ropp, of course, is... Mr. Ropp. Now... Yes, Mr. Vinson. Mr. Vinson."

"Let's get busy and pass some of these Bills. Let's get this place moving, Mr. Speaker."

"Apparently, your metabolism rate has risen. Agreed Resolutions."

"House Resolution 592, offered by Representative Barnes; 594, by Brunsvold and DeJaegher. House Joint Resolution 81, by Kubik; 82, Panayotovich. Senate Joint Resolution 75, by... by Parke - et al; and Senate Joint Resolution 78, by Matijevich - et al."

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

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, House Resolution 592, Barnes, recognizes Herbert Hoening. 594, Brunsvold - DeJaegher, congratulates the Magnusson's. House Joint Resolution 81, Kubik, commends the First Czechoslovakian Garden Club. House Joint 82, Panayotovich, congratulates Marilyn Fitch. Senate Joint 75, Parke - et al, commends Virginia Hayter. Senate Joint 78, Matijevich - Churchill - Williamson, urges that O'Hare Air Reserve Forces Facility and Great Lakes Naval Training Center remain open. I move the adoption of the Agreed Resolutions."

"Thank you. The Gentleman from Lake moves for the adoption of the Agreed Resolutions. Those in favor say 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, 3  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the 'ayes' have it, and the Agreed Resolutions are adopted. General Resolution."

"House Resolution 595, offered by Braun - et al."

"Committee on Assignment. Death Resolution."

"House Resolution 593, offered by Representative Shaw, with respect to the memory of Mr. Buffin Tillman Brown."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Shaw, moves for the adoption of the Death Resolution. Those in favor say 'aye', opposed 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. And the Death Resolution is adopted. Mr. Clerk... Mr. Clerk, the doors that used to be here on the podium, do you know where those doors are stored? Mr. Clerk, do you know where they are stored? They are available. Alright. I don't... We may call in the carpenter later on today. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Hallock, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have an inquiry of the Chair. For the past week, I've had on the Special Order of Business on Public Utilities - Environmental Protection a very fine community right-to-know Bill. It's been on there for a week now and I noticed on today's Calendar it somehow has vanished from that Order. And I would like the inquire of the Chair just what happened to that Bill."

"We'll check it out."

"I had hoped then maybe, perhaps, you had suggested that be on the Consent Calendar of some type."

"Representative Breslin in the Chair."

"Ladies and Gentlemen, we are going to the Special Order of all appropriation Bills that are on Second Reading that do not have Amendments filed for them, so that we can move through those Bills and move them onto Third Reading. The first Bill on that Order is Senate Bill 1. 4  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill #1, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the Board of Regents. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 160."

"Senate Bill 160, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the Department of Transportation. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 226. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 226, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the Metropolitan Fair and Exposition Authority Reconstruction Fund. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 306."

"Senate Bill 306, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the Auditor General. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 356. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 356, a Bill for an Act making certain appropriations for higher education. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments." 5  STATE OF ILLINOIS 34th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 357."

"Senate Bill 357, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the Illinois Community College Board and the Board of Trustees of the State Community College of East St. Louis for fiscal year 1986. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 358."

"Senate Bill 358, a Bill for an Act making an appropriation to the Board of Governors for state colleges and universities. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 359. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 359, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of certain retirement systems. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 362."

"Senate Bill 362, a Bill for an Act making certain appropriations to the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 363. Clerk, read 6  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the Bill."

"Senate Bill 363, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the state universities' civil service system. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 364. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 364, a Bill for an Act to provide for the ordinary and contingent expenses of Southern Illinois University. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 450. Clerk, read the Bill. 450."

"Senate Bill 450, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Public School Teachers' Pension and Retirement Fund. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 454. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 454, a Bill for an Act to provide for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Office of the Lieutenant Governor. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendments #1 and 2 were adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?" 7  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 456. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 456, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Civil Service Commission. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 460."

"Senate Bill 460, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Industrial Commission. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 462. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 462, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Illinois Arts Council. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 465. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 465, a Bill for an Act to provide for 8  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Office of the Governor. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 466. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 466, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Department of Mines and Minerals. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #2 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 471. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 471, a Bill for an Act making certain reappropriations to the Department of Transportation. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendments #1 and 2 were adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 474. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 474, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Department of Financial Institutions. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #2 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed." 9  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 475. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 475, a Bill for an Act to provide for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Bureau of the Budget and the Executive Office of the Governor. Second Reading of the Bill. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 496. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 496, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Department of Public Aid. Second Reading of the Bill. Strike that. Senate Bill 496, a Bill for an Act making appropriations for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the Office of the State Treasurer. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 507. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 507, a Bill for an Act making appropriations of the Illinois Development Finance Authority. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 963. Clerk, read 10  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the Bill."

"Senate Bill 863, a Bill for an Act making certain appropriations and amending certain appropriation Acts. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 1033. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 1033, a Bill for Act making appropriations to the Department of Agriculture. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 1112. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 1112, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the State's Attorneys' Appellate Service Commission. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 1410. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 1410, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the Illinois Job Development and Venture Investment Fund. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"None."

"Third Reading. Senate Bill 1411."

"Senate Bill 1411, a Bill for an Act to appropriate $5,000,000 to the Department of Central Management Services for minority business bonding. Second 11  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, did we do 1112 and move that to Third Reading? Very good. Ladies and Gentlemen, the next Order of Business will be the Special Order of Call on Higher Education. That's the Special Order of Call on Higher Education. The first Bill on that call is Senate Bill 329, Representative Dunn. Representative Dunn. Ladies and Gentlemen, we are preceding to Third Readings on the Special Order of Call. Sponsors should be in their seats and ready to present their Bills. The first Bill on this call is Senate Bill 329, Representative Dunn. Out of the record. Senate Bill 355, Representative McGann. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? Representative McGann. This appears on page 15 on your Calendar. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 355, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Public Community College Act. This Bill has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

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

"Representative Ewing. Representative Ewing."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Amendment should get everyone's attention and hopefully get us off to a speedy start today. The Bill that you have before you, Ladies and Gentlemen, is the Bill which would require that all nonjunior college territory in the State of Illinois, either form a new junior college or be assigned to an existing junior college, certainly an effort which has gone on for a number of years by the 12  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 junior college proponents in this state and up until very recently had been thwarted by the good judgment and wisdom of our fine Governor, James Thompson, who had on at least one occasion vetoed a Bill passed by this General Assembly. And, let me point out that this legislation, as it's currently composed, will require that those areas be forced into or create a junior college district and that will be done or will include a tax without a referendum. And I think that many of us in this House strongly oppose that type of action. The Amendment, which I proposed to this Bill, I think is fair to those areas affected and I think it is also better for the junior college system in Illinois. The Amendment would provide that any nonjunior college area have another option. And this option would be with the referendum to impose a tax on themselves to pay the charge-back currently being picked up by high school districts. Now, let me point out that under the current system if you're not in a junior college area, your high school district is required to pay the tuition for any students living in that district who wish to attend in Illinois junior college. I don't think this is a fair situation. It is a drain on already hard pressed high schools to meet their educational needs. This Amendment would address that and it would say that you must impose a tax if it is approved by a referendum and reimburse your high schools for any charge-back. But if you do this in any nonjunior college district, you wouldn't have to join the junior college or create a new one. Finally, let me say why is this good for the existing junior colleges. First of all, I believe that the existing junior colleges really are only interested in taxing the nonjunior college area, not in serving it. In my particular situation, the community in which I reside would be taxed as heavily as 13  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 any community or any area within driving distance of a junior college. And yet, we are 60 miles from any campus. And I would say to you, Ladies and Gentlemen, that you can't have a commuter... community college if you're 60 miles away. What I believe will happen if we don't put this Amendment on this Bill is that the major nonjunior college areas in this state will create new junior colleges. And what will that do to existing junior colleges? Number one, it will take students that they already have in their junior college. It will cut down the student pool available to existing junior colleges. Number two, it will keep them from having the taxing base increased which is really their desire in this case. And third, it will create some unneeded new junior colleges which can come to Springfield and compete for available funds allocated to the junior college system in Illinois. Let's put this Amendment on. Let's give people a chance to vote on any tax increase. Let's don't have taxes imposed without a referendum. Let's solve the problem, but let's don't throw the baby out with the wash and not put this Amendment on. I would ask for your favorable vote."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 355. And on that question, the Gentleman from McLean, Representative Ropp."

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

"He will yield for a question."

"Representative Ewing, in the fact that we both share concerns for the educational fund, should this Amendment pass and the referendum would fail, there would still continue to be a heavy drain on the educational fund within each of the school unit districts. Is that correct?"

"No, that's not correct."

"Well, would you explain why it would not be correct?" 14  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"If this... if this Amendment is put on and if there is a referendum and if the people in any nonjunior college district refuse to pay the charge-back, they would then be under the provisions of this law and they would be required to pay the charge-back and within a certain number of years, either form a new junior college or join an existing one. This would not let them off without doing one or the two."

"Well, I guess... Reexplain the Amendment, then. I thought if the Amendment passes and a referendum is called and passed, then the tax would continue to pay for the tuition to community colleges."

"That's right."

"If it would fail, the local educational fund would have to be dipped into to continue to pay the tuition."

"No. That's not correct because if it fails, then the other provisions of the Bill, 355, would apply and they provide for a tax to pay the charge-back for five years after which you'd be forced into a district or must create one."

"In other words, whether or not the Amendment... whether or not the referendum passes or fails, you're still, under the Bill, would be taking the tax to pay for tuition out of all the taxpayers and would be leaving the educational fund alone."

"It would leave the education fund alone. It would solve that problem. What it really does is give you a third alternative. You can either impose a charge-back tax on yourself permanently and stay out of the district, you can create a new district or you can join an existing district. All three alternatives would be available for nonjunior college areas in this state."

"Alright. Then, in fact, if the referendum would fail, you 15  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 would, at the end of five years, be forced, under this Bill, to go into an adjacent community college at a significantly higher tax imposed on the constituents within that school unit district. Correct?"

"Or create another junior college. You'd have all three options."

"Which could even be an administrative college which would be somewhat less than half or about half of what a full-fledged, brick and mortar kind of a community college that we have been considered."

"That's right. Could be either one of the three."

"Thank you."

Speaker Breslin: "The Gentleman from Cook, Representative McGann."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the General Assembly. First of all, I would like to inform the Assembly that I am in opposition of this Amendment. The Sponsor, my esteemed colleague, did not have the courtesy to come to me and tell me he was going to place this Amendment upon my Bill, but I'm not really concerned about that because he has a tremendous amount of credibility and I'll always respect him accordingly. But more importantly, this Amendment is a tax for the people and it's not giving them the choices that we would have under Senate Bill 355. If this Amendment goes through, a referendum would be required in order for a school district to have authority to levy a tax to pay out-of-district tuition charge-back to meet community colleges. Presently, this is a tune of $3,000,000 in the drain of the educational fund of the elementary and secondary education and especially, the secondary education. This is where we're talking about $3,000,000. If this continues and especially for the need for training and so forth in these areas where they do not 16  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 have a college district, it could become quite a financial burden in the years to come. If no referendum were held or were successful by December 1989, according to this Amendment, the ICCB would have the authority to assign a school district to a community college. Some school districts might be successful with the referendum early, but the pressure wouldn't come until 1989 when the prospect of annexation of a community college district would increase the incentive for passage. During the interim period, these districts would continue to find it necessary to pay charge-backs from the educational funds. This would be a regression to the 1965 era because school districts, then, had authority to levy a tax to pay charge-backs without referendum. This authority was been removed by the Legislature in 1977 to create encouragement to join a community college district. It would make no public policy sense to go back to 1965 policies for 42 school districts which is 3% of the total state's population. These Amendments would not address the issue of school consolidation where a school district belonging to a community college district would consolidate with a school district not in a community college district. The new school district would have two classes of taxpayers; one class paying to directly support the community college operation and one paying a lesser amount to the school district to pay charge-backs. Pressure would mount to deannex from the community college district in order to be taxed at a lesser rate. The result would be disintegration of the community college district structure. This issue will become more acute as school consolidation increases as an issue. You will recall that the community college district lost three school districts, parts of districts within the last two years. While these Amendments purport 17  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 to be Amendments to a require referendum, closer scrutiny shows that the threat of a forced annexation without referendum is being used as pressure to point out and to pass the referendum. Madam Speaker, I believe that this is very important. So much work has gone into this Senate Bill. Could have we the attention of the Assembly? I know that sometimes these things become boring, and I'm trying to make it as close as I can. But I am trying to bring out to all of the Members of this Assembly, the importance of how we have to defeat these Amendments so they don't destroy the Bill and destroy the future for education to the community colleges in the State of Illinois. I'm just going to say that with the Illinois community college system now enrolling close to one half of all enrolled in higher education in the state, with it providing most of the dislocated worker training, with it being asked to increase it's training and service to industry and business as the state's economy continues in transition, with it enrolling over 65% of the minorities enrolled in public and private higher education, and with it providing most of the retraining services to those who must be retrained periodically throughout their lifetime, where would we be if everyone elected to permanently support community colleges through charge-backs, as 3% of the population is attempting to do through these Amendments? I ask you to earnestly defeat this Amendment. Thank you."

Speaker Breslin: "The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Hoffman."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise to join Representative McGann in opposing this Amendment and the next Amendment. He is accurate when he says that if these Amendments are adopted, they will defeat the intent of House Bill 355. At 18  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 present, there are only 42 high schools in unit districts which encompass about 8% of the total land area in the state and about 3% of the state's population that are not included in a junior college district. To tell you the truth, Ladies and Gentlemen, we... as we look back, we probably made a mistake when we didn't assign all territory into a junior college district initially. What this has led to, of course, is a tremendous problem for those high schools and unit districts that are not in a junior college district because they have to pay the tuition. One of those school districts is located right west of here, Jacksonville, and their budget for 1985 - '86 contains a quarter of a million dollars which has to be taken out of their local education program to pay charge-back costs. It's an unfair burden on the local school districts. And with all due respect, of course, to the Sponsor of the Amendment, I rise in opposition to the Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Effingham, Representative Hartke."

"Will the Sponsor yield?"

"He will."

"Tom, I don't rise in opposition. As a matter of fact, I'm supportive of this measure, but I have some questions. Right now, how does the local school districts make up these funds when they get the charge-back bill to them?"

"Right now, Representative, they have to take it out of their education funds."

"Okay, then, this Amendment would allow them to add an additional tax with a referendum to their local school districts to pay that charge-back cost."

"That's correct. And any of the prior speakers who indicated that this Amendment wasn't going to do that, are incorrect. It will allow the school districts to make up 19  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 and to stop that drain on their education fund."

"Okay. And without this Amendment, it would be mandated that they would raise that tax, correct?"

"They're going to raise the tax with or without the Amendment. With the Amendment if they raise the tax, then they are freed from being required to be assigned to a junior college district or to form one. Without the Amendment, they're going to get the tax imposed without a referendum and then they're going to have to join the district or create a new one."

"Okay. And I understand there is only, what, 42 school districts in the state that do not belong to a junior college district?"

"I understand it's in that area. I can't tell you for sure the number."

"Which is 8% of the land area and 3% of the population. When a junior college district makes this charge-back, is it at full cost right now to that unit?"

"They pay the... The high school district has to pay the going tuition rate of that junior college when any student goes to the junior college from the high school district."

"Alright. That should be the actual cost, then, of the education of that student."

"I cannot tell you how the junior colleges set their tuition fees, but I would imagine it would be, yes."

"To the Bill."

"Proceed."

"I do believe this is a good Amendment and it gives the local school districts the opportunity to raise their taxes with a referendum. It would also help the school... the junior college districts, in my opinion, because then that money would be there and they could get paid timely. I still have some problem on how they would be able to 20  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 determine what tax rate to raise or to charge to bring up the number other than going on a possible history of how many students attend out-of-state or out-of-district schools, but I think it's a good Amendment and I'm supportive of it."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Representative Wolf."

"Madam Speaker, 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 main question is put. Representative Ewing, to close."

"Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly, first of all, I do want to apologize to the Sponsor of the Bill. Of course, no offense was made in filing an Amendment without contacting him, though my staff may have messed up in that regard. It's probably a common practice here, but I do extend to the Sponsor my apology. I would like to quote from a letter from the Illinois Community College Trustees' Association, when they say, 'the Bill now stands, it is not opposed by any organization.' That's not correct. It is opposed by the IAA, the Illinois Farm Bureau. I would also like to point out in that letter that they say the issues which this Bill addresses are complex and defy simple resolution, and that's probably true also. But the fact is, there is a simple resolution as far as imposing on people without a referendum - a tax increase, something many of us find very objectionable. When the junior college system was created in this state, there was a promise that they would not force everyone into one. But that promise has been forgotten by the junior college trustees, and it is absolutely their aim to get areas that 21  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 they can't serve and to tax them. Ladies and Gentlemen, most of us don't mind paying for services when we get them. We don't like to be taxed without a referendum and for services that we can't enjoy. This Bill solves a problem as far as our high school districts. It provides for a tax to pay the charge-back. That's fair. I ask for your support. Thank you."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 355 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'nos' have it. Representative Ewing has asked for a Roll Call. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Representative Satterthwaite, one minute to explain your vote."

"Madam Speaker and Members of the House, I rise in opposition of this Amendment. The experience is that until 1977, this tax was permitted in the hopes that the areas of the state would come in under their on volition. Since that has not happened, we, then, went to the system of essentially penalizing the local school districts instead. I think that we should not penalize the local school districts, and I see the votes are there. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Marion, Representative Friedrich, one minute to explain your vote."

"Well, Madam Speaker, I think it's wrong when we take on a position that we're going to impose things on folks back home and they don't have a right to make their own decision. The Farm Bureau is not exactly a radical organization. In fact, in my opinion, they've been very responsible through the years. And they don't think it's fair and I don't either to impose a junior college district on someone who lives 60 miles away and will never get any benefit from it. I think the Amendment is a good 22  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendment, and I don't know... I don't understand exactly why you're voting against it."

"Representative Ewing, one minute to explain your vote."

"Madam Speaker, I appreciate your courtesy in granting me the Roll Call. I'm not sure now that that was a wise decision."

"The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 35 voting 'aye', 76 voting 'no', and 3 voting 'present'. And the Amendment fails. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Ewing, amends Senate Bill 355 as amended."

"Representative Ewing."

"I would withdraw that Amendment."

"Withdraw Amendment #2. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Representative McGann now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 355. The Gentleman has leave. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 355, a Bill for an Act to amend the Public Community College Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative McGann."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the Assembly. I believe we've had much debate and discussion in the last 15 or 20 minutes in regards to this Bill. I would be very happy to answer any questions. I'd asked any questions about any of those... answer any questions about those who are sponsoring and supporting this legislation. And I'd asked for an 'aye' vote."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 355. And on that question, the Gentleman from 23  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Cook, Representative Bowman."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. We all come from different districts and different parts of the state, but I think that we can all agree that this is legislation that truly serves the policy of the state to provide comprehensive opportunities for junior college training throughout the state. I'm happy to rise in support of this legislation."

"The Gentleman from Livingston, Representative Ewing."

"We've had a full debate on this issue. I certainly would stand in opposition to the Bill as it's currently constituted. It's a tax without a referendum. It's unfair to those people upon whom it's being imposed, and I'd ask for a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from McLean, Representative Ropp."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I stand in support of the Bill now, particularly coming from an area that does not have a community college and some 800 plus students who do not have a chance to go to a community college because they're 40 to 50 miles away. It would provide an opportunity for us to have a community college of administrative type, very low in cost in relation to buildings. I think the opportunities that these young people have far outweigh the areas that we have talked about as to the taxing mechanism. Vocational education is important. This will be provided, and I urge your favorable vote."

"The Gentleman from Edgar, Representative Woodyard."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I also rise in support of Senate Bill 355. I certainly have been involved in these discussions and negotiations that have gone on for quite a 24  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 long period of time, particularly, with the community college people. I might add that I don't think Bill 'Hart' was involved in this agreed agreement, but certainly most of the organizations heavily involved are in agreement that this is by far the best way to address this problem of the nondistrict district. And I urge your support on Senate Bill 355."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 355 pass?' 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 111 voting 'aye', 14 voting 'no', and 1 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. With leave of the Assembly, we will go back to Senate Bill 329, Representative Dunn. It appears on page 15 on your Calendar. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 329, a Bill for an Act to amend the Regional Service Agency Fellowship Act. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"There are none."

"Third Reading. Read the Bill on Third."

"Senate Bill 329, a Bill for an Act to amend the Regional Service Agency Fellowship Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Dunn."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 329 would create a program for... create the Regional Service Agency Fellowship Program which would allow for internships in municipalities for the purpose of providing students in public administration the opportunity to work in municipal government and provide 25  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 those governmental agencies the opportunity to have the benefit of these students. And I would ask for a favorable vote."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 329. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion. The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 329 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? This is final action. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 115 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Ladies and Gentlemen, we are going now to the Special Order of Call on Transportation. The first Bill on that Order is Senate Bill 137, Representative Mautino. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 137, a Bill for an Act regulating the use of automobile repairers and rebuilders. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Mautino. Representative McCracken, for what reason do you rise?"

"Just an inquiry of the Chair. Can't we just finish this Order of Business?"

"It doesn't seem to be possible right now. So, that's why we're going to the Order of Transportation and we will be back."

"Why is that?"

"It's just a matter of handling the schedule, Sir. Representative Mautino."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Senate Bill 137 sponsored by Representative Topinka has one Amendment on that legislation. Excuse me. An Amendment has been filed 26  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 and I... I'm not taking it back to Third. I will... I will not take it back to Second. I'll leave it on Third. It was Representative Koehler's Amendment. The Bill is in its same form as it came over from the Senate. This adds the following provisions for the list of improper claim practices by insurers. It was part of the legislation addressing chop shops in the State of Illinois. What this does is set up and implements reasonable standards to verify that a repairer who has been designated to provide the estimate, perform repairs or engage in other service connected with an insurer's loss of a vehicle is licensed in the State of Illinois. Also that the insurance check when made out to both the repair shop and the individual, that it is submitted to the individual who is licensed in the State of Illinois. This legislation provides that there is a statement that the business is licensed. There will be a license on the wall showing the number and the expiration date and the...an advertisement as it pertains to service complaints that could be brought to the attention of the Attorney General's Office. And it's also included in here requirements that are required to appear on all estimates and receipts. I think it's a good piece of legislation. I ask for it's adoption and passage."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 137. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"Just a few questions of the Sponsor. Will the Gentleman yield?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Just for the purposes of clearing the record. What kind of reasonable standards must be adopted and implemented? Do they need to be reduced to writing? Do they need to be made available to the customer?" 27  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Yes."

"Yes to both?"

"Yes."

"Okay. So that when you come in you'll be handed, in effect, a statement of standards."

"It will be placed on the wall and also the licensure will be on the estimates and the billing forms, the license number and also in a place in the facility will be the information on the wall that is licensed... the license will be shown and the provisions for the standards would be there."

"Okay. And who does the licensing, Secretary of State?"

"Yes. Under the Motor Vehicle Code, yes."

"Alright. And has he promulgated any rules relative thereto or is he given the authority to do so by this Bill or the Vehicle Code?"

"Yes, he has and I understand from Representative Topinka and Representative Kubik that there is no opposition. The standards are provided and rules and regulations are provided. Correct me if I'm wrong."

"Okay. Alright. And the violation Section is a failure to provide as a persistent tendency of notification on any written estimate prepared by an insurance company in connection with an insured loss that Illinois law requires the vehicle repairers must be licensed."

"Correct, yes."

"Okay. Nothing further. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Terzich. Representative Terzich."

"Mautino, is this a licensure Bill? What does this Bill do? Does it only require that people who have licenses are authorized to repair automobiles or make insurance... or 28  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 insurance companies can only deal with license?"

"No, it doesn't do that, but what it says is when there is an insured loss, if the check is made out to the repair company as well as the individual that for the protection of both the insurance company and the individual that they are not dealing with the chop shop or the parts. There is no tracking or trading on the parts. This licensure sets up those standards and rules and so that when a person comes in then they are well aware that this facility abides by the rules, regulations and standards of the Secretary of State's Office. And it is a licensure Bill."

"How would a person know whether or not he's dealing with a chop shop? Just because he's got a license, does that mean he... they don't used parts, or where does the license facility get their parts and one that isn't licensed where would they get their parts? Is there something in the license that says that they're not a chop shop or something like that?"

"Well, they do already have the tracking system for parts and there is an additional Bill, I think, 1136 that tracks those up to eight years. I guess there is no guarantee for anyone that a place doesn't use questionable parts and there is no way we can license for that in the State of Illinois, but at least you'll know you'll be working with and providing your vehicle to a facility that has at least been licensed, completed the questionnaires and are under the standards and regulations of the Secretary of State's Office."

"Who does the policing of this? Aren't these repair shops currently licensed by either local units of government or, you know, to do business? Why would we need this legislation?"

"Under the home rule provisions, they are. Statewide, 29  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 they are not and the inspection provisions would be under the Secretary of State under Motor Vehicle Code."

"Doesn't the Secretary of State presently, you know, check into repair shops to see if they have any stolen parts or chop shop parts or something like that?"

"I understand that they do. This would maintain that those individuals operating are registered with the State of Illinois and there is some recourse for an individual which may not be the case if they weren't licensed."

"Well, if the Secretary of State went and found some stolen automobile parts in a repair shop, I assume that they would charge them with some type of felony charge. Wouldn't they presently?"

"I would assume so, yes."

"Then why would you need something like this to... Why would you need this type of legislation?"

"Mainly because there are some repair shops that are not registered. Some are fly-by-nights where they take the down payment and they never complete the work. At least the individual customer would know that there is recourse if, in fact, the person is licensed and under the standards of the state."

"Well, to the Bill. You know, all this Bill does sound like is it... it's supposedly licenses repair shops. And that is currently done by local units government. There are laws on the books that does protect them from repair shops. I really don't know what this Bill would actually do other than supposedly is another licensure Bill which function... it does nothing really, other than to say that I may be a reputable repair shop and you can only do business with me. I actually don't see any purpose in this type of legislation."

"Representative Mautino, to close." 30  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"I believe it has been adequately discussed. It does provide confidence for the consumer that when they take their automobile to a repair shop that individual is under the auspices of the Secretary of Secretary State, the motor vehicle law as well as complaints that can be brought against them under the licensure provisions and that when checks from insurance companies are submitted, they will be submitted to agencies that are not fly-by-night operations. I ask for an 'aye' vote."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 137 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 106 voting 'aye', 7 voting 'no', and 1 voting 'present'. Capparelli wants to vote 'aye'. There are, therefore, 107 voting 'aye', 6 voting 'no', and 1 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitution Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 239, Representative Flinn. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 239, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Flinn."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Senate Bill 239 is a Bill that passed the Senate by 58 'yes' and no 'no' votes. I don't whether that's important or not, but it is to me in this case. The... What the Bill does is adds to the list of violations of which a court is not required to report to the Secretary of State, speeding violations if they're only ten miles over the 55 miles per hour. It does not change the speed laws at all. The fines remain the same. It doesn't touch that portion of the law. It simply takes away the requirement of reporting the speeds on the 31  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 interstate highways of over 55 miles an hour and under 65."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 239. And on the question, the Gentleman from Adams, Representative Mays."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Will the Gentlemen yield for a question?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Representative Flinn, did you say this just applies to the speed limit on interstate highways?"

"No, I take that back. The original Bill does, but there was an Amendment put on by Representative O'Connell. If you wish to question the Amendment, it deals with something under 55. The original Bill dealt only with the 55 miles an hour on the speed limit."

"Okay. Representative O'Connell, then, would you yield for a question on the Amendment #1 that was adopted?"

"Representative O'Connell."

"What, you know, what we're doing is creating a number of classes of nonreportable offenses to the Secretary of State's Office. Is that not correct?"

"We're adding to a number of nonreportable offenses found in, I believe, it's 16-204. Chapter 95 and half."

"Can you... you know, for the benefit of a lot of us in this chamber, could you tell us what some of those nonreportable offenses will be?"

"Sure. Sure. Speeding violations not in excess of 12 miles per hour over any limit of 35 miles per hour or less, lighted lamps, farm or slow moving vehicle, signal lamp or device, required driving lamps, illegal flashing lamps, flashing lights, defective brakes, use of unsafe tire, no safety glass, tow truck identification, suspension system, head set receivers in the car, improper explosive warning, improper radioactive warning, improper flammable warning. 32  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Now, I might add, Representative, that the nonreportable aspect of this Bill is only effective if there is a local ordinance which addresses these specific violations. If there are no local ordinances that do so, they become reportable offenses."

"In other words, home rule municipalities may enact an ordinance that says that these shall not be reported to the Secretary of State's Office; otherwise, this is not reported... otherwise these will be reported."

"Any unit of... any municipality. Strike that. Any unit of local government home rule or nonhome rule."

"So, the Adams County Board could pass an ordinance of sorts saying that these should not be reported to the Secretary of State."

"Well, if you have a county police department..."

"A sheriff's office."

"Alright."

"Okay. Then they can do that and then for those people that are ticketed for driving 47 miles an hour in a 35 mile an hour zone, they will not have that ticket reported to the Secretary of State's Office. Is that correct?"

"If they are issued a ticket and the violator pays the amount of the ticket, which is not more than $15, and if the defendant or the violator accepts the violation and pays the ticket, then it become a nonreportable offense if there is a local ordinance."

"Thank you very much. To the Bill. You know, this is a policy call. I'm sure there are some of these offenses that are in here that many of us don't give a whole heck of a lot of care about, but there are some in here that I think do matter a little bit, especially in regards to speed limits. If we've got a 55 mile an hour on... limit on an interstate, why, then, should we not have... Why 33  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 should we have an allowance for going 65 miles an hour without a nonreportable offense? By the same token if in some of our small towns, we've got a 35 mile an hour. Why, then, should we have an allowance for going 47 miles an hour for a nonreportable offense? The Secretary of State's Office, as I understand it, opposes this Bill. They believe that it will substantially decrease the number of convictions that are reported to the Secretary of State's Office. And they also believe that they cannot properly access of drivers records if convictions for moving violations are not reported to their office. For that reason, I stand in opposition to this Bill."

"The Gentleman from Jefferson, Representative Hicks."

"Yes, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Bill came about due to the fact that insurance companies have been somewhat abusing the rights of looking at speed limits as far as the charges that are... and the violations of speed limits. Currently in Illinois, if you get a speeding ticket for 5 miles an hour over, the insurance company looks at that and they have a reason to raise your rates. And that's what's happening. Insurance companies are abusing the rights to look at your violations and they are raising rates in the State of Illinois. That's the reason the Bill really came about; because, if you have a violation for less than 10 mile an hour over the speed limit, there is really not a need for you to have your insurance rates raised up. So, I stand in favor of the Bill and ask for your 'aye' vote on the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Piel."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will one of the two Gentlemen yield? I'm not sure which one would be better qualified to answer the question." 34  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Representative Flinn is the Sponsor. Proceed."

"Representative Flinn, basically my question deals with the Amendment. Can you give me an example? What worries me is the situation, let say, that we have a 20 mile an hour speed limit, that's why I say may be it'll be Representative O'Connell, but whichever one. Let's say that we have a 20, 25 mile an hour speed limit. We're talking about a residential area. The way I read this is it's basically giving them an option of going 37 miles an hour. You start going down a residential street - I think we all have the problem with the dragsters going down our residential streets - and you start adding in a 10 mile an hour difference on that, that's the way I'm reading the Amendment. Could you explain to me when it would be acceptable to go 40... let's say, 37 in a 25 or when it would not be acceptable?"

"Well, let me try to explain to you. First, the Amendment does not grant them that privilege to speed. It only grants the local government the right to take that away as a reportable offense and fine them. Now, we're not changing any of the speed laws, those that are under 55 or those that are over 55. The speed laws are staying intact as they were. All we're doing is picking out some areas where there is a severe penalty involved in speeding in addition to the fine. And we're thinking that since the state police now are serving as judges out there of 56 miles an hour, 58 miles an hour and that sort of thing, knowing full well that this might be the third reported violation of the speed laws and; therefore, the person would lose their license, have it suspended - we're trying to take the policemen out of position of being a judge."

"I understand, Monroe, but what my question basically is just to the one area that concerns me as far as the 35  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendment goes. The original Bill, I'm not arguing with. I'm not arguing with any of the other parts of the Amendment, even though I could, but I... The granting of the 12 miles an hour in a city. Now you start talking about 12... because I know that municipalities in our area, lots of time what they'll do, they'll, you know, give the people if it's 25, they'll give them up to maybe 30. But anything over that, they pull them over. And that's the question that I have. Maybe Representative O'Connell..."

"Well, the answer to that question is it doesn't grant any miles over the speed limit. It just let's local government take those violations, if they so desire, take those violations as one of those that are reported to the Secretary of State for one of the three violations. It doesn't do anything to local government except let them do that if they have a desire to do so."

"In other words basically what we're saying is - correct me if I'm wrong. As an example, if I... in ABC community they decide that anything over 10 miles and over, they will not report this. In other words, I would still be fined for the offense of 35 in a 25, but that would not be reported to the Secretary of State."

"Providing that local government took that action."

"Fine. Thank you very much."

Speaker Breslin: "The Gentlemen from DuPage, Representative Barger."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Many, many years ago in the State of Illinois, we had difficulty with local speed traps, the funding of local police departments by enforcing local rules and regulations, that not everyone in the State of Illinois knew existed and they were not uniform. This particular Bill allows for the opportunity for local police 36  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 departments to increase their funding by operating speed traps, by enforcing unusual rules and regulations that are not normally enforced. It is not in the best interest of honest law enforcement. Police officers now have discretionary power to not issue a ticket if they think that a ticket ought not be issued. This Bill is not in the good interest of the people. It's not in the good interest of government. It is a disservice to us as citizens and to those people we represent if we allow it to pass. I suggest very strongly that we vote 'no' on this Bill."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Representative Wolf."

"Madam Speaker, 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 main question is put. Representative Flinn, to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I suspect the previous speaker has not read the Bill. And certainly, if he read an analysis that said what he said, he read a bad analysis. This does not provide for speed trap. It doesn't change the speed laws at all. All it provides for by the Amendment is to let local government, if they see fit, to change the reporting of violations within a certain area from 35 miles up, for example, up to 47 as somebody pointed out. The original Bill, all it does... does not change the 55 miles an hour speed limit. All it does is provide that the court shall not be required to report speeding violations of up to 10 miles per hour over the 55. And that's all the Bill does. So, I would ask for a favorable vote, Madam Chairman (sic - Speaker)."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 239 pass?'" 37  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Representative O'Connell, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. This Bill does a couple of things. First of all, it gives the local governments the opportunity to enforce its own speed limits under 12 miles an hour. It allows them to eliminate the inefficiencies of crowded court dockets for people that show up in court and wait all day for a flashing light that wasn't repaired properly, for a use of an unsafe tire. These are minor violations. What we're trying to do is to give the local units of government the opportunity to eliminate inefficiencies and still maintain safe streets. The Bill is proposed by the chiefs of police from the Cook County area, that is the Amendment is. There is no way that they want to enforce laws that will be construed or the lack of enforcing laws that will be construed as providing for unsafe highways. The real opposition to this measure is that the Secretary of State's Office and certain law enforcement agencies will not be getting the surcharges that they get now. Right now, if... particularly a downstate motorist, if he has the use of an unsafe tire, he can be facing a fine of up to $80. The flat $50 fee for the violation and then surcharges which are piled up by $5 increments. That's what the Secretary of State is worried about is not getting that $5. I would suggest that this is a very good government Bill. It's a good Bill that eliminate a lot of the inefficiencies that are in our court systems and maintain safe streets."

"Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 75 voting 'aye', 35 voting 'no', and 4 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the 38  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 243, Representative Van Duyne. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 243, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Van Duyne."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. It's a very simple Bill. It reduces the definition of retired members from eight years to six years and reduces from 62 years of age with a minimum of four year service in order to become eligible for your retired license plates. That's all there is to it. And I move for the passage of House Bill... Senate Bill 243."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 243. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion. The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 243 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 89 voting 'aye', 20 voting 'no', and 8 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 492, Representative Wolf. Clerk... Out of the record. Senate Bill 583, Representative Rea. Clerk, read the Bill. And Representative Churchill. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 583, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Churchill."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentleman of the House. Senate Bill 583 provides that the Secretary of State shall not issue a supplemental license to new or used car dealers outside of their market area unless three or more licensed dealers make application to hold a joint sale 39  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 and the Secretary has considered the ability of the applicants to honor their service warranties and guarantees on vehicles offered for sale. I would move for passage of the Bill."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 583. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Yes, I would inquire of the Clerk. Is there Amendment adopted on this Bill?"

"In answer to your question, no Amendment has been adopted."

"Thank you."

"Is there any further discussion? There being no further discussion. The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 583 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Representative DeJaegher, would you change my vote from 'aye' to 'no', please? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 110 voting 'aye', 5 voting 'no', and 1 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 610, Representative Vinson. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 610, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Vinson. Representative Vinson."

"Has the Clerk read the Bill, Madam Speaker?"

"He has."

"Is Representative Cullerton on the floor, Madam Speaker?"

"He is."

"Then, Madam Speaker, to the Bill. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, for months I have known just how important 40  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 this Bill is to the automobile industry and their many lobbyists that gather around this chamber. And for months, I have known just precisely how important this Bill is to the Illinois Department of Transportation. You will note, standing in the rear of the chamber in the middle aisle, Secretary 'Bays' of the Department of Transportation. . He has been on the floor of this Assembly for the past five days working on this Bill. You have the finest road program offered to you in history because of his efforts on this particular Bill. This is a finer road program and a more elaborate program than Representative Ronan brought to you with the gas tax. This Bill has brought you that road program. I deeply understand the dilemma that those automobile industry lobbyists and Secretary 'Bays' pose for you on this particular issue. But let me suggest that there is something else you ought to be thinking about and those are the people back home, the people back home who feel that the mandatory seat belt law is the single worst vote, the single worst law, the most obnoxious intrusion on their freedom as individuals this chamber has ever perpetrated on them. Today you have the chance to give them what most of them regard as a meaningful piece of liberty, the freedom for them to choose whether or not to wear their seat belt. Senate Bill 610 would repeal the mandatory seat belt law in Illinois. It is going to be your one and only chance to vote on that issue. It is going to be the one vote that many people look to you for in this General Assembly's Session. I ask that you vote for freedom and that you vote for the repeal of the mandatory seat belt law. I ask for an affirmative Roll Call on Senate Bill 610."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 610. And on that question, the Lady from Cook, 41  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Representative Didrickson."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. I hate to stand up here and oppose my conservative colleague on the right here to me. However, I think he happens to be misreading the general public's growing support on an issue of safety. If we look at a recent poll that was conducted just this March in 1985, it was a market research opinion poll, 600 people statewide. What did we find? Sixty-three percent favor the law; 62% favored belts over bags; 78% said they'll comply. If we look back at the 'Katz' poll which was done a year ago, we find that this recent poll has increased the public support on safety belts. Chicago had a 61.3% favors of safety belts. Statewide, it was 60.3%. I mentioned that I felt that my colleague was misreading the general public's support on safety belt issues. I also think that we ought to look at some statistics because, quite frankly, that's what I think the public has finally educated themselves on versus an emotional hype. We repeal laws in the State of Illinois because they become obsolete or they're ineffective. We haven't even given them a chance to try the safety belt law. I'd like to put together some numbers for you that the public hasn't even seen with regards to compliance. I'm not going to use New York City's or New York State's numbers with regards to 70% compliance. I'm going to use 54% compliance for my conservative colleague here. With 54% compliance in the State of Illinois, it is estimated we can save 235 lives, prevent 34,000 injuries and let's look at the dollars if we're going to talk about conservative measures. Cost, $8,600 per average injury; per fatality $210,000. That adds up to a savings in the State of Illinois with regards to insurance, health care and medical rehabilitation and welfare costs to a savings the first 42  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 year of $343,000,000. I don't think that can be ignored and I don't think the public is ignoring statistics. I would like to close with... Three years ago when I first came down here and I recognized that many freshmen weren't down here with regards to the child restraint law or the safety belt law that was passed previously. We passed the child restraint law overwhelmingly. It had bipartisan support. It had bipartisan leadership on it. That was half the loaf. We're going to be buckling up and we have been putting safety belts and restraints on our kids and now, we're going to repeal the other half, the other components of parents. And what we're going to end up with is a whole class of orphans if we don't vote 'no' on 610."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Brookins."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and to the General Assembly. I rise to speak to this Bill with mixed emotions. I have taken a poll in my district and I have talked to the constituency and the people that I most respect, and they say, smilingly, 'Why force us to put on these seat belts?' I, myself, have never used the seat belts, but I know as a practical matter that this will save lives. I know that it is for the good of all, and I know that it is effective. So, with that from my knowledge, I'm going to have to do something that I rarely ever do and that is go against the people that have told me not to use... not to... that they don't use the seat belts, but I know that they are law abiding people and that they'll do what is best for them. So with that I will have to support the seat belt law."

"The Gentleman from Marion, Representative Friedrich, on the question."

"Madam Speaker, I have a true story to tell you and I think you might find it interesting, although Secretary 43  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Edgar did not find it to be very funny. Just last week one of my constituents went to take her drivers license test and it is the practice and the rule of the Secretary of State's employees that they have to buckle up when they're giving a driving test. Well, the test was successful. They came back to the station and the Secretary of State's employee couldn't get out of the belt. It wouldn't come unfastened. So, they went inside and got someone to help. They couldn't get it unfastened. They finally had to drive to the Ford garage and have the belt cut off so the lady could get out. Now, I think that gives you an idea of what you could come up against in this. Let me tell you a couple of things. When this came up last time, I told you that six countries in Europe have national mandatory seat belt laws. Only one of those, only one has a better... a lower fatality rate than the United States. Now, I have an article before me which says car seat belt laws don't save life, British government says. Compulsory use of seat belt does not save lives, according to a startling British government report. And one expert says, it's because belted drivers are much more reckless and cause more accidents. Now, who are you trying kid? We're... You're not endangering someone else when you don't put your seat belt on. And I resent, I resent very much more and more government telling you what you can do and setting you up for harrassment. And every time you pass a law, there is more regulation, more people involved, more taxes. Let's don't get government into everybody's business. It's not the obligation of the government to protect everybody from everything."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Ronan."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. Will the Sponsor yield for a few questions?" 44  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"He will yield."

"Representative Vinson, let's not talk about the rhetoric of this concept and let's not talk about some of your hypothetical examples. Let's talk about the facts. Do you believe that this law will save lives of citizens here in the State of Illinois?"

"No, I think it'll cost lives."

"Well, obviously, you're wrong on that state. There is no question about it. Alright, it will cost lives and we're going to have a tremendous..."

"You're right. It's going to cost lives."

"It's going to cost lives - your repeal. The legislation you're bringing before the General Assembly will cost probably 300 lives here in the State of Illinois."

"No. No. No. The mandatory seat belt law..."

"Representative Vinson, the Gentleman is speaking to the issue."

"Secondly, let's talk about..."

"Proceed."

"Let's talk about... let's talk about injuries. Representative Vinson, what do you think about injuries? Will your repeal cause increased injuries here in the State of Illinois?"

"My repeal will save lives and will save injuries."

"Well, Representative Vinson, you're wrong again. Not only is it going to cost lives, it's going to cost increased injuries. The statistics that have been documented in states and in countries that have instituted mandatory seat belts show that in each Legislative District here in the State of Illinois, three lives will be saved next year if we keep this law on the books. And over three hundred serious injuries will be prevented in every district. The Members of the General Assembly have a very 45  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 clear decision to make. If you want see residents of your district killed, if you want to see residents of your district maimed, if you want to cause serious injuries in your district, then vote for this bad concept. But if you really care about the people of your district and if you really care about the citizens of Illinois and if you really care about a safe driving environment that's going to show that we want to move this state in the right direction, you'll vote against this bad concept. This Sponsor has brought many unique ideas before the General Assembly this year, but this is a bad idea. It has no warrant, and it really moves us in the direction that Illinois should not be going. I'm appalled at this idea, and I hope that we all work together to defeat one of the worst Bills in this Session of the General Assembly. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Tate."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the flowers."

"You're welcome."

"Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, this issue certainly is not a new one, but this, without question, has to the most classic example of big brother government that we've ever had. The previous speaker had indicated this is an issue of one that strikes to the heart of safety and what's doing right for our constituents. If you really, truly believe we're here to do what's right for our contitents, then there's no question of how you should vote on this Bill, because what's right for the citizens of this state, what's safest for the citizens of this state are airbags. There's no questions. All the studies would indicate that air bags are much safer than seat belts. And what really the issue is here is... I guess, if you want to support GM and you want to support the auto makers here and 46  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 you... then you probably should vote against this Bill. But if you want to do what's right for your constituents, if you want to do what's right for the safety of your constituents, then you should vote against this Bill. There has been no other issue, since I've been down here in this General Assembly, that has generated the intensity from our constituents that this issue has. Just last night, I had a little old lady call me at 10:30 in the evening and said, if this Bill goes into effect, she'll leave the State of Illinois. Right here... right here are just letters and letters and petitions from constituents that want to see the repeal of this legislation. If you want to do what's right and if you want to represent your constituents, you should repeal this bad piece of legislation."

"The Gentleman from Sangamon, Representative Curran."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. We seem to have a difference of opinion about this... Ladies and Gentlemen, may I have your attention? We're talking about saving lives here. Alright? We seem to have a difference of opinion in this chamber as to whether this legislation is going to save lives or not. Mr. Vinson would have us believe that in spite of the experience of the State of New York, somehow it's going to be a miraculous difference here in Illinois and that if we have a seat belt law, it's actually going to cost us lives. Mr. Ronan has told you different. I'm telling you different. Common sense tells you different. I am going to propose, as an Amendment to legislation in just a minute, a study which, at the end of two years, will show us whether we are saving lives and whether we are preventing injuries here in Illinois. There may never be another time in your life when you can reach up and push a 47  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 button and save 500 lives or save 400 lives. There may never be another time in your life where you can reach up and push a button and prevent 30 or 40,000 injuries every year in one state. Now, this is a tough political decision for many of you. Many of you feel that a lot of the people who you represent don't want this law, and they don't. It is an unpopular law. You will probably never meet the people whose lives you have saved. You will probably never meet their children. You will probably never meet the people whose injuries you have prevented. You'll probably never meet their children or their families or their friends. And, yet, by your action, voting against this Bill, you can save hundreds of lives. You can prevent tens of thousands of injuries, if you've got the guts. Now, Ladies and Gentlemen, I know it's a very unpopular thing to do, to vote against the repeal of the seat belt law, but you've got to make a decision. You've got to decide if other people's lives are more important than your political career. I suggest that other people's lives are more important than your political career. I suggest that you vote 'no'. I suggest you have some guts. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Lee, Representative Olson."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker... or Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I'm speaking to you as a survivor. I've worn seat belts since 1952. That's longer than some of you are. Within nine months of my first installation of a seat belt, I had a tire blow off the front rim and I was headed for the woods in northern Wisconsin, but I managed to save my life. Eleven years ago, I was picking my wife up at a hospital in Monroe, Wisconsin. An Indiana motorist ran a 'T' intersection. I could hear the fan belts... I mean, the fan motor coming through the radiator and the radiator coming into the engine and the engine coming into 48  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the front seat. I was not injured because I was wearing a seat belt, and that was before the advent of the shoulder harness. Anyone who would posture and say that this legislation that we passed last year would not save lives is not being correct with you. As Representative Curran has spoken, this may be a courageous decision for you. We weren't sent down here to pander. We were sent down here to make tough decisions. I'm going to oppose this Bill."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Dunn."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. To get back to the other side of this issue, we seem to overlook the fact that the seat belts are in the car now. If you want to wear them, all you have to buckle them. I don't know that we need big brother to tell us we need to buckle them. And first... and more importantly, wait till your people back home find out what it's going to cost them. In our county, a 25 dollar traffic ticket, which is what is proposed here, will cost a total of 67 dollars by the time the court costs are added in. So what you're voting here for today is to... is to put a 67 dollar traffic ticket on the back of someone who happens to run to the grocery store and forgets to buckle the safety belt. I'm for safety belts. If we really were serious about wanting to require that people wear safety belts, seat belts, we could impose a five dollar warning fine that the officer could just... we could have meter maids like we have in our parking... We could have them run around town looking for people without seat belts and hit them with a five dollar ticket everytime they saw one. Eventually that would make people wear seat belts. This is... This is a sledgehammer approach, and it will prove to be very unpopular and it really isn't needed. If we're going to talk about safety, it's summertime now. If someone is 49  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 driving down the road toward me wearing a seat belt or not wearing a seat belt, they probably are no more a hazard one way or the other. But if they don't have their sunglasses on and they're driving into the sun, they might be a hazard to me. Maybe we ought to think about requiring everybody to wear sunglasses in the summertime. I think we... what we're hearing back home in our districts is that we overregulate. This is a classic example of going too far with regulation. We don't need this Bill, and I would... or we don't need the seat belt law, and I would urge the favorable passage of this Bill to send a message that we are responsive to what the people want. I urge an 'aye' vote."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. You know, this is the second Bill that Representative Vinson has sponsored that attempts to repeal a law that I have passed. The first one dealt with Wrigley Field. And when we debated that issue, we heard about Representative Vinson propound the interest of the Tribune Company, that big corporation up in Chicago. And we were talking about buzz words like free enterprise system and letting the Tribune Company having the right to play night games. And then when we get to this second Bill that he wishes to pass to repeal a law that I passed, he talks about these big corporations coming down here to Springfield, and you know what they're doing? Do you know what outrages him so much? They've hired lobbyists. They actually raised money and hired lobbyists to come down here and try to pass a Bill that's in this big corporation's best interest. Well, let's call 60 Minutes with this scoop. We've got all these Bills right here that I've 50  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 looked at throughout the Session, and we've got Bills that do unbelievable things for big corporations, give them tax breaks in the millions. And no one seems to get that upset about it, especially Representative Vinson. But these big corporations come down here and they hire lobbyists to try to pass a Bill and we're supposed to be outraged. Well, I've said, right from the start, I don't share their motivation. I don't share the big car manufacturers' motivation. I share their goals. Now, the other thing is that he mentions that's kind of ironic, that the Secretary of Transportation is in favor of killing this Bill, and he may have made a political promise to somebody in an effort to vote against the Bill. Now, isn't that... Give me a break. I mean, that's going to happen on just about every Bill from every Department within the State Government. And, once again, we all participate in that process. Now, when you think about it, to listen to some of the opponents, they say, 'Well, we don't know whether seat belts save lives or not. Sometimes they don't, sometimes they do.' As if it's a fifty-fifty proposition. That's ludicrous. If you look at all of the countries in Europe, in Australia and Ontario and New York State, you realize that the death rate goes down dramatically. We know that seat belts don't hurt people. If you took one instance when it did, you'd find 10,000 others where it saved the lives. We all know that. So, what's the next excuse we've got to come up with to try to justify being against this Bill? Well, we talk about freedom of choice. Last week, when we talked about a Motion to table this Amendment on this Bill, I heard Representative Friedrich talk about the right to... the people's right to control their own body, as if it was a pro-life/pro-choice vote. I mean, we have all these closet civil liberatarians from central Illinois 51  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 who all of sudden now are concerned about their freedom of choice, their freedom of right, their right to go out and kill themselves if they want to. It's very important to understand that this does not simply talk about the safety of the driver. This Bill talks about the safety of other... of pedestrians on the highway and of other drivers of other cars. It's very important. That's what makes the Bill constitutional, and that's what makes it important for the rest of the citizens of the state. Representative Johnson, in the past, has talked about where are we going stop? Where are we going to stop? Pretty soon we'll tell people what they can and cannot eat. We tell people what they can't put into their body. We have laws that deal with drugs. You can't put cocaine in your body. You can't put PCP in your body. You can't put marijuana in your body. The government says that you can't do that. There's no one down here that would think about repealing those laws. That's government intrusion. The real reason... Let's get down to it. The real reason why there's any talk about repealing this law is because, unfortunately, the public has not decided to wear their seat belts. Only about 12 percent wear their seat belts. I concede that. So, that means there's all these great percentages of our constituents who don't wear their seat belt. Now, I'm convinced that about three-quarters of them know they should wear their seat belt, and they don't mind if we tell them to do it. But it's that other 25 percent that's sitting down and writing these letters. And as I said before, I didn't mean to be facetious about it, if you went and took a poll up at the Rehabilitation Institute in Chicago, where half the people in there are there because they weren't wearing seat belts in cars, you'd get a different result than if you get on a country and western 52  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 radio station and have people call in. The fact of the matter is, people have told me, they've told the Governor that they don't remember to wear their seat belts; but, if they had the law, they'll be reminded to wear their seat belts. The Governor has indicated he has no intention of signing this Bill if it was to pass. It's going... It's going to go into effect on Sunday night at midnight. We know that. Even if this Bill passed, it's going to go into effect, and we're going to have the opportunity to see what's going to happen over the next year. And if it works like it worked in New York, where they have a 40... almost a 40 percent reduction in fatalities, a 75 percent usage rate of the seat belts, higher in the rural areas because they tend to follow the law a little better than ... unfortunately, than those of us in the cities, we're going to end up saving 350 to 500 lives, 40,000 injuries. And then we've got to listen to somebody say, 'Well, it's going to cost us 67 dollars for a fine.' It just doesn't make sense. When we talk about important Bills down here, we're talking about money. All these Bills deal with money. Just about every one of them. This one deals with money, true, and that's why the car manufacturers are here, but it also talks about saving the lives of many of our constituents and many... and saving the lives of those families that don't have to lose their loved ones. For that reason, we should vote against the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Representative Wolf."

"Madam Speaker, 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 53  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 question is put. Representative Vinson, to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I think that the emotions expressed in the course of this debate accurately reflect the emotions that people feel on this issue. There are three reasons why you will make up your mind on how you vote today. You may make up your mind on this issue because you've talked to Secretary 'Bays', or you may make up your mind because you've talked with an auto industry lobbyist, or you may make up your mind on this issue because you've listened to what your constituents think of a law that is the most obnoxious intrusion on their freedom this Assembly has ever perpetrated on them. If you make up your decision, if you make up your mind on the basis of what the people back home think, about their jealous concern for their individual freedom, then you're going to vote for this Bill, and then you're going to be able to go home and face those people in a Fourth of July parade. I ask you, what are you going to do in that Fourth of July parade if you vote 'no'? I urge an 'aye' vote on this Bill."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 610 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Representative Flinn, one minute to explain your vote."

"Well, Madam Speaker, I'm voting 'aye' on the Bill, and I'll tell you why. One of my constituents talked to me, and a number of them have talked to me about the buckle... seat belt law and why we wouldn't repeal it. He said, 'If you're going to leave that law on the books, why don't you add smoking, ban smoking? Smoking kills more people with heart attacks and emphysema each year than automobile accidents do.' He said, 'Why don't you ban drinking? You know, we tried that some years ago and that didn't work. 54  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 But why don't you try that? That breaks up families. That causes all kinds of problems that seat belts can't solve. Why don't we just tell people what they can do all the time, not part of the time, all of the time.'"

"The Lady from..."

"'Let's be a closed society.' And I couldn't answer his questions, so I voted 'aye' on this Bill."

"The Lady from Sangamon, Representative Oblinger."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker and Members of the General Assembly. It's amazing to me that we are reminded that we are to listen to our constituents. I represent a district right between Representative Tate's and Representative Vinson's, and I would invite you to come over and look at my book where I record my constituents. They're about fifty-fifty. There isn't an overwhelming cry from them that I should repeal the seat belt. It's a wonder that my constituents are so different from theirs."

"The Gentleman from Grundy, Representative Christensen."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. The people of my district have told me outright they're opposed to mandatory seat belts. First, we passed the safety belts... or safety seats for infants. Then we come up with seat belts in school buses. Now we come up with mandatory seat belts in the front seat for driver and passengers. The next thing you know somebody's going to come up with the idea that we have seat belts on bar stools. I think this is... I think this is one time that we ought to join with Sam Vinson and pass this Bill out of here."

"The Gentleman from Coles, Representative Weaver."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. If we would believe some of 55  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the previous speakers today in their true commitment to safety, we will expect to see some Bills asking us to put roll bars and to where helmets in our automobiles as well, because who can argue the safety factor of those facilities? What we have to do is maintain a balance between concern for the welfare of the drivers and concern for their personal freedoms. We can manipulate statistics, but the only statistic that really counts are the voters back home. If we are not sent here on the basis of listening to the people who send us here, I think we need to go back home. This is an intrusion of government. It's an invasion of personal choice. And it's unenforceable. And an unenforceable law is no longer a law. We need to vote this measure across. I vote 'aye'."

"The Gentleman from Effingham, Representative Hartke."

"Yes, Ma'am. This Bill is one of the hottest topics in my district, and I just completed a survey in my district and 77 percent of my constituents want me to vote to repeal this measure. I feel the law would be unworkable, and I think we're missing the point. You know, just because we pass a law, that's not going to save lives. People have got to want to do it. And in my district, they're totally opposed to this thing. So, why pass a law that, like Representative Weaver suggested, is unworkable? My law enforcement people say they don't know how they're going to enforce it. So, if they don't know how, why pass the thing? Now, the Governor has stated he's not going to sign this Bill, as I understand it, so we're going to have the law. But it's an indication, is it not, when we vote this Bill or approve of this Bill, to have the seat belt law repealed? I don't think the people of the State of Illinois want it, and that's why I'm supporting this 56  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 measure to repeal the Act."

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

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm sure glad I paid attention to the debate this morning; because, in doing so, I've learned that the city people don't obey the law as well as country people do. That was a courtesy of a Chicago Representative. I kind of like the idea of seat belts on bar stools. That makes more sense than this one; because, when you're sitting on a bar stool, maybe you're not in control of yourself. Truly a question of American freedom, the freedom to choose. I kind of resent those that remark that what we're really doing is saving lives here, and they stand before us nobly and tell us how many lives they're going to save. If they indeed want to save lives, why don't we just force everyone to have public transportation? Take away one more right. Take away the right to have their own car. And I'll guarantee you that we'll save lives. Take away their right to smoke cigarettes or the right not to exercise daily, their right not to have a good diet. And we can just regulate everything, and we'll have the healthiest, longest-living nation in the world. But that's not why my ancestors came here. They came here for a certain right to choose certain things. Now, I wear my seat belt and I encourage you to wear yours. And I think the public discussion will encourage people to wear their seat belts, but it's their choice. And if they choose not to, then so be it. So, I cast my vote 'yes'."

"The Gentleman from Franklin, Representative Rea, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. By the way, I've had my light on from the very beginning. I hope my light is working. As Cosponsor of the Amendment, I 57  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 strongly support this Bill. It's not that I don't believe in seat belts, but I think that instead of mandating, that if we truly want to do something and something that will be effective, we should provide more information and education as to the value, because there are times that, yes, it also may take one's life. And I heard one Sponsor or one person speak earlier that said that it saved their life. Well, I happened to be on the other end a few years ago, that, by not having a seat belt, I was probably saved because I was tossed out of the car and the car was completely, where I was sitting, was completely caved in and would probably not be here today if I'd have had my seat belt fastened. This does not mean that I don't think that in more cases than naught you probably should have your seat belt fastened. But if we want to do something, let's provide information and education. There's been over 50,000 signatures collected from one person in my district in opposition to the seat belt law. As I've traveled throughout this state, people are very much opposed, not that they're opposed to seat belts, but because of the mandating. I ask that you vote 'aye' on this. Let's put enough votes up there to pass this out of the House. Thank you."

"Gentleman from Will, Representative Regan."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I wear my seat belt. Then again, I think that everyone should. The statistics are rather clear, but it's your personal freedom, your personal choice. It's interesting to me that this Orwellian Bill came out of the House Session in 1984. How far can government go into the lives of personal freedoms? I'll tell you how far they can go. The next step will be that they'll force you to put padding on your bathtub and on your toilet seat because that's a very dangerous room in your house. They'll have 58  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 state inspectors to come in to check your step ladders in your home because that's a very dangerous part of home maintenance. You won't be able to change lightbulbs pretty soon because that's dangerous, as well, and God knows, light your gas grill. That should certainly be outlawed. I think that government has a right to educate the people in regards to what safety is, not legislate."

"The Lady from Lake, Representative Stern."

"Madam Speaker and Members of the House, I certainly vote against this repeal and I would say to you that I am following the dictates of my district. I have not received a single request to vote for the repeal, and I have quite a high stack of letters of people urging me to encourage the use of seat belts and to vote against the repeal. And just by the way, I have a roll bar in my car. Maybe that is next."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Parcells."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Here again two districts right next to each other seem to have different people living in them because I have had numerous requests to repeal this law, and my district is right next to Representative Stern's. I, myself, wear a seat belt. My neighbor told me that if this goes into law, he will be against the law. He will not wear his seat belt. His life was saved, as Representative Rea's was, because the motor ended up in the front seat where he would have been if he had had a seat belt on. He said, 'I don't care if you pass the law. I'm not going to wear it. I will die in the form I want to die and don't strap me into my car to die.' I would urge your 'aye' vote for this repeal."

"The Gentleman from Will, Representative Van Duyne, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. No one argues that the 59  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 seat belts wouldn't help or at least they're available, as John Dunn said, if you desire to use them. Hartke says, and I agree with him, that people have to be taught that they want to. Now, I propose that we do something, rather than negative, that we do something positive and hope that our insurance companies may develop some kind of a positive program wherein if you do have an accident and you can prove that the seat belt did save you and other people from harm, that maybe you might get a rebate or a little cut off on your premium. You know, all the argument and the worry on this Bill is kind of a joke in my mind, especially when we legalize abortion and throughout our country we're killing a million and a half little babies every year, and now we talk about seat belts."

"Ladies and Gentlemen, I'd like to introduce to you a former Member and the former Speaker of the House, Bill Redmond. Speaker Redmond? The Gentleman from McLean, Representative Ropp, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. This Bill, should it pass or not pass, will have done one good thing. It will encourage a number of people to wear seat belts by their own choice. If this Bill does not pass, then, in fact, everyone will be forced to wear seat belts. A year ago, when this Bill was brought up, I made one statement and I think it is still true today, that God has given all of us a brain. It's a real tragedy that we have to legislate on how to use it."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Washington, one minute to explain your vote."

"Yes, Madam Speaker, Members of the House, I voted the way I did, and I know many of my colleagues did also, but one thing that hasn't been said here today, that in your innercity urban areas, poor, plighted areas, many of 60  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the situations of those people have been misused and abused. And what am I saying? I'm saying simply that this would allow a more of a police state, give the policeman an excuse to go in and harrass people. And for that reason, I voted the way I did because I don't want to see any further privilege of being able to harrass individuals on a technicality of doing something which they're not. And for that reason, I voted 'no'."

"The Gentleman from... The Gentleman from... The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Huff, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I just wish, Ladies and Gentlemen, that we would regulate the utilities with the same fervor that we want to impose on people's personal freedoms. I'm voting for personal freedoms. I vote 'aye'."

"Ladies and Gentlemen, please come to order. We still have people who wish to explain their vote. Representative... Representative Ronan, for what reason do you rise?"

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. If this vote would get the requisite number of votes, I want to make sure we have a verification."

"Very good. Representative Greiman, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you. I was... I appreciate the opportunity to be recognized. I came into the chamber, and I didn't know what Bill was being debated. And I thought this was a 'Saturday Night Live' routine. I have rarely heard, honestly, such humerous analogies, such outrageous twisting of reason and logic that, you know, somehow we were going to, from this, from this very important Bill - and everybody has a very great deal of seriousness about it - 61  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 for that reason, I am going to vote for the repeal."

"The Gentleman from Kankakee, Representative Pangle, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. When we passed this Bill out a year ago, we all thought it was fine and great until we went home. And when we went home, we were asked by the people that elected us to come to Springfield, 'Why in the world would you vote for such a Bill?' I, too, have a lot of letters. In fact, I have 3100 people who signed petitions for the repeal and I've got three letters from people for the seat belt law. One previous speaker said that we are here to do the job for the public. That's exactly right. The reason that we have the Amendment, the reason that we have the repeal Amendment is simply because the public has told us over the last twelve months they want the Bill... the law repealed. And I would certainly hope we get a lot of green votes and get it repealed."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Young, Anthony Young."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. To explain my vote, I know some of my colleagues from the innercity have a concern that this Bill will lead to further and extra harrassment from the police and law enforcement agencies to the minorities, who we represent. But I'd like to point out that I think it's a matter of balancing interests and that extra harrassment that we will undoubtedly receive has to be outweighed by the very simple and plain fact that seat belts save lives and they will save lives in the innercity, as well as in the country. And I think this is a bad Bill, and I urge a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Preston, to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of 63  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 we're going to go to all these draconian things. That's the next step. Now, choice, of course, is another meaning for some people. And a lot of those people who are jumping up now talking about freedom of choice, purely, in other areas, aren't quite as concerned about freedom of choice. And apparently the people who care so desperately and deeply about civil rights and human rights, somehow when we got to the Order of Business where we deal with draconian civil rights, representing defendants' rights in criminal cases, somehow it just ebbs away, all that care and concern for individual rights. I really am touched that the Membership can have such great concern, such... that this is it. This is the cutting edge for American democracy. We live in an urban society. We have some things that we're not comfortable with. We have to recognize that we have to... sort of the life you save may be your own."

"Representative, your time is up."

"Thank you very much."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Wojcik, one minute to explain your vote."

"Yes, Madam Speaker and Members of the House, I think I'd like to point out a few things to the Members of the Assembly. Yesterday, we sat and we debated criminal law. If we vote against this, we will again be debating criminal law. We are going to be making the people of Illinois criminals, because they're not going to buckle up. I want to ask every one of you in this House, are you going to buckle up? Are you going to abide by the law? You can't be told what to do. The system will be tested. All it will do is create utter chaos, and we do speak of freedom. We do have freedom. That's what our forefathers were founded on, freedom of choice. Again, we're taking that choice away from the people in the State of Illinois. And 62  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the House. The United States Constitution leaves to the states the ability to, and the power, to legislate for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens. Well, we in Illinois in this General Assembly have taken that ball and run with it, and we run with it and we run with it and we run with it. We raise taxes. We hurt people. We throw money at problems that don't solve those problems. We raise penalties for crimes when it doesn't do any good. We create new crimes where there was no need to create new crimes. But rarely, very rarely, we come up with legislation that actually protects people. And we did that in this instance. We passed a seat belt law that simply was created for the purpose of saving lives and saving people from horrendous injury. That's what the seat belt law does..."

"Your time is up, Sir."

"Now we're faced with the repeal which is the outrage of all. I urge a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago, Representative Mulcahey, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am voting 'yes' because I think it's the right thing to do."

"Is there any further discussion? Any further explanation of votes? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 56 voting 'aye', 56 voting 'no' and 3 voting 'present'. Representative Vinson, for what reason do you rise?"

"Would you poll the absentees, Madam Speaker?"

"Poll the absentees, Mr. Clerk."

"Poll of the Absentees. Sutker. Terzich. Turner."

"Representative Terzich. Representative Terzich wishes to be recorded as voting 'present'. Representative... Representative Vitek, for what reason do 64  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 you rise?"

"How am I recorded?"

"How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"The Gentleman's recorded as voting 'present'."

"Vote me 'no'."

Speaker Breslin: "Representative Vitek votes 'no'. Representative McAuliffe, for what reason do you rise? Representative McAuliffe changes his vote from 'present' to : 'no'. Representative Nash, for what reason do you rise?"

"How am I recorded?"

"'Present'."

"Vote me 'no', please."

"The Gentleman changes his vote from 'present' to 'no'. Representative Turner, for what reason do you rise?"

"Record me 'aye', please."

"Record Representative Turner as voting 'aye'. Mr. Clerk, what's the count? On this question there are 57 voting 'aye', 59 voting 'no' and 1 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having failed to receive the necessary Majority is... Representative Vinson, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, I do not want to put this on Postponed Consideration."

"You do want to?"

"I do not want to."

"Very good. This Bill, having failed to receive the necessary Majority, is hereby declared lost. Senate Bill 755, Representative Preston. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 755, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Preston."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of 65  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the House. What Senate Bill 755 does is to give the regional superintendent of schools the authority to issue a school bus driver permit to transport children to and from child care facilities and to hold out certain criteria for the establishment... or to hold out criteria for issuance of that permit. Included in the criteria that the regional superintendent of education will have for the issuance of these bus driving permits is to make it similar to the requirements for school bus drivers and to require those criteria to be met, to have the driver of the child care facility bus be 21 years of age or older, that they have a valid driver's license, that they have no record of revocations or suspensions of that driver's license within the previous three year period and so on. And I'd be glad to answer any questions, and I ask for your 'aye' vote."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 755. And on that question, the Gentleman from Adams, Representative Mays."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Will the Gentleman yield for a question?"

"He will."

"When we discussed this Bill on Second Reading, there was a series of questions that I asked that, after review of the Bill, we felt were unanswered. And the answer we received... the questions pertained to the use of volunteers in driving for day care centers on special trips and things like that. And the questions centered, would those people need to be licensed under this Bill? Now, the response that we got at this time, correct me if I'm wrong, was that, no, you did not feel they would need to be licensed under that Bill. We then had staff meet with each other. Are you still certain of that response, Representative?" 66  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"That is my... I'm certain of nothing. I'm ... That is my belief, that that response is still valid."

"Okay. To the Bill. This... The Sponsor is sincere and very well-intentioned in this piece of legislation, and I have no qualm with the intent. I do believe that the questions we raised, however, were valid, the response, and it is still a questioned response, would indicate that indeed a voluteer driving for a day care center on a day trip or a trip to the zoo or something like that may, indeed, have to be licensed under this Bill. There's another Bill that's pending on Second Reading in the House, sponsored by Representative Young, with the same intent, although the language is much more clear on this particular aspect. And for that reason, I personally am going to oppose this Bill in hopes that we can vote for Representative Young's, which is much more clear on that point that we raised on Second Reading when the Amendment to this Bill was being considered."

"The Gentleman from McHenry, Representative Klemm."

"Yes, will the Sponsor yield, please?"

"He will."

"Just for legislative intent, Representative, two instances that I can think of that was called to my attention. One is that we have a small and local taxi cab company that does some picking up children, taking to day care centers. Would they be required to be licensed in addition to their regular licensing provision?"

"Representative Klemm, I'd have to ask you one question before I can answer that. Are these taxi cabs hired by the parents of the children or by the day care facility?"

"By the parents."

"Well, by the parents, then the answer is no, they would 67  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 not. However, if it was the day care facility that hired the taxi cabs, they would have to meet this criteria. And incidentally, the criteria here for issuance of that license is not terribly stringent at all."

"Alright. Then the second request for clarification for your legislative intent would be, again, for the volunteers or a neighbor who has their child driving to the day care center, picks up one or two neighbors to take to the day care center. Would that person, in your legislation, be required to be licensed?"

"Absolutely not. Again, if they are doing this as an agent of the day care facility, then that driver would have to have this license. If they are doing it as a parent who is accommodating other parents whose children are going to the same destination, this law doesn't affect them at all."

"So it's only those that are provided for by the licensed day care center for transportation purposes."

"That is correct."

"Thank you very much."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 755 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 94 voting 'aye', 18 voting 'no' and 1 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a brief, very brief, introduction by Representative Tate."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. It's my pleasure today to introduce Ms. Rhonda 'Cullison', a 1985 graduate of Decatur McAurthur High School, participated in the student council, class council, cheerleading, band, softball, gymnastics and other 68  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 activities while in high school. Ms. 'Cullison' was named 'Who's-Who' among American high school students, received the 'Lyle' Music Award, and she's accumulated 278 dollars while working as a counselor in East Bay Camp Nursing Home Special Olympics. Ms. 'Cullison' is Miss Teenager Illinois. Let's have her... give a warm welcome."

Rhonda 'Cullison': "First of all, I'd like to say that I'm very honored to be here today. I grew up in Illinois, so, to me, Illinois is home. I was born in Decatur, the soy bean capital of the world, also known as 'Pride of the Prairie'. You, as leaders of our government body, are faced with many decisions, and I pray that God will direct you throughout this Session. Thanks to you this is what Illinois... you've made a great state. I'm very honored to represent Illinois at the National Pageant, and I hope my dream of becoming Miss National Teenager will come true. But regardless whether I win the title or not, they will remember us here in Illinois. Thank you."

"The next Bill on this Order of Call is Senate Bill 756. Does Representative O'Connell have leave to present this Bill for Representative Ronan? Hearing no objection, the Gentleman has leave. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 756, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Vehicle Code. Has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Repr... Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, O'Connell - Ronan, amends Senate Bill..."

"Representative O'Connell."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Amendment #1 is essentially... or is the Bill. It is a very significant piece of legislation which, for the first time in many, 69  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 many years, has addressed modernization of the Illinois Commercial Transportation Law. Hence, the name for this Act is the Illinois Commercial Transportation Act. It takes out of the Utility Section of the Illinois Revised Statutes and places it into Chapter 95.5 provisions... or strike that - creates its own Section 18-(c) which is the Illinois Commercial Transportation Act. It is the result of numerous meetings and conferences between every facet of individual who represents or has any dealings with commercial transportation, trucking, as well as railroad, in this state. It is an agreed Bill, endorsed by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, United Transportation Union, International Brotherhood of Railway and Airline Clerks, the Illinois Railroad Association, the Illinois Trucking Association, the Midwest Truckers' Association, the Illinois Movers' and Warehousemen's Association, the Small Truckers' Alliance, the Illinois Intrastate Motor Carrier Rate and Tariff Bureau, 'Mack and Wriggle' law firm, representing a number of transportation clients, Transportation Consulting and Services and Cost-Cutter Consultants and, by all means, it is endorsed by the Illinois Commerce Commission whose staff should be commended for its deliberation and analysis into an area which is quite esoteric and quite detailed."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 756. And on the question, the Gentleman from Adams... no. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Levin."

"Would the Gentleman yield for a question?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Representative, I believe that in the Sections that you're changing were the provisions that we passed several years ago regulating towing services, like Lincoln Towing 70  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 and so on. Does this affect that, and do you make any substantive changes in the regulation of towing services?"

"Representative, what it does in that Section, it reduces from 72 to 24 hours the requirements for free storage."

"For what?"

"Free storage of the towed vehicle."

"That's the only change it makes?"

"That's the only substantive change with regards to tow trucks."

"Okay. Thank you."

"Is there any further discussion? The Gentleman from Madison, Representative McPike."

"Only for a comment, Madam Speaker. Since no one on the House floor, on either the Republican or the Democratic side, has read this Amendment, it probably should go to Interim Study and we should probably devote some time to this issue next year like we did on telecommunications and on... and on the energy portion of the Bill. It's unfortunate that sometimes the General Assembly becomes so bogged down in other matters that we can't devote enough time to every issue. This seems to have been one of those issues. And hopefully we'll be able to take a better look at this next year. I recognize the Bill is going to pass, but I don't think that means that we're not going to come back and take a better look at this next year."

"The Gentleman from Adams, Representative Mays."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. The Sponsor of this Amendment is absolutely correct. This issue has been under study and under review by any number of associations as well as the Illinois Commerce Commission for the last two years. A lot of movement has occurred in the last five or six weeks, but this Bill... or this Amendment, if adopted, 71  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 would put this Bill into the identical form that House Bill 2196 was in when it was before this chamber about three or four weeks ago. And, you know, I'm not saying there won't be any further fine tuning of a piece of legislation like this as the years follow. It seems like we very seldom hold anything sacrosanct after the passage date of a given Bill, but I think this is the best effort as a culmination of any... of a couple of years on this topic and the involvement of any number of groups affected by this legislation. So, I would urge the approval of this Amendment and hopefully the passage of the Bill on Third Reading."

"Representative Ronan, on the question. Representative Ronan."

"Okay. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I, too, rise in support of this Amendment. As has been stated, a tremendous amount of work has gone into this concept. Some Members of the General Assembly have reviewed it. We feel it's a fair compromise, and we feel it moves a long way in establishing transportation policy here for the State of Illinois. I move for the adoption of Amendment #1."

"Is that considered a close? Are you closing on the Amendment? The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 756 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?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative O'Connell."

"Representative O'Connell."

"Madam Speaker, I'd like leave to withdraw Amendment #2."

"Withdraw Amendment #2. Are there any further 72  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. The Gentleman now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 756 on Third Reading as amended. Are there any objections? Hearing no objections, the Gentleman has leave. Proceed, Representative Ronan. Read the Bill, excuse me, first."

"Senate Bill 756, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Ronan."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. We basically discussed the Bill. The Amendment is the Bill. A tremendous amount of time and effort has gone into it by the Commerce Commission, the railroad industry, the trucking industry. No one is completely satisfied with what's come out, but it's an important move in the right direction. I think transportation policy in Illinois has been well served by this concept. I applaud Representative O'Connell for his hard work on the measure, and I look forward to a large number of green votes on this fine Bill."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 756. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 756 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 88 voting 'aye', 1 voting 'no' and 26 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 771, Representative Friedrich. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 771, a Bill for an Act to amend 73  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Friedrich. Representative Friedrich."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to table Amendment #1. This has been worked on by both the Secretary of State and the Department of Transportation..."

"Excuse me, Representative. This Bill is on the Order of Third Reading. The Gentleman now asks leave..."

"Yes, I would like to move it back to Second."

"... to return this Bill to the Order of Second Reading for the purposes of an Amendment."

"Thank you."

"Does the Gentleman have leave? Hearing no objection, the Gentleman has leave. Read the Bill on Second, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 771, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Vehicle Code. This Bill has been read a second time previously."

"Are there any... read... Are there any Motions filed?"

"A Motion to table Amendment #1, by Representative Friedrich."

"Representative Friedrich moves to table Amendent #1 to Senate Bill 771. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 be tabled?' 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 tabled. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Amendment #2 was withdrawn. Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Friedrich."

"Representative Friedrich." 74  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Madam Speaker, this becomes the Bill. It has to do with the Financial Responsibility Law. There has been some problems. This is operated, as you know, by the... both the Department of Transportation, who gets the original accident report, and then reports to the Secretary of State. Because of the procedure in the present law, there's a long delay, and sometimes it's up to six months before the driver is really... loses his license or furnishes financial responsibility filing. This speeds up the procedure. It is an agreed between the two, and I think it will cut the time down to about 100 days. So, I move the adoption of Amendment #3."

"The Gentleman has moved the adoption of Amendment #3 to Senate Bill... Correct the board, Mr. Clerk. The Gentleman has moved the adoption of Amendment #3 to Senate Bill 771. This is an Amendment, not a tabling Motion. The question is, 'Shall Amendment #3 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Representative Friedrich now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 771 as amended on Third Reading. Does the Gentleman have leave? Hearing no objection, the Gentleman has leave. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 771, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Friedrich."

"As I previously explained, Madam Speaker, this deals with the Financial Responsibility Law. It will simplify the process. We have about 20,000 drivers out there now 75  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 who have been involved in an accident with no insurance. And this should cut the time down to about 60 days before they receive notice that they'll either have to comply with the law or have their license suspended. I would appreciate your vote."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 771. And on the question, the Gentleman from Knox, Representative Hawkinson."

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

"He will."

"How does it cut down... is it going to cut down the time period?"

"It's going to cut down the... It requires the Department of Transportation to notify the Secretary of State that they do have a report, a person has been involved in an accident and the report shows they have no insurance. And that's to be done within 45 days."

"Does it, in any way, change the requirements as to how an individual would comply with the law or the notices that that individual will receive?"

"He'll get his first notice at the end of 45 days that he could be subject to the law if he does not prove that he had insurance at the time."

"And that notice will be from the Secretary of State's Office?"

"It will... The original notice may come from the Department of Transportation saying they're notifying the Secretary of State that their report shows they have no insurance. The responsibility of seeing that he has insurance in the finality will be at the Secretary of State and there's a suspension provision also."

"But there's no change in the requirements as to how 76  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 they fulfill their responsibilities or the time period or how they completely satisfy of get out from under the suspension?"

"No, they have to have the release and insurance and so on, the same as it is now."

"Thank you."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 771 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? 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. Senate Bill 1229, Representative Shaw. It appears on page 22 on your Calendar. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 1229, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. This Bill has been read a second time previously. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

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

"Representative Ronan. Representative Ronan. Representative Shaw, what is your pleasure?"

"Madam Speaker, could we pass this and come back to it?"

"We'll take this Bill out of the record. Representative Friedrich, there are two Bills that have been added to this Order of Business with agreement on both sides of the aisle. We would like to go to those two Bills first. Representative Friedrich."

"Madam Speaker, the... the Minority Leader has asked 77  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 that we have the Conference now. I'm sorry. I thought this would be the end of it."

"They have agreed for two other Bills added to the Call. So, we will get back to that as soon as we finish. I understand Representative Ronan is back. So we will go back to Senate Bill 1229. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 1229, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. This Bill has been read a second time previously. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Floor Amendments?"

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

"Representative Ronan."

"Oh, the... yes, Madam Speaker. Amendment #2 is a request that came to me from the Secretary of State's Office to clean up the Bill as I amended in Committee, and I was happy to accept the Amendment. I move for its adoption."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 1229. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to 1229 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. Representative Ronan now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 1229 as amended. Are there any objections? Hearing no objections, the Gentleman has leave. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 1229, a Bill for an Act to amend 78  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Ronan."

"I'll be glad to handle this Bill for Representative Shaw. He and I have worked extensively on it during this Session. Basically what this Bill does is it deals with the issue of summons that are issued in municipalities. It clarifies two points in the law. It allows firms that handle this matter to be able to mail out multiple warrants which will cut down their expenses. And, secondly, it deals with the Secretary of State's Office in its ability to deal with warrants. I'll be glad to answer any questions concerning the legislation. I think it's an important concept for the city and the State of Illinois. I move for the passage of Senate Bill 1229."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 1229. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. To the Bill. We debated a similar Bill earlier in the year which gave the City of Chicago the right to suspend drivers' licenses on the mere existence of parking violations when they were ten or more or where there were two or more warrants outstanding. This Bill differs in a couple of respects. One, it makes it 20 tickets, but it still doesn't require convictions. It still doesn't require an identification of whether the party whose license is being suspended is the same party guilty of the parking violation. It still doesn't require any due process hearing before a suspension. It still doesn't require any of those things. Now, there's a second part to the Bill which apparently some company in Chicago or the Chicago area has requested which allows for the suspension upon the final judgment for a parking violation. 79  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Now that's added to the Bill. That's an improvement to the Bill, but it's an alternative to the Bill. So, we still have the objectionable Section in the first part of Amendment #2. Making it 20 tickets doesn't make it any less objectionable. There is still no due process. There's still no right to a hearing. And this Bill is something that the City of Chicago wants for revenue, and they don't care if due process is included in it. It still isn't there. It's still a bad Bill. We should defeat it again."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Bullock."

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

"He will."

"Yes."

"Representative Ronan, is what counsel McCracken said about this Bill correct? And, if so, is there a hardship provision?"

"Representative Bullock, what Representative McCracken has said is partially correct. He's somewhat correct in his analysis, as he normally is. What we've done here is we've raised the provision to 20 violations. How is someone going to make 20 mistakes without notification? I think that we've got a serious problem, not only in the City of Chicago, but around the state with people who don't tend to obey our parking laws, and we're talking about 20 violations have to be issued before this Bill kicks into effect with the Secretary of State's Office. So, I feel that there is a situation where at some point we have to act as rational, reasonable human beings; and, when 20 violations occur, that individual obviously in that vehicle has abused the law to a sufficient degree that there should 80  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 be action taken by the State of Illinois."

"But, Representative Ronan, my question is, Mr. McCracken, who I think is certainly a learned individual and is exhibiting some concern here for civil liberties of all citizens, in fact, if a person owns a car, is not driving it, and gets an auto ticket, your Bill would say that that person is liable for those tickets whether they were driving the car or not. And my question is, is in this Bill a hardship provision for an individual who, by chance circumstance, may need his driver's license to gain employment or to maintain employment? Is there any provision in the Bill for that?"

"No, there is not, Representative Bullock, but we're not talking about an individual who drives a vehicle and makes a mistake. We're talking about 20 violations on the law. Okay, Representative Bullock?"

"Well, I mean a parking..."

"We're not talking about an individual whose young person takes a car out one evening and then parks in a no parking zone and gets a ticket. We're talking about continued misuse of a vehicle."

"One last question."

"Twenty misuses."

"One last question. Is there anything in the statute that would speak to the hardship issue as it relates to this Bill, even though it's not in your Bill?"

"No, there' nothing in the statute, to my knowledge, that speaks to the issue of hardship, but I'll be glad to look at that as a concept and you and I can work on that for the rest of the Session."

"Well, I don't make a habit of opposing Representative Ronan, who I have tremendous respect for. I don't know where he picked this Bill up, and I don't know why 81  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Representative Shaw is proceeding with this Amendment. Because, if there's not a provision in here for hardship, we are, in fact, doing exactly what Representative McCracken has indicated. And I happen to think he's absolutely right, and I'm sorry that I can't agree with Representative Ronan and Shaw who I think are absolutely wrong. We cannot say that a parking violation, in fact, subjects an individual to the rescission of their license, without a trial, mind you, and at the same time, not provide any provisions for hardship if those individuals need for gainful employment their driver's license. I think this is a very serious enfringement on the rights and liberties of individuals. I know that the Sponsor is as concerned as I am about individual liberties. But in this particular case, Al, I've got to agree with McCracken and urge a 'no' vote."

"Representative Ronan. Representative Ronan, Representative Daniels has indicated that they would like to have a Republican Conference at this moment. I would request that you would take the Bill out of the record and we can come back and deal with it immediately thereafter."

"That will be fine."

"Thank you very much. This Bill is out of the record. Representative Friedrich, for a Motion. Representative Friedrich, for your request."

"Madam Speaker, I would like for a 30 minute recess for the purpose of a Republican Conference in Room 118 immediately."

"How long will it take, Representative Friedrich?"

"Thirty minutes."

"Okay. The Gentleman has requested 30 minutes for a Republican Conference. That will be held immediately 82  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 in Room 118. I must make an announcement, however, Ladies and Gentlemen, for the benefit especially of the Republican side of the aisle. I have been advised by the Speaker of the House that this day he has called Representative Daniels and that call has not been returned. This House is in recess until a quarter after twelve. You have 30 minutes. We're in recess."

"The House will be in Session. A Message 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 concurred with the House in passage of Bills of the following title, together with Amendments, and the adoption of which I am instructed to ask concurrence of the House, to wit; House Bills #38, 69, 82, 83, 100, 112, 137, 150, 152, 167, 182, 204, 228, 253, 261, 264, 269, 270, 301, 340, 408, 419, 467, 489, 578, 621, 714, 743, 807, 809, 833, 851, 852, 864, 879, 882, 889, 891, 894, 950, 968, 986, 997, 1016, 1035, 1039, 1059, 1079, 1104, 1142, 1177, 1204, 1208, 1212, 1249, 1265, 1301, 1356, 1362, 1382, 1392, 1411, 1412, 1455, 1458, 1491, 1500, 1544, 1555, 1578, 1654, 1680, 1714, 1769, 1806, 1813, 1833, 1849, 1860, 1889, 1901, 1918, 1925, 1944, 1948, 1951, 1955, 1962, 1969, 2032, 2106, 2113, 2129, 2132, 2181, 2217, 2219, 2273, 2275, 2276, 2349, 2368, 2407, 2414, 2436... 2431, 2436 and 2450, passed the Senate as amended June 24, 1985. Kenneth Wright, Secretary.'"

"We were, I believe, on the Order of Special Call - Transportation. Senate Bill 1229 is... Mr. Clerk, is that on Second Reading still or Third? That's on Third Reading. Alright. That Bill will just be out of the record for a couple of minutes, and we'll get right back to that Bill. So, on the Order of Transportation, Special 83  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Call, appears Senate Bill 1091. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 1091, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Panayotovich. Second Reading of the Bill."

"This Bill has been read a second time previously. Amendment #1 was adopted previously."

"Are any Floor Amendments?"

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

"The Gentleman from Sangamon, Mr. Curran."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Amendment #2 simply determines that the Department of Transportation will tell us and the Governor and our Legislative Leaders whether we are saving lives and preventing injuries by using seat belts in Illinois. It's the kind of thing we had a discussion here about not too long ago. I think we all have a right to know it. I think we have a responsibility to know it. This Amendment sets forth the determining factors as to how we will get that information at the end of two years. I ask for an 'aye' vote."

"Gentleman from Sangamon, Mr. Curran, moves for the adoption of Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 1091. And on that, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Lake, Mr. Churchill."

"Will the Gentleman yield?"

"Indicates he'll yield for a question."

"Representative Curran, how is this effectiveness of the mandatory seat belt law to be accounted for?"

"We simply ask the Department of Transportation to let us know whether we're saving lives or preventing injuries. I 84  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 think that's the kind of thing that I would want to know. I would imagine you'd want to know. And that's what this Bill does... this Amendment does."

"So, is there some type of data that is to be provided, and what type of data is that?"

"We ask the Department of Transportation, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the State Police, to compile statistics regarding the lives saved by the requirements of the seat belt law."

"And so then you're asking them to investigate every situation in which there's been an accident, or are you asking them just to compare figures with one year versus the past year?"

"You know, the truth is I'm not familiar enough with the way they conduct their business to give you that answer. I'm simply asking them to come up with the information. I don't know enough about how the Department of Transportation runs its statistics to know the answer to that. I think we all want to know, though."

"Do you have any idea what the cost of this would be?"

"Can't image it would be very much at all. I imagine that most the statistics are available on a regular basis anyway through the Department of Transportation. This simply sets forth a mechanism whereby at the end of a two year period, we get that information presented to us so that if we want to make any changes in the seat belt law, we can then make them. And we can make them on an enlightened basis."

"Mr. Speaker, to the Amendment. I think the concept of finding out the effect of the seat belt law is one that I'd like to find out, too. I just question whether or not the Amendment really is going to produce that type of result. Without putting in some standards that we're 85  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 measuring, whether we're measuring traffic fatalities, those with and without seat belts or if we're measuring one year's effectiveness versus the other year's effectiveness, I don't really see how we're going to be able to come up with accurate figures to determines whether or not seat belts have saved lives. I think what we want to go is really get accurate figures, and I just don't think this Amendment does it."

"Mr. Leverenz."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of the Amendment. The Bureau of Traffic Safety already keeps a broad laundry list of statistics, and it would be very simple for them simply to add the question, use of seat belts - yes or no, to the information that they already document. And it may be that in the forms that they are printing currently for current use, they have already, on their own, added that column to continue to get the same information that they have been, as well as to find out if seat belts were in use at the time the injury or fatality occurred. So, I would solicit everyone's 'aye' vote for the Amendment."

"Gentleman from Macoupin, Mr. Hannig. Mr. Panayotovich."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. As the Sponsor of the Bill, in working with the Secretary of State's Office on this, I rise in support. The Secretary of State gave me this Bill, and we pulled it back off the Consent Calendar for a couple of Amendments and they don't see any problem with it. So, I hope that we can adopt this Amendment and move for an 'aye'."

"Question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 be adopted?' Okay. Mr. Tate."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?" 86  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"He indicates he will."

"Mike, I know you've already indicated that you're not really sure how the Department... Apparently, in this Amendment, you're not recommending what kind of data the Department uses. Is that correct?"

"Mike, in the Amendment, we are not determining specifically how the innerworkings of the Department of Transportation would be changed. It is my understanding now from talking to staff, the Department of Transportation already intends to develop the kind of information that we want. This Amendment sets forth the way that information should get to us, as Members of the General Assembly, in two years so that we can know whether what we've done, that is passage of the seat belt law, is saving lives and preventing injuries. I cannot imagine any person in this room who would not want to know that."

"I can appreciate that. I'm not rising to oppose the Amendment. I'm just trying to... I do, however, have some reservations because what you're directing is the Department of Transportation, which, you know, we all know that Greg 'Bays' was in favor of the... and the Department was in favor of the seat belt law and so was the Secretary of State. However, that doesn't concern me, in terms of a biased report. What I am concerned with though is whether we're going to... to determine an objective report, how we're approaching that and the vehicle that we're setting up to deliver that information. I'm not... In fact, I'm not totally sure we wouldn't be better off... insurance companies often have... In fact, there was recently, after last year, the insurance companies released statistics trying to determine that. And do you have any idea whether the Department of Insurance wouldn't have a better capability of working with? Because, one statistic they 87  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 used was insurance claims. Like, I heard the statistic that there were projections, supposedly, that there would be a... like 40,000 fewer claims if we had a seat belt law. But if you can address for me that question and in addition to that if anyone knows what kind of information that Transportation and the Secretary of State has to give us a report back. That's what I'm really trying to find out."

"First, it is my understanding the Department of Transportation intends to change its form to include the kind of statistical data that we need here, so that starting on or about July 1, they would be having a different accident form that would say whether people were wearing their seat belts or not. That's first. Second, it is my understanding that the insurance companies get their information from the Department of Transportation. And so they would... And so, what we would be getting from insurance companies would really be information we've already given to them. It's simply a way for that information, which we all know that we need, to get back to us and simply a formal way to declare that it should come to us at the end of two years so that we can be enlightened about our choice of having mandatory seat belts in this state, so that we can know whether seat belts are saving lives and preventing injuries, which we all hope it will do."

"Al, just one more question. One more question. The... My last question then is the final report that they will submit to us which will be on or before October 1, 1987, explain to me what... what that report... basically what information we'll basically be provided with. Is this going to be like a relative or comparison type thing where like before seat belts and then after seat belts, one of those?" 88  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"I think it's with seat belts and without seat belts. And I'm not going to get into the fine tuning of how the professionals in the Department of Transportation... they have an Office of Transportation Safety. I don't want to get into those details. I don't think that's our business here. What those... What the Department of Transportation will do is tell us that as of the statistics that are compiled by July 1, 1987, which will get on October 1, 1987 or before, whether we're saving lives and preventing injuries. I don't know any other way to say it. I'm not suggesting that your questions are insincere or misdirected. It just seems to me that we should leave that matter up to the Department of Transportation."

"No problem."

"Gentleman from Adams, Mr. Mays."

"Thank you very much... Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Would the Gentleman yield for a question?"

"He indicates he will."

"Mike, was Amendment #1 adopted to this Bill?"

"I believe that is was, Jeff."

"Or was that withdrawn? Because I notice that Amendment #2 incorporates the language of Amendment #1 within it. What does that Section of Amendment #2 do?"

"Amendment #2 determines that the Department..."

"That Section that pertains to... I think it incorporates Amendment #1 within it. What does that do?"

"Yes, I asked the Legislative Reference Bureau yesterday. They said that if we did not incorporate the language in Amendment #1, effectively we'd be gutting the Bill. I had that conversation yesterday afternoon. It simply makes it technically correct, Jeff. I called on that exact matter because Representative Mautino asked me about what you are now asking me." 99  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Okay. So, even though Amendment #1 was adopted, Amendment #2 had to contain those same provisions to be technically correct. Is that correct?"

"I talked to somebody named Stewart whose last name begins with an F. I can't remember. 'Fararra', or something like that."

"Okay."

"From the Legislative Reference Bureau. He told me that yesterday afternoon."

"Okay. And then just to the Section of the Amendment that is yours. Why October 1 and July 1?"

"July 1..."

"Of '87? Why not before then so that we could consider the stats in a timely manner before this Assembly so that, you know, we wouldn't have to go through all the rules and things like that to get around... finding is that indeed this has not saved the lives or has not done that? Why these dates?"

"Usually these things are checked out at the end of three or five years, Jeff. In this case, I wanted to move it up to two years so that we would know at the end of two years. That's the reason for July 1, 1987. It gives us two years of statistics. The reason for October 1 is then to give them 90 days to compile those statistics in some way that are meaningful to us, give them to us before the Veto Session of that year."

"Thank you."

"Mr. Mulcahey."

"Move the previous question."

"No, it's not necessary. The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 be adopted?' Those in favor say 'aye', opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Amendment's adopted. Further Amendment?" 90  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Panayotovich, moves to... asks leave of the House, using the Attendance Roll Call, to waive Rule 37(c) so the Bill may be heard at this time. Does the Gentleman have leave? The Gentleman has leave. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill on Third Reading."

"Senate Bill 1091, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Panayotovich."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Secretary of State's Office is having a problematic... a problem with the recordkeeping on suspensions of drivers' license and registration on a two year period. This Bill corrected that problem. It was put on the Consent Calendar out of Committee, and we brought it back for a couple of technical Amendments, and also Representative Curran's Amendment. I move for immediate passage."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Panayotovich, has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 1091. On that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open, and this is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 109... 111 voting 'aye', 1 voting 'no', none voting 'present', and this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On the Order of Senate Bills Special Call - Transportation appears Senate Bill 379. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 379, a Bill for an Act to amend 91  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Kulas, on Senate Bill 379."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 379 amends the Illinois Vehicle Code. This Bill came to us from the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, and all the Bill does is it specifies that drivers' licenses may be suspended or revoked by the Secretary of State for convictions of traffic related offenses which occur on military installations within Illinois. At the present time, the Secretary of State does do this, and all this Bill would do would give them the statutory permission. And I would ask for a favorable Roll Call."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Kulas, has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 379. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open, and this is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 114 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. We'll return to this Order of Business later in the day. On the Order of Special Call - Elections appears Senate Bill 506. Mr. Terzich. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. The Bill is, I believe, on Second Reading."

"Senate Bill 506, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Election Code. This Bill has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Yes, is there any Floor Amendments?" 92  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

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

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Terzich, on Amendment #1."

"I don't have a copy of Amendment #1, but I would move that we adopt Amendment #1."

"The Gentleman from Cook moves for the adoption of Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 506. On that, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Leverenz."

"What's it do?"

"What is does, it simply deletes the 10 percent, and inserting in lieu of 10 percent of that, and by changing line nine through 11, in lieu of school district, and on page 12 by deleting 'election'. It's just a minor technical Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Vinson."

"Representative, DeWitt."

"I'm sorry. What, Sir?"

"DeWitt. You said the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Vinson. It's DeWitt."

"Oh, I thought you said... Yes, the Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Clinton... Mr. Clinton... Mr... Wait a minute. Mr. Vinson."

"It's alright, Mr. Speaker. That's the least of the mistakes that have been made in that Chair in the past two days. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly, I rise in strong opposition to Floor Amendment #1 to this Bill. What Floor Amendment #1 does is to take away power from the people. What the Bill does is to reduce the number of petition signatures to... for the people to put a referendum on the ballot. The Bill reduces it to eight percent. The Amendment raises it back to 10 percent, where it is now. What you're doing if you vote for this 93  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendment, and I would request a Roll Call vote - you're taking power away from the people. I don't think that's right, and I would urge a 'no' vote on the Amendment."

"The Gentleman... The Lady from Cook, Ms. Braun."

"I have a question of the Sponsor."

"Proceed."

"Representative, is there any specific situation which gave rise to your interest in making referenda more difficult? I mean, what... why do we have this Bill?"

"Am I on? Alright. Well, what I'm doing... this Amendment is simply going to restore it back to basically what the present requirement is. That's all."

"But..."

"Who am I speaking to?"

"Carol Braun."

"Oh, hi, Carol."

"How are you? Is there a specific situation which gave rise to the underlying Bill, as well as the Amendment, in making referenda more difficult? I'm... I can't figure out why we have this legislation, or if there is something specific that you're trying to address... issue."

"Well, this... Number one, no, this is not my Bill. I mean, this is a Senate Bill. It's not mine."

"Alright."

"I want you to understand that, and I just want to restore it right back to where it presently is, with the 10 percent for good government."

"Thank you."

"Mr. Piel."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Gentleman yield to a question, please?"

"Indicates he will." 94  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Representative, basically what you want to do is, you want to put the Amendment on - correct me if I'm wrong - but you want to put the Amendment on to bring it back to almost exactly what it is presently, but if you put an Amendment on, then you've got a potential vehicle over in the Senate. Is this correct?"

"Well, I don't know if you'd have a potential vehicle over in the Senate, but you certainly have a good Sponsor over in the House, so I wouldn't let that happen."

"So basically, you know, you're in favor of the Bill, but if you don't amend it, then it goes right to the Governor. So you were going to put the thing back in the original form. They're going to disagree with it, because they've already passed the thing out, and it's going to come back here. You're going to disagree with them, and then you're going to go into Conference Committee with the Bill. Right?"

"Well, I don't believe so. I think that they would..."

"But I think the Bill... the reason... the way the Bill is right now, you've got a Bill that's a... you know, basically, as one of the speakers before said, it's a people's Bill. It's a situation to where it will, you know, let the people have their voice heard in a lot easier manner. And what you want to do is move it back to where it's going to be hard for the local, small individual to have his voice heard. Isn't this right?"

"Well, Representative, it's also my option. I don't have to call the Bill either, I mean, as far as the Amendment is concerned, and it still would stay in that same place. I think it's a good Amendment, and I would move to adopt it."

"Well, the way the Bill states before the Amendment, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, it's a... it's 95  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 a situation to where it will help the little man, the little woman, who wants to have their voice heard through government. What the... the Sponsor of the Amendment wants to do is bring the Bill back into the original form and basically the way the law states right now. So, the individual, what it does, it creates more signatures needed for an advisory referendum. If the citizens throughout the state want to have an advisory referendum right now, it's 10 percent. The Bill came over here at an eight percent figure. The Sponsor wants to raise it back to 10 percent, and I would ask for defeat of the Amendment, and I would also ask for a Roll Call on the Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Terzich, to close."

"Well, again, the Bill provides that the petitions requesting at a local question of a public policy be placed on a ballot must contain signature in equal, and I want to change that to 10 percent of the votes cast in the political subdivision proceeding. The Bill allows the governing body of a political subdivision to authorize submission of this question. There are presently no policy on that. This is a good Amendment, and I would move for its adoption."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 be adopted?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. Sorry, Bob. Yes, Representative Terzich?"

"No, you know, I don't know why they think this is a vehicle, because I'll tell you right now, if the Bill... if it's not amended, I'm just going to table the Bill anyhow, so I don't know why they vote 'no'."

"Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 16 voting 'aye', 87 voting 'no', 6 voting 96  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 'present', and the Amendment fails. Further Amendment?"

"No further Amendments."

"Thank you. Third Reading. We'll get back to it, Mr. Terzich, unless... Alright. Next, Special Call - Agriculture. On that Order appears Senate Bill 418. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 418, a Bill for an Act relating to the regulation of rivers, lakes and streams in the State of Illinois. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Effingham, Mr. Hartke."

"Yes, Senate Bill 418 provides that no permit shall be required to drain lands used for agricultural purposes. It is supported by the Farm Bureau and the Illinois Environmental Council, and I would... answer any questions. If not, I'd appreciate an affirmative vote."

"The Gentleman from Effingham moves for the passage of Senate Bill 418. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by... I'm sorry, Mr. Ryder. I didn't see your light. The Gentleman from Jersey, Mr. Ryder."

"Thank you for recognizing, Mr. Speaker. I understand that may have happened at other times in the past. Representative, I'd like to ask some questions, please. Will the Gentleman yield?"

"Indicates he will."

"Thank you very much. What is the law now about draining of agricultural areas? Is this something that's regulated by the State of Illinois?"

"Yes, the Department of Transportation requires a permit for certain drainage areas and so forth. This would eliminate that need for a permit."

"Is there a cost to the permit?" 37  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Not that I'm aware of."

"Alright. Are there limits on the amount of land that can be drained? Are we talking about 40 acres or 1,000?"

"Depends upon the area."

"Are there limits now?"

"Yes."

"Okay. So we're removing those limits."

"No, we're limiting them to ten square miles in certain drainage areas and one square mile in urban areas."

"But we're basically kicking the Department of Transportation out of the farmers drainage area. Is that correct?"

"That's a fact."

"That sounds like a good idea to me. Thank you."

"The Lady from Cook, Ms. Braun."

"Thank you. Representative Hartke, I'm kind of confused, because it looks like the Senate Amendment to the Bill said that you had to have a permit from IDOT, and that it preempted local governments from being able to make decisions about their streams and lakes and rivers."

"No, this eliminates the permit requirement for agricultural land."

"Okay, and it..."

"It eliminates it. Eliminates it."

"Okay, but is there a preemption in the Bill?"

"What do you mean by that?"

"Pardon? I'm sorry. What was your answer?"

"What do you mean by that?"

"A preemption."

"You mean home rule?"

"Right."

"I'm not sure."

"Could you check?" 98  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"I would think that... I would think that they have the... they have the right, still, for that permit requirement."

"Alright. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Mr. McPike."

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

"Indicates that he will."

"It... It appears that the Bill requires permits for all water related construction. I think it would be our concern that even the smallest project, for example, building a boat dock in Lake Michigan, would require that type of permit. My question is, does DOT's rule making power take care of this concern? Will they be able to make rules that get around these common sense problems?"

"I think that's the intent, yes."

"I don't know if it's intent, but the question is, do they have that authority, or does this need an Amendment?"

"No, I think they have that authority."

"They have the authority to adopt administrative rules sufficient to create exemptions?"

"That they do, but this... this exempts farmers from that requirement."

"What I'm looking for is a 'yes' answer to this. On page six of the Bill, 'The Department of Transportation may make such reasonable rules and regulations as be... as may be necessary to administer this Act.' 'To administer this Act.' Does that cover the intentions and the problem that I just raised?"

"If you're looking for a... 'yes' answer, you got it."

"The answer is 'yes'?"

"Yes."

"Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Young." 99  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

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

"Indicates that he will yield for a question."

"I'm not quite sure I understand. What is the state of the law right now, Representative?"

"The law right now requires that a farmer must get a permit to clean his ditches in his field, his drainage areas and drainage structures, and we feel that's... that's not necessary at all. The Department sometimes grants these permits. Sometimes it does not, and we think it's undue harrassment of the farmer's right to drain his ground."

"Okay. As far as the Bill relates to units of local government, what is the status of the law right now?"

"This does not give the units of local government any... DOT any authority over units of local government - any new authority at all."

"As I read Senate Amendment #1, it seems to say that a unit of local government could not do anything without permission from Department of Transportation."

"This does not give the DOT any new authority that it already has over this... this..."

"Okay. My analysis says that this Amendment provides that no unit of local government shall undertake construction in a public body of water without a permit from DOT. Is that a faulty analysis?"

"That's... That's current law now, and we're not exempting that. This just reiterates current law."

"The Gentleman from Livingston, Mr. Ewing."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I would like to make some comments that may clear some of the questions about this Bill. The Department of Transportation, a number of years ago, set forth some rules and regulations without going through the hearing process, 100  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 without going through JCAR, to try and regulate all manner of drainage in this state. It has been very poorly and spasmatically enforced throughout this state, and now, there is a new effort by the Department to enforce that as it refers to farm drainage. And it can deal even with a farmer putting a tile in his field and taking it to an outlet. The Farm Bureau is concerned about that type of regulation. They are concerned about it, because they feel that the Department really lacks the authority to do it. This Bill is set out to clear that up and to limit the Department's authority to issue rules and regulations and to direct all of these small drainage projects, whether it be a farmer putting in a waterway or a small tile outlet to a drainage ditch. I think it's a good Bill. It is supported by the Farm Bureau, and I would ask for your support."

"The Lady from Lake, Ms. Frederick."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, would the Sponsor yield for a question? Representative..."

"He indicates... Yes... for a question."

"Representative, does this Amendment have anything to do with coastal zone management?"

"Excuse me. I didn't understand the question, or I didn't hear the question."

"Alright. Does this Amendment have anything to do with coastal zone management, which is management of private property along a lake?"

"Absolutely not."

"Thank you very much."

"The Lady from Cook, Ms. Braun. Did you speak on this before?"

"Mr. Speaker, I had asked a question that the Sponsor had not answered, and I just read the Bill. And I think it's 101  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 been clarified, and so I'd like to clarify it. There apparently is a preemption in this legislation. However, the preemption exists already in current law, as I understand it, and the legislation only cleans up an existing preemption that is in the law. Is that correct, Representative Hartke?"

"I think that's what I said."

"Okay. Thank you."

"Mr. Kulas."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. On Senate Bill 418, a lot of people did a lot of work. The Department of Transportation worked together with the Farm Bureau, with the Illinois Environmental Council who also supports this Bill, even though it does give the... give the farmers the right to do it without permit, but it does call for environmentally responsible techniques to be used, and I would ask for a favorable Roll Call."

"The Gentleman from Edgar, Mr. Woodyard."

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

"Indicates he will."

"Yes, I know there was a lot of controversy surrounding the... the indication that the Department of Transportation was going to be able to promulgate rules and regulations on farm drainage districts. Now, does this Amendment, Chuck, grandfather in the existing drainage districts and exempt them from rule promulgation? And if that's correct, would any new drainage districts being formed fall under the purview of promulgation of rules and regulations by the Department of Transportation?"

"Yes, Mr. Hartke?"

"This... This does not grandfather in any existing drainage districts, but it..." 102  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"What the question is, would it exempt from permits existing drainage districts?"

"Not if they're going to make a substansive (sic - substantial) change in the drainage system."

"Oh, I thought that..."

"That would... That would affect over ten..."

"Ten square miles. Yeah."

"Right."

"Oh, I thought that's what Farm Bureau was opposed to, to start with."

"The maintenance, they're okay, of those districts." Woodyard: - "Yeah, the maintenance, but..."

"New... New construction over that ten square miles, would still require a permit."

"Even... It would require permitting from IDOT, if it fell within the criteria of the twelve square mile interpretation of what is maintenance and what is construction."

"New construction."

"New construction."

"Maintenance, no."

"Okay. Okay. Then that would require a permit."

"New construction would."

"Yeah."

"Not maintenance of that..."

"Okay."

"Of that ditch."

"Do you know what the... Have the professional engineers or consulting engineers - do they support this Bill? Or do you know?"

"Yes, they do. Yes, they do. Yes."

"Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Boone, Mr. Wait." 103  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd just like to stand in support of this. I've worked on this Bill quite a bit, and while it's not exactly all that the farmers were asking for, here, it is a compromise between the conservation people, the Farm Bureau and many other parties here. I think it's a good Bill, and we should support the Sponsor on this, because it will help to solve a lot of problems that we've had out there. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cole, Mr. Weaver."

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

"He indicates that he will."

"Representative, on this Bill, would a farmer who is clearing brush to provide for additional or improved drainage be required - as the Bill is amended - would he be required to obtain a permit from DOT?"

"He would not need a permit if it was a prior improved channel. In other words, if he has... if he has a drainage ditch that has, you know, has grown up in weeds and brush and trees and so forth, he could go in and clean that out."

"That would not..."

"No permit."

"That would not be considered construction."

"No, that's not construction. That's maintenance."

"Okay. Well, as I understand it, that is part of where this problem arose, is that some modification of the drainage area would be considered construction, but you're telling me that..."

"Right. But..."

"But you're telling me that this Bill..."

"Under the current rules, he would need a permit, but this would eliminate that..."

"Okay."

"... need for that permit to maintain that." 104  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"I'm all for it. Thank you."

"Mr. Hartke to close."

"Yes, I might remind the Body that this... this Bill passed through the Senate 59 to nothing, and I really thought there would be very few questions on this, but everyone is enlightened now. I'd appreciate an affirm vote."

"The question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 109 voting 'aye', 6 voting 'no', and none voting 'present', and this Bill, having received the Constitutional... Harris votes 'aye'. Harris 'aye'. Mr. Friedrich, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Mr. Speaker, you've just received a Hollywood candy bar. That's the fifth largest candy company in the world. It's from Centralia."

"Well, if we could just let me declare this, and then we'll get back to you for a commercial. On this question, there are 110 voting 'aye', 6 voting 'no', none voting 'present', and this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Yes, Mr. Friedrich, the Gentleman from Marion."

"You had most of my commercial already. We just wanted you to enjoy a Hollywood Candy Company bar. They're the fifth largest in the world, and they're in Centralia. And they're expanding, and we're proud of them. And we think you ought to be, too."

"Now... We move now to Special Call - Games of Chance. And on that Order appears Senate Bill 1375. Clerk, read the Bill." 105  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Senate Bill 1375, a Bill for an Act to authorize off-track pari-mutuel wagering in Illinois. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago, Mr. Giorgi."

"Mr. Speaker, as the House well knows, Senate Bill 1375 is just a shell Bill now, and it's going to have to go back to the Senate for concurrence of the Leaders and the Governor's Office and the interested parties so that a comprehensive Bill can be written that we can all live with if we're going to have off-track betting. So I'd the Assembly to support me and send this Bill to the Senate."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago, Mr. Giorgi, moves for the passage of Senate Bill 1375. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. This is final action for the moment. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question... The Lady from LaSalle, Ms. Breslin, votes 'aye'. Mr. McCracken votes 'aye'. Mr. Leverenz votes 'aye'. Ms. Alexander votes 'aye'. Mr. Pedersen votes 'aye'. Mr. Stephens votes 'aye'. Mr. LeFlore votes 'aye'. Mr. Homer? Mr. Homer votes 'no'. Mr. Curran votes 'no'. Mr. Davis votes 'no'. Mr. Saltsman votes 'aye'. Braun... Ms. Braun votes 'aye'. Alright. We're going to dump this Roll Call. There's just too many changes. I can... We can no longer have an accurate count, and I know it's important to have an accurate count. On this... The question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' Those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. This is, again, final action. Mr. Cullerton."

"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker, just to explain my vote. 106  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Just so people understand, to reiterate, this is a shell Bill on off-track betting. The Bill was passed out of the Senate and we've entered into - and I say 'we' - we're going to have a meeting in the Governor's Office tomorrow with representatives of the all the Legislative Leaders to see if we can work out an agreement with regard to this. If it can't be worked out, there's going to be no Bill. All this is is a shell Bill, a vehicle which will be nonconcurred with in the Senate, and there will be a Conference Committee with regard to this issue. So it's... You're not voting for anything that's bad. It doesn't... The Bill doesn't say anything. It just amends the Horse Racing Act."

"Mr. Vinson?"

"Mr. Speaker, this is nothing more than a vehicle for off-track betting, and I would urge a 'no' vote on the subject and would request a verification, should it appear to get the requisite number of votes."

"Mr. DeJaegher."

"Ladies and Gentlemen, the Sponsor of the Bill, Representative Cullerton, both of them have explained to you that basically this is a shell Bill. The Governor of the State of Illinois is concerned what racing is doing, the income it's generating today. All this is basically is for a period of review. You're really doing nothing with this particular Bill at the present time. All we're doing is trying to exercise options. Let the Governor decide basically which way we should go pertaining to pari-mutuel betting. I think that all of us must agree to this, that something has to be done with the racing industry in the State of Illinois. For that reason, I encourage each and every one of you. You're not committing yourself to nothing at the present time. Give us a green vote. Let us 107  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 decide the issue. See what these issues are going to bring. Then we can respond to that particular question."

"Have all... Have all voted who wish? Mr. Bullock, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was off the floor and didn't know this Bill was called. I join with Representative Vinson in verifying the Roll Call, and I guarantee you, if you vote for this Bill, you're voting to take money away from the county fairs. You're voting for a subsidy for the super rich. You're voting to subsidize individuals that draw salaries of $2,000 a week. One owner, in fact, in the State of Illinois, has a family of four that draws a half million dollars before taxes, before the reports to the state. Some individuals from districts in Southern Illinois say that they are against gaming, in fact, say that they are against subsidizing the super rich, but they are voting 'aye' on this Bill. Representative Vinson and I will assure you that the Roll Call on this Bill will get the maximum exposure because it clearly is a subsidy for the super rich. The State of Illinois cannot afford to bail out an industry that clearly will not clean up its house, will not clean up its act. If you send this vehicle out of here to the Senate, you are preparing to tell the citizens of your district, back in your district, that you want to subsidize an industry that clearly is not being fair with the taxpayers of our state, and it's an irresponsible vote, and you should vote 'no'."

"Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Ms. Zwick, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members of the House, I would simply say to you that it doesn't seem to me to be terribly responsible at this point to be cutting off the debate and 108  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 discussion on a Bill that has such great possibilities for enhancing the revenues of the State of Illinois. I know we all think it's... many out there think it's late in the Session, but it's really pretty early in the Session. We haven't discussed this measure as thoroughly as we should. I don't think it's appropriate for us to be saying 'no' to off-track betting at this point, before we have any real Bill before us, and I think the responsible thing to do is at least continue the debate on this measure by voting it out of here today so that it can continue. You will have an opportunity to vote against it at a later point, should any real proposal come forth. So I would simply urge you to vote 'yes' on this measure at this time."

"Mr. Huff, one minute to explain your vote." Huff:: "Yes, Mr. Speaker, with regards to this issue, I'm reminded of an admonition from the Bible that says that it's easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to gain entrance into heaven. But with this issue, the rich won't mind going to hell, I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, if they can go by way of Illinois. The red vote is the right vote."

"Have all voted who wish? Mr. Cullerton? Mr. Cullerton wishes to change his vote..."

"Yes, normally, I don't do this, but at the request of the Speaker, I will change my vote to 'no'."

"Mr. Cullerton votes 'no'. Mr... The board is still open. Ms. Currie, change me to 'no'. Mr. Turner. Mr. Turner, you're 'no'. You were already 'no'. Mr. Mautino, one minute to explain your vote."

"I can see what the power of... the Leadership has in this case, but I'd like to remind our downstate Legislators that in order to get something out of this Session, we're going to have to put some chips on the table. Is that... 109  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 okay. Alright."

"Mr. Leverenz, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A few weeks ago, at the end of moving House Bills out of the House, we got to the point where we tried to move a few vehicles for the appropriations process, and all of a sudden, it all broke down, and we couldn't move a few vehicles over to the Senate. And it all depends in this process on compromise, and we have to move Bills to get to the point where we can have something in final form to vote on. I would encourage the Members of this side of the aisle that if we cannot make the process work, we'll have to scrutinize the Bills that come before us in the coming days, and we can play the same game, and maybe even better, and to kill a few Bills. And so, I would encourage my colleagues to look for Bills to send to an early grave. Thank you."

"Speaker Madigan, to explain his vote."

"Mr. Speaker, in explaining my 'no' vote, at the beginning of the Roll Call, I was recorded as 'aye' in an effort to move this stripped Bill to the Senate, where it could be put to a Conference Committee. The Bill currently provides nothing. It is a stripped Bill. The Bill is a proposal from Governor Thompson. It emanated from Governor Thompson's task force on the horse racing industry, and I am prepared to work with the Governor, which I have told him, and to work with the other Legislative Leaders to attempt to fashion a Bill that can be acceptable to the General Assembly, but I will not participate in political games designed to gain political advantage in some future election. And so, therefore, I wish to be recorded 'no', and if there is a legitimate effort to revive this Bill, then we can revive it under agreement. Thank you."

"Have all voted who wish? Have all... Yes, the 110  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Gentleman from DuPage, Minority Leader Daniels. Mr. Daniels."

"This is a telephone call to Mike. Amen."

"Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 2 voting 'aye', 94 voting 'no', 21 voting 'present', and the Bill fails. Special Call - Human Services. On that Order appears Senate Bill 295. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 295, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. White, on Senate Bill 295."

"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, we had a thorough discussion on this piece of legislation a few nights ago, and all it does is change the name of a category of social workers. And I ask for favorable consideration of this piece of legislation."

"The Gentleman from Cook has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 295. And on that, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Lake, Mr. Churchill."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to rise and say that we did have a thorough discussion on this issue. There were some concerns that I had and some concerns that some of the Members of this side of the aisle had. I believe those have now been cleared, and I would stand in support of the Sponsor's Motion."

"The question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All in favor vote 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 113 voting 'aye', none voting 111  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 'no', 2 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On the Order of... Special Call - Human Services appears Senate Bill 653. Mr. Bullock? Mr. Bullock? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 653, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Bullock."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 653 as amended basically deals with the subject of child abuse and the reporting of child abuse in a uniform manner, and the Amendment to the Bill would ensure that uniformity in those forms used by employers, and that there be actual knowledge of the act and its reporting requirements. I don't need to suggest to Members of this Assembly the epidemic that abounds in our society today as it relates to abused children, abused and neglected children. This Bill attempts, in some small measure, to add to the list of professional and state agencies required to report cases of abuse, including neglect. This mandates that employers merely sign a statement indicating their knowledge and their responsibility to report, and persons mandated to report who knowingly fail to report this, in fact, commit a disorderly conduct charge. Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly, I urge its adoption and an 'aye' vote."

"Representative Breslin in the Chair."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 653. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. The 112  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Bill as originally drawn was a requirement that a person working for a particular type of provider or employer would acknowledge his duties to report abuse as required by the Act. I don't know if DCFS was the author of that Bill originally, but it certainly supported it. The Amendment adopted in the House requires that DCFS distribute copies of the Act to all employers, in addition to the original requirement that the statement of the employees of the particular employer sign a statement acknowledging their duties thereunder. The Department is opposed to that Amendment; and, because it's on the Bill, is opposed to the Bill. It's estimated that the cost of reproducing the Act and mailing it to the estimated 50,000 persons involved, or employers or parties involved, or 500,000 forms would be about $340,000. I submit that although the intent is very good, and there's no quarreling with that, the fact of the matter is that it goes beyond what is necessary to inform those mandated under the law that they, in fact, have that duty to report suspected cases of abuse. I think the original Bill served that purpose, and I think in voting on that, you should consider this. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Dunn."

"Will the Sponsor yield for a question?"

"He will."

"Does this Bill - and I think while I was waiting to speak, I think I see the answer. I want it clarified. Does this Bill provide that someone who is charged with the responsibility of reporting child abuse must, before they themselves are subjected to a criminal penalty, must knowingly fail to make a report. Is that correct?"

"Representative Bullock."

"That is correct, Representative Dunn."

"One other question. Are there guidelines someplace that 113  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 provide the people who are supposed to report child abuse with some guidelines about what constitutes child abuse for the purpose of making a report, what triggers a report and what doesn't, or is this a case by case judgment call on the part of all these people?"

"No, the Department of Children and Family Services, Representative Dunn, is required to distribute the pamphlet explaining this."

"I can't hear you. Required to what?"

"DCFS is required to promulgate and distribute the guidelines that you refer to."

"Thank you."

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

"Madam Speaker, I ask for a favorable vote."

"The Gentleman... The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 653 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 98... 99 voting 'aye', 17 voting 'no', and 1 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Ladies and Gentlemen, Representative Hensel will take the Chair now for the purpose of an introduction. Representative Hensel."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. It gives me great pleasure today to introduce to you some people from St. Charles, Illinois, which is in my district. We have a Resolution, a Joint Resolution, Senate and House, which I won't read so we can move right along, but the swim team from St. Charles High School coached by Dave Bart, won state championships in 1979, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1984 and 1985. 114  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 And at this time, I'd like to present Dave Bart, who will introduce the members of his swimming team."

"Thank you. I would like to introduce to you the people that represented St. Charles at the state meet this year. Before that, I'd like to introduce my assistant coaches, and I'll just kind of wave their way... your way when I announce their name. First is our diving coach, John Mizanin; then my two assistant coaches, Ken Pearson and Angie Vallejo. And these are the swimmers and divers which were at the state champions for us: Rick Williams, David Fix, Rich Foster, Andy Edmondson, Fred Westhoff, Mike Lambert, Jay Zuber, Aaron Turner, Mark Wainwright, and our last member, Mike Avolio."

"Thank you, Members of the House, and now we can get back to the Order of Business, and I appreciate everything that they've done for us. Thank you."

"Ladies and Gentlemen, the next Order of Business is Senior Citizens, Disabled Persons. The first Bill is Representative Soliz' Bill, Senate Bill 954. It appears on page nine on your Calendar. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 954, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Act on Aging. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Soliz."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 954 is a Bill that will provide for the establishment or a study of the establishment of an affirmative action program for senior citizens in the State of Illinois. It would authorize the Department of Aging to enter into a contract with a university or higher education institution to study the issue of whether there can be implemented in the State of Illinois an affirmative action program to further the employment opportunities of senior 115  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 citizens, those over the age of 60, and what we decided to do as a result of several... an Amendment that was introduced by Representative Oblinger is to ensure that the senior citizens that would, in fact, benefit from this program, would engage in professions to which they would be able to find employment, not those that they would be prohibited from seeking employment given their age. For example, there is an Amendment which would prohibit them or would exclude the provisions of the affirmative action programs from participation in careers such as policemen or firemen or other professions where we all recognize that perhaps age could be a factor and could prohibit their becoming gainfully employed in these... these professions. So, what we are trying to do with this Bill is essentially enter into a study through the Department of Aging to study the issue of whether employment opportunities can be furthered, can be expanded, can be promoted by the Department of Aging for senior citizens or those over 60 years old, and I ask for an affirmative vote on this... on this issue."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 954. On that question, Representative Frederick."

"Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I, too, rise in support of Senate Bill 954. After much discussion in the Committee, we came up with this compromise, which is a very good compromise, and I urge you to vote 'aye' on this Bill."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 954 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all... Representative Wojcik, for what reason do you rise?"

"I have a question of the Sponsor."

"Did you put on your light?" 116  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"It's on."

"Representative Wojcik, proceed with the question."

"Representative Soliz, could you tell me the Department on Aging's feelings regarding this Bill?"

"The Department of Aging was concerned first that they didn't have the personnel to be able to handle the study. One of the reasons for the Amendment, I believe it was #1, was to authorize them to contract the study out to an institution of higher learning. And so, that particular concern has been rectified. The second concern was that they didn't have the money to be able to finance the study. They indicated that they need approximately $30,000 - 20 to $30,000 to fund this... this study. What we have done in the Department of Aging budget is to include an Amendment which would essentially fund or provide the funds for the study. And so, that Amendment was approved in the Appropriations Committee. So, I believe that all of their concerns have been addressed, and I don't think that they would be opposed to this Amendment."

"Thank you very much."

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

"I would ask the Speaker if he would leave for a question, please."

"He will yield. Proceed."

"Representative, I just want to make it clear in my mind what this study is before I vote. Is this study for... if affirmative action is possible for senior citizens? Is that what this study is?"

"What this study would essentially do is explore the possibilities, the opportunities for those over 60 years old... to enter into the employment areas that they may be 117  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 qualified to enter into. There was a concern that we don't want to mislead our senior citizens, and that was the reason for Amendment #2, I believe. This would, of course, provide for a study into employment opportunities where it's forseeable that senior citizens could be engaged in fruitful employment opportunities."

"You mentioned affirmative action before. Is that in the Bill, or was that just a terminology that you used?"

"I don't recall whether that's the exact terminology used in the Bill, but what we are providing for here is employment opportunities or the study of employment opportunities for senior citizens. And there was a feeling, I think, in Committee that there are, in fact, many opportunities or employment fields in which senior citizens can gainfully be employed. However, because there... these fields or these professions or these careers are not... they're not informed of these opportunities, they are... they are not able to take advantage of them. So, what we want to do, basically, is have a... the Department of Aging study the issue. We want to be able to discover what these opportunities are. I don't... I'm not sure that I know what they are in any particularity, but I know that our senior citizens have not lost all opportunity to be gainfully employed at the age of 60 or any age... particular age, and many of them are... can, in fact, be gainfully employed, and what we seek to do here is basically identify those opportunities for them and then implement a program whereby they can become gainfully employed."

"Thank you."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 954 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who 118  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 110 voting 'aye', 3 voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. Representative Flowers wishes to vote 'aye'. There... And Representative Huff votes 'aye'. There are, therefore, 112 voting 'aye', 3 voting 'no' and none voting 'present', and this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. The next Special Order that we will go to deals with insurance. Excuse me. The next Order deals with civil law. But it is a very short Order of Call. The first Bill is Senate Bill 164, Representative.. The next Bill is Senate Bill 887, Representative O'Connell. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 887, a Bill for an Act to amend the Code of Civil Procedure. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative O'Connell."

"Madam Speaker, I would defer to my hyphenated Sponsor, Representative Hartke, who is a non-lawyer and stands a much better chance of passing this Bill than I."

"Representative Hartke."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. Senate Bill 887 is a Bill that requires that if a woman, wife, seeks an abortion, that she must have her husband's permission, a 24 hour... give a 24 hour notice before an abortion can be performed. My fellow Members, I feel that the father of the unborn child has an equal right as well as the woman to at least have an option on this operation. I urge that you give a vote for life for this Bill."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 887. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton."

"Yes, will the Sponsor yield?"

"He will yield for a question." 119  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Representative O'Connell... Oh, Hartke. Representative Hartke, normally I don't... I just didn't understand this Bill. If... There was a House Amendment adopted to the Bill. Is that correct?"

"Yes. A House Amendment?"

"Yes."

"Well, I'm not sure, but there's a Senate Amendment to it."

"Okay. Okay. There was a House Amendment that allows for an injunction... Okay. First of all... Let's start over. Maybe you could just tell me what the Senate Bill does first, and then I'll ask you about the House Amendment. Okay, maybe... Let me tell you what I think it does and see if this makes sense. It allows the spouse, who is the father of an unborn child, to receive an injunction that would prevent the mother from having an abortion if the child is viable. Is that... Does that sound right?"

"That's correct."

"Okay. It allows for a court to hear testimony on both the husband's... father's behalf and the mother's behalf when the father wishes to prevent this abortion and to issue an injunction when the father's interest outweighs the interest of the mother's. But this only deals with a viable child... fetus. So, my question would be, when can you get an abortion, now, of a viable fetus? I thought it was only when the court finds that the mother's life or health are in danger. I thought that's the only time you could... that a woman can get an abortion now. Okay, and that's the question. Maybe Representative Pullen can answer that. I really, honestly, am asking this question, not to... I'm going to vote 'present', you know, like I always do. I'm just curious... Madam Speaker, perhaps 120  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Representative Pullen could answer this question, then."

"Is the Lady a Sponsor of the Bill?"

"I don't know. O'Connor... O'Connell looks to me like the Sponsor."

"I'm sorry. The rules provide that the Sponsor will answer questions. If the Lady would like to speak in debate, she can surely be recognized."

"Representative O'Connell is a Sponsor. Perhaps he can answer the question."

"Representative Pullen has been... is, I understand, is indicated one of the five Sponsors. So, Representative Pullen, in answer to the questions."

"If I can rephrase the question. My understanding now is, the only time that you can have an abortion of a viable fetus would be if... if there is a... finding that the mother's life or health are in danger. And so, I didn't understand this Bill because it would allow for an injunction to be granted at the request of the father to preclude a viable fetus from being aborted, but if the only time that a viable fetus could be aborted would be if the mother's life was in danger, then that... when would this Bill be necessary? So that's... that's the question I have. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the current law. Perhaps Representative Pullen or McCracken can answer it."

"This Bill provides for the right of the father to seek an injunction when the baby is viable, late term abortions, and the exemption... the exception is when the mother's life or physical health are in danger. That is a tighter exemption than the Supreme Court guideline that allows abortions up until labor is completed and delivery is made when the mother's life or health is in danger, because the word 'health' has been used as a loophole for a Mack truck." 121  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"You mean, they're allowing abortions of... in the third trimester?"

"Yes."

"When the mother's life is not at stake?"

"Yes."

"What type of... what are they using as the definition of 'health'?"

"It can include mental health, which can include anything from aggravation and inconvenience on up to, literally, a mental problem."

"Couldn't... Would it be unconstitutional for us to pass a law that just defines health as 'physical health'?"

"This does not prohibit... unfortunately, this does not prohibit abortions under that situation. It grants the father of the baby the right to seek an injunction, and then, it is still up to the court whether, in particular circumstances, the father can receive that injunction."

"Okay. I understand the purpose of the Bill. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative... The Lady from Cook, Representative Currie, on the question."

"Before yesterday's action in this House to adopt House Amendment 1, it could have been argued that this was a silly Bill, since present state statutes do not permit abortions in the third trimester unless the life, the health, the safety of the mother is threatened. That's the law. We certainly could have argued there was no point in offering another kind of judicial action to make sure that our laws were adequately enforced, but that would have been the major argument against this Bill. With yesterday's action, to say that the life, the health of the mother is restricted to physical health, to physical life, 122  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1995 that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. This Bill is not only a senseless one, since it seems to say that, never mind giving birth to a child may turn the woman into a psychotic and, therefore, perhaps somebody who ought not to be taking care of that child. In addition, this Bill is flatly unconstitutional. Too often in this Legislature, we have cheerfully spent taxpayer dollars in a fruitless pursuit of some kind of notion that we know will be struck down in the courts. I don't know how much we've spent in this Legislature of our taxpayer dollars to play games in courts of law, games in this area that we know we're going to lose. When are we going to wake up and say that we have better ways to spend our taxpayer dollars, better ways in education, for example, in human services, to see that these babies that are born are given a proper chance to make it in this world? Here we are, a state that is 48th on the list in terms of infant mortality. We do a crummy job with the babies that come into our jurisdiction after they are born, and here we are, wasting our time on Senate Bill 887, a law that, under the Danforth Decision by the United States Supreme Court, will clearly be held unconstitutional. It's a waste of money. It's a waste of time, and it's taking us and our people in altogether the wrong direction."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Preston."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. What I object to in Senate Bill 887 is the possibility that a mother may be allowed to die or suffer very grievous permanent injury while a spouse, for good reasons or vindictive reasons, seeks to file a lawsuit asking for injunctive relief, and in the delay period, where a temporary restraining order may be issued, perhaps 123  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 even without notice to that mother, without giving that mother an opportunity to hire a lawyer to go into court and argue against the temporary restraining order, that temporary restraining order against an abortion may be issued by the court, setting a hearing within 10 days, and in that 10 day period, a mother's life or health may be in such danger that there may be irreparable harm done to her while the court process is dragging on. That could have been cured in this legislation. It would have been easy to say in this Bill, to add a sentence or two that indicates that under no circumstances where there is a medical emergency, could the medical procedure be hindered while the court is undertaking consideration of the injunction action. But that type of language was not included in this Bill, and it was not included in the Amendments of this Bill. So, while I am sympathetic to the proponents of this legislation, and I think a father, unlike some of the opponents, I think a father does have a right to at least some input into the decision process where his wife is seeking an abortion. This Bill goes far beyond that, and this Bill could cause the death of the mother while someone is filing a lawsuit, before the court has had sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of that injunction action. While the court wheels are progressing, a person could die or be seriously and permanently injured. And for that reason, I cannot support this legislation."

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

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. I rise in support of this Bill for the simple reason that it's... I think, as a Legislative Body, it's important that we make the statement that the child to be born has two parents. And the rights of the father are every bit as 124  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 important as the rights of the mother. Simple notification of that father before you take that child's life seems to me to make a whole lot of sense, and I urge an 'aye' vote on this Bill."

"The Lady from Lake, Representative Stern."

"Madam Speaker and Members of the House, besides reiterating the decision of the Supreme Court, which I'm... does not give the father input to this decision, I would make the point only that to suggest that an abortion is had by a woman for purposes of avoiding inconvenience or for reasons of aggravation really denigrates a very serious bit of major surgery. To have an abortion in the last trimester is major surgery, Ladies and Gentlemen. It is not something to be undertaken lightly and is not undertaken lightly by the women of Illinois. And for us to pass another unconstitutional Bill on such a subject seems to me an outrageous waste of time and state money. I urge a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"It's important that we're talking about two lives, here. We're talking about a viable fetus, which is the scope of the application of this Bill, and we are balancing that viable fetus against the health of the mother. Certain decisions have either impliedly or expressly expanded the scope of health of the mother to include things other then physical health or well-being in a physical sense. This Bill would seek to address two issues not currently addressed - one, whether the father has an interest in this issue - the husband, I should say, as opposed to a father; and two, whether or not this General Assembly should balance the one life of the fetus against the life and only the life or threat to physical health of 125  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the mother. The balancing should be relatively equal, I submit to you, one life for another. And a 'no' vote is a vote saying that the life of the fetus is not worth as much as the mental health of the mother, and I think that's a vote we don't want to make, and that is precisely, and you're looking at me, Representative, and I am precisely correct. That is what this vote says, and a 'no' vote would be the wrong indication to give to the people of the State of Illinois. Those who are in favor of seat belts and say the state can intervene on that, should be in favor of this Bill, as well. There is absolutely no validity to the argument that the injunctive process would endanger the welfare of the mother. By its very nature, it is an equitable remedy, where the welfare or health of the mother would be taken into account. It is an emergency measure, where the welfare and health of the mother would be taken into account. Under no circumstances would the life be threatened by resort to this judicial remedy, and I submit to you that this should be voted unanimously, because everybody here claims to be in favor of life."

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

"Madam Speaker, I most graciously move the previous question."

"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 Hartke, to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker... Speaker and Members of the House. It is not the intent of this legislation to harm the mother. The intent is to recognize the father's rights. You know, we've... we've looked at the mother so 126  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 often, we forget about the father. He has just as much right for the life of that child as the mother does. We're talking about a husband, the father of the child. We're talking about the father of the unborn child. We're talking about a viable fetus, and the court making the decision. I ask for an affirmative vote."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 887 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? This is final action. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 72 voting 'aye', 34 voting 'no', and 10 voting 'present'. Representative White wishes to change his vote from 'aye' to 'no'. There are, therefore... Representative Giorgi wishes to change his vote from 'present' to 'aye'. Representative Bowman, for what reason do you rise?"

"What... What is the required Majority on this vote?"

"Excuse me?"

"What is the required Majority for passage?"

"60 votes for passage. What is the count, Mr. Clerk? On this question, there are 72 voting 'aye', 35 voting 'no', and 10 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 889, Representative Capparelli. It appears on page 21 on your Calendar. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 889, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relationship to the office of public defender. Third... Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"There are none."

"Third Reading. Representative Capparelli. Clerk, read the Bill." 127  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Senate Bill 989, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relationship to the office of public defender. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Capparelli."

"Madam Speaker, Senate Bill 889 requires that a public defender, when appointed by a court to defend a person under the Parental Notification Abortion Act... As you know, the Notice of Abortion Act was passed by the Illinois General Assembly in 1983. The Act, at that time, required parents of a minor who is under 18 years of age to be notified of a pending abortion by the physician who is to perform the abortion. This Act allows for a minor who does not wish her parents to know of the abortion to go to court and ask for a waiver of notice. It also provides that the court shall appoint counsel for the minor. I'd ask for a favorable Roll Call."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 889. And on that question, the Gentleman from Knox, Representative Hawkinson. Representative Hawkinson."

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

"He will."

"Representative, I understand that this is an Amendment to the Public Defender Act. My question is, if the court chooses to appoint other counsel other than someone from the public defender's office, there is nothing in this Act that requires the appointment to be made of a public defender, is there?"

"That's right. That's right."

"Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Preston."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Would the Gentleman yield 128  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 for a question?"

"He will."

"Representative Capparelli, I don't understand what the purpose of this Bill is."

"When this was given me, the only reason this Bill is being introduced is to ensure that the provisions of providing counsel for a minor will not be a problem in having this Act to go into effect. It's not in effect, and they're making rules and regulations now, and this will probably be one of the rules that a minor must have counsel."

"And that... that... the court would still be free to appoint court-appointed counsel who is not a public defender, in these cases?"

"Yes. It does not have to be... They can go to have their own private attorney, yes. Right."

"Well, not private, but I mean... can... may the court appoint an attorney who is not a public defender to be paid by the county to defend... to represent this minor seeking an abortion? Or is the court constrained to only appoint a public defender?"

"It does not require the court pick or pick only a public defender, but it gives that option."

"I'm sorry. I didn't hear what you said."

"It does not require that the court pick or only pick a public defender, but it gives them that option."

"I see. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Levin."

"Would the Sponsor yield?"

"He will."

"The way I read this, this is a new state mandate imposed on local jurisdictions. Somebody's got to pay for the public defender. Isn't it the counties that pay? Has 129  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 there been a State Mandates Act filed in terms of how much this is going to cost the local jurisdiction to set up this new bureaucracy?"

"Well, the court will be minimal, they say here, in that... like in Massachusetts, the parental notice law is in effect, and they have set up a group to aid these minors, and they are voluntary attorneys."

"But this isn't going to be limited to voluntary attorneys."

"No, it does not."

"So, you know, we are... there is going to be some substantial cost, here, to the counties of the state. Is there an appropriation to pay for this... this new mandate?"

"No, there's not. No."

"Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I think this Bill, you know, just shows how silly we're getting in terms of some of these abortion Bills. The last Bill we had imposed the courts between a husband and a wife, and this Bill tries to resurrect a law we passed that sends us to court which was found to be in serious problems, by throwing monies that somebody's going to have to pay for, the taxpayer, either at the state level or local level, so that we can have this old jerry-built system of taking what is really a very private, personal decision and holding it up to court scrutiny. And now, we're going to go the step further. We're going to involve the expenditure of taxpayers' money, not only to defend against these unconstitutional laws, but now, we've got to set up a whole bureaucracy of attorneys. I guess, as an attorney, I ought to be in favor of this, but I think we ought to save the taxpayers' money and defeat Senate Bill 889."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Representative 130  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Wolf."

"Madam Speaker, 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 main question is put. Representative Capparelli, to close."

"Okay. Thank you. As I said, the reason that the Bill as introduced is to provide counsel for these minors, which will be presenting a problem, probably, in the near future, according to the Seventh District Court of Illinois, and we would ask for a favorable Roll Call."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 889 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Representative Ropp, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I think it's interesting how, in the last period of time, we are able to create, let's say, a conception in an auger jar, and now we're in the process of dealing with a very close family matter. We're taking that and giving that option out of the realm of family discussion and decision making and putting it into some hands of some attorney. I think the whole premise of families is at stake here, and I really question why we need to attempt to further break up family relations in the State of Illinois. And that's why I'm going to vote 'no'."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Bowman."

"Thank you. Inquiry of the Chair. If this imposes a financial responsibility on another unit of government, is there not an Extraordinary Majority required?"

"Is the basis for your question that an Extraordinary Majority would be required because there is 131  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 an expenditure of state funds?"

"No, no, because it requires other units of government to... it's a mandate. The State Mandates Act, I think, would require this, because other units of government are going to have to expend monies without a reimbursement from the state."

"Representative Bowman, in answer to your question, this Bill requires a Constitutional Majority for passage. That is 60 votes. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 76 voting 'aye', 32 voting 'no', and 6 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. The next Order of Business, Ladies and Gentlemen, if Representative Huff is in the chamber, is School District Reorganization. Representative Huff. Clerk, read the Bill. It's Senate Bill 1010."

"Senate Bill 1010, a Bill for an Act relating to school districts and boards of education. It's been read a second time previously. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Huff, amends Senate Bill..."

"Representative Huff."

"Madam Speaker, I'd like leave to table Amendment #1."

"The Gentleman... The Gentleman moves to table Amendment... Committee Amendment #... The Gentleman moves to table Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 1010. On that question, is there any discussion? Hearing none, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 be tabled?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it, and Amendment #1 132  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 is tabled. Amendment #2, Representative Huff."

"Madam Speaker, I'd like to withdraw Amendment #2."

"Withdraw Amendment #2. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, Huff."

"Representative Huff."

"I'd like to... leave to withdraw that, too."

"Withdraw Amendment #3. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #4, Huff."

"Representative Huff."

"I'd like to withdraw Amendment #4."

"Withdraw Amendment #4. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, Ronan - et al."

"Representative Ronan, on Amendment #5. Are there any hyphenated Sponsors of that Amendment?"

"Ronan - Braun - and Soliz."

"Representative Braun, could you present this Amendment for us?"

"Thank you. Withdraw Amendment 5."

"Withdraw Amendment #5. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #6, Kulas."

"Representative Kulas. Representative Kulas."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Leave to withdraw Amendment #6."

"Withdraw Amendment #6. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #7, Madigan, amends Senate Bill..."

"Representative Madigan. Is anyone prepared to present this Amendment for Representative Madigan? Representative Madigan is here. Representative... Withdraw 133  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendment #7. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #8, Madigan, amends Senate Bill 1010."

"Representative Madigan."

"Request to withdraw that Amendment."

"Withdraw Amendment #9. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #9, Madigan."

"Representative Madigan."

"Withdraw."

"Withdraw Amendment #9. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #10, Madigan."

"Representative Madigan."

"Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #10 would provide for four items. Number one, it would provide for the creation of a subdistrict council to advise the district superintendent in the City of Chicago and to have veto power over the expenditure by that superintendent of certain discretionary money which is vested in the superintendent's office through the budget of the Chicago Board of Education. Two, it would provide for the creation of school councils to advise the principal in the school in the same manner relative to discretionary money given to the principal in the school. Number three, it would create a requirement that the budget for each school building in the City of Chicago would be subject to a community review and comment process where the principal in the school would present the budget for that building. The principal would be under obligation to get an affirmative vote in favor of the budget. If he failed to get the affirmative vote in favor of the budget, then the Board of Education would be under requirement to return to 134  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 a second community meeting to show the changes that would be made in the budget. And lastly, it provides for the creation of a task force on citizen involvement in education which would continue to monitor the situation in Chicago and would be in a position to recommend further decentralization of that system if, in the judgment of the task force, that action would be needed to provide for better citizen access to the decision making at the Chicago Board of Education. I move the adoption of the Amendment."

Speaker Breslin: "The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #10 to Senate Bill 1010. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Levin."

"Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I'm a realist and I know when the concept of elected school board for the City of Chicago has... has had it for this year. So I do not intend to oppose this Amendment. But what I would say is this, that we have, in failing to deal with an elected school board for the City of Chicago, we, I think, have lost the last, best opportunity to restore confidence in a school system where there is no confidence and what we have is very much a self-fulfilling prophesy. Parents are not willing to put their children into the Chicago schools. They are not willing to keep their children in the schools. They are today voting for an elected school board by moving to the suburbs when the children get to be school age. And if we had been able to deal in some fundamental way with some structural changes that would restore confidence, and I think an elected school board would do that, we would have to change this cycle in terms of what parents and taxpayers think in Chicago; and, having restored some confidence, we might see some students coming back to the system. We might see some parents who are willing to invest their time once again in making the system work. I 135  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 do not believe that what is embodied in Amendment #10 makes a significant enough change in the structure and organization of the Chicago Board that that will happen. I do not think that it's going to change the perception of the average taxpayer and the average parent in the City of Chicago that the system is being turned around. But I think it is a step and despite the fact I don't think it's going to make that much of a difference, I'm going to vote for it."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Braun."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in support of Amendment #10. Essentially what it does is effect school reform from the bottom up by giving some accountability at the local level through the creation of the local school council and giving them a role to play in the formulation of a individual school budget. It is probably... it has... this Amendment has the essential idea that the way to reform the schools is not to react by simply shuffling characters at the top, but rather by empowering parents and teachers and school administrators at the local school level. I congratulate the Speaker for coming up with this Amendment and urge your support for it."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Brookins."

"Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. I rise in support of this Amendment and I take issue with my colleague who says there is no confidence in the school system in the City of Chicago. I will not sit here and let him indict every school teacher in the City of Chicago as incompetent and don't know what they're doing. I'm also saying that confidence is returning to the teachers, the administrators and the citizens in Chicago and that we will see a marked 136  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 change and a marked district... a marked change in the educational level and the return of the youths to the... to the City of Chicago and the school system there. I commend the Speaker for this legislation and just thank you."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill... Shall Amendment #10 to Senate Bill 1010 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. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #11, Madigan, amends Senate Bill..."

"Representative Madigan. Speaker Madigan, on Amendment #11."

"Madam Speaker, am I the Sponsor of the Amendment?"

"Yes, you are. Representative Vinson, for what reason do you rise?"

"I'd be glad to explain the Amendment and then Mr. Madigan can do with it what he wishes. Would that be useful?"

"It would not be proper within our rules, Representative Vinson. Representative Madigan."

"We wish to thank Mr. Vinson for his offer. We have other functions you could perform, Mr. Vinson. This Amendment is technical in nature, has no significant change to the Bill and I would move the adoption of the Amendment."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #11 to Senate Bill 1010 be adopted?' Representative Vinson, on the question."

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

"He will yield for a question."

"I appreciate those other functions you would offer me, Mr. Speaker, but my understanding is that under the 137  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendment, the subdistrict... the council appointed by the subdistrict superintendent would also have the power to disapprove expenditures from the superintendent's discretionary fund and that is a substantive authority. Is that in the Amendment?"

"The answer to your question is yes and, Mr. Vinson, in the original draft of the Amendment, we were dealing with three funds and in each instance, there was a use of different language in terms of the degree of control that the community would have over the funds. This Amendment #11 provides for consistent language in terms of the degree of community control over the money."

"Okay, I would join the Speaker in urging the adoption of this Amendment and hope that he will support mine."

"Is there any further discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Huff. No. The question is, 'Shall Amendment #11 to Senate Bill 1010 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 #12, Vinson, amends Senate Bill..."

"Representative Vinson."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly. Floor Amendment #12 would really..."

"Excuse me. Speaker Madigan, for what reason do you rise?"

"For the purpose of a parliamentary inquiry. Is this Amendment in order?"

"Representative Madigan, with regard to your inquiry, the Bill... the Amendment is not in order since Amendment #11 was adopted. Therefore, the Amendment is ruled out of order. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #13, Vinson, amends Senate Bill 138  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 1010."

"Representative Vinson."

"Well, Madam Speaker and Members of the House, I am somewhat disappointed that in reciprocation of my spirit of bipartisan cooperation, the Speaker didn't join me. This particular Amendment will permit the Hispanic population to be represented on school..."

"Excuse me. Speaker Madigan, for what reason do you rise?"

"The purpose of a parliamentary inquiry."

"State your inquiry."

"Is this Amendment in order and is the Amendment printed?"

"I am informed that the Amendment is not printed and distributed. In addition to that, the Amendment is not in order. Therefore, the Amendment is ruled out of order. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Representative Huff now moves for immediate consideration of... Representative Vinson, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, I believe there is a fiscal note filed on the Bill as amended."

"You are correct, Representative Vinson. Therefore, the Bill has to be brought back to the Order of Second Reading. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, I have a Motion with regard to Senate Bill 1010. In reviewing the Fiscal Note Act with regard to the school... School Code, there is a distinction made, as opposed to other Bills. And that reason, I would move that the Fiscal Note Act not apply to Senate Bill 1010. The Fiscal Note Act found at Chapter 63, Section 42-31 139  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 indicates that for Bills dealing with school districts..."

"Representative Huff, do you agree that the Fiscal Note Act does not apply? Representative Huff."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Then I would renew my Motion to have this heard immediately on Third Reading."

"Very good. The Gentleman agrees. Representative, we'll take a vote on your Motion. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. The question is, 'Does the Fiscal Act Note apply?' All those in favor say 'yes', all those opposed... excuse me. The Motion is... Representative Cullerton's Motion is that the Fiscal Note Act does not apply. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 62 voting 'aye', 49 voting 'no' and none voting 'present', and the House accepts Representative Cullerton's Motion. So, the Bill moves to Third Reading. Representative Huff now moves for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 1010 as amended. Representative Vinson, for what reason do you rise?"

"I object to that."

"Therefore, we will take a Roll Call. The Gentleman has moved that we consider this Bill immediately. The question is, 'Shall this House consider immediately Senate Bill 1010 as amended?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? This Motion requires 71 votes for adoption. Have all voted who wish? The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Huff, one minute to explain your vote."

"Well, Madam, do I have the required number of votes to speak on this... on this Motion?"

"The Motion is to have it heard immediately and 140  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 that's what you have one minute to explain your vote on, only that issue."

"Well... Madam Speaker, I don't think there is anything untoward in this Bill now as it's been amended. This Amendment provides a reasoned, measured step, in my opinion, through that threshhold to legitimate community participation with the school system in Chicago, and I would move for an... affirmative vote."

"Vote your switch, Sir. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this Motion there are 66 voting 'aye', 51 voting 'no' and none voting 'present', and the Motion fails. The next Order of Business, Ladies and Gentlemen is the Special Order dealing with labor issues. The first Bill on that Call is Senate Bill 75. Representative Alexander. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 75, a Bill for an Act to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act. Has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Alexander, amends Senate Bill 75."

"Representative Alexander."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to withdraw Amendment #1."

"Withdraw Amendment #1. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Alexander."

"Representative Alexander."

"I would like to withdraw Amendment #2."

"Withdraw Amendment #2. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, McPike."

"Representative McPike. Representative 141  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Cullerton, to present Representative McPike's Amendment, with leave of the Body."

"Yes, thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. The Amendment deals with the UI extension. It extends the 1983 unemployment insurance summit agreement by six months. It conforms the Illinois UI Act to the Federal Unemployment Tax Act regarding inclusion of sick pay and disability pay into the definition of taxable wages. An entry of an order of supervision in a criminal trial regarding employment related misconduct makes that employee ineligible for UI benefits. There's a bypass of the Board of Review upon failure to act within 120 days and it allows the Department of Employment Security to use the State Comptroller, or Comptroller, offset procedure to withhold monies that the state may owe a person by the amount that that person received unemployment insurance benefits to which he or she is not entitled. It makes changes to clarify provisions that establish the Director of the Department of Employment Security's salary and other provisions that need revision due to the Department's reorganization of last year. Provides that the information received by the Department of Employment Security from the state and from its political subdivisions and municipal corporations is not confidential and may be disclosed by the Director. And I believe that sums up the Amendment #3."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #3 to Senate Bill 75. And on that question, the Gentleman from Peoria, Representative Tuerk."

"Madam Speaker, will the Sponsor yield?"

"He will."

"Do you know exactly what you just read now? You know what the Bill does?" 142  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Yes, this is the same as House Bill 1263 that you were the Co-Sponsor of."

"Very good. Very good. Quite alert. Well, Madam Speaker and Members of the House, I just wanted to see if the spokesman on that side of the aisle was alive and he is and he seems to be well. He explains that it is the same as House Bill 1263, which for some reason or another got stymied in the Senate. I rise in support of the Amendment. The extension of the UI summit agreement of 1983, which was supposed to expire on June 30, 1986, but this extends it for another six months. Does some other things, as he pointed out in his explanation. I think it's a good approach and should be supported by all Members of the House."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #3 to Senate Bill 75 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. Representative Alexander now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 75 as amended. Are there any objections? Hearing none, read the Bill on Third, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 75, a Bill for an Act to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Alexander."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Bill now is in a very good form and it does contain that portion of 12... House Bill 1263 which was almost like an agreed Bill that went out and got 'stymied' over in the Senate. I don't have too much to say about the Bill in its present form except that it is an agreed Bill and I would hope that everybody 143  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 would put those green lights up there as it... for the vote."

"The Lady has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 75. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 75 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? 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. Senate Bill 200, Representative Braun. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 200, a Bill for an Act to provide for assistant director apprenticeship and training for programs and systems of apprenticeship. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Saltsman, amends Senate Bill 200."

"Representative Saltsman."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. This Amendment extends the application of the prevailing wage law to include construction in the private sector financed by industrial revenue bonds issued pursuant to its two existing Acts, the Industrial Project Revenue Bond Act and the Illinois Municipal Code and the Industrial Building Revenue Act. Both Acts authorize units of local government to issue revenue bonds to finance construction, industrial, commercial, office and research facilities and this also brings it to the private sector."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 200. And on that question, the 144  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Gentleman from Peoria, Representative Tuerk."

"Will the Sponsor yield?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Is this... Is this Amendment the same as your Bill, the House Bill?"

"Yes."

"What happened to that?"

"It passed the House."

"What happened to it in the Senate?"

"Still in Committee."

"That's where it should remain, too. I think this Amendment is a bad Amendment and I would speak against it and ask for your 'no' vote."

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

"Yes, this is a Amendment that protects our contractors to make them be able to provide the efficient bids with the proper wage adjustments that out-of-state, right-to-work construction companies can't come in and invade the contractors of the State of Illinois and underbid them with right-to-work wages and to not go by the prevailing wages in the communities. I do ask for the passage as we did before."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 200 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 59 voting 'aye', 48 voting 'no' and none voting 'present', and the Amendment is adopted. Are there any further... Representative McCracken, for what reason do you rise?"

"Point of Order. Pursuant to Rule 36(d), this title of the Amendment just adopted amends the title of the Bill 145  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 and I require... or I ask that it be moved back to Second Reading, First Legislative Day."

"I'll look at the Bill. Representative Braun, for what reason do you rise?"

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Amendment #2 has not yet been considered."

"We just voted on Amendment #1. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2."

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

"The Amendment is not in order. This is a... This is a timely moment in which to make my Motion pursuant to Rule 36(d). The Amendment 1, which amends the title of the original Bill, has already been adopted. I have made my demand pursuant to rule. The second Amendment is out of order. It should be Second Reading, First Legislative Day."

"Okay, we are on Representative Cullerton's Motion... or Representative McCracken's Motion. Representative Cullerton is recognized on that Motion."

"Yes, let me first just say, Madam Speaker, that I do agree with Representative McCracken, that his Motion is timely. After the first Amendment is adopted, the title is changed. He can certainly demand that it be moved back to Second Reading... at that time, before we adopt any subsequent Amendments. However, I would like to make a substitute Motion that that rule be suspended."

"I move to table the substitute Motion."

"Representative Cullerton has offered a Motion to substitute Representative McCracken's Motion. Representative McCracken's Motion... or rather Representative Cullerton's Motion can be adopted by this 146  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 House on a Constitutional Majority, requiring 60 votes. Representative McCracken has now moved to table Representative Cullerton's Motion. All those in favor of Representative McCracken's tabling Motion should vote 'aye', all those opposed should vote 'no'. Voting is open. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 52 voting 'aye', 64 voting 'no', and none voting 'present' and Representative McCracken's tabling Motion fails. The Chair would note that while there has been discussion on how the rules operate with regard to 36(d) and the movement of Bills, the Chair has not agreed nor been asked to make a ruling on those... on either of those positions. Now, we are back to Representative Cullerton's substitute Motion. Representative McCracken, for what reason do you rise?"

"Point of Order, very briefly."

"State your point."

"I think if you look at the rules, the conclusion you must draw is that this is not a suspendable demand and I note, of course, the language that any Member may demand. That language is nowhere else used except where it relates to non-suspendable rules. In most other instances, you will note, that the language used is different connoting and... a permissive nature in the sense that it can be overridden, by leave or vote of the Body. I would submit to you that at the very least this requires an Extraordinary Majority or may not be suspendable at all and I persist in my demand to return to First Legislative Day, Second Reading."

"Representative McCracken, we have considered your point and we have not taken it. Any rule of this House is suspendable unless it is specifically stated otherwise and that is not the case under this particular 147  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 - rule. So, Representative Cullerton has moved to suspend the rule regarding the movement or the advancement of this Bill and it regards Rule 36(d). All those in favor vote... all those in favor of Representative Cullerton's suspending of the rules should vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Representative Saltsman, for what reason do you rise? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 62 voting 'aye', 51 voting 'no' and none voting 'present'. Representative McCracken, for what reason do you rise?"

"Verify the affirmative."

"The Gentleman has requested a verification of the Affirmative Roll. Representative Cullerton has asked for a Poll of the Absentees. Proceed with the Poll of the Absentees."

"Poll of the Absentees. Virginia Frederick. Mautino. Satterthwaite. Shaw. And Sutker."

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

"Leave to be verified."

"Representative McCracken, may Representative Kulas have leave to be verified? You do. Proceed with the Poll of the Affirmative, Mr. Clerk."

"Poll of the Affirmative."

"Excuse me. Representative Ronan. Representative Ronan asks leave to be verified and that is granted. Representative Brookins asks leave to be verified and that is granted. Representative Hartke asks leave to be verified and that is granted. Proceed, Mr. Clerk."

"Poll of the Affirmative. Alexander. Berrios. Bowman. Braun. Breslin. Brookins. Brunsvold. Bullock. Capparelli. Christensen. Cullerton. Curran. Currie. DeJaegher." 148  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Excuse me. Representative McCracken, Representative Bowman asks leave to be verified and that is granted. Proceed, Mr. Clerk."

"DeJaegher. DeLeo. Dunn. Farley. Flinn. Flowers. Giglio. Giorgi. Greiman. Hannig. Hartke. Hicks. Homer. Huff. Keane. Krska. Kulas. Laurino. LeFlore. Leverenz. Levin. Matijevich. McNamara. McPike. Mulcahey. Nash. O'Connell. Panayotovich. Pangle. Phelps. Preston. Rea. Rice. Richmond. Ronan. Saltsman. Soliz. Steczo. Stern. Terzich. Turner."

"Representative McCracken, Representative Satterthwaite would ask leave to be verified so she can go back to her meeting and she is voted 'aye'. Proceed."

"Van Duyne. Vitek. Washington. White. Wolf. Anthony Young. Wyvetter Younge. Mr. Speaker."

"Excuse me. Representative Satterthwaite asks to be voted 'aye', and then to be verified, and so she is. Representative Steczo asks leave to be verified and that is granted. Have any questions of the Affirmative Roll, Mr. McCracken? Representative McCracken."

"What is the count, please?"

"There are 63 voting 'aye'."

"Representative Bullock."

"Representative Bullock. Representative Bullock. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him. Proceed, Mr. McCracken."

"Did you remove him?"

"Yes, I did."

"Okay. Representative Giglio."

"Representative Giglio is in the chamber."

"Representative Hannig." 149  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Representative Hannig is in the chamber."

"Representative Laurino."

"Representative Laurino. Representative Laurino. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? He is not. Remove him. Representative Dunn asks leave to be verified and that is granted. Representative Nash asks leave to be verified and that is... that is granted. Proceed, Mr. McCracken."

"Representative DeJaegher."

"Representative DeJaegher is in his seat. Representative Mautino, for what reason do you rise? Proceed, Representative McCracken."

"Representative Terzich."

"Representative Terzich. Representative Terzich. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him. Representative Stern asks leave to be verified. May she have leave?"

"Leave."

"She may have leave. Proceed."

"Representative Capparelli."

"Representative Capparelli. Representative Capparelli. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? Remove him."

"Representative Greiman. Representative Greiman. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him. Representative Shaw, for what reason do you rise?"

"Would you record me as 'aye', please?"

"Record Representative Shaw as voting 'aye'. Proceed, Representative McCracken." 150  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Representative Matijevich."

"Representative Matijevich is in the chamber. Representative Levin asks leave to be verified."

"Leave."

"He has leave."

"Representative Keane."

"Representative Keane. Representative Keane. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him."

"Representative Hicks."

"Representative Hicks. Representative Hicks. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him."

"Nothing further."

"Representative Mautino, for what reason do you rise? Representative Mautino asks to be voted 'aye'."

"Mautino was previously verified."

"No, he was not. He was not voting. Representative Preston asks leave to be verified. Does the Gentleman have leave?""

"Very... a very timely request."

"The Gentleman has leave. On this question there are... Representative McGann, for what reason do you rise?"

"Yes, may I ask the count, Madam Speaker?"

"Yes, there are 58 voting 'aye'."

"Would you kindly change my vote from 'no' to 'aye'?"

"The Gentleman changes his vote from 'no' to 'aye'. There are therefore... There are, therefore, 59 151  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 voting 'aye' and this requires 60 votes for adoption. Representative Matijevich, for what reason do you rise?"

"So much paper over here and I just walked... How am I recorded?"

"How is Representative Matijevich recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Well, I wanted the record straight because I have been here 19 years and I have voted that way on every issue and I wouldn't want my record to be in any way any different than it has been for 19 years. I have been right for 19 years. I was right today and I think somebody else wants recognition."

"The record will so reflect that, Representative Matijevich. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise?"

"Yes, if Representative McCracken would consider the fact the... I believe he verified off Representative Greiman. Representative Greiman is..."

"Excuse me. Representative Hicks. Representative Hicks. Representative Hicks has returned to the chamber. Add him to the Roll Call and Representative Greiman... Representative Greiman has returned to the chamber. Add him to the Roll Call. Representative Leverenz, for what reason do you rise?"

"Speaker, how am I recorded? I was off the floor for a few minutes."

"You are recorded as voting 'aye'. Mr. Clerk, what's the count? On this question there are 61 voting 'aye' and 50 voting 'no' and the Motion carries. We have, therefore, suspended the rules so that we can keep this Bill on the Order of Second Reading, Second Legislative Day. The next... Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Braun, amends Senate Bill 200 152  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 as amended."

"Representative Braun."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Members of the House. Amendment #2 is the revision on the Apprenticeship and Training Council. It allows for a structure to be developed for the inclusion of minorities and women in the trade unions. It also provides for a set... a preference to be given for contractors who employ minorities and women on the different construction projects in the state. It has the support, at this point, of the construction industry as well as labor and I encourage your support."

"Representative Braun moves for the adoption of Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 200. And on that question, is there any discussion? There being no discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 200 be adopted?' Representative McCracken, on the question."

"Will the Sponsor yield?"

"She will yield for a question."

"Would you explain again, Representative, what the Amendment does? It's about five pages long... nine pages long. What is the... What is the practical effect of adoption of the Amendment?"

"Oh, okay, thank you. The practical effect of the adoption of the Amendment, Representative, is as I described. It is a fairly simple Amendment to the Bill in that it provides for a change in the original structure of the Bill... I'm sorry. It provides for a change in the original structure of the Bill by allowing for the Apprenticeship and Training Council to come under the auspices of the Minority and Female Business Council as opposed to being a separate structure. It also provides for a preference for construction industry... construction companies that engage in apprenticeship or on the job 153  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 training."

"Alright. It gives a five percent preference on the issue of the lowest..."

"Representative, I... I'm sorry. I've worked with the Department... the relevant departments on this Amendment, as well as the construction industry, as well as with labor on this Amendment."

"I know."

"Oh, okay, sorry."

"Does it give a five percent bidding preference to a party that participates in this apprenticeship program?"

"Yes."

"Alright, and that bidding process would affect the cost to State Government only or would it affect the cost to local governments as well?"

"I don't believe that it would affect the cost at all. I think what it does is suggest that a bidder that has an apprenticeship program would be given a competitive advantage vis-a-vis other bidders, but that it would not have... it would not necessarily have the effect and probably would not have the effect of increasing the cost to government, local or statewide."

"Alright, let me... Let me rephrase it then. To whom does this five percent preference apply? Local government or state government or both?"

"To any... the private sector."

"The private sector?"

"Yes, yes."

"You mean the private sector has to give a bid preference to parties that participate in this?"

"No... no. To whom does it apply? It applies to bidders in the private sector."

"No, no. Who... Who is the party contracting with the 154  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 contractor? Is it... Is it..."

"It doesn't... If you read the language, it's not a five percent add on. It's not an add on. What it says..."

"Representative Braun, let me... let me try again, and I'm just trying to get to the point."

"Okay, yes."

"This is a... this is a five percent preference given to those who participate in the apprenticeship program. I understand. The point I'm trying to make is who is on the other side of the contract? Who is offering the contract for letting? Is it a public entity or a private entity?"

"Public entity."

"Okay, and is it state or is it local or is it both?"

"Both."

"Both, alright. Now, does this constitute a reimbursable mandate or have you made provision for any reimbursable mandates for the difference in cost that would accrue as a result of passage of this Bill?"

"I think maybe our confusion is the... is the misconception or your misapprehension that there would be an increase in cost. I submit to you that there is no increase in cost occasioned by the giving of a preference, any more than there is an increase in cost by virtue of veterans' preference, for example. That's all this is, the equivalent of a veterans' preference."

"Okay, okay. I understand the argument that there is no cost because there is nothing to compare it against. The fact of the matter is that you are going to spend more money in the future, but relative to the present, there is... there is no difference because we don't have the preference currently in effect. I understand that's the argument. But just so the Membership knows what it's voting on, contractors who make bids with the state or 155  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 local governments get a five percent preference where low contract bid is one of the detorminants of awarding those contracts. So, there is the potential for increased cost. There is the potential for increased costs not only to the state, but also to local units of government. And the question then is, 'Well, who is it who participates in this apprenticeship and whom does this benefit?' As I read the Bill on page seven... or six and beyond, apparently, the apprenticeship relates to efforts to support a healthy economy by encouraging and assisting in the development and maintenance of a skilled labor force in order to meet the needs of this state's industry and other business. Well, we already have unemployment, so we already have a labor force that is large and healthy and desirous of jobs. I question whether this is a necessary Bill. Apparently, it's not going to cost anybody anything so apparently, it doesn't do anything. And I would ask you to consider that in voting on this measure. Point of order. It also changes the title. I'll be making the same Motion."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Panayotovich."

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

"She will yield for a question."

"Representative Braun, Senate Bill 200 now, Senator Newhouse's state apprentice program, is this Bill now okayed by labor and they're in full agreement now that this is right?"

"Representative Braun."

"This Bill has the support of organized labor. It has the support of the Illinois Construction Industry Committee. It has been the subject of discussions with representatives of the Governor... not the Governor's Office directly, but 156  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the relevant departments and I, frankly, know of no opposition to it at this point."

"I think this Bill should have the support of everybody in the House and urge 'aye' votes."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 200 be adopted?' 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? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 70 voting 'aye'... Representative Shaw votes 'aye'. There are 71 voting 'aye', 43 voting 'no' and none voting 'present' and the Amendment is adopted. Representative McCracken has renewed his Motion that since this Amendment changes the title of the Act that this Bill go back to the Order of Second Reading, Second... First Legislative Day. However, the Chair should note that the... with regard to the first Motion, although the Chair was not requested to make a ruling, this is a perfect reason why that first Motion was not timely put. We should wait until all of the Amendments are heard before we entertain a Motion on that question to decide whether or not there has, in fact, been a change. Representative McCracken, on his Motion."

"Well, I think... I think, in retrospect, you are correct. I didn't know whether or not I would get an opportunity, so I took it at my first... at its first availability. I will not make a Motion to table Representative's impending... or Representative Cullerton's impending Motion to suspend the rule, however, so we'll go directly to that Motion."

"Well, first of all, let's see if there are any further Amendments. Mr. Clerk, are there any further Amendments?" 157  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"There are no further Amendments."

"Very good. Representative Cullerton is recognized for a substitute Motion."

"Yes, I would move that we suspend the appropriate rule that requires the Bill, after the title is amended, to go back to Second Reading, First Legislative Day."

"The Gentleman moves to suspend Rule 36(d) so that this Bill can be advanced. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This Motion requires 60 votes for adoption. Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 65 voting 'aye', 47 voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. Representative Mulcahey asks to be recorded as voting 'aye'. There are, therefore, 66 voting 'aye', 47 voting 'no' and none voting 'present' and the Motion carries. Representative McCracken, for what reason do you rise?"

"To verify."

"The Gentleman has asked for a verification. Representative Cullerton, for what reason do you rise? Representative Cullerton."

"Yes, I would ask Representative McCracken to perhaps reconsider that Motion to... or that request to verify. We've got a lot of good Republican Bills that we want to get to before this deadline tomorrow night and I don't think we are going to get to them if we have to keep on going through all these verifications. So, why don't you have your Leader request it himself, Representative McCracken, and you just withdraw the request?"

"Representative McCracken persists in his request for a verification. Representative Satterthwaite asks leave to be verified. Representative O'Connell... does the Gentleman have... grant leave to Representative 158  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Satterthwaite to be verified. Representative Brookins is granted the same leave. Representative Dunn is granted the same leave. Representative Turner is granted the same leave. Representative O'Connell is granted the same leave. Proceed with the Poll of the Affirmative, Mr. Clerk."

"Poll of the Affirmative. Alexander. Berrios. Bowman. Braun. Breslin. Brookins. Brunsvold. Bullock. Capparelli. Christensen. Cullerton."

"Excuse me. Representative McCracken has asked leave to be verified, Representative... Excuse me. Representative McNamara asks leave to be verified, from Representative McCracken, and that is granted. And Representative Greiman asks leave to be verified and that is granted."

"Continuing..."

"Representative Brookins also asks leave to be verified. Representative Bullock asks leave to be verified and that is granted."

"Continuing with the Poll of the Affirmative. Cullerton. Curran. Currie. DeJaegher. DeLeo. Dunn. Farley. Flinn. Flowers. Giglio. Giorgi."

"Representative... Representative Nash and Representative McPike ask leave to be verified, Representative McCracken. Nash and McPike. Representative McCracken, for what reason do you rise?"

"I've... I've spoken to Representative McPike. He doesn't need to ask leave for verification."

"Very good. Representative Stern asks leave to be verified and that is granted. Proceed, Mr. Clerk."

"Continuing. Hannig. Hartke. Hicks. Homer. Huff. Johnson. Keane. Krska. Kulas. Laurino."

"Excuse me. Representative McCracken, Representative Flinn asks leave to be verified and that is 159  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENEBAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 granted. Proceed, Mr. Clerk."

"LeFlore. Levin. Matijevich. Mautino. McGann. McNamara. McPike. Mulcahey. Nash. O'Connell. Panayotovich. Pangle. Phelps. Preston."

"Excuse me. Representative McPike... Representative Preston asks leave to be verified and that is granted. Proceed, Mr. Clerk."

"Rea. Rice. Richmond. Ronan. Saltsman. Satterthwaite. Shaw. Slater. Soliz. Steczo. Stern. Terzich. Turner. Vitek. Washington. White. Wolf. Anthony Young. Wyvetter Younge. And Mr. Speaker."

"Do you have any questions of the Affirmative Roll, Mr. McCracken?"

"Yes, Representative Laurino."

"Representative Laurino. Representative Laurino. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him."

"Representative..."

"Excuse me. Representative Steczo asks leave to be verified, Representative McCracken. That is granted. Proceed, Mr. Clerk. Representative Hartke asks leave to be verified and that is granted. There has been a request, Mr. Doorkeeper, to remove all unauthorized persons from the floor of this House. Please do so immediately. All unauthorized persons should remove themselves from the House. Proceed, Mr. McCracken."

"Representative Ronan."

"Representative Ronan. Representative Ronan. How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him." 160  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Representative Homer."

"Representative Homer. Representative Homer. How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him."

"Representative Hicks."

"Representative Hicks. Representative Hicks. Representative Pangle, would you move so that I can see if Representative Hicks is in the chamber? How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove him."

"Representative..."

"Representative McCracken, Representative Giglio asks leave to be verified."

"Leave."

"And that is granted."

"Representative Flinn."

"Representative Flinn asked leave to be verified and that was granted."

"I'm sorry, you are right. Representative McGann."

"Representative McGann is in the chamber."

"Representative Saltsman."

"Representative Saltsman is in the chamber."

"Representative Slater."

"Representative Slater is in the chamber."

"I have nothing further."

"What's the count, Mr. Clerk? Representative Slater, for what reason do you rise? Representative Slater changes his vote from 'aye' to 'no'. Representative Johnson, for what reason do you rise? Representative Johnson changes his vote from 'aye' to 'no'. What's the count, Mr. Clerk? On this question there are 60 voting 161  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 'aye' and 49 voting 'no' and the Motion carries. Third Reading. Excuse me. There is a fiscal note filed, Representative Braun, so this Bill has to be held on the Order of Second Reading. As a matter of fact, I believe there is a State Mandates Act note filed also. Representative Braun, for what reason do you rise?"

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move that neither the States Mandates Act nor the Fiscal Act provisions apply to this legislation."

"The Lady moves that the state fiscal note..."

"It was admitted during debate and I frankly... if those notes have... those notes have, no doubt, just been filed and the opposition to this legislation admitted during debate that... that there was no cost associated with it and I think the Motions are clearly dilatory at this point."

"Representative Braun moves that the States Fiscal Act note and the State Mandates Act is not necessary and thus does not apply. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"Parliamentary inquiry. Does this require 71 votes?"

"It takes a majority of those voting on the issue."

"Alright. To the Motion."

"Speak to the Motion."

"Or strike that. I think the Motion has to be in writing on the demand of any Member. I demand it to be put in writing."

"You are correct, Sir. The Lady is putting her Motion in writing. Representative Braun has now put her Motion in writing and her Motion is that the Fiscal Note Act and the State Mandates Act is not necessary. All those in favor vote 'aye', all those oppose vote 'no'. Voting is 162  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 open. Have all voted who wish? This requires a majority of those voting on the issue. The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 62 voting 'aye' and 42 voting 'no' and 1 voting 'present'. And Representative Braun's Motion is adopted. Representative McCracken, for what reason do you rise?"

"We were going to debate that Motion."

"You were allowed an opportunity..."

"The Motion wasn't in order because I made the demand for the Motion to be in writing. It wasn't in order until it was in writing."

"Okay, you certainly could be recognized to explain your vote, Representative McCracken. Proceed."

"That's all."

"Okay, the Bill now moves to Third Reading. Representative Braun now moves that this... that the appropriate rules be suspended so that Senate Bill 200, as amended, be heard immediately. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken. He objects. Excuse me, Representative Braun, for what reason do you rise?"

"Madam Speaker, I would just as soon have this heard on Third Reading tomorrow."

"Very good. This Bill will be held on the Order of Third Reading. Senate Bill 447, Representative Giorgi. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 447, a Bill for an Act concerning the compensation of individuals for employment related injuries, disabilities and illness. It's been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Representative Giorgi."

"I think there's an Amendment to the Bill. It's on Second Reading?" 163  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Excuse me. The Bill is on Second Reading. Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Panayotovich - Giorgi, amends Senate Bill 447."

"Representative Panayotovich."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. We are back to that Bill that is going to create jobs. We are back to that Bill that's going to put money back in everybody's pockets. As I mentioned to Representative Ropp the other day, when we were talking about his milk Bill, we worry about our people in our community. We worry about people in the state. We worry about people in the country. This Bill, known as the 'buy American' Bill is very similar to the Bill that the Governor, last... two years ago, signed as a Steel Procurements Act so we had buy American steel. I think that this Bill has been debated and talked about enough. I urge an 'aye' vote on the Amendment and adoption of Amendment #1 and I'll answer any questions."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 447. And on that question, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Piel."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Will the Gentleman yield, please?"

"He will yield."

"I noticed in our analysis that it says exempt from the State Mandates Act. Could you explain to us why?"

"Representative Panayotovich."

"We just don't... we feel that local governments and county governments take care of it on their own. We 164  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 don't want to mandate the state to pay for it."

"You... alright, you don't want the state to pay for it, but obviously, the local and the county governments are going to be paying for it in the long run. You can either pay me now or pay me later in certain instances where the price would be higher. Have you come up with any ballpark figure on what the... the total potential cost would be to local and county governments?"

"Well, the Bills calls for that they could buy anything up to fifteen percent. There's a cap of fifteen percent that they would have to pay for if there is a differential of fifteen percent. What that would be on any individual item, I wouldn't know. For example, on an automobile, if we are talking about $10,000 automobile, we are talking about a car could be as much as 11,500."

"But you have no idea according to past purchases? I mean, I know you have been working on this for about three, four years. Past purchases on what the potential..."

"It's hard... Well, it's hard to judge, Representative."

"...potential revenue loss is to the units of local government?"

"It's... It's hard to judge because I couldn't tell you exactly what this new State of Illinois Building that was built 485 percent foreign steel that we didn't get any of it here in the State of Illinois. Take the figures there and figure it out. I mean, it's just... we are losing... we are losing this business within the state and I think that this is the way to go about it right now. Dollarwise, I couldn't give you a figure. We don't know how... how many cars were bought by certain agencies in the past year. We don't know how much steel was bought for a school building. I couldn't tell you a dollar figure." 165  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Just out of curiousity, where are the units of local government coming from on this Bill? Have you heard from like the City of Chicago which obviously would be a loss of a million dollars a year... millions of dollars a year?"

"I have not heard the million dollars a year figure other than from you and I have not had one mayor call me, tell me he's opposed to it."

"Is this similar to the 1665 that we defeated earlier this year?"

"This is the identical Bill that was defeated by two votes when we didn't have everybody here on the House floor and that's why I brought it back because I know it will got out this time."

"No further questions, Madam Speaker. No further questions."

"The Gentleman from McLean, Representative Ropp."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. To the Bill. This is a Bill that the distinguished Representative has had for a number of years. Should it become law, it very clearly will place a perimeter, a border, a fence, a iron curtain, if you will, around the United States and people will not export products into this country. It'd have a... it has a devastating effect on the fact that international trade is a two way street. Under this provision, it would really make it a one way street and we would not be a part of that. I urge a 'no' vote on this. The very day that this Bill is being considered, today, we have people in this state that are attempting to move into this state and build a major automobile plant which would, in fact, generate some 2000 jobs. If this Amendment goes on, you can kiss those 2000 jobs good-bye because they won't come into Illinois and I urge a 'no' vote." 166  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"This also changes the title and I would... and there are subsequent Amendments. I'm willing to wait if the Chair would answer this parliamentary inquiry, whether on not a Motion pursuant to 36(d) would be in order at the end of all the Amendments?"

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Shaw."

"Yes, thank you, Madam Chairman... Speaker. I rise in support of this Amendment. I think it's a good Amendment and the people on the other side of the aisle talk about jobs and that. Well, they should come up in Representative Panayotovich's district and my district and see what happened to the steel industry if they want to talk about jobs because of the steel companies is... the manufacturers here is buying steel from other countries and I think they should buy America. I think that we have too many goods coming into this country from other countries with cheap labor and that type of thing. So I... I think this is a good Amendment. I think that it would create jobs if we put this Amendment on and I urge the full Membership to support this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Peoria, Representative Saltsman."

"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. With regard to Representative McCracken's Motion, you are correct, Sir. This Amendment, if adopted, does change or amend the title of the Bill and your Motion, should you wish to make it, would be in order." 167  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Representative Panayotovich, to close on the Amendment."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, we talk about fair trade. We talk about what we have got going on, our imports, our export. Is it fair when the country of France has a three percent buy content cars where they can only let three percent of foreign cars be bought in France. Is that fair trade? Look at our deficit with Japan today. Our trade deficit with Japan. We talk about being fair. We take a car, we send it over there to sell for $10,000. They put it through their inspection and bring the same car out for $13,000 for that inspection. Do we have fair trade? We don't have fair trade. We're talking about being protectionists. Well, let's start worrying about our neighbors. Let's start worrying about people in this state. Let's start worrying about people in this country. All we keep hearing is that we are going to hurt ourselves. We're going to hurt ourselves. There are 29 states that have some sort of 'buy American' legislation in the country today. The... The Federal 'Buy American' Legislation Act has been in since the thirties and President Reagan in his 1980 road building program said we should buy American to build the roads in America. I urge an 'aye' vote on this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Adams, Representative Mays."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I would simply raise a point of parliamentary inquiry. The Bill itself amends the Workers' Comp Act and I think this Amendment goes to the Procurement Act and I would be wondering if, indeed, this is germane or violative of the single subject matter..."

"Representative Mays, the Chair rules that the Amendment is not germane. Are there any further Amendments?" 168  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Floor Amendment #2, Vinson."

"Representative Vinson, on Amendment #2."

"Madam Speaker, am I... did I really hear my ears right, that I was ruled out of order?"

"That's correct."

"Well then we certainly don't need 2. I withdraw it."

"The Gentleman withdraws Amendment #2. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, Giorgi, amends Senate Bill 447."

"Representative Giorgi, on Amendment #3."

"There is no Amendment #3."

"The Clerk has an Amendment #3. Isn't that correct, Mr. Clerk?"

"Amendment #3, Giorgi."

"Representative Giorgi."

"Madam Speaker, this is a minor Amendment and in that it allows, in its decision on review... this is the Industrial Commission we are talking about now, the Commission shall determine in each particular case the amount of the probable cost of the record to be filed as they return to the summons in that case and no request for a summons may be filed and no summons shall issue unless the parties seeking review of the decision of the Commission shall exhibit to the Clerk of the Circuit Court proof of payment by filing a receipt showing payment or an affidavit of the attorney setting forth payment has been made. It's just a cleanup Amendment."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #3 to Senate Bill 447. And on that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"I'm going to ask you some rhetorical questions just so the record is clear. This is a Supreme Court 169  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 recommendation which prompts this, correct?"

"Yes, this is Slater's House Bill 186 that..."

"And it's identical..."

"It's identical to House Bill 186."

"Yeah, but it's identical and does no more than the Supreme Court recommendation?"

"That's correct."

"Okay, thank you."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #3 to Senate Bill 447 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. Representative Giorgi now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 447 as amended. Are there any objections? Hearing none, read the Bill on Third."

"Senate Bill 447, a Bill for an Act to amend the law concerning compensation of individuals for employment related injuries, disabilities and illness. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Giorgi."

"Madam Speaker, the Bill now, all it says... this Bill applies to the self-insured employer and his workmen's comp premiums. It provides that an assessment to any individual employer shall not exceed 25 percent of the average annual contribution to the premiums of the past three years. Nothing else in the Bill except what the Supreme Court dictated and I urge its adoption."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 447. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, the question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 447 pass?' All those 170  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENEPAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open."

"'Aye' votes."

"This is final action. 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. Senate Bill 562, Representative Panayotovich. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 562, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act to create the Illinois Union Label Act. It has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Representative Panayotovich. Excuse me. Are there any Amendments from the floor?"

"Floor Amendment #1, Panayotovich."

"Representative Panayotovich."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Represent... I mean Amendment #1 was a clear up Amendment that we had put in. We talked to LRB. They have also Amendment #2 which we will withdraw. It adds the word 'knowingly' and it made a few technical changes and I'd move for the adoption of Amendment #1."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 562. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 562 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?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Panayotovich, amends Senate Bill..."

"Representative Panayotovich." 171  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENEBAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Withdraw Amendment #2, please."

"Withdraw Amendment #2. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Representative Panayotovich now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 562 as amended. Are there any objections? Hearing none, the Gentleman has leave. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 562, a Bill for an Act to create the Illinois Union Label Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Panayotovich."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, this was brought to me by all different unions throughout the State of Illinois. We have had problems throughout this state with people using union labels whether it be for musicians' contracts, whether it be for carpenters, whether it be for printing, no matter what, they are going up to individuals and people and organizations and saying they are a union organization... they are union printers, they are union musicians, they are union such. And they are using the union labels which is basically pirating. What this Bill is doing, it is going to correct that and it is going to prohibit the use of it. It's going to prohibit the use of counterfeit or imitation union labels. If I can give you a perfect example of what this Bill would do, for example, if you were having a fund raiser at a hotel that required you to have union musicians and the un... and they hired the band and they said they were a union band and they gave you a union contract and the local union official come in to find... came in to find out if they are union and asked for their union cards. They were... they say they are not union. They would pull that band off of the stage at your fund raiser. Of course, 172  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 you would not have to pay them, but you would not have a band for the rest of the evening. What it is, it's just a protection for the consumer and I move for immediate adoption."

"The Gentleman moves for the passage of Senate Bill 562. On that question is there any discussion? Hearing none, the question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 56...' Excuse me. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Turner, on the question."

"Will the Gentleman yield?"

"He will yield for a question."

"Regarding the use of union... you say regarding... in particular with union printers, you mentioned the fact that, in Committee, that there was some clause that if you subcontract out the business that the non-union person would not be in violation of this Act if he subcontracts with a union person to do work. Am I correct?"

"What we are talking, Representative Turner, as I told you in Committee, we want to make sure and I know that it affects what you were saying in Committee and I have talked with Representative Braun on this as far as the union black printers, what we are trying to do is make sure that the authorization through a subcontract from another printer can be used so that you can use the printer that you would want then."

"And in the case of belonging to the union, we're... by that, you mean that the person has to have a valid union card so that if, in fact, I was in a union and I haven't paid my current dues, theoretically, I'm not a member of..."

"Well, you have to be... yeah, you have to be a valid union member, sure. Paid dues."

"Okay, okay." 173  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Barger."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker... Madam Speaker. I happen to have been a union photoengraver years ago and at that time it was considered fraud to misuse a union bug. Each bug has a number on it that identifies the shop that it... the work originates in and for anyone to use that label, a label that does not belong to them that has not been issued to them by the union is fraud. And I don't know the real reason for having to reemphasize that, but it's criminal to use somebody else's union bug and I don't know why and I would like Mr. Panayotovich to explain to me why this Bill is needed at this time to reinforce a law that to my knowledge has been in existence since the beginning of unions."

"We... We have set up some... some penalties making it a Class A misdemeanor with a one year plus a thousand dollars. We have set up some rules and guidelines that we can go by and it is... it's been, just like letting somebody else use your driver's license. They can't do that. It's fraud and what we are doing here is setting up some rules and guidelines that we can watch out and punish the people that do wrong."

"I support Mr. Panayotovich's position. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Representative Wolf."

"Madam Speaker, 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 Panayotovich, to close."

"I just ask for affirmative votes for this consumer 174  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 protection Bill."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 562 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 110 voting 'aye', 3 voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 588, Representative Panayotovich. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 588, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act. Has... amended... Has been read a second time previously. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, Panayotovich, amends Senate Bill..."

"Representative Panayotovich."

"Thank you, Madam Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This was a Bill that Representative Mays and I successfully moved out of the Labor and Commerce Committee as a bipartisan effort to show that good work could come out of it. Amendment #2 removes as a defense some actions brought by the Educational Labor Relations Board for enforcement of a final order. Those matters alleged violators could have raised by initiating a judicial review of the final order as provided in the Educational Labor Relation Act. I move for adoption of Amendment #2."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 588. On that question, is there any discussion? Hearing none, the question is, 175  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 'Shall Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 588 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Representative Panayotovich now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 588 as amended. Are there any objections? Hearing none, the Gentleman has leave. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 588, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Panayotovich."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. And I would like to let my Cosponsor close, Representative Mays. What this Bill does, it amends the Labor Relations Act to provide that employees subject to the Act may file charges of unfair labor practices with the Illinois Education Labor Board, and I move for its adoption and passage."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 588. And on that question, is there any discussion? Hearing none, Representative Mays to close. The Gentleman waives his close. The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 588 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Representative Panayotovich, for what reason do you seek recognition?"

"I'd like to explain my vote if I may."

"Please explain your vote."

"Thank you. I would like to let everybody know that Representative Mays has learned how to tie his tie due to me, and I'd like to see all those green votes up there."

"Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question, there are 112 voting 'aye', 176  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 1 voting 'no' and 1 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 722 (sic - 721), Representative Dunn. Clerk, read the Bill. 721."

"Senate Bill 721, a Bill for an Act to create the Illinois Emergency Employment Development Act. It's been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, John Dunn, amends Senate Bill 721."

"Representative Dunn."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would ask for adoption of Amendment #1 which would change the base period for... determination as to who is eligible from calculation over a six month period to a twelve month period and the Amendment would also provide that not more than fifteen percent of the funds available for the purposes of this Act shall be used for overhead. I ask for adoption of the Amendment."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 721. And on that question, is there any discussion? Hearing none, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 to Senate Bill 721 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 #2, John Dunn, amends Senate..."

"Representative Dunn."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Amendment #2 is a technical but significant change. The Bill provides for subsidies to employers who pay wages up to a maximum of four dollars per hour and the Bill actually should have read a little differently. The 177  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendment would provide that the employment subsidy may be 50 percent of the wages paid up to a maximum of four dollars per hour subsidy. So, if a... if an employee is paid eight dollars per hour, the subsidy would be four dollars. If the employee is paid six dollars an hour the subsidy would be three dollars. If he is paid four dollars an hour, the subsidy would be two dollars."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 721. And on that question, is there any discussion? Hearing none, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 to Senate Bill 721 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, John Dunn."

"Representative Dunn."

"I ask leave to withdraw Amendment #3."

"Withdraw Amendment #3. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #4, John Dunn."

"Representative Dunn."

"Ask leave to withdraw Amendment #4."

"Withdraw Amendment #4. Are there any further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, Dunn."

"Representative Dunn."

"Amendment #5, I would ask for a favorable adoption of Amendment #5. What Amendment #5 does is to provide that the areas for determination as to eligibility for the subsidies provided in this legislation shall be the Job Partnership Training Act areas and I would ask for adoption of the Amendment."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of 179  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendment #5 to Senate Bill 721. And on that question is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Knox, Representative Hawkinson."

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

"He will yield for a question."

"John, I didn't hear the discussion on this Amendment."

"Okay, Amendment #5 makes a change in the Bill to provide... the Bill is to provide subsidies to employers who hire people in areas of high unemployment. The state is to be divided into areas for this purpose and Amendment #5 provides that the areas into which the state shall be divided are the existing Job Training Partnership Act areas. The... Those serve as delivery areas rather than areas in... the DCCA service areas which were in the original Bill. This... This Amendment is... is drafted at the request of the Department of Commerce and Community Affairs and it does further provide, if I recall correctly, that those eligible shall be for-profit businesses and non-profit agencies, but government shall no longer be eligible for this subsidy."

"Thank you."

"The question is, 'Shall Amendment #5 to Senate Bill 721 be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendment?"

"Floor Amendment #6, Wyvetter Younge."

"Representative Younge."

"Please table the Amendment."

"Withdraw Amendment #6. Are there any further Amendments?" 179  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Representative Dunn now asks leave for immediate consideration of Senate Bill 721 as amended on Third Reading. Are there any objections? Hearing none, the Gentleman has leave. Read the Bill, Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 721, a Bill for an Act to create the Illinois Emergency Employment Development Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Dunn."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Bill would provide help all across the State of Illinois to those areas which have high unemployment. What it would provide is a subsidy to employers who are willing to hire people in those areas who are out of work and who meet certain qualifications, which basically means that they are from households with no income. To the extent, an employer is not mandated to hire these people, but to the extent an employer does, this Bill will provide for a subsidy of up to 50% of the hourly wage of that employee for a period of 26 weeks, unless they're involved in the Job Partnership Training Act school when the subsidy might go as long as a year. In the event an employee does hire such... an employer does hire such an employee and lays the employee off, there could be a payback. So employers should know that. But it is an incentive where you have a large number of your work force out of work to encourage employers to participate in this program, provide employment and to give them a break on the hourly rate to get their program started. So, it's a business and labor industry. It's a people's Bill and I would ask for passage of Senate Bill 721."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of 190  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Senate Bill 721. And on that question, the Gentleman from Adams, Representative Mays."

"Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Would the Gentlemen yield for a few questions?"

"He will yield for a question."

"What's the cost of this program, Representative?"

"The cost shall not exceed $10,000,000. There is a proviso in the Bill that it shall be capped at $10,000,000. So, the cost will be something less than that. It will, of course, depend upon the number of employees who choose to participate in this program in eligible areas. And not every employer will, of course, choose to participate. So, I don't think anyone knows the exact cost and for that reason, a cap was put in the Bill so it could not run away with the State Treasury."

"Thank you. Is this in Department of Commerce and Community Affairs' budget at this time or do you have an Amendment proposed to the budget for this purpose?"

"There is an Amendment attached to the Department of Commerce and Community Affairs' appropriation Bill, the ordinary and contingent expense appropriation at this time in the sum of $10,000,000 to cover the cost of this Bill."

"Are those General Revenue Fund dollars?"

"That will be... I think pretty sure it's General Revenue, yes."

"Okay. So, of the $10,000,000 then, three-fourths of those have to go for wages for people hired under this Act. Is that not correct?"

"I believe it's 85%. Three-fourths is in the original Bill, but I think one of the Amendments increases that to 85%."

"Okay. And so an employer... You also have a mechanism within the marketing area or the JTPA area, only the 181  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 employers in the county within that area that have the highest unemployment rate are eligible for these funds. Is that not correct?"

"What will... This... The best way to visualize this is a pilot program. Where the unemployment is high, those areas will be eligible first and it's like any pilot program. You have to see who applies. Nobody applies, this Bill won't cost a dime. I feel certain there will be a number applicants."

"Okay. So, my service area then goes from Quincy up to Galesburg and everything in between. The one county that has the highest employment rate as of what date is going to be eligible for these funds?"

"I think you're correct about the highest employment county. I... You catch me off guard. I don't know the effective date of the Act, but first of all, we have to pass the Bill. So, after it becomes law, I don't know how soon this will kick in."

"To the Bill. Representative, I'm not... I don't know whether this has merit. There's a lot of questions that I presently have on this Bill that we didn't have answered in Committee, and I think that's why we saw a 13 to 9 vote out of the Committee. I would simply... You know, with all those questions that we have and with the doubt in my mind as to what kind of impact it would have in my area, I don't know that it's a reasonable expense of $10,000,000 to the state. How would you even determine this in the Cook County area where you... how many market areas do you have up there? I think you'll have trouble in determining where the allocations go should this go in the first place and I would like to know how it would impact my area before I could justify an expense of $10,000,000. It wasn't in the Governor's proposed budget. For that reason, I stand in 192  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENEAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 opposition to the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Peoria, Representative Tuerk."

"Madam Speaker, Members of the House, notwithstanding the impact or the thrust of the Bill as laudible as it may be I think, as the previous speaker just enumerated, there are a number of questions unresolved. Beyond that, the Federal Government tried this, oh, ten or fifteen years ago in trying to put underemployed types of people back to work or in the work force. It actually was a big failure. I'm fearful that this program could follow the same suit, and I would ask for your negative vote on the Bill."

"Madam Speaker, if I could just respond to the..."

"Excuse me, the Gentleman did not ask a question. The Gentlemen from Madison, Representative Wolf."

"Madam Speaker, 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, and the main question is put. Representative Dunn, to close."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. In closing, I would like to respond to the previous speaker. It is true that there have been previous programs in place and they have had only limited success, but this program is different and it's different in this respect. The earlier programs provided for job training with no assurance that at the end of the training program a job would be out there. The thrust of this Bill, this legislation, is entirely different. This legislation makes an opportunity available to an employer. This Bill says to an employer, if you have need for employees, we will help 183  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 subsidize the initial start up of those employees if you hire them in high unemployment areas and we will provide up to half of your per hour cost of wages. This doesn't have anything to do with training people for jobs that aren't there. This is a Bill. It's an employer Bill. It's a business Bill. It's a good Bill. The only reason there are any objections to this legislation at this time is that, as provided in the Bill, it could cost up to $10,000,000. And this Bill and the cost of it, if any, is not in the Governor's budget. Well, I only know one set of tablets which came down from the sky cast into stone. The Governor's budget is not cast into stone. The Governor is seeking approval for 'Build Illinois'. This is a 'Build Illinois' program. This is a job's program. This is an employer Bill. This is a Bill that would help employees as well. It'll provide a 50% subsidy per hour for wages. It's different from all the others. It's a good Bill and I ask for your 'aye' vote."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 721 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is open. Please correct the board, Mr. Clerk. This is final passage. It's not an Amendment. The Gentleman from Will, Representative Regan, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Members of the House. We've got enterprise zones, JOPPAs and CETAs, and this sounds worse than the CETA program that was before. The main problem with the CETA program that was stopped by the Reagan administration was that employers, with all due respect, would hire, when they got their share of the money and 50% of the salaries weren't paid anymore, the people were laid back off again. So, I think the same kind of thing can happen here, and I think it's a waste of 184  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 $10,000,000. So, I vote 'no'."

"Representative Young, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. I think this is a very good Bill. It's just what the state needs. Contrary to what the other speakers have said, this Bill, in effect, will bring back to the state the original $10,000,000. The people who will receive these jobs are currently on general assistance or AFDC. They will go from being recipients of state money to paying state taxes. And most importantly, it allows businesses to expand. Once these businesses expand and increase their number of employees, I think it's ridiculous to assume that they will cut back on that expansion just to pick up the 50% of the salary."

"Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 77 voting 'aye', 40 voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Senate Bill 1064, Representative Saltsman. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 1064, a Bill for an Act to amend the Code of Civil Procedure. It has been read a second time previously. Amendment #1 was adopted in Committee."

"Are there any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Read the Bill on Third."

"Senate Bill 1064, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Code of Civil Procedure. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Saltsman."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. This Bill changes the 185  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 jurisdiction to review the final order of the Education Labor Relations Board from the Circuit Court to the Appellate Court, the Judicial District in which the Board maintains its principal office. I ask for its passage."

"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 1064. And on that question, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Peoria, Representative Tuerk."

"Madam Speaker, Members of the House, the Bill itself was not a bad Bill when it came over here, but the Gentleman that's proposing passage of the Bill put on in Committee an Amendment which provides for a collective bargaining agreement that contains a successor clause must be honored by anyone who purchases the company. Now, that Bill, if you recall, was the subject of a House Bill some weeks ago and it failed pretty miserably in the House. And I think as a result of this Amendment, which was the concept of that Bill originally, should be defeated the same way that we defeated that House Bill, and I believe that was 1448 if I recall. I would ask for your negative votes on the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Bullock."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise as a hyphenated Sponsor on Senate Bill 1064. In addition to the fact, the Gentleman from Peoria on the other side of the aisle alluded to the Amendment, Committee Amendment #1, which went on this Bill. And that Amendment, in effect, attempts to codify into law what is called a successor clause. He is correct up until that point and after that point, he gives us an editorial comment which somewhat at variance with the truth. The fact of the matter is, this Assembly has passed it on 186  STATE OF ILLINOIS 64th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1995 several occasions, the concept of successor employer clause. And basically what we're saying with this Amendment is that the individuals in our state, particularly those who come in contact with the Service Employees' International Union - those who come in contact with Mr. Gene 'Moats' in that union knows full well that what is attempted here is to make certain that corporate piracy does not continue to abound in the State of Illinois where individuals choose to use the russ of law to avoid obligations to our working people in this state. Violation is a business offense. In this particular Amendment, the successor employer could not be bound by a collective bargain agreement for more than three years after the original effective date of the agreement. This Amendment makes the Bill stronger. The Bill itself only missed passing the House by a hand... less than a handful of votes. Many of the Members had left early that day. I urge an 'aye' vote on Senate Bill 1064 as amended. As I said before, the Service Employees' International Union supports this Bill, and you know that's a fine union. It's bipartisan in support from Members of the House. I'd urge an 'aye' vote."

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

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. As everyone agrees, the Bill is in correct form. And the Amendment, which I think is an excellent Amendment, with the three year clause of the original date of the agreement. That is not too long for a new employer to honor a contract. If he can't honor a contract for three years, then he shouldn't be in the business anyhow. I ask for your favor... passage of this Bill."

"The question is, 'Shall Senate Bill 1064 pass?' 187  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 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 73 voting 'aye', 42 voting 'no', and none voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. The next Order of Business, Ladies and Gentlemen, that we are going to go to is on the Special Order of Public Utilities. The first Bill on that Call is Senate Bill 3, Representative Mautino. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 3, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relationship to the concentration and storage of radioactive waste and the Civil Administrative Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Representative Mautino."

"Thank you, Madam Speaker. Senate Bill 3, sponsored by Senator Joyce in the Senate, addresses the provisions for on site and off site low level radioactive site storage or disposal. Last year, Senator Joyce was involved, after this General Assembly established the radioactive waste compact, with the State of Kentucky as it pertains to a joint venture. What this legislation did after that provision and after that meeting between Kentucky and Illinois for the compact, was to provide the establishment of local approval as one of the requirements for a low level radioactive site. This proposal is virtually identical to the existing requirements for landfill waste sites under Senate Bill 172. Local approval for off site low level radioactive waste would be required as follows: It prohibited the Department of nuclear safety from acquiring any property for the purpose of building a low level radioactive waste storage treatment or disposal facility unless it has been approved by the municipality 188  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 which is located or the county if it's in unincorporated area; it establishes the criteria in making the siting decisions so that it provides for the health, safety and welfare of the citizens; it requires notice for the proposed site to residents who live within 250 feet of the property and the Members of the General Assembly and public notice in local news media; it requires the provisions for a public hearing to be held on a proposed facility and that any member of the public would be allowed to present his or her case on the question; it sets up the provisions for the decision on deciding approval within a 180 days; allows for appeal by the local decision by the... it allows for the appeal of the local decision by the Department of Nuclear Safety or rather third parties to the Pollution Control Board; it requires the General Assembly approval before any low level nuclear waste repository or spent fuel reprocessing facility be licensed by the Department of Nuclear Safety. In entering the central midwest low level radioactive waste compact with Kentucky, Illinois sets forth the provisions upfront, stating to the individuals of this state that there should be public input to a low level off site or on site repository provision. Kentucky and Illinois are going to be the two states in the compact for the low level facility, and I believe, as does Senator Joyce, that the public must be aware this is not a provision to impede any siting. But I believe that now if you do it up front, inform the people of the geographic provisions, the geologic provisions, the hydrological provisions of a site and do it up front..."

"Excuse me, Representative Mautino, we have found that we are not prepared to go to this Order of Business. Would you mind if we take it out of the record for just a short time? I'm very sorry. I know it was 189  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 complicated and you gave an extensive explanation of the Bill, but would you mind taking the Bill out of the record? Hopefully, just for a short time."

"Happy to accommodate you, Speaker. I understand full well your concerns. Thank you."

"Thank you, Sir. The Order of Call that we will go to, Ladies and Gentlemen, is the Special Order - Subject Matter of State and Local Government Administration. Representative Greiman in the Chair."

"On the Order of Special Call - State and Local Government Administration appears Senate Bill 122. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 122, a Bill for an Act in relationship to lost and abandoned boats. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Nash."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentleman of the House. Senate Bill 122 establishes new requirements relating to lost and abandoned water craft. Requires reporting of abandoned boats to local law enforcement agencies - provides for disposition of such boats if the owner cannot be identified. I ask for a favorable Roll Call."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Nash, moves for the passage of Senate Bill 122. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. This is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 112 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority. Mr. Shaw votes 'aye'. 113 'ayes', none 'no', none 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On the 190  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Order of Special Call - State and Local Government Administration, appears Senate Bill 141. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 141, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act concerning the terms of office of various state commissioners and board members. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago, Mr. Giorgi."

"Mr. Speaker, Senate Bill 141 is the Bill that brings the various boards and commissions appointed by the Governor in conformance with the state's pay plan. And the Boards are of the Pollution Control Board, Human Rights Commission, Industrial Commission, Civil Service Commission, Commerce Commission, Board of Elections, Liquor Control Board, Prisoner Review Board and Racing Board, and I urge support of the House for this Bill."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago moves for the passage of Senate Bill 141. And on that, is there any discussion? The Lady from Marshall, Ms. Koehler."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I think it's important to point out that apparently some Members of the General Assembly are trying to provide planks in the election platform of their statewide candidate. Last week we put together... the General Assembly voted out a Bill that would create legal aid for farmers for Attorney General Hartigan who wants to run for Governor. Today, they are giving an opportunity to Pat Quinn to have another issue with which to slam the General Assembly. This Bill, Ladies and Gentlemen, is another Bill that would allow, contrary to our Constitution, Members who are executive appointees to resign their position one day and to be reappointed the next day so that they might come in at a higher salary. Now, Ladies and Gentlemen, these 191  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 people, when they took their position as appointees, all knew what their salary would be, for what period of time they were to serve. I object to this method. It's just another cute trick to sidestep the obligations given to us in the Constitution and I hope that you will reject this Bill."

"Further discussion? The Gentlemen from Winnebago, Mr. Giorgi, to close."

"Mr. Speaker, I repeat. This a Bill that brings the various boards and commissions appointed by the Governor in conformance with the state's new pay plan. I urge support of the Assembly."

"The question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. And this will be final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 37 voting 'aye', 70 voting 'no', 3 voting 'present'. And the Bill fails. On the Order of Special Call - State and Local Government, appears Senate Bill 296. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 296, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Municipal Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Parke."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 296 permits a person who has served as an auxiliary policeman for at least five years and is under forty years of age to be a candidate for full fledge policeman status. The Illinois Police Federation supports this Bill because they believe it will provide more candidates who are experienced in law enforcement field to the police departments. The Illinois Municipal League also 192  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 supports it, as does the Fraternal Order of Police."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Parke, moves for the passage of Senate Bill 296. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. And this is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 109 voting 'aye', 1 voting 'no', 1 voting 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On the Order of Special Call - State and Local Government, appears Senate Bill 343. Mr. Clerk. Mr. Dunn. Mr. Dunn in the chamber? Well, alright, we'll just take that out of the record for a little while till Mr. Dunn returns, and we'll move to the next Bill. On the Order of Special Call - State and Local Government Administration, appears Senate Bill 5... I'm sorry, 425. 425. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 425, a Bill for an Act to enlarge the corporate limits of the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago. This Bill has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

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

"Gentleman from Kane, Mr. Kirkland, on Floor Amendment #1."

"Please withdraw the Amendment."

"Amendment's withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

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

"Same thing, please."

"Mr... Withdraw Amendment #2. Further 193  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Amendments?"

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

"Gentlemen from Cook, Mr. Terzich, on Floor Amendment #3."

"Withdraw Floor Amendment #3."

"Floor Amendment #3 is withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

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

"Mr. Terzich, on Floor Amendment 4."

"Floor Amendment #4 strikes everything after the enacting clause and makes an adjustment for the North Shore Sanitary District for a minor salary adjustment which is from 7500 to $10,000 for the president and from 5,000 to $7,000 for the other board members. And I would move for its adoption."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Terzich, moves for passage... moves for adoption of Amendment 4 to Senate 425. And on that, the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Piel."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Gentleman yield, please?"

"Yes."

"Indicates that he will yield for a question."

"Bob, you mentioned the situation as far as the minor salary adjustments. Was there something else in there dealing with bonds, the issuance of bonds?"

"Yes, the Amendment adds language to the district to provide that all bonds, notes or evidence of indebtedness shall be..."

"I'm sorry. Excuse me, Bob, for one minute. Mr. Speaker, could we have some order here? I cannot hear at all what he's saying. Mr. Speaker, can we have some order here, 194  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 please?"

"Would you give Mr. Piel some attention and order, please?"

"It's not necessarily Mr. Piel. The Sponsor..."

"Thank you, Mr. Piel."

"The Sponsor is trying to describe the Amendment to the Members of the House."

"Proceed, Mr. Piel."

"Go ahead, Bob. I'm sorry."

"It provides notes or other evidence of indebtedness shall be sold at a price and upon such terms as determined by the Board of Commissioners and which will not cause the net effect interest rate to be paid by the district to exceed the rate established by Illinois law as now or hereafter amended."

"Okay. So, that just basically brings it up to where they can bring these bonds in at the permissible interest rate of what the bonds are going at at the present time."

"Yes, the variable rate."

"Fine. Thank you very much."

"You're welcome."

"Gentlemen from Cook, Mr. Bullock."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This concept has been before the Assembly before. And I've spoken in support of Representative Terzich's initiative. The fact of the matter is, this Amendment would, in fact, enable the district to perform a function that it is performing quite well. The district, in fact, is an efficiently run operation in the metropolitan area of Chicago. It, for nothing else, performed quite admirably during the salmonella outbreak epidemic by protecting the public health as it relates to the illegal disposal of tainted milk in certain sewers. So, if nothing else the 195  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 sanitary district has performed admirably and well in that regard. The fact of the matter is, Representative Terzich is absolutely correct. The inflation rate has impacted on that particular entity. And I think that we all know that now is the time for us to support Representative Terzich and ensure that these individuals are, in fact, compensated. And I urge an 'aye' vote."

"Mr. Shaw."

"That was nice of you, Larry. Thank you."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, a point of information. How many votes does this Bill need, and does this Amendment change the title of the Bill?"

"Mr. Shaw, the Bill is present... is presently constituted in... if Amendment #4 were adopted, it would take 60 votes, as to your first question. As to your second question, it appears to change the title."

"I withdraw the objection to it."

"Okay. Further discussion? Mr. Terzich, to close."

"Yes, I would move for the adoption of Amendment #4, Mr. Speaker."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Terzich, moves for the adoption Amendment 4 to Senate Bill 425. All those 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?"

"Floor Amendment #5, offered by Representative Kirkland."

"Gentleman from Kane, Mr. Kirkland, on Amendment 5."

"On that Amendment too, please."

"Withdraw it. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments." 196  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Third Reading. The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Terzich, asks leave of the House to use the Attendance Roll Call to waive Rule 37 (c) so the Bill may be heard at this time on the Order of Third Reading. Gentleman have leave? Leave is granted. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill on Third Reading."

"Senate Bill 425, a Bill for an Act to enlarge the corporate limits of the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Terzich."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #4 basically is the Bill. And it's not the MSD. This happens to be the NSD which is the North Shore Sanitary District. What it does, it provides for a minor salary adjustment. In the last twenty years, this has not been adjusted. It's a very minor one. It goes from the current salary of $7,500 to $10,000 for the president and for the board members from 5,000 to 7,000. And like I say, there hasn't been any adjustment in about twenty years. And I would urge your support of Senate Bill 425."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Terzich, moves for the passage of Senate Bill 425. Is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open and this is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 73 'ayes', 44 'nos', none 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitution Majority, is hereby declared passed. Returning to the previous Bill on the Order of State and Local Government - Special Call, appears Senate Bill 343. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 343, a Bill for an Act to amend 197  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Sections of the Court Reporters Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Mr. Dunn."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 343 is a Bill which is identical to a Bill we passed out of this House earlier. It amends the Court Reporters Act to eliminate the requirement of the Chief Judge of the Circuit must have the advice and consent of the Circuit Judges and provides that the Chief Judge of the Circuit may appoint an administrative assistant, salary to be determined by the Supreme Court. This is a Bill that the Supreme Court and the court administrator would like to have passed. And I would ask a favorable vote."

"The Gentleman from Macon moves for the passage of Senate Bill 343. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is... I'm sorry, the Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson."

"Yes, Representative... Will the Sponsor yield for a question, Mr. Speaker?"

"Indicates that he will."

"Representative Dunn, is this the Bill... I'm having a hard time finding my analysis. Is this the Bill that transfers the appointment authority for court reporters from the Chief Judge... from all the Circuit Judges to the Chief Judge?"

"The Bill provides the Chief Judge may appoint an administrative assistant, but I don't think it does that with the court reporters. I'll check here, but I don't think so. Now, wait a minute. The Bill... the Bill itself may very well deal with the... The Bill itself does provide that the... it eliminates the requirement that the Chief Judge must have the advice and consent of the Circuit Judge in appointing and removing the court reporters." 198  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"So, the Chief Judge will be able to unilaterally to make the appointment of court reporters."

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

"Mr. Speaker, to the Bill. I have no particular problem with Floor Amendment #1 and the administrative assistant issue. I do believe that it would be a mistake for us to vest this much power over court reporters in the hands of the Chief Judge. There is no reason that there ought not be some process where the other Judges who have to use these court reporters can have some say in the court reporters selected. What this does is to vest a great deal of patronage authority and an authority over the actual operation of each Judge, each Judge's courtroom, in the hands of the Chief Judge. I think that's a mistake. I think the individual Judges ought to have some role in selecting the court reporter who is actually going to report the proceedings of that particular courtroom. And all that we have right now is an advice and consent process as I understand things. I think it would be a mistake to take advice and consent process away. If a Judge can't control his own courtroom, then I don't know what good Judges are and I would urge a 'no' vote on the Bill for that reason. Now, if the Gentleman wanted to take the Bill back to Second and take that particular provision off, I'd have no problem with that. I'd have no problem in granting him leave to go back and hear it on Third Reading, but I think that particular provision would be a bad mistake to lodge in the Chief Judge's hands. And I would urge a 'no' vote on the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Cullerton."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Just so... Sometimes I just can't understand this place. This Bill is identical to House Bill 1267. If 199  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 you look on your Digest, it's on page 1259 of the Digest that's dated June 21st. It was House Bill 1267. I was the Sponsor, Short Debate Calendar. Passed on May 20... June 5th. I'm sorry. It passed on May 17, 106 to 2 with 2 voting 'no'. I don't which... I don't know whether Representative Vinson was one of the two people that voted 'no'. I tend to doubt it, because he... when he votes a certain way, a lot of people come with him. This Bill is an absolute meaning... not meaningless, it's a request from the Supreme Court because they had to go around and get - in these downstate Circuits - they had to go around and get all of the the Judges to give the advice and consent to the Chief Judge in appointing and removing court reporters and they just felt that it took too much time, and that's why they recommended the Bill. And that's how we passed it. And you undoubtedly, when I say you, I mean most everybody in this chamber undoubtedly voted for it. Now, Amendment #1 is also an Amendment which was the subject matter of a House Bill which also passed. And what that Bill or Amendment did was to say that the administrative assistant, which is now called the secretary, the name would be changed to assistant, that their salary would be determined by the general appropriation of the Supreme Court. Right now, we have statutory limits as to what their salary should be and the thought was that their salary should be set by the appropriation of the Supreme Court. Some people... some of these administrative assistants would get more and some would get less than they get right now, dependent upon how much work they do for that particular Circuit. So, that's all these Bills do. There is, in effect, two Bills that both flew out here. They're now combined into one Bill and there should be no reason in the world, no reason in the world why we shouldn't vote for 200  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 then. And I would suggest to you that you'll be faced with a situation if you vote 'no' of having voted on the opposite side of an issue within a matter of weeks which is not a good record to bring back to your district."

"Gentleman from Marion, Mr. Friedrich."

"Would the Sponsor yield?"

"Indicates he'll yield for a question."

"Since this is an idea of the Supreme Court, I'd like to know if the Supreme Court is an agency of State Government."

"You know as much about the Supreme Court as I do, perhaps, more."

"Well, they keep contending they're not an agency of State Government and don't have to be audited. I just wondered if they've suddenly become one."

"I know of your long standing concern about auditing the Supreme Court, and this Bill has nothing to do with that. And I understand your viewpoint."

"Further discussion? There being none, Mr. Dunn, to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House."

"I'm sorry. Mr. Van Duyne, you are covered by my Calendar. Mr. Dunn, Mr. Van Duyne had his light on. I'm sorry, Sir."

"A very quick question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does this affect the Circuit Court clerks at all?"

"No. It..."

"Thank you."

"It involves the court reporters and administrative assistants."

"Thank you."

"It does not affect the circuit clerk, if I heard you 201  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 correctly."

"Mr. Van Duyne, have you completed your interrogation? Mr. Dunn, to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. As one of the previous speakers indicated, this is a Bill which passed out of the House with 106 votes when it was a House Bill. It's coming back now. I would ask for your favorable approval. This Bill was passed, I think, unanimously in Committee. I don't have the report here, but I know it was placed on the Consent Calendar originally. This really is a Consent Calendar Bill and I would ask for the passage of Senate Bill 343."

"Question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open and this is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 85 voting 'aye', 32 voting 'no', none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On the Order of Special Call - State and Local Government Administration, appears Senate Bill 557. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 557, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of an Act to revise the law in relation to counties. This Bill has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments."

"Are there any Floor Amendments?"

"No Floor Amendments."

"Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 557, a Bill for an Act to revise the law in relation to counties. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Gentleman from Winnebago, Mr. Giorgi, on Senate Bill 557." 202  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Mr. Speaker, Senate Bill 557 provides with a front door referendum to increase or decrease the county corporate levy. Now an increase on a referendum is limited to a 25% reduction or increase. This allows after a referendum that the amount be greater or lower than the 25% limit. I know of no opposition to the Bill and I urge the adoption by the House."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago moves for the passage of Senate Bill 557. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open and this is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 90 voting 'aye', 24 voting 'no', none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. The Gentleman from Rock Island, Mr. DeJaegher, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Yes, Mr. Chairman (sic - Mr. Speaker), I would like to have you give me consideration. When House Bill 1064 was called, I was out in the lobby conversing with one of my constituents. And I would like to be recorded as 'yes' on that particular vote."

"Well, the Journal will so indicate your desire. We cannot change the Roll Call, however. On the Order of Special Call - State and Local Government Administration, appears Senate Bill 5... Ms. Wojcik, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"It's my Bill."

"...appears Senate Bill 560. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 560, a Bill for an Act relating to 203  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 taxes for libraries. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Lady from Cook, Ms. Wojcik."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, what this Bill does it amends the Local Library Act and the Public Library District Act and increases the maximum tax rate permitted by a front door referendum from .40 to .60%. And it corrects an error contained in Public Act '82 - 1014. I move for its passage."

"The Lady from Cook moves for the passage of Senate Bill 560. And on that, is there any discussion? Being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open and this will be final action. Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Cullerton, one minute to explain your vote."

"Yes, I want to explain my 'yes' vote. I'm in favor of increasing the tax rate for libraries with this Bill which is a front door referendum. Because it has a front door referendum, I'm in favor of this Bill which increases the tax rate for local libraries."

"Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 92 voting 'aye', 17 voting 'no', 6 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On the Order of State and Local Government - Special Call, appears Senate Bill 629. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 629, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Municipal Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Young."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 629, as amended, provides that 204  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 specifically described uninhabited property in the City of Burbank may be annexed by that city upon passage of an ordinance. The property right now is located within the County of Cook with boundaries in Chicago and in the City of Burbank. I move for its passage."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Young, has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 629. On that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. This is final action. Yes, Ms. Pullen, one minute to explain your vote."

"I had wished to ask a question, Mr. Speaker, in debate, but apparently my blinker came on late up there even though it was on here all the time. Perhaps, I could ask the Gentleman and he would nod."

"Yes, please, of course, please. Proceed."

"I would like to verify, Sir, that the Amendment is still on this Bill which restricts its provisions solely to the situation between the City of Burbank and Chicago. Thank you."

"For the record, Mr. Young shakes his head in the affirmative. Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 109 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', 5 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On the Order of Special Call, Senate Bills, State and Local Government Administration, appears Senate Bill 729. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. I'm sorry, 728. 728."

"Senate Bill 728, a Bill for an Act concerning the establishment of standards through administrative rules. This Bill has been read a second time previously. No Committee Amendments." 205  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Yes, the Gentleman... Are there any Floor Amendments?"

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

"Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson, on Floor Amendment #1."

"Mr. Speaker, I would withdraw Floor Amendment #1."

"Amendment #1 is withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #2, offered by Representative Vinson and Flinn."

"Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Floor Amendment #2 deletes the requirement in Section 3 that rules be adopted for fees charged for certificate examination and the standards for passage of a certificate examination. It deletes Section 4 which deals with the Medical Practice Act. I would move for the adoption of the Amendment."

"The Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson, moves for the adoption of Amendment 2 to Senate Bill 728. On that, the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Cullerton."

"Yes, I wonder if the Sponsor would yield for a question."

"Indicates that he will."

"Representative Vinson, what does this Amendment really do?"

"Mr. Cullerton, I believe that's what the Amendment really does."

"Okay. Let me ask you... I may be for this. Now, don't get me wrong. I may be for this. It deletes the Amendment of the Medical Practice Act included in the original Bill." 206  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"It deletes Section 4, which deals with Medical Practice Act, yes."

"Okay, what does the... what does the Bill do that we're eliminating in the Medical Practice Act from its application?"

"Well, what the Bill does is... it's a JCAR Bill. We routinely have agencies come before JCAR which have adopted certain rules and regulations which JCAR's staff and members determine that they're not really authorized to adopt by law. So, what we do is then come in with legislation to give them the authority to adopt those rules and regulations if they seem reasonable and if they seem appropriate to effectuate what legislative intent probably was. Now, Section 4 of the Bill amended the Medical Practice Act to require the Department of Registration and Education to specify by rule the standards used in determining whether to grant a permit renewal of a visiting professor to practice medicine and the standard used in determining whether an interview by the Medical Practice Examining Committee was necessary before granting a permit. And this Amendment would delete that Section 4."

"Thank you for answering that question. Now, then the other part of the Amendment deals with the occupational therapy."

"The other part of the Amendment?"

"Yes. The fees."

"The fees and standards for certificate examination in that."

"Does that have any..."

"It amends the... What the Bill had done was to amend the Occupational Therapy Practice Act to require the Department to promulgate rules setting forth standards and criteria used in determining when oral interviews would be 207  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 conducted, standards and criterias used when determining fitness and practice therapy and the procedures used in following oral interviews, the fees charged for certificate examination and the standards for passage of certificate examination. This deletes the requirement that rules be adopted for fees charged and standards for passage. Leave..."

"Well... Rep..."

"Leave the other part there."

"Thank you for... Representative Vinson, thank you for answering my question. It appears that on this one, you have nothing up your sleeve and I think either I'm misreading it or... it's a legitimate Amendment, and I'll support it."

"Bill Hart wasn't in the meeting."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. No further questions."

"Question is, 'Shall Amendment #2 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. The Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson, moves to waive Rule 37 (c) with the Attendance Roll Call so the Bill may be heard at this time. Does the Gentleman have leave? The Gentleman has leave. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill on Third Reading."

"Senate Bill 728, a Bill for an Act concerning the establishment of standards through administrative rules. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly. Senate Bill 728 is a Bill proposed by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. It deals with three 208  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 areas, the Department of Labor, the Secretary of State and the Department of Registration and Education. The purpose of the Bill is to create a statutory authorization for rules that have routinely been applied by those agencies. The rules can reasonably be inferred but are not expressly authorized and it is our intention to expressly authorize the application of those rules. I would move for a favorable Roll Call on Senate Bill 728."

"The Gentlemen from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson, has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 728. And on that, is there any discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open and this is final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 116 voting 'aye', none voting 'no', none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Alright. Alright. We're going to... What... Mr. Vinson, for what purpose you're seeking recognition?"

"Just to get you to call my Bill. I'm ready. Prepared to go."

"Don't be pushy."

"I mean, we gave you that time, Mr. Speaker."

"Alright. On the Order of Special Call - State and Local Government, appears Senate Bill 734. Mr. Clerk."

"Senate Bill 734, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Municipal Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd ask leave to take the Bill back to Second Reading for purposes of an Amendment."

"The Gentleman asks leave of the House to return 209  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the Bill to the Order of Second Reading for purposes of Amendment. Gentleman have leave? He has leave. Mr. Clerk, are there any Amendments?"

"Amendment #4, offered by Representative Johnson - et al."

"The Gentleman from Champaign, Mr. Johnson, on Amendment #4."

"Amendment #4... I move its adoption. I move its adoption."

"Excuse me, Mr. Johnson, the Chair didn't hear what you said."

"I said... Sponsor... the Bill is... Amendment. No, I'm not going to do that. If I didn't think you would catch me, I might try it. But I won't do that. Amendment #4 to Senate Bill 734 is House Bill 410. And what House Bill 410 does or did and what Senate Bill 734 will do after we adopt this Amendment is to provide that the uniform policy for the State of Illinois is to establish the right to keep and bear arms. This is the classic Morton Grove Amendment and I think I can address it in closing, but everybody knows what it is. It's the vote of the year on the issue of gun control. Everybody's going to debate about all the various nuances of this issue and local control and everything else. But the fact of the matter is, if you're for gun control and you think you ought to divest people of their right to bear arms, you ought to vote 'no' on this Amendment. If you believe that it's a sacred right and if the people ought to have the right to keep in bear arms for a variety of purposes, you ought to vote 'yes'. And that's the issue and I would ask its adoption."

"The Lady from Cook, Ms. Currie."

"I rise to question the germaneness of Amendment 4 to Senate Bill 734." 210  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Parliamentarian is examining it. Mr. Johnson, with respect to Ms. Currie's inquiry, we find that the Amendment is not germane. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, offered by Representative McPike."

"Excuse me. No one ever takes a ruling lying down. Mr. Johnson, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Well, usually when a judge makes a ruling, he gives the party some idea of the basis of the ruling. I'd like to know why the Amendment has been ruled nongermane."

"Oh. Alright, fine. I'm glad you asked that. Mr. Johnson, the Bill is an Amendment to the Municipal Code and the enacting clause provides for an Amendment... indicates it is an enactment to the Municipal Code... Illinois Municipal Code. The new title, however, of the Amendment is an Act in relation to units of local government. Units of local government are considerably broader than are Municipal Code... units of... which would be cities. Accordingly, you are broadening the scope of this very significantly and accordingly the Bill, therefore, is not germane. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #5, offered by Representative McPike."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. McPike. Gentleman from Madison, Mr. McPike. Mr. McPike, Amendment 5."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. It's my understanding that current state law allows cities to recoup attorneys fees for... in suits where there is delinquent sewer Bills. We're simply asking for the same authority for townships. I move the adoption of the Amendment."

"Gentleman from Madison moves for the adoption 211  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 of Amendment #5 to Senate Bill 734. On that, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Macon, Mr. Tate."

"First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would... parliamentary inquiry to see whether this Bill is germane. I believe this is the same Act in relationship to the units of local government, and your ruling from the previous Amendment would be applicable to this. Mr. Speaker, I just withdraw my request."

"Gentleman withdraws his request. Further discussion? There being none, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #5 be adopted?' Those in favor say 'aye', those opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

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

"Gentleman from Macon, Mr. Tate."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, Amendment #6 adds a new paragraph to the Municipal Code regarding firearm ordinances, provides that a municipality may not deprive a person of the right to possess firearms so long as the person..."

"Excuse me. Mr. Cullerton..."

"Thank you, Mr. Speak..."

"On a point of order."

"Yes, on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. With the adoption of Amendment #5, I believe Amendment #6 is out of order."

"Yes, Mr. Tate."

"Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of cooperation, I withdraw my Motion on Amendment 5. I would hope the Gentleman would withdraw his on 6."

"Mr. Cullerton, the Amendment's in order. Proceed, Mr. Tate." 212  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"It's in order?"

"That's what I ruled."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Amendment #6 adds a new paragraph to the Municipal Code regarding..."

"Excuse me, Mr. Tate. Mr. Cullerton, on a point of order."

"Yes, when a judge rules, normally he tells you the grounds for his ruling."

"Yes, alright, the ruling is, Mr. Cullerton, that the Amendment 5 of Mr. McPike's was inserted on line 23 of page one and the Tate Amendment is inserted earlier on line seven, I believe, of the Bill. I think... I believe. I'm not looking at the Bill. That's my recollection at this moment."

"And the title of Amendment #5 was changed."

"Well, we're not sure if the title was deleted or changed."

"I believe it was changed. Just ask for a replay."

"Well, just hold on. We're going to take a look again. Mr. Cullerton, in looking at the Amendment again, the Chair will have to confess error. We find that the... in the original... in the Amendment that Mr. McPike offered, it does change the title. It does delete lines one and two and; therefore, the Amendment because of that reason is out of order. And you are correct and the Chair stands corrected. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"Third Reading. Yes, Mr. Tate."

"Well, Mr. Speaker, I would just like the record to show that I withdrew my request on Amendment 5 and in the spirit of cooperation, I had done so. And that again, that the other side of the aisle felt to take the liberty of asking for this ruling. And again, we're the nice guys and 213  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 they're the tough guys. Thank you."

"Mr. Tate, no good deed deserves to go unpunished. The Gentleman from DeWitt."

"Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the portion of the rules, the requisite rule, whatever rule is required in order to hear this Bill immediately."

"The Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson, asks leave of the House using the Attendance Roll Call to waive Rule 37 (c) so the Bill may be heard at this time. Does the Gentleman have leave? The Gentleman has leave. Leave is granted. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill on Third Reading."

"Senate Bill 734, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Municipal Code. Third Reading of the Bill."

"Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly. When this Bill came over from the Senate, it dealt with the removal of garbage and how municipalities would do that. Then for a while this Bill dealt with lights in Wrigley Field. Then some people wanted to have this Bill deal with the individual liberty and the individual's right to bear arms. Now, this Bill, as I read it, does one thing. It serves the purposes of the Minority Leader (sic - Majority Leader), Mr. McPike. Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to help Mr. McPike serve his purposes. I want to help him pass his Bill. I think that come July 1st around here, concerns like Mr. Tate's can be addressed when you got to have 71 votes to pass things. And at that particular point, there may be some leverage. Someone once said, 'Give me a lever and I can move the world.' Well, June 30 at midnight's the fulcrum to that lever. And I move for a favorable Roll Call on Senate Bill 734."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Mr. McPike." 214  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's the first time that I can recall Representative Vinson being for me on anything. I'm not sure I'm for the Bill. Does the Bill do anything now that the Amendment's adopted?"

"What? I'm sorry, I couldn't hear."

"Does the Bill do anything now that the Amendment's adopted?"

"Well, it was your Amendment. It does whatever your Amendment did."

"There is nothing left on the Bill except the Amendment?"

"Just your Amendment from the way I read your Amendment."

"That's not how we read the Bill."

"Well, tell me what it does then."

"Excuse me. The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Cullerton."

"Yes, if I could indicate to Representative Vinson what the Bill does. It deals with garbage. And it..."

"No, it is garbage."

"What we're doing is we're looking at the Rockford experience and we're applying the Rockford experience with regard to garbage and we're going to apply it statewide. It permits municipalities to provide by ordinance for an exclusive method for the disposition of their garbage, notwithstanding the effect on competition. Now, the only municipality in the State of Illinois that has this right now is Rockford. And apparently, the garbage in Rockford has been - which is the second largest city in the State of Illinois, second largest park district, second largest water commission and sanitary district. So, the purpose of this Bill is provide a state action exemption from the federal anti-trust laws for the designation of an exclusive disposal method. And so, it deals with garbage. It does more than just what Representative McPike's Amendment does, 215  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 dealing with the right of the township to recover attorneys' fees in the collection of delinquent water payments. So, I don't know if it's a good Bill or not. We probably should hear from Representative Hallock and Giorgi to tell us whether or not this is a good idea to eliminate the effect on competition... the effect of competition."

"That's fine with me, but will you answer their questions?"

"Fine. Thank you very much, Representative Vinson."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago, Mr. Hallock."

"I think this Bill shows that everything in Rockford is ahead of its time, even the garbage. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Will, Mr. Van Duyne."

"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I heard the last couple of comments where the... says that it gives all state municipalities or all the municipalities in the state exemptions for a lot of things, and it's kind of garbled up in my mind. We, in Will County, have had an awful, awful lot of trouble with garbage. ESL landfill and we've been in court and I've sponsored many Bills and so has Representative Mautino and he ought to be paying especially... paying attention especially to this Bill. And I want to know whether or not there are any exemptions from any of the federal standards or the state standards. Does it give the city the right to operate garbage disposal sites and does it exempt them from the restrictions that are on the rest of the private people?"

"Further discussion?"

"Wait a minute, Mr. Speaker."

"Yes, Mr. Will..."

"I'm looking for the Sponsor here. I want to know..."

"Mr. Van Duyne, the Sponsor is Mr. Vinson."

"Mr. Vinson. You know, we've had so many problems 216  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 with landfills in Will County, toxic, hazardous and just plain, ordinary landfills that I am fearful with the vagueness of the explanation of this Bill as it stands right now that you may be... you may be substituting nothing for whatever we've worked for all these years."

"No, I'm not."

"Would you take it out of the record until I can come over there and talk to you for a while?"

"Let me see if I can handle your problem, Sir, so that you'll thoroughly understand the situation. The Bill, as it stands right now, is the Bill as it came over from the Senate with Amendments #1 and 5. The Bill as it came over from the Senate amended the Municipal Code to allow municipalities to provide by ordinance for an exclusive..."

"Would you please speak up, Sir? I can't hear you."

"Yes. It amended the Municipal Code to allow municipalities to provide by ordinance for an exclusive method for disposing of garbage, refuse and ashes. It was amended by Amendment #1 and that Amendment specified... that saved recycling so that material intended or collected for the purpose of recycling would be exempted from that municipal power to provide for an exclusive method of disposal. It does not affect in any fashion state regulation of hazardous waste landfills and so forth in that part of the Bill. Mr. McPike added an Amendment on, Amendment #5, added onto those provisions I just described that provides that a township utility may recover reasonable attorneys fees to be fixed by the court, which it incurs in seeking payment of delinquent accounts. I don't believe there's anything controversial on the Bill at this time, Representative, certainly nothing that would undo everything, all the good things you've done in your legislative career. Mostly what the Bill does is Mr. 217  STATE OF ILLINOIS 94th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 McPike's. The other part of it is the exclusive disposal at the option of a municipality."

"Very quickly, this allows them to develop their own method. Is that right?"

"I... I couldn't hear your question."

"That this Bill allows them to develop their own method."

"Yes, it enables them to provide for an exclusive method."

"Yeah, but what does that word 'exclusive' mean?"

"Sole, only."

"What?"

"Sole, S O L E, or only, O N L Y. Single."

"Okay, well, I don't know. As long as it doesn't give them expressed permission to avoid the EPA rules and the air pollution rules."

"It doesn't do anything like that at all. They've got to perform in accordance with state law."

"Thank you."

"Further discussion? Being none, the question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. This will be final action. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 113 voting 'aye', 1 voting 'no', none voting 'present'. This Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Ladies and Gentlemen, it is the intention of the Chair to now move to a Special Call - Public Utility and Environmental Protection. We will do only the public utility Bills on this Special Call. We will return to Government Administration in due time. But at this time, Public Utilities - Special Call, appears Senate Bill 110. Excuse 218  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 me. Mr. Hallock, for what purpose do you seek recognition? Thank you, Mr. Speaker."

"This morning as you'll recall when you were in the Chair, I asked you about an important matter I had on this Order of Call, Senate Bill 849, which had been on this Order for about a week. This morning somehow it vanished from this Order and I made an inquiry of the Chair as to just what happened to that Bill and why it was removed from that Order. You said this morning that you would look into it and get back to me later on today. I think it is now later on. Now, I would ask for your decision on that matter."

"I haven't got an answer yet. Mr. McCracken."

"Well, Mr. Speaker."

"Yes, Mr. Hallock."

"I respect your position on this matter, but it seems to me that after eight hours of discussion and debate, your staff, you and your staff should have had ample time to find out just what happened to that important Bill."

"Mr. McCracken."

"Well, what happened is we reached agreement with the manufacturers and now we've got a good Bill. So, let's leave it on the Special Calendar and move on."

"Mr. Vinson, for what purpose do you seek recognition now?"

"Mr. Speaker, how did we get to Senate Bill 110?"

"We got there because we are on Special Order - Public Utility and Environmental Protection - Public Utilities only, and we are, therefore, on 110. It is the first Bill on that Order of Business."

"Well, where does it say that there is a Special Order of Public Utilities only?"

"It says a Subject Matter Call, Mr... It's a 219  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Subject Matter Call within the Call. On that point, I'm going to 110. Mr. Clerk. Mr... Mr. Vinson... Yes, Mr. Vinson, what do you wish?"

"Mr. Speaker, I just want every Member in this chamber to understand what's happening. First of all, you establish a Special Order of Business, a series of them. Now, one of those Special Orders is Public Utility and Environmental Protection. You carry a Bill on there for several days, Senate Bill 849. An Amendment appears on Senate Bill 849, which you don't like, so you knock it off that Special Order. Then, what you do next is that when you call a Special Order, you decide you're only going to call some of the Bills on the Special Order. Now, what you're doing is just as bad as what Paul Powell ever did in that Chair. You're absolutely refusing to go by the rules that are specified on how you call Bills. You're just abrogating to yourself your own absolute discretion. We go along. We try to move Bills. We try to cooperate with you and then what you do is just go to the Bills you want to call. It is an absolute denial of democracy, due process and order. What you're doing is returning to that Chair all of the legislative power of the people of Illinois. It's wrong. You ought to be embarrassed. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. You ought to stand and apologize to the chamber and to the people."

"Yes, Mr. McPike, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's my understanding that we're on, under Rule 39-1, the Calendar that we're on Subject Matter - Public Utilities, and so that we are calling four Bills in that subject area. Is that correct?"

"No, Mr. McPike, to make it quite clear, the Chair, relying on the rule that you just enunciated, will 220  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 not resort, as we previously had, to the Special Call that is already on the Calendar of Public Utility and Environmental Protection. We will, instead, rely on the language in 39(a-1) which provides for the calling of Bills by subject matter. On the Order of Third Reading, there are three Bills dealing with Public Utility. It is the intention of the Chair to call the three Bills. So that you will all know what they are, they are Senate Bill 110. This is on Senate Bills Third Reading - Public Utility. Senate Bill 110, Senate Bill 217 and Senate Bill 1021. Those are the Bills that are on... These are the Bills that are on Third Reading. Now, we will... Mr. Piel seeks recognition. Mr. Piel, what is your pleasure?"

"Question of the Chair. Where is 217 on the Calendar, Mr. Speaker?"

"217 is on the Order of Third Reading. Senate Bills Third Reading."

"Is that on the Special Call, though?"

"That's on the Special Subject Matter of Call the Chair has just announced that it will go to. We will go to Bills on Third Reading, Senate Bills Third Reading by subject matter."

"Okay. But, that wasn't on the previous Public Utilities Special Call, correct?"

"That's... Well, it happens it is, but that's neither here or there. We're going on a new Call now."

"I'm sorry, but it isn't."

"Mr. McCracken. Oh, it wasn't. It... Apparently, it was not. No, we're just going on Bills that are on Third Reading. Senate Bills Third Reading. Mr. McCracken, I called on. Mr. Hallock."

"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to renew my question. Now, my Bill stood on Second. My community 221  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 right-to-know Bill was on this Order of Business for over a week and it disappeared this morning, and you said you were going to get back to me. I believe I have a right to know. You can't capriciously drop Members' Bills from Special Orders because it suits your fancy. I believe we are entitled to an answer to the question."

"And I will get back to you. On the Order of Senate Bills Third Reading, Special Call - Public Utilities, appears Senate Bill 110. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. Out of the record."

"Senate Bill 110..."

"On the Order of Senate Bills Third Reading, Public Utilities, appears Senate Bill 217. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 217, a Bill for an Act to amend the Public Utilities Act. Third Reading of the Bill."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Young."

"Alright, thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 217 amends the Public Utility Act to permit certain businesses located within an enterprise zone to file a claim for a refund to recover the amount of the pass on of a municipal and state utility tax. The refund is available at the county or municipality which assigned the zone has adopted an ordinance authorizing such claims for a credit or refund of the pass on of the utility taxes. I move for its passage."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Young, has moved for the passage of Senate Bill 217. And on that, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from DeWitt, Mr. Vinson."

"Yes, will the Sponsor yield?"

"Indicates he will yield for questions."

"Representative, would you explain to me again what your Bill does?" 222  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"What this Bill does, it allows for a claim for a refund to recover the pass on of a municipal and state utility tax once that option is granted by the county or municipality which has assigned the zone."

"Only in an enterprise zone?"

"Only in an enterprise... only in an enterprise zone."

"And why would you do that only in an enterprise zone?"

"The... To promote growth of business within the designated enterprise zones."

"And those taxes hinder that growth. Is that correct?"

"What we're trying to do is provide an incentive for growth."

"And... and... Yeah, an incentive by giving them a credit against the taxes. Those taxes hinder... those taxes hinder the... those taxes would hinder the growth and development of business. Is that right?"

"I think this Bill would promote the growth and development of business."

"Because it grants a credit against the taxes."

"It grants a refund provided... One thing, Mr. Vinson, this is not an automatic grant. This grant has to be approved by the county or the municipality which has authorized the enterprise zone. So, if someone applies for this refund, that application has to go through the designated unit of local government. If they feel that this refund provision will not, in fact, be a greater benefit to the area than the loss of the tax dollars... then, of course, they won't grant it."

"Now, who in that municipality or that local government makes that approval?"

"Either the county board or the council of the enterprise zone."

"Are there any enterprise zones in the City of Chicago?" 223  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Yes."

"So, in the case of the City of Chicago, it would be the city council that would do that."

"The enterprise zone council, not the city council."

"The enterprise zone council?"

"Yes."

"And who is on the enterprise zone council?"

"The enterprise zone council members vary according to the zone."

"I'm sorry."

"Members of the enterprise zone council vary according to the zone."

"Well, how are the enterprise zone council members selected?"

"In the City of Chicago, they are appointed."

"By whom?"

"By the Mayor."

"By the Mayor. Well, to the Bill, Mr. Speaker. I would suggest that Members look at this Bill very carefully. What the Gentleman has just stated is that members of a thing called the enterprise zone council can choose arbitrarily whether or not to give a tax credit to an enterprise zone enterprise. Those board members are appointed by the Mayor. So, what you really have is a situation where the Mayor can choose whether or not he's going to give a tax credit to a company. He doesn't have to give the tax credit to them, only has to do it if he wants to. Is that a return to the kind of clout that traditionally characterized the City of Chicago in the operation of the Mayor's Office? It looks to me like it is a legislative system of clout, and I would suggest that Members retain some skepticism about how such a system would operate. I think we all know enough about government 224  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 to have some skepticism about whether that would be legitimately operated, and I would suggest that a great deal of skepticism is certainly in order in regards to this particular giveaway."

"Mr. Piel."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Gentleman yield, please?"

"Indicates he will."

"Representative Young, you know, Representative Vinson brought out the situation as far as this being allowed as a credit or a refund to the businesses as far as, you know, the utility taxes went. What is the potential, you know, and obviously it's somewhat of a 'guesstimate'. But what is the potential tax loss to the State of Illinois in this type of a case?"

"The fiscal note that is on file says that it cannot be estimated because it depends on how many refunds are granted by the enterprise zone board."

"How many re... I'm sorry, I missed the last line of what you said. The refunds are granted by who?"

"By the enterprise zone councils throughout the state."

"Okay. Now, the enterprise zone council... Now, correct me if I'm wrong, then. In other words, who is going to be offering these credits now, the enterprise zone council, the city government, the county government, the State Government or DCCA or who?"

"I'm sorry, I didn't understand that question."

"You said the enterprise... depending on who authorized... you know, how many were authorized by the enterprise zone council. I didn't see anything in here as far as the enterprise zone council per se, and that's the reason I'm trying to figure out who is authorizing these tax credits or refunds. You know, I mean is it going to be the 225  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 municipality, the county, state or DCCA? Who is this?"

"Alright, they will be authorized by the council from the particular enterprise zone. In some zones, that would be a council from within a city and other smaller zones throughout the state which comprise more than one town, then each town within an enterprise zone appoints one member to that council. It would be the joint action of that council who would either approve or disapprove an application for a refund under this provision."

"Let's take Cook County where you and I both live. Cook County and the City of Chicago, where... who comprises the council, the enterprise zone council in those two areas?"

"The enterprise zones within the City of Chicago that council is appointed by the Mayor. Other zones in Cook County but not located within the City of Chicago, the council is comprised of one member appointed from each town within the particular zone."

"So, if I've got... in suburban Cook County, if I've got a council down there and it's all completely in one town, there is one member on that council that's going to make the decision whether they get a tax refund or a tax credit?"

"Would you repeat the question, please?"

"Your remark was that in suburban Cook County that each town, the Mayor of each town appointed one member. So, if I have an enterprise zone that is completely in one town, then that town would have one member on that advisory council. Excuse me, Representative McNamara. That town would be comprised strictly... that council would be comprised strictly of one member. That one member would make the differentiation. The reason I'm asking the question, and I don't mean to sound as obstruction, but the reason I'm asking the question is because the way I read 226  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 this is that DCCA, you know, is the guiding force here and not the specific councils on as far as... You're shaking your head no. You mean, the council is making the decision, DCCA is getting the credit?"

"The council is making the decision and the credit is the credit of both municipal and state utility tax dollars. So, it is the council. It's my understanding that should there be enterprise zones located entirely within one city other than the City of Chicago, then that council would be appointed by the Mayor of that city just as it is in the City of Chicago. However, if it is more than one... more than one town involved, then it would be an intergovernmental agreement between the towns located within the zones. And I think these agreements were drawn up before the zone was established."

"What type of figure are we... The reason why I'm asking... I want to get back to this figure that what we're talking about as far as a credit. Is this... You know, I realize and correct me if I'm wrong that you're doing this as an incentive to bring new businesses into the enterprise zones. Correct? If I'm wrong, I will..."

"That is correct."

"Now, do these businesses... Alright, let's say that I have a business in the south suburban area, they apply to go into an enterprise zone in the south Chicago area. Now, are they still entitled to this?"

"You have to be more specific. Are they going into a business in the enterprise zone? And for one of your earlier questions, this Bill would not just apply to new businesses within the zone. It would also apply to old businesses who wish to expand within the zone."

"Okay. Now, let's say that we're talking about a town... Let's just take Chicago Heights. We have a business in 227  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Chicago Heights that is not in an enterprise zone presently that is willing to move into an enterprise zone in Chicago, let's say. And now, are they entitled to this credit if the council sees fit?"

"Yes."

"Because the way... Unless I'm reading this wrong, the way... the detail of it, it must be a new business in the state or a new operation of business within the state. It is not a relocation of existing business to an enterprise zone. And, you know, twice you've told me that they could relocate from one area of the state to another and that was... you know, that's the thing that basically... the subject matter of enterprise zones is to get businesses to go to blighted areas and that is not addressed. I'm sorry, Tony, it's not addressed in the Bill the way I read it."

"You're correct, Mr. Piel. What I was referring to is when a business outside the zone wants to expand within the zone. But if you're talking about moving, closing up one shop completely, no, it would not apply. If you're talking about expanding, say, a second operation, then that second operation would be eligible for the benefits of this Bill."

"Now, what you're saying is if ABC corporation has their main office in Skokie and they want to move a subsidiary office down to an enterprise zone, they're eligible for this?"

"The office that is located within the zone would be eligible. Would be eligible to apply. One thing I want to reemphasize, Representative, is that the local authority has the option to approve or disapprove. This is not automatic."

"I agree, Tony. I agree wholeheartedly, but the way I'm reading the legislation is that it has to be basically a new business in the state or a new operation of a 228  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 business."

"It can also be an expansion of an existing business as long as the new part, the expansion, takes place within the enterprise zone."

"But they would have to have ceased operation for twelve months. Correct?"

"Mr. Piel, have you finished your questions?"

"No, I'm still trying to get an answer to my question."

"Well, Mr. Piel, bring your remarks to a close. The ten minute period has been gone. Proceed."

"I'm waiting for an answer, Mr. Speaker. I'm waiting for an answer."

"It's my understanding, Mr. Piel, that the ceased operation for twelve months would apply to a business that is not expanding that I believe terminated and started again. Are you reading from the Bill? If you direct me to the Section of the Bill you're reading from, maybe it'll help."

"No, that was just... that area of it was just called to my attention. Line 24, says... 22 through 27. Okay. I tell you what, I'll... I'll... You can take a look at it. I just had some questions in reference to it. I'm a little bit concerned about what we are opening. I think we are opening up Pandora's box, and I would ask everybody, you know, I think, you know on enterprise zone... legislation was put into effect a couple of years ago. I think it's... you know, bringing new businesses into the state and expanding new businesses in areas that need them and I just at the present time don't see need for this legislation because I think, you know, we are, you know, bringing the businesses in that we need to have in there and I think we're walking before we run. I think that's the name of the game. Thank you." 229  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Alright. The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Vitek."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move the previous question."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Vitek, moves the previous question be put. Those in favor say 'aye', opposed 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. Mr. Young, to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. I like to make it clear to the Members of the House that this Bill will only benefit businesses within an enterprise zone if the local government agrees to grant this tax credit. Local government won't agree to give up its share of tax dollars unless they reasonably believe that the sales from the new taxes generated by business expansion will outweigh the tax money they have to give up. With that, I'd ask for your favorable vote."

"The question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open and this is final action. Mr. Barger, one minute to explain your vote."

"I thank you for the courtesy of the minute. I know I was not allowed to discuss this in debate, but we are dealing with two taxes, each levied by a legislative body, one by a municipality and one by the state. And we are authorizing by this action an administratively appointed board to rebate those taxes. This action to me is totally unconstitutional. It's illegal and there is absolutely no justification for us taking these powers away from the Legislature and giving them to an administrative board. I would think that anyone who thought about the integrity of our Constitution would feel obligated to vote against this particular kind of legislation."

"Mr. McNamara, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think there is a 230  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 misconception on this. First of all, in an enterprise zone, it is a requirement that an intergovernmental relationship be set up between the different towns. Second is that an ordinance must be issued by that town in order to allow the tax decrease. If they do not wish it, it is a legal ordinance. We are not saying to any governmental body, 'We are taking away your taxes.' We are allowing local control and allowing them to create their destiny so that they can expand and get the needed business into their area. There is no way that anyone is taking away the taxes or saying that you must do this. And it's clearly in the situation that it must be governed by ordinance."

"The Gentleman from Adams, Mr. Mays, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Sponsor of this measure has recognized the value of increased jobs for the state's economy through proposing this Bill. He has also recognized the impediment that state taxes impose upon that worthy goal. I had some questions that I wanted raise during the course of debate that I felt would make this shed some more light on this Bill. It appears to me that when this Bill becomes effective that it would not apply to those zones that have already been established in this state. For that reason, I am voting 'no'."

"Ms. Oblinger, one minute to explain your vote."

"Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to ask if this took 71 votes because it preempts a home rule city on their taxes on utilities."

"While we're looking, Mr. Homer, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen. I rise to support the Gentleman's Bill. I think one of the main criticisms that was leveled against the Enterprise Zone Act 231  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 that was passed a few years ago, when businesses came in to find out what real incentives exist in the enterprise zones, they've been highly disappointed because those incentives, although there, are not substantial enough to really make an impact on attracting business. The Gentleman's Bill would provide an additional incentive, that being utility tax relief to those new businesses or those businesses which substantially expand in enterprise zones. And my understanding is that it would apply to businesses in existing enterprise zones as well, Representative Hays, to those newly created. So, I feel that the legislation is good and will, perhaps, give enterprise zones the incentive status that the original legislation intended them to have."

"Mr. Young, one minute to explain your vote."

"Just two things further, Mr. Speaker. One thing, the language of the Bill clearly indicates that it applies to existing enterprise zones as well as new enterprise zones. And secondly, this is a permissive Bill. We are not mandating anything. This is a totally permissive Bill."

"Ms. Oblinger, the Bill does not preempt home rules and does not require 71 votes. Further... Mr. Woodyard, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In explaining my vote, I... I like the concept of an enterprise zone. I think it's great. As a practical matter, though, it is not doing what it's designed to do. It's doing just exactly the opposite. I think the South Chicago Works is a good example of a closure and the enterprise zone is still there. What is happening, as we continually expand the abatements allowed in enterprise zones, we find that the taxing bodies who have abated are now having to come back for tax referendum because they've abated their sales tax and in this case, 232  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 utility tax and real estate tax. I think it's time to stop passing the expansion of definitions of enterprise zones until we've had a chance to study the actual attack and effect on what's happening now. So, I encourage a 'no' vote."

"Mr. Clerk, take the record. Mr. McCracken, your light began flashing after I said it, but we'll give you that courtesy. Proceed."

"Thank you, we're seeking a verification."

"Okay. On this question there are 63 voting 'aye', 53 voting 'no', none voting 'present'. And Mr. McCracken... And Mr. Young requests a Poll of the Absentees. Mr. Kulas, for what purpose do you seek recognition?"

"Leave to be verified."

"Mr. Kulas asks leave to be verified. You may be verified. Mr. Berrios and Mr. Panayotovich also ask leave to be verified. Mr. Laurino asks leave to be verified. Mr. Nash, apparently they need a foursome, also asks leave to be verified. Mr. Phelps asks leave to be verified. May he be verified? Mr. Phelps, you may be verified. Mr. Clerk, poll the absentees."

"Poll of the Absentees. Keane and Sutker. No further."

"Mr. Clerk, proceed with the Verification of the Affirmative Roll."

"Alexander. Berrios. Bowman. Braun. Breslin. Brookins. Brunsvold. Bullock. Capparelli. Christensen. Cullerton. Curran. Currie. DeJaegher. DeLeo. Dunn. Farley. Flinn. Flowers. Giglio. Giorgi. Greiman. Hannig. Hartke. Homer. Huff. Krska. Kulas. Laurino. LeFlore. Leverenz. Levin. Matijevich. Mautino. McNamara. McPike. Mulcahey. Nash. O'Connell. 233  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Panayotovich. Pangle. Phelps. Preston. Rea. Rice. Richmond. Ronan. Saltsman. Satterthwaite. Shaw. Soliz. Steczo. Stern. Terzich. Turner. Van Duyne. Vitek. Washington. White. Wolf. Anthony Young. Wyvetter Younge. Mr. Speaker."

"Mr. McCracken, questions of the Affirmative Roll."

"Representative Farley."

"Mr. Farley. Mr. Farley. How is Mr. Farley recorded?"

"The Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove Mr. Farley from the Roll Call."

"Representative Giglio."

"I'm sorry, who?"

"Giglio."

"Mr. Giglio. Mr. Giglio. Is Mr. Giglio in the chamber? Mr. Giglio... May Mr. Steczo be... have leave to be verified? Mr. Steczo, you have leave. And we were on Mr. Giglio. Gentleman in the chamber? How is the Gentleman recorded?"

"The Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove Mr. Giglio from the Roll Call."

"Representative DeJaegher."

"Excuse me."

"He's in the back."

"Mr. DeJaegher is here. Mr. McCracken, I don't know whether this is meaningful. I'm told that Mr. Farley is in the nurse's station. I just..."

"I'll withdraw that. You can have that back."

"Mr. Farley is withdrawn and Mr. Giglio has returned."

"Representative... I just saw him too. Representative Brunsvold." 234  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"Mr. Brunsvold is in his chair."

"He's so tall when he sits down, I lose sight of him. I don't know how that happens."

"Sit up straight, Mr. Brunsvold."

"Representative Bullock."

"Mr. Bullock. Mr. Bullock. Is Mr. Bullock in the chamber? How is Mr. Bullock recorded?"

"The Gentleman is recorded as voting 'aye'."

"Remove Mr. Bullock."

"Representative Dunn."

"Mr. Dunn. Mr. Dunn."

"I see him."

"Mr. Dunn is back there in the rear of the chamber."

"Representative Bowman."

"Mr. Bowman. Mr. Bowman is right there in the center aisle. Now, Mr. Farley, Mr. McCracken was good enough to withdraw his challenge when he heard you were in the nurse's station."

"Representative Mautino."

"Mr. Mautino. Mr. Mautino. Mr. Mautino is right here at the well."

"Nothing further."

"On this question there are 62 'ayes', and 53 'nos'. Mr. Bullock has returned. There are 63 'ayes', 53 'nos', no 'present'. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Special Call, Senate Reading Third... Senate Bills Third Reading, appears Senate Bill 1021. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 1021, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relation to public utilities. Third Reading of the Bill." 235  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985

"The Gentleman from Kendall, Mr. Hastert, on Senate Bill 1021. Ladies and Gentlemen, please let us have some order. Mr. Hastert."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, 1021 is the rewrite of the Public Utility Act. Work on the rewrite began over two years ago in the Sunset Committee and has in the last six months been undertaken by the Joint Committee on Public Utility Regulation. The finished Bill, or the Bill as in the state that we had it before it was... came out of the Senate and was amended here on the House floor. Basically, the general changes in the Public Utility Act, as provided in this Bill, is a reorganization of the Illinois Commerce Commission to ensure participation by all Commissioners and addresses the qualification of the hearing examiner. It increases the Commerce Commissions jurisdiction over reorganization by public utilities and utility holding companies. It establishes a process to provide for independent and comprehensive energy planning for future supplies of energy. It increases the Commerce Commission's supervision and control over the construction projects, namely to provide energy, production or generating plants. It improves the rate making standards adopted by the Illinois Commerce Commission, and overall it contains many, many provisions to set the standards higher for the Illinois Commerce Commission so that they have the tools to do a better job of regulating the utility industry in this state for decades to come. Be happy to answer any questions."

"The Gentleman from Kendall, Mr. Hastert, has moved for this passage of Senate Bill 1021. And on that, the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Levin."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. You know, last Friday we had a very, very close 236  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 vote on excess capacity. And it was a 58 to 57 vote, and we lost on that. You know, this is nevertheless a good Bill. This is a very good Bill, and we'll come back some day and fight again in terms of the issue of excess capacity. But I have been asked by a number of Members, particularly on this side of the aisle, should they vote for this Bill or should they not vote for the Bill given the outcome of the vote last week. And my answer to them is, it is obviously not quite as good a Bill as it would have been if Amendment #12 had been defeated. But that's last week's fight. And it is nevertheless a truly outstanding Bill. Clearly... have the potential to be one of the landmark pieces of legislation, certainly of this Legislative Session. We are talking here about an opportunity which was literally a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to amend a Public Utility Act initially established in 1916 and not substantially amended since 1924, an Act that was really drafted by Samuel 'Insul' who founded Commonwealth Edison and some of the other utilities. So this is really the first comprehensive rewrite of the legislation, and it was done by consensus. It was done by a consensus of Democrats and Republicans, and House Members and Senators and public members who listened to literally hundreds of hours of testimony and deliberation and concluded that there was a need to make some significant changes in the law to better protect not only the consumers but also the businesses of the state. And these are changes even without the excess capacity which will go a long way towards protecting the consumers of the state. Among the most significant changes that are in the Bill in its current form are some things that sound very technical but have a very, very important effect and really merit everybody's support as a result for this Bill. 237  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Let me just mention a few in passing. We changed in this Bill the procedures with regard to appeals from the Commission. Now this sounds very technical but it's very important because right now it is virtually impossible to reverse the decision of the Illinois Commerce Commission because a court has to reverse the entire decision, and the standard of proof is very, very high. This means the Commission can do a number of things that are correct, do some things that are wrong, expecting that they're going to be left alone, that they're not going to be accountable for what they do. That is changed and changed significantly by this legislation. That is something the consumer strongly supports. Secondly, we do a reorganization of the Commission. One of the things that exists right now is that total control for staff hiring and firing and direction is in the Chairman of the Commission. The other six Commissioners have no staff of their own, have no say in the hiring and firing of the other staff as well. That is changed by this Bill. For the first time, the individual Commissioners will have some of their own staff to be able to do their own investigations and collect their own information with which to make enlightened decisions. And the hiring and firing of an executive director will not simply be in the hands of the Chairman of the Commission. It will be a decision to be made jointly by all seven Commissioners. For the first time, we heard from some of those Commissioners during the construction of this legislation that they did not agree with the Chairman in his opposition to various provisions in the Bill. They thought that a lot of the provisions in the Bill were absolutely essential and would make significant changes, and that is one of them. A third change that's very, very important is the ex parte communication. This is something 238  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 that was worked on very hard by the Joint Committee and has also been the subject of litigation by the City of Chicago in the Circuit Court of Cook County which is currently pending. There are a number of other changes which I don't need to go into. Representative Hastert can answer if there are any questions. But the message I have today is, no, this is not as a good Bill as it was before the vote on Friday, but it is certainly, nevertheless, a landmark piece of legislation which is going to do a lot for the consumers of this state and a lot for the business community and deserves the support of everybody whether they voted for or against Amendment #12 last week. Thank you very much."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Mr. Hoffman."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. As a Member of the Joint Committee on Public Utility Reform, I want to take this opportunity to commend the Chairman, Representative Hastert, to commend the last speaker, Representative Levin, because it was, as Representative Levin indicated, an open process with participation by everyone who had an interest, and we distilled this legislation through the Committee, through the Senate and through the floor on the House last week. And you have before you the first comprehensive rewrite of the Public Utility Act to come before this Legislature during my long tenure in this House and much longer before. And so I join with the two previous speakers and rise to, ask this Assembly to pass with... with dispatch Senate Bill 1021 as amended by this Body."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Bowman."

"Will the Sponsor yield for a question?"

"Indicates that he will."

"Representative Hastert, I voted against Amendment 12. It was, nevertheless, adopted. I have some remaining 239  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 anxieties that I would like to... to clear up. I am concerned that the language in Amendment 12 might somehow permit or condone or recommend to the Commerce Commission grandfathering into the rate base the construction that is now in process and that will not come on line until 1989. So let me... let me begin by asking if under current law does the Illinois Commerce Commission have the authority to exclude some or all of the costs of excess generating capacity from utilities' rates?"

"The current law is silent. But the Commerce Commission... On that issue, the Commerce Commission on... in the past has acted and has denied excess capacity or at least they have denied... they reduced the amount of revenue retrievable in a 1982 case."

"With respect to existing power plants and those plants now under construction, does this Bill in any way preclude the Commission from excluding some or all of the cost of excess generating capacity from a utility's rates?"

"Well, let me say and let me simplify an answer to kind of a complex question. What the Bill does and what Amendment 12 did was to say that plants that are being built now and capacity that has already been built, otherwise plants that are in service now, are under the purview of the old law. So those things that have been done in the old law and even though the law remains silent, the Commerce Commission has acted in various cases on holding up some flows of revenue. That remains intact. And so the Amendment is basically a two-tiered approach. The law now is two-tiered with the excess capacity in the future and the present plants now under the purview of the old law which the Commission has acted on for years past."

"So, let me make sure I understand this. In the future, the Commission would thus be empowered to exclude some or 240  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 all of the costs of any such excess generating capacity from a utilities' rates. Is that correct?"

"The way you stated it, yes."

"Thank you. Mr. Speaker, briefly to the Bill. I believe that some of my anxiety about the potential effect of Amendment 12 has been clarified, because I do not... I believe that... I believe that the... the Sponsor's response clarified that we are not grandfathering in anything that the entire generating capacity of the... of all utilities would be open to examination and review by the Commerce Commission at any future date for the possible determination of excess capacities. Therefore, I am prepared to support the legislation, and I guess we make progress by inches. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Huff."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. The old edict that all the more things change, how little they change at all, I think is extremely applicable with this issue. For years, because the ICC was in bed with the utilities, Illinois consumers, and particularly those consumers in my district have paid millions, Ladies and Gentlemen, for service they didn't receive. I think it's... I think it's utter nonsense to argue that the availability of abundant power is the key to economic growth, when the costs of that excess capacity are causing the loss of jobs and driving so many large customers off the system that it poses a threat both to the costs borne by the remaining customers and the economic viability of this system. Just recently, Republic LTV is considering moving its Chicago operation to the Canton, Ohio plant because Ohio Edison, which buys wholesale power from Commonwealth Edison here in Illinois, can sell it in Ohio cheaper than Illinois can sell it here in this home state. 241  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 I'm opposing this because I don't believe that, as Representative Hastert unconvincingly mumbled to the question of Representative Bowman about excess generating power. I have the perception that the utilities now, as then, have their hands deep in the pockets of our consumers and my constituents, and for that reason, I am going to vote against this measure. Because I do not intend to imply erroneously, by my vote, that I am endorsing, in the minds of my constituents, that somehow their utility cost is going to go down. And I think, come November, my position will be more than vindicated. This is a life and death issue in my district, Ladies and Gentlemen, and I do not take it lightly. I do not think that we have achieved one thing with two years of fumbling around with this issue. I think it's a bad Bill, and I think we are perpetuating another fraud on the constituency of this state."

"Mr. Shaw."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I, like Representative Huff, rise to speak on the behalf of the people of my district and the people of Illinois. I think that what happened with this Bill last week, if we pass this Bill out now, it would be a fraud on the people of this state. I voted against the Amendment. I voted against putting the Amendment on last week that would have protected the consumers, and I'm going to oppose this Bill because it's a bad Bill. And come winter, when the utility companies go in and ask for those additional rates and the Illinois Commerce Commission give them those additional rate increases, the... my constituents and your constituents are going to look at you and say, 'I thought you brought me some reform. You've been working on this Bill for two years.' But today, you still have a bad Bill. 242  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 And the reform that you're going to tell the people of your district and the people of Illinois that you have brought them, you have not actually brought those people any reform. The only thing that you have done is give the Utility Commission a machine gun when they already had a pistol. And I think that's bad for the people of this state. I think this is a bad Bill. Certainly there's pros and cons about this Bill. There's some things in here for the consumer. There's some thing in here... in here that's going to benefit everybody. But no one in the wintertime when those utility companies are getting those high bills and the senior citizens of this state will not be able to pay those high utility costs, where is the Members of this General Assembly going to be? The people... The senior citizens of this state are going to be sitting in a cold house, and the utility committee... Utility Commission is going to be pondering over some papers... talking about what we can come up with. We have to reorganize the entire system. That Amendment should be put back on the Bill to put a cap on it. The cap should have been maintained. But it wasn't. I urge the Members of this General Assembly to put... to defeat this legislation. Let them rewrite the right kind of legislation for the people of this state. Let them put a cap on there where they won't be digging in their hands of... in the pockets of the people of this state. And I think that this Bill should be defeated, and I'm going to oppose this Bill. And I can explain that to the people of my district, because I'm not going to go out and try to fool by people of my district - tell them they have something when they have nothing."

"The Gentleman from Fulton, Mr. Homer."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. After that, I'm not sure that I 243  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 want to fit in at this point in time with what my question is, but my question is more mundane, however, perhaps very important because it attempts to establish legislative intent. And while we have that lull, let me ask if the Sponsor would yield for a question for the purpose of establishment of legislative intent. Ask the Sponsor to yield."

"Proceed. Yes, proceed, Mr. Homer."

"Thank you. Representative Hastert, specifically in Section 7-204 of the proposed Act, which is found in Amendment 13, which deals with the reorganization, the provision provides there... It says, 'For purposes of this Section, reorganization means any transaction which regardless of the means by which it is accomplished results in a change in the ownership of a majority of the voting capital stock of an Illinois Public Utility.' Then it goes on to say, 'or the ownership or control of any entity which owns or controls a majority of the voting capital stock of a public utility.' And my question is, does the terminology 'ownership or control of any entity which owns or controls a majority of the voting capital stock of a public utility' refer to a change in the majority ownership or does it refer to a change in the ownership of a single share of stock of the entity?"

"Majority ownership, Representative."

"It does not then refer to simply a change in a single share or minor shares of stock in the entity. Is that correct? It does not do... It does not refer to that situation."

"Yes, it does not do that."

"Alright. It's a change in the ownership of the majority itself."

"You're not asking me a lawyer question, are you? Yes, 244  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 it does not do that."

"Okay. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Lake, Mr. Matijevich."

"Mr. Chairman... Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I joined many others on this side of the aisle the other day in opposing the very key Amendment which I call the... some call the jobs Amendment. And we here on this side of the aisle called it the anti consumer Amendment. It sort of grieves me that anybody on this side of the aisle with this Bill in this form should speak in behalf of the Bill, especially when we on this side of the aisle celebrate ourselves as the friends of the consumer. That was a very key Amendment. I think Mr. Levin, Representative Levin, accurately said that the Public Utility Act was drafted by Sam 'Insul'. I'm sure Sam 'Insul' in his grave would enjoy seeing Democrats vote for this Bill, because with that Amendment we really have done what Sam 'Insul' today would do. It is still because of that key Amendment a pro utility Bill. I don't like to see Members on this side of the aisle voting for what I call a pro public utility Bill. You know, we ought to have legislation that can control the public utilities. We should not reward them for mismanagement. We should not reward them for excess capacity. We had a very, very good pro... not a pro consumer, fair Bill when Senate Bill 1021 came out of the House. We did no service to the consumer when that Amendment was put on the Bill. That Amendment alone, that Amendment alone is reason enough to vote against this Bill. I would urge my colleagues on this side of the aisle to vote against Senate Bill 1021 to show the consumers we are still their friend; we are going to remain their friend. We want a fair public utility rewrite. And until we get one, we want to stick with the consumers, and 245  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 you can do that by voting against the Bill."

"Mr. Friedrich, the Gentleman from Marion."

"Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, you can hear all the oratory around here, and the truth is whether this Bill passes or not utility bills are not going to go down. Now you can kid yourself all you want to. It just isn't in the cards because it costs more to produce electricity, number one. And number two, people are just using more. You know, I didn't even know I was underprivileged. We didn't have electricity in my house when I grew up. But I tell you what when the power goes off now I know I'm a utility user now because everything in the house stops. The furnace stops. The refrigerator stops, and everything else. The TV stops. And when all those stop we think we're underprivileged again. But I can tell you now that the electric coop rates, which are not under the Commission, have higher rates than do... does the Illinois Power Company. The people who are on TVA down in Kentucky where my daughter lives, their rates are higher than they are here, and they're not under the Commerce Commission. But in the meantime gasoline has gone from 20¢ a gallon to $1.25. Nobody complained about that too much. Coal has gone from $1.00 a ton to $38.00 a ton, and you think you could still get electricity at the same price you got it in 1920. It just isn't in the cards."

"Ms. Flowers."

"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I rise in opposition to this Bill. Show me where it's written that the utilities' need for profit takes precedent over the need of the people that they are supposed to serve, and we are supposed to represent. Exceptionally high costs of utilities are forcing people to lose their homes because some of their utility bills run higher than 246  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 their house payment. Which do you pay first? Industry is leaving the state because of the high cost of utilities. There are people losing their jobs, losing their homes, unable to buy food, and last but not least, dying because of the almighty utility companies are freezing them to death. And I do urge a 'no' vote."

"Lady from Sangamon, Ms. Oblinger."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, I've listened to all the debating because I really want to understand this Bill. I don't know what kind of a district you represent. I know what kind of a district I represent. Almost all the letters I got asked me to vote for this Bill because they want their jobs kept. I represent the district where Com Ed is, where they have all that big mine and electric plant in Pawnee - Kincaid. I got more bills (sic - letters) saying, 'Please, save our jobs.' The last speaker said this would cause us to lose jobs. The people in my district are saying, 'Please do this so we can keep our jobs.' It depends on where you sit on what kind of jobs and what kind of a constituency you represent. I would like to hear more on this, but I think I would have to listen to my constituents too."

"Mr. Hastert, to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Before I make my final closing I want to say that this Bill is a product of a work effort of a lot of people. I want to extend my appreciation to those people who've worked a lot of hours, namely the Cosponsors of this Bill in the House, Representative Currie, and Representative Levin and Representative Hoffman. I also want to extend my appreciation to Representative McPike who kept his office open for negotiation over many, many hours of time. This Bill is indeed a product of compromise. And we've heard a 247  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 lot of rhetoric this afternoon about how this Bill isn't pro consumer. But let me tell you something. If we would have left the Amendment on... or the Bill the way it was, we would be faced with higher electric costs in the out years. We would be faced with closing down of Illinois coal mines and Illinois power plants that burn Illinois coal. We would have been faced with astronomical electric bills in 1990 and the year 2000 because our electric supply would have come from gas fired turbine plants that are cheap to build and expensive to run. This is a consumer Bill. This is a Bill that can serve the needs of Illinois people whether you're a residency or whether you're a small business or whether you're an industry looking... to come into the State of Illinois. This Bill provides for the future. It talks about the opening and the studies for the future needs and the energy needs of the State of Illinois. It's a good Bill. It's a Bill that deserves your 'aye' vote and a Bill that will live long beyond most of the people whose terms are in this General Assembly. I ask for your positive support."

"The question is, 'Shall this Bill pass?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open, and this is final action. ...Mautino, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm not sure what the rush to judgment here is. If I remember correctly, the rewrite and the sunset doesn't occur until January of '86 which still gives us plenty of time to do whatever has to be done to give it a little more consideration at least in the override Session. I think many of us are in the same dilemma. We're not quite sure what we should be doing for the benefit of the consumers as well as making sure that our constituents and those same consumers have energy 248  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 sources. Those of us that have discussed this over the last hour or two would like to have the Sponsor or the supporter of the legislation as amended present to us the need for immediate action at this time, because there are many people who are going to stay away from making this vote until someone can tell us why we have to take the rush to judgment and maybe not do the right thing that we would have to live with for quite a few years. If you can truly say to yourself you understand it totally and we are providing a benefit as well as protecting the energy source, then fine. I'm not sure we can do that at this time. I'd like to hear the Sponsor or the Sponsor of the Amendment tell us why we have to do it now when there is that concern."

"Ms. Satterthwaite, one minute to explain your vote."

"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, I rise in support of this legislation, even though I think it would have been a better Bill with the... as it came from the Senate. There are a number of things in this Bill that strengthen the ability of the Commerce Commission to act on behalf of the consumers. The fact that they will have more power over their internal operations of the office, the fact that they will have more staff at their disposal will all help the Commerce Commission members to do a good job. I think the reason we need to support this legislation now is we've already put a substantial amount of energy into this rewrite, and certainly the Sponsor of the Bill here in the House deserves a great deal of credit for the effort that he has put into this legislation. For it to go down now would be a disservice to all of the people of the State of Illinois. There is still enough flexibility that the Commerce Commission can make decisions in favor of our 249  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 constituents, and I would urge them to do so. But certainly the legislation needs to be passed so that we can take the advantage of the hard work that has gone into this measure."

"Mr. Young, one minute to explain your vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. To explain my vote, I'd like to start by saying something the Sponsor said in closing. He said, 'This is a product of compromise.' I would suggest, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, that this Bill is not a product of compromise. The compromise was taken out of this Bill when the Amendment #12 was passed the other day. This is no longer a Bill for the consumer, and I'd like to make it clear as I cast my vote that I do recognize there are some consumer benefits in this Bill. And in this House we often try to accept a half a loaf, but Amendment #12 leaves less than a half a loaf for consumers. We still have time to at least get them half a loaf. I urge your 'no' vote."

"Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 66 voting 'aye', 42 voting 'no', 6 voting 'present'. This Bill, having received... Mr. Leverenz... This Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Ladies and Gentlemen, it is now the intention of the Chair to have a similar Subject Matter Call on Public Utilities Second Reading, Senate Bills. And on that Order appears House Bill... I mean... Senate Bill 486. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

"Senate Bill 486, a Bill for an Act in relation to energy assistance for low-income persons. Second Reading of the Bill. No Committee Amendments."

"Any Floor Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative 250  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 Piel and Klemm."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Piel."

"Move to withdraw Amendment #1, Mr. Speaker."

"Amendment #1 withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

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

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Piel, on Amendment #2."

"Move to withdraw Amendment #2."

"Amendment #2 withdrawn. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #3, offered by Representative Piel and Klemm."

"Mr. Piel, on Amendment #3."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Amendment #3 basically changes the Bill instead of offering a cash incentive. What it is, it's offering a credit incentive to the low income energy assistance program. These grants will be administered by Department of Commerce and Community Affair... Affairs with a maximum fiscal impact of credits not to exceed $20,000,000. DCCA will administer the program. The utility companies will offer the credits to the low-income people. These credits then will be turned over to DCCA, and DCCA will credit the utility. And I would ask... answer any questions that might be asked by the chamber."

"Alright, the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Piel, moves for the adoption of Amendment #3 to Senate Bill 486. And on that, the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Soliz."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in opposition to Amendment #3. Amendment #3, essentially, as was stated by our colleague, Representative Piel, changed the Bill. It does it so dramatically that it essentially guts the Bill. This is 251  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 one of the only, I believe, pieces of energy assistant legislation in the House this year. It's a very critical piece of legislation. At the present time in the State of Illinois, we have between May of 1983 and May in 1984, 56,000 People's Gas customers and 193,000 Commonwealth Edison customers which had their utilities disconnected. We have a utility crisis in our state. We have fashioned this piece of legislation which I think is a very acceptable piece of legislation. I have to rise in opposition and resist this Amendment very vigorously because it essentially guts our Bill which tries to provide some medium of alleviation for energy assistance in this state. What essentially the Bill does is it provides for 12% cap or limit on the amount of utility expenses that a household... a low income household can bare in any one year during the winter months. The limit of their income that they can expend on utility bills for heating is 12%. I would ask that we be given a chance to present our main legislation and oppose this Amendment which essentially guts our piece of legislation."

"Further discussion? The Gentleman from Madison, Mr. McPike."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would ask the Sponsor of the Bill or the Amendment if he had a companion appropriation for $20,000,000, but it would be a silly question because it's quite obvious that Representative Piel, not only does not have a companion appropriation for $20,000,000, but if there was one on the floor, he would probably vote against it. This is the usual Republican attitude when you try to help the poor. The purpose of this Bill is to assure a poor person that he or she is not going to freeze to death in the winter time. The purpose of the Amendment is to gut 252  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 the Bill. The purpose of the Amendment is to say that we'll give this person a tax credit, or we will give the utilities the credit against taxes they owe to the state, but there is no companion appropriation. Here is an answer to help the poor, a typical answer to help the poor. By helping them, we simply put a program into effect with no money. I don't understand why they would want to change the Bill to begin with. The Bill itself takes a realistic approach to the subject. It says that if you are poor, you have to spend 12% of your income month after month for your utility Bills and if you don't, they can cut off your services. That method of payment will insure, number one, that the utilities do not have $55,000,000 in outstanding bad debts and, number two, that a poor person is going to have heat in the winter time. This Amendment guarantees nothing. It simply guarantees that the Bill is gutted or the Bill is lost and the poor person is never helped. I would ask you to defeat the Amendment."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Piel, to close."

"Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House... Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I hope that everybody was listening to the previous speaker because he couldn't have been any farther from the truth than he was during his diatribe, so to speak. Ladies and Gentlemen when you're talking about a credit - when you're talking about a credit, you don't have to have a companion appropriation. That will be less money be received by the Department of Revenue, but there is no money changing. It's a credit. It's a credit. It's nice to sit here and play on the heart strings and say that... that Bob Piel's against the poor people. This is the furthest thing from the truth. All this is doing... is the original Bill the way it is right now, there is no appropriation with that, 253  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 but they need an appropriation with it. Maybe he was reading the wrong thing. But this Bill will be a credit. It's not cutting off anybody's utilities. It's not cutting off anybody's heat or gas or electricity. All it is doing is giving them a credit towards their bill. I would say that I would rest my case, Ladies and Gentlemen. All this is it is establishing a credit procedure and it would... if the maximum were to go into effect, it would be $20,000,000 less than the Department of Revenue would be... to receive. You don't need an appropriation. All it will be... and as for as gutting the Bill, it's not gutting the Bill. It's just rearranging the way that the money or in this case the credits would be allocated. And I would ask for a favorable vote and, Mr. Speaker, I would ask for a Roll Call vote on Amendment #3."

"Question is, 'Shall Amendment #3 be adopted?' All those in favor signify by voting 'aye', those opposed vote 'no'. Voting is now open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 46 voting 'aye', 63 voting 'no', 1 voting 'present'. And the Amendment fails. Further Amendment?"

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

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Piel."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would say that Amendment #4 is a lot less controversial than Amendment #3. Basically what Amendment #4 does it deletes the oil overcharged refund monies from the Bill. These monies are disbursed by the United States Department of Energy to be used for the benefit of all classes of customers. Illinois would not get their share of money if it was required by law in this Bill and the way... with 254  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 this in the Bill right now, Illinois would not get its fair share of monies through the U.S. Department of Energy, and so, I would ask for passage of Amendment #4."

"Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Piel, moves for the passage of... the adoption of Amendment 4 to Senate Bill 486. And on that, the Gentleman from Cook, Mr.... I'm sorry. Gentleman from Madison, Mr. McPike."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Bill... Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Obviously there are two ways to kill a Bill. One is to put on a substantive Amendment as what is attempted by Amendment #3, which changes the language in the Bill and guts the Bill and changes the program. That's the first attempt. The second attempt is to put on a technical Amendment - a technical Amendment that requires the Bill to go back to the Senate for concurrence. You look in your Digest you'll see that on a verified vote in the Senate the Bill received 30 votes. So, obviously, anyone that's opposed to the Bill, anyone that fears this Bill is going to the Governor's desk would dearly love to put a technical Amendment on the Bill - send it back to the Senate so they see if they can get one of our good Senators to take a walk. For this reason we oppose any technical Amendments to the Bill. We intend to send it to the Governor's desk and we hope that he signs it so we can take care of some of the poor people in the state."

"Mr. Leverenz."

"The Sponsor yield?"

"Indicates he'll yield."

"Is that why you're offering this Amendment?"

"Is question... Is Rep... question to me?"

"Is that why you're offering this Amendment as the Majority Speak... Majority Leader points out, just to send 255  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 this Bill back to the Senate?"

"I could care less if it goes back to the Senate, Representative. All I'm saying is if we don't... You want me to answer your question?"

"Yes."

"If we don't put this on, and, basically, it is deleting that one small Section from the Bill, we will be losing federal money. You ask your staff people."

"I don't have to. May I ask another question?"

"Go right ahead."

"Is there any other way to cure that problem which you point out if this Amendment doesn't get adopted?"

"I'm sorry, I didn't hear the first part."

"Is there any other way to cure that which you point out if, in fact, it's true, is there any other way to cure that problem like with the pen of the Governor? Couldn't he eliminate that?"

"Well, if the Governor doesn't amendatorily veto this out of the Bill, it would cost the State of Illinois about $285,000."

"Now, that we have established that it is not your intent then to be devious and send the Bill back to the Senate, and it is within the power of Governor to veto this out as you just explained, would you withdraw this Amendment?"

"No, because I don't think it's our position. To be truthful, I don't think it's our position to send faulty legislation to the Governor or to the Senate. I think that's what the Amendment process is for. The Amendment process is to clarify problems with Bills, whether they be technical on an effective date or what have you. I don't think this is a technical Amendment. I think this is an Amendment that saves the state $285,000. Now, if you want 256  STATE OF ILLINOIS 84th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 61st Legislative Day June 25, 1985 to vote for the thing... I don't... You know, if you want to vote against it, fine, Ted. I'm just, you know, that's the reason I included the thing there."

"Mr. Speaker, to the Amendment."