"The House will be in order. The Members will be in their chairs. The Chaplain for the day is the Reverend Tom Cross of the First United Methodist Church of Oak Park, Illinois. Reverend Cross is the father and guest of Representative Tom Cross. Reverend Cross.
"Preparatory to our Prayer, I want to state that I am a United Methodist pastor in the Christian tradition and I will offer a Prayer in my tradition. But I want to acknowledge my awareness that there are probably in this chamber today a number of different religious points of view that are represented and beyond that in our state there are many different religious traditions and philosophical orientations. I trust that you will in will since implied is the Prayer I offer on awareness and respect for all of the principles that all of our people of this state hold sacred. In that spirit, my we pray? Holy and wondrous God help us to listen, help us to hear the voices on both sides of the aisles, help us to hear the voices of our people, those who pressure us, those who are powerless, those who are organized, those who feel they have no voice at all. For all of us in this room sense in a strange and unique way that there is hardly a person in our state these days who is not afraid of something. If we do not listen, where will they go? Finally help us to hear a divine voice, that voice which continuously reminds us, what every religion teaches its believers, to respect and honor one another. And help us to remember that if in all of our actions here we will aspire to that simple yet noble standard. Our peoples lives will be enriched perhaps beyond their fondest hopes. And our lives as colleagues may well be blessed beyond our wildest imagining. Help us to listen. Amen." 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day
"Thank you, Reverend Cross. We will be led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Representative Tom Cross. Representative Cross"
"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 Currie, are there any excused absences on your side of the aisle?"
"Thank you, Speaker. Let the record show that both Representative Ben Martinez and Bill Laurino are excused today."
"Journal will so reflect. Representative Kubik, any excused absences on the Republican side?"
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let the record reflect that there are no Republicans absent, we are here and ready to work."
"Thank you. Clerk, take the record. Let the record reflect that there are 116 present and 2 excused and a quorum is present. For purposes of seat selection, Mr. Madigan."
"Mr. Speaker, the Democrats would like to select their seats now for when we return after next week. So, for purposes of the vote this afternoon all Democrats should stay in the seat that has been assigned to them, because that seat is wired to the scoreboard. But right now we would like you to select your seats for when we return after our one week break and it will be done on a seniority basis. And so we have Mr. Rossi here with the seniority chart, I have selected already and other Leaders should select and then we will just go down on seniority basis. 2 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day Thank you." January 12, 1995
"With your permission, Sir, when we recess for party caucuses, if you could do it at that time, if that is alright with you? Okay. The announcement for party caucus, Representative Leitch."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to request a recess for a party caucus."
"Mr. Madigan, your preference, Sir. Your pleasure."
"I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker, I didn't hear you."
"Party caucus."
"Yes, we would like to do that."
"Would you like to do that?"
"Is it 118?"
"Yes, Sir."
"Okay."
"We noticed that it is fixed up all nice and pretty now and so..."
"Thanks."
"So the House...the House will stand at recess until 11:45 for the purpose of a Republican Caucus Conference in Room 114 and a Democrat Conference in Room 118. Upon recess the Democrats will select their seats and then go to caucus, the Republicans will start caucus at 10:30. Caucus is at 10:30 for Republicans. And Mr. Madigan, 10:30 all right with you, Sir? Ten-thirty for the Democrats. The House will be in recess until 11:45."
"The House will reconvene. Members will please be in their Chair. The House is now back in regular Session. For purposes of the record and in accordance with the Rules of the House, I wish to announce at this time the appointment of the Majority Leadership. The Majority 3 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 Leader of the House will be Representative Bob Churchill, the Deputy Majority Leaders will be Representative Tom Ryder, Representative Tim Johnson. The Assistant Majority Leaders will be Representatives Roger McAuliffe, Representative Kay Wojcik, Representative Bill Black, Representative Larry Wennlund, Representative Jack Kubik and Representative David Leitch. The Conference Committee Chairperson will be Judy Biggert, Representative Judy Biggert. And that completes the leadership roster on the Republican side. Mr. Madigan, do you wish to leave your one spot vacant, on your leadership, Sir? Okay. Mr. Madigan acknowledges that he wishes to. Representative Churchill?"
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. At this time I would move adoption of House Joint Resolution 1."
"Clerk will read the Resolution."
"House Joint Resolution #1, offered by Representative Churchill. Be it Resolved by the House of Representatives of the 89th General Assembly in the State of Illinois the Senate concurring herein: That the two Houses shall convene in Joint Session on Thursday, January 12th, 1995 at the hour of 12 o'clock noon. For the purpose of hearing his Excellency, Governor Jim Edgar, present to the General Assembly his report on condition of this state as required by Article 5, Section 13 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois."
"You have heard the Resolution. Any debate or discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying 'aye'; opposed, 'nay'. The 'ayes' have it. And the Resolution is adopted. This House will stand in recess until the hour of 3 o'clock p.m. at which point we will 4 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day bring up the question of House Resolution #4."
"The House will come to order. Members please in their seats. I recognize the Doorkeeper for an announcement. Members will please be in their seats."
"Mr. Speaker, the Honorable President Philip and Members of the Senate are at the door and seek admission to the chamber."
"Mr. Doorkeeper, admit the Honorable Senators. As designated and House Joint Resolution #1 the hour of 12 noon having arrived the Joint Session of the 89th General Assembly will now come to order. Will the Members of the House and our esteemed guests from the Senate please take their seats? Mr. Clerk, is a quorum of the House present?"
"Yes."
"Mr. President, is a quorum of the Senate present...present in this chamber?"
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, a quorum of the Senate is present."
"There being a quorum of the House and a quorum of the Senate in attendance, this Joint Session is convened. I wish to acknowledge the attendance of many of our dignitaries today. And if I might, starting with the esteemed Members of our Supreme Court, our Supreme Court Justices, Chief Justice Michael A. Balantic, Justice Balantic. Justice Ben Miller, Justice Miller. Justice James Hypol, Justice Hypol. And Justice Mary Ann G. McMorrow, Justice McMorrow. We have present with us today the Constitutional Officers, Lieutenant Governor Bob Kustra. Secretary of State George Ryan. Comptroller Loleta Didrickson. Treasurer Judy Barr Topinka, and the Auditor General of the State of Illinois Bill Holland. The Chair recognizes the House Majority Leader, Mr. Churchill." 5 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the Clerk would please read Joint Session Resolution #1, then I would move for its immediate adoption."
"Mr. Clerk, read Joint Session Resolution #1."
"Joint Session Resolution #1, offered by Representative Churchill. Resolved that a Committee of ten be appointed, five from the House by the Speaker of the House and five from the Senate by the President of the Senate, to wait upon his Excellency Governor Jim Edgar and invite him to address the Joint Assembly. Representative Ryder, Representative Skinner, Representative Weaver, Representative Brunsvold, Representative Ronen, Senator Hasara, Senator Madigan, Senator Parker, Senate Boltz and Senator Garcia."
"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of the Resolution. All those in favor signify by saying 'aye'; opposed, 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair the 'ayes' have it. The Resolution is adopted. Pursuant to the Resolution, the following are appointed as a committee to escort the Chief Executive. The appointments from the House are Representative Brunsvold, Representative Ronen, Representative Ryder, Representative Skinner and Representative Weaver. The Senate Members are Senator Boltz, Senator Garcia, Senator Hasara, Senator Madigan and Senator Parker. And let me introduce the Attorney General of the State of Illinois, Jim Ryan. Also, I would like to introduce the First Lady of the State of Illinois, Brenda Edgar. The Committee of Escorts please convene at the rear of the chamber and await his Excellency, the Governor. I recognize the Doorkeeper for an announcement."
"Mr. Speaker, the Honorable Governor of the State of Illinois, Jim Edgar and his party wish to be admitted to 6 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day this chamber." January 12, 1995
"Admit the Honorable Governor. Ladies and Gentlemen. The Governor of the State of Illinois."
"Speaker Daniels, President Phillip, Justices of the Supreme Court, my fellow constitutional officers, Members of the 89th General Assembly and my fellow citizens of Illinois. STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS TO THE 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY Governor Jim Edgar January 12, 1995 Speaker Daniels, President Philip, Justices of the Supreme Court, my fellow Constitutional officers, members of the 89th General Assembly and my fellow citizens of Illinois, Two months ago the voters of this state and this nation sent a clear and strong message they want less government, not more. Less interference. More efficiency. Less red tape. More accountability. Less bureaucracy. More common sense. They told us they want government to offer the needy a helping hand, not a handout. They want to feel safe in their own homes and they want those who break the law and violate their security to get the punishment they deserve. They want an education system that promotes learning and rewards excellence. They want less rhetoric and more results. I believe we have been on the right track during the last four years. We have moved state government in a new direction of reform, efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability. When the voters spoke in November they reaffirmed this new direction. But they didn't say that we had accomplished enough, that we could put the ship of state on automatic pilot. They are demanding more change, more results from us and we must deliver. We in Illinois have the great opportunity and the awesome responsibility to respond to that mandate quickly and creatively. And we must respond. We have the opportunity to build on the 7 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 progress we have achieved. We will. We will by curbing local taxes and continuing to make state government more efficient and more effective. I don't want to increase state taxes. And I don't believe most members of the General Assembly want to raise taxes either. But we must continue to be frugal. And we must continue to tighten our belts if we are to be successful in holding the line on taxes. We must continue to live within our means. We must continue to demand more productivity and more accountability. During the last four years we brought a halt to the building of bureaucracy. If the trend in place when I became Governor four years ago had continued, agencies under my control would have expanded by nearly 6,000 employees. But we didn't expand. We downsized. We cut those agencies and even reduced the payroll by 3,000 employees. And we did so while staffing additional prisons to keep dangerous people behind bars and adding hundreds and hundreds of caseworkers to respond to child abuse and neglect. We showed that state government can actually accomplish more with less. And we will continue to demonstrate that. As a matter of fact, I am proposing today that we consolidate three code departments that deal with natural resources, Conservation, Energy and Environment, and Mines and Minerals into a department of Natural Resources, and elimining boards in higher education. And we are going to be looking at other possibilities for reorganizing state government to slash administrative overhead and further downsize the bureaucracy. Streamlined, downsized, more cost-effective and more accountable government. That's what we've been doing. That's what we'll continue to do. Because the people who pay for state services and those who rely on state services deserve no 8 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 less from us. And we have every right to expect the same reforms and fiscal restraint from local governments in Illinois. Four years ago, after a prolonged battle, we capped property taxes in the five collar counties in the Chicago metropolitan area. Since then the property taxes have not skyrocketed as they had for years before in though counties. Tax caps have worked. Homeowners and businesses in the collar counties have been spared 300 million dollars in property tax increases since we put the brakes on. Caps do not starve local governments. But they do curb their appetites. And two months ago, more than 80 percent of Cook County voters said they wanted caps. How did some local governments react? By padding their budgets and their tax levies. They sensed that this Legislature would help me cap property taxes in Cook County. They got the message, all right. But they responded in the wrong way. You and I need to respond in the right way. I think we should respond to voters of Cook County and cap property taxes in Cook County. And we should give voters in the rest of the state the same opportunity. And we need to write into the legislation that those local government units can't get away with what they tried to do. As I have said since 1990, all of Illinois should have property tax caps. And with your approval of my proposal, we'll be getting closer, especially in those areas that have been hardest hit by soaring property tax bills. Indeed we have the opportunity to accomplish much for the people and businesses of Illinois. And we will continue to make progress, with renewed, and I hope bipartisan, cooperation between the Executive and Legislative branches of government. The presiding officers of this new, dramatically changed legislature and I agree. We need not wait until the closing 9 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 hours of this legislative session to act responsibly and responsively on major reforms. The expansion of property tax caps. Reforms in the court system that will stimulate job creation in Illinois. Reforms that will continue to move people from welfare to work. Reforms that will improve learning in our classrooms. Reforms that will build on our efforts of last fall when we enacted the most sweeping anti-crime package in decades. Property tax caps, tort reform to spur job creation, school reform, continued welfare-to-work initiatives and anti-crime legislation. I want all of it sent to me on a fast track. Not all matters can be handled so expeditiously. I understand that. Some will have to wait until the closing days of the Session. But when the final gavel falls we should be able to say with conviction and credibility that we responded to the people's will, that we kept Illinois moving in the right direction. To do so we must reaffirm our commitment to high-quality education in every corner of Illinois. That means stable and predictable funding. It also means spending that money wisely and effectively. The state of Illinois experienced some very difficult financial times during the last four years. Still, by making the education surcharge permanent we saved 1.6 billion dollars, for schools that otherwise would have been lost. Indeed the state has provided an additional half billion dollars on top of that. And we will continue to increase funding for schools as you will see when I deliver my budget for next year to you on March 1. But money is only part of what should be three R's of our educational priorities. Resources, reform and results. There are some innovative and dynamic things going on every day in the classrooms of this state. They are stimulating children to learn. And 10 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 they are providing them with insights that will shape their lives in very positive ways. But we cannot be comfortable with the status quo. We need to take advantage of the technology revolution and put it to work for our students and our teachers. We must fulfill our 75-million-dollar commitment to build a statewide telecommunications network, a network that has virtually unlimited potential for bringing the best in instruction to students and businesses throughout Illinois. Already 30 million dollars are at work providing the infrastructure that will enable students to learn from teachers and professors a hundred miles away. Twice in the past year I have hosted day-long technology summits where leaders in the state's education and technology fields had an opportunity to exchange views on the status of technology in our schools and plan for its expansion. Those summits showed we have a tremendous investment in technology at all levels of education, but in many ways it seems we are just beginning to tap the potential of that technology. With the leadership of Lieutenant Governor Kustra and continued state financial support we will expand the number of classrooms and businesses using technology to bring new educational opportunities to our students. By this time next year I want students in every Illinois school to be able to access the information highway that will open new worlds of knowledge and intelligence to them. I also am proud of the job Illinois has done in requiring accountability from our schools. While other states are just talking about education reform, Illinois is implementing it. We are issuing report cards to help parents, business executives, and taxpayers determine whether schools are producing the right results. We are requiring corrective measures when 11 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 the results are unacceptable. But we must continue to reform. We cannot afford to leave education rooted in the timeworn practices of the past. If we do not act today we may never catch up. We need to give our educators and local school boards the flexibility to determine what works best in their classrooms, liberated from the shackles of bureaucracy. So I am asking the Legislature once again to approve my initiative for a Learning Zone for the Chicago public schools. By establishing such a zone we will test a thesis strongly held by me and many others. Reform can best be achieved by empowering educators, parents and communities in Chicago. Allowing them to focus on what will improve learning and freeing them from the state mandates, the layers and layers of centralized bureaucracy and the red tape that inhibit reform. I also am asking the General Assembly to empower communities in all regions of the state by permitting them to establish charter schools, schools that would be held to high standards but not micro-managed by state mandates in how to meet those standards. The charter schools and the Chicago Learning Zone offer an innovative approach to relieving the frustrations many of our educators. They want more flexibility at the local level. More business involvement. More participation by parents. More bottom-up reform. Fewer top-down directives. Less of Springfield passing out the orders. Toward that end I am also proposing and will gladly sign legislation allowing school districts to easily obtain waivers from many burdensome and costly state mandates. Those waivers can free up instructional time, and help stimulate innovation and enhance student performance. Indeed much of that reform, much of our efforts to improve student performance, must focus on those students who are not bound 12 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 for four-year degrees. I'm talking about two out of every three students in Illinois. And programs for them have been under-emphasized for too long. We will continue to expand apprenticeship programs and other innovative efforts for those who won't be attending four-year colleges and universities; even as we press for reforms in those institutions of higher learning. To be sure we have some of the most respected universities in this nation. And the higher education community has made substantial progress during the last four years. At least 115 university programs were found to be unnecessary and were eliminated. More than 130 downsized or consolidated. More that 260 community college programs eliminated or reduced or restructured because the "status quo" could not be justified. The reforms have given renewed emphasis to undergraduate education, to removing hurdles for the student who is willing and able to earn a bachelor's degree in four years. But as we have said before, it is time to remove unneeded layers of governing bureaucracy. We should eliminate the Board of Governors and the Board of Regents and let the universities be governed by their own trustees under the oversight of the Board of Higher Education. And it makes no sense for the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois to be elected by voters who understandably know little or nothing about the candidates, except perhaps their political affiliation. That board should be appointed just like the others, and we should under the umbrello of the University of Illinois. We have accomplished much in making schools at all levels more accountable and helping them meet the challenge of keeping Illinois businesses and workers competitive. But there is much more that should be done now to assure not only that 13 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day there are enough capable workers for the jobs of the future but also enough jobs for all the capable Illinois workers who will want them. Because of our moderate tax structure Motorola is building a 100 million dollar production plant in McHenry County. Because we have held the line on taxes more than 3,000 new jobs will be available to our workers there. Because business has thrived during the last four years, the Illinois economy is strong and becoming strong and becoming stronger. Illinois Unemployment rate is at its lowest rate in more than 20 years. A record 5.7 million Illinoisans are working, the highest in the history of the state. Illinois added more than 82,000 jobs during 1994 in a broadbased expansion that we expect to continue during this next year. And the earning advantage of our workers has increased nearly 43% since 1991. But we must build on the momentum. We must stimulate even more job growth because too many Illinoisans still aren't working. And we can do that by removing roadblocks to prosperity that discourage job creation and raise consumer prices. As I said last year, and the year before, and the year before, it is time to bring some sanity to the Illinois tort liability system. It is time to reduce the number of costly and frivolous lawsuits that clog our court system and cost all of us far too much money and to many jobs. Those victimized by the neglect of others should be compensated. But is there any reason for a civil lawsuit to be filed every 30 seconds of every business day in Illinois? Is there any legitimate purpose for more than a quarter million civil suits a year? Those who cause harm to others should be held liable. No question about that. But should the expectant mothers in 30 Illinois counties be denied medical advice and services because no physician is willing 14 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 or able to pay the cost of malpractice insurance? Or should the Girl Scouts of DuPage County be forced to sell 35,000 boxes of cookies just to cover their liability costs? The only people benefitting from the system in place now, are a few, wealthy lawyers. The rest of us are paying, whether we realize it or not. It is time for a dose of fairness. It is time to put a ceiling on awards for non-economic damages in medical malpractice and product liability cases. We need to look at continued reform of our workers' compensation system. And it is time to reform or perhaps even repeal the archaic Scaffolding Act that now allows injured workers to receive worker's compensation as well as to sue for additional damages. Those reforms will help all of us, as taxpayers, employers, employees and patients. We need to assure the workplaces of this state are safe. But we also need to do whatever we can to to stimulate the creation of more workplaces. And on another front we need to assure that Illinois workers who are covered by insurance can retain it if they change or lose jobs. And we need legislation to expand coverage to many, many others. We can achieve that expansion by making it easier for businesses to band together and obtain insurance at prices affordable for both employers and employees. We should not and cannot wait for Washington. On health care. And on welfare reform. It is clear that states will be taking on additional responsibilities and and hopefully be given new flexibility especially in the area of human services. I and other Governors welcome that prospect. We are ready and willing to accept the challenges presented by the dawning of a new era in federal and state relations. In fact, I urge this General Assembly to join other state Legislatures throughout the nation in passing a resolution calling for a 15 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 Conference of the States to redesign and reshape federalism in the United States. But even as this historic transition unfolds in our federal system we must continue moving ahead in Illinois. Our state has been a leader in helping welfare recipients move from dependence to independence. We have worked to break the generation after generation cycle that has locked far too many families into lifetimes on public assistance. We are encouraging welfare recipients now to find work. And once they do we are not penalizing them for bringing home a paycheck. We have removed obstacles that penalized welfare recipients who took temporary jobs. And that discouraged fathers from staying with their families. Through out earnfare program we provide thousands and thousands of former welfare recipents with work and a pay check. We are giving teenaged mothers 18 and under the help they need to complete their high school educations and find meaningful work and a pay check. And if the mother does not participate she eventually will lose a portion of her monthly aid check. Through our Earnfare program we provided thousands and thousands of former welfare recipients with work and a pay check. But there is more that can and should be done to assist our welfare recipients in becoming self-sufficient. In Illinois today there are thousands of mothers on public aid who have no job and no children under the age of thirteen. We will expand our welfare initiatives to require those women to seek and hold down jobs to qualify for their welfare benefits. And we will launch even more initiatives as we get a better sense of whether Washington, under new congressional leadership, will truly give us more opportunity to innovate in the welfare area. Meanwhile this administration will continue to crack down on child support deadbeats. We have collected record 16 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 amounts of child support $225 million last year, a 50 percent increase from what we were collecting just four years ago. That is money that has supported families that otherwise might have been totally dependent on taxpayers. Often fathers duck their responsibility claiming to be unemployed and without the resources to meet their court-ordered support. My administration will initiate a program to require those delinquent fathers to participate in supervised job search programs or in our Earnfare program so they can meet their obligations to their children. We are helping families, because stronger families mean stronger neighborhoods. And stronger neighborhoods mean stronger communities. We are working to make sure the system works for the people. Not the other way around. We are working to coordinate social services at the local level in the school through Project Success which is now underway in 90 communities throughout Illinois. In our Lincoln's Challenge program we are teaching the high school dropouts of this state values far different than those they learn on the streets. Through Help Me Grow, the First Lady's campaign for children, we have increased awareness of existing services to help children, their parents and caregivers. The one-stop shopping program we have launched with the assistance of the Casey Foundation is being watched by the nation as an innovative model for delivering human services effectively, efficiently and compassionately. The problems facing children and families in this state are many. They are complex. They are inter-related. Poverty, teen pregnancy, violence, alcoholism and substance abuse. All are claiming far too many victims among our children and their parents. All often we attempt to solve those problems from our desks in too 17 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 Springfield and Chicago. But we know that state government does not have all the answers. State government cannot solve all the problems. But state government can and should be a catalyst for change. A unifying force that brings churches, parents, local business, and community organizations together to break down barriers that limit effective programs in their neighborhoods. Rather than attempting to impose solutions from Springfield we must look to local communities to identify their needs, and to suggest and implement solutions. We will continue our efforts to prevent tragic child abuse and neglect. In the last year the number of child abuse calls to the DCFS hotline increased to more than 385 thousand. A record number of 45 thousand children are now in the state's care, and all-time high and a 22% increase last year alone. We have seen that additional funding is not the only answer. In the last four years we doubled funding for the Department of Children and Family Services to more than one billion dollars. We have hired hundreds of new caseworkers to ease the workload. We have fired workers who did not do the job. We now have on the books laws to ensure that a child's interests are to be considered above all else. We now have on the books laws to hold DCFS and community agencies to even higher standards. But government can do only so much. All of us in this community called Illinois must work together. And we must work together to stop the violence that has turned too many of our neighborhoods into armed war zones. Too many neighborhoods whose residents have become prisoners in their own homes. And aren't even safe there. In September Brenda and I went to Roseland, a community on the South Side of Chicago, determined to do something about the curse of gangs and violence. Two 18 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 thousand people from that community joined us. Determined to begin the daunting challenge of taking back their neighborhood. All of us, ministers and teachers, law enforcement and community workers, parents and public officials must band together to point our youth in a positive direction. For there is nothing but a troubled future ahead for our young people and for our society if we do not. At the same time we must be tough on those violent criminals who break the peace and threaten our security. And we have. As I said earlier, last month I signed the most sweeping reforms of our criminal justice system in decades. It gives police and prosecutors valuable new tools in their daily fight against gangs, guns and violence. It imposes the death penalty for murder in drive-by shootings. It mandates tough new penalties for gun-related violence by juveniles and adults. It establishes secure facilities in Illinois for dangerous delinquents. And it makes it easier to try 15 and 16-year-olds as adults for gang and drug-related felonies involving firearms. Those new laws afford more protection to men, women and children of Illinois. But there is more that should be done. We should give the statewide Grand Jury the power to investigate gun-running. And we should strengthen and expand our sex offender laws. The Child Sex Offender Registration law should be broadened to cover offenders no matter the age of the victim. And to require periodic registration, in person, with law enforcement agencies of those convicted of these monstrous crimes. And I believe we should mandate that convicted sex offenders who move into Illinois provide DNA samples just as those who commit sex crimes in Illinois now do. We need to take advantage of this growing and proven medical technology to build a database against which 19 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 sex offenses can be checked. We must continue to protect our citizens from those who threaten our society and put our people in harm's way. And we must also continue to protect our treasured natural resources from the forces that threaten them. Illinois has a proud past. And we must preserve that heritage that has made Illinois the great state it is today. We must continue our efforts to further reduce the stream of waste that heads to our landfills, which has already decreased every year for the past four years. We must continue our efforts to protect our natural lands from development. Such as we have done by purchasing the 15 thousand acres of Site M in Cass County. And as we have done by acquiring more than two thousand acres of prime woodland along the Rock River in northwestern Illinois. We will work with the new Congress for the legislation that will reclaim 19 thousand acres of the Joliet Arsenal for natural areas and outdoor recreation. I am also renewing my call for this General Assembly to approve Conservation 2000, a six-year plan that will take a long-term approach to managing Illinois' natural resources, helping our agriculture community conserve soil and water resources, and developing a wide-ranging plan for green ways and recreation trails. Indeed we have a duty to take a long range view when it comes to managing our natural resources and addressing many of our major concerns. But there is at least one area where the shorter the better. I'm talking about the length of the campaign season in Illinois, one of the longest in the country. Long campaigns are grueling for the candidates. And for the people of this state. So I am asking this General Assembly to approve changing the date of our primary elections from March to September. Three days ago I renewed the sacred bond I hold 20 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day with the people of this great state. Just yesterday you members of the General Assembly took a similar oath. Together we are partners for progress. Today let us celebrate that renewed beginning. Let us remember our past achievements. But look to the future. Let us remember the reason the people sent us here. And the job they sent us to do. let us move forward, with cooperation, with compassion, with common sense, and with courage. Today let us get to work. Let us get the job done. And done right.
"Thank you. Will the committee of escort please come forward to escort the Governor from the chambers? The President of the Senate is recognized for a motion."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move the Joint Sessions do now arrive."
"The President of the Senate has moved that the Joint Session do now arise. All those in favor signify by saying 'aye'; all opposed signify by saying 'nay'. The 'ayes' have it and the Joint Session will now arise. The House will now stand in recess until 3 p.m."
"Representative Ryder in the Chair. The House will be in order, the Members will be in their seats. The hour of 3 p.m. having arrived, we will consider House Resolution #4. The Gentleman from Lake, Majority Leader Churchill, is recognized to offer House Resolution #4."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And what a great joy it is to see you in the Chair banging that gavel. Let me...let me begin on House Resolution #4. House Resolution #4 is...I'm sorry..."
"In the event that you're preceding to do this, I think we need to have the Clerk read the Resolution."
"Okay. Thank you."
"All right. If you would make the appropriate 21 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995
Motion then I will have the Clerk read it. Churchill: "I would move for the adoption of House Resolution #4."
"House Resolution #4, offered by Representative Churchill."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Clerk."
"Mr. Churchill."
"House Resolution #4 is the new House Rules. And I want to start out by saying that these Rules are new, they are not an Amendment of past Rules, they are new Rules. And because of that we consider these Rules da novo today. We have had an opportunity over the past several years, 12 that I have been here, to follow the Rules of the previous House Speaker and some things we found were good and some things we found we thought should be changed. And so in our current proposal of House Resolution #4 we have some things that do make some changes. I think that if you stand back and take a look at the Rules that we are proposing today, what you will see is that we are trying to empower our Members. To give our Members a chance to take a look at the legislation which comes through this Body and to develop areas of expertise and to try and have some consistent pattern of dealing with legislation in the House. One of the things that we do..."
"Excuse me, Mr. Churchill. Representative Madigan, for what reason do you seek recognition?"
"I think just a question, Mr. Speaker. Is it your intent to permit Mr. Churchill to basically explain your proposal and then go to the Amendment that has been filed?"
"Yes. It is the intention of the Chair to allow Majority Leader Churchill to explain the Rules that were filed yesterday. After that explanation, the Chair will 22 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 allow full debate on all Amendments that have been timely filed. After those Amendments have been considered, then we will allow full consideration of the original Resolution as or if amended. Any further questions?"
"I find that agreeable. Thank you."
"You're welcome. You're welcome for that, too. Majority Leader Churchill, I apologize for the interruption. I think you will be allowed to continue without interruption for the complete explanation of the Rules as filed yesterday. I would ask the Body to please give Majority Leader Churchill their attention. Thank you."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. And let me just say also that it is my intention to permit the Minority Party to offer its Amendments and any attempts it may have to amend these Rules and to deliberate and debate those Rules and to push for acceptance of the Rules that I am proposing at this time on behalf of our side of the aisle. As I was beginning to say, I think that what this set of Rules does is to empower our own Members on both sides of the aisle. One of the things that it does, is it takes Amendments and it takes Conference Committee Reports and those kinds of actions that come very late in the Session and it puts them into committees. And it says to the Members, you are the experts in the committees, you take a look at the Resolutions and the Bills and things that come through those committees, you decide if they are consistent with what your belief is about how things should be in this Body. And so therefore, instead of having Leaders coming in at the last minute and popping all sorts of things on Bills or Conference Committee Reports which nobody has been, we actually take 23 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 it back and put in the hands of the Members who serve on the committees and allow them to make those kinds of decisions. This I think also operates to shed the light of day on this process. As I said, we hope there should never be any more sneaky backroom dead of the night Amendments that are presented for the first time in the late days of Session here on the House floor. There is a whole group of people in this state that know exactly what they want to do in January and in past years they have only come down to Springfield in the last two or three days of Session because they know that if they get something snuck into a Conference Committee Report, that they have accomplished their mission, without allowing the Members of this Body to be participants in the decision making on those issues. These Rules force those kinds of things to go back into committee where Committee Members have an opportunity to observe what it is that is trying to be done and make sure that it is something that is consistent with their wishes. These Rules also provide for new technology. We have put something in these Rules that would permit the electronic communication of Bills and Amendments to the Members directly on the floor. Many times in the middle of this Session you will get a picture in one of the local media of the stack of Bills beside some person's desk and sometimes that stack, if you added them all up, would probably be taller than even the tallest of our Members. There is no reason why we need to keep killing trees to provide information to our Members. That ought to be done through electronic technology and we need to take that step and be consistent with what is consistent in the rest of the business world around us. These Rules curtail the time consuming and expensive processing of Non-substantive 24 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day Resolutions. January 12, 1995 I, In this past legislative cycle we had 3,616 Resolutions, 2,842 of them were congratulatory, 349 for the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, 178 for athletic teams, 288 for birthdays, 212 for wedding anniversaries, including special week designations for dance marathon weekend, bike to work week, music therapy week, mathematics awareness week. as many of the other Members on this floor, are perhaps guilty of...in keeping that system alive because we have all used Resolutions to commemerate activities, events and groups and people back home. And we need to do something to stop that...to stop clogging up this system and I believe these Rules do that. These Rules also provide for better decorum on the House floor. I said in my nomination speech, yesterday for Speaker Daniels, no longer should the school children of this state walk out of the galleries of this House shaking their heads in disbelief. There are too many people who are on the floor. People are not in their chairs, people are not following the process and the noise level gets so high that even those who are debating cannot hear each other. And SO we are limiting access to the floor, we are eliminating the explanation of vote. And by the very process of taking Amendments and putting them into committees, we are going to eliminate hours and hours of going through Amendments on this floor. So that...I would hope that when Members came to this floor, they would come to do the business of the people, that it would be deliberative, that it would be spent on substantive issues, allowing more informed debate a deliberate action on the Bills that are before us and I think these Rules do that. These Rules do provide for the individualism of the House. They retain certain items like the committee structure, the Consent Calendar, special orders of business, short debate. 25 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 Those things that speed us along and are not contained in the Rules that you might find in the Senate. We also keep the prohibitions on smoking in our Rules, which I think is a good thing. And lastly, in terms of the big picture items, I think that we try to look at the Senate Rules and in as many places as we possibly can, we try to be fairly consistent for the Senate Rules because there is no reason why the public need to learn two systems of Rules when they come to this Body. If they have to come to the House and do business or they have to go to the Senate and do business or if they want to understand what is happening in this whole process, they ought to be able to do that by looking at one fairly consistent set of Rules. Members who are in the House ought to understand the basic system when they go to the Senate; Members who are in the Senate ought to understand the basic system when they come to the House. I think that these Rules do that very thing because they try to be as consistent with the Senate Rules as they possibly can be. I would now just to take a couple of minutes and walk through some of the specific sections of the Bill (sic Resolution) so that I can highlight any changes that we might have."
"The Chair would ask that the noise level be reduced SO that we might have any opportunity to hear in detail the speaker and to give him our attention and our respect. Thank you."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Article 1 is basically a definition section which is true in most places in such Rules. We have defined the word Chairperson after a debate as to whether we ought to continue with Chairman, Chairman and Chairwoman or whatever. We've decided that Chairperson would be the politically correct definition for people who 26 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 head committees. In Section 1.7 you will see the definition of Joint Action Motions. And this is a significant section because it defines Joint Action Motions as all those Motions, such as to concur in a Senate Amendment, to non-concur in a Senate Amendment, to recede from a House Amendment, to refuse to recede from a House Amendment, to request that a Conference Committee be appointed or to adopt the Conference Committee Report. And these are the actions that basically occur late in Session where much of the business of this Body takes place. Skipping along just to Section 1.23, you will find the definition of record vote. We have tried to consistently change what used to be called the Roll Call Vote to the record vote and to apply that across the board in both floor actions and committee actions. Article 2 deals with organization. Basically the organization is fairly the same as the concepts that we've lived with in the past of the Sections 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 set forth the powers and duties of the Speaker, the Minority Leader, the Clerk, Assistant Clerk and the Doorkeeper and I think those are pretty close to the Rules that we currently have. Section 2.10 is about scheduling and that basically is to set the deadlines for house action and our way of handling that is to have the Speaker set the deadlines and to file those deadlines so that we know when Bills have to be through the House and Senate Bills have to be through and committees are done and those kinds of things. Article 3 is a section on committees, in Section 3.4 you will find that we have basically kept the same committees that we had last time, so there won't be a lot of changes. We have changed the names of a couple of committees; we have now a Commerce Industry and Labor Committee. We have changed that 27 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day Judiciary I and Judiciary II to make a Judiciary Civil Law and Judiciary Criminal Law so that even our own Members, including myself from time to time, know what committee we are talking about when we talk about the Judiciary Committees. We have taken and created privatization, deregulation, economic and urban development as a committee and basically have the same numbers of standing committees. In Section 3.7 we have created the Rules Committee; we have a Rules Committee now and under the new Rules we will continue to have a Rules Committee. We will not have an assignment of Bills Committee. The Rules Committee will handle that function. And the Rules Committee basically is a committee that directs the flow of paperwork through the House into committees and to...or onto the floor as the case may be. But it is the committee that makes those directions. In Section 3.14 we have again continued with the current language on the rights of the public, so that the people of the State of Illinois have the right to come in and testify in front of committees. In Section 3.15 we have again prohibited smoking in committees, as we did in the past. Article 4 is our conduct of business section and I would call your attention specifically to Section 4.3 where we have designated who is entitled to the floor. And we have made some changes in who is entitled to the floor and it is...and it would be a good section for you to take a look at because we are changing for the people who are on this floor. The number of people, the kind of people that can be on the floor with them. And if you are used to bringing other folks on the floor with you, you ought to take a look to make sure that those people are considered under this Rule. If they are not, then they should not be on the floor. In Section #35 we do Bills and Amendments. 28 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 The biggest change here would be in Section 5.4 when, as I have previously stated, Amendments are filed, those Amendments are referred to the Rules Committee. If you have a Floor Amendment and come to this floor and you file a Floor Amendment, it will assigned to the Rules Committee where it can be assigned back to the floor. If it is a technical Amendment or if it is an Amendment of great importance to the State of Illinois, in most cases it's my belief that those Amendments will be referred to a standing committee where they can be considered and the subject matter can be discussed as any Bill would have been discussed to try and keep things consistent and to empower the Members to make those kinds of decisions. You will see in Rules 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, Consent Calendar, Short Debate status, changing in the order of business, special orders and the Rules Committee. And basically those are the same in the House today under the new Rules or the proposed Rules as they were in our past Ruls. Section 6 is in regards to the Resolutions and Certificate of Recognition. As I stated in my earlier remarks, we believe that there could be a cost savings and an efficiency in trying to take Resolutions that are commemorative or honoring people and offer to our Members a Certificate of Recognition. It is my believe that the Certificate of Recognition will look very nice, that it will be something that you will find that you can present to groups or people back home and they will appreciate that as much as they appreciate any Resolution that might have been done on their behalf. And that we can unclog the system from all of those thousands of Resolutions that we process through here every year. Article 7 relates to Parliamentary Practice. In Section 7.1 we have the voting section and Section 2 we have 29 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 announcing the record vote. You will note, if you look through those sections, that we do not permit explanation of vote. I think that in the past years, explanation of vote has served to slow down this process and I think that eliminating the explanation of vote is one of the things that will speed things along. It is one of those points that more people have come up to me and said, 'I hope you get rid of explanation of vote,' and so we have done that. Paragraph 6... Section 7.6 relates to verification and that continues. And basically the rest of the Motions that you find under Parliamentary Practice are those that are regularly seen in most sets of Rules and have been seen in past sets of Rules. Section 7.17 is the section which can amend or suspend Rules and you ought to take a particular note of that. In Article 8 we refer to joint actions and these are, as I said before in the definition, those kinds of things that happens normally at the end of our Session as Senate Bills come flying back, House Bills come flying back with Senate Amendments and we have Conference Committee Reports. You will note that those items, those Joint Action Motions, get referred to the Rules Committee and go back to Standing Committee. So again, the Standing Committees are empowered to hear the substantive matters that are contained in these Bills. Article 9 relates to vetoes and I think is fairly self-explanatory. Article 10 relates to election contests and qualifications challenges. And I think that that section is almost word for word the way that it was in the previous Rules, if not, it is certainly very very similar. Article 11 relates to discipline and protests. And Article 12 relates to disciplinary proceedings. These two sections work hand in hand and I think that Article 12, which is relating to 30 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 disciplinary proceedings, is pretty much again word for word what we have in our current set of Rules. And the last section is Article 13 and that relates to force and effect and basically that's the same as we had in our previous Rules. Again, as with all sets of Rules, the fall back position, if we don't have a Rule to cover it, is Robert's Rules of Order and that is clearly stated in 13-2. So that if a question should arise and it's not covered by these Rules, we do go back to Robert's Rules of Order. At this point, Mr. Speaker, I'll wrap up these remarks and at the appropriate time or now, whenever the case may be, I would move for the adoption of House Resolution #4."
"It is now the intent of the Chair...it is now the intent of the Chair to consider all filed Amendments, after which, we will return to and consider the Resolution as and if amended. The Chair recognizes...the Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Minority Leader Madigan. For what purpose do you rise, Sir?"
"To ask questions of the Sponsor."
"It is the intention of the Chair to go to Amendments. And then after the Amendments are considered, to allow full and...full opportunity for debate on the Resolution if or as amended."
"Okay. So are you ready to consider the Amendment?"
"I was going to that Motion before I recognized you."
"Okay."
"We will do that now. Mr. Clerk, are there any Amendments?"
"Floor Amendment #1, offered by Representative Madigan."
"The Gentleman from Cook, Minority Leader 31 2nd Legislative Day Madigan." STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995
"Mr. Speaker, before I begin on the Amendment, I have a procedural and operational question to ask of you or maybe the Clerk's office. I haven't seen a Daily Calendar on the desks. Was a Daily Calendar printed today?"
"No calendar was printed for today."
"All right, so let me reference you to House Rule 8 of the Rules that we're operating under until you adopt House Resolution 4 and that Rule reads STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 ball on this one, that's all. Don't be offended."
"Mr. Minority Leader, I just have this hunch that over the next few months that your job will be letting us know if and when a ball is dropped. When the ball is in your court we will let you know. Would you proceed on the Amendment, please."
"Mr. Speaker and all of you kind people who just applauded, the Amendment which has been filed contains eight items. Number one, the Rules as proposed by House Resolution 4 would allow the Rules Committee to hold Bills by simply refusing to refer those Bills to committees in both the odd-numbered and the even-numbered years. This is a radical departure from previous practice, which granted that power only in even numbered years. This Amendment, which I am offering, would require the Rules Committee to assign Bills to standing committees in the odd number year, the first year of the Session. What that would mean is that every Member of this Body, Democrats and Republicans, having introduced a Bill for consideration before the House would be guaranteed that that Bill would receive a hearing before a standing committee. The Rules, as drafted by Mr. Churchill, do not carry that guarantee. You, as an individual Member of the House of Representatives, expected to represent the approximately 95,000 people in your district, will not be able to guarantee to your voters that you will be able to present a Bill to a standing committee of the House, that you will have an opportunity for a hearing before a standing committee of the House. Now there may be some of you who feel that the action of the Rules Committee will be okay with you because your party controls the Rules Committee. And it will be people on this side of the aisle who will feel a grieved as a result 33 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 of this process. I simply advise you, you, too, will suffer under this arrangement. You, too, will be told, 'Sorry we don't want to consider that Bill. We know you want to consider the Bill, we know that there are people in your district who wanted this Bill considered but there are other considerations at work. And those considerations are such that you are not going to even get a hearing on your Bill.' Number two, under previous Rules, once a Bill was referred to a committee the Chair was required to call the Bill for hearing within 30 days. If the Chair did not do that, 35% of the Members of the committee could force the Bill to be considered. If that did not happen, the Sponsor could demand a hearing with in 45 days of assignment of the Bill to the committee. So in this instance, there were Member's rights, you, as a Member, sponsoring a Bill had rights written into the Rules. Our Amendment would restore this provision, thereby preventing a Committee Chair from defeating any bill simply by refusing to give a hearing to the Bill. Number three, this Amendment would restore the vote requirement to foreclose oral testimony during committee hearings. The proposed Rules, HR 4, reduce that requirement from two-thirds of those voting on the question to three-fifths. Our Amendment would increase that vote requirement to two-thirds of those voting on the question. So what this means is, that you are the Sponsor of a very controversial Bill, you have numerous people from wherever in the State of Illinois who want to come to Springfield to testify on that Bill and they feel so strongly about the Bill, that they want their personal testimony in the record. Today in order to shut that off you need two-thirds of the Members of the committee to agree to it, your Rules provide three-fifths. Number four, the 34 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day Amendment, our Amendment, would January 12, 1995 Member restore participation to establishing deadlines for consideration of Bills. The proposed Rules allow the Speaker to set or change the deadlines at his discretion. Under our Amendment, the deadlines would be set by Resolution of the Rules Committee. If the Rules Committee were to approve the Resolution by a three-fifths vote, the Resolution can be adopted by 60 votes. If the Resolution is approved by less than a three-fifths vote the Resolution may be adopted by 71 votes. So again, as Members you are made part of the process. Five, the proposed Rules provide that all Floor Amendments must go to the Rules Committee, Mr. Churchill explained that, which can either ignore it, defeat it, assign it to a committee or return it to the floor. If it is assigned to a committee, the committee can either ignore it, defeat it, assign it to a subcommittee or report it to the floor. In the meantime, the Bill can be called on Second and Third Reading without an Amendment ever being considered. Our Amendment would do three things: one, Floor Amendments would go directly to the standing committee from which the Bill was reported. That committee would conduct a subject matter hearing and then return the Amendment to the floor. The entire Body would then be entitled to vote on the Amendment. So for those who want the committees empowered to hear Amendments that would be covered, for those who feel that all of us have a right vote on Member Amendments on the floor, that would be protected also. And the Amendment would adopted if approved by a majority of those voting on the question as opposed to the 60 votes as required in the proposed Rules. Last, the proposed Rules provide that a Bill may be moved from Second to Third Reading and passed, despite the fact to to 35 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 that Amendments may be pending to the Bill. The Amendment deletes that provision. Sixth, your proposed Rules provide that the Rules Committee must give reasonable public notice. Our Amendment would simply define reasonable notice as either one day, three hours or one hour, depending upon the time of the Session. The proposed Amendment, our Amendment, also deletes the provision that every matter in the Rules Committee is deemed posted for every meeting, thereby requiring the posting notice to specify each matter that may be considered at each meeting. Your Rules, as drafted, would provide that every Bill introduced and kept in the Rules Committee, every Amendment introduced and kept in the Rules Committee, every Motion for concurrence or non-concurrence or for the adoption of a Conference Committee Report would be assigned to the Rules Committee. And when the Rules Committee decides to meet with no notice, nobody knows what the Rules Committee is going to consider, except Mr. Churchill. So for all of you, stay on good paper with Mr. Churchill. Humor him, tell him that he is wearing nice clothes today and that he has combed his hair the right way. Seven, the Amendment proposes to restore the current Rule regarding control by the Chief Sponsor. Your proposed Rules provide that the sponsorship of a Bill may be changed at any time by a majority vote. Our Amendment would restore your right to control your Bill. Now you may think that there is nothing to this now but just try and contemplate what happens at the end of the Session when somebody needs a Bill. And what they need it for is something that you are diametrically opposed to. And you are requested to give up the sponsorship of your Bill because they or we need it or want it. And you resist the request, you will be voted out 36 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 of the sponsorship of your Bill. Hey, the previous Rules required a two-thirds vote of those voting to put the previous question, thereby requiring bipartisan support to terminate the debate. The proposed Rules lower the vote requirement to 60, thereby permitting Republican Members to terminate debate on any Bill. This in particular is a very serious matter. When you file your petitions to be a Member of this Body, you fully expected that you would be permitted to be an active participant in the debate on the floor. You never thought that a simple majority of the Body, wishing to rush through whatever the Bill might be, would actually move a Motion and then because you hadn't been called to speak by the Speaker, you don't get a chance to talk and debate, this is exactly what this says. Now I have been here 24 years and I have never seen a Motion for the Previous Question adopted. Never. Never where there was resistance to the Motion. The Motion has been adopted when nobody objected. But whenever there was any kind of an objection, that Motion always failed. And therefore, every Member of this Body was guaranteed the opportunity to at least speak in debate. I offer these Amendments for a good solid reason. I think that we ought to have an open process. There is a very prominent, political, governmental official in America today who agrees with me. His name is Newt Gingrich, the Savior of our Nation. All on his own, he is going to turn that clock back to the way Representative Stephens wants to turn it back, to 1950, all on his own. But if you agree with Mr. Gingrich, he is opening the process, he is not doing what you are doing. He is proclaiming and by action of his Body providing for an opening of the process. You're moving just in the opposite direction and for that reason I offer this 37 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 Amendment, Mr. Speaker. And naturally I request a record vote and I know you will give it to me. And I want to thank you for permitting me so much time in this particular debate."
"Representative Madigan has moved the adoption of Amendment #1. Is there any debate on that Amendment? The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Lake, Representative Churchill."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would like to respond to several of the points that were just stated by Minority Leader Madigan. These Rules do crave for a lot of changes and this is the place where public policy meets the road. How are we going to do this, how are we going to run our Body? How are we going to... Are we going to consider the Bills and legislation that goes through this process. And so these Rules do make some changes in people's lives around this place. Let me just first say that I believe that it is our intention that every Bill that is filed in this year willl go to a standing committee and that those Bills will be acted upon in those standing committees in one fashion or another. However the Chairperson of those committees decides, much as it has been in the past. In the second year of Legislative Session, the Rule provides that we're basically in a mode of the considering Appropriation Bills and those Bills which may be considered of an emergency status in our government. And this may happen again in the future but I remember in past years emergency status meant choosing the state fish and, you know, some of those kinds of things, so I guess that has always been a subjective test. But those parts of the Rules still continue in the second year. There is a question that was raised regarding moving the 38 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 previous question. And, you know, that is how I came to know Monroe Flinn, I'm not sure I would have known Monroe Flinn if it wasn't for moving the previous question. And we did change the number of votes that were required to move that previous question. I believe that it is the intention of Speaker Daniels to try and let people talk on pieces of legislation so that we can have a deliberate chamber. I can't tell you how many times in the past 12 years I've been standing at my desk with my light on and I've never even been called on and it wasn't necessarily that it was a Motion of previous question, just that the Bills got banged. They got called up and a Roll Call Vote was taken and you're standing there and your light is still flashing and I don't think there is anybody on this side of the aisle and probably some people on the other side of the aisle that didn't have that happen to them also. If we do have a 50% vote for a Motion on the previous question, at least the Body is making that decision and it is not something that is solely coming from the Chair. There is a question regarding deadlines. I mean come on, look at what we did this past Legislative Session on deadlines. First we had a set of deadlines, then we had another set of deadlines, then we had another set of deadlines, then we had another set of deadlines, I don't remember how many times. Maybe somebody over here has kept track of them but it was...maybe Representative Black has kept track of them. I know he used to always say, 'This is changing deadlines the seventh, eighth or twelfth time,' or whatever it was. You know, reality is if...that is the case that you have to keep changing your deadlines, then let's just let it get done as a part of the process and not have to have something where we got to go through a whole committee 39 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 procedure and a floor procedure to do that. I think, you know, we were the ones, of course, creating the problems on that but I think that was somewhat embarrassing to the Majority Party and I'm glad that we can try and change that. Regarding Floor Amendments, this, you know, probably the one major failing of this Amendment is the fact that it changes the way that Floor Amendments are handled under the Rules which we have proposed. And I think that by sending Floor Amendments to the Rules Committee you accomplish several things. The first thing is that the Rules Committee can determine whether or not the Amendment is a technical Amendment and deserves to go to a standing committee or deserves to come right back to the House Floor. That is a positive thing. Why should we send countless technical Amendments into standing committees to have hearings on those things? Let's just put them back on the House Floor where they can go to the second Amendment process and be attached to the Bill if that is the will of the Body. Many, many times on Second Readings Bills...Amendments just get put on because they are technical. Secondarily there have been a lot of Bills, since I have been here, where the Amendments really change the subject matter of the Bill. Now if you have a Bill that goes to the Transportation Committee and all of those of you who will sit on a Transportation Committee are going to say, 'Hey, wait a minute, I want to see those Bills that impact this piece of legislation...this type of legislation.' Maybe it is some...something to do with hauling agricultural equipment or something like that. And you feel that you have always tried to keep the consistent viewpoint on that. Now somebody files an Amendment that deals with that subject area but the Bill was over in a 40 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 different committee, like maybe the Revenue Committee or some other committee, you are going to say wait a minute this is a subject matter that really belongs before our committee because we want to consider it, we want to keep that consistent with the rest of what we do. And it is the Rules Committee that will take that and look at the subject matter of it and refer it to that committee which deals with that subject matter and that is a positive thing for this House. There was also a criticism about the term 'reasonable public notice'. And since I was one of those who probably spent as much time as anybody in the last few years arguing about notice for Rules Committee meetings, I went back to find out, you know, if there was any other type of law or anything that would relate to this and I found a...an Attorney General's opinion from Roland Burris. Not even someone from my Party but Roland Burris wrote a letter to Senator Emil Jones, I believe this was probably after discussing the Rules of the Senate in the 88th General Assembly and what Roland Burris said was that for quote, 'For the reasons here and after stated it is my opinion that to the extent that Rule 3.5 reports to authorize the Senate Rules Committee to meet' and I would emphasize these words, 'without giving reasonable public notice of its meetings or without including in that notice a statement of the subjects to be considered at a meeting is contrary to sub-section 7(a) of Article 4 and is therefore invalid.' So what we did in crafting these Rules was to use higher authority. We used the Democrat Attorney General of the State of Illinois and we put in reasonable public notice with a statement of the subjects to be considered. So, you know, I think to try and change that at this point would be to change what Roland Burris has 41 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 said we should have in this public notice. All in all, I think that the Amendment to House Resolution 4 is serious, it is a piece of...it is an Amendment that deserves consideration. I think that it is lacking because of the various items that I have just gone through. And I don't think that this Amendment should change the House Rules as proposed in HR (House Resolution) 4. And therefore I would stand in opposition to it and I'm sure that you will give the Gentleman his Roll Call Vote, if that is what he has requested. And I would just ask the Members of my side of the aisle to vote 'no' when we get to that Roll Call Vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House." Cook,
"The Chair recognizes the Lady from Representative Currie."
"Thank you, Speaker and Members of the House. I rise in strong support of the Amendment. First let me point out that this is not a wholesale rewrite of the Rules that are proposed in House Resolution 4. You are the Majority Party, you have a right an opportunity, to run this chamber the way you think it makes sense to run it. You want to abolish Congratulatory Resolutions, fine. We do not seek to restore them in Amendment 1 to the underlying Resolution. You have the idea, probably borrowed from the Senate, that maybe it makes sense to have Conference Committee Reports heard in the Substantive Committee that first considered that legislation. That seems a good idea, fine we're for it and we don't try to change that with House Amendment 1. But there are several areas in which I think your Rules, your Rules proposal, are seriously deficient, deficient for the rights of the individual Members, both on the Minority side and on the Majority side. It is these that I think we must...we must highlight 42 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 and explain why we think that another approach is better. First, the issue, how many votes does it take to stifle our voices, to cut off our speech? We have been the Majority Party and we thought that instead of the mere 60 votes that you propose, we thought that because we care about public discussion and shedding the light, as Mr. Churchill SO properly put it, shedding the light on the business of this chamber, that it ought to take a super majority an extraordinary majority to say to an individual Member, you don't have the right to speak. We said 79 votes when we're all here, that's the kind of threshold, that's the kind of barrier to stifling the speech of any individual Member of this chamber. That was good enough for us when we were the Majority but I guess it isn't good enough for you. You think 60 votes is plenty, hey, you got 60 votes. When the debate is over, when it is time to vote on the Bill, you can have it your way. But why do you think, what are you afraid of, why is it important to you to say that a mere minimum number of Republican votes is all it is going to take to stifle speech on this House Floor? Secondly, the question of what happens to my Bill? You know I put in a Bill, a constituent, a neighbor says, 'Hey, Barbara there is a problem, put in a Bill.' In the past I had an opportunity for that Bill to be heard in committee. The Majority Leader assures us that under these Rules the chances are, I'll get that Bill heard. Well, if that is what you plan to do why, don't you say so in the Rule...my Bill heard in Committee. What we're really talking about here is the opportunity of the 96,000 people I represent to have their Bills heard in this legislative chamber. Traditionally we do the hearing in committee but under these Rules there may be no hearing whatsoever. We heard a 43 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 good deal from the new Speaker yesterday about openness, about accountability, about bringing the public in. We heard from the Majority Leader this afternoon about shedding the light on what we do here in the Illinois House of Representatives. I would encourage all of us, you Members of the Majority Party as well as my friends on this side of the aisle, you know you guys over there, once in awhile you probably have an independent thought, a new approach, a different way of looking at things from your colleagues. It matters to you as much as it matters to me that your constituents have the right to have their ideas heard in this legislative chamber. For those reasons, Speaker and Members of the House, I urge all of us to adopt these minimal, reasonable and open suggestions that are included in House Amendment 1 to House Resolution 4."
"Further discussion. The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Champaign, Representative Tim Johnson." Johnson, Tim: "I think it's important to address the details of this Amendment, as well as the details of the Resolution. But I think in doing SO it's necessary, specifically responding and generally responding to the Minority Leader's comments as well as Representative Currie's comments, to point out some general issues about these proposed Rules that are sought to be amended. I think they serve to address several issues in a bigger sense that have needed to be addressed for perhaps decades. The first is efficiency in government, fair efficiency in government. This Amendment, if adopted, would eliminate the essence of HR (House Resolution) 4 in its effort to try to make the process fairly efficient. We've all seen overtime Sessions, we've all seen the last minute Amendments that never see the light of day, or if they do are put together 44 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 in some backroom. If we have and we do a working Rules Committee that first considers the germaneness, the purpose of these various Floor Amendments and then refers them to the appropriate committee, then we have openness and efficiency in government. We don't have last minute gigantic Amendments that are solely designed to obstruct and frankly keep us here often times until July and August. We all know what our constituents want and they don't want us here in June, July and August. And this Amendment, if adopted, would do precisely the opposite. Secondly, what this...what this HR (House Resolution) 4 does and what the Amendment would undo is to open up the process, to bring sunlight into the process to allow the analysis and consideration by the elected Representatives of the people and by witnesses, which by the way would be precluded by this Amendment, because there is only a one hour notice requirement and all we would have is a rump committee meeting, to bring sunshine to the process, to open up the process, to let the public and to let the Members have the opportunity, which they have been denied, to see and to consider issues on their merits. This Amendment would undo that. This Amendment would also undo, at least in part, what I think is to some people minutiae but to our constituents it is not minutiae and that is to restore decorum to the House. I think that each one of us, as we go back in our districts, and has seen school groups that have come here and various constituents who have been here, the one consistent comment that I receive and I think a number of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle received is that there is no decorum. No one listens to debate, we don't know who the Members are from anyone else on the House floor. And these... these Rules, Representative 45 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 Churchill has proposed do precisely that. They operate this chamber efficiently...efficiently with fair deadlines, with full consideration of all the issues and with decorum in this House. And I think that is something that is sorely needed. We don't need obstructionism, we don't need to have multi page Amendments unrelated to the Bill go back to a standing committee on a one hour notice when a fair operating Rules Committee, which everyone intends to have and which we will have, can first consider those Amendments. And in many cases we will refer them to the standing committee. That wouldn't happen under the proposed Amendment. I would also point out that with respect to several points addressed by the Speaker...by the Minority Leader, the former Speaker, in his capacity as Speaker, never in his Rules did anything resembling Page 3, Lines 11 thru 21, it was never part of the Rules. It is something that is here for reasons unknown. The only reason that we can determine is that it would further obstruct and further delay the process, we don't want to do that. We had an election in November, the people spoke and the purport of Subsection (h) would be to be obstructionist, would be to be delay and would serve only to thwart the purposes of the Resolution that Representative Churchill, the Majority Leader, has offered. And so I'm sure there's a number of other specific points that Representative Churchill and others will address. But I think we can't lose sight of the forest for the trees. And the forest is, this is an open process, the attempt of these Rules is to open up this process to the public. The attempt of these Rules is to restore demeanor to this chamber. The attempt of this process is to restore demeanor and decorum to this process and the intention is 46 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 to make for an efficient government where we are not here in July and August eating up the per diem of the public, dealing with issues in the manner that this Amendment would permit. With all due respect to the Minority Leader, former Speaker, these Rules are ones that have been considered at great length, as a matter of fact my own newspaper contained a quasi-editorial by the Minority Leader as long ago as a month and a half already analyzing these Rules in a critical manner. These are ones that have been long considered, fairly considered and attempt and do achieve those objectives that we have set out to achieve. And I think they're objectives that are ones that would be shared by not only people on this side of the aisle but Members on the other side of the aisle as well. So with all due respect I would urge a 'no' vote on this Amendment and a 'yes' vote ultimately on House Resolution 4."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Madison, Representative Stephens."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just briefly, first of all I would say that the...it is ironic that the Lady from Cook who stood and talked about the unfairness of some of these Rules and that certain pieces of legislation and/or Amendments will not be heard, when I sat in her committee as a Minority Member of this General Assembly and as what was fondly referred to as a target. And I would be told by her, as Chair of the Committee, that she was so sorry but I said, 'what in the heck is an arrow? Well, I learned what an the Speaker, then Speaker, had issued arrows. arrow is, if it is a down arrow that meant that you had no chance to get anywhere with your legislation. Now I called that stifling, they call our Rules stifling. What our Rules do is place...they make the system work and that is 47 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 one of the things that they oppose because the Minority Leader is on record here in the local press as saying that he really doesn't want the place to cooperate with the Governor's Office; he prefers an adversarial relationship. And we relish a good strong working relationship with the Governor's Office and with the Senate. The only thing about these Rules is they make the system open and we all know that that's really why the Minority Leader opposes these Rules. He does not thrive in a system that is open to public scrutiny. I would remind Members that are here from last Session and let the new Members know that our Minority Leader on the other side of the aisle when he was in the Chair had to change his Rules six times during the last Session to accommodate one mistake on his part after another. So I don't want anyone here to think that he might be disguised as an expert on Rules. I would also say that the...the remark that he made earlier in reference me in wanting to return to the 50's, I can see how he might misinterpret that because I talk about things that were in the 50's and that I want in the 90's. Chicago Schools actually graduated a majority of their students in the 50's and I yearn for that in the 90's. Everyone worked in the 50's and I want everyone to work in the 90's. So you might think I want to go back when really I want to go forward. People got married and actually raised their children. Welfare was not a way of life, taxes were limited and expectations in this country were high. And the only bad news in the 50's, Mr. Minority Leader, was that the Fighting Irish of Notre Dame were not having good years. Frank Leahy was on his way out, Terry Brennan had a few bad years through the mid-fifties and Joe Kubich, if I am saying the name correctly, did not have great years and 48 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 that's probably the only thing about the 50's that I would change. I would much rather, like you, that Notre Dame had better teams in those years but I don't want to go back to the 50's, Mr. Minority Leader, I want to go to the 90's and the prosperity that the 50's best reflected. And SO I would move in opposition to your Amendment to these Rules and these Rules should be passed clean and clear as the Majority Leader wishes them to be."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Lang."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. There is much to be said and many questions to be asked about HR (House Resolution) 4, but we will get to that later. As for the Amendment sponsored by Representative Madigan, I rise in strong support. And rather than discuss each individual section there is just a few that need to be highlighted. Firstly, as to the issue of deadlines, the Majority Leader in his comments referred to the fact that he wants the Members of the Body to be part of the process. And that he thinks that we should be part of this in an open way, I don't understand how anyone can think that allowing the Speaker of the House to set all of our deadlines at his discretion, and then to perhaps then change them five minutes before the deadline to another date or another time is leaving us part of the process. I believe that keeps us out of the process as one Member we used to have here used to call it we would all be mushrooms. And I don't think that's what we were elected to be, I think we were elected to know what the process is about and to know where we are going and what direction we're going and how we're going to get there. So to leave in the hands of one person all of the deadlines of the 49 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 House of Representatives, representing all of the people in the State of Illinois, does not seem to be what we want to do in representing our constituents. Second, this issue of Floor Amendments, you know the whole notion of democracy is that we're sent here to be a deliberative Body. And perhaps as we're debating a Bill one of us, after all there is 118 of us here, perhaps one of us will get an inspiration. Perhaps one of us, spontaneously, will get an idea to make a Bill better or to figure out what can be done to a Bill to change it in a way that would be better for all the citizens of the State of Illinois. Well the proposal that will be before us, that this Amendment would change, would keep us from that spontaneity, would keep us from deliberating legislation and would put in the Rules Committee far too much power and would keep us from having the ability to deliberate and to discuss legislation. Next, the issue of reasonable public notice that the Bill...the Resolution and Chief discusses and the Amendment wishes to change. Reasonable public notice means what? Most legislation we pass tries to be specific, to tell the people what it's about and if the real point here, as Speaker Daniels has pointed out on numerous occasions, since November 8th, is that he wants to bring sunshine to the process. How does it bring sunshine to the process to have virtually no notice before a Rules Committee Meeting where the Rules Committee is expected to be all and end all and have all power in this Body? How does it serve our purposes and how does it bring sunshine to the process have people who would like to be at the Rules Committee Meeting to testify before the Rules Committee or at least listen to the deliberation of the Rules Committee in that small room in the back where we usually meet? How does it 50 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 serve the purpose to not give them sufficient time to get there? To marshal their troops, to marshal their forces, to be either for against some unknown measure that the Rules Committee may decide to just pop out. After all the Resolution discusses the fact that all matters before the Rules Committee are fair game at any meeting. And now we are going to say that with hardly any notice at all it somehow brings us into the light of day and sunshine into society to just rush those things through without the ability of anyone to come and state their case before the Rules Committee. That isn't sunshine, that's a continuation of darkness. In addition, the proposed Amendment would change the proposal by Mr. Churchill that would take the control of the Bill away from the Chief Sponsor. It is outrageous at a time where we all work very hard to be elected to this Body, to come here and through the tyranny of the Majority by perhaps one vote be told, 'Well, you're no longer the Sponsor of that Bill. Either we like that Bill and these 60 people are going to take it from you and some other constituency perhaps will reap the benefits of that legislation or we're going to take your Bill and completely change it.' So that the Bill you started out with perhaps in a 50 page Bill, they are going to add the word 'not' in there someplace. So instead of doing something the law will say we are not going to do something. And then your legislative record, even though you are off of it, will be somehow tainted by the tyranny of the Majority. We're here to represent our constituents and in so doing they expect us to propose legislation and be in control of our legislation. And through the tyranny of the Majority taking the opportunity for us to debate even something that the Majority thinks is bad legislation 51 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 is not Democratic at all but in fact takes...when you take away the rights of the Minority, you take away everyones' rights in the State of Illinois. In addition and finally on the Amendment, the proposal to cut off debate by a simple Majority is again the tyranny of the Majority. We are here to debate legislation and ideas for all the people of the State of Illinois. And as we debate them even unpopular ideas should be debated and we're here and we have a 118 different and 118 different people backgrounds and 118 different constituencies. And we have the right and, yes, the responsibility to propose legislation that we like and to state our case on legislation that's here on the floor. And if by one vote I can be denied the right to state the case of my constituents on this floor, then you are denying my constituents and the constituents of many of you the right to have their views heard by their elected official that came to this Body to present them. And finally on this point, I find it highly unusual that this portion of the Resolution applies even on Bills that take 71 votes to pass. So without passing this Amendment, if the Resolution... House Resolution 4 would pass without this Amendment, you are saying that 60 people on this floor can stop debate on a Bill that takes 71 people to pass. That makes no sense logically, governmentally, or legislatively. And I would urge the Sponsor of the Resolution to consider, if nothing else, at least to consider that. Because it cannot make any sense to allow 60 people to stop debate on a Bill that takes 71 people to pass. For all of these reasons I strongly urge an 'aye' vote on Amendment #1."
"The Chair recognizes the Lady from Kane, Representative Lindner."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of Mr. 52 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 Churchill's opposition to Floor Amendment #1. Certainly our Rules as people have spoken will open up the process but they will also allow us to get business done and business done in a professional manner. As many have said it was ridiculous to sit here last year and have 30 Amendments on one Bill, all declared germane by the Chair and then to try and make an intelligent vote on that Bill. Also, I wondered what was happening at the end of the Session when reams of yellow and pink and green paper kept coming out of the backroom. And I thought we are suppose to be the Legislators, who is doing this back there? The process that we have now by having Floor Amendments that are proposed in our current Rules to have Floor Amendments and to have Committee Amendments which the committee does not want to consider, go back to the Rules Committee will certainly curb these wrongs that we have seen in the past two years. First of all, it would be ridiculous to use up a standing committee's time to have the public come in and have a Amendment go straight to the standing committee, when there are provisions in our Rules 3.8 for the Rules Committee to make decisions on some of those Amendments and I think this addresses Mr. Lang's concern if he does get a bright idea that would serve the best interests of the people in the State of Illinois. That Amendment can be decided by the Rules Committee under our Rules. Because the Rules Committee can approve things that consist of language that has previously been favorably reported to the House by a committee or technical or clarifying language or language of an emergency nature or language of substantial importance to the operation of government or in the best interest of Illinois. Why take up a standing committee's time by referring those Amendments back to a standing 53 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 committee? But if it is a substantive nature, other than what I have just spoken of then it would be the Rules Committee that would best determine what standing committee that Amendment should be sent to. And I think that our business will be able to be conducted in a much more judicious manner if we adopt these Rules. I urge opposition to Representative Madigan's Amendment and to support our Rules."
"The Chair represents...recognizes the Gentleman from Clinton, Representative Granberg."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For a moment let's distinguish rhetoric from reality. We have heard a great deal of discussion about open governments and I will give the people who were just elected the benefit of the doubt. For my friends on the other side of the aisle who have had the honor to serve in this deliberative Body. Don't you understand, do you really believe this, do you really believe taking rights away from individual Members helps you, do you really do? We've sat here for years, last year your party ground the process to a halt by the filing of Amendments. So apparently you want to try to correct a policy that you initiated. But that affects every Member, it doesn't matter if you're Republican or Democrats. We had Members on this side of the aisle last year come to leadership and ask that Rules be changed so Amendments could not be considered on the floor. We had Members on this side of the aisle who were tired of that process taking place, of not being accomplished, of limiting debate. And to the credits of the former Speaker, he did not do that because we as an institution are suppose to be a deliberative Body. We were assigned here, we were given the privilege of serving here by 95,000 people. We all 54 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 have a job to do. For my friends who are Freshmen over there, you will rue the day you vote for these Rules, not for this Amendment, you should vote for this Amendment. You will eventually regret this day. When we had Representative, former Representative Mautino's Rule four years ago you cannot take a Bill away from the Sponsor. Leadership cannot take a Bill away from the Sponsor. That was a Democratic Member and we did that because it was the right thing to do. Representative Klingler, Representative Jones, when you have that Bill that deals with the State Board of Election and we are in the last days of Session and there is some movement on it to change the School Aid Formula to benefit the collar counties, they can take your Bill away from you and impact your local school district. Is that what you want to do? Do you want to give Leadership, whatever party, the right to take your rights away? The ability to just take your rights away? You were sent here by the people, you have an honor to the people, you took an oath yesterday. Don't let this process start already. I beg the Freshmen to consider what you do because when they do that, you will find out the people should have the prominent position here, not the politicians."
"The Chair recognizes the Lady from DuPage, Representative Biggert."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to the Amendment and in support of the Resolution. I'm hearing language from the other side of the aisle that I think I used many times in debate last year. Such as, I represent 95,000 people and suddenly it seems like the shoe is on the other foot. I think that with this Resolution and what the Amendment is trying to obstruct is a real return to the 55 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 committee process where Bills are going to be heard in committees by Members of this Body that have the expertise in those areas to make decisions and bring those to the House Floor. So I really think that to have the House Amendments go back to the substantive committees is something that is very important to us. I'm not sure that I want to get into specifics but I would like to address (h) on Page... Page 3 of the Amendment. And I think that this would be an obstruction and would be really the Rule by the Minority Rule which I'm sure the other side of the aisle would like to do. But times have changed and I think that...that we are going to find that Bills are going to be heard and they're going to be heard by the experts and we're going to have deliberation on the House Floor. I can remember many Bills and it just seems like that...that it was said that these Bills...every Bill that we ever presented came out to committee. I seem to remember many of mine that never made it out of Rules last year, I don't see where this is...that this was true that everything was heard. Nor were Bills called on the House Floor. I remember 35 days when none of the Republican Bills were heard. I remember Special Orders were we went by alphabetical order and my name was skipped for some reason. So I think that we're going to find that Bills are going to be heard under these Rules and they're very fair. I would urge a 'no' vote on the Amendment."
"The Chair recognizes the Lady from Cook, Representative Schakowsky."
"Thank you, Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. We talk a lot about efficiency today and that's certainly a goal that all of us share to make government more efficient. But I also want to say that democracy is 56 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 often very messy, it's not particularly tidy kind of process. And that efficiency is not always the major goal when we're talking about arriving at a solution that is the best for all the people. After all, the most efficient kinds of government are those that are the most autocratic and don't allow participation at all. We've been told in very reasonable and reassuring tones that it is the intention to hear all Bills in committee and that it is the intention of Speaker Daniels to let everyone who wants to speak in debate and I have no doubt that in most cases that is going to be true. In the few cases where it is not true is going to be in those instances where there is the most controversy, where there are the sharpest differences, where there is the most cotention and where we need the most discussion. And in those instances it is now in the power of the Majority to shut us down, to simply cut off debate. I believe that is undemocratic and I think that it is not in the best interests of the people that elected us as well. I urge support for the Amendment to House Resolution 4."
"The Chair recognizes the Lady from Cook, Representative Monique Davis." Davis, Monique: "Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to ask a question of the Sponsor or you."
"The Chair...excuse me, the Chair is not in a position to respond to a question on the content...rather on questions of procedure. Does the Sponsor of the Amendment yield for a question?" Davis, Monique: "How many Members..."
"The Sponsor yields." Davis, Monique: "Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How many Members are there in the Rules Committee or on the Rules Committee?" 57 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day
"As proposed by the Republicans?" Davis, Monique: "Yes, Sir."
"Eight." January 12, 1995 Davis, Monique: "So, eight Members will sit in the Rules Committee. Now according to Page 21, Line 17 if you would like to refer to Page 21, Line 17. It says, 'Any Floor Amendment Joint Action Motion for final action Conference Committee Report or Committee Amendment referred to the Rules Committee that is not approved by the Rules Committee is out of order.' Are those of us who are elected by 95,000 people, are we to turn over our authority or our ability to pass legislation over to eight people? I...let me give you an example of what that means, let's just say that we have a Bill in reference to the proprietary schools and this Bill states that each proprietary school has to put up a bond of, let's say, a $1,000,000. A lobbyist calls you outside and that lobbyist is from the Cosmetology Association and this lobbyist informs you that the Cosmetology Association will find many of its schools going out of business because they will not be able to afford that $1,000,000 bond that this Bill is seeking, that they put up. So you quickly get staff to draft legislation that amends the existing Bill to remove the cosmetology...cosmetologist from this legislation. But according to this Rule, this Amendment that you are proposing would go to a committee of only eight people who may determine that your consideration cannot be even hailed or brought before this floor. I know since I have been here that we've listened to Amendment upon Amendment sometimes late into the night, giving each individual Member his or her right to have the issue heard based upon the district or group you are representing. And to remove 58 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 that from this Body...actually it removes the Democratic process, not only from this side of the aisle but from your side of the aisle. The purpose may not be in order that something get voted down or get supported but this purpose seems to be to stem your ability to even bring it before the floor. And every elected official in here should have a right to bring his or her issues before the floor be voted up or voted down. And to remove that from this Democratic Body is actually removing the Democratic process and it's moving close to a titalitorian type government and I don't think we want that. We were all elected to serve a group of people, my people did not send me here for eight people sitting in the back room without benefit of the public even hearing what's going on. For you to Rule whether we can hear what the public would like to have brought before this floor. And I would urge, I would urge the Members on both sides of this aisle, if you want to preserve your right to be here with a purpose that you will support this Floor Amendment #1. I think it would help to leave a little bit of justice and a little bit of democracy remaining in the House of Representatives in the State of Illinois. Thank you."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Livingston, Representative Rutherford."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Before we get started I want to let Mr. Churchill know I think he looks nice today, he dressed well and if he is on the Rules Committee I want him to have it on the record that I think he dresses fine. Thank you. The...you know...as I sit here and listen to this debate, I'm looking somewhat at a transcript of two years ago. You know the tyranny of the Majority, the process of stifling debate. You are going to hurt us who 59 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 represent 95,000 people. You know I wasn't real happy these past two years in regards to the way that everything went but all in all the 11,500,000 people of the State of Illinois didn't pack up their bags and move away. There are more people working in this state than there ever have been. You know evolution and change is tough for all. The Senate has run smoothly, we're bringing in new ideas in regards to going back to substantive committees with the Amendments. Evolution and change is tough to take. We talk about reasonable notice, I'm not a lawyer but when the Attorney General of the State of Illinois, a Democrat, helping to define the set of Rules brings in the point about reasonable notice and requiring subject matter notification, it seems only practical to put it in our Rules. The question that was brought forward in Amendment 1 from the Minority Leader in regards to having Amendments go back to Rules Committee before substantive committee can well be addressed in the fact that we can hear, have the change to determine whether they are germane or not. Also, highlighting that I see that we have already distributed to the Body a proposed Amendment 2 from the Majority Leader Churchill which would require the Sponsor of a Bill to agree prior to having the change in the sponsorship noted. So I think that we will be addressing that in a second Amendment. I would rise to urge a defeat of Amendment I and look forward to supporting the underlying House Resolution #4. Thank you, Mr. Speaker."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Macoupin, Representative Hannig."
"Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. For most of us yesterday was a day of great celebration, even for those of us who were on the Minority side. I 60 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 think it was a great opportunity to be here, to see many of our friends back here, to share an opportunity with our family, to have achieved something, to get...to have gotten to the Illinois House of Representatives. And I think it was a day of conciliation when the former Speaker Mr. Madigan offered to simply allow Mr. Daniels to have his day and to be the Speaker by acclamation. And when Mr. Daniels talked about openness and notification and having a role for the public and the Minority Party. And I think that we need to keep those things in mind when we start to look at this first real business before the House of Representatives. What does this piece of proposed Rule do? Well, it wants to limit the floor debate, it wants to concentrate more power into the Rules Committee and into the leadership. I mean I don't think that those are the kind of things that the people who voted on November 8th wanted us to do. I think that when the people who framed this Constitution back in 1970 thought about the Illinois House of Representatives, they thought of this Body as being the Body of the people, to being a place where democracy could flourish. To being a place where ideas could be debated out in the open and that the best ideas could win today. And I think it is a shame that we are seeing stifling of that debate in this proposal. The long history of open debate in Illinois House of Representatives is not just something that the Democratic Party has a right to. It is something that Republicans in the past, when they had control of this Body, offered to the Minority Party. Speaker Ryan, who was here yesterday and presided, offered opportunities to the Minority Party and other Republican Speakers and that has been the way this House has operated as far as I can recall. And I think that 61 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 those Members who are even more senior than I will tell you that that has always been the case. So for those who say that we need to change the Rules the way this House operates, I would suggest that that is not really the answer to the problem. We have a good system, we have had a good system, we simply need to make the system work. So I would urge each and every one of you who have been here and who has had an opportunity now for a few years perhaps to take a look at this Amendment and decide whether or not you really think it is a step forward. I think the Majority Leader mentioned that he thought these Rules were very close to what they have in the Senate. Do you believe that the Senate is really a better Body for having restricted debate, for having restricted the Minorities opportunity to debate ideas? I think not. This is not a rewrite of your proposed Rules, this Amendment is simply another jesture by the Minority Party to work with you, in order to fine tune these Rules so that we can make these new Rules that apply to all of us, Democrats and Republicans, better Rules. So I would suggest that we accept this Amendment and ask the Members on that side of the aisle to accept this Amendment in a jesture of working together in an effort to form a good, final product. And I urge for a 'yes' vote."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Bureau, Mr. Mautino."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I rise in support of the Amendment offered by the Gentleman from Cook. It is very ironic and interesting that we stand here and we talk about opening the process to the public and to our Members itself. I think Minority Leader Madigan's Amendment does not go far enough. In 62 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 looking at the underlying Amendment and some of the things addressed, if we look at our rights as Members in this Body, if you remember on the standing committee and you are...you resign or leave that committee, you cannot be replaced during that term. Under the new Rules, if you have taken the time to read these, you are going to find some very interesting things. Don't simply accept the staff analysis. Once you go to the Page 18, Line 27 the Rules Committee, Members can be...they can be taken off the committee, reappointed. So we have created basically revolving door on a graveyard for the Bills of the Members of this Body. When we look at the...that Rule in specifically it doesn't state how many times that Member may be replaced and then we concentrate all powers into the Rules Committee. For those of you who aren't aware in the 88th General Assembly, for those of you who are new, we dealt in the House with 4,255 pieces of legislation, which now upon introduction would go directly to the Rules Committee. The Senate dealt with 1,843. If we want to be generous on the Amendments, we'll say about 66 or two-third's of the Amendments were filed on Bills. That is another 2,000. Add in the Conference Committee Reports, now you are going to delegate to eight Members, five appointed by the Speaker, three appointed by the Minority Leader, complete control over let's just say 10,000 pieces of legislation or motions that we are going to deal with. We meet 60 days a year, if Members believe that we're going to hear 100 pieces of legislation or motions per day, everyday we're here, you will not, that will not happen, that is not acceptable. It's also very interesting to notice, if you go to Page 56, Line 29, on Appropriations Conference Committee Reports, the Rule says that it will go 63 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 back to a standing Appropriation Committee and then in parenthesis, unless it remains in Rules. Now Rules, as you heard earlier, has to give reasonable notice. So it is conceivable that we could have a Conference Committee, let's say a 1,200 page budget that returned, which will be decided on by five Members of this Body, excuse me, eight. You know, I kind of look at the process a little bit different. I have a tremendous respect for all Members in this Body and the fact that you're here says that you have agreed to come down and take on the fights for your districts, carry the burdens, the hopes, for your people and to stand on the fact that you made it through an elections says that your shoulders are broad and your knees will not buckle. If you pass these Rules as individual Members you will bend and you will buckle, guaranteed. It's very simple, if you go back, a little bit of history of this place may help you to understand. When I came here, I'm actually a child of the Assembly, and 20 years ago I stood almost exactly where I stand today as the new Speaker Daniels took the oath of office for the first time. Through the course I've watched changes and listened to changes in the Rules by both Parties and by Leadership who controlled the chamber at different times. We had the cut back Amendment, which took and it reduced the power of the Minority in every district in the State of Illinois, further consolidating power. And then we see a breakdown of the committee process where our rights as Members have been taken and pushed into the form of Leadership. So now we have to go on bended knee and that's not what you were sent here for. We have gone from representing our districts to what they used to call in the papers the circle of ten, the power that decided the State of 64 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 Illinois. To after...if the underlying Amendments or the underlying Resolution is adopted, a caucus that will decide the fate in your districts in the State of Illinois that could meet in a phone booth or at best an elevator. This is not why they sent you here, I believe that the Speaker...not used to calling him Minority Leader yet, but I believe that the Amendment offered by Representative Madigan is in the best interest of the people of the State of Illinois, of your districts and of the Members, each of you individually. Please support this Amendment."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Vermilion, Mr. Black."
"Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I'm sure it is no surprise to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that I rise in opposition to Floor Amendment #1. And I would like to summarize, if I could and if you will bear with me, some of the things that we have heard. My good friend and colleague who now toils, I hope or I think, as Floor Leader on the Minority side of the aisle, the Gentleman from Clinton County who I have looked up to these past two years, I have looked up to him because his office was on the fourth floor and mine was on the third. He said something about reality versus rhetoric. I want to come back to this in a minute and share some thoughts with you on it. But you know the reality is, that we now stand in the shoes that many of you have stood in for the last dozen years. And if you will sit back in your chair and close your eyes, as I have done the last few moments, the rhetoric sounds very familiar to me. I think it sounds a lot like what I used to talk about when you were drafting the Rules. But let me come back to reality versus rhetoric, another one of my colleagues on 65 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 the other side of the aisle said, 'We wanted to bring sunshine to the process. Speaker Daniels wants to bring sunshine to the process but oh contrar, this isn't it.' I submit to you, look out the window but an hour ago if you think I am exaggerating, when House Resolution 4 was conceived and delivered on this floor but a few short hours ago, the fog that has shrouded this Capitol Dome for the last three days lifted, lifted my friends, and the sun shone on the Capitol of this great State of Illinois once again. We promised sunshine to the process, we've already delivered. To another one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who said, 'In righteous indignation there was something in this Resolution that could take away the sponsorship of a Bill.' Oh good heavens, now you may not of had that in your Rules but I can tell you I have been here for the last nine years and I have been told on more than one occasion, 'If you want this Bill, to move and it is a good Bill Representative Black but it has a bad Sponsor, Representative Black, if a Democrat would be the Sponsor the Bill could then perhaps wind...wind its way though the process.' I cannot count how many Bills I conceived and gave birth and nurtured only to lose sometime between Second and Third Reading on the floor of this House. But it was all right because I knew most of you who picked up my Bills were good foster parents and you gave the Bill a good home and you did what you said you would do, you would pass the Bill. Take away the sponsorship, good heavens, I'm sure you are shocked that that might happen in this process. A last thought, someone got up on the other side of the aisle and said and I quote, 'The Republicans must want to quash independent thought.' We have no mugs over here with a little ducky on them, 66 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 remember when the Speaker, how quickly I have forgotten his name. The Tribune called the Members of the Majority Party the Ducklings and they all followed the Speaker and quack, quack, quack, quack, quacked. So many of you who have been here have one of those mugs. I...I have one of those mugs because I was told if I didn't quack, I couldn't move some of my legislation. Two years ago, let me read to you Amendment to House Resolution 44, which was the Rules at the time two years ago in this chamber, sponsored by then Speaker Michael Madigan. This was Amendment #8 that was subsequently adopted and let me read to you what this Amendment was. No notice of posting is required for any meeting of the Rules Committee convened to consider Bills pursuant to Subsections A (4,5,6) of this Rule. I repeat that no notice of posting is required for any meeting of the Rules Committee. That was your Rule two years ago, granted you subsequently changed that Rule on the advise of Roland Burris. Let me add something else that was in Amendment #8 to your Rules. Just two years ago, Bills may be discharged from the Rules Committee only by unanimous consent. Bills may be discharged from the Rules Committee only by unanimous consent. That's certainly creating independent thought. Now you are upset at what some of our Rules say, I would say if you want to blame us, look in the mirror, we are your children. There are only six Republicans who have ever served in this Body in the Majority, the rest of us have toiled and labored under your Majority Rule since we have been in this chamber. Perhaps, my fellow colleagues on the other side of the aisle, perhaps you taught us too well. Perhaps we want to follow in your footsteps too closely. But as you sometimes had to change your Rules, perhaps we'll have to change some of 67 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 ours. Hopefully not 14 times in a three week period but we'll certainly take a look at that. Last but not least, reality versus rhetoric. I have a column from the Chicago Tribune, fine newspaper, lovely city, January 13, 1993, headline, 'Clever Maneuver May Have Edgar Playing by Madigan's Rules in the End.' Now, what this says and let me just take a couple of quotes, there is some really neat quotes in here by Thomas Hardy, I won't quote all of them. But let me see if I can quote just a few, reality versus rhetoric. 'The changes House Democrats voted for last week gave Speaker Madigan controlled Rules Committee more power than ever. The panel can now prevent the full chamber from voting on Amendatory Vetoes by Edgar whenever Madigan deems that the Governor has abused his power to rewrite legislation. The Governor's changes would die if a legislative chamber does not vote on them. This has been a priority with Mr. Madigan, dating to his feuds with Edgar's GOP predecessor, former Governor James Thompson. The Rules Committee will also now give the thumbs up or down to end of Session Conference Committee Reports before the full House can even see them. These Reports ostensibly are to reconcile variations in legislation between the House and Senate but they often wind up containing major proposals having nothing to do with the original Bill.' I continue from Mr. Hardy's column, 'If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Mr. Madigan paid Philip a parliamentarian's compliment. The provision on Conference Reports was a major component of the Republican's new Senate Rules. But whereas, Philip's intent was to enhance the authority of the Senate Committee process, Mr. Madigan's was designed to shorten the already taut leash on his Democrats' independent thought. 'Part and parcel of 68 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day that effort finally was a new Rule that required a three-fifth vote rather than a simple majority for House lawmakers to appeal a ruling by the Speaker and thus proceed with a piece of legislation.' As Mr. Hardy continues, 'In other words, blocks within the Majority such as the black and hispanic caucus, downstaters, women and Daley Democrats cannot now peel off from Madigan to join forces with the then 51 Republicans for the 60 votes it would require to pass a coalition initative over the objection, in other words, to overrule the Chair. The new requirement of 71 votes to overrule the Chair will be nay, impossible to get. Although his own Members have often toiled over the years under the special orders Madigan designed to erode the power of House Republicans, remember even if a Bill gets through committee it must get through special orders for floor consideration. And these new Rules mean individual Democrats have even less autonomy.' Reality versus rhetoric. I don't see why we have here until midnight or two or three o'clock in the morning debating this, you taught us well. Some of our Rules will be more open than we thought yours were, your position will be that some of our Rules will be more closed to you than yours were to us. And that debate can continue throughout the Session. And I would hope that we could reach out if we truly find that any of us have made a honest error in judgment that we could correct these Rules. This isn't the Constitution, but I would hope we not have to go through every...every Amendment that will be offered today and two hours of debate when all you have really done is for the first time in some of your political careers, you are now beginning to see how uncomfortable it can be to stand in the shoes of the Minority. Something I have tried to tell to to be 69 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 you for the last four years and you had a good time often at my expense. I rise in opposition to Floor Amendment #1. I urge favorable action on the Majority Leader's Resolution. Let's get on with the Rules and get on with the business of the House."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Morrow."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I am going to be very brief. You know, some of the comments that I have heard during this debate were needed, some of it wasn't needed. We really could have just brought this to a vote, you guys got the vote. You've got the votes to do whatever you want, that's the bottom line. But the reason why I...I rise to...to say a few words, I'm saying this to some of the new people here, I've been around here going on eight years now, over eight years. And there's Democrats on this side, there's Republicans on that side but I'm going to tell you, you are going to find out and most of the votes that you're going to make down here is not about Democrats, it is not about Republicans, this is about taking care of your district. And the only way that you are going to get reelected is by taking care of your district. Leadership has their own agenda and that agenda does not necessarily include getting you re-elected, whether you're a Republican or Democrat. So my warning to all Members, if you want to come back here two years from now and have your family and everybody partying and saying what a good guy you are, you better show some independence. Yes, I'm a Democrat but as many of the Members on this side of the aisle know, I have fought the Minority Leader when he was the Majority Leader. I was...I was with him more than I was against him but he knows that he has to count my 70 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 vote separately when he wants to get votes. And that's what you have been sent down here to do, not be a lackey. And, yes, Democrats did some wrong things to Republicans and many times I didn't go along with what we did to you guys and, yes, there is a thing called payback but first of all I thought we were all adults here. If we aren't suppose to be adults elected to represent 95,000 people, I think we need to get above some of the pettiness that I see is going to happen this spring. Somebody says that we want to make the House like the Senate. Well, I'm going to tell you, I don't want to be like the Senate. Do you know why? Because the Senators are like...most of them are older than us, most of them are more set in their ways than us. The purpose of the House is to include all the people and yes we might go too fast. But then that is the purpose of the Senate to say, 'Hey guys, slow down.' But now we are going to say slow in the House and slow in the Senate! Well many of you better bring blankets and pillows in because it is going to get real dull. I like the House the way it is, I like to debate, I like the fact that all the Members have an opportunity to bring out their ideals, whether I agree with them or disagree with them. But to you Freshmen there were a lot of Democratic Freshmen that lost their elections in November and it wasn't because of any sweep by the Republicans. You know why? They didn't represent their district and I told them, you don't represent your district, you won't get back down here. Take it from a five term Representative, represent your district and you will be back. Your agenda gets you reelected, not Leaderships."
"Is there any further discussion on the Amendment to the Resolution? There being no further discussion, the 71 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 Chair offers to the Sponsor of the Amendment the opportunity to close."
"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, we've had a very full debate. In conclusion and in summary, I would simply like to characterize this Amendment as a Member's Bill of Rights. That is all it is, you have listened to the explanation, you have listened to the responses. Every element of this Amendment is designed to enhance the rights of Members of the Illinois House of Representatives. It is a Member's Bill of Rights. And I would move for the adoption of the Amendment."
"The Gentleman has asked for a Roll Call Vote and a Roll Call Vote shall be granted. The Gentleman moves the adoption of Amendment 1 to House Resolution #4. Those in favor vote 'aye'; those opposed vote 'nay'. The voting is open. Representative Wirsing votes 'no'. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, the 'ayes' are 52, the 'nays' are 64. And Amendment 1 to House Resolution 4 is defeated. Mr. Clerk, are there any other Amendments?"
"Amendment #2 offered by Representative Churchill."
"Representative Churchill on Floor Amendment #2 to House Resolution 4."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. To prove that this is a brand new day, I want to offer this Amendment. What this Amendment does is to recognize a point that was raised by the Minority side, that I think was a valid point. And they said that a Bill should not be taken away from the Sponsor without the Sponsor's approval and I think that that is a good thing to 72 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 have in this House. I think we ought to do that so I have arranged to have this Amendment prepared. And basically what this says is that the principal Sponsor has to be in agreement before the Bill can be taken away from the principal Sponsor. As long as we were making that change, we made a couple of other technical changes and I would read those now into the record. We have the cross reference to the Rules Committee to supplement section on discharge which is currently the way the Senate Rules operate. We clarified the reference, to suspend Committee Posting Rules and we changed from three to five the number of Rules Committee Members would be necessary for the suspension of special orders. And at this point I would move adoption of Amendment #2 to House Resolution #4."
"Representative Churchill moves the adoption of Amendment #2. Is there any discussion? And on that, the Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Minority Leader Madigan."
"Question of the Sponsor."
"Would the Sponsor yield?"
"On this Amendment. Question of the Sponsor on this Amendment."
"Would the Sponsor of this Amendment yield for questions? He indicates that he will. Representative Madigan."
"Mr. Churchill, I understand that part of this Amendment is designed to correct some drafting mistakes that were made earlier, is that true?"
"That is correct."
"And I earlier heard Mr. Stephens talking at length about mistakes. Have you reviewed this with Mr. Stephens?"
"I...I think that Mr. Stephens will approve this." 73 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995
"Okay. Well, that makes me feel a lot better."
"Yes. This is a 1990's Resolution and I think he likes those."
"So I would move to agree with the Majority Leader and support the Motion to adopt the Amendment."
"Upon that sentiment, does the Gentleman from Clinton wish to speak? The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Clinton, Mr. Granberg."
"Will the Gentleman yield?"
"The Gentleman indicates that he will."
"Representative Churchill, does this actually change the Rules or could that Rule be suspended previously? How many votes would it take to suspend that Rule?"
"I'm sorry, Representative, we...we didn't quite hear what you said."
"When you're at... The purpose of this Amendment is to try to correct a policy change that you thought necessary. That fact the Leadership will not take a Bill away from the Sponsor without his or her approval. That was my understanding when you explained the Amendment. Is that correct?"
"Correct."
"A part of that is to..."
"Part of this Amendment is to allow the principal Sponsor the right to agree or disagree with taking away the sponsorship of his Bill. I hope I have answered you correctly."
"Can that...can this portion of the Rule be suspended?"
"The answer is yes."
"So the arguments, the previous Rule under the previous General Assembly was that the Sponsor of a Bill could not have that Bill taken away from him or her without their 74 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 approval. Isn't that correct?"
"Would you just sight that reference in there in your current...in the Rules of the previous Session?"
"Section 35.1. Subsection (c)"
"And if I understand your question correctly, you're asking if that Rule could have been suspended and from what I am reading that that rule could have been suspended also?"
"Under the previous Rules it took 6...71 votes to suspend that portion of the Rule. Now how many votes does it take with your Amendment to suspend the Rule that you in fact can take the Bill away from that Sponsor?"
"A majority of those elected which would be defined as 60 votes."
"So, it takes 60 votes and you can still take a Bill from, away from a Member. This is, this is no policy change that you're going to support a Member's rights. You can still take a Bill away from a Member, isn't that right? I thought this was a new General Assembly, a new day, we're going to change this. We're going to protect Member's rights, you thought you made an error."
"If this is the wish of the Body to do that at that time, then that, that would be done. Just as it could of been done under the previous House."
"This is a drafting error. If you'd like, we can amend the, amend this Amendment on its face to increase it to 71 as the previous Rule. Would you be amenable to that?"
"No."
"And I would so move."
"I'm not so amenable to it. Do you have your rights under the current Rules to do whatever you wish."
"So, this is not a great policy change. This is no 75 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 change whatsoever to support Member's rights. So, let's not try to tell everybody it is. You can still take the votes. You can take the Bills away from Members and that's what we're here to talk about, protecting Members rights and the Members, the rights of their constituents. This doesn't do a dang thing and you know it."
"Well, I'll tell you a little story. When I first came down here 12 years ago I had a great Bill and I drafted it with some language that I created myself and I introduced that Bill and you know there was a Bill that was introduced almost immediately behind that. And that Bill was the same as my Bill, with the same language in it. And there was a new Sponsor on that Bill, it wasn't me, and Representative Madigan passed that Bill. It was a great Bill and I remember holding a press conference with him and he got done he introduced himself and said here's what the Bill is and now Representative Churchill will explain to you what it does and I lost my Bill. But I went on with Representative Madigan and we did get it passed out of the House due to his influence. So, I want to tell you that you can say what you want to but the practical reality of it is that we've all lost Bills on this side of the aisle over the last 12 years and whether you've got 71 votes or 60 votes or whatever, when you're forced to give up your own Bill it's not a comfortable thing, it's not a nice thing, but that has been reality."
"What we're talking about, Representative, is a policy of this Body. That Members have certain rights and certain obligations with their constituents and they come here as a deliberate person in this Body which is one of the finest in this country. And now you're taking away those rights and you can take you and your Leadership and the Member can 76 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 take someone's Bill away from them, whether it's Republican or Democrat, it does not matter. As a matter of policy you can take their legislation away from one Member, any Member, it does not matter. It does not matter what Party, it does not matter whom they represent or what section of the state, you can take their legislation away from them. And that's what were talking about, the ability to let you do that. I just want to make this clear, this is no great policy change. Thank you."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Balthis."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd just like to make a comment. AS a freshman down here in 1991 I went into a committee meeting with House Bill 125, which was an outstanding Bill and I didn't have the privilege of 60 people taking my Bill away from me, I had the privilege of the Chairman of the Committee telling me halfway through that Committee hearing, 'Mr. Balthis, with another Sponsor you...your Bill will pass.' And that Bill was given to a Democratic Sponsor and it did pass, and it was an excellent Bill. So, I feel very comfortable with 60 Members deciding whether I keep a Bill because when it was the Democrats were in control, one Member, the Chairman of the Committee would decide."
"The Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Lang."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?"
"The Sponsor indicates that he would yield."
"Thank you. Mr. Churchill, did I understand you to say when you stood up to present the Floor Amendment 2 that you heard our comments here and that you felt that a change was appropriate because you didn't want the rights of the Sponsor of the Bill to be taken away from them?" 77 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day
"That's correct and I believe that the practice of this side of the aisle will be to allow Members to keep their legislation. I don't believe that the practice will change and I think that you can have the Rules that you had before, or the Rules that you have today, but if you do the practice the way it was done in the previous administration, you have affectively taken people's Bills away for a long, long period of time. I hope that never happens."
"You did say however, I just want to understand the purpose of this. The purpose was that we noted on this side of the aisle that a Majority of the House could decide that a Bob Churchill Bill could become a Lou Lang Bill and you didn't think that after listening to us that that was an appropriate thing to do, is that correct?"
"I thought that we ought to state in our Rules, make a statement that the agreement of the Sponsor is an important thing and that's why I've added this."
"If, if a Majority under your original Resolution could take a Bill away from you and give it to me and if 60 votes can suspend the Rule as amended by your Amendment, then tell me what the difference is between 60 people voting to take your Bill and giving it to me or 60 people voting to suspend the Rule that requires my authority, or your authority to do that in accomplishing the same task."
"Because I believe if the Sponsor gives us agreement you make get the 60 votes."
"Thank you. Mr. Speaker, to the...to the Amendment. I don't think that there's anyone on this side of the aisle that misunderstands what this is, but perhaps there are people on that side of the aisle. Perhaps Mr. Churchill has boxed himself into a corner and doesn't really realize 78 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 what he has done. Perhaps he doesn't realize that the proposal he makes is...is no proposal at all and perhaps he doesn't realize that he may of intended to do something different and now he can't explain his way out of it, but what he's done Ladies and Gentlemen, is nothing. The proposal here on Floor Amendment 2 is nothing. If 60 people can take your Bill away, under the original Resolution and the Amendment says that 60 people, that 60 people can't take your Bill away unless 60 people say they can do it anyway, then what have we done? And if Mr. Churchill starts his comments by saying that we don't think the Sponsor should lose control of their Bill by 60 votes, then what we have here is a sham. What we have here is no proposal at all, no change at all, and if you vote for Floor Amendment #2 you will do nothing except create more paperwork and create something for them to do in Enrolling and Engrossing as they mix these two together. The bottom line is 60 people can still take your Bill from you and give it to some other person in this Body. That is not what our constituents elected us to do, perhaps that's not what Mr. Churchill intends. Perhaps he intends something else, if he does he should change this so that this Rule could only be suspended by 71, which was what the original plan was as we've been working under for the last two years. There is no sense at all to this. Anyone who thinks they're voting for something positive or even something different than the original Resolution by voting for this Amendment is just kidding themselves, just kidding themselves. If your Bills are important to you, if the time you spend with staff and the time you spend with constituents and, yes, the time you spend with lobbyists, and the time you spend in LRB and the time you spend 79 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 talking to each other in bars and restaurants about the Bills you care about is important to you, then you must realize that this is a sham. That the section of this, of the original House Resolution 4 relative to taking a Bill away from the Sponsor is a sham, and that there is no change here at all. And if these things are important to you, if your Bills are important to you, then you must rebel against this and you must tell Mr. Churchill resoundingly that what he's proposing here is not in the best interest of the citizens of the State of Illinois and not in the best interest of the Members of this House of Representatives."
"The Gentleman from Will, Mr. Wennlund."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Today from the other side of the aisle I've heard three terms: unfairness, rights of the Minority, tyranny of the Majority. Now those terms have been absolutely arcane to your side of the aisle for the last 12 years. This Amendment was supported by the Minority Leader. As Representative Black said, the fog has lifted, it's coming back and we have a long drive tonight. So, let's support the Amendment, let's put it on, adopt the Rules so we can all get home at a decent hour traveling through the fog."
"The Chair recognizes the Minority Leader, the Gentleman from Cook who had previously spoken in debate, for what purpose do you rise, Sir?"
"To admit a mistake, SO as represented to me I mistakenly thought the Amendment did what my Members want it to do and in light of Mr. Wennlund's comment that I offered my support for the Amendment, I want to show you how courageous I am, I'm going to withdraw my support for the Amendment." 80 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995
"The Chair recognizes the Lady from Cook, Representative Currie."
"Thank you, Speaker and Members of the House. First, I would like to join the earlier remarks of Representative Rutherford with respect to Representative Churchill's tie. I think it's smashing, too. I think Representative Churchill when he offered this Amendment to us did think he was making a policy change from the language in the underlying House Resolution 4. I think he meant it. Unfortunately, when we pointed out to him that he had made no policy change, he didn't take the obvious and easy step of trying to correct that error himself. So, I would for Members of this House who care about their rights as principal Sponsors of legislation of Bills, I would offer this Motion for our consideration. On page six of the Amendment, I would insert before the word, 'provided' this sentence: 'This subsection may only be suspended by an affirmative vote of 71 Members.' I urge that Motion, I urge its adoptions. I would appreciate a Roll Call Vote and I certainly would appreciate Mr. Churchill's support, splendid tie and all because I believe that's what he thought his Amendment would do."
"The Chair acknowledges that a Roll Call Vote has been requested and one will be granted. The Chair recognizes the Lady from DuPage, Representative Biggert."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I think that there, that we're still have missed, that there is a difference between the Amendment and what has been said, is that there is a difference between suspension..."
"For what purpose is recognition sought, and who is seeking it? Representative Lang." 81 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995
"A point of order, there's a Motion on the floor..."
"Please state your point."
"Point of order is there is a Motion on the floor and there should be no further debate on the Amendment until the Motion is resolved."
"The Chair acknowledged that a Roll Call Vote will be granted. What Motion was stated? The Chair recognizes the Lady from Cook, Representative Currie."
"Thank you, Speaker. I believe I stated clearly that I was making a Motion to amend Amendment 2 on its face by the addition of a single, straightforward sentence. I would be happy to repeat the Motion for the Chair if you like."
"The Chair would so request."
"Okay. I, my Motion was that we amend on it's face the Amendment #2 so that on line six of the Bill (sic-Amendment) by inserting before the word, 'provided' the following sentence. The sentence to read: 'This subsection may only be suspended by an affirmative vote of 71 Members.'"
"The Chair is under the understanding that such a Motion should be in writing but the Chair will allow that Motion to be heard. Did the Lady request a Roll Call Vote on that oral Motion?"
"I did indeed."
"Then we will proceed to a Roll Call Vote on the Motion. Is there any discussion on that Motion? Seeing none, the Chair would allow a vote to be taken for the oral Motion of the Lady to amend on its face the Amendment of Representative Churchill. Those in favor of the Lady's Motion should vote 'aye'; those opposed to the Lady's Motion should vote 'nay'. And the voting is now open. Representative Lang, for what purpose do you seek 82 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day recognition?" January 12, 1995
"Well, I think it's in the nature of a point of order, since we are voting on a Motion it would be appropriate that the Clerk place on the board the Motion were voting on so that no Member of the Body is confused that we're voting on Floor Amendment 2."
"The Chair granted the extraordinary courtesy to the lady who would of been required to place her Motion into writing SO that we could vote on it and in addition the Chair is allowing this roll call vote. The Chair will clarify for the record that we are voting on the lady's oral Motion to amend Floor Amendment 2, sponsored by Representative Churchill. I hope that clarifies it for you Representative. Representative Lang."
"Well, in fact I wasn't being critical, I was just commenting that as we go through this Session, that Members look up at that board and maybe they don't always here what the Speaker is saying and we want to make sure that they see up on that board what we're talking about. It's no criticism of the Clerk, it's early in the session, it is just a comment."
"In addition, I'm...I'm advised by the Clerk that it's not electronically possible to do that on a Motion on its face. I believe the issue's been clarified, your position has certainly been noted. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk shall take the roll. On the Ladys oral Motion to amend Floor Amendment #2, there are 52 voting in favor, 64 voting against and the Motion is denied. Is there any further discussion on Floor Amendment 2? See in none, would the Sponsor of Floor Amendment #2 wish to close on the Amendment? Representative Churchill." 83 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the interest of time as time does go on and a lot of people have real long rides home in rather nasty weather. I would just move for adoption of Floor Amendment #2 to House Resolution #4."
"Is there a request for a Roll Call Vote on this Amendment? There being no further discussion, the question is, 'Shall Amendment #1 be adopted?' All right. The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Madigan."
"Very briefly, ordinarily we would agree to this Motion and not request a record vote but in light of how the Amendment is drafted, why we're put into a position where, where we simply don't want to support any language which denies a Member's right to maintain the control of their Bill. And you've stated in the record that you agree with us on that but you're not doing it in this Amendment. So, consequently we have to stand in opposition to the Amendment."
"I understand your opposition, I've not yet heard a request for a Roll Call Vote. Was that the intent? There's been a request for a record vote. The Chair will grant that request. Those in favor of Floor Amendment #2 to House Resolution 4, please vote 'aye'; those opposed 'nay'. The voting is open. Representative Moffitt, for what purpose do you rise?"
"Thank you, Mr Speaker. I'd like to be recorded as a 'yes' vote but my switch will not come on here."
"Representative Moffitt will be recorded as 'aye'. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk shall take the roll. Floor Amendment #2 on this vote having received 64 votes in favor, 52 votes against is hereby adopted. Mr. Clerk, are there any further Amendments?" 84 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995
"No further Amendments."
"House Resolution #4 is now before us as amended. Is there discussion on that? Representative Churchill."
"Again, thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the interest of time and to make sure that everybody has a safe ride home, I believe that from our side we've discussed the Resolution to its fullest extent. I could be happy to answer any questions and then proceed to a vote at the appropriate time. I would move adoption of House Resolution #4."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Madigan."
"For the purpose of two questions and then to speak to the Motion. So, question #1 directed to the..."
"The Sponsor yields."
"...Majority Leader concerning the Rule relative to posting notice by the Rules Committee. The Rule provides that the notice must include a statement of the subjects to be considered but also provides that all such legislative measures shall be deemed posted for hearing by the Rules Committee for all of its meetings. These two provisions appear to be contradictory. Is the Rules Committee required to post each Bill that may be considered for each meeting or is that not the case?"
"Representative Churchill."
"We could move this along quickly if you could just site me the Rule number you're in." Madigan: "Again it would be the posting notice by the Rules Committee and we're searching to give you the number just now."
"I'm sorry."
"Page 18, line 27."
"The answer would be that every item that is posted for Rules remains in a Rules posting so that every week we 85 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 don't have to repost all of the Bills from the previous meeting. I hope that's responsive to your question."
"No, I don't think it is because again there's two statements in the Rule. First statement would read, 'A statement of the subjects to be considered,' and then the next statement is, 'All such legislative measures shall be deemed posted for hearing by the Rules Committee for all missed meetings.' So you see, either when you do your posting will be a piece of paper with Bill numbers and Resolution numbers or either there won't be a piece of paper or there will be a piece of paper that doesn't enumerate any Bill numbers or Resolution numbers, one or the other. My question is, what are you intending to do?"
"The way that we read the Attorney General's opinion is that we need to provide notice, a statement of the subjects to be considered. And since Bills that have been previously posted to the Rules Committee may be referred to that would set forth the statement of subjects that are to be considered and I believe that that would be in compliance with the Attorney General's opinion."
"Mr. Churchill, could I rephrase the question and deal on a hypothetical. So next week there's a Rules posting of House Bill 5. Subsequently there are ten postings of the Rules Committee and then the twelfth time that there is a posting of the Rules Committee, House Bill 5 does not appear on the posting for the twelfth meeting. Could House Bill 5 be called for consideration during that twelfth meeting of the Rules Committee? Even though it had not appeared on a notice from meeting two thru eleven."
"Yes."
"You have answered my question. Next question, this concerns suspension of posting requirements. Your 86 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 Resolution provides that a Motion to suspend the posting requirements must appear on the Calendar before it can be considered and that the Calendar requirement may be suspended only by unanimous consent. Now that concerns the calendar requirement. Our question would be, how many votes are required to adopt the Motion itself? Because we don't think that that is dealt with in your Resolution."
"Again, if you would be so kind, just so that you and I are talking about the same provisions..."
"Page 52, Line 1."
"Okay."
"Page 52, Line 1."
"Thank you."
"Strike that please, Gentlemen. We should have Ron Stephens over here to redo these things, there wouldn't be any mistakes."
"The Chair will put out an APB for Mr. Stephens."
"Don't be in a hurry. Page 28, Line 5. Page 28, Line 5."
"Again I hope I'm responsive to your question because we're trying to listen, find it and hear you at the same time. I think that the question I heard was, how many votes would it take to suspend it from the calendar requirements? And that would be unanimous consent."
"No. No. No. How many votes on the Motion to suspend the posting requirement? We don't think your Rule sets that out. So there is two things here, there is the calendar requirement which requires unanimous consent and then after that there's the Motion to suspend the posting requirements. How many votes are needed there?"
"Sixty."
"Thank you. Could you tell us where that is stated? 87 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day Page and line."
"Yes, just give us a second. We would be happy to move this along quickly but we're listening to Representative Currie over here, SO this could take awhile."
"She may help you."
"The House will be in order. Representative Churchill, please."
"The question and I hope we have it right this time. The question would be, how many votes does it take to suspend the posting requirements that we believe to be 60 votes, which would be found in Rule 717(d)."
"Seven Seventeen (d). Would you give us the page number on that?"
"Yes. Fifty-two."
"Page 52. Mr. Churchill. Mr. Churchill."
"Yes."
"We can see that you are simply going to reference us into that section of the Rules to answer our question. We would suggest that when you do come back with a corrective Amendment on those other matters that you might want to correct this, too, and put a specific statement in the appropriate place that sets out the number of votes to suspend the posting requirements."
"Yes. We had a lot of our Members that said that they get confused. They were particularly confused under the previous Rules because of all the cross referencing."
"Yes."
"And so we have tried to minimize cross referencing. Those of us who are lawyers know that kind of stuff but a lot of other folks don't and perhaps this does need a cross reference at some point but I think it is in the Rules." 88 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995
"Good. So I think if you throw it into that Amendment and correct these things down the road why it would be a good idea."
"Thanks."
"Anything further, Mr. Madigan?"
"Yes. I have another question of Mr. Churchill. Mr. Churchill? Mr. Churchill? Are you prepared to tell us how many Democratic appointments there will be to each committee? So your Resolution tells us the names of the committees and are you now prepared to tell us the number of Democratic appointments to each committee?"
"It's my understanding, Sir, that you've already received delivery of a copy of the list of all the committees and breakdowns and everything?"
"Well, Mr. Churchill, we found a document in the office that you mistakenly left there."
"No, that wasn't mistaken, that was to spread some sunshine on this process."
"I see. That along with the chocolate chip cookies that were on my desk. Right?"
"That beats the first aid kit you left in the Speaker's Office."
"Right."
"Plus the fire extinguisher. We could have used that yesterday."
"Right. So, if you could just advise us, we have been operating on the basis of that document and we thought that it might be subject to change, if it is not we would like...we would like to go ahead and make our appointments. So we..."
"I believe that as with all things of this nature that I will await the pronouncement from my Speaker." 89 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day
"Right."
"And I think that is probably a good mode for everybody in this Body."
"Sure. Yes."
"It is good advice for you."
"Absolutely. Right."
"By the way you are dressed excellently today."
"Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Many of my Members have been saying the same thing."
"Yes. Right. Thanks for the advice."
"Sure. I would like to speak to the Motion. We're prepared to move to a final vote."
"Sir, we have several people seeking recognition."
"I'm sorry."
"It has been the practice of the Chair to recognize everyone today and your..."
"I would simply like to vote...I would simply like to speak to the Motion before we finish. That's all."
"Your opportunity to speak is now, Sir."
"Thank you. So, Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we are close to closure on this particular debate. I am greatly disappointed because early in December, I raised the question of the form and the method of the House Rules and I spoke with Mr. Daniels, our Speaker, and I sent him a letter setting out my concerns. And I sent out a letter to the newspapers of the state and as published in the Chicago Sun Times on December 13, 1994, I implored our Speaker to differentiate himself from Senator Philip and Senate operations. And I asked him not to move to the adoption of a set of Rules which would deprive Members of their rights as Members of this Body. And I implored him not to become a Pate Junior. I said, Mr. Speaker, the integrity of the 90 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 House of Representatives is too important for all of us, for you to move in a direction where you will be looked upon as just a clone of Senator Philip and you would be referenced as Pate Junior. Unfortunately you heard Mr. Churchill and his initial presentation where he explained that much of this is modeled on Senate Rules for a variety of reasons, one of which was that those seeking to understand the Rules ought to be able to understand maybe one set of Rules with some minor modifications and not be made to know two different sets of Rules. So what's happening is, as we move to the adoption of a new set of Rules, we are just moving piggyback to what they did in the Senate two years ago and I find that very regretable. I found it regretable that on our first full, real day of Session we were not supplied with a Daily Calendar. I found it regretable yesterday that this consideration of the Rules was done in clear violation of Illinois law and the Rules that would govern the posting of this consideration. All of this should have been done in a meeting of the Rules Committee. Properly posted with six and a half days posting requirement. A meeting of the committee would have permitted any interested Member of the House to attend that committee. It would have permitted any citizen of the state to appear before the committee and to speak to these Rule changes and to offer their comments but that wasn't done. What we got was an edict from the Speaker. The Rules will be considered Thursday at three o'clock. And I told the Speaker yesterday that I certainly didn't want to disrupt what was a day of celebration for him and rightly so. And I didn't want to interfere with any festivities that he had planned and so we didn't pursue our rights yesterday. We simply let this thing go ahead to 91 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 today's consideration. But understand what is being done today should have been done in a committee and you have all been full of rhetoric about committee consideration of Bills and Amendments and Resolutions. Well here is a Resolution that has never been considered by a committee and it is up on the floor, one day notice, that's all we got. So, as I said yesterday, my hopes for all of us are very high, my hopes for Mr. Daniels are very high. We want to have a productive Session. Ladies and Gentlemen, we have not done well on our first day. I'm not quite sure that we are on a fast track today; I think we're really on a back track today. But we will take a rest for a few days and we'll come back. We're not going to support this Resolution but we'll be here and we'll be prepared, be cooperative and to participate. These Rules provide the Majority Party with the opportunity to exclude us from participation. If that is your intent, if that's what you do, I think it will come back to haunt you before we close this Session at the end of May or whenever it happens. And so, Mr. Speaker, again thank you for permitting me to participate in debate. I rise in opposition to the adoption of this Resolution."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Washington, Mr. Deering."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Will the Sponsor yield?"
"The Sponsor indicates that he would yield for questions."
"Representative Churchill, Page 36, Line 19. That is House Rule 5-4, Section (d). Line 19 says, 'The Clerk shall also have printed all adopted Floor Amendments.' It further goes on to say, 'No Floor Amendment may be adopted 92 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 by the House unless it has first been reproduced and placed on the Member's desks, which may be done electronically.' How could the Clerk print the Amendments, if they're not adopted? I read this to say that they can be notified electronically, I do not read this to say that it can be adopted electronically."
"I'm not sure that you and I read this the same. The way I read it is that the Amendments that are to be adopted would have to be reproduced, which they could do on paper or electronically and placed on the Members' desks, which could be done by paper or electronically and after that is done, then you can proceed to adopt the Floor Amendment. That's the way I read this, if that is not the way you read it perhaps you can explain to me the way you see it differently."
"Well, I beg to differ, I read it that the Clerk can't reproduce them until they adopt them. Maybe...or maybe that is a different interpretation than you and I see. Second question..."
"Let me just add one point to your previous question..."
"Yes."
"If I might be...just take a second and...what we are trying to do is, you know, to move this Body forward and get into the electronic age and we feel that we need this part in our Rules to be able to...to be able to produce Amendments and put them on Member's desks electronically and I think that that's the intent of this and I think my reading of this is correct. But obviously if that is not what you read, then that may be a difference of opinion."
"So, we still as Members will have Amendments placed on our desks that we can read before we adopt them now. Now 93 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 electronic notification which you mentioned earlier in debate today doesn't mean that it will be on the LIS System where we have to get up and look back. Will we each individually have that notification?"
"I'm not sure what your side of the aisle will do. It is the hope of our side of the aisle to be able to put some type of computer process on each Member's desk, so that instead of having to have stacks of paperwork sitting next to your desk, you will be able to use the keyboard and go right to the Amendment and see all the language of the Amendment right in front of you on a computer screen and that you won't have to thumb through all those pages of actual physical paper. And I think that is what we are trying to do is prepare for that day."
"I concur with that, I think it is time we move into the electronic age here. Will you ask the Majority and the appropriation process be submitting that into the form of an appropriation so that every Member of this Body will have a computer or some sort of equipment at their disposal to get this information?"
"I'm not sure...I'm not sure exactly how this will be done. I think perhaps that is a question that you could talk to your Leader and talk to your Assistant Clerk. Because I think it is really a function out of the Clerk's office in terms of reproducing the Bills and Amendments and other things that we do here. I believe that is a question perhaps that would be addressed to your own Leader."
"Thank you for your time."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Clinton, Mr. Granberg."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Gentleman yield?"
"The Gentleman indicates that he will yield." 94 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day
January 12, 1995 "Representative Churchill, under the previous Rules, we have briefly discussed this, a Motion for the previous question required the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Members. What is it now to move the previous question, to terminate debate?"
"Yes, Representative Granberg, I know you have been celebrating a lot the last couple of days and perhaps your voice is almost as hoarse as mine sounds and I just didn't quite hear your question. Would you just please state that again?"
"Under the previous Rules required two-thirds vote to move the previous question, to terminate debate and the intent behind the Rule was to assure that there would be bipartisan support on that matter. How many votes are now required terminate the debate under your proposed Rules?" Churchill: to "Sixty votes."
"So you no longer have bipartisan support to terminate debate?" Churchill: to "I think it is totally possible to have bipartisan support. I know there are Members on both sides of the aisle that sometimes are... feel that they know the issue well enough and that they don't need to hear any further debate. I join with a lot of your Members move the previous question, whether...regardless of what the Rule says just because, you know, I think that sometimes we get into a point were everybody is saying the same things. So we've had bipartisan support on these Motions in the past and I'm sure we'll have bipartisan support on those Motions in the future."
"And under the previous Rules each Member was entitled to explain his or her vote. In fact this might be the last 95 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 time we will be entitled to do that. That right will no longer be available to every Member. Is that correct?"
"That is correct."
"So Member's rights to debate is now going to be limited by these two provisions?"
"A Member's right to debate will be the right to debate. But an explanation of vote, which comes not in debate, but after the vote is already on the board is being eliminated. You'll still your right to debate, we love to have lots of debate. In fact, I think what you are seeing today is lots of debate and I think that is how this whole system will go."
"That's because we're under...we're operating under the old Rules."
"Yes. But I believe the Chair and the Sponsor of the Resolution and everybody on our side of the aisle is bending over backwards to make sure that you have every opportunity to discuss these Rules and we are going to try to do that throughout the Session."
"Thank you. Representative Churchill, obviously we disagree and I just want to reiterate some earlier comments and with due respect to Mr. Black. It is an honor to serve in this Body and all of us that have been elected by those 95,000 people to do that and if you look to the history of this institution I would say to the Freshmen, look around you, look to the history of this Body itself and the great statesmen that were here, Douglas, Lincoln, the greatest President in the history of country. These people were in this Body, this is a great institution and now by limiting debate, limiting what can happen on the floor, you're going in contravention of the intention of all the people in this state. Never before in the history of this state have 96 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 these Rules been so restrictive, not just for Democrats but for Republican Members as well. For the first time in the history of this state, this Body will be limited. At a time when the last election should of told us that we need to be more open to make government more deliberative, to have open debate. We are going just the opposite. Speaker Gingrich has said on time and time again on other occasions. On Crossfire once again they're going to allow more opportunities to offer more Amendments on the floor in Congress. That's what this is all about, to open up the process, let people see. We hear about closing the process, you're closing it more. We need to open it up, that is the nature of this institution. That is the nature of our individual rights as Members. Our most solemn vow and duty is to our constituents, whether they be it in Southern Illinois or the suburbs or in Chicago. And you're limiting the debate, you're limiting what individual Members can do to fulfill their obligation. That is not good government, that is not the message of this last election. We are going the opposite way and that is something that should not be done. When we all made that solemn oath yesterday, we promised to uphold the constitution and to send our message to the people that we have listened to them and now we are going the opposite way. This is not good policy for government. Whether it is this Body or any Legislative Body we need to open it up. So, Ladies and Gentlemen and particularly the Freshmen when you made that oath yesterday to serve your constituents, you are now breaching that promise, if you vote for this Resolution. Understand your obligation to your people as we do and this is not a partisan issue because I know most of you do that as well as can be done and we all try to do 97 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 the best we can for our constituents. But when you look at the history of this Body and what you are about to do, the people are not the top priority and that should never be the case in this Body."
"The Gentleman from St. Clair, Representative Hoffman. Representative Hoffman."
"Thank you, Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. My concern is like the previous Gentleman's concern regarding the...the lack of debate or the inability to debate by closing off debate by moving the previous question. And I think that the point made by the previous speaker is well made and I'm not a historian but I do know that...that President Lincoln during his time in this chamber, or may have during his time in this chamber, gave the House Divided Speech. And if you think about it, under your Rules...under your Rules you could've cut off...cut off that speech from being made, one of the greatest speeches in the history of our country would not have been made because you could of cut it off by moving the previous question and having 60 votes. What else concerns me is when people can no longer amend things on the floor of the House. So you come here from various parts of the state, from Carbondale, Mt. Vernon, Rockford, Champaign, Collinsville and your people ask you to do something for them and the pilot bureau of five people who are going to be sitting on the Rules Committee is going to make a decision whether you're going to have the right, whether you're going to be able to exercise your right to represent your 95,000 people, that's my concern. This is not a Minority or Majority rights issue, it is Membership's rights issue and I ask that you consider that when voting on this Resolution." 98 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995
"The Lady from DuPage, Representative Cowlishaw."
"Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I have noticed that the word 'intent' and 'intentions', those words have been used with some frequency by the Members serving on the other side of the aisle and they raise a good point when they use those words. Because those of us who have served here for any length of time at all know that although the Rules are certainly important, what is most important of all is how the Majority Party chooses to interpret them, chooses to impose them. Now I have also detected a certain tone of fearfulness among those making comments from the other side of the aisle. And I am hoping that there is really no reason for that but of course that time will only tell that. I can understand a feeling of fearfulness because you see we all understand the very human and natural inclination when one has been treated unfairly one self, the inclination to seek retribution. But, my friends, those of us who have suffered under tyranny are the most likely to defend liberty for all and therefore in accord with the words of Bob Michael who wrote a magnificent essay recently published in the publication called 'Common Sense', which is a publication of the National Republican Policy Committee. He cautioned the Republican Members of the U. S. House of Representatives to please be fair, that they had not been treated fairly themselves and for that very reason should be all the more anxious to treat others fairly, to regard pieces of legislation on the basis of their merits, not whether the Republicans or the Democrats get the credit or the blame. And so indeed our intent, our intentions are important, they are more important than these Rules and it is my fervent hope that what we will 99 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 prove to all of you on both sides of the aisle and all the people of Illinois and this was the concluding sentence in Bob Michael's essay, 'Governing well is the best revenge.'"
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Dart."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I mean seriously, let's cut through this, I mean there has been all of this rhetoric, let's have a little reality check. A reality check is you guys won, we lost. So you are imposing these Rules upon us. And yet there has been this constant harping about how onerous these Rules were, just what a nasty little weapon these were. Well, if they were such a nasty weapon you probably would adopt them but the thing is you don't want to stop there, you want to stop debate, you want to stop Bills, you want to stop all that stuff that would otherwise be the characteristic of maybe a General Assembly, you don't want that. So that is what we hear about, there has been this constant refrain about openness, about fairness. Avoiding obstructionism...Obstructionism is, if I'm not mistaken, I remember a great deal of Amendments that were filed over here. I remember individuals from this side of the aisle who were required by Leadership to speak, even though they didn't want to, they had to keep speaking. So come on let's knock that off, you know it is all a bunch of garbage. The reality is, we're all elected by about 95,000 people to come down here and represent their needs, their wishes, that is what we are suppose to do. Instead we, by voting for this, will be advocating that thing. We are saying that the king and his court are going to Rule this. Our constituents didn't vote for them but they're the ones that are going to call the shots. So by doing this, the 100 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 king and the court is going to call all the shots for you here and if that's how you want to do it, that's fine and you are the ones that are going to have to live with that. But by doing that you have really done everything, you have advocated every power you have been given here. It is an utter disgrace to have something like this occur, this is something we all ought to be ashamed of but if this is how you want to run things, go ahead and do it, you've got the votes, you're going to do it anyway. So please, no more of this fairness and openness stuff, you know it isn't true, let's knock it off."
"The Chair recognizes the Gentleman from Cook, Mr. Lang."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?"
"The Gentleman indicates he will yield for questions."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Churchill? Are you with me? Mr. Churchill? Are you there?"
"Yes, I am."
"On Page 16 of your Resolution, Subsection (d) it talks about setting up special temporary committees, created and appointed by the Speaker when the House is not in Session. What are those committees? What are we referring to? Page 16, Subsection (d)."
"Yes. These are...there may come a time when a special committee has to be formed. I remember a time when we a had special committee on gambling issues and I think that special committee went all over the whole state and took testimony and heard people and these provisions in (c) and (d) basically give the House the ability to create committees so that they can do general or specific business of the House while the House is in Session or while the 101 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 House is out of Session. And I think it has been an important tool for this Body to have. And these would be committees that I would think would be very similar to committees that have been formed in the past...by past House Rules."
"Well let me ask you a question. How are these committees appointed?"
"I think if you will look at what you were talking about (d) and if you will look in Line 15, you'll see they may be created and appointed by the Speaker."
"Only by the Speaker. Well, where is it in Section (d) that discussed Minority Members of these special temporary committees?"
"Speaker Daniels in the Chair."
"I think the answer to your Rule is that the or the answer to your question is that, the temporary committees are to be created and appointed by the Speaker. But that the wishes of the Minority Leader and in regards to his Membership would be honored."
"Well, where does it say that here, Representative Churchill? Let me read you what it says. It says, 'These committees may be created and appointed by the Speaker. The actions of the Speaker and of such special temporary committees shall stand as the action of the House.' It says nothing here, as it does in many other Sections of HR 4, about minority representation. So I'm interested in where that is here so we can point to it. Because I'm sure you will agree, would you not, that we don't want to pass the House Rules and have a section here where you could have the Speaker appoint any number of Members to a committee and have their wishes become the dictates to the House of Representatives without minority representation, 102 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 that would go against your view of sunshine. Is that correct?"
"Representative Lang I think if you'll look under Rule 2.6 or 2-6, Page 9. It says that a Minority Leader shall appoint to all committees the Members from the Minority Caucus and shall designate a Minority Spokesperson for each committee."
"Well, Sir, in...on Page 16, Subsection (d), you refer to special temporary committees, those are not the committees in my view that are referred to in the citation you've given me. Or in the definition on Page 1, Section 1.3 of committee, this does not refer to special temporary committees. I think you've left something out of this Section, Sir."
"Section 1.3 defines a committee."
"Section 1.3 defines a committee and does not refer to special temporary committees."
"The Section in 3-3(d) creates a type of committee that is a special committee, that's why we call it special. The Section that I referred to earlier in 2-6, permits the Minority Leader to appoint the Members from that committee. And I think that those Rules basically create the same type of situation that we have now and we have always had where whenever the Speaker in the past created a special committee, he permitted Minority Members...not always, but there were times when he didn't let Minority Members be on it but normally when there was committee of both Majority and Minority Members, the Minority Leader chose his own Members."
"Sir, you're talking about what normally happens, what we should expect to happen, what the traditions of the House has been. That's all fine and that's great if you do 103 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 everything that you should do. But we're not sure you're going to do everything you should do and so I am going to ask you the question again. Subsection (d) on page 16 in capital letters, so it is separated out from any other kind of committee, you set up a special category called Special Temporary Committees, this is defined nowhere in the Rules that you proposed. The only definition of the word 'committee' is on Page 1, Section 1-3 and does not refer to anything called special temporary committees. And so I ask you again, why if the Minority Members of the House of Representatives been left out of the opportunity to be appointed to these special temporary committees? I am not here to say that your proposal purposely left us out, I am not suggesting you would be disingenvous enough to ignore Minority Members of this House in these committees. I'm just simply suggesting that you acknowledge that perhaps you've left that out of this paragraph."
"Representative Lang, since what you are talking about now is shifted to the definition of committees. I would ask you to take a brief look at 3-1(a), Parens. (II) end Parens. which says special committees created by House Resolution under Rule 3.3 and that is defined under committees."
"Where are you, Sir?"
"Page 13 and Line...starting at Line 22. Special Committees created by House Resolution under Rule 3.3 or 3-3."
"Sir, those are not the special committee that you are talking about here. On Page 16, Paragraph (d), you're not talking about committees of the House. You say, very specifically, when the House is not in Session. And when you're talking that other...on Page 13, that special 104 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 committees with a small S and a small C. This is a specific kind of committee called a Special Temporary Committee, all caps, a very special kind of committee. And it says that this committee can be appointed by the Speaker when the House is not in Session and you further go on to say that the actions of this committee become binding upon the House of Representatives. And you will allow the Speaker without Minority representation to appoint this committee. Now there is nothing in here that allows minority representation or requires minority representation."
"Representative Lang, the provision in 3-1(a) (II) refers to special committees, it has a small s and a small c because it is talking about all of the different kinds of special committees created under Rule 3.3. If you will then turn to Rule 3-3 on page 15 you will notice under (a) that there are special committees under (b) that there are special subcommittees, under (c) that there are special committees."
"Sir, in Section (c)..."
"(c) and under (d) there are special committees and all of those special committees, in each one of those provisions are wrapped together and referred to under 3-1 (a) (II) and since those fall under the root work of committees they also fall under the previous Rule that I have sighted to you where the Minority Leader has the right to appoint the Members of the Minority Delegation to that committee."
"Sir, that refers to Subsection (c). In Subsection (c) you're talking about a Resolution or Motion creating a special committee or special subcommittee. It must...it must talk about the subject matter, it must talk about the 105 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 2nd Legislative Day composition. You said that in Section (c), I don't have a problem with that because that's going on while the House is in Session. The only kind of committee that can be created by Resolution is when the House is in Session. In Subsection (d) you are referring to a committee that can be created by the Speaker on his own hook when the House is not in Session. And there is no language here that discusses anything about Members of this side of the aisle having to be required to be Members of that committee. There furthermore is no notice requirement in this Section. Why is there no notice requirement?"
"In answer to the first part of your question, let me just talk about practical reality. We will have a final makeup of all of our committee structure that will be presented following the next day or so when we're not in Session. We are not in Session next week and yet practical reality dictates that the Minority Leader will make appointments to that committee next week when we're not in Session. So that committee will be created when we're not in Session. And so if you want to talk about...relief the day that we are in Session, that means that those committees will be formed on a day when we are literally not in Session. But we have started in the big picture, big Session, small desk. We have started our Spring Session and we are in Session and committees may be formed during that period of time and this rule just goes beyond. It says that the Speaker has the right to create a temporary subcommittee or a committee to look at a particular issue. I think it gives a certain amount of flexibility to this House. In case there is a major issue that confronts us at a time when we are not in Session, for us to be able to put together a committee to go out and 106 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 look at the needs of the people of Illinois, it may be the people in your district that will receive a visit from one of these committees in a time of great need for them. And if you were to follow the thought pattern that you're proposing here, we would not have the power to put that committee together and we couldn't go to your district and we couldn't help your people. I think that this is something that is for the good of the people of Illinois and I hope we never have to use this special committee to look at some major problem in your district or mine. But should the occasion ever arise these Rules provide for that opportunity."
"Is it your statement for the record for legislative intent that HR 4 that minority people...Minority Members of this Body be appointed to any special committee under this subsection?"
"The Speaker will determine how many people are on the committees and the Minority Leader, under the Rule I previously recited has the power and ability and right to appoint the Members of his side of the aisle."
"All right. I have...I'm going to let this go because nobody is really listening now anyway accept you and I, Mr. Churchill. But I do have another...one more question and then I will forego the other 30 or 40 that I have because the Members probably want to get on home. Let me ask you this, if a Member has an Amendment to a Bill in committee. A Member of the committee has a Bill in the committee or the Sponsor of the Bill has a Bill that's being heard by the committee. What's the procedure on that Amendment?"
"Which part of the procedure are you asking for?"
"Why don't you give me both, I've got time."
"Well, I'm not sure exactly what it is you are 107 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day wanting."
"All right, January 12, 1995 we'll take them one at a time. I'm a Sponsor of House Bill 5 and it's before the Pension's Committee and I'm calling it but I have an Amendment. What do I do with that Amendment? Does it have to go before the Rules Committee first?"
"Under the past practice the Pension's Committee would automatically be deferred to the last day of the binding Session. But...I'm just kidding...the answer to your question because it is a serious question. When you come into the committee and you have an Amendment it is a Committee Amendment. You will be allowed to present that Committee Amendment instanter as the Sponsor of your Bill."
"And does the same go for the Member of the committee? If I'm a Member of a committee and you have a Bill and I want to amend it, may I present that Amendment as a Committee Member?"
"A Member of a committee has the right to present a Committee Amendment which will be considered instanter providing that they are on that order of business and that Bill and all those other kinds of things. There is no notice required for that."
"Thank you. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I could spend a great deal of time on these Rules but I'm not. I don't believe that Mr. Churchill is being disingenvous answering my previous question about appointing Members to this special temporary committee. But it's of great concern that the House Rules would allow the Speaker of the House of Representatives to appoint a committee when...when we are not in Session, such committee not being required by the Rules to have Members of both political parties and having that committee's decisions be binding upon the House 108 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANS 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 your voice heard back home. And Charlie Morrow said it very well, you're here to serve your constituents and if they don't hear your voice back home, you won't be back here. So search your conscience, find out why you came here. If you came here to do somebody else's bidding, then vote for this Resolution, but if you came here because you care about government and you care about the people you serve, vote 'no'."
"Further discussion? Being none, Representative Churchill, to close."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And let me just say to the previous Speaker. Lou, I thought you did a great job, if I were on your side of the aisle I'd give you that last Leadership spot. I hope it works that way for you. There are some comments that I just need to give some reaction to and then I think we will close this off and let Members go on SO that they can get home in appropriate time. There was a comment made by folks on the other side of the aisle that these Rules are just like the Senate Rules. Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah. I would say, as I said in my initial remarks, these Rules are de novo. They are new Rules and we have taken some of the better ideas from the Senate. We have taken some of the better ideas from Representative Madigan's former Rules. We have taken some of the better ideas from House Members who have come forth and asked us to include their thoughts in these Rules. These are de novo. They're not like anybody else, they are new and they are ours. There was a comment made about notice, we gave 25 hours of notice on these Rules. The last time that we had a new set of Rules I walked into the Rules Committee Meeting, I had not been presented with a copy of the Rules. I got them five minutes before the Rules Committee Meeting. 110 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995 We went from the Rules Committee to the floor to vote on it, we had five minutes notice and about an hour's notice before we came to the floor. This time we gave 25 hours of notice, that's 25 times what we received the last go around. I heard someone say that we were imposing Rules on somebody and I say, don't feel that you're imposing Rules. Vote with us, join with us, join so that we can all vote for these Rules. If you do that then we are not imposing Rules on you, we're just allowing democracy to occur. For all the rhetoric that has gone on today I know that when these Rules are passed and they go into practice, I'm going to have Members from both sides of the aisle that are going to come up and say, 'You know what, that really does work and it works right and it works well, thank you for a job well done.' And I know that is going to happen from Members from both sides of the aisle because these Rules open up the process to sunshine and openness. They improve the decorum of this House; they create efficiency and I believe that they are fair. This is a time for a new beginning, this is a time for new Rules, this is a time for a great new beginning and I would move the adoption of House Resolution #4, Mr. Speaker."
"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of House Resolution #4. Those in favor signify by voting 'aye'; those opposed by voting 'nay'. The voting is open. Representative Turner, the Gentleman from Cook."
"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Seeing that this may be the last opportunity to do this, I want to first of all compliment the Majority Leader on his tie and let him know that this morning and many of you know my wife buys most of my ties she bought this one for me because she said we would be playing a different tune in this chamber and it's 111 2nd Legislative Day STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE January 12, 1995 quite obvious looking at the numbers that there is a different tune. But I do rise in objection to House Resolution #4 and I would ask each and every one of you to reconsider those green votes and give us more reds. Thank you."
"Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk will take the record. On this question there are 64 'ayes'; 51 'nays'; none voting...none voting present. And the Resolution is adopted. Mr. Clerk, read the Adjournment Resolution."
"A Message from the Senate by Mr. Jim Harry, Secretary of the Senate. 'Mr. Speaker, I am directed to inform the House of Representatives that the Senate has adopted the following Senate Joint Resolution in the adoption of which I'm instructed to ask the concurrence of the House of Representatives. Senate Joint Resolution 5, offered by Representative Churchill. Resolved by the Senate of 88...89th General Assembly in the State of Illinois in the House of Representatives concurring herein. That when the two Houses adjourn on Thursday, January 12, 1995 they stand adjourned until Friday, January 13, 1995 at 12 o'clock noon in Perfunctory Session. And when they adjourn on that day they stand adjourned until Wednesday, January 18, 1995 at 12 o'clock noon in Perfunctory Session. And when they adjourn on that day they stand adjourned until Friday, January 20, 1995 at 12 o'clock noon in Perfunctory Session. And they stand adjourned until January 24, 1995 at 12 o'clock noon. Adopted by the Senate January 12, 1995. Jim Harry, Secretary of the Senate'."
"Representative Churchill now moves for the adoption of the Adjournment Resolution. On that matter, the Gentleman from Cook, Minority Leader Madigan." 112 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 2nd Legislative Day January 12, 1995
"The Clerk's voice got lost with the noise, I presume that this provides that we will come back into Session the week after next on Tuesday?"
"Yes, Sir."
"Okay, thank you."
"Yes, Sir, it today."
"Thank you."
"We will be in Perfunctory Session on January 18 and January 20 and return in Session on January 24, 1995 at the hour of noon. Representative Churchill now moves for the adoption of the Adjournment Resolution. Those in favor signify by saying 'aye'; opposed, 'nay'. The 'ayes' have it. And in the opinion of the Chair the 'ayes' have it. Are there any further announcements? The House will next meet at noon on January 24th. There will be Perfunctory days for the introduction of Bills by the Clerk during that time. Being no further business Representative Churchill now moves that the House stands adjourned until Friday, January 13th at noon allowing perfunctory time for the Clerk. All those in favor signify by saying 'aye'; those opposed 'nay'. In the opinion of the Chair the 'ayes' have it and the House is adjourned." 113 REPORT: TIFLDAY PAGE: 001 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DAILY TRANSCRIPTION OF DEBATE INDEX JANUARY 12, 1995 95/02/27 12:23:23 HR-0001 ADOPTED PAGE 4 HR-0001 RESOLUTION OFFERED PAGE 4 HR-0004 RESOLUTION OFFERED PAGE 22 SUBJECT MATTER HOUSE TO ORDER SPEAKER DANIELS PAGE 1 PRAYER REVEREND TOM CROSS PAGE 1 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PAGE 2 ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PAGE 2 JOINT SESSION PAGE 6 GOVERNOR EDGAR STATE OF THE STATE PAGE 7 JOINT SESSION ADJOURNED PAGE 21 REPRESENTATIVE RYDER IN CHAIR PAGE 21 SPEAKER DANIELS IN CHAIR PAGE 110 MESSAGE FROM SENATE PAGE 112 HOUSE ADJOURNED PAGE 113