Illinois House Floor Debate — February 1, 1989

"...Come to order. Members will be in their seats. The House will come to order. The Chaplain for today will be Reverend Mark Lanz from Christian Bible Church in Springfield. Reverend Lanz is a guest of Representative Mike Curran. The guests in the balcony may wish to rise and join us in the invocation."

"Shall we pray. Lord, as we come into Your presence this morning, Father, we bow before Your throne. Lord, we pray that You would forgive us of our sins. That we may be cleansed before You and that we may be worthy of Your blessings. Father, today I ask that You pour out Your spirit upon the men and women here in this room that make the decisions, that run this state. And I pray, Father, that You would give them instruction and discernment into Your will to accomplish all that You desire for them to do. Pray, Lord, as they turn to You for counsel, that You'd pour Your spirit upon them. Make Your words and Your will known to them. And we pray, Father, that as they commit their work to You that You would bless it and You would establish all their plans. And we pray these things and ask them in Jesus' name. Amen."

"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. Representative Piel."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the record show that Representative Myron Olson is excused today."

"Take the Roll, Mr. Clerk. One hundred and sixteen Members answering the Roll, a quorum is present. 1  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day Mr. Clerk, House Joint Resolution 3." February 1, 1989

"House Joint Resolution 3. Be it resolved, by the House of Representatives of the 86th General Assembly of the State of Illinois, the Senate concurring herein, that the two Houses shall convene in Joint Session on Wednesday, February 1, 1989 at the hour of twelve o'clock, noon for the purpose of hearing His Excellency, Governor James R. Thompson present to the General Assembly his report on the condition of the state as required by Article V, Section 13 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois."

"Representative Wolf moves the adoption of House Joint Resolution 3. All in favor say 'aye', opposed 'no'. The 'ayes' have it and the Resolution's adopted. Committee Report."

"Representative Matijevich, Chairman of the Committee on Rules, has reported the following Committee Resolu... Committee Resolution for adoption, as amended."

"... Resolutions."

"House Resolution 53, offered by the Committee on Rules."

"Speaker's Table. Representative Petka, for what reason do you rise? The Chair recognizes the Doorkeeper for an announcement."

"Mr. Speaker, the Honorable President Rock and Members of the Senate are at the door and seek admission to the chamber."

"Mr. Doorkeeper, please admit the Honorable Senators. Speaker Madigan in the Chair."

"As designated in House Joint Resolution #8, the hour of twelve noon having arrived, the Joint Session of the 86th General Assembly will now come to order. Will the Members of the House and our esteemed guests from the Senate, please take their seats. Mr. Clerk, is a quorum 2  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. February 1, 1989 The Senate Members are Senators Lechowicz, Collins, Rea, Davidson, Donahue and Karpiel."

"Will the Committee of Escort please convene at the rear of the chamber and await His Excellency, the Governor. Would the Committee of Escort please retire to the rear of the chamber to escort the Governor. Mr. Giorgi, you're on the committee and the Governor is waiting for you. He wants to talk about the state office building in Rockford. The Chair recognizes the Doorkeeper for an announcement."

"Mr. Speaker, the Honorable Governor of the State of Illinois, James Thompson, and his party wish to be admitted to the chamber."

"Admit the Honorable Governor. Would the Members please take their chairs. Mr. Governor."

"Mr. Speaker, Mr. President, Members of the General Assembly, my fellow Constitutional Officers, Mr. Justice Miller and my fellow Illinoisans, this is the thirteenth occasion I have been honored to stand before you - I hope that's lucky - and report on the state of our state. The tradition of Governors detailing the progress of their states comes from the very foundation of our nation's history, and it is worth noting in this bicentennial year of the American presidency, that the tradition precedes even George Washington's 1789 State of the Union Address. 'What is an Illinoisan? In the voices of the people there is no clue, neither in the stridency of Chicago's street urchin nor in the Southern accent, tinged with a faint twang, of the lower Illinoisan. Historically, his state has been one where paradox blossoms continually, where both Lincoln and the suppressors of Lovejoy were nurtured; where the Utopias of the Janssonists and the 4  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 Icarians rose in counterpoint to the lusty individualism of old Chicago; the home of both William Jennings Bryan and Robert Ingersoll, of John Peter Altgeld and Samuel Insull. Across this state have eddied almost all the major currents from both without and within the country. Crisscrossed by railroads from all corners of the country, a steel-maker as well as a wheat-stacker, Illinois functions as a working model of the Nation as a whole.' That definition of an Illinoisan was written 50 years ago by the Federal Writers Project for its 1939 guide book. And it remains true today. Illinois is 'a working model of the Nation as a whole'. I am proud to report today, that by many measures, we are a robust and healthy state. Together, we have responded to change from changes in the weather to the ongoing revolution in the workplace and we are moving our economy forward. Following the difficult transition of the last decade recession, technological change and foreign competition the Illinois economy is back. The gap between Illinois and the nation has virtually disappeared. The growth rate of the Illinois economy measured in terms of personal income again is climbing almost as rapidly as the nation. The evidence is clear. In the last fiscal year, Illinois personal income climbed to $197 billion. By the end of this fiscal year, we will surpass the $200 billion mark for the first time, ranking Illinois the state in the top 10 percent of all the countries of the world. Total employment climbed 5,408,000 in 1988, a record high for the fourth consecutive year. More Illinoisans are at work today than ever before in the 170-year history of our state. The number of unemployed and the unemployment rate remain too high, but both have now dropped to the lowest level in nine years. The Illinois Gross State Product the total of all goods 5  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 and services produced in Illinois — is larger than the Gross National Product of all but 13 nations of the world. We're finding new markets for our 'Made in Illinois' products. As the home to six of the top 50 U.S. exporters, our Illinois exports increased by nearly 30 percent in 1988, including the shipment of 6,000 television sets from Illinois to Japan assembled by Illinois workers from the Matsushita Plant in Franklin Park, Illinois. The cars have started rolling off the assembly line at Diamond-Star Motors Corporation in Bloomington-Normal, where today 1,500 Illinoisans work — many of those unemployed or laid-off before you helped me bring Diamond-Star to this state — and by the end of this year that number will double, 2,900 Illinoisans working side-by-side with 470 robots in the most automated autoplant in the world, proof that Illinois is on the leading edge of the new technologies. And few states will benefit more from the Canadian-American Free Trade Agreement, and we in Illinois helped lead the fight for the enactment and the ratification of the FDA. Illinois farmland, the nation's richest, was parched in 1988, and many of our farmers once again were engaged in a struggle for survival. Yet while production was greatly reduced by the drought, higher prices from sales and sales from storage, and federal drought assistance all brought an increase in cash receipts for many farmers. The drought hit some sectors of the farm community harder than others, but our farmers have bounced back before and will again. And we're hopeful that the results of the 1989 growing season will enable the farm community to continue the recovery that was underway before the 1988 drought. Manufacturing added 14,000 jobs in 1988, more than doubling the increase of 1987 and marking the first time in a decade that we've had successive yearly increases in 6  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 manufacturing. High technology businesses are increasing; high tech employment is jumping; service industries continue to be among the fastest growing, and we had 28,654 new business incorporations last year. Our 1983 road program an investment in our infrastructure and our economy, now ending has allowed us to repair 4,800 miles of roads and repair or replace 1,200 bridges. The North-South Tollway will open to traffic later this year and provide a new transportation route for up to 80,000 vehicles daily connecting the high growth areas of Northwest Cook County with the rapidly growing high technology corridor along Interstate 88, ending in northern Will County. That $450 million, 17-mile highway has done much more than employ 1,400 construction workers. It has set the stage for future long-term economic expansion. And imperatively, we're training the workers for the jobs of today and tomorrow. In the last fiscal year alone, we've helped train and retrain nearly 200,000 Illinoisans, at the legendary giants like Deere, Case, Caterpillar, Ford, Chrysler and Motorola, and at hundreds of small businesses all across the State of Illinois. My optimism is tempered only by the knowledge that we could have done more by investing more in ourselves sooner, and we still should. We should be investing more in human services for the poor, the aged, children, the mentally ill and developmentally disabled; investing in the more than 100,000 children in need of pre-school education, investing more in our higher education classrooms and professors; investing more in retraining our workers, investing more in the repair of our deteriorating roads and bridges; modernizing our airports; and replacing obsolete rolling stock of our mass transit systems. I still stand ready to support and sign a modest increase in the lowest income tax in the nation the 7  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 Illinois income tax. Without it we will in the long run, see local property taxes go through the roof or public education pounded into the ground. And if you choose to ignore the need for a gasoline tax increase, within five years there will be 3,500 miles of deficient roads that will not be repaired. We will not have funding to repair nearly 200 miles and more than 100 bridges on the critical Interstate system throughout Illinois. Deterioration of the Chicago street network will accelerate. The 1983 revenue increase provided an average of $19 million annually from the state to that city to match federal and city funds totaling $55 million a year. It funded 120 miles of street improvements in Chicago neighborhoods. That program ended last year, and without new state aid the taxpayers of Chicago will have to pick up all of the costs. In mass transit, the RTA has identified $6 billion in capital improvements necessary for the Chicago metropolitan area, city, suburbs and collar counties in the next decade. Without new state assistance, the RTA and its systems eventually will be forced to raise fares repeatedly and cut service and lose federal funds. The Chicago Tribune described the situation in clear terms last month. 'The help, if there is to be any, must come from the Illinois Legislature.' But these issues, the income tax and the gas tax cannot be resolved without a coming together of the Leadership of this General Assembly. And when that happens, we can move forward. In the meantime, we stand ready in this administration to deliver more than $22 billion worth of services to the people of Illinois. And we do SO proudly. The men and women who are state government in Illinois are the best in the nation, and we will, with or without an income tax increase, serve the people of this state this year in unprecedented ways. 8  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 Today, I am proposing that Illinois take the lead in two vitally important areas — meeting the challenges of technological change in the workplace, competitiveness for our state and its business climate; and freeing this state from the burdens imposed by the widespread abuse of alcohol and drugs. Current revenue sources will not fund the kind of massive efforts demanded by these extraordinary challenges. As an alternative to a modest increase in the income tax, I am im... proposing an increase in the tax on cigarettes. This has been a traditional source of general revenue for state programs, for over 200 years and as many of our sister states are doing today, I think we should join in turning to this tax for help in funding specific new programs. Increasing the cigarette tax by 18 cents a package, and extending it to other tobacco products not now taxed, we could generate an additional $65 million to prepare our workers for the jobs of the next century and assist companies trying to take scientific discoveries out of the laboratories and into our homes and workplaces. We could pay for a $50 million fight against the loss of human lives and economic waste caused by illegal drug and alcohol abuse. And another $65 million would be available to add to the Fiscal 1990 education budget increases, which I will present to you one month from today. In recent years, I have witnessed a tremendous coalescence of leaders from many varied walks of life — from academia, from the business world, from labor halls, from science laboratories and from government at all levels. We had a common goal — bringing the Superconducting Super Collider, its jobs and scientific research projects to Illinois. Although the SSC escaped our grasp, we have not lost the momentum. We must not let that coalition disintegrate with each piece going off in a different direction. Together as a Task Force, 9  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 they are going to help us bring more jobs at a faster rate and a lower cost to the whole state than the SSC would have brought to a single corridor. The key leaders of the fight for the SSC remain together, a science alliance advising us on how Illinois can best improve its competitive advantage. They are harnessing public and private and academic interest and energy towards the goals of increased research and development and commercialization of new technologies in Illinois by Illinois workers, businesses, colleges and universities. Today, I am asking them to concentrate on how we can improve the environment for increased productivity and intense competitiveness that we face from the world around us. Research and development will be the bread and butter of our economic future as the successes in the laboratories are transferred to the production lines in the high tech workplace. Illinois is far behind the national average in the amount of private and public money invested in research and development. Our goal will be to achieve a dramatic increase in R & D investment. If we are to accomplish that goal, we must capitalize on what we already have, including the Beckman Institute and the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois. We must capitalize on what is about to become a reality, including the National Science Foundation's decision to make Illinois the home of the nation's only Science and Technology Center for High-Temperature Superconductivity and of a new Center for Advanced Cement-Based Materials. If our state had not been willing to make a modest investment, we would not have won the competition for those projects. I propose devoting $20 million to a new Challenge Fund to leverage private and federal research development dollars for Illinois research at Illinois universities and companies - by Illinois 10  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 workers. There is an abundance of scientific projects to be identified throughout the technologies — in the fields of manufacturing, computers, electronics, telecommunications, biochemistry and agriculture technology, materials research, manufacturing, and basic physics, services and transportation. We need to upgrade the crucial laboratories at our universities and colleges, revive math and science instruction in our schools and create a new Technology Investment Fund to make loans and equity investments to technology-based enterprises. I am calling on the Task Force to help us work towards three important goals: One. Help us modernize and expand science and technology facilities at our colleges and universities, both public and private. Two. Help us make the Challenge Fund become a reality. Three. Help us improve math and science literacy for elementary and secondary schools in every section of Illinois and expand technical training at community colleges to meet the needs of labor and to business. The Task Force will work in conjunction with a Science and Technology Advisor to the Governor. He will advise me on state policies impacting science and technology, productivity, competitiveness and economic development. Our newest Nobel Prize winner — Leon Lederman has agreed to be the first Illinois Science and Technology Advisor, our own Illinois Science Laureate. The nation's premier high energy physicist, Leon Lederman has already has used his own high energy to advance Illinois. He helped guide Fermi Laboratory into an international research center. He inspired the formation of what should have been the winning proposal to bring the SSC to Illinois. And as one of the founders of the Illinois Math and Science Academy, he has propelled development of young minds in Illinois. He will work in 11  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 conjunction with other leaders from the business, labor, scientific and education communities to develop a list of specific recommendations on how we best can meet our competitiveness goals, and I will report them to you by May 1st, in time for action this Session. We also need to be doing more to promote scientific and mathematics literacy. Clearly, America is failing. Students from foreign countries — our competitors for high technology jobs — outperform American students in science and math classes. In fact, as USA Today reminded us this morning, the United States, in a test of thirteen year olds for math literacy came in dead last. In the United States, in a test of thirteen year olds across the world for scientific literacy came in dead last. Neither America nor Illinois can afford now or in the next century to be dead last in math and science. But we must heed the warning sounded recently by the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. Their three-year study concluded that students steer clear of math classes because 'their view of mathematics shifts gradually from enthusiasm to apprehension, from confidence to fear'. Math is a key to a career in science and technology, but the percentage of students opening math books drops steadily from the eighth grade through high school graduation. And because we are falling behind in math and science instruction, our economy also suffers. The study determined that you could combine all of the money spent on math education in our schools and colleges and still not match what U.S. industry, what business has to spend each year on remedial math instruction — teaching their employees what they should have learned in our school systems. That is money that could go for research and development for capital infrastructure to create new jobs. Illinois higher 12  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 education has a special responsibility to work in cooperation with our public schools in the development of a continuum of math and science instruction from grade schools through high schools. We can use the Math and Science Academy as a flagship institution to reach out to all Illinois schools and suggest ways our schools can restructure their programs. We need more computers and updated lab equipment and specialized training for our math and science teachers. And we in Illinois need greater access to higher education. In the 1840's when Lincoln spoke to the issue of education, it was universally assumed that access to elementary education by all was the number one public goal of the state. It would serve our population well and it did. But this is not 1840, this is 1989 and the next century is just around the corner. And access to higher education for all who can and want to attend our colleges and universities ought to be a primary goal of the people of Illinois. But since 1970, for example, tuition and fees at the University of Illinois have increased by nearly 550 percent, while the Consumer Price Index increased by less than 200 percent. That has not blocked access to college educations for or the very wealthy, and our more than $150 million in state financial aid programs have helped gain entry for many of the very poor. But middle income Illinoisans, including thousands of families trying to send two or three children to college at the same time, have been squeezed by the skyrocketing costs at one end and the restrictive requirements of financial aid programs at the other end. Our goal must be that everyone, regardless of income, can go to college if they have the intellectual ability and the motivation. We made some headway last year with the nation's first offering of College Savings Bonds. We need to be doing 13  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 4th Legislative Day more to encourage this type of savings and to help parents plan for their children's future. We can do that by expanding the current public-private partnership, that made the  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 jobs and increasing benefits to unemployed workers. That system is now solvent. Neither Illinois business nor Illinois taxpayers owe anybody anything and we are a model for the nation. But we now need to turn our attention to a much larger step in the process of reforming the workers' compensation system. A nationally recognized expert has evaluated the entire system in Illinois its strengths and weaknesses. Labor and management have been included in the review and have their own suggestions for change. It is time for us to act. Workers' compensation costs to Illinois employers are not out of line. Benefits paid to injured workers and insurance premiums paid by employers are close to national averages. But the costs are higher than those in the states which border Illinois, the states that often are our prime competitors for business expansion. And some features of the current Illinois system have the potential for significantly increasing costs in the future. The administration of the workers' compensation system in Illinois is a clear target for reform. Cases can and do take years to work through the system. During that delay, benefits are not paid; workers and their families often must struggle to survive; and rehabilitation is delayed. Workers lose. Businesses lose. And the state loses. To achieve agreement on workers' compensation reform I am calling business, labor and Legislators back to the table at the Mansion. We need to agree in the next few months to legislation that guarantees that our workers' compensation system will be on a solid administrative and financial footing into the next century. In addition to a healthy workplace, we also need workers in top physical condition, free of the burden of worrying about how to care for the health of themselves and their families. Increasingly, Americans can't afford to 15  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 get sick. Astronomical increases in the cost of health care have made access a problem for millions. Many of those once covered by employer-supplied insurance no longer have easy access to health care because as the cost of insurance went up, many businesses stopped offering insurance. The Comprehensive Health Insurance Program, authorized more than two years ago, will begin providing health insurance on April first. The potential irony of starting such a program on April Fool's Day should not be lost on any of us. It would be a cruel joke, indeed, to start this program on April first only to end it on June 30th. That will not happen. Even though no provision has been made for funding after this fiscal year, it must and will be funded. If it is not funded from a new revenue source, it must be funded by shortchanging some other area of government responsibility. But even a fully funded CHIP'S program would reach only 20,000 of the one and a half million Illinoisans without health insurance. There is no readily apparent solution that can be enacted without a high and burdensome cost, but we must search for one. Initiatives in this chamber and in the chamber across the rotunda are welcomed by me. And I will bring together the best minds and boldest spirits in business, labor, health care, insurance and in this General Assembly to develop a program of opportunity in health care. And we should be guided by these principles: Insurance provided at the workplace will continue to be the primary source of health care financing for most of us. Spreading the costs and risks over a large population is preferable to a give-away program that provides free care to the sick. And while housecalls by family doctors may be gone forever, health care insurance should be designed to promote access to preventive care and give the comfort of knowing that the 16  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 attending physician is well aware of the patient's medical history. The solution should not contribute to the escalation of costs in health care, and anything that harms the Illinois business climate will not be a solution. In fact, a successful program will improve the business climate. And we must recognize the diversity of Illinois and its needs by helping forge a common sense health delivery system for Cook County, increasing access to basic medical care for southern Illinois and helping fill the gaps in the four hundred miles in between. Any new health insurance program requiring state funding must have its own new and dedicated source of revenue to ensure its stability. Our goal will be to provide health insurance to anyone working and willing to bear a fair share of the costs. And an enlightened society can offer no less. Let me now turn to the one problem that underlies every problem that we, the family of Illinois, now face: the widespread use and abuse of drugs and alcohol. Most of us don't come into contact with the crack dealers and the marijuana smugglers and the shuffling wrecks wr of wasted bodies and corroded minds passing needles in shooting galleries. But we see and pay for their activities. Their momentary highs bring life-long misery to too many of us. Today, I've emphasized the importance of making Illinois more competitive with the world. But we have to do more than change the math and science curriculum in our schools. We have to get the drugs out of our schools. We have to do more than create jobs by bringing technology to the marketplace. We have to make certain that businesses can find drug-free workers to fill those jobs. We have to do more than guarantee access to health care. We have to stop the flow of drugs that weakens and too often kills the bodies and minds of our youth. We have to do more than set 17  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 goals to lower the infant mortality rate. We have to keep cocaine and liquor from entering the blood stream of pregnant women. We have to do more than build prisons. We have to get drugs off the streets where the crimes are committed. Last month the Justice Department told us that nearly three of every four people arrested for violent crime in Chicago tested positively for drugs. And our own court system told us that more than 17,000 adults on probation need treatment for drug abuse but only six percent get that treatment. And we wonder why probation often fails. The time has come to restock the arsenal for we're losing the war on drugs. But if this is to stop, all of us will have to join forces. Lieutenant Governor George Ryan has been a superb leader in our fight against drug abuse and in motivating our young people to resist peer pressure to start down the road to nowhere. We need to give George Ryan and the many others, both adults and kids, more help in their fight. We don't expect our schools to do it alone. Communities will have to stand with them. We don't expect our police to do it alone  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 We must increase and coordinate our law enforcement efforts to stop drug traffic with concentration on both dealers and users, especially in our schools. We must do a better job of making treatment available to help those who want to stop their own illegal drug abuse. We will move against drugs in a rational plan of attack with $14 million additional for education and prevention, $19 million for enforcement, and $17 million for treatment. Treatment centers for intravenous drug users a critical component of AIDS prevention are at capacity. With increased funding, we can reduce the waiting list of I-V drug users seeking our help in helping them kick their habit. And we should expand the offering of treatment for drug-related criminal offenders, increase the capacity of youth treatment programs and expand services to women, many of whom are pregnant. We should enact a Steroids Control Act, regulating a dangerous drug that is far too popular and available to young athletes a fact squarely faced by the Chicago Sun-Times' frightening series on the use of steroids by our high school and college athletes. The new Act would set penalties for the possession, distribution or possession with the intent of distribution of anabolic steroids, other than as legally prescribed for the treatment of disease. In the area of law enforcement, we must intensify the attack on drugged driving. Our Secretary of State has led an enormously, successful attack on drunken driving. But laws are unclear and law enforcement practices are therefore unclear in the fight against drugged driving. Current laws do not identify concentration levels of drugs in the body, and that frustrates law enforcement's ability to prosecute drugged drivers. State Police emphasis on identifying drug couriers through routine traffic stops resulted in 385 19  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 arrests last year, more than one ton of illicit drugs and more than one-half million dollars in forfeited drug money. We must add more officers to the road and expand that training to local police and sheriff's deputies. We must create new 'MEG units' in this state. Prevention. Treatment. Enforcement. All must be strengthened together. At this very moment somewhere in Illinois a baby is being born to an addicted mother, and that child too is now addicted. The number of cocaine babies has jumped 79% in just the last year in Illinois. Somewhere in Illinois a child is being beaten by a father whose temper is fueled by addiction to drugs or alcohol. Somewhere in Illinois an old woman's purse is being snatched by a hoodlum in need of money for another drug buy. And somewhere in Illinois a manufacturing plant is being slowed and pulled backwards either by a blue collar worker who smoked a joint at lunch or a white collar executive who snorted lines of coke. We must not engage in denial. We must engage in combat. But I think that we're up to all of these challenges, and more. In writing about his hometown of Chicago, Asa Baber said something that really applies to all of us in Illinois. 'We have been tested by extremes,' he said. 'This special place we live in forces us to face more contrasts and oppositions in life than we are ready to handle: black versus white, rich versus poor, city versus country, elite versus disenfranchised nowhere in our culture do these elements stand in starker contrast than here. They are as harsh as our violent weather.' Baber went on to note 'that it is no accident Illinois is the fulcrum on which this country balances. Being at the center of things,' he said, 'we are also under the most pressure.' This state does face a great many pressures and challenges. We sometimes are tested by extremes. And this state must meet those 20  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 challenges, as we have in the past, and together we will. Thank you very much."

"Will the Committee on Escort please join the Governor to escort him from the chamber. And we would like to acknowledge the presence of the Treasurer of the State of Illinois, Mr. Jerome Consentino. The... We'd like to acknowledge the presence of the Governor's wife in the gallery, Jane Thompson. Jane Thompson. We would like to acknowledge the presence of Justice Miller from the Supreme Court. Justice Ben Miller. And also a former Member of this Body and now the Deputy Governor, Mr. James Riley in the center aisle. The President of the Senate is recognized for a Motion."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do move that the Joint Session now arise."

"The President of the Senate has moved that the Joint Session do now arise. All those in favor signify by saying 'aye' and all those opposed signify by saying 'nay'. The 'ayes' have it and the Joint Session will now arise. The House shall remain in Session. All House Members should remain in the chamber."

"The House is still in order. Representative McPike in the Chair. Unauthorized people could please clear the House floor. It's the intent of the Chair to start on rules. Mr. Clerk, for a Supplemental Calendar Announcement."

"Supplemental Calendar #1 is being distributed."

"Supplemental Calendar #1, Speaker's Table appears House Resolution 53. Representative Matijevich."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, the House... the House Rules Committee met today for the consideration and adoption of a rule which will be our permanent rules for the 86th General Assembly. I will 21  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 quickly try to summarize what the... the House Resolution, as amended by the committee, contains and if there are any questions I'd be happy to answer them. The present rules are change... we have a new rule added which gives the Chief Sponsor of a substantive Bill complete control of the consideration of that Bill on all orders of business. This is a complete departure from the past rule, the... the... rule change does allow that the Chief Sponsor of a Bill... of a appropriation Bill shall have complete control on Second and Third Reading, but it doesn't change the process now, where that Chief Sponsor doesn't have control over a Bill after that. The Amendatory Veto rule is amended to allow the Chief Sponsor of a Bill, which was passed both Houses to request the Clerk to notify the Governor that he or she wishes to be consulted by the Governor or his designee prior to returning the Bill with specific recommendations for change. This change was at the request of Myron Kulas, who felt that much of the problems that have developed over the Amendatory Veto process could be avoided if we can get the Chief Sponsor and the Governor's Office to 'talk'. We... the rules currently provide that the Majority Leader is the leader of the numerically strongest political party other than the party to which the Speaker belongs. This would be amended to provide that if the Member elected Speaker received at least 31 votes from Members not affiliated with his political party then the Minority Leader is the Member selected by the Caucus of the political party to which the Speaker belongs. This change was offered because of what we thought was a flaw in the present rules, which would allow for 'party rating' in the selection of Speaker and Minority Leader. Rule 7 on the daily order of business is amended to add the Speaker's Table as an order of business. We changed the rule with 22  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 regard to Short Debate Calendar. Representative Steczo had suggested that very often in committee, you think that a Bill is on Short Debate Calendar, but someone forgot to make the Motion. This would require that all Bills that receive unanimous votes in committee are automatically on Short Debate, unless a Member objects to placement on that Calendar. Also, the... currently, the Senate Sponsor may remove a House Sponsor by notifying the Speaker in writing. Our Resolution would provide that the Senate Sponsor would make the notification in writing to the Clerk, who shall provide copies to the Speaker, Minority Leader and the House Sponsor removed from the Bill. This change was at the suggestion of the Minority Leader. The rule regarding the introduction of Bills for consideration in the odd numbered years is amended to reflect the different dates... because under the current rule, some of the... some of the dates for introduction would fall on Sunday. There is no difference in time sequence, but the changes in dates are now added. The rule on committee deadlines is amended to state that the deadlines do not apply to consideration of Bills introduced in a Special Session. The Third Reading deadline rule is amended to provide that the deadline does not apply to the consideration of Bills introduced in a Special Session and on page 35, we delete an obsolete reference to the Spring Calendar because there is now no Spring Calendar. The rules now provide that during a verified Oral Roll Call, for Mem... the Member... the Members vote by rising at their desks, calling out their vote and voting their switch at their desks. We changed the rule to reflect the actual pass... practice now because we have the new voting... electronic voting device. Rule 63 on access to the House' area is amended to prohibit anyone other than Members of the General Assembly from 23  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 using telephones in the booths at the rear of the chamber. This conforms to the rule that prohibits anybody from the... except Members from using the telephones at their desks. Currently, the Doorkeeper locks the switch of an absent Member and does not unlock it until the Member returns from the excused absence and the Speaker recognizes the presence of the Member. The actual practice is for the returning Member to sign a request to be placed on the Quorum Roll Call and file it with the Clerk. The rules are therefore amended to reflect what is the current practice. The rules dealing with the Amendment of the House Rules is amended to require that a Resolution... amending the House Rules or proposing new rules underscore and strike all language changes. This is so it is easier for the Members to understand what the proposed rule change is and it actually conforms to the same type of language when we introduce a Bill. The rules dealing with disciplinary proceedings are amended to allow the Minority Leader to appoint the Minority Members to the Special Investigating Committee and the Select Committee on Discipline. Currently, it is three Democrats and three Republicans, however, under the current rule the Speaker appoints the Minority Members and we changed that procedure. We also changed the rule with regards to committees. The... We delete two committees... Select Committees, which change the... we eliminate the Election Law Committee. We changed what is now the Executive and Veterans' Affairs Committee by making the Veterans' Affairs a Select Committee. We changed the name of the Coal Development and Marketing Committee to Coal and Oil Resources Committee. We add a committee... Select Committee on Constitutional Officers. We delete the Select Committee on Local School District Reorganization and add a Select Committee on Mental Health. 24  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 We... we have a Select Committee on Roads and Bridges and we have a Select Committee now on Veterans' Affairs. Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, I believe that the Rules Committee now has presented to us a Resolution, under which the Assembly can operate in an orderly, deliberative fashion. And I therefore, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, move for the adoption of the House Resolution 53... 53, as amended."

"You've heard the Gentleman's explanation of House Resolution 53. The Chair intends to call the Amendments to this Resolution and then vote on the Resolution as amended. Committee Amendments."

"Committee Amendment #1, 3, 4 and 18 have been adopted."

"Any Motions filed?"

"No Motions filed."

"Any Floor Amendments? Representative Hallock, are you seeking recognition? No, he's not."

"Floor Amendment #19, offered by Representative Terzich and John Dunn."

"Amendment #19, Representative Terzich."

"Yeah, Mr. Speaker, I move that we adopt Amendment #19. Amendment 19 prohibits smoking on the House floor and also in the House gallery, that this is a public area and the... one of the leading killers in the United States is smoking. And Amendment 19 would also set an example throughout the state for adoption of a Clean-Indoor Air Act. All Members, as well as visitors through the House chamber, are entitled to a clean environment. And I would move for its adoption."

"Is there any discussion? Representative Mc... McNamara."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield for a 25  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day question?"

"He will..."

"Yes."

"It's very difficult to hear you over here. Could you tell me exactly what this Amendment does?"

"Yes. As I mentioned to you, I said that the Amendment prohibits smoking on the House floor and also in the... in the... in the House galleries."

"Which you mean... that all of the House floor then would be... I mean, instead of just the first three rows or the first two rows of the House, the whole House floor could not smoke, is that correct?"

"That's correct."

"Okay. I... I think that we should take particular note to the Bill or to the Amendment, particular note of this Amendment or this proposed Amendment. It is one... If I could have a little bit of order, please?"

"Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, if you could give the Gentleman some attention. Give the Gentleman some attention, please."

"Okay. The Sponsor..."

"Representative McNamara..."

"Thank you. The Sponsor of this Amendment has proposed that we eliminate smoking on the House floor. As you know over the past several years, I have been a Cosponsor with him on the right of people to have nonsmoking and also smoking areas. Now there is a new crusade and those crusades are that they will govern our lives, going against what we wish or wish not to do, and you know what happened in the last crusades. The last crusades, the crusaders were the people that tried to force religion down to... the throats of people, slaughtering everyone else because they thought their viewpoint was the only one. If we take a 26  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 look at these chambers and we take a look at the size of this chamber and the air circulation, if we take a look at the first two rows that have been designated as nonsmoking areas, if we take a look at all of these things and consider what would happen to those Bills if all of a sudden the smokers decided to take a smoking break when their respective Bills came up on the floor for a vote. Let us consider each other's considerations, as I have done in the past with you Gentlemen. Let us not discriminate against people on this House floor, where we are forced to be here. If we are going to ban that, let's ban popcorn from this House floor, because it's just as dangerous to my health as anyone else's. Let's ban food. How ludi... how ludicrous can we get? I urge you to defeat this Amendment."

"Representative Goforth."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On this Amendment, I don't think is anything... anyone on this House floor that smokes, if someone asked them to put out their cigarette or their cigar, they're not... they're more than happy to do it. The Representatives that introduced this Bill, they're already sitting in the no smoking area. We ask year after year after year after year we see this thing come back. I don't know why anybody wants to take away some of the things that some of us enjoy doing or some of us want to do. We're not bothering the people in the first three rows of either side. We have no complaints about them whatsoever. You know, this is just not fair. If you want to do something, if you want to have a separate thing, we got no problem with it, but to do it on the whole House floor is ridiculous. Thank you."

"Representative John Dunn."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. 27  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 I rise in support of the Motion. And first of all, I would like to express consideration and appreciation to those who voted in the previous Session to eliminate smoking in committee rooms and to those who have so considerately abided by that rule. There are some of us in the General Assembly, and I include myself in that category, who suffer more than just irritation with smoke. I've had nasal surgery since I've been a Member of the General Assembly and there's little doubt in my mind that it is caused by casual smoke. Those who talk about the rights of people to do as they please, mean well, I know they do. They are my friends who smoke here in the General Assembly, but what they don't appreciate is that by smoking they force the rest of us, who don't want to inhale smoke, to... to live with it. We have no rights. The smoke hangs in here all day, everyday. It's pretty... the atmosphere is pretty good in here right now. But when we get into prolonged Sessions and people are up and down the aisle smoking cigarettes, and the grey cloud begins descending from the ceiling and the air that is in this chamber doesn't recharge itself to the outside. At least it didn't used to and I don't think it does. It recharges in a tank somewhere up in the catacombs of this Capitol and comes back stale today from yesterday's smoke. It really is a problem to those of us who don't smoke. I think that we should adopt this rule and... and I think we would all learn from it. I know we've all learned from the battle in smoking in House Rules. And I think those of us who don't smoke have gained greater appreciation for our colleagues who have been sensitive to the needs of those who are troubled by cigarette smoke. More and more evidence is accumulating that casual inhalation of cigarette smoke is harmful and perhaps as harmful as smoking the cigarettes 28  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 themselves. I have emphysema in my family. I choose not to smoke. I don't want to smoke and I think I have trouble healthwise. And I think there are others like me around here because of casual smoke in this chamber and elsewhere. I would urge the adoption of this rule to protect the rights of those who feel or maybe we imagine, I don't know, that we are troubled by cigarette smoke. So, I ask your adoption of this rule. Thank you very much."

"Representative Johnson."

"Representative McNamara is my friend, but for him to analogize cigarette smoke to popcorn is about the most ludicrous analogy I've ever heard anybody give on this House floor. If I eat popcorn, John Countryman, Ed Petka aren't going to suffer from my eating popcorn. If I smoke a cigarette, I don't, but if I did, it's clear and all the scientific evidence is that secondary smoke affects John Countryman and Bob Piel and Ed Petka. It affects their lungs almost as it affects... as much as it affects my lungs. Clearly, secondary smoke has a direct affect on other people's rights. If I can sit here on the House floor or Bob Piel could and smoke a cigarette and have no impact on the health or lungs of other people around them, as silly a decision as I think it would be for someone to smoke, I suppose it's their own business. But it's not their own business when you're putting cigarette smoke in my lungs and causing me to get cancer because you want to smoke on the House floor. Cigarettes and nicotine are just as much a drug as other drugs. The only difference is it's legal because they have a better lobby than perhaps others do. That's the primary difference. It kills the user. It kills others. It's addictive. It's dirty and at the very least, if we don't ban cigarettes generally, they shouldn't be allowed to be smoked on a House floor where we're 29  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 supposed to be setting an example for other people. Children come in here, school groups and other people and they look down at the House floor and they see... as this area is always strewn with ashes and cigarette butts and... and ashtrays. They see us using what is clear in anybody's mind, drugs on the House floor. It smells bad and it affects their lungs just as much as it does mine. If people want to go in their own offices and smoke cigarettes, I suppose it's their own business. But it is not... it is my business, it's clearly my business when people are smoking and it's going in my lungs and I'm getting cancer, and I'm getting heart disease because of secondary smoke. And for us to sit here as examples for the children of Illinois, and examples for the citizens of Illinois and say it's okay to smoke on the House floor, that's ridiculous. And to analogize cigarette smoking to popcorn, epitomizes the argument. The difference is your right extends as your right to swing your fists, extends to the extent of my nose. When it hits my nose, I've got a right to do something about it. And whether we do or don't pass this Amendment, I'll tell the smokers on the House floor, I'm going to do something about asserting my rights anyway."

"Representative Flinn."

"Mr. Speaker, for the first time in the 86th General Assembly, I move the previous question."

"The Gentleman moves the previous question. The question is, 'Shall the previous question be put?' All in favor say 'aye', opposed 'no'. The 'ayes' have it. The previous question is put. Representative Terzich to close."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, this is a very, very important issue. Now, the Members of 30  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 the Illinois General Assembly certainly have to set an example. Now, how the defending of cigarette smoke into one of the leading killers in the United States is really not very understandable. We do prohibit smoking up in the gallery as well as food products, that we do have to protect the rights of all of the other Members and visitors of the gallery of not smoking. That there basically is no rule, for example, in the press, here up in the rostrum. They're smoking all over the place. And that the problem is caused by the smoker, not the nonsmoker. And certainly that we all deserve a right to have a clean breath of air and especially, let it start in the Illinois General Assembly. And I would move for support of this Amendment."

"Question is, 'Shall Amendment 19 be adopted?' All in favor vote 'aye', opposed vote 'no'. Representative Ropp to explain his vote."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. I was thinking those who were opposing it might say, well, we need to continue to smoke so that we can pay the tax that the Governor wants to have to support education so we can prevent drugs. Really, it's more important that this Body set an example, because the fact that the state and the nation is seeing more and more people who are dying because of lung cancer and other associated concerns like this, we need to set an example so that our colleagues will be able to live longer and this is an issue dealing with life and breath."

"Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Representative McNamara, for what reason do you rise?"

"Should this measure receive the requisite number of votes, I would seek a verification."

"Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Representative Johnson, for what reason do you rise? 31  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day Representative Johnson. Mr. Electrician, if you could turn on Representative Johnson." February 1, 1989

"Did I... I didn't pay my dues this month or something? Just... just... to..."

"...For what reason do you rise, Sir?"

"Just to keep my options open. If Mr. McNamara's verification were to succeed in defeating this..."

"...Well, it's not a time to request, Sir..."

"...I would want to be able to verify the negative..."

"Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this Amendment there are 57 'ayes', 52 'nos' and the Gentleman has asked for a verification. Mr. Clerk, poll the absentees."

"A poll of those not voting. Bugielski. And Homer. No further."

"Proceed with the Poll of the Affirmative votes."

"Ackerman. Balanoff. Barger. Barnes. Black. Bowman. Breslin. Capparelli. Churchill. Countryman. Cowlishaw. Cullerton. Curran. Currie. Daniels. Deuchler. Didrickson. Dunn. Frederick. Hallock. Harris. Hasara. Hensel. Hoffman. Johnson. Shirley Jones. Kirkland. Klemm. Krska. Kubik. LeFlore. Levin. Martinez. Matijevich. McCracken. Parcells. Petka. Preston. Pullen. Rice. Ropp. Ryder. Saltsman. Santiago. Satterthwaite. Sieben. Stange. Stephens. Stern. Sutker. Terzich. Trotter. Wait. Weller. White. Williams. And Williamson."

"Representative McNamara."

"Thank you. Representative Stange?"

"Would you state that again."

"Stange?"

"Representative Stange. The Gentleman in the chamber? Representative Stange here? Mr. Clerk, remove 32  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 Representative Stange from the Roll."

"Representative Ryder?"

"Representative Ryder is here."

"Representative Churchill?"

"Representative Churchill. The Gentleman is in front of the chamber. Further questions?"

"No further."

"On this Amendment there are 56 'ayes' and 52 'nos', 6 voting 'present'. The Amendment's adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #20, offered by Representative Countryman."

"Representative Countryman. Representative Culler... Countryman."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move to withdraw..."

"The Gentleman withdraws Amendment #20. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #21, offered by Representative Breslin."

"Representative Breslin, Amendment #21."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen, Amendment 21 would provide that the Doorkeeper not deliver messages to us while this House is on Third Reading in either Short Debate or Regular Debate. The issue was brought up last year. The issue was whether or not we should be called off the floor when we were... are on the order of final passage of Bills. I would be happy to answer any questions."

"You've heard the Lady's explanation, is there any questions? Representative Matijevich."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker. Last Session, I spoke against this Amendment and I... yesterday, I told Representative Breslin I made a... I may be neutral on it, but the issue 33  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 is whether you want to be called off the floor by the Doorkeeper if some of your constituents are out there asking to see you. And I thought about it and then I... I guess, I realized why I really voted against it last Session. If we had Third Reading where it was only, you know, for a half-hour or so, I can understand why. You know, it can be very disconcerting. It can be, you know, I've been called off the floor and our responsibility is really to vote and sometimes you get called off and you lose your train of thought. So I can understand Representative Breslin's concern. But then I thought well sometimes we're on Third Reading all day. So if you vote for this Amendment, you're really taking away the right of your constituent who comes down here on his or her own time, and it's not often that they can come and confront their Legislator. To me that's part of the democratic process. So on that basis, I think you ought to add that to your...to whether you want to vote for this Amendment or not. If you want to preclude your constituent from actually seeing you possibly within the whole day, then you can vote for this. But I...I'm sorry, Peg, I'm going to again vote 'no' because of that problem that I have with it."

"Representative Parke."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I too, understand the intent of the Sponsor of this Amendment; however, I may point out to my colleagues that in the process of legislation being discussed, there are times when a lobbyist or someone has information pertaining to the discussion at hand that needs to be relayed to the Legislators so it can be brought to the forefront of the Legislator for consideration on that very piece of business. I think this stymies the process. It further 34  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 restricts the ability of each of us to get as much input as possible until the final vote is taken. And remember, what we're talking about is laws of the land of Illinois. Should we restrict our rights to hear, because I may remind you and I may remind the Sponsor that all you have to do is tell the doorman no, that you do not wish to be bothered and I am sure the doorman would not forward that. So I don't think we need to have this kind of legislating... legislation restricting the access of information for us to use so we ultimately can make the correct decision for all the people that voted for us to be in this office. So even though I think the legislation is well intended, I think it is restrictive, unnecessary and I shall ask that you vote 'no' on this Amendment."

"Further discussion? Representative Regan."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. If the calling of Bills were done in an orderly fashion, that's one thing. Sometimes the way that things happen here toward the last minute, you're on First, you're on Second, you're on Third, bang, bang, bang. How can the Doorkeepers possibly keep the notes in and out, back and forth. Too much confusion. And I would urge your 'no' vote."

"Representative Breslin to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. I remember after the November election when there was a hue and cry against improper advertising and challenges to incumbent Members of this House, because they had an empty chair. Many people said, 'How can you help but have an empty chair, when we are called off the floor, willy-nilly, all times of the day or night when we are in Session?' At that time I suggested that perhaps we should set some limits. This... This limit is very small. It applies only to Third Reading, it does not apply specifically to 35  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 Conference Committee Reports or when we are on the Order of Concurrence, because you are quite right, some things come up in short order at that time and we need to have some input from people who are on the outside, people who are lobbying for special interest, etc. This applies only when we are on the Order of Third Reading. We know what the Bill is, it has been on the Table for a minimum of a day, not an hour and we ought to be here participating in the debate. It is just a suggested limit that would keep Members in their chairs participating in their debate, doing what they're suppose to be doing, what they were elected to do. Thank you."

"The Lady has moved for the adoption of Amendment #21. Question is, 'Shall the Amendment be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Clerk will take the record. On this Motion there are 33 'ayes', 77 'nos', none voting 'present'. The Amendment fails. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #22, offered by Representative McCracken."

"Representative McCracken. Representative Young in the Chair."

"Welcome to the Chair, Mr. Speaker, it's nice to have you."

"Thank you, Representative, I hope all your remarks will be that cordial."

"I move the adoption of Floor Amendment #22. This would create for the purposes of scheduling business to come before this Body... Calendar Committee, the Calendar Committee in the final draft in the Amendment before you is different from that proposed in the Rules Committee. We acknowledge the majority's prerogative in scheduling House 36  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 business, and for that reason, have made this committee 2-1 Repub...or Democrat to Republican. We do not want to freeze out the system. As Representative Woods Bowman noticed...noted in the Rules Committee, there is some concern that what is a structural solution, creation of a Calendar... Could I have order please, Mr. Speaker? Bang your gavel, so they all pay attention. Very good. The Calendar Committee would be responsible for setting forth the daily schedule of business. The daily schedule of business would have to have been completed the night before the next day's Session. It would have to be a schedule made as...they are incorporated into the Daily Calendar. The schedule of business could not be varied. by the Speaker. The schedule of business gives the Speaker no discretion in changing orders of business. The use of Supplemental Calendars would be limited. The ability to change orders of business based on subject matter or other things of that nature are eliminated. Special orders are eliminated. But, this is not an attempt to force a particular position on the merits of any Bill. We are not seeking to affect indirectly what we cannot affect with our votes on the floor. What we seek however, is an opportunity to prepare for the day's business. It is a fundamental rule of due process, a fundamental rule of law which should govern the lawmaker as well as the person subject to the law, that each side to a controversy must have adequate notice to prepare for that...for that particular argument on the merits of a Bill. And we have been denied that. We have been denied that by the indiscriminate use of changing orders of business. We have been denied that by the use, overuse, abuse of Supplemental Calendars. Just in the six years that I have been in this chamber, the use of Supplemental Calendars has escalated to 37  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 the point where it now is used on virtually a daily, daily business. It is a matter of course. And it is a matter of course even when it is not needed. Look at today's Daily Calendar. This order of business, Consideration of Permanent House Rules for the Eighty-Sixth General Assembly, does not appear. We all knew we were going to conduct this order of business today. We don't even give lip service anymore to the Daily Calendar. Now that doesn't hurt the majority, because they set the rules. They know what's going to be called the next day and that's your right, but we want an opportunity to respond. Again, this Calendar Committee would be controlled by the Majority Party. We don't...we don't believe it will give us any undue control over what's being called, but when the Calendar Committee acts we have the right and we can take the comfort in relying  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989

"We can... If it passes we can correct it with a later Amendment. Is that correct?"

"Or even a...something very technical. It doesn't go to the substance of it. It would be a 2-1 vote, Democrats to Republicans."

"Okay. Now, Mr. Speaker, to the merits of the Resolution. I would point out first of all with regard to the comments made by the previous speaker concerning the Daily Calendar. He indicated that we did not have on our Daily Calendar consideration of House Resolution 53. The reason for that is that... this Resolution was to be considered today in the Rules Committee, and the calendar... the Clerk did not know that the Resolution was going to come out of the Rules Committee. It didn't even have a number earlier today when the calendar was printed and therefore, it could not reflect this. That's why Supplemental Calendars are necessary. With regard to the issue of special orders; maybe my age is starting to show here. I've been here ten years starting the llth, I was here when Speaker Ryan presided over the General Assembly in 1981 and '82. He is the one who invented special orders. It was Speaker Ryan who invented them and frequently it was Representative Daniels who was in the Chair switching from one special order to another. This was an invention of the Republicans and I think it's worked fairly well for the majority. It did in 1981 and '82 under Speaker Ryan and it certainly seems to have worked well and fairly...as a matter of fact it's been...if it's been abused, it was abused back then in '81, '82 and certainly not to the same extent, if at all, in the last few years. So I think that the main arguments that are proposed for this House Resolution, that of eliminating special orders and number two, eliminating Supplemental Calendars, are not 39  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 strong arguments and would ask for the defeat of the Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Preston."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in opposition to the adoption of this Amendment, notwithstanding that I find much in Mr. McCracken's argument that leads me to believe that when he is Speaker, he will, I'm sure, want to see the adoption of an Amendment such as this, a rule such as this. But the special order of business is not only a question of fairness, it's also a question of how do we deal with the business that is before the General Assembly, and how do we deal with it in a manner that when there is the necessity because of the press of time to prioritize issues, to deal with issues in some priority and also to set matters for debate when our constituents and various lobbying groups may have scheduled their appearance in Springfield to show the Members of the General Assembly, and petition the Members of the General Assembly as is there right, with their concerns. They might come down here when they are expecting to have an issue brought before them, and for one reason or another because of time constraints, that may be delayed, but because of having the opportunity to use a special order of business, the Speaker can let people who have come from their homes, organize and come to Springfield, to hear the debate on an issue of grave concern to them, this special order will enable them to do it. Beyond that, it also enables us to deal with business that is very important. We have passed many pieces of legislation on special orders that otherwise might not have had an opportunity even to be considered by this House. I think the adoption of this rule is in the worst interest not only of this Body, but certainly in the worst interests 40  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 of the people of Illinois, and I would urge a 'no' vote on this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Tate."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Mr. Speaker, why don't we have some order in this House. They...this issue, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen, is an issue that all of us should pay very close attention to. This is an issue of fairness, this is an issue of how we're going to deal with the orderly business of this House. This is an issue that is important to each and every one of our constituents throughout this state. We're all elected to come down here and do a job for the people of this state. We all have the same equal rights to have our Bills heard fairly, in an orderly fashion on this House floor. Now I would just suggest to all of you, that you might be for Mayor Daley, you may be for Mayor Sawyer, you may be a downstater, you may come down here and have a Bill very important to you, but you might not have voted the way the Speaker wanted you to vote yesterday, and that's no reason that we skip your Bills on a daily basis and change the special order of businesses, the Supplemental Calendar, in a direct fashion to circumvent this process. We all have a right to have our Bills heard. We all have a right to represent our constituents on an equal basis. This is an issue of fairness. This is an issue that you all know for those of you that have been there for the last few years, know that sometimes you get ripped off on this. Not only Minority Republican Members, but Minority Democrat Members. If you believe in fairness, you should believe in going down this calendar and calling every Bill in an orderly...orderly fashion. And you better vote 'yes' on this, because I'll tell you what, there'll be a day in this Legislative Session that you'll all regret it." 41  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Bowman."

"Thank you. Well, I wasn't going to speak until the previous speaker got so wound up. I just want to make one observation, that the practical effect of this Amendment will be to keep us here many more days, because as Representative Cullerton observed about the use of the Supplemental Calendar today. You know if we hadn't had that sort of flexibility, we wouldn't be able to consider these matters today. And everybody knows that Majority Party, the Minority Party each have an agenda, and any time you make the rules more stringent, more rigorous, more of a straitjacket really, it simply takes longer to do what needs to be done, or what people want to have done. And so, we'll just be in Session more days and it'll just cost the taxpayers more money, and I'm sure none of us want that. Thank you."

"Representative McCracken to close."

"I'm glad I was the next speaker, I wanted to respond to that. Until Representative Bowman got so wound up, I wasn't going to speak. I think we confuse the substance of the merits of the legislation with the procedure for getting there. I don't think it's such a bad thing if doing it the right way, in an open process, fair to the minority, fair to the public, costs a few days. Passing legislation is not the most important thing in the universe. It depends on the quality or the merits. It depends on the quality of the debate which leads up to it. The public discussion which leads to an adoption or a defeat of a particular Bill. That is what's important. It is the means by which we do it, which in some cases can be even more important than that which we do. And that is something our Constitution stands for, that is something our rule of law by which civilized society is judged, 42  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 stands for. And it is that, by...of which we are deprived everyday that the order of business changes without an opportunity for us to prepare. Everyday that a Bill disappears and is not on any calendar for days at a time, every time that a special order is called and then adjourned and then called and then adjourned and then called, that is our problem. But you have created the problem. We want a system which has no implication on the merits of any particular Bill, has no implication for the merits. If you've got a Bill worthy of passage, you've still got enough votes on that side of the aisle. If you want a Bill called or not called, you still control the Calendar Committee. The value of the Calendar Committee is one thing only. It gives us notice. And that notice is necessary for us to perform our function, that we were sent down here to do. And that's all we're asking. You retain control. The bottom line is: Democrats still prevail in the chamber, they still set the agenda. Only now, the Republicans will have an opportunity to be prepared."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Floor Amendment #22 and the question is, 'Shall Floor Amendment #22 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 50 voting 'yes', 66 voting 'no'. Representative Rice wishes to be recorded as 'no'. There are... On this question there are 50 voting 'yes', 67 voting 'no', none voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #23, offered by Representative McCracken."

"Rep... Floor Amendment #23."

"24, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are withdrawn." 43  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day

February 1, 1989 "Withdraw the Amendments. Further Amendments?" "Floor Amendment #330, offered by Representative McCracken."

"Representative McCracken."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen, Floor Amendment #330 would require certain time limits to be in effect prior to the consideration of Conference Committee Reports. Conference Committee Reports, if this Mo...if this Amendment were adopted, would be time stamped upon receipt by the Clerk and must be distributed within three hours of opening Session if filed at least one hour before that opening. Otherwise they must be distributed within six hours. Beginning June 28th, a Supplemental Calendar if it is used, shall be distributed every two hours, listing newly received Conference Committee Reports and messages of concurrence, nonconcurrence. It's no secret to anybody that the work of the Legislature gets done in a hurry around June 30th. And in an effort to pass all these meritorious pieces of legislation on which the fate of western civilization hangs, we sometimes find ourselves cutting corners. We sometimes confuse the value of the process with the value of the merits of the legislation. And I'm sure that every House Sponsor feels that there's nothing more important in the world than his Bill, or his particular issue, and for that reason is willing to participate in cutting corners. But we have come to a point in this Assembly where it is becoming a public embarrassment the way we conduct business those last three days of the Spring Session. It is a disgrace that Conference Committee Reports can be dropped on us in such great quantities after having been held for some period of time, that we cannot even digest them properly in order to meet our deadline. We cannot allow ourselves to lose sight 44  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 of the value of the process by which we create laws. It's a value we impose on everyone else in society, but for some reason feel we are...we are too good to be subject to it. Let us return to a time when it is the process as well as the merits by which we are judged as public officials. And it is that process which we seek to restore by adoption of Floor Amendment #330."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Floor Amendment %30. On that is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, all of these Resolutions being offered by Representative McCracken and the Minority Party have been considered by the Rules Committee. I would urge the Members on this side of the aisle to reject those Amendments. I can't help but say though that I'm not sure what the Minority Party is trying to tell us, because I'm not sure...I don't think Representative McCracken was here during the quote 'Ryan Years', because evidently what the Minority Party is trying to say is that the Speaker and the Majority Party are somehow being unfair to the minority. If that is true, let me present to you the statistics of the 'Ryan Year...Years' as Speaker, as compared to the quote 'Madigan Years'. You know, when George Ryan was Speaker of the House there was a one vote majority. It was a fifty-fifty split. And Rep... Speaker Ryan had actually the same type of differential as between committees as we do now, as we Democrats do now, with the vast majority as we do have. Under the 'Ryan Years', the Rules Committee let out in those, you know, years when we didn't have all the Bills that come out, only let out twenty-two percent of Democratic Bills out of the Rules Committee. You know, and I hear a lot of what you're saying now. At least during 45  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 the 'Madigan Years' of the Legislature of the House, thirty-one percent...or thirty...thirty-one percent of the Bills came out of Rules Committee. You did pretty well compared to what we did. Last year...last Session 189 Bills, 76 percent of the Bills that were tabled, were Democratic Bills, not your Bills. And you did much better than we did in passing Bills from the House than we did under Ryan. You have passed 44 percent of your Bills as compared under the 'Ryan House', that we passed only 41 percent of the Bills, even though we had a lot of Members, a lot of Members, many more than you have under the 'Madigan Years'. Mr. Speaker, with regards to the Conference Committee Reports, there are rules now as to the time limits of the distribution. We have taken into consideration the...the fact that the Speaker ought to run the business of the House. The Republican Amendments actually try to divide authority. Any time you divide authority and responsibility, you are going to have more problems rather than less problems. Mr. Speaker, I would urge the Members of this side of the aisle to reject this Amendment and future Amendments that are going to be proposed by Representative McCracken and others on that side of the aisle."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago, Representative Hallock."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. You know, we in this General Assembly languish for months and months debating issues and spend a lot of time on those Bills right up until the very end. And in the very end, those of us who've been here a few years and even the new Members, see that things change like day and night down here. And that's when the Conference Committees come out. A Conference Committee, as we all know, has the power to 46  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 take an issue as last debated back in March and all of a sudden put it on our tables and on our desks. Bills which we had thought had died a long time ago, all of a sudden come back to life. All this Amendment seeks to do is give all Members of the House, on your side and on ours, a chance to see what's in those Bills. That's all. That's pretty simple. That's not devious. That's not surreptitious. It's quite fair. All we're asking is that the Members on this side and your side of the aisle, too, have a chance to find out what's in these Bills, what's in a Conference Committee Report. It takes more than five minutes to do that. You have that right. Your citizens who speak through you have that right, too. Vote for this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Tate."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would just like to react to John's comments on the other side of the aisle. I was here during Speaker Ryan's days and anyone who wants to make some comparisons to a House that has 118 Members to...or had 177 Members to a House that have 118 Members. Come on, John, where you coming from? Number one, we had a five vote majority in 1980 and 1981. Those committees had a fair representation proportionately to the representation that we have. But you know what we're trying to do here today, we're trying to protect individual rights. We're trying to allow every Member in this process to be involved. Now we all know that on your side of the aisle that you have various coalitions, that you have a downstate coalition, you have a Black Caucus, that you have people that support Daley, that you have people that support Sawyer. But the bottom line is, is all we want is an opportunity to take a little power from this Speaker up here and give a little power to the 47  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day Members. February 1, 1989 We want a little fairness in this process. We want to know what we're doing in this process. We want an opportunity to hear Bills, we want an opportunity to read Bills, we want an opportunity to represent people better, and that's why you should vote for this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Preston."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I'm going to be voting in opposition to this Amendment, because not...well, I'm sorry about the people that disagree with that. Let me just say that this Amendment is not off the wall. There is... There were some arguments that were made by Representative McCracken that certainly hit home and that is that we ought to have a better opportunity to peruse the legislation that comes out of Conference Committees, so that we know what we're voting on. And I'm certainly hopeful that the staff and the Leadership will try and endeavor to do a better job to see to it that in fact we do have those Conference Committee Reports in a more timely manner than has been the case in the past, but yet I'm going to be voting in opposition."

"The Gentleman from Fulton, Representative Homer. Representative Homer."

"Will the Gentleman yield?"

"He'll yield."

"Tom, what...what's the remedy if in fact the Clerk violates this rule?"

"Class IV felony. I don't...I don't... There is not a remedy in the Amendment."

"Well, Mr. Speaker, to the Amendment. The Members on the other side of the aisle have actually been debating an issue that is not before us, that's already incorporated in the rules, that this Amendment does not attempt to address that has to do with the number of hours or days that 48  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 Conference Committee Reports have to be distributed and on the Member's desks prior to taking consideration. That's in the rules and there's nothing here that would change those rules. If it's...if it's between June 16th and June 27th, it's three hours. If  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 a regular flow of business. The reason we back up at the end among other reasons, is because we are allowed to do so. This addresses a different issue. And I don't find the fact that there's no sanctions stated in the Amendment to be such a compelling argument. The other subsection doesn't have sanctions, it just sets forth the rule, they must be on the desk for one hour. I don't know what the sanction would be, but to the extent there is one, it's no different from the current rule. I have objected based on the one hour rule. It has been sustained and we have waited to consider a particular report for that one hour. But, they drop with such frequency in those last few days, and one of the reasons they drop with such frequency is because of this printing backlog, if that's what it is, that we have no opportunity to have a reasonable chance to respond to these Conference Committees. Now remember something; maybe, maybe if this rule had been in effect when we passed the Sales Tax Reform Act last summer, maybe, that annual appropriation language would have been discovered, and maybe it wouldn't have been passed in the first place. And all of you over there who have had your communities yelling at you because you changed an...a continuing appropriation to an annual appropriation, can thank in part this rule and the loopholes by which it is allowed to go on. If that printing requirement had been in place, maybe we would have had enough time to discover that before we voted on it. I'll bet you virtually everyone in this chamber voted for the continuing appropriation, assuming it was in that language and it wasn't. And this would help us to discover that. I move the adoption of Floor Amendment #30."

"The Gentleman moves the adoption of Floor Amendment #30 and the question is, 'Shall Floor Amendment 50  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 #30 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 51 voting 'yes', 65 voting 'no' and none voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #31, offered by Representative McCracken."

"Out of the record. Further Amendments? Withdrawn."

"Floor Amendment #32, offered by Representative McCracken."

"Thank you. Ladies and Gentlemen, this Bill would restore the rule regarding Special Sessions back to the status quo. Our current rules exempt from all deadline requirements matters or Bills considered in Special Session. The rule would be amended by adoption of the underlying Resolution to accept from the deadline requirements only those Bills introduced in the Special Session. That is, any Bills not introduced in the Special Session would be subject to the deadline requirements or the deadline rules. The effect being, if the Special Session is called after June 30th of a particular year, all Bills except those introduced in the Special Session itself, would be tabled. Now, what is the significance of this? I suppose at first blush it looks rather innocuous, but let me tell you this, I see this as a continuing struggle between Governor Thompson and Speaker Madigan. I believe that by adoption of this rule, the House Majority seeks to thwart the Governor's authority to call Special Sessions. That is the authority to call a Special Session in which a Bill can be considered immediately. Think of it. In various Special Sessions called over the last few 51  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 years, it has not been uncommon for the subject matter of the Special Session to be identified by Bill number. That would no longer be possible. Now that's not the end of the world. I'm not claiming that this is an unconstitutional infringement, it's just another example of this continuing fight between House Democrats and the Republican Governor. It is a fight which has taken many forms, some of which we'll hear about today, but this one is also part of that struggle. Why limit it to only Bills introduced in the Special Session? The only possible reason is because of the desire to make Special Sessions as cumbersome and as difficult to accomplish as possible. You can't tell the Governor that he can't call a Special Session, but you can tell him that it's going to be very difficult and as a practical matter, not able to be accomplished. And that's what this Bill does. This Resolution does violence to our systems of checks and balances between the Executive and the Legislative. It's a small poke in the eye. I don't think it's as bad as the gubernatorial compliance rule, but nonetheless it's a poke in the eye in this continuing battle. The Constitution has resolved all these problems. Just live with it, don't try to rewrite it by virtue of House rule. I move the adoption of Floor Amendment 32."

"The Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich."

"Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I would urge the Members on this side of the aisle to reject this Amendment. It undos what the Rules Committee had provided in the General Resolution. I might state to the other side of the aisle, let's face it, the news of the day is going to be the media, that there is no smoking on the floor of the House. So you might as well forget everything else. Even... That's even going to take away probably from the 52  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day Governor's State of the State Message. We fought the same February 1, 1989 battle you're trying to fight to get media attention to what we thought was unfairness during the 'Ryan Years' and believe me, they didn't publish it, it just went right by everybody. And probably the reason is that everybody knows that democra...democratic form of government really is majority rule and we happen to be the majority here. And the responsibility is on us to conduct the business. So I would urge the Members on this side of the aisle to vote 'no' on Representative McCracken's Amendment."

"Representative McCracken to close."

"I assume the press doesn't listen to a word I say, so I'm not surprised that no one is here. I've pulled a few Amendments here to make our points where we feel they're most important. Those points have addressed...or will address two concerns. One, this tug of war between House Democrats and the Governor and two, our access to participate in the process. This one has constitutional implications. You're going to make it as unpleasant and impractical as possible to call a Special Session. Again, I don't know that it is unconstitutional, but it clearly is just another poke in the eye and we cannot stand for it. We feel we have to defend the Constitution, we have no choice."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #32 and the question is, 'Shall Floor Amendment #32 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 50 voting 'yes', 67 voting 'no', and the Amendment fails. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #33, offered by Representative McCracken." 53  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989

"Representative McCracken."

"Thank you. House Resolution 53 makes a change in the way...or the consequences of votes taken to elect Speaker and Minority Leader. The Resolution requires in the case of 31 crossover votes or more in an election for Speaker, that the Minority Leader be in a different party than the Speaker's affiliation. It has been explained to me that this is an attempt to prohibit...or to restrict the use of Republican crossover votes. In the first place, what's wrong with Republican crossover votes? The first and second time your leader was elected, he was elected unanimously. We can no longer do that. But a much more compelling reason not to adopt this rule is that it clearly is unconstitutional. I would think anyone would agree with this analysis. Article IV, Section 6(c), requires that the Minority Leader for purposes of appointing Leadership will be in the numerically strongest party other than the party to which the Speaker belongs. I f in fact this rule applied, you would have a Minority Leader who would not be able...or who would not be in a position to appoint Minority Leadership. And it is that infirmity which makes this unconstitutional. If you read the rule, you will see that the Minority Leader as designated in this particular circumstance, would be responsible for the appointment of Leadership. However, there is...in this particular circumstance he would not be of the numerically strongest party other than the Speaker necessarily. The problem is, as a matter of fact, that is the problem. The problem is that there could be no appointment of Leadership in that situation. Not Leadership pursuant to the Constitution. Apparently that was not the intent of the drafters of this, but we did have some discussions about it where they explained their concerns. In looking at the Constitution 54  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 however, I submit that it is clearly unconstitutional as it pertains to the situation where a Speaker is elected with 31 or more crossover votes."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Floor Amendment #33, and on that question, is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, the Resolu...the language drafted in the Resolution is an attempt to prevent ratings to prohibit what could be both the Speaker and a Minority Leader being from the same political party. I don't think any of us think that's right. The constitutional provision which Representative...Representative McCracken referred to, refers only to the Minority Leader definition as to appointing Members to a Redistricting Committee. So that's a limited definition. I would urge the Members on this side of the aisle to reject Amendment 33."

"The Representative from Winnebago, Representative Hallock."

"Well, with deference to the previous speaker, if one looked at the Constitution, there are separate paragraphs. The first paragraph which Representative McCracken was referred to, does in fact enunciate very clearly how the Speaker and how the Minority Leader are elected. It stops there. It then goes on to explain some duties of the Minority Party Leader. So my opinion, very frankly, it seems quite clear that the duties are clearly prescribed in the Constitution. And so therefore for the Illinois House to even contemplate changing those provisions is wrong. You can't do it and you know it. Vote 'no'."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton." 55  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day

"Thank February 1, 1989 you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. To further clarify and explain the reason why this rule we are about to adopt is not unconstitutional. I will be happy to quote from the Constitution and explain why I feel it's not unconstitutional. Section 6 of the Constitution under organization, paragraph C, says, 'For purposes of powers of appointment conferred by this Constitution'. And then it goes on to say, 'The Minority Leader of either House is a Member of the numerically strongest political party, other than the party to which the Speaker or the President belongs.' I would suggest to you that this definition of Minority Leader clearly only applies for purposes of powers of appointment conferred by the Constitution. And the only powers of appointment conferred by the Constitution for the Minority Leader, comes in the Section 3 dealing with legislative redistricting. The Minority Leader of the House of Representatives shall appoint Members to the commission. That is the only power of appointment conferred by the Constitution to the Minority Leader. The powers of appointment of the Minority Leader to committees and the like, to commissions, those are done by our rules. So this rule that which we had proposed, is not, clearly not in violation of the Constitution. That's number one. And number two, the rule is design to prevent a certain occurrence. It does not prohibit crossover votes on the election for Speaker. It does not say that a Republican Party can't vote for a Democrat and elect that person Speaker. All it says is, if that should happen, where the Republican Party cuts a real big deal with some dissidents in the other party, the Majority Party and elects a Speaker, they shouldn't also be in control as the Minority Leader. And that's the evil to which this rule addresses 56  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 that you're having trouble with over there? Or is it the Sawyer people? Is it the Daley people? Is it the downstate people? Put the 67 votes together, Mr. Speaker. Why don't you answer that question? Why don't you address this rule yourself."

"Representative McCracken to close."

"I'll defer to the Speaker."

"The Gentleman moves for the adopt... Representative McCracken."

"This rule at the very least, if Representative Cullerton is right, would create the anomaly of a Minority Leader for one purpose, appointing the Minority Leaders and another Minority Leader for the purpose of legislative redistricting. That's what can happen in this case. And in the case of appointing the leaders, you would have a situation conceivably where both sides could control that and a third party would be available for the minority legislative redistricting. Now certainly that in and of itself is enough reason that everybody should be voting against this Bill. What if you're on the short end of the stick in '92? You may have nothing to go with if this Bill...if this rule is passed. This at the very least, Representative Cullerton's analysis supports a proposition that this change should be made and we should adopt the Amendment."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #33 and the question is, 'Shall Floor Amendment #33 be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 49 voting 'yes', 67 voting 'no', none voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #34, offered by Representative 58  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day McCracken."

"Representative McCracken." February 1, 1989

"We take advantage of this adoption of rules process to bring back again for consideration the patent abuse which accompanied the adoption of the Veto Compliance Rule 46.1. This Resolution now would add to that insult. The requirement...or not the requirement, the ability of a Sponsor to submit to the Governor a request to be consulted before an Amendatory Veto is passed upon. Now that sounds very innocuous. You would say, 'Well, there are competing interests there. The Governor has his position. The Sponsor of the Bill has his.' But I think the implications of it are far more ominous. It is another one of those instances of this fight over the constitutional authority of the Executive Branch of our government. And whether you like it or not, our Constitution allows Amendatory Veto authority. It has sustained by Supreme Court decision the constitutionality of various uses of that power and in your report, which accompanied the original adoption of the amendatory compliance rule, you admit that you disagree and would rule differently on the same set of facts as our Supreme Court has...has upheld the use of that power. Now you may not like the Amendatory Veto rule, you may think it impinges on your rights, but let me tell you something, this gets back to the rule of law, a process which is more important in this case certainly, than the merits of any particular power struggle between personalities. And it is this: the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Civilized society is a society of laws. In our society we have a supreme law. No internal House rule can change that. Now you argue, well, the Bill comes back into our forum and we're free to consider it. You're free to consider it, but let me tell you, in the annotated copy of 59  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 the Constitution under the separation of powers clause, it is stated that any violation of the separation of powers clause is that which inhibits the exercise of another branch's duty. And that is precisely what you do here and you do not do it by accident. You do it knowingly. You do it with the intention of political intimidation. You want the Governor to back down from the use of his Amendatory Veto power. And you accomplish it, or seek to accomplish it, by the adoption of nothing more than a House rule, a House rule that does not even have the status of law, less than constitutional law. And you would sit here and tell us that you can adopt by a simple majority or by a sixty vote minimum, a rule which will change our constitutional form of government, which will change the powers and relationships of the various branches of government. And you're just plain wrong. There is one immutable fact which always surfaces in this discussion and it is this: You do not like the way the Constitution is written. You do not like a Governor who is willing to exercise his constitutional authority. And you do not like the results of his exercise of that constitutional authority. And in a rule of law in a society based upon a rule...the rule of law, that's too bad. You don't have the right to change it. You don't have the right to impede and intimidate. You don't have the right to, in effect, create a veto-proof House. You don't have the votes. You don't have the authority in the Constitution. Let's get rid of this. Now I've heard, I've heard that there are some on that side of the aisle who agree with us on this, who want to get rid of this veto noncompliance. They want to be able to work with the Governor. They want to be able to consider on the merits, those changes. And that's consistent with what we've been talking about all day. Your reliance on this 60  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 4th Legislative Day phony issue allows you to duck votes on the merits. Do you remember the Pension Bill, Representative Bowman? Do you remember how that went down in flames because your side of the aisle insisted that the Amendatory Veto didn't comply with its conception of the Constitution? It failed because of people on your side of the aisle. Now those of you who want to be able to pass your legislation, those of you who want to be able to address the merits of your legislation, should vote with us on this issue. This will do nothing to hurt the majority power, it will only restore our constitutional separation of powers."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #34. Is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Amendment would totally subvert what the House is trying to do with what we will admit is something that is in its initial stages in trying to prevent the Governor from abuse of his authority, not from following responsible authority, constitutional authority. It is an abuse and there's no question about it. And it's not just this Governor, evidently other Governors have been watching what he's doing and thought maybe they can do it too. The Council of State Governments in one of the magazines that we just got in the last month, had an article on this, where the Governor of Wisconsin, ironically his name's Thompson too, had...was abusing what is their item veto power by taking out a word and totally changing the intent of the...of a Bill. This is what disturbs us and ought to disturb us. Now the practical effect of what we're doing, even before we injected the rule when we...when the Governor had heard evidently that we had a task force that was looking into this this summer, there were less 61  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 Amendatory Vetoes. That to me is an admission of guilt, if you will, the fact that he was abusing the Amendatory Veto process. I can stand on this floor and say with all honesty, that I don't like what's happened under both political parties when they have had the Governor and abuse this authority. And I think that the rule has had its intended effect and we ought to keep it. Therefore, I reject the Amendment and ask others to do so."

"The Gentlemen from Bureau, Representative Mautino."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In response to the learned Gentleman from the other side of the aisle, yes, there was some concern as it pertains to noncompliance and compliance provisions. Many of the Members though, felt that with the inclusion of control by the Chief Sponsor of the legislation and the recommendation that we as Members made concerning the provision that the Governor shall notify and consult with the Chief Sponsor of a Bill prior to returning the Bill with specific recommendations for change, address the question of having input and knowing exactly what the Governor was going to do with a piece of legislation at least those instances and issues being known to the Sponsor. I think that the fact that legislation is amendatorily vetoed and changed in many cases without the Sponsor or the process being aware of it, is addressed, even though I didn't totally agree with the noncompliance, compliance provisions. If the Sponsor agrees that it's within the compliance provisions or noncompliance and then that Sponsor decides not to call that Bill, it solves the same purpose, doesn't it? And the same result comes out. Therefore, I don't think there's anything wrong with the provisions that we've already adopt...already addressed on the Committee of Rules. And I don't think that you're 62  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 argument is well taken."

"Representative McCracken to close."

"The conclusion I draw from the Governor's not appearing before your committee, is that he agreed with me that your committee was not legally constituted. It had no subject matter jurisdiction over the Amendatory Veto process and should not be given the dignity of appearing before it to argue his case. It is a response very common when one feels that what is being done does not even merit the courtesy of a reply, which I think that is precisely what was warranted in your case. We feel strongly that these movements are not merely movements in an attempt to accommodate the competing interests. Every speech, every speech quarrels in effect with what the Constitution says. You claim it's a separation of powers issue because the Governor can write substantive legislation. You ignore the fact that the Constitution specifically says he has those Amendatory Veto powers. You ignore the fact that the voters have passed on whether these should be only technical changes only and they have said no. You ignore the fact that our Supreme Court charged with enforcement and construction of our Constitution has upheld the constitutionality of this Amendatory Veto. You admit in the report by which you adopted this Amendatory Veto, that you disagree with one of those cases and that you would rule differently if you had the chance. And Representative Mautino, I understand that it is in any particular Legislator's interest to make the best of a situation. But you're not going to save yourself with the adoption of this consultation rule. What's going to happen is, you'll work with the Governor and you'll come in in good faith and say, I wanted this Amendatory Veto. But your party for reasons unknown to everyone but them, is going to say no, it 63  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 violates their noncompliance rule and your Bill's going to go down like a wounded duck. It's going to be no different next fall than it was last fall. This little Amendment to it is nothing but lip service to mollify those of you who do not want to be subject to the games playing that goes on. This is an awful House rule. It's unconstitutional. It's unauthorized at law. Let's get rid of it."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #34. All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 50 voting 'yes', 67 voting 'no', none voting 'present', and the Amendment fails. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #35, offered by Representative Cullerton."

"Representative Cullerton."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Amendment does the following: It says that the Speaker shall assign the offices, secretaries and parking spaces for the Members of Majority Leadership and the Minority Leader shall make those assignments for the Members of the Minority Leadership. The Chief..."

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

"Point of order, Mr. Speaker. I believe the Mot...the Amendment is out of order and ask the Chair to so rule. The new language added by the Amendment in Subsection B of the Amendment is not in quotes and is therefore out of order."

"While the Parliamentarian looks at the Amendment, Representative Cullerton can continue."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I was saying, what this 64  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 Amendment does: the Chief Clerk shall coordinate the assignment of number 1, offices; number 2, secretaries; and number 3, parking spaces for the remaining Members of the Majority Party on the basis of seniority and the Assistant Clerk shall coordinate those assignments for the remaining Members of the Minority Party on the basis of seniority. What this means is that the Speaker shall pick his Leadership team, Minority Leader picks his Leadership team and they are assigned secretaries, parking spaces and offices. Then the remaining Members, those who are not part of Leadership, that's the rest of us out here, our secretaries, offices and parking spaces will be chosen on the basis of seniority. Now I would suggest that this rule..."

"Mr. McCracken, your point is not well taken. There is no... It is not well taken. There is no rule that new language has to be in quotes, it merely has to be underlined or stricken. Representative McCracken. Representative Cullerton to continue."

"Yes. Now, Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to be fair about this, that I would ask the Democratic Members to vote 'present' on this rule and I'll tell you why. The Democratic Members on our side of the aisle, we already have this rule. The Speaker has decided that our office assignments, our secretaries and our parking spaces should be assigned on the basis of seniority. And we've done that every since he's been our leader. However, the Republican Minority Leader does not use this method. The Republican Minority Leader decides what offices you get, what secretaries you get and what parking spaces you get, not on the basis of seniority, but on some other basis. So I think it's only fair for this rule to be adopted, that the Republicans decide among themselves whether or not they 65  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 wish to adopt it. I personally think it's fair. I think that the Speaker has not been autocratic, has not been a dictator, but rather has been very fair and open with his own Members by letting these decisions be made on the basis of seniority. So let me once again present this issue to you. If you're a Republican Member of the House and you think that your office space, your secretary and your parking spaces should be determined on the basis of seniority, then you'd want to support this. If you think they shouldn't be on the basis of seniority and if the Minority Leader should decide this on his own, then you'd vote against it. And I would urge the Democratic Members to vote 'present', so as to let the Republicans make this decision on their own."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #35 and on that question, Representative Tate. Representative Tate."

"Tom, go ahead. I yield to Representative McCracken."

"Representative McCracken."

"You put an Amendment before us and then you ask everyone to vote 'present'. Is this your idea of something funny? Great sense of humor, John. Great sense of humor. I've seen better humor in kindergarten people. This is suppose to be funny? Stand up and everyone vote 'present'? You know you were the party that had to switch the way in which the Speaker is elected, because your Speaker was afraid he'd be defeated by dissident Democrats. And you're trying to make a joke out of what we do, how we pick our offices. A very wise use of the taxpayer's money. Very wise."

"The Gentleman from Macon... Representative Cullerton to close. Wait. Excuse me. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Parke." 66  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day

"Thank you, February 1, 1989 Mr. Speaker. I'd like to yield to Representative Tate."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Tate."

"Yeah. I'd just would like to ask the previous speaker, the Sponsor of the Amendment, he's given a great deal of thought to our process over here. We still...we haven't really provided...you haven't never provided us with the insights on how your Speaker arrives at his Leadership team. We heard a great deal of discussion on your side and we thought maybe...maybe what you'd want to do is arrive your Leadership on your side at seniority, since you do everything on seniority on your side."

"The Gentleman from Lake, Representative Churchill."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I think everybody who thinks that this is such a wonderful joke ought to vote 'yellow' and I'm going to vote 'yellow'. I think this is a wonderful joke."

"The Gentleman from Will, Representative Regan."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. I'd like to address the Democratic side of the aisle just for a second. Every two years we go through rules changes that heaps more power on the Speaker of the House, an overly powerful position as it is. Every two years more erosion of your personal rights goes down the drain. When are you guys going to wake up?"

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Cullerton to close."

"Well, thank you. The previous speaker has just endorsed this proposal. This is not an erosion of personal rights. We have a Speaker that makes these decisions as to secretaries, parking spaces and offices on the basis of seniority. You have a leader who just makes these 67  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 decisions on his own, without considering seniority. Now let me explain one more time why I suggested it would be fair for the Democrats to vote 'present', not the Republicans, the Democrats to vote 'present'. This rule only affects the Republicans, it doesn't affect the Democrats. We already have this rule. And I didn't think it would be fair for us to decide for you whether or not you should have this rule. So we will defer to you. I don't think it's a joke at all. We've heard a lot of speeches here today about dictators and autocratic rule. This is what this Amendment is about. This is taking away autocratic rule and power from one person and giving it to all of you SO you can decide whether or not you want to have your offices, your secretaries and your parking spaces determined on the basis of seniority. You make up the decision. I would urge the Democrats to vote 'present'. Republicans can decide what they want to do on their own."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #35. All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 16 voting 'yes', 1l voting 'no', 87 voting 'present', and the Amendment is adopted. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #36, offered by Representative Churchill."

"Representative Churchill."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. We just talked about one joke, now I'm going to talk about another. What this Amendment would do would be to eliminate the Rules Committee. Let me tell you why. Today we had a Rules Committee meeting and some of the Members of the majority got to speak and some of the 68  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 Members of the minority got to speak. And then we went to a vote and it was typical, all Members on the one side of the aisle vote one way, all Members on the other side of the aisle vote the other way. Let me tell you, today was the high point of the Rules Committee. From this point the Rules Committee deteriorates. Pretty soon we'll get to a point where the Democrats will decide there's no reason to show up for the Rules Committee and then the Republicans will say, 'Well, hey listen, if the Democrats aren't showing up, why should the Republicans show up?' And what happens is it evolves into a process where when they call a Rules Committee meeting, two people show up, the Chairman and the Minority Spokesman. They have to recess the meeting from time to time. They can't adjourn the meeting, because they can never get a quorum to have the Rules Committee meet again. And every vote's always the same; leave for the Democrats to vote one way, leave for the Republicans to vote another way. I mean that's a joke. Those of you who are in standing committees in this House, have more time and more energy and more ability to debate Bills. You have more power to cut deals and get your own Bills passed. You don't have any power in the Rules Committee. I mean this is an embarrassment to the legislative process to even have this committee. Let's eliminate it. Let's end...let's put a humane ending to this otherwise worthless charade."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #36 and the Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich."

"Well, to my good colleague from Lake County, you weren't here under George Ryan. If you wanted to see a joke, that was the Rules Committee. I'm telling you, if you don't like the Rules Committee, get off of it. It's no 69  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 4th Legislative Day joke compared to what George Ryan had, that was a joke. And we did everything you did, we walked out. So what? We felt we'd get media attention. Hell no. Nobody gave us any attention. You know the fact of the matter is, I think I work pretty good with John Hallock. And if you were the Minority Spokesman, I think I'd work pretty good with you. You know, evidently I've heard talk about dissidents. Evidently you've got 16 dissidents on your side of the aisle according to that last vote. So there's dissidents all over the place. You know, we can say a joke about everything, but the fact of the matter is, the majority rules. And that's good. That's the democratic process. If you don't like it, get enough votes and be the Majority Party, but don't ridicule democratic government, little 'd', and thank God for the taxpayers that's big 'D' too. You know, so this is the silliest Amendment we've had yet. This is a joke. So I would urge the Members on this side of the aisle, dissidents and all, stick together and reject this Amendment."

"The Lady from Cook, Representative Pullen."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to comment that every time the Gentleman speaks about rules, somehow he gets around to mentioning our previous Speaker. And I would like to mention that there are a great many Members in this Body who did not serve during that time, so they don't know how it was. I've been on the Rules Committee since I was a sophomore. I've seen it under the previous Speaker, I've seen it under this one. I've seen it under the Speaker before the previous Speaker. It has never been the kind of Rules Committee that it is now. And I'm not being critical of the Chairman of the Rules Committee, he follows his orders quite well, but it is a farce. And the kinds of...of turns around the rules that that committee 70  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 does have never been done before during the last six years. It's just pathetic. The Rules Committee is routinely meeting in the Speaker's conference room, that is not a public meeting, because you can't cram people in there. I mean it might be announced as a public meeting, but it is not effectively a public meeting. Most of the Members on both sides do not attend the Rules Committee meeting. Its Roll Call is left open meeting after meeting for the leader on each side to cast the votes of all of the Members of the committee by proxy in affect whether or not the Members are there, because there isn't a Quorum Roll Call taken. It is not a committee that functions the way it ever has before. I can recall during the previous Speaker's administration, Members came before the Rules Committee and presented their Bills. There was not testimony from the public because the Rules Committee is not a standing committee, it's a service committee. But Members at least could come and present their Bills and tell the Rules Committee why they thought they should be exempted. They don't anymore. They aren't welcome. Their Bills get put on a list. They're either on the approved list where all Democrats vote 'aye' and all Republicans vote 'no' or 'present', or they're on the unapproved list where all Democrats vote 'no' or 'present' and all Republicans vote 'aye'. It is a strict farce and I think this is the best rules change since Amendment #19, if I recall the number. And I hope everyone votes for it. Thank you."

"The Gentleman from Macon, Representative Dunn."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I've been listening carefully to the debate here and I hope that when all the debate is over and the questions have been decided, that the parties could come together and we'll have a kinder, gentler Rules Committee for the future." 71  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989

"Representative Churchill to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I always appreciate the history that I learn from Representative Matijevich, because he's been here for a long time and normally I find that what he says about history is pretty correct. And I guess what I learned in his speech a few minutes ago was that this committee has always had a problem. It's had a problem under the previous Speaker and I don't go back to the previous Speaker. So I imagine that perhaps under the previous Speaker there were those on the other side of the aisle who said, 'Hey, this committee really should be disbanded.' I want to ask those people who thought that at that time to do, is to say 'yes', it still needs to be disbanded. Let's get rid of this committee, we don't need it."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #36. ... All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 48 voting 'yes', 67 voting 'no', 2 voting 'present' and the Amendment fails. Further Amendments?"

"Floor Amendment #37, offered by Representative Shaw."

"Representative Shaw."

"I yield to Representative McNamara."

"Representative McNamara."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Amendment amends House Resolution 53 as amended and Rule 63 by deleting all the subsection (e) and relettering the subsections (f) and (g) as (e) and (f) respectively. I urge for your approval of this Amendment. Just technical in nature."

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #30... Mr. Clerk, I think we're on Amendment 37, 72  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 if you'll correct the board. And the Gentleman from Champaign, Representative Johnson, on Amendment #37."

"No, on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. I would ask after conferring with the Parliamentarian that you would rule that this Amendment is dilatory, since about 45 minutes ago we had an extensive floor debate on the same subject matter and passed the Amendment that now sought to be repealed by this Amendment. I'd ask that you so rule."

"Your point is not well taken, Representative Johnson. The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Parke."

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, I just have a question. I'm looking for that Amendment and I don't have it and I don't know if it's been printed and distributed. Well, your side may have it but we don't have it."

"Mr. Clerk, has the Amendment been printed and distributed? It's been distributed."

"Well, then, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to yield to Representative Johnson so he can finish his point."

"Representative Johnson."

"You're the last Speaker I want to give a hard time to, Representative Young, because you vote with us on this issue and so forth, but I was just curious as to the basis for your ruling. It seems to me that we had a verification, Roll Call, extensive debate on this subject matter 45 minutes ago, now how do we turn around and reconsider it now without it being considered dilatory?"

"Representative, we're not reconsidering, this is a separate Amendment."

"Oh, I understand that. Okay. I'll... I'm not going to overrule the Chair, but I just... I think we're wasting everybody's time. I would hope everybody would vote against this just in consideration of the time... of your 73  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 colleagues on the floor. However you feel about the issue, this had a fair debate 45 minutes or an hour ago and they lost. Now if we're going to do everything that we can turn around 45 minutes later and try to do everything that was undone by a previous vote, it's an insult to our time and an insult to the deliberation that we gave a serious issue a little bit ago."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Preston."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I join Representative Johnson in encouraging that we defeat this Amendment. We've heard a lot of speeches by Representative McCracken and well-intentioned and well-meaning speeches about the process, and this does certainly undermine the process to consider something that's been considered, was debated at great length and was decided upon. So please, reject this Amendment."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Terzich."

"Yes, you know I... what is (f), (g), (e) and (f)? I mean is that an explanation of an Amendment? I mean could he tell us what the Amendment does?"

"Will the Gentleman yield? Indicates he'll yield. Representative McNamara."

"It comes right after (a), (b), (c), (d), (e)."

"Well, what's the explanation of the Amendment?"

"Representative McNamara."

"Yes, the Amendment restores fairness to the House. What it says is that a certain minority..."

"What is subsections..."

"You asked a question, I'm trying to answer it. Do you wish me to answer it or do you want to keep interrupting?"

"Yes."

"Okay, what it tries to do is bring fairness to the House where a minority in this House is being discriminated 74  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 against, because somebody thinks it's for the betterment of that minority. That is wrong. That's the principle that I'm standing on. There is no other principle other than a certain amount of people that wish to dictate to the rest of the people in this House when it is obvious from all tests that have been taken for everything is taken in a room of this size and with the air conditioning that there is, that there is no problem with any of the pollutants. That's what it's for and I ask for your 'aye' vote."

"Could you tell me what subsections (f) and (g), what they are?"

"Yeah."

"What does (f) and (g) say?"

"I don't have that in front of me. I just have the Amendment."

"But you don't... you don't even know what (f) and (g) stand... says, you just..."

"I do know the substance of (f) and (g), but not the technical details in it."

"Well, could you read the language of (e) that you're taking out?"

"For what purpose does the Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich, rise?"

"Well, I intend to agree with many of my colleagues on this issue. I'm going to move to table this Amendment. I think we could eliminate a lot of time, because we have addressed this issue. I move to table Amendment #37."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Shaw."

"I take... I know that the Motion to Table is not debatable, but at the same time, I think that this Amendment should have a fair and impartial hearing. And I think it's unappropriate at this time for... for this Gentleman... for the Gentleman to make such a Motion..." 75  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day Speaker February 1, 1989

"For what purpose does the Gentleman from Champaign... excuse me, Representative Shaw. For what purpose does the Representative from Champaign rise, Representative Johnson?"

"Mr. Shaw is one for two. He's wrong on the merits... the underlying merits but he's right that Representative Matijevich's Motion is non-debatable, so let's vote on it. He's violating the rules of the House by debating on a non-debatable subject."

"Representative Matijevich, your point is not well taken. The Motion is not in order. It would have been in order before the debate start... started, but since we're debating the Motion, it's not in order. Representative Shaw to close."

"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I think that this is a good Amendment. I think that the... as I have said many times on the floor of the House that the people from our respective districts sent us down here to be their watch person in this Body. And I don't believe that we can be their true watch person if we going to have to go out in the halls somewhere outside of this building to smoke, so therefore, I... we have dedicated a non-smoking section in here and not only does this Amendment put people's legislation in jeopardy by Members of this floor being off the floor... Members of this House being off the floor, I think that really today is just a beginning of what's to come. This Amendment is unwarranted, unnecessary. The chamber's here is large enough that everyone that the... that the ventilation in here can remove all of the smoke where it wouldn't be harmful to anyone's health. And what's the next step? Are we going to stop eating on the floor of the House? Are we... we stay here long hours, spend long hours on this 76  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 floor. We can't leave. What are we to do? And I think every Member of this Body should be cognize of the fact that their legislation is in jeopardy if Members, large number of Members, is off of this floor at... when their Bill come up. I think you should look at it and look at the issue as it is and vote accordingly. I would urge the passage of this Amendment."

"You've heard the Gentleman's Motion. All in favor vote 'yes', those opposed vote 'no'. Representative Johnson to explain his vote."

"I think nicotine must have some effect on analogies. The... the analogy to food is silly. If they... we took popcorn and I force-fed Representative Petka and made him eat butter and salt against his will, maybe the analogy would be appropriate. But that's not an appropriate analogy because if you read any studies anywhere in the United States over the last ten years, it'll demonstrate to you clearly that secondary smoke directly affects one's lungs. The other people who aren't smoking. It causes people who aren't smoking to get cancer and lung disease and heart disease and everything else. So the analogy to eating on the floor is silly. And I would simply suggest that we voted on this before, it passed before and to turn around two hours later and to debate a subject matter again is a discourtesy to the Members and it negates the fact that a majority voted for an Amendment and felt it was appropriate at a previous time. I urge a 'no' vote."

"Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question there are 52 voting 'yes', 58 voting 'no', 6 voting 'present'. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Terzich."

"Yes, I would like to have a... I'd like to verify the Negative Roll. Oh, we did. Fine. Well, I repeal that..." 77  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 4th Legislative Day

"On this question there are 52 voting 'yes', 58 voting 'no', 6 voting 'present' and the Amendment fails. Representative Johnson."

"And I'm sure Representative Terzich will want to respond... having voted on the prevailing side by which this Amendment was defeated, I move to reconsider the vote by which this Amendment was defeated. And I think Representative Terzich wants to move to table my Amendment... or my Motion."

"Representative Terzich."

"... I move that Motion lay on the Table."

"Representative Johnson has moved to reconsider the Motion. Representative Terzich has moved that that Motion be tabled. All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and the Motion is tabled. Further Amendments?"

"No further Amendments."

"On the Resolutions, Representative Matijevich."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I... we have fully debated and discussed the Amendment... the Resolution and its Amendments. I move the adoption of Resolution 53 as amended. Move to adopt House Resolution 53 as amended."

"The Gentleman moves to adopt House Resolution 53 as amended. On that question, the Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"Unfortunately, these Rules are as bad as when we started so, I'm asking my friends to vote 'no' on this. I won't waste your time with any further discussion."

"The Gentleman from Winnebago, Representative Hallock."

"Well, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, just to highlight a few of the onerous parts. Obviously, we have 78  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 the provision about the election of the Minority Leader. We have the provision in there about the Speaker's Table which allows the Speaker to set his own agenda irrespective of what the Members seemed to be necessary. We have the provision in the Short Debate. We have the Amendatory Veto process in here which is also onerous. All in all we have a Bill here... a Resolution here which is going to disenfranchise an awful lot of people in this state. If you look around, we on this side of this aisle are not fighting just for the minority, we're fighting for the five million people we represent. And if you on that side of the aisle care about their rights as well, you'd also want to vote against this. I urge a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from Vermilion, Representative Black."

"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. You know a little while ago I heard a Gentleman, I think the Gentleman from Lake County, a man I hold in high esteem. He's been a very good friend to my district for many, many years say that the majority shall rule. The majority shall rule. And if you don't like that then get off the committee. Well, you know, the Gentleman's right. That is part of the ... part of the cornerstone of the democracy that we work under. But he forgot one section, one very important section. Yes, the majority shall rule, but the rights of the minority must be protected. In all due respect to that Gentleman, and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, there has been today an erosion of the rights of the minority. That's not fair to the people who send us down here, be you a Republican or be you a Democrat. Because at some point in our history, both of us will have served in the minority, both of us will have served in the majority. I cannot in good conscience 79  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 support the Gentleman's Resolution simply because the cornerstone is yes, the majority shall rule, but the rights of the minority must be protected, and I do not think that the Resolution we're asked to vote on does that. In fact, it has eroded the rights of the minority. I urge a 'no' vote."

"The Gentleman from Will, Representative Regan."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House and particularly Members, one more time, on the other side of the aisle. If you vote for these rules changes, you've given up your right to have your Bills passed if the Governor has amendatorily vetoed them. You give up your right to put pressure on your Leader if you feel he's being too unfair to you. And last but not least, smokers on the Democratic side of the aisle, you give up your personal right to your personal privilege to do what you wish with your smoking habits. Please vote 'no'."

"The Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich, to close."

"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, this Resolution does not diminish the rights of the minority and I for one will always protect the rights of the minority. In fact, this Resolution actually gives more power to the minority, to the Members in that one Bill... one Amendment that gives the control of a Bill to the Chief Sponsor. That's a very, very extensive change and does give more power to the individual Members. I think there's been a lot said... I have attended all, not only the committee meetings of the rules, but the House Rules Task Force. I want to tell the minority that there had been some discussion and attempts by some Members who would have thwarted your right to be heard and Speaker Madigan was the one that spoke out in those... to those suggestions and 80  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 said no, that's the right of the minority to be heard... to be heard. That's important. But not to be .... to have the responsibility to run the business of the House. That's what ought to be the right of the majority and that's what the rules of every, every... every deliberative Body has that right to the Majority Party. Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, I would again move the adoption of the House Resolution 53 as amended."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of House Resolution 53. All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. This Resolution takes 60 votes for passage. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this Resolution there are 67 voting 'yes', 48 voting 'no', 2 voting 'present' and the Resolution is adopted. On page 2 of the calendar, under the Order of Motions... the Chair recognize Representative Bowman. Representative Bowman."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is a Motion to advance House Bill 104 to Second Reading without reference to a committee. The Bill 104, you may remember in its previous incarnation as Senate Bill 1470 or Senate Bill 711. This legislation has to do with the funding of our state employee pension systems which are woefully underfunded. It was a Bill that passed this House unanimously, passed the Senate unanimously and then got hung up at the end of Session in the Amendatory Veto process. So that with this legislation, advanced directly to the floor, we can move the issue along expeditiously in the 86th General Assembly and put this legislation on the books where it belongs."

"The Gentleman has moved to advance House Bill 104 to the Order of Second Reading. On that Motion, is there 81  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 any discussion? The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Parliamentary inquiry. Does this take 71 votes?"

"The Motion takes 71 votes. Representative Bowman: Bowman." "Inquiry of the Chair. It was my understanding that if the Motion appeared on the Regular Calendar, it took 60 votes. If it did not appear on the Regular Calendar, it took 71. And I believe that it is a 60 vote majority."

"It's my understanding that if the Motion is not on the calendar, it takes unanimous consent. If it is on the calendar, requires 71. Representative McCracken."

"Thank you. To the Motion, I would ask my colleagues on this side of the aisle to resist this Motion. This is the Pension Bill. There has been a lot of debate over it. Some of it was caught up in the Amendatory Veto, some of it was caught up relative to the Brass Rule or whatever. We don't know how clean this Bill is. This is not something that should be advanced on a moment's notice like this. So I would ask you to join in this, my opposition to this Motion. We can defeat this."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Harris."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Question of the Sponsor."

"He indicates he'll yield."

"Representative, House Bill 104, I have not... I apologize, I have not read it yet. Does it contain anything else besides the level percent amortization funding mechanism?"

"No, that's all that's in the Bill. The Bill is the same as Senate Bill 1470 with the amendatory change by the Governor. That's all that's in the Bill."

"To the Motion, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the 82  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 House and particularly on our side of the aisle, I don't often stand in opposition to our Floor Leader, but I think on this occasion, I must. This Bill got tied up in partisan politics at the end of the Session. On our side of the aisle, we blamed it on the other side of the aisle. They came back with a Bill and blamed it on us. We all know in this chamber and I'm taking now the word of Representa... of the Representative that the Bill contains nothing else besides the proper funding mechanism that we've talked about. We all know in this chamber that this is the right thing to do. This Bill deserves to be passed. The provision was on a... was on an Amendatory Veto which got hung up because there was a pay increase involved and it didn't get out because of that. If this is a clean Bill as the Representative says it is, it deserves to be passed. You know that every pensioner out there says I want this funding mechanism. You've gotten the letters. I've gotten the letters. Regrettably, I urge my colleagues on this side of the aisle to vote in favor of this... in favor of this Motion."

"The Gentleman from Madison, Representative Wolf."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. I rise in support of the Gentleman's Motion. I think the Motion is proper. The concept contained in this Bill has been discussed in committee numerous times. It's been debated on the floor of the House. It's been debated in the Senate. It's a concept whose time has certainly come, maybe long overdue. I would urge your support of this Motion."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative Hoffman."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. As frequently happens early in a Session, we end up 83  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 with some mixed signals. This legislation is exactly as the Sponsor has indicated it is. We have supported this in the past and we're prepared to support it today now that we understand exactly what's involved."

"The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Parke."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, since we have the ability to debate the issue at hand, I would like to ask the Sponsor a question, so if the Sponsor'll yield? I presume he will, so I would like to know what the cost of this to the state will be and if you can explain a little bit more in depth what this legislation does SO that I and all the colleagues in the General Assembly that are going to vote on it have a better understanding of what we're voting on. Thank you."

"Representative Bowman."

"A question of the Chair. The Gentleman asked for an explanation of the substance of the Bill. Is such an explanation in order or are we debating the Motion? I believe we're debating the Motion. I don't wish to be uncooperative, but I think everybody knows what's in the Bill."

"You are correct, Representative Bowman. The... before the House is the Motion and you can discuss the Motion to the extent to let the Members know what they are voting on. Further discussion? Representative Bowman to close on the Motion."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would like to ask for a Roll Call vote on this. This particular issue has been around a long time. It's actually been around for at least five years because about five years ago it passed the House and Senate and went to the Governor and got hung up in some kind of problem at that time. It's been around for a long time. We all know 84  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 what's in this Bill. We all regret that we weren't able to pass it last term. Let's get on with it. Let's advance it and deal with it in a responsible way. I urge an 'aye' vote."

"The Gentleman moves to advance House Bill 104 to Second Reading. All those in favor vote 'yes', all those opposed vote 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this Motion there are 116 voting 'yes', none voting 'no' and none voting 'present' and the Motion carries. Resolutions. The Gentleman from Rock Island, Representative DeJaegher."

"House Bill 163 carries my name as Chief Sponsor of that particular piece of legislation. I'd like to remove myself from the chief sponsorship of that particular Bill."

"Is there leave? Leave is granted. Motions with respect to House Joint Resolution 4. Representative Kubik moves pursuant to Rule 43(a) to bypass committee and place House Joint Resolution 4 on the Speaker's Table for immediate consideration. The Resolution has been reproduced and distributed on the Member's desk. Any discussion on the Motion? Representative Kubik."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Are we on the Motion or are we on the Resolution?"

"On the Motion."

"I would move to suspend the appropriate rule to have House Joint Resolution #4 considered immediately. What House Joint Resolution 4 does, it just calls upon Congress to oppose any effort to put a 25¢ per year tax on... or fee on savings deposits and I would move for immediate consideration of the Resolution."

"You've heard the Gentleman's Motion. Is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Lake, Representative Matijevich." 85  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989

"I join and urge colleagues on this side of the aisle. We can all unanimously tell President Bush he was wrong. That trial balloon was a total bust and let's all tell President Bush read our lips. That was a bad, bad balloon. Vote 'aye', everybody."

"The question is, 'Shall the Motion be adopted?' All those in favor vote 'aye', all those opposed vote 'no'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and the Motion's adopted... by the Attendance Roll Call. Representative Kubik on the Resolution."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think we all know what the contents of the Resolution is. Ultimately, Congress has the authority to either put the fee on or not. I think we should make our voices heard to Congress so that we make sure that this particular idea does not become a reality. I think the depositor should not be taxed or placed a fee upon their deposits simply because of some bad judgement by some savings and loans. So I would urge your support on the adoption of this Resolution."

"The Gentleman's move is to adopt House Joint Resolution #4. And on that question, Majority Leader McPike."

"Will the Sponsor yield?"

"Indicates he'll yield."

"Well, Representative, I haven't had an opportunity to read your Resolution. I take it from your brief explanation that this Resolution is against the administration's proposal to put some sort of tax, 25¢ per $100, whatever it was, on savings and loans. Is that correct?"

"Well, they... there is... has been a talk of that type of a proposal. We just wanted to make sure that Congress, which is democratically controlled and ultimately has the 86  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 authority to pass any of those kinds of things, wouldn't... wouldn't take up on that idea and pass it."

"Now, in the wisdom of drawing up this Resolution, have you made any suggestions to Congress or to the administration as to how to deal with this one hundred billion dollar problem? Or is this just something you're going to pass along to the current administration and allow them to come up with some solution for the hundred million dollar problem... hundred billion dollar problem created by the Reagan decision to deregulate the savings and loan industry? Are there any suggestions in this as to how to pay for this hundred billion dollar boondoggle?"

"Representative, there is no suggestion per se in the Resolution. I've got some of my own ideas on it. I think that Congress certainly will have their own ideas as well..."

"Well, to the Resolution then, Mr. Speaker. I presume this will pass unanimously. It would appear to me like every Legislator in every state could pass Resolutions like this. It's a meaningless Resolution. It just says that no matter what you come up with, if it's a tax, we're going to be against it. But what we ought to do, we ought to be a little bit responsible every now and then and try to come up with some solutions. This... this country is facing a hundred and fifty billion dollar a year deficit. We've got another hundred billion dollar program. And it seems to me instead of introducing silly Resolutions being against every possible solution, we ought to bipartisanly look for a Resolution. And I would anticipate that if the Gentleman was serious about this, he would have actually have put some suggestions in here, both for the Republican Administration and for the Democratic Congress to try to solve some of these problems that in eight year... that an 87  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 eight year Reagan Administration has left this country."

"The Gentleman from DuPage, Representative McCracken."

"As I recall, Democrats invented deficit spending. It's only a problem now because the Reagan Administration brought peace and prosperity to this nation of ours. And that's the only reason you hear Democrats complaining about the deficit. You guys loved it at one time. So let's just put all that aside. This was an unauthorized statement made off the cuff by an administration official. We don't want the Democrats in Congress to get the idea and move on it. Let's just tell them not to do it."

"The Gentleman from Will, Representative Regan."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. Obviously, the boys just sent this up the flagpole to see how it would wave. It broke the flagpole. This Resolution is just to make sure they don't tape it up again with some tape."

"Representative Kubik to close."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Well, with reference to the Gentleman on the other side of the aisle, if you think that taxing the depositors of savings and loans is a silly idea and a ludicrous idea, then vote against this Resolution. If you believe that the depositors in savings and loans put that money in there believing that the savings and loans would protect those dollars and don't believe that they ought to have to bail out some of the bad judgments of not only some savings and loans, but certainly for Congress which has developed the mechanism to regulate these savings and loans, well, then you ought to be for this Resolution. It's a simple statement that we are against the fee on savings deposits. The reason that I didn't put some ideas as to the 88  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 Resolution of the problem is because I've got a lot of different ideas on it. But I think we'll pass those along to Members of Congress in private letters rather than in public Resolution. I would urge the adoption of this Resolution and would appreciate an 'aye' vote."

"The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of House Joint Resolution #4. On... The question is, 'Shall the Resolution be adopted?' All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'no'. The opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it. The Resolution is adopted. The House schedule for February and March are now being distributed. The Chair would like each Member to pay attention to the February schedule that there will be three perfunctory days, February 9th, 16th and 23rd where the House will be open for the introduction of Bills from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The Adjournment Resolution."

"Senate Joint Resolution #4. Resolved, by the Senate of the 86th General Assembly of the State of Illinois, the House of Representatives concurring herein, that when the Senate adjourns on Wednesday, February 1, 1989, it stands adjourned until Wednesday, March 1, 1989, at 11:30 o'clock a.m. And when the House of Representatives adjourns on Wednesday, February 1, 1989, it stands adjourned until Thursday, February 9, 1989, at 10:00 o'clock a.m. and when the House adjourns on that date, it stands adjourned until Thursday, February 16, 1989, at 10:00 o'clock a.m. and when the House adjourns on that date, it stands adjourned until Thursday, February 23, 1989, at 10:00 o'clock a.m. and when the House adjourns on that date, it stands adjourned until Wednesday, March 1, 1989, at 11:30 o'clock a.m."

"The Chair recognizes Representative Bowman for purposes of an announcement." 89  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day

"Thank you, February 1, 1989 Mr. Speaker. Just to remind the Members of the House Special Committee on Patient Care, there will be a brief organizational meeting right after Session in room 118. As soon as we get our quorum together, it should not take more than ten minutes, but we would like to have our quorum so we can conduct a brief item of business. Thank you."

"Representative McPike moves for the adoption of the Adjournment Resolution. All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and the Resolution is adopted. Agreed Resolutions."

"House Reso... Senate Joint Resolution #333 Capparelli; House Joint Resolution #5 Capparelli; House Resolution 19 Johnson; 21 Curran; 24 Stange; 25 Ryder; 26 W. Peterson; 27 Giglio; 28 Shaw; 29 Rice; 30 Cullerton; 31 Weller; 33 Terzich; 37 Daley; 41 Novak; 42 Bugielski; 44 Morrow; 45 Kubik; 46 Kubik; 47 Kubik; 48 Kubik; 49 Giglio; 50 Countryman; 52 Frederick; 54 Stephens; 55 Currie; 56 Mautino; 57 Mautino; 58 Mautino; 59 Barnes; 60 Terzich; 61 Terzich; 62 Ryder; 63 Harris; 64 Currie; 65 Wolf; 66 Novak; and 68 McGann."

"Representative Matijevich on the Agreed Resolutions."

"Mr. Speaker, we have examined the Resolutions. They are congratulatory. I move the adoption of the Agreed Resolutions."

"Representative Matijevich moves the adoption of the Agreed Resolutions. All those in favor say 'aye', all those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair, the 'ayes' have it and the Resolutions are adopted. General Resolutions." 90  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989

"House Resolution 32 offered by Representative Weller and House Resolution 35 offered by Representative Curran."

"Committee on Assignments. Death Resolutions."

"House Resolution 17, offered by Representative Johnson, with respect to the memory of John A. Douglas. House Resolution 18, offered by Representative Johnson, with respect of the memory of Lillian P. Jeffery. House Resolution 20, offered by Representative LeFlore, with respect to the memory of John Wade. House Resolution 22, offered by Representative Morrow, with respect to the memory of Harold Harris, Sr. House Resolution 23, offered by Representative Morrow, with respect to the memory of Cozetta M. Taylor. House Resolution 34, offered by Representative Terzich, with respect to the memory of Mary Henderson. House Resolution 36, offered by Representative Daley, with respect to the memory of Laverne Salmon. House Resolution 37, offered by Representative Daley, with respect to the memory of Mary Rubino. House Resolution 39, offered by Representative Daley, with respect to the memory of Joan M. Caturra. House Resolution 40 offered by Representative Shaw, with respect to the memory of Maria Moore. House Resolution 43, offered by Representative Daley, with respect to the memory of Kenneth P. (sic - F.) Pruddock. House Resolution 51, offered by Representative Frederick, with respect to the memory of Helen Amendola. House Resolution 67, offered by Representative Giglio, with respect to the memory of Bonnie M. Krol Kubisz."

"Representative Matijevich moves the adoption of the Death Resolutions. All those in favor say 'aye', those opposed say 'nay'. The opinion of the Chair is the 'ayes' have it and the Death Resolutions are adopted. Representative McPike moves to allow for perfunctory time 91  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day for the February 1, 1989 introduction of Bills and... and after the perfunctory time this House will stand adjourned till 11:30 a.m. on March 1st. All those in favor say 'aye', those opposed say 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair is the 'ayes' have it and the Motion's adopted."

"Introduction and First Readings of House Bills."

"Representative McPike moves that allowing for the perfunctory days set forth in the Adjournment Resolution, the House does... the House now stands adjourned."

"Introduction and First Readings of House Bills. House Bill 176, offered by Representative Wolf, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Public Community College Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 177, offered by Representative Kulas and Stange, a Bill for an Act to amend the Environmental Protection Act in relationship to infectious waste regulation. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 178, offered by Representative Stange, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Open Meetings Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 179, offered by Representative Matijevich et al, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Liquor Control Act. ct. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 180, offered by Representative Matijevich, a Bill for an Act to amend certain Acts in relationship to the election of officers of certain boards. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 181, offered by Representative Anthony Young, a Bill for an Act in relationship to the regulation of insurance. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 182, offered by Representative Anthony Young, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Public Utilities Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 183, offered by Representative Anthony Young, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Public Utilities Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 184, offered by 92  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 4th Legislative Day Representative Anthony Young, a Bill for an Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Retail Installment Sales Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 185, offered by Representative Black, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relationship to cemetery maintenance districts. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 186, offered by Representative LeFlore, a Bill for an Act in relationship to the investment and obligations of African development bank. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 178... correction House Bill 187, a Bill... offered by Representative Matijevich, a Bill for an Act concerning certain property rights in Lake County by the state. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 188, offered by Representative Matijevich et al, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Criminal Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 189, offered by Representative Anthony Young, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Criminal Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 190, offered by Representative Matijevich et al, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the State Employees Group Insurance Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 191, offered by Representative Van Duyne, a Bill for an Act to provide for the election of Members of the Illinois Commerce Commission. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 192, offered by Representative Cowlishaw, a Bill for an Act to amend the School Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 193, offered by Representative Ropp et al, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Animal Control Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 194, offered by Representative Ropp, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Unified Code of Corrections. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 195, offered by Representatives Black and Parke, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Local 93  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 196, offered by Representative Countryman, a Bill for an Act to amend the Probate Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 197, offered by Representative Virginia Frederick, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Alzheimer's Disease Assistance Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 198, offered by Representative Countryman et al, a Bill for an Act in relationship to the exemptions from occupation and use taxes. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 199, offered by Representative Capparelli et al, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Illinois Municipal Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 200, offered by Representative Capparelli et al, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Liquor Control Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 201, offered by Representative Wennlund, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Environmental Protection Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 202, offered by Representative Wennlund, a Bill for an Act to amend certain Acts in relationship to solid waste management. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 203, offered by Representative Capparelli et al, a Bill for an Act in relationship to increased property tax levies. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 204, offered by Representative Mautino, a Bill for an Act to create the Private Enterprise Review and Revisory Board. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 205, offered by Representative Krska, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Vehicle Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 206, offered by Representative Krska, a Bill for an Act to amend the Illinois Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 207, offered by Representative Cowlishaw et al, a Bill for 94  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 an Act concerning fire protection and emergency services relating to telecommunication facilities. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 208, offered by Representative Satterthwaite et al, a Bill for Act to amend Sections of the Burial of Dead Bodies Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 209, offered by Representative Saltsman and Flowers, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of an Act regulating wages of laborers, mechanics and other workers employed in any public works by the state, county, city or public body or any political subdivision or by anyone under contract for public works. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 210, offered by Representative Saltsman et al, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 211, offered by Representative McNamara, a Bill for an Act in relationship to financial planning of supervision commissions for units of local government. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 212, offered by Representative Matijevich et al, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Pension Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 213, offered by Representative Steczo, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Act concerning fees and salaries and to classify the several counties of this state with reference thereto. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 214, offered by Representative Preston, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Pension Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 215, offered by Representative Currie et al, a Bill for an Act to establish a system to provide information and assistance regarding the rights of older persons entering or residing in long-term care facilities. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 216, offered by Representative Giorgi and Hallock, a Bill for Act to amend Sections of the Revenue 95  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day Act. First Reading of the Bill. February 1, 1989 House Bill 217, offered by Representative Giorgi et al, a Bill for an Act to add Sections in the Act in relationship to transportation. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 218, offered by Representative Mautino, a Bill for an Act to amend an Act in relationship to the acquisition of Illinois-Mississippi Canal and the use and administration thereof as a state park. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 219, offered by Representative LeFlore, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Public Aid Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 220, offered by Representative Sutker, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Income Tax Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 221, offered by Representative Hallock and Giorgi, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Illinois Housing Development Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 222, offered by Representative Steczo, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Optometric Practice Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 223, offered by Representative Saltsman, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Pension Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 224, offered by Representative Flinn, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Environmental Protection Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 225, offered by Representative Novak et al, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 226, offered by Representative Saltsman, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Emergency Services and Disaster Agency Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 227, offered by Representative Giorgi, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of an Act in relationship to compensation of Sheriffs, Coroners, Country Treasurers, County Clerks, 96  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 Recorders and Auditors and their necessary clerk hire, stationery, fuel and other expenses in counties less than 2,000,000 inhabitants. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 228, offered by Representative Giorgi, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of an Act in relationship to the compensation of Sheriffs, Coroners, County Treasurers, County Clerks, Recorders and Auditors and their necessary clerk hire, stationery, fuel and other expenses in counties less than 2,000,000 inhabitants. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 229, offered by Representative Flowers et al, a Bill for an Act to make it unlawful for an employer to inquire as to whether a prospective employee has ever filed a claim for benefits or received benefits under Workers' Compensation Act or Workers' Occupational Disease Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 230, offered by Representative Weller, a Bill for Act to amend certain Acts in relationship to solid waste. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 231, offered by Representative Ropp, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Unified Code of Corrections. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 223, offered by Representative Homer, a Bill... correction, that's House Bill 232, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Workers' Compensation Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 233, offered by Representative Ropp and Hensel, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Pension Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 234, offered by Representative DeLeo et al, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Criminal Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 235, offered by Representative Ropp, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Unified Code of Corrections. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 236, offered by Representative Ropp et al, a Bill for an Act to amend certain Acts in relationship to mental health and 97  STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 4th Legislative Day February 1, 1989 physical... psychiatric services provided to certain persons held in custody in jails. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 237, offered by Representative Countryman and Sieben, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Meat and Poultry Inspection Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 238, offered by Representative Capparelli et al, a Bill for an Act making an appropriation to the Metropolitan Fair and Exposition Authority. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 239, offered by Representative Capparelli et al, a Bill for an Act making appropriations to the Metropolitan Fair and Exposition Authority Reconstruction Fund to the Metropolitan Fair and Exposition Authority. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 240, offered by Representative Steczo, a Bill for an Act relating to civic centers. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 241, offered by Representative Farley, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Minimum Wage Law. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 242, offered by Representative Farley, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 243, offered by Representative McAuliffe, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 244, offered by Representatives Currie and Bowman, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Election Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 245, offered by Representative Dunn, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Code of Civil Procedure. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 246, offered by Representative Giglio, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Illinois Vehicle Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 247, offered by Representatives Preston et al, a Bill for an Act to amend the Code of Civil Procedure. First Reading of the Bill. 98  4th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 86th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE February 1, 1989 House Bill 248, offered by Representative Daniels et al, a Bill for an Act in relationship to taxation. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 249, offered by Representative Cullerton, a Bill for an Act to amend the Code of Civil Procedure. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 250, offered by Representative Ropp et al, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the School Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 251, offered by Representative Cullerton, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Code of Civil Procedure. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 252, offered by Representative Breslin et al, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Criminal Code. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 253, offered by Representative Breslin, a Bill for an Act concerning transfer of property rights by the state. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 254, offered by Representative Satterthwaite et al, a Bill for an Act prohibiting discrimination in insurance. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 255, offered by Representative Breslin and Didrickson, a Bill for an Act to add Sections to the Illinois Income Tax Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 256, offered by Representative Homer, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Income Tax Act. First Reading of the Bill. House Bill 257, offered by Representative Giorgi et al, a Bill for an Act to register landscape architects. First Reading of the Bill. And House Bill 258, offered by Representative Krska, a Bill for an Act to amend Sections of the Illinois Vehicle Code. First Reading of the Bill. No further business, the House now stands adjourned." 99  REPORT: TIFLDAY 15:38 STATE OF ILLINOIS 36TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DAILY TRANSCRIPTION OF DEBATE INDEX FEBRUARY 01, 1989 PAGE 1 02/24/39 HB-0104 MOTION PAGE 81 HB-0176 FIRST READING PAGE 92 HB-0177 FIRST READING PAGE 92 H3-0173 FIRST READING PAGE 92 HB-0179 FIRST READING PAGE 92 HB-0180 FIRST READING PAGE 92 HB-0181 FIRST READING PAGE 92 HB-0182 FIRST READING PAGE 92 HB-0183 FIRST READING PAGE 92 H3-0184 FIRST READING PAGE 92 HB-0185 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0186 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0187 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0188 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0189 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0190 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0191 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0192 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0193 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0194 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0195 FIRST READING PAGE 93 HB-0196 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0197 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0198 FIRST READING PAGE 94 H3-0199 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0200 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0201 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HE-0202 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0203 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0204 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0205 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0206 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0207 FIRST READING PAGE 94 HB-0203 FIRST READING PAGE 95 HB-0209 FIRST READING PAGE 95 HB-0210 FIRST READING PAGE 95 HB-0211 FIRST READING PAGE 95 HB-0212 FIRST READING PAGE 95 HB-0213 FIRST READING PAGE 95 HB-0214 FIRST READING PAGE 95 H8-0215 FIRST READING PAGE 95 HB-0216 FIRST READING PAGE タラ HB-0217 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HB-0218 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HB-0219 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HB-0220 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HB-0221 FIRST READING PAGE 96 H3-0222 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HE-0223 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HB-0224 FIRST READING PAGE 96 не-0225 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HB-0226 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HB-0227 FIRST READING PAGE 96 HB-0228 FIRST READING PAGE 97 HB-0229 FIRST READING PAGE 97 H5-0230 FIRST READING PAGE 97 H3-0231 FIRST READING PAGE 97 HB-0232 FIRST READING PAGE 97 HB-0233 FIRST READING PAGE 97 HB-0234 FIRST READING PAGE 97 HB-0235 FIRST READING PAGE 97 HB-0236 FIRST READING PAGE 97 HB-0237 FIRST READING PAGE 98 HB-0238 FIRST READING PAGE 98  REPORT: TIFLDAY 15:38 STATE OF ILLINOIS 86TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DAILY TRANSCRIPTION OF DEBATE INDEX FEBRUARY 01, 1989 PAGE 2 02/24/89 H3-0239 FIRST READING PAGE 98 H3-0240 FIRST READING PAGE 98 HB-0241 FIRST READING PAGE 98 HB-0242 FIRST READING PAGE 98 H3-0243 FIRST READING PAGE 98 HB-0244 FIRST READING PAGE 98 HB-0245 FIRST READING PAGE 98 HB-0246 FIRST READING PAGE 98 HB-0247 FIRST READING PAGE 98 H3-0248 FIRST READING PAGE 99 H3-0249 FIRST READING PAGE 99 H3-0250 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HB-0251 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HB-0252 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HB-0253 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HB-0254 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HB-0255 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HB-0256 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HB-0257 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HB-0258 FIRST READING PAGE 99 HR-0053 ADOPTED PAGE 81 HR-0053 RESOLUTION OFFERED PAGE 21 HJR-0003 ADOPTED PAGE 2 HJR-0003 RESOLUTION OFFEREC PAGE 2 HJR-0004 NOTION PAGE 85 HJR-0004 ADOPTED PAGE 89 HJR-0004 RESOLUTION OFFERED PAGE 86 JSR-0001 ADOPTED PAGE 3 JSR-0001 RESOLUTION OFFERED PAGE 3 SUBJECT MATTER HOUSE TO ORDER REPRESENTATIVE MCPIKE PAGE 1 PRAYER REVEREND LANZ PAGE 1 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PAGE 1 ROLL CALL FOR ATTENDANCE PAGE 1 COMMITTEE REPORT PAGE 2 JOINT SESSION COMES TO ORDER PAGE 2 GOVERNOR THOMPSON'S STATE OF THE STATE MESSAGE PAGE 4 JOINT SESSION ADJOURNMENT PAGE 21 HOUSE COMES TO ORDER PAGE 21 ADJOURNHENT RESOLUTION SJR 4 PAGE 89 ADJOURNMENT RESOLUTION SJR 4 ADOPTED PAGE 90 AGREED RESOLUTIONS PAGE 90 GENERAL RESOLUTIONS PAGE 90 DEATH RESOLUTIONS PAGE 91 ADJOURNMENT PAGE 92 PERFUNCTORY PAGE 92 PERFUNCTORY ADJOURNMENT PAGE 99