April 30, 1992 "The House will come to order. Mr. Doorman, close the front door, please. The House will come to order. We'll be led in the prayer today by Representative Lou Lang. The guests in the balcony may wish to rise and join us for the invocation.
"During a week that we celebrate Civil Rights and we remember the Holocaust in Eastern Europe, may we all remember that we all have responsibilities, one to the other, to vouchsafe all of our rights and to root out from our society hatred and prejudice, and may we all say, 'Amen'.
"We'll be led in the Pledge of Allegiance by
Representative Preston. Preston et al: "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 Matijevich."
"Speaker, I only have Representative Mulcahey excused today."
"Representative Kubik."
"No... No excused absences today, Mr. Speaker."
"Mr. Clerk, take the record. One hundred and sixteen Members answering a roll call, a quorum is present. Representative Weaver."
"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In a day that we may be actually looking for things to celebrate, I'd like to invite you all to come over to help us celebrate the 41 year birthday of a friend of ours, David Hultgren."
"Committee Reports."
"Representative Saltsman, Chairman of the 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Committee on Executive, to which the following Resolutions were referred, action taken April 29, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: tabled in committee, Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment #15 and 30, pursuant to Rule 26(d). Representative Stern, Chairman of the Committee on Election Law, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass as amended' House Bills 3565 and 3562; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bill 3565 and 3564. Representative McGann, Chairman of the Committee on Mental Health, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bill 3713 and 3006; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bill 3005. Representative DeJaeger, Chairman of the Committee on Aging, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bill 3373 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bill 3610; 'do pass Consent Calendar' House Bill 3811; 'do adopt' House Resolution 1249. Representative Morrow, Chairman of the Committee on Economic and Urban Development, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bills 4124 and 3858; 'do pass as amended' House Bill 4010; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bill 4070, 3614 and 1876. Representative Kulas, Chairman of the Committee on Environment and Energy, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 29, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House 2 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Bills 3574 and 3605 'do pass as amended' House Bill 3892; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bills 3095, 3251, 3435, 3666, 3843, 4025, 4027, 4039, 4040, 4041 and 4112; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bills 3380 and 4037. Representative Phelps, Chairman of the Committee on Mental on Health Care, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 29, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bill 3164; 'do pass as amended' House Bills 3687, 2590 and 2774; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bills 3965, 3796, 3854, 4163, 4044, 3818, 4057, 1516, 3747, 4165 and 3638; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bills 3160, 3884 and 3908; 'do pass Consent Calendar' House Bill 3619; 'do pass as amended Consent Calendar' House Bill 3862. Representative Shaw, Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Officers, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bills 1747, 337, 2651 and 3310. Representative DeLeo, Chairman of the Committee on Consumer Protection, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 29, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bills 4058, 4132 and 3247; 'do adopt' House Resolution 1764. Representative Hartke, Chairman of the Committee on Counties and Townships, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 29, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bill 3171; 'do pass as amended' House Bills 3440 and 3170; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bills 3824, 3662, 4107, 2812, 3826 and Senate Bill 221; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bills 3374, 3516 and 2995; 'do pass 3 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Consent Calendar' House Bills 3878, 3780 and 3087; 'do pass as amended Consent Calendar' House Bills 1495 and 854. Representative Davis, Chairman of the Committee on Elementary and Secondary Education, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 29, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bill 3102; 'do pass Short Debate Status' Senate Bill 184, House Bills 3278, 3474, 3484, 3800, 3882, 4022 and 4144; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bill 2755, 3070, 3106, 3465 and 3385; 'do pass Consent Calendar' House Bill 3735; 'do pass as amended Consent Calendar' House Bill 3513; 'do adopt' House Resolution 1748 and 1793; tabled in committee, pursuant to Rule 26(d), Senate Bill 641. Representative Turner, Chairman of the Committee on Housing, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bills (sic) 3808, and House Bill 1875 and House Bill 2903. Representative Currie, Chairman of the Committee on Revenue, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 29, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bills 2720, 3120, 4066, 4122, 2725, 2954, 2957, 3216, 4028, 3945 and 3499; 'do pass as amended' Senate Bill 318, House Bills 429 and 4013; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bills 1103, 3042, 3623, 1084, 2949, 3130, 451, 3782 and 4120; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bill 2947, 3594; 'do pass Consent Calendar' House Bill 3256, 2966, 3418, 3460, 3580, 3670, 2765, 2766, 2817, 3618, 3150; 'do pass as amended Consent Calendar' House Bill 3740; 'do adopt as amended' House Resolution 644."
"House Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 4 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 130. That's a corréction, Senate April 30, 1992 Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment. Page 28 of the Calendar. SJR 130. Representative Wennlund."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I rise to announce that Republican Conference immediately in Room 118."
"Speaker Madigan."
"Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that while the Republicans are in Caucus that the Clerk be permitted to read into the record the Committee Reports. We will not read in the Constitutional Amendment, but he is in the process of reading the Committee Reports. That would simply expedite the work of the Clerk's Office. Is there anyone in authority over there?"
"Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Representative Wennlund sits third from the aisle. Representative Wennlund. Mr. Wennlund. Wennlund."
"As long as there's (sic-there're) no discharge Motions being read, I don't object to reading Committee Reports."
"Fine. All right the Republicans have a Caucus immediately in Room 118. Twenty minutes. Twenty minutes."
"Mr. Speaker, it's going to take longer than 20 minutes, probably 45."
"One half hour, 30 minutes, 30 minutes. This House will reconvene; we'll stand at ease until 4:45. At 4:45 we're calling this Constitutional Amendment. The House will stand at ease for one half-hour."
"Committee Reports. Representative Martinez, Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bill 3924. Representative Flowers, Chairman of the 5 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 Committee on Real Estate Law, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bill 1617; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bill 3865, 3612 and 3663; 'do pass Consent Calendar' House Bill 3898. Representative Curran, Chairman of the Committee on State Government Administration, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 29, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bills 2953, 4160, 4162 and 3178; 'do pass as amended' House Bills 3032, 3587 and 2714; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bills 3946, 3867, 3650 and 3628; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bills 3754, 3579 and 2849; 'do pass Consent Calendar' House Bills 3034, 2299, 3101, 3597 and 3917; 'do pass as amended Consent Calendar' House Bill 3872; 'do adopt as amended' House Joint Resolution 97, House Joint Resolution 102; 'do adopt'; House Joint Resolution 87. Further Committee Reports. Representative Homer, Chairman of the Committee on Judiciary II, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bill 3857; 'do pass as amended' House Bill 4035; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bills 4068, 4030, 4029, 3768, 3186, 3187, 3040, 2801, 2467, 3585 and 4101; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bills 3866 and 3588; 'do pass Consent Calendar' House Bills 4052, 3985 and 2694; 'do pass as amended Consent Calendar' House Bills 4055 and 3672; 'do adopt' House Resolution 1751. A Committee Report correction on Judiciary II Committee report; 'do pass Short Debate' House Bill 3040 should be House Bill 3043, Judiciary II Committee reporting April 30, 1992. Committee 6 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Report. Representative Preston, Chairman of the Committee on Children and Family Law, to which the following Bills were referred, action taken April 30, 1992, reported the same back with the following recommendations: 'do pass' House Bills 3445, 3998 and 2712; 'do pass as amended' House Bill 3352; 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bills 4075, 3311, 3823, 4128, 3261, 2711, 3090, 3091 and Senate Bill 934; 'do pass as amended Short Debate Status' House Bills 3785, 3004, 3353, 3480, 2225 and 4105; 'do pass Consent Calendar' House Bills 4168, 3493 and 3769; 'do pass as amended Consent Calendar' House Bills 3260, 3770, 4104, 4106 and 4147. A correction to State Government Administration Committee Report: House Bill 2953 was reported 'do pass'; the correct report should be 'do pass as amended' for House Bill 2953. Committee report correction on Children and Family Law; House Bill... 'do pass Short Debate Status'. I reported House Bill 3823; the correct report should be: 'do pass Short Debate Status' House Bill 3832."
"Representative Johnson, is the Caucus over? Who else is here? Who? Representative Parke, is the Caucus over? It's over. The House will come to order. General Representative Trotter. Mr. Trotter? Resolutions."
"House Joint Resolution 125, offered by Representatives Satterthwaite, Steczo, Deering, Obrzut and Edley."
"Speaker's Table. Page 28 of the Calendar, Constitutional Amendments-Third Reading appears Senate Joint Resolution 130. Mr. Clerk read the Amendment."
"Senate Joint Resolution 130 RESOLVED, BY THE SENATE OF THE EIGHTY-SEVENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE 7 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day OF ILLINOIS, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HEREIN, that there shall be submitted to the electors of the State for adoption or rejection at the general election next occurring at least six months after the adoption of this resolution a proposition to amend Section 1 of Article X of the Illinois Constitution as follows: ARTICLE X EDUCATION SECTION 1. Fundamental Right - FREE SCHOOLS A fundamental right of the People of the State is the educational development of all persons to the limits of their capacities. It is the paramount duty of the State to provide for a thorough and efficient system of high quality public education institutions and services and to guarantee equality of educational opportunity as a fundamental right of each citizen. Education in public schools through the secondary level shall be free. The State has the preponderant financial responsibility for financing the system of public education. There may be such other free education as the General Assembly provides by law. SCHEDULE This Constitutional Amendment takes effect upon approval by the electors of this State. Third Reading of the Constitutional Amendment."
"Representative Saltsman."
"Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to waive the posting rules on HJR 113 and HJRCA 115 so they can be held...in Executive Committee tomorrow and the committee will meet at 10:00."
"Has this been cleared with the Republican side?"
"We've got one of theirs on it, so I guess it has been. Yes, Representative Parke is...."
"Repeat, please repeat the numbers."
"HJR 113, Rotello; HJRCA 115, Representative Parke."
"All right, are there any objections? Any 8 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 objections? Mr. Parke, do you object, or Mr. Wennlund, are you objecting to this? Your lights are on. Well one of them is Mr. Parkes'."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, House Joint Resolution..."
"Does anyone rise in opposition to this Motion?"
"It is a..."
"Yes, Representative Wennlund objects to the Motion. Mr. Wennlund objects to the Motion. Mr. Saltsman. Yes, put him on the board. Mr. Saltsman, this is not on the Calendar, and it requires unanimous consent, and there are objections. Mr. Parke would like a division of the question, but there will be objections to his Resolution 'cause it requires unanimous consent. So, take them out of the record. Senate Joint Resolution 130. Senate Joint Resolution 130 has been read a third time. Is that correct, Mr. Clerk?"
"The Resolution has been read a third time."
"Speaker Madigan."
"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I rise in support of Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 130 which would amend Article X, the Education Article of the Illinois Constitution. This Amendment would provide for six changes in the current language of the Education Article. Number one, both in the title and in the first paragraph, the word 'goal' would be changed to the word 'right' SO that in the future the Constitution would talk in terms of education as a 'fundamental right' rather than as a 'fundamental goal'. Secondly, in the second paragraph of the Article, the language, 'It is the paramount duty of the State...' is added to the Constitution. Also, in the same paragraph, the word 'thorough' is added SO that the language reads, 9 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 '...thorough and efficient system of high quality public education institutions and services....' Next, language is added which reads, 'and to guarantee equality of educational opportunity as a fundamental right of each citizen.' Next, language is added which reads, 'The State has the preponderant financial responsibility for financing the system of public education.' And, lastly, the language which today appears at the very end of the Article would be removed and so the language, 'The State has the primary responsibility for financing the system of public education,' is removed from the Article. Let me go back and move step by step through these changes and attempt to tell you what the intent of the changes would be. Number one, concerning the substitution of the word 'right' for the word 'goal', the intent is to provide that education would become a fundamental right of every citizen of this state; and therefore, education would be placed on a higher plane than other rights accorded to citizens of this state under the Constitution. Next, the Constitution would talk in terms of a paramount duty, and the intent here would be to provide that the word 'paramount' means foremost in importance, preeminent, superior to all others. The Amendment would create a duty that is supreme, preeminent or dominant, and flowing from this Constitutional duty is a corresponding right, the right of all children residing within its borders to have the state provide for a system of high quality public education. Next, 'thorough and efficient system'. The intent here would be that a 'thorough and efficient system' of education requires all school districts, all school districts, to deliver to children a substantially equal mix of courses and to account for the individual educational needs of students. 10 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 The intent would be to provide that a quality public education must be a function of the wealth of the entire state as a whole, not of local school districts. Next, the addition of the language 'equality of educational opportunity'. 'Equality of educational opportunity' means that all children, regardless of their place of residence, their economic environment, their race, or their family situation are entitled to the same level of educational goods and services. The phrase means access to the system of high quality public education is a fundamental right. The word 'preponderant'. The word 'preponderant' is intended to create the duty of the state to fund education to meet the requirements for the thorough and efficient system of high quality public education defined above. The word 'preponderant' also means that more than half the cost of a state system of public education should be provided from state funds. I served as a delegate to the Illinois Constitutional Convention which met in 1969 and 1970. I can tell you that it was the clear intent of that convention that the State of Illinois would be responsible for providing one-half of the cost of education for local school districts. The convention was a body much like this; it worked in a legislative manner; it engaged in a series of three debates or three considerations of every question to be included in the document. Necessarily, the document, which was eventually submitted to the people for ratification, was a compromise. The compromise language, which is the Education Article of today, was a compromise but it was clearly the intent of the convention that the state would provide one-half the cost of education. What this proposed Amendment to the Constitution would provide, in my judgment, would be clarifying language SO that the 11 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 135th Legislative Day intent of 20 years ago would be crystal clear in the language of the future. Over the last 20 years, the intent of the convention was never completely fulfilled - in part because of inaction by Governors and Legislatures, in part because of adverse court interpretations. But we today have an opportunity to permit the people of Illinois to clarify the language; we have an opportunity today to permit the people of Illinois to speak to the question, 'How much should the state provide in terms of support to local school districts?' If there are 71 people in this Body today, willing to let the citizens of Illinois vote on this question, speak to this question, debate this question over a period of several months, then all of us will have an opportunity to lay to rest the question and the ambiguity which has clouded this matter over 20 years. I feel a sense of deep regret at actions taken by Governor Edgar on this question. Governor Edgar has postured himself for many, many years as a person sincerely interested in education, interested in providing educational opportunity to every child in this state. As an example, in September of 1989, the Decatur Herald reported Mr. Edgar as saying, 'I will not pull the rug out from under education in this state.' I will not pull the rug out from under education in this state. In November of 1990, there was a (sic) Edgar press release which read: 'One of the major issues is whether this state is going to backtrack on its commitment to education, and I strongly believe that we cannot backtrack.' In April of this year, April 24, 1992, The State Journal-Register reported one Daniel Egler, who many of us know - today he is an agent of the Governor - as stating, 'The Governor for years has been committed to closing the gap between the haves and the 12 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day have-nots with that April 30, 1992 among school districts in this state.' And so record of alleged support for education in Illinois, I view with deep regret the Governor's comments over the weekend, where in an apparent effort to imitate Neville Chamberlain, he said, 'I'm neutral on this issue,' and then he went on to raise the specter of a gigantic tax increase to pay for this Amendment by simply stating, 'If the Legislature puts the Bill on my desk, I'll sign the Bill to pay the cost of the Amendment.' Nobody can state unequivocally that this Amendment will lead to a tax increase. If you wish to argue, if you wish to argue that this will lead to a tax increase, sure, you are free to do that. If you wish to argue that it will not, you're free to do that. What I know about the question of tax increases and taxes, as affected by this Amendment, is that today in Illinois two-thirds of the cost of education for local school districts is paid for by the local real estate tax. Today, two-thirds of the cost of providing education at the local level is paid for by the local real estate tax which is a regressive tax, and were that to be changed to support from an income tax, then the support would be coming from a progressive tax. So, you see, it's very easy in a legislative body to defeat something. You simply raise a few red herrings; you bring to the legislative struggle a few interest groups that have some friends in different places, and you develop some spurious arguments; and you move ahead to defeat a legislative initiative. Very easy. And so you see if there are people here today that wish to defeat this Amendment, why they've laid the groundwork for defeating the Amendment. They call upon the Chief Executive of the State, on the major question facing the state for how many years, to say, 'I'm neutral.' And 13 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 then, 'By the way, I'd sign the big tax increase if it comes down the road and hits my desk.' So the groundwork is there. If there are enough people here today that (sic-who) don't want the citizens of this state to vote on this question, then have your way. You'll be successful; you'll pat yourselves on the back and you'll say, 'We did a great job,' but the issue will not go away because our state is failing to prepare our children for the society that lays (sic-lies) ahead. Everybody tells us that. Everybody tells us that Illinois and America is failing in competition with foreign nations and they tell us it's because our educational system is not doing the job, not doing the job for everybody. So if you wish to turn your head away from that, so be it, you'll have your way. I stand in support of this Amendment. I stand in support of the proposition that the people of the State of Illinois, after 20 years, ought to be given an opportunity to clarify this language and to provide constitutional underpinning for what all of us say: that our number one responsibility is to provide for the education of the children of the State of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Speaker."
"The Gentleman has moved for the passage of Senate Joint Resolution 130 and on that question, Representative Parke."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Will the Speaker please answer a couple of questions for me?"
"Yes, he will."
"Mr. Speaker, how much will this cost the citizens of this state?"
"Speaker Madigan. Mr. Parke, repeat your question." 14 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992
"Yes, Sir. How's the Mayor? I was just kind of curious. Can you tell us how much..."
"You are treading on thin ice because that was one, Shirley Madigan. I can tell you, you can take me on, but I would advise you not to take her on."
"A word to the wise, and I'11 accept it. I have...on behalf of the taxpayers of this state, I must ask you, 'How much do you expect that this Constitutional Amendment will cost the taxpayers of this state?"
"I don't plan to offer a dollar amount on the cost because there are several estimates available; certain people have one number, other people have another. I don't plan to offer a dollar amount SO that it can be used against the advancement of this proposition."
"I see, SO in other words we are going to have a 'blank check' on....when we pass this Constitutional Amendment on to the citizens, we're going to say that there's a blank check to cost the taxpayers and to be determined later on. I f we do not pass a tax increase onto the taxpayers, where are we going to get the money to pay for this, Mr. Speaker?"
"Mr. Parke, the money provided to local school districts is done through the appropriations process of this Legislature and so it would be an appropriations budgetary decision, as always."
"I was afraid that that was going to be your answer because if that's the fact, and we're not going to have a tax increase, then we're going to have to take the money away from children, from the poor, from the aged, and that will be a responsibility this General Assembly must accept by virtue of passing this; and I presume that you're prepared to make those kind of cuts, Mr. Speaker, when the 15 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day time comes. In addition, I may ask you, 'Is private education going to benefit by your Constitutional Amendment?'" April 30, 1992
"I'm sorry, Mr. Parke, could you repeat the last question?"
"Yes, Sir. Will the private education that many of our citizens - many of your citizens, in your legislative district, who take their children to private education will they benefit in any way directly by this Constitutional Amendment, if it were to pass?"
"Let me give you a two-part answer. It would be my view that to the extent that education generally is improved, then the education provided in private schools would also be improved. But, part number 2, you get to a very good point. The majority of children in my district do not attend public schools, but I will not let that political consideration dissuade me in attempting to advance this matter to a vote of the people. I recognize the political risk entailed in sponsoring this Amendment for myself, but I'm prepared to take that on, come what may."
"So, therefore, your answer is, for all those citizens who have children in private education, they probably will lose with this Constitutional Amendment, and that's what you've just said to us. May I ask, 'Is higher education going to be included in this Constitutional Amendment and will they benefit?'"
"My answer would be essentially the same, but there is no clear intent to provide for higher education in this Amendment."
"So, if this Amendment passes then higher education also will lose; basically, then, we will just say that elementary and secondary are going to have the priorities 16 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 in this state and higher education will have to fend for the crumbs that will be left. Thank you, Mr. Madigan, I... Speaker Madigan, I appreciate the frankness of your answers. To the Bill: Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, if we wish to have more money for public education currently, we can go to our taxpayers, such as those Members here that are Members of (sic) Chicago, and provide legislation...legislative expertise to the citizens of Chicago. If this is so important, over the years you know you could have gone to the Chicago City Council and proposed, each one of you, if you're so concerned now, you could have proposed to your alderman to raise the taxes of your taxpayers to pay for your public education system, but you didn't. It's interesting, just before a major election, that we get this Constitutional Amendment. Isn't it interesting. In addition, I might point out that in here, as was told to us by Senator Berman, fine Senator who introduced the Bill in the Senate, in questioning in the House Committee responsible for passing this out, that there is no property tax relief built into this. No property tax relief built in. So, I may point out that for those of you who think there's property tax relief in this, there in fact is not; and I might also point out to you that if you think that we're going to trade off property tax relief by virtue of having a higher income tax, I may ask you to look at the State of Wisconsin who (sic) a number of years ago tried that; and I may ask you to, now that I got a report from the Heartland Institute today that said that Wisconsin is one of the top five states in taxes because they tried to offset the cost of at one time lowering property tax to increase the income tax....And you know what they have now? They have a high income tax and a 17 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 high property tax, and I would venture to say that's what's going to happen in Illinois. You know, we're saying then that if this passes on November 3, we will then have the citizens the right to vote on this, and that's the high lofty goal. Of course, we as legislators are acquiescing our responsibilities that we were duly elected to do, and so we want to let someone else make those decisions for us. But I would say that there is nothing wrong with the citizens having the right to make decisions on this, but I will tell you what disturbs me most about this Bill is that it's a last minute, vaguely worded proposal that has been rushed to the Senate and then to the House without adequate study of its ramifications, and I believe I've pointed it out to you. In addition, I may point out to you there's not been adequate public input into this procedure to...and we are now faced, as elected Legislators, to make a decision on something, without any kind of real input from the taxpayers of this state and the citizens and the special interests of this state; and I say that this is a bad idea, lofty in its goal; and I say that it is our responsibility to vote 'no' on this legislation, so that we, though is well intended, I know we have a deadline that we have to hit, but this state can wait to make sure that when we offer something to the citizens of this state, that it is something that means something, and that stands for something, and that is built into it, is accountability. If you're talking about 2.9 billion dollars, which is what (the) Economic and Fiscal Commission says that they think this is going to be, then let us have some accountability. What do we expect from the education community for a trade-off of this kind of money that will go to their salaries and their benefits - because that's where 80%, 18 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 75%-80% of this money is going to go - what can we expect as taxpayers, what can our children expect to get back for this influx of money that we're going to give them? I say to you, that it's just can't say it's going to be good education because we've been talking about that good education for years, and many of the taxpayers of this state feel we're still waiting for it; but I will tell you that I am proud of the educators that we have in this state and I know that they need the help and support; but I will say this, this is not the piece of legislation to do it; this is the wrong legislation; let's get something out there that means something and that ultimately helps the children of the State of Illinois."
"Representative Pullen."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would like to point out that this Amendment does not say that the state will provide 50%, plus 1, of the funding for education in every district in this state, and we know why it doesn't, too. That would cut Chicago's share of education funding from the state, wouldn't it? Rather, this Constitutional Amendment says that the state will provide the 'preponderant' share of education funding overall. That was not the intent of the Constitutional Convention, and I submit that the Gentleman knows that. In fact the court decisions, that he bemoans, have demonstrated that that was not the intent of the Constitutional Convention. What this is, is a fundamental change in the State Constitution, and in its intent; and it is a very intentional, fundamental change. This Constitutional Amendment would fundamentally change the way this Legislature conducts its business with respect to budgets; and it would fundamentally change the way schools 19 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 are governed in Illinois, shifting not just funding, but even what little control is left at the local level, to the state. It changes the whole picture, but that's not even the real issue. In fact, I believe that all this talk about shifting the burden of spending on education to the state is a red herring to distract from what is really intended by this Constitutional Amendment. Because it could say 50, plus 1; it could say the state will be paying the 'preponderant' share, without saying anything else; but there is a more important change in this Constitutional Amendment. It changes the word 'goal' to the wor... to the phrase 'fundamental right', and it says that every school child, excuse me, every citizen, not resident, but citizen, in Illinois would have a fundamental right to 'equal access to education, to the full extent of his or her capacity'. That is not even possible; but when it gets into a court, where there are resident, folks who are not at all practical, or accountable to the taxpayers of this state, the substitution of the word 'goal' with the phrase 'fundamental right' will take on new and awesome meaning, especially when followed by this wonderful phrase about equal access to a thorough and efficient education to the extent of his or her capacity. The sky will not be the limit to the taxes you are forced to enact, Ladies and Gentlemen. There will be no limit. Whatever the judge sees as the Utopian goal will be what you are mandated by the court to tax the people of Illinois for this one function of government that becomes paramount over all others, becomes paramount over every other piece of the budget, every other function of government. There is currently in our State Constitution a contract with our pensioners that says no matter what else happens, their 20 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day pension benefits April 30, 1992 will be paid. Well, now we are substituting a paramount fundamental right that, no matter what else happens, whatever a judge says you owe the children, the citizens, not residents but citizens of Illinois for education, you will have to pay ahead of any other function of government, ahead of any other priority that that taxpayer might have for his or her own money that they earned. This is not simply political window dressing. I wish it were. It is a fundamental change in the Constitution of this state and a fundamental change in the way you do business. It will have an enormous effect on this state for many, many years to come. You cannot even imagine the pressure that you are submitting yourself to when that court orders you to do this, and you won't be able to go home to your people and say, 'well, it wasn't me that required you to pay the..."
"Representative Black."
"Thank you...thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield for some questions?"
"Yes."
"Thank you. Speaker Madigan, you have a unique ability in this debate and in this question because, as you said earlier, you were a Member of the Constitutional Convention of 1970, and, of course during your tenure as Speaker, I think it does put you in a unique situation and I would in that...because of that situation, would like to ask you some questions that perhaps may be difficult but may also shed some light on what we are about to do. As you indicated earlier, you are assuming some degree of political risk in sponsoring this, and I assume that you know your district well enough to indicate that that indeed is a fact. Should this Constitutional Amendment pass the 21 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day General April 30, 1992 Assembly and subsequently pass muster by the vote by the citizens of the state, would you also then be willing to assume the significant political risk of sponsoring a tax increase to meet the Constitutional mandate?"
"Mr. Black, you may remember I did sponsor a tax increase, just a couple of years ago, which was successful, so..."
"But, I don't think the next one will be temporary."
"Well, maybe it will; maybe it won't. Nobody likes to support tax increases; we all like to serve in this Body without being called upon to support tax increases but sometimes they come along, and at times I voted for them, and at times I voted against them. It's all part of service in the General Assembly."
"Kind of like, 'Some of my friends are for this and some of my friends are against it so I'm going to vote with my friends.' Let me....Let me go on. This Amendment is silent on some very critical points, and I go back to what you said earlier. Because of your involvement in the Constitutional Convention of 1970, perhaps you are the only one in this chamber as qualified to give direction on what the intent of this Amendment might be. For example, and I don't know whether this is by custom, or rule, or what, higher education funding in this state has traditionally, historically, whatever the correct term may be, at approximately one-third of the dollars appropriated for elementary and secondary education. Now the Amendment is silent to that. Are we to assume that continues or that has to be dealt with at the appropriate time?"
"I would think that that would be a matter for future Legislatures to determine. Many Legislatures, over the 22 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 years, have abided by that ratio, but there's no law or rule which says that a future Legislature must abide by that."
"Thank you. Now let me ask you another question and again, I'm not an attorney and I would defer to your legal background, as well as the fact that you were involved in the Constitution of 1970 - 'Should this Amendment pass and it is silent, to my understanding, on a question of some importance to many people in this chamber and Illinois if the preponderant duty and fundamental right will be to public education, the financing thereof, would it not then seem logical that legal interpretation would then preclude any public dollars being given to private schools such, as we do now, for example, on transportation and text book assistance?"
"I would not agree with that."
"But, would you agree that that might indeed be a legal question that would have to be addressed?"
"Well, I think that that has to be addressed every year that we're in Session. So there's certainly not as much support for private education as there is for public education. In the past, I have been a proponent of private education and I did not, in those endeavors, represent a majority of the Members of the General Assembly."
"All right, I'm just looking for some direction. Mr. Speaker, someone...an earlier.... Someone got up and asked a question earlier, and I want to make this very clear..."
"All right, Mr. Black, bring your remarks to a close."
"All right, let me forego the question where I was headed. I guess if you could give some direction, as you understand this Amendment and from your involvement in the 1970 23 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Constitution, should this be accepted, what safeguards, and really I don't know the answer to this, what safeguards will we have on absolute control of spending dollars on education, should this pass and half of the obligations come to this Body? What then precludes staffing levels of 1:2, capital expenditures that normally wouldn't be done because of local controls that exist now? In other words, a very legitimate question. If you could enlighten me. Do you see any safeguards on what might be just a decade of spending that is totally out of control, albeit, perhaps, maybe spending in the right direction, but I worry about who will run this mechanism once it gets under way?"
"There will be two major factors in running this mechanism, to use your language. Number 1, this General Assembly, in its decision-making capacity, in cooperation with a Governor; and then local school boards accountable to those that elected them. So, if a local school board were to be the recipient of a state largess and then continue to levy a high real estate tax rate, they would be subject to the decision of the voters at the next election."
"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker."
"Representative McCracken."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think it's unfortunate that this has been allowed to sound political in its presentation. I think that we can consider this issue without reference to the Governor's position. I think we can discuss this solely by looking at the applicable principles of law and the function we view, the Legislature to hold under our Constitutional system. Our Governor had the courage to run for office and admit to the people that he would support the permanent extension of the income tax 24 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 for education. The Democrat candidate for Governor in that election did not make that observation, did not have that candor. Now, I think that we do injustice to the debate if we allow this to descend to political name-calling. Our Governor has nothing to be ashamed of in his commitment to education. So let's put that issue aside as a red herring. The question is, 'Do you want to abrogate your responsibility as a Legislature; do you want to defer to the courts; do you want to take out of the hands of the people the decision over how much tax will be raised and how it will be spent?' That is what you do here today, if you vote for this measure. Now let me say, up front, I don't believe education should be the 'paramount duty' of state government under our Constitution. I don't think our hands should be tied. The whole point of a Constitution is that it puts into stone, lasting values, that it protects people in their most fundamental needs, and that is what our Constitution does today. Our Constitution wisely was vague on how much state funding there should be for education because our drafters understood that it is the Legislature that makes that decision, properly so - not the Constitution and not the courts. My friends, if you pass this today, you will see a lawsuit within minutes of its ratification, if that happens. And that lawsuit will tell you that you have no authority to vote on the issue, that you cannot be trusted to do your duty as a Legislature that is precisely what you do today. And all those people who think that the lawsuit brought seeking, so-called, 'equal funding', all the people who think that is a sham, as I do, will be denied their right to exercise their powers as elected Representatives. Don't kid yourself. This Constitution will be used as a vehicle to put into the 25 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 power put into the hands of the courts the sole power to for determining how much tax will be raised, and how and where it will be spent. Don't kid yourself. Federal courts, in an age of judicial activism, have done far more with far less ammunition. If you think the courts will be able to resist the temptation to rely on the Constitution to take away our authority, you are mistaken. So, it's irrelevant how much money will be raised. I personally believe there is no way that less than 2 billion dollars has to be raised, because the Legislature historically has never had the guts to make cuts, to make ends meet, with far less red ink flowing. Now, you tell me that if a court says it's 2 billion dollars that you have to pay, what do you think we're going to do? You think we're going to find cuts of two billion dollars in our budget? So all those who argue that it does not neccessitate a tax increase, while they have a perfect right to say so, just aren't right. It's as simple as that. The court is going to tell you how to vote in the future. This abrogates entirely our authority to act in the area. It isn't a solution. All it is, is a weapon, a weapon to be used by unelected judges judges who are responsible to nobody. Every 10 years a judge is retained. How often do you see a Supreme Court justice not retained? They aren't accountable; and, frankly, once the Constitution is ratified, the Constitution is not accountable. That's the reason for the Western tradition of popularly-elected, representative bodies, and that is what you foresake by passing this Amendment. So, whether you want the children to do well or not, is immaterial. What you do today is destroy our system of representative government. Don't kid yourselves. It will happen just as sure as I'm standing here today. 26 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Proponents are already attempting to make it a reality, and when they have this ammunition, that will seal our fates. Don't abdicate your responsibility. Don't abrogate your rights. Take the stand and say, 'I'm either (sic) for taxes 'cause I want to help education, or, I'm not, 'cause I think we can find the money elsewhere, or people can get by.' Whatever you want to do, just do it. Okay? Don't sell us down the river for the sake of political expediency. What we do here today is far greater than the election in November, because once it's in there it'll never be taken out. It's the end. So let's stand up, make the hard decision - the unpopular decision - and say, no. We will make the decision on taxes; we will make the decision on education, and if we don't do it, it will be gone forever."
"Representative Curran."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Frankly, Ladies and Gentlemen, I cannot imagine anybody in this room of people who wish to be considered public servants, that we would fail to give to the citizens who put us here the opportunity to vote on the most important question to come before us in 20 years. What are we afraid of? The public has come to believe, gradually over time, that their voices are not being listened to, and by this vote you can give to those people who sought to put you here in these seats and who sought to give you power, you can give them the opportunity to speak their mind on what education is going to be like. We have been talking about this in our campaign speeches and in our campaign slogans. Why shouldn't we let the people decide whether this should be in our Constitution? What are we hiding from? Don't be afraid of the people. The people put you here. Don't be afraid to listen to the votes of 27 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 the voters and to the voices of the voters, because as soon as you turn your back on those people and say that they can't make an intelligent decision, you have made the worst possible decision in representative government. You have turned your back on those folks; you have said that they were too stupid to make a decision; you said that it only could be made in this hallowed room by a bunch of pompous politicians. Well, it can't just be made in this room. It can be made all over this state. The people are smart; the people know what is good for them; they know what is good for their schools; they know what is good for their property taxes, and they know what's good for their state. If you turn your back on the voters by voting 'no' on this Constitutional Amendment, you'll be tempting them to turn their backs on you, because you'll be denying them the opportunity to vote on the most important question in a generation; and I say you can't turn your back on the voters like that. You have got to vote on this. You've got to vote 'yes'. You've got to put it in the hands of the people, and you've got to trust the people of this state. Vote 'aye'."
"Representative Pedersen."
"Well, here we go again. Another tax hike in a state that already has a high tax burden. Now, we have heard people say today that we're not necessarily going to have a tax increase. Well, now we have a org...a group here, an organization, or a unit, called the Legislative Research Unit, and they have given us four scenarios about are we going to have tax increases or not. And they...the lowest estimate of increased taxes in this state is a little over a billion and the highest is 2.9 billion. But we know that that was the whole idea, wasn't it? The whole idea was, 28 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 we're going to do this thing so that we can get more money; we're gonna raise taxes; or, otherwise, why would we bother? Now, we talk about letting the people decide. Why, we've had all kinds of attempts to let the people decide. Now it appears that there are some of us who are very willing to let the people decide about a tax increase. But it was just last year, wasn't it, when we had this tax accountability...we had people moving heaven and earth to keep the people from deciding whether they wanted to control taxes or not? But then that's different; we don't want to control taxes, we want more money. Now, you take a look at what's going on in this country. In Washington they've been talking about multi-trillion dollar debt; they're talking about budgets that are in the trillions. Now I know you guys over there that (sic-who) are promoting this thing, that they could probably tell us what a trillion is, but there doesn't seem to be any, even any thought about trying to control that. We had lots of prosperity in the last years, and the states went on a spending and taxing binge. Now that things are starting to catch up with them, they're taxing more. All I...I just wonder where you are going to stop this. I can tell you, folks, based on my experience with the people, based on the State of New Jersey, you know what happened there folks, your people out there are damned tired of tax increases and spending...giving more money to government, no matter whether it's local, and something like this, or the others. What we need, if we are going to be a competitive State that gets all those revenues that you want, is a reduction in tax burden. Now I'm not talking just the state, I'm talking all of us, that's local government, all of us. Take a close look at it so that we can have a lower tax 29 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 burden, SO that we can compete with the rest of those states in this nation and get some growth and jobs, and when we get that we'll get the revenues that you want. No, this is just a vote for another tax hike, folks, so take a close look at it because after, if it passes, you're going to be, your people out there are going to wonder why you're promoting another tax increase, I suggest we vote 'no'."
"Representative Edley."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the General Assembly. I, like many others here, have children that (sic-who) attend our public schools, in fact that's one of the major reasons I became involved in politics was because I wanted to help provide the kind of educational opportunities that they are going to need to compete in the 21st century. That's one of the reasons I'm down here. And that's one of the reasons I serve on the Education Appropriation Committee, and here last year I asked to serve on that Joint Task Force on Education Finance. If you all remember, that's the task force that we formed, I think over almost two years ago, to resolve this question, and we're still meeting. Why is it? Why is it that when we ask for government to do better, the Republicans continually say, 'That's going to take more taxes, more taxes'? You know one of the reasons we're in the financial dilemma or our schools are in the financial dilemma, that they're in, is not just the fact of the lack of state funding, but the maldistribution of growth in EAV among school districts in this state. We have some school districts that have over $600,000 of assessed evaluation behind every student, and we have one school district in this state that has less than $4,000 per student. And many schools downstate have less than $20,000 per student. One 30 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 of the proposals, in fact if you talk to some academics they think that this will have to be part of whatever solution we have to school funding, and that is sharing the property tax base. Commercial property in this state generates up almost 50% of all the local property taxes and yet 85% of that commercial property is located in the six counties around Chicago. One proposal would be able to have the state share taxing authority with the local school district on commercial and industrial property, take that money into the state and redistribute it based on the local school district's wealth. You could do that without raising any taxes, property or income taxes, and create a more equitable situation than what we have today in funding our school systems. We've got to learn to do things better in state government and quit the knee-jerk reaction of every time we want to operate a government better, we need more taxes. That's not necessarily so."
"Representative Ropp."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. I dare say there are few people who are any more concerned about education than many of us, in fact is I think all of us are generally in support of it. When we see across this country that education in the United States is falling behind other world leaders, that gives some of us some concern to take a look at our situation: clearly, that this Body could do exactly what this Constitutional Amendment is attempting to address. There is no reason we have established committees to study how to formulate new methods for funding education throughout the state; they've been working on that for a year or two and yet we cannot come to any agreement. Why is it that we have that perception out in the State of Illinois that the 31 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Legislature cannot respond to the needs of the state? Why is it that we have that perception? The reason is because were not willing to stand up to do some of these important issues here in this Body and are willing now to say to the public, 'You tell us what to do.' Why don't we have the courage to stand up and say, 'We need to address the fact that we need smaller classes, we need to have teachers that are better paid so that we have the best quality teachers in our class rooms?' Why is it...why aren't we in that position, to be courageous, to do that now? I have no problem really with allowing the public to give us some direction. But, Ladies and Gentlemen, they have sent us here to give us that direction, and I think in one respect we are shirking our responsibilities. Why is it that under this Constitutional Amendment we don't have some kind of formula directions that help us make a decision that we could determine here on (sic-in) this Body? Why is it that we have to put this off for another eight months to a year before we really address the needs of education in the State of Illinois? Now, on the other hand, I think there are some pluses on this issue. It, once and for all, finally gives the public the opportunity to speak on this issue. It gives an opportunity for the public to finally say, 'Yes, we are tired of the inadequacies of our educational system because we've seen the drop-out rate continue to stay even, if not increase; we have seen people who graduate from high school and can't read at a sixth and seventh grade level.' Ladies and Gentlemen, I think the public finally is getting tired of what we are spending for education. There are areas, and I can assure you, more money will not guarantee a better system. What this proposal will in fact do will begin to get more public 32 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 concern about what is truly important - the fact that we are willing to finally say, 'Yes, education does have a concern, and we are willing to say 'yes' or 'no' in a Constitutional Amendment.' I am quite sure that this issue has been drawn by, I hate to use the term, attorneys because I know some of them have drawn this, that this rascal will probably be in court for some time, trying to determine what do some of these words really mean. I truly think that what we have attempted to do over the years, when we talk about high taxes is to give relief in property taxes. This does not say that in any way, shape or form. All we hear from those who are supporting this is, 'Yes, that is our intent to put that in the form of legislation.' Ladies and Gentleman, at this point, it is nothing but 'blue sky'. You can reach for it, but we don't see it. We don't have it in our hands to make a clear judgment. Unfortunately, Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we, as a legislative Body, have somewhat shirked in our responsibility, in providing the financial concerns that we need to adequately fund quality education - elementary, secondary and truly, in higher education."
"Representative Matijevich."
"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. The intentions of the Sponsors of HJR(sic) 130 I believe are laudatory. Their intentions, I'm sure, are to precipitate a statewide dialogue on funding of public education and the importance of education. I have the highest regard for Senator Berman, he's our expert on education, as is John Maitland, as is Dick Mulcahey who is recouperating from surgery, and former Representative Gene Hoffman, those were my people who I rely on as far as experts in education. And everybody knows my respect and my regard for the 33 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 Speaker. I'm sure that the Amendment was offered in the expectation that such a debate would generate discussion to whether the financing of public education should be more appropriately be shifted from the property tax to the income tax. I'm certain that they expect that such a debate would generate discussion of the inequities of our school aid formula, and certainly of the state's failure to provide an adequate level, which usually is determined to be at least 50% of the funding of public education. If this Resolution is adopted, and we're to go to a statewide referendum, I can guarantee you that there will not be a reasoned debate on the issue. I do not denigrate the Governor, but I must say that when Governor Edgar immediately set the tone of any future debate when he warned that 50% a 50% increase in the income tax would result; that as much as 3 billion, he said, of new dollars would be necessary for education alone if HJR 30 (sic) were adopted. The debate on the proposed Amendments offered here yesterday are further evidence that the referendum debate would not be a reasoned one. No, it would not be a reasoned one; the whole debate would be emotional. The buzz words, the scare tactics, everything that plays on the emotions of voters will be used. The whole debate will be steered to that feared word, the 'T' word, and we all know that. Taxes. It will be a debate, a referendum on taxes. It will not be a debate on education, the quality of education, or even the funding of education. People will forget that this was the issue in...in the referendum. The debate has already, as I've said, been diverted and perverted and no one with good intentions or noble purposes, as I know the Sponsors have, to discuss the serious problems of providing quality and equality 34 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 education and the fairest way to finance it, will bring the debate back on track and on a high level. In addition to the debate being fraught with emotion, I can guarantee you another thing - that the referendum will fail. Everyone I, virtually everyone I have talked to has admitted that in their opinion that the referendum will not only fail, that it will fail miserably. And if it does, what does that do for education? Some say it puts us where we are today - in bad shape - so there's nothing to lose. But any referendum where the Sponsors of the Resolution rightfully hope that it would cause a dialogue to re-enforce the belief that education is our number one priority, our highest priority, and that referendum fails miserably, wouldn't it be right and proper for some to conclude that education in the eyes of the voter, are (sic-is) not the highest priority? Surely, that could be a reasonable conclusion. So, when the referendum loses, who loses? Education loses; the children of Illinois lose; and yes, because when things get emotional, rather than reasoned and logical, taxpayers are prone to tie their emotions to candidates on the ballot, possibly to incumbents. In the final analysis, even candidates, some of us, may be losers. I say, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, much as I respect all who put this before us today, and it did come to us quickly, that I don't think it's going to do what the Sponsors of it feel that it should, that we should have a clear and reasoned debate. I fear "
"Representative Matijevich, bring your remarks to a close, please."
"I fear that it would be the same as if we put the Equal Rights Amendment, if we put abortion on the ballot, it would be highly emotional, and if it is, we are all the 35 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 losers. And I am going to vote 'no' on it."
"Representative Steczo."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. I rise in support of Senate Joint Resolution 130. I have been a Member of the General Assembly now for the last 16 years. And, going back 16 years, with the number of people that I have spoken to during the course of, of discussions and meetings and other things that related to education, there's always two questions that are the first two that are ever mentioned. The first one always is, 'Where does the Lottery money go? I thought it was supposed to go to schools.' And anybody in this chamber knows that that is the first question that's always asked. The second question always asked, not only by administrators, not only by teachers, but by citizens who have their children in school and citizens who want children in their areas to get good educations are, 'I thought the state had the primary responsibility for funding education.' And I was here, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, in the good old days, or what we can call the good old days, when we funded education in this state at 48%. That now has fallen to 35%. I hear from constituents that there is nothing but disgust at the failure of this General Assembly to act the way that it should have in terms of providing proper education funding for our schools in this state. The people of the State of Illinois gave us direction in 1970; they approved the Constitution. In that Constitution was a provision about the state having primary responsibility for funding schools. We have not lived up to the responsibility that the people feel was contained within that Constitutional provision, notwithstanding what the courts have ruled, notwithstanding how that provision has 36 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 been interpreted by other people. It's our responsibility to make education the number one priority in this state. This Amendment will give those same people that (sic-who) approved that same Constitution in 1970 the opportunity to say, 'Yes, we meant that you had the preponderance of responsibility.' That's not an unfair thing to ask because we've been deliberating for the last 20 years under that same Constitutional provision. There are some people, Mr. Speaker, who will look today and say that 'Here we go, again; you know, this is another tax increase. 'When you look at the way education is funded today, you look at 35% state funding, you look at 57% local funding - local property tax funding. If you are under the presumption that this will automatically result in an income tax increase if it passes, you also have to be under the presumption that this Amendment, if it fails, will automatically result in property tax increases. So if you vote 'no', or if the Amendment fails, you take the responsibility for those reprehensible property tax increases that we all feel so strongly about back home. So, that would be a word to the wise, and, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, we feel...we feel...we sit here and we feel that we know best, the presumption is that we know best. Why not, for a change, let the people speak on what they feel is best? I hear it, and you hear it all in your districts, about the importance of funding education. Let's now take a lead from the people instead of people taking a lead from us. Let's give them the opportunity to tell us, 'Yes, we feel that education is a priority. We feel it's your responsibility to provide the funds and the leadership to make our schools the best in the state.' That's all we're doing here. All we're doing is saying, 37 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 'People, you tell us for a change, instead of us telling you.' This is a good vote; it's a good 'yes' vote. Give the people a right to speak in November."
"Representative Hicks." Hicks: I "Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. You know, Representative McCracken's remarks a while ago, think were expressed as eloquently as I've ever heard on the House floor. I truly believe his remarks are things that I've tried to live by while I've been in the House. I think that the bottom-line of the question, though, since Representative McCracken and I first came to this House, for me has been that education is of sincere importance to both of us. I think, though, that I've spent ten years in this House, and I've seen, as was expressed by Representative Steczo, that we've seen education funding go to 35%. We've seen in 15 years it go from 48% to 35%, but the real question for me falls in the actuality that in my district I have kids that are educated for less than $3000 per year, per child. I have schools that I can't have enough teachers in that school to have small enough class sizes because I don't have the facilities available to have those smaller class sizes. I read in the newspaper where schools in certain parts of the state tear out their swimming pools because they're not Olympic-sized swimming pools and build new ones, when I don't have enough class rooms for my kids to get an education. I see the state average of what it costs, and what children, and what school districts get to educate children, and I see my schools many, many dollars short of what that average is, even. It's very important for me to think that the kids in my district, the kids in all parts of our state, not just my district, have a fairness in education, have the 38 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 opportunities in education. I believe with the passage of this and with the hope and desire that the people of Illinois recognize the importance of education, then maybe those kids will have that equality in education, will have that chance in all parts of the state. For that reason, I'm going to be supporting this Constitutional Amendment, and I would hope the Members of this Body see the future of our children in a light that we all see fit to vote for. Thank you very much."
"Representative Monroe Flinn."
"Mr. Speaker, I think all of us thoroughly understand the question before us; therefore, I move the previous question."
"The Gentlemen 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. Speaker Madigan, to close."
"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen. First, for purposes of the record, let me read a letter from the Mexican-American Legal Defense in Educational Fund. This letter is directed to Senator Del Valle, and it reads as follows: 'I am writing on behalf of the Mexican-American Legal Defense in Educational Fund (MALDEF) to request that this statment be incorporated in the legislative record for the Joint Resolution of Constitutional Amendment 130. This Resolution amends Article X of the Illinois State Constitution by guaranteeing equality of educational opportunity as a fundamental right of each citizen. I am informed the General Assembly uses the word 'citizen' in the amendatory language, in the generic sense, to mean any person who resides in the State of Illinois, regardless of his or her immigration status. In light of this specific 39 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 legislative intent, and given that there is no time to make additional changes to the language of the statute, MALDEF wishes to have noted in the legislative record, our concurrence with the General Assembly's intent with regard to the use of the term 'citizen'.' And this is from the Mexican-American Legal Defense in Education Fund, signed by their regional counsel. Mr. Speaker, in closing, let me be very brief. As part of my opening remarks, I said that in a legislative Body it's much easier to defeat something than it is to pass something, and that if you wish to defeat a proposition before a legislative Body, it's easy enough to find reasons that can be advanced as reasons to vote 'no'. And so what did we hear during the debate? Very odd things being raised - they're not odd if you realize why they're doing it - but some people are now very concerned about 'private' education. There is a great concern about private education. I've been a supporter of private education, and I didn't see those people standing with me when we were trying to help private education. Other people are concerned about higher education. Course, we're all concerned about higher education, but today we're talking about an Amendment to the Education Article of the Illinois Constitution. Someone went so far as to say there's been no input from the taxpayers. Well, what's going to happen if there's a referendum question on this matter? Won't those be taxpayers voting in a November referendum? So you see, as I said, it's easy to raise these red herrings. Don't be fooled; don't be dissuaded. The language change is very simple. If you believe what you've said, for, oh, so many years, then vote 'aye' to let the people of this state finally and conclusively change their Constitution, so that we can move ahead with the 40 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 intent that was clearly desired at the Constitutional Convention of 1970. As one of the previous speakers said, 'Simply let the people vote on this question.' Let the people participate in our system of democracy. Please vote 'aye'."
"Question. The Question is, 'Shall Senate Joint Resolution 130 pass?' All those in favor vote 'aye', opposed vote 'no'. Representative Parcells, to explain her vote."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Those who are voting 'yes' are just plain shirking your duty as elected Representatives. You were sent down here to make these hard decisions, not throw it back into the laps of those who elected you. You know very well this will end up with the court making those decisions. We will be spending millions and millions of dollars in litigation, and maybe a great deal of time in litigation, wasting time, that we could have controlled. Those millions of dollars could have gone to that education that you are considering paramount, or on something else that many of us consider just as important such as personal safety, feeding the poor, taking care of elderly, or on the pensions we have promised those who have contributed to them and are depending on them being there when they retire. One of the speakers today said that this will end up as a debate on taxes, and it most certainly will end up as a debate on taxes because there is no other way. We all know in our heart of hearts that this is going to raise taxes. The unfortunate thing is, that you're saying, 'We're going to let the court decide how much, and the court decide where,' when that was what you were elected to come down here and do. We are just chickening out on this issue, and we 41 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 shouldn't do it. And let me warn you, that on that debate, those of you who are voting green, on the debate about taxes you're gonna end up on the wrong end of it. Let's defeat this Amendment today, and get down to the business of doing our jobs that we were elected to do here, and let the Legislator, (sic-Legislature) not the courts, decide those education decisions."
"Representative Dunn, one minute to explain your vote."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. For a number of years here in the General Assembly I have been pleading, begging, wheeling, cajoling, shouting, arguing and sometimes railing, about the lack of the...about the failure of the General Assembly to fund education to proper levels. So, I proudly rise today to, with my vote, make a statement on behalf of full funding for education, no matter what the outcome of this issue. If this issue passes, and funds do flow into the educational coffers, all the better. If this issue doesn't pass, maybe the voters will receive the signal they need to demand of elected officals that we live up to our duty to put more money into education and to stop making the educational slice of the pie smaller and smaller each year."
"Representative Cronin, one minute to explain your vote."
"This proposed Amendment is indeed an irresponsible way to establish public policy. More importantly, this proposal is a cowardly attempt to force a huge tax increase upon the taxpayers of the State of Illinois. If the supporters of this Amendment want a tax increase, please propose a tax increase. This Amendment, and the language 42 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 in it, is not an issue of the people. The people are not asking for a change in the language of the Constitution. I have no doubt that if this proposal appears on the November ballot, it will be overwhelmingly defeated in the district I represent. In Chicago, and perhaps downstate, there will be support for it, because they will be taking money from the suburban schools and the suburban taxpayers. I cannot in good conscience support this Amendment. It does not help suburban schools, nor does it help suburban taxpayers."
"Representative Persico."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to explain my vote as well. I have wrestled with this question for the last few days, and it's a very difficult vote for me, and I want to explain this vote. In the sense that I am a member of the task force, we've worked very hard for the last year-and-a-half to try to come to some sort of consensus on the recommendations that are needed to provide an adequate education for every student, you know, in the State of Illinois. Sometimes we've agreed, sometimes we've argued, sometimes we've disagreed, but we've debated this issue and we're debating it as a legislative Body with citizen input from other Members of the committee. The reason I'm voting 'no' is for what I was fearful of. As one Representative said earlier in the debate, maybe we don't need to increase the income taxes, all we have to do is take it from the wealthy districts, with a statewide property tax, and distribute it on a basis that way and that's not how we're going to solve this problem."
"Representative Regan."
"Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the House. If this Amendment should pass, I guess this should be the first 43 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 part of the education process for the public because this will say on the referendum something that sounds very well and very good, do you consider education profoundly important in the State of Illinois?' That's an easy vote. That's 'Yes, of course I support education.' But it won't say that this is a 3 billion dollar tax increase with absolutely no hope of any kind of a property tax rollback. It just won't happen. You'll say, 'Well, those school districts are totally wrong; those boards should roll back property taxes.' I guarantee you, you won't see it. You're gonna increase a tremendous amount of income tax without a rollback if you vote, Ladies and Gentlemen, of the public, on this particular referendum. One more..."
"Representative Wennlund."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. The real issue here is one of fundamental fairness to the taxpayers and the residents of Illinois - Asking them to vote on a question, with all the unanswered questions, the meaning of the question itself. They could read it from now until November 3rd and never understand the language of the Resolution. Will it result in a tax increase? Will it bring about property tax relief? How much will it cost? Will it improve education? Will the formula change? Will their schools get more money? What will the courts do with it? The Sponsors have answered none of these questions, and yet we're asking the people of this state to vote on it with all of these unanswered questions. This year it may be the education. Next year, public aid, a referendum on cutting public aid. Maybe the following year on health care. When is it gonna stop? How can we possibly ask the people of Illinois to vote on it? There are no answered questions. They can't make an 44 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 intelligent decision. It's totally unfair to the people of Illinois."
"Representative Satterthwaite."
"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, earlier this week I had a visit from some members of the Farm Bureau. As Members are aware, the Farm Bureau has been interested for several years in devising a way of getting more money for education without depending on the property tax to do that. Those members of the Farm Bureau are in support of this Amendment because they see it as one way of being able to provide the same thing they have strived to do for a number of years. I suggest to you that if we do not put this on the ballot, we are insulting the voter if we think they cannot determine whether this is what they want, or do not want. Those who have been active in the area are in support of it, and I suggest that more Members should be supporting it as well."
"Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this Amendment, there are 72 'ayes'... On this Resolution...this Resolution, there are 72 'ayes' and 44 'noes'. Representative Wennlund. Representative Wennlund asks for a verification. Mr. Clerk, a Poll of those not voting."
"There are no Members recorded as not voting."
"Mr. Clerk, proceed with the poll of the Affirmative."
"Balanoff. Black. Brunsvold. Burke. Curran. Currie. Davis. Deering. DeJaegher. Dunn. Edley. Farley. Flinn. Flowers. Giglio. Giorgi. Granberg. Hannig. Hartke. Hasara. Hicks. J. Hoffman. Homer. Hultgren. Johnson. Lou Jones. Shirley Jones. Keane. Kirkland. Lang. LeFlore. Leitch. Levin. Marinaro. 45 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day Martinez. F. Mautino. McAfee. McDonough. McGann. McGuire. McNamara. McPike. Morrow. Noland. Novak. Obrzut. Phelan. Phelps. Preston. Rice. Richmond. Ropp. Rotello. Saltsman. Santiago. Satterthwaite. Schakowsky. Shaw. Steczo. Stepan. Stern. Tenhouse. Trotter. Turner. Walsh. Weaver. White. Williams. Wolf. Woolard. Anthony Young and Mr. Speaker."
"Representative Wennlund. Questions of the Affirmative."
"Representative Lou Jones?"
"Representative Lou Jones. Representative Lou Jones. Is the Lady here? The Lady is not here. Remove her from the roll call."
"Representative Kirkland?"
"Who?"
"Representative Kirkland?"
"He's here."
"Representative Schoenberg?"
"Schoenberg is voting 'no'. He's voting 'no'."
"Representative Granberg?"
"Representative Granberg. Right here."
"Representative Balanoff?"
"Balanoff is here."
"Representative Schakowsky?"
"She's here."
"Representative Currie?"
"She's here."
"Representative Jesse White?"
"He's here."
"Representative Charles Morrow?"
"He's here. He's here. Mr. Wennlund, are there any more questions?" 46 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day
"Representative Phil Novak?"
"Representative Novak is here."
"Representative DeJaegher?"
"He's here."
"Representative Anthony Young?"
"He's here."
"Representative Stern?"
"She's here."
"Representative Levin?"
"He's here."
"Representative Hannig?"
"He's here."
"Representative Jay Hoffman?"
"He's here." April 30, 1992
"Representative Rice?"
"He's here."
"Representative McNamara?"
"He's here."
"Representative Wolf?"
"He's here."
"Representative Shaw?"
"Representative Wennlund, the Chair could not hear your last request."
"Representative Shaw?"
"He's here."
"Representative Keane?"
"He's here."
"Representative Farley?"
"He's here."
"Representative Burke?"
"He's here."
"Representative Mary Flowers?" 47 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992
"She's here."
"Representative Leitch?"
"Mr. Leitch is here."
"Representative Johnson?"
"Representative Johnson?"
"Tim Johnson?"
"He's here."
"Nothing further."
"Mr. Wennlund, the Chair could not hear because of the commotion. Please, give the Gentleman your attention. Mr. Wennlund."
"Nothing further, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for your patience."
"On Senate Joint Resolution 130, there are 71 'ayes' and 44 'noes', and Senate Joint Resolution 130, having received a Three-Fifths Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Trotter."
"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Body. I would like to ask leave for the waiving requirement for House Bill 3349 for the Public Utilities Committee. I have spoken to the Minority Leader Ackerman, and to the Democratic Chairman, Mr. Levin, and they have both given me their permission."
"All right, the Chair is not, not finished. We are not finished with tonights business. You have heard the Gentleman's Motion. Are there any objections? Hearing none, the Attendance Roll Call will be used, and the Motion carries. Representative Saltsman. Mr. Trotter, give us that Bill number again."
"House Bill 3349."
"House Bill 3349. Representative Saltsman would like to renew his earlier Motion, in regards to 48 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Representative Parke's Resolution and another one. Mr. Saltsman, to the Motion again."
"Mr. Speaker, could I yield to Representative Wennlund. He has the Motion."
"Yes, Mr. Wennlund."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I'll make the Motion. Both Motions on both Bills."
"Fine. Well, what are the two Bills? Please?"
"It was House Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment #15 and House Resolution 113."
"Representative Saltsman. Representative, listen, when you find the Bill numbers please let us know. Representative Preston."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to point out that the Committee on Children and Family Law will not be meeting tomorrow. On the final schedule it has been removed. It adjourned today and finished its legislative business."
"Representative Parke."
"Representative Saltsman, did we solve the problem on this? Have we had a Motion to discharge that's been accepted by the Chair?"
"We don't know the Bill numbers. As soon as we're informed of what Bill numbers you would like to make a Motion on, we will present it."
"House Joint Resolution 15 is the Motion to postpone consideration until tomorrow."
"Representative Wennlund, do you have the numbers now? Representative Wennlund."
"House Joint Resolution 113 and House Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 15."
"All right, the Motion is to suspend the posting 49 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 requirements so that those Bills can be heard in committee tomorrow. Are there any objections? Hearing none, the Attendance Roll Call will be used, and the Motion carries. Representative Curran."
"Since there has been some confusion as to when the State Government administration..."
"We are not finished. We are not finished tonights business. Please do not leave."
"Since there has been some confusion as to when the State Government Administration Committee will meet, it will meet at 11:00 in Room 122B. State Government Administration, 11:00 o'clock, 122B."
"House Calendar Supplemental #1, on the Speaker's Table, appears HJR 125. Representative Satterthwaite."
"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, I move to suspend the appropriate Rules for immediate consideration of House Joint Resolution 125."
"That is not necessary. The...the Resolution is before the Body at this time. Proceed."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. I move for the adoption of House Joint Resolution 125. This Resolution will reject the report of the Compensation Review Board that has been placed before us. The Compensation Review Board at this time is suggesting that we have catch-up increases in salaries for the elected officials that come under their purview. It's my understanding that the increases that they are suggesting would amount to about $20 million in the first year, if it were to be implemented. We have calculated that this equates to about 800,000 prescriptions that could be filled for the participants of the circuit breaker. These recipients have incomes of under $14,000, and it seems to 50 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 me that that would be a more pressing need for the state to address than giving salary increases of 14.4% to our elected officials. I believe that in these days of tight budget, the public would not look kindly upon legislative and other state official salary increases in the amount of 14.4%, and for that reason, I am moving for the passage of House Joint Resolution 125."
"All right, and on the Lady's Resolution. Is there any discussion? Representative Kubik. Mr. Kubik."
"Mr. Speaker, I'm not going to speak to the Resolution, but could we have some order in here? I'm not sure that anybody knows what we're even voting on. I think one ought to have some order in here."
"Yes, please. We're voting on the pay raise. We're voting on the pay raise, and maybe a few people, maybe a few people should pay attention like Representative Kubik suggests. Representative Churchill, on the Motion."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Two years ago we had a similar Motion. I remember the debate on it at that time. The Motion...the Resolution was originally filed by Representative Johnson and some people on our side of the aisle. At a later time, another Resolution that was similar in nature was filed by a Member of the other side of the aisle, and we had a very large debate at that time over whose Resolution should go first. The compromise that was worked out at that time was something that was agreed to by all parties, and that was that both sides of the aisle should be able to join in the Sponsorship of the Resolution. Representative Satterthwaite has filed HJR 125. It is my understanding that Representative Johnson and others have filed a similar Resolution that has been filed with the Clerk. At this time as a matter of courtesy 51 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE April 30, 1992 I would rise to ask if the Majority Party would allow the Minority Party to join with the Resolution, and allow Representative Johnson and others to be named as Sponsors of the Resolution."
"Representative Weller, on the Resolution. Mr. Weller."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this Resolution. This day...In this day when we're...we're faced with making tough choices, where cuts have been made in education, cuts have been made in programs affecting senior citizens, I just can't understand how we can accept the pay raise for public officials. This Resolution is a right Resolution, it's a common sense Resolution, and also it's a fair Resolution for the taxpayers. I rise in support and urge, an 'aye' vote."
"Representative Johnson, on the Resolution."
"Well, the last thing we need to do is engage in a debate about me-too-ism and taking credit. That's the kind of thing you do in grade school. The fact is, we've introduced HJR 128, which is virtually identical to this one. And the thrust of the issue is this: That in a time when we're going to have to say, as we did last spring, 'no' to felt needs in education, 'no' to needs in mental health, 'no' to needs in public health, and otherwise, to, at the same time, support recommendation of a Compensation Review Board that puts substantial pay raises and benefit increases into the pockets of Legislator, judges, and executive officials is absolutely outrageous, and something we can't accept. I've introduced, over the course of the last several years, and recently with Representative Black and others this spring, Resolution or a Bill that would call for the absolute abolition of the Compensation Review 52 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day April 30, 1992 Board, and this report is an indication of why we need to abolish the board. In addition to that, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, we introduced a Resolut... or a Bill, HB 2923, which, unfortunately, is still held in Rules Committee, which would, in addition to this, would also call for a one-year moratorium on the automatic cost-of-living increases that we've received in recent years. That Bill I would hope we could get out of Rules Committee, and either out of the substantive Committee or on another vehicle, so that we cannot only set aside these recommendations, and not only abolish the board, but also call, in a year when we're not going to be able to give pay raises to university employees, we're not going to be able to give pay raises to others who work for the state, would also say we shouldn't have cost-of-living increases for ourselves. So, whoever gets credit really doesn't matter. The people of Illinois are the ones who are served by this, and I would call for the support, the unanimous...unanimous vote, in favor of HJR 125, 128 and any other Resolutions that are introduced on this subject matter. Apparently, the report just came out from the Compensation Review Board and was just put on my desk a matter of within an hour or Satterthwaite so, and I think that not only Representative and others, but people on this side of the aisle should get some credit for saying unequivocably, 'This is wrong. It's bad business, and it's bad politics.'"
"Representative Satterthwaite, to close."
"Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, I believe that we are aware that a vote in favor of this Resolution will reject the report of the Compensation Review Board, and not permit a 14.4% increase for all of the state officials that come under this reporting body, and I urge 53 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day your 'aye' vote."
April 30, 1992 "The question is, 'Shall the House adopt House Joint Resolution 125?' All those in favor vote 'aye', opposed vote 'no'. An 'aye' vote is against the pay raise; a 'no' vote is for the pay raise. Have all voted? Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Laurino, 'aye'. Laurino 'aye'. Morrow, 'aye'. Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? Representative Williams, to explain his vote."
"Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of this Chamber, I stand here today as a person who knows that I won't be here next year, so I won't receive any of the benefits of this that might come about. Over the years, you know, I guess I've practiced law, or at least I've tried to, but it's hard. A lot of things that, you know, you go through, so I think I'm gonna say what's in a lot of your hearts. I know that the money's in a crunch, I know that we can't afford it, but I also know that you're gonna lose good people over time because of the fact that they can't afford to be here. It gets to a point whereas when you're asked to work on weekends when you get home, go to parades, go to different social events, do all types of things for your community, trying to make sure that things work and get fixed, it takes time, it takes energy, it takes commitment. And I'd like to say that each person in here, in my own opinion, has shown a certain degree of commitment, and deserves a certain degree of at least respect for the time that they give. And so I don't mind being the only vote, and I know people will say whatever they'll say, and write whatever they'll write, but the reality of it all is what you're asking and what giving in here is not too much for the work that the Ladies and Gentlemen of this Body do, and I am a 54 135th Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 87th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE respectful 'no' vote." April 30, 1992
"Have all voted? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this Motion, there are 113 'ayes' and 2 'noes', and the House does adopt House Joint Resolution 125. Representative Matijevich moves that the House stand adjourned until tomorrow at the hour of 12:00 noon. All in favor say 'aye', opposed, 'no'. The 'ayes' have it, and the House stands adjourned. Representative McNamara."
"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to make sure that everyone knew that the Educational Finance Committee meeting will take place immediately downstairs, Room 118. We'll be there for about a half hour, get our business over, and c'est la vie. So, don't forget, all the democrats, some of the Republicans, can go downstairs, Room 118. Thank you." 55 REPORT: TIFLDAY PAGE: 001 STATE OF ILLINOIS 87TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DAILY TRANSCRIPTION OF DEBATE INDEX 92/09/09 11:34:08 APRIL 30. 1992 HB-3349 MOTION PAGE 48 HR-0113 MOTION PAGE 49 HJR-0113 MOTION PAGE a HJR-0125 MOTION PAGE 50 HJR-0125 ADOPTED PAGE 55 HJR-0125 RESOLUTION OFFERED PAGE 50 HJR-0015 MOTION PAGE 49 #HJR-0115 MOTION PAGE 8 SJR-0130 THIRD READING PAGE 7 SJR-0130 THIRD READING PAGE 9 SJR-0130 OUT OF RECORD PAGE 5 SUBJECT MATTER HOUSE TO ORDER SPEAKER MCPIKE PRAYER REPRESENTATIVE LANG PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL FOR ATTENDANCE COMMITTEE REPORTS COMMITTEE REPORTS GENERAL RESOLUTIONS ADJOURNMENT PAGE 1 PAGE 1 PAGE L PAGE 1 PAGE 1 PAGE 5 PAGE 7 PAGE 55