Illinois House Floor Debate — April 2, 2003

"The House shall come to order. The Members shall be in their chairs. We shall be led in prayer today by the Reverend Prentiss Harris of the Mt. Zion Baptist Church in East Moline. Reverend Harris is the guest of Representative Mike Boland. The guests in the gallery may wish to rise and join us for the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance.”

"We shall be led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Representative Lang.”

"Roll Call for Attendance. Representative Currie.”

"Thank you, Speaker. Please let the record reflect that Representative Fritchey is excused today.”

"Mr. Bost.”

"The Clerk shall take the record. There being 117 Members responding to the Attendance Roll Call, there is a quorum present. Mr. Clerk.”

"Mr. Parke, do you wish to call House Bill 1318? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Mr. Parke.”

"The Gentleman moves for the passage of the Bill. The Chair recognizes Mr. McCarthy.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I just want to compliment Representative Parke for his work on this issue. This is a serious concern of the people in my area of the state, with the bankruptcy of Meyer Medical. Some of them waited for almost a year for their records and some are still waiting today. But I think by putting some more teeth in the measure as far as making sure these records are disclosed to the patients and the citizens of our state… this is a great measure and deserves every ‘aye’ vote in the House. So, I want to thank Representative Parke once again.”

"The question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ Those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed by voting ‘no’. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk shall take the record. On this question, there are 117 people voting ‘yes’, 0 voting ‘no’. This Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Is Mr. Burke in the chamber? The Chair recognizes Mr. Bost. Mr. Bost. Mr. Dunkin, did you wish to call House Bill 3429? 3429. Mr. Dunkin. Mr. Dunkin.”

"No.”

"The Gentleman indicates he does not wish to call the Bill. Mr. Flider, do you wish to call House Bill 09300040.doc 4  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 3048? The Gentleman indicates he does not wish to call the Bill right now. Is Representative Flowers in the chamber? Mr. Franks. Mr. Franks. Mr. Lang, do you wish to call 89? Mr. Clerk, House Bill 89, read the Bill.”

"Mr. Lang.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen, House Bill 89 was thoroughly debated when the Amendment became the Bill yesterday. As you know, we have $10.5 billion owed to the state by our taxpayers and not a good way to collect it. I’ve been working on this Bill a number of years. This’ll give us a centralized debt collection system to go after some of the people that owe us some dollars. It’s a good time to be doing it. I would ask for your support.”

"The Gentleman moves for the passage of the Bill. There being no discussion, the Chair recognizes Mr. Black.”

Speaker Madigan: "Mr… Mr. Black, I didn’t see your light flashing as I rolled into my routine.”

"But as usual, Mr. Black, you know, the…”

"… the knowledge that you wish to speak stops everything.” 09300040.doc 5  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Mr. Black, did you want to interrogate Mr. Lang?”

“The Gentleman’s ready.”

"Yes, Sir. In fact, the Department of Revenue and I worked closely to draft the final Amendment. They are the ones who suggested that we delay the transfer of debt from 2003 to the year 2004, and in some agencies 2005, because they think it will take them a period of time to tool up their computers, to hire the appropriate people, and to get this program in place. And I was certainly willing to give them the time to do it.”

"Thank you.”

"I’ll be there with ya.”

"The question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ Those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed by voting ‘no’. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Has Representative Hultgren voted? The Clerk shall take the record? On this question, there are 117 people voting ‘yes’, 0 voting ‘no’. This Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Ryg. Representative Ryg. Representative 09300040.doc 7  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 Younge, did you wish to call House Bill 2598? 2598. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. House Bill 2598 would transfer to the Department of Human Services the administration of the Guaranteed Job Opportunity Act. And the… the Department of Human Services would accept this responsibility and supports the Bill as a result of the adoption of the Amendment #1, which would call for a pilot project of subsidized employment for TANF or Temporary Assistance for Needy Family recipients. It would be a small demonstration of taking people from public aid to a private gainful employment. There would be job clubs, which would teach people how to fill out resumes and how to be interviewed, how to dress, and how to get ready to work. This is an important initiative because it… makes an investment in people as a priority rather than a dole. And I ask for your approval of this matter.”

"The Lady moves for the passage of the Bill. The Chair recognizes Representative Mulligan.”

"The Sponsor yields."

"Because the Department of Human Services has the responsibility for TANF recipients. And the Department of Human Services wishes to do this Bill and this project and set up the jobs… projects. And so I thought it would be a good thing to give them the responsibility, since they want it.”

"It will be my effort to get an appropriation. The project will not proceed unless there is an appropriation.”

"Currently, there aren’t any projects under this Act. The… as of the passage of 2598… the first project would involve TANF recipients under the Department of Human Services.”

"I… I feel comfortable the Department of Human Services will work with the other departments and the other programs to… to maximize the benefit to TANF recipients.”

"Thank you.”

"The question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ Those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed by voting ‘no’. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Clerk shall take the record. On this question, there are 102 people voting ‘yes’, 0 voting ‘no’. This Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Franks. Mr. Franks, did you wish to call House Bill 209? The Gentleman indicates he does not wish to call the Bill. Is Mr. Hassert in the chamber? Do you wish to call House Bill 1729? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Mr. Hassert.”

"The Gentleman moves for the passage of the Bill. There being no discussion, the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ Those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed by voting ‘no’. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk shall take the record. On this question, there are 111 people voting ‘yes’, 5 people voting ‘no’. This Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Brosnahan. Mr. Capparelli, do you wish to call House Bill 9? The Gentleman indicates he does not wish to call the Bill. Representative Collins. Collins. Do you wish to call House Bill 1182? The Lady indicates she does not wish to call the Bill. Mr. Forby, do you wish to call House Bill 3407? The Gentleman indicates he does not wish to call the Bill. Mr. Hartke, did you wish to call House Bill 3635? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. House Bill 3635 is the annual land transfer legislation that IDOT 09300040.doc 11  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 puts forth each and every year. The original Bill has seven pieces of property, one in Rock Island County, one in Woodford County, one in Winnebago, another in Ogle, Rock… another in Rock Island, Bond County and… and then one in Cumberland County. Each of these, in my opinion, has met the scrutiny for them. And number two then adds one, which we talked about yesterday, in Representative Mitchell’s district for the purpose of a veterans’ memorial. I appreciate everyone’s support. Be happy to answer any questions.”

"The Gentleman moves for the passage of the Bill. There being no discussion, the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ Those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed by voting ‘no’. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Did Mr… has Mr. Burke voted? The Clerk shall take the record. On this question, there are 117 people voting ‘yes’, 0 voting ‘no’. This Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Bill Mitchell. Mr. Bill Mitchell. Mr. Burke, did you wish to call House Bill 70? 70? Mr. Clerk, what is the status of the Bill?”

"Mr. Burke.” 09300040.doc 12  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I’d ask… I’d ask for the adoption of Floor Amendment 5, which would, in fact, shell the Bill.”

"The Gentleman moves for the adoption of the Amendment. Those in favor say ‘aye’; those opposed say ‘no’. The ‘ayes’ have it. The Amendment is adopted. Are there any further Amendments?”

"Put the Bill on the Order of Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, how many times has the Bill been called… read?”

"Leave the Bill on the Order of Third Reading. Mr. Granberg, there’s a House Bill 962. Do you wish to call the Bill? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Mr. Granberg.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 962 directs the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the Rend Lake Conservancy District, located in downstate Illinois. The Bill provides that the audit would be paid for by the district itself; there would be no state cost. We simply want an objective audit to be conducted to instill public confidence in the conservancy district. And I would ask for your support.”

"The Gentleman moves for the passage of the Bill. There being no discussion, the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ Those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; 09300040.doc 13  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 those opposed by voting ‘no’. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? The Clerk shall take the record. On this question, there are 117 people voting ‘yes’, 0 voting ‘no’. This Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Ryg, do you wish to call House Bill 3061? The Lady indicates she does not wish to call the Bill. Mr. Brosnahan, did you wish to call House Bill 2215? The Gentleman indicates he does not wish to call the Bill. Representative Flowers, do you wish to call House Bill 1507? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Representative Flowers.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 1507 provides that in any proceeding on a petition seeking a finding that a minor is neglected, abused, or dependent or seeking a finding that a parent is unfit and that it is in the best interest of the child to terminate the parent’s right, the parent may have a jury trial. And I’ll be more than happy to answer any questions you may have in regards to this Bill.”

"Mr. Hartke in the Chair.”

"Is there any discussion on House Bill 1507? The Chair recognizes Representative Mulligan. Representative Mulligan.”

"The Sponsor indicates she will yield.” 09300040.doc 14  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Thank you very much, Representative, for the question. And I want to say to you the answer is that it’s voluntary by the parent. It’s up to them, if they want to have a jury trial.”

"It’s up to the parent, it’s permissive. If the parent wants to have a jury trial, they can do so.”

"Well, Representative, I didn’t address that in the legislation and… because right now there is no length of time as to how long a child lingers in the system or how long DCFS may or may not want to terminate their rights. But let me just say this, for criminal purposes, a criminal can… must be brought to trial within 130 some odd days. A juvenile has the right to a trial within 120 days. So I’m sure some place in the middle there, we can work that out.”

"Representative, let… let me just answer that, if I may, by saying that the Fiscal Note of a child being deprived of their parent, I don’t know that. And how… how could anyone possibly put a Fiscal Note on an issue when it is our constitutional right to be able to demand or ask for a jury trial if we’ve been accused of a crime. Whatever the… whatever’s applicable in regards to a criminal, whatever the Fiscal Note may be, or whatever the process may be, I think a parent whose rights are being terminated and those rights is not… Well, I don’t know…”

"Representative, and also DCFS has a conflict of interest with my Bill, because the longer a child stays in the system, then the more children that they can have to adopt, the more moneys that they get for this issue. So, because they are in opposition, it does… you know, it’s okay.”

"Representative, I… you know, I’m amazed at when people talk about jury trial for children and the confidentiality. The same child at the age of 10 or 13 on the civil side that you would think that there should be confidentialities on… in the same bill, but on the criminal side there need not be any confidentiality. As a matter of fact, in three places in the juvenile criminal court section of this Juvenile Act it states three times that a sh… a minor ‘shall’ have a jury trial, a minor ‘shall’ have a jury trial, a minor ‘shall’ have a jury trial. Not unless that minor so choose to waive the right. So the confidentiality, and if on that criminal side the defense attorney may say in defense of that minor, ‘Your honor, the reason why Johnny is the way that he is, because at the age of 10 he was sexually abused while he was in the foster care of the juvenile… of the Department of Children and Family Services.’ So where is the privacy that was on the civil side that is no longer on the criminal side that’s causing this to continue?”

"Well, let me give you the background. In… from 1899 to 1966 this state did have a right to a jury trial, and it was under the Family Practice Act. The Family Practice Act was eliminated; then came the Juvenile Act. The Juvenile Act did not address the rights of a parent to have a jury trial. So, there was a case… and if I may, I have the… one of the professors that dealt with the case in 1979. And I… let me just read this, please. ‘I am one of the attorneys who litigated the right of a parent to a jury trial when the state seeks to terminate the parent’s rights. It was in 1979. The Illinois Appellate Court urged that this matter be resolved by the Illinois Legislators. You finally have this opportunity to do that today. Our society has long recognized the unique nature of the parent/child relationship as an essential ingredient of family integrity. The uniqueness is enveloped in a high degree of constitutional respect for the way a parent controlled the details of the child’s upbringing and in retaining the custody and the companionship of the child. The right of a parent to raise and care for a child is a fundamental liberty interest, which our Constitution promotes and protects. This right is far more precious than any property right that the American enjoy under the constitution of the United States. When the state seeks to end the sacred relationship, it does more than terminate it, it extinguish it altogether. Justice Blackmun was 09300040.doc 18  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 correct to observe that the forced dissolution of the relationship is punitive in nature; the decision to terminate is final and irrevocable. The forced dissolution of parental rights is more substantial than mere loss of money. Justice Ginsberg has characterized a termination decree as among the… the most severe of state action and against the individual of our society. Moreover, the United States Supreme Court recognized in a case that the state cannot evade the constitutional protection of due process by law by labeling it the proceedings of civil. When Illinois granted a litigant the right to a jury trial to contest his or her interest in real property, personal property, or money, but failed to accord a right to a jury trial when the severity of the decree that terminated parental rights is final and irrevocable, the state turns its legal system on its head. It elevates property over fis… over fiscal rights… I’m sorry, it elevates property or fiscal rights a way above the fundamental Constitution to protect one’s own child. Such a result is constitutionally and unconscionable, and ultimately it creates a statutory scheme in the degradation of the fundamental right, which violates the equal protection of the law. Because termination of parental rights is state action against the individual and is punitive in nature, Illinois must safeguard a parental interest by allowing a parent to be judged by a neutral decision making… maker that reflects the diversity of the community’s values and its collective wisdom. As a matter of participa… participatory democracy 09300040.doc 19  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 and protection against the government dominated justice, a jury trial is the mo… is the most direct attempt at realizing this goal.’ And that was said by Charles H. White in the criminal procedures.”

"Excuse me, Representative. Let me… I’m almost finished, please. Okay? If the Resolution of a contract dispute regarding an eviction from an apartment or personal injury claims arising from an automobile accident merits community participation in its decision-making efforts, a jury trial is essential to a fair and just resolution of parental rights. Our society benefits from the participation of juries in a justice system, civil and criminal, when juries represent the diversity of the community. I am not at all convinced that the objections that have been voiced against this Bill, which were premised on the up… on the unsubstantiated allegations that a jury trial in this atmosphere of the law are too costly or that it may impede the just and the expeditious adjudication of important rights, can be constitutionally justified. Concerns for the judicial economy should never be allowed to undercut the Constitution guarantee of fairness and judicial proceeding. And, Ladies and Gentlemen, for 25 years… for 25 years, the court… the court have been asking the Legislators to speak on this issue, because when we eliminated the Family Practice Act in 1966, we were silent on the issue whether or not a parent… a 09300040.doc 20  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 parent, a family member had a right to a jury trial. And they are asking us to speak because the silence is killing and destroying so many children and families.”

"Fur…”

"You know, Representative, I’m glad you brought up the Justice, because I have a report here and it’s from the Chapin Hills (sic – Hall) Center for Children at the University of Chicago and it deals with child abuse and neglect proceedings. In this report, and I’m just gonna take an excerpt out of here, it says, ‘In a descriptive 09300040.doc 22  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 report of child abuse and neglect proceeding by Chapin Hall Center for the University of Chicago, May, 1997, revealed that despite the fact that most judges hear abuse and neglect cases have had substantial legal experience, approximately half the judges have served on the bench for more than 10 years. Unfortunately, the promotion of that experience and the level of training in the law related to the abuse and neglect was not discernible from the complete survey. Survey respondents specifically mentioned the need for access to additional training for juvenile court judges and attorneys to counter their often limited exposure to the juvenile law and access to current information. Overwhelmingly, the concern that… that the necessary services was scarce and there was a lack of availability of services required… and required lengthy involvement by DCFS. They argued that without continued juvenile court jurisdiction family lacking external support and access to need and services will never ever be able to get their children back. Another critical concern was the lack of legal representation of parents in an uneven throughout the state. In some jurisdictions, custodial parents are represented by attorneys doing adjudication and dispositional, and 50 percent of the times or less, and representation of shelter care.’ And so, Representative, by their own admission, the judges have their own issues with what goes on within DCFS. And some of them even stated that they refer to this pamphlet here. This pamphlet is called ‘Caring for Kids: The Juvenile Court 09300040.doc 23  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 Abuse and Neglect Proceeding’. This, Ladies and Gentlemen, is what is used to determine whether or not I am worthy of having my child. And I don’t think this is appropriate for a judge to sit at a bench and consult this.”

"Further discussion? This issue is on Short Debate. Short Debate calls for the Sponsor to present the Bill, one person in response. Representative Mautino, for what reason do you seek recognition?”

"Take it off the Short Debate.”

"I see… I see the necessary hands to put this Bill on Standard Debate. Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Lindner. Representative Parke, for what reason do you seek rec…”

"We’ve… we’ve just done that.”

"Representative Lindner.”

"The Sponsor will yield."

"In regards to confidentiality, Representative, imagine yourself in a courtroom. And in that courtroom, 09300040.doc 24  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 Representative, it’s not just the judge and the parents. It’s the prosecutor, the public defender, the guardian at litem and other people just walking in and out the courtroom. That’s on the civil side. And also, it stated in the state statute that the media have access as well as anyone else that the court and DCFS deem that should know about it. So, there’s your confidentiality on the civil side. Now, for that same child that you’re trying to protect on the civil side, there is not that protection on the criminal side, because that same child in the same building, different courtroom, other side, have a right to a jury trial. And all the things that we were trying to keep a secret on the civil side is now exposed on the criminal side. So, once again, what do you mean about confidentiality?”

"Representative, I’m talking about jury trials for parental rights who have been terminated. Now, let me just say this. Let me say this. We have a problem in this state. Whenever, according to our own records, that we have a flawed system… Let me just… There are numerous of 09300040.doc 25  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 families that is… that are in this system because DCFS did not follow their own guidelines in regards to family preservation, in regards to reunification. When you think about… when you think about, Representative, the number of children… there was 50 thousand children in this system at one time. And there was ap… DCFS could’ve taken the opportunity and the judge, the court, could’ve taken the opportunity to put in…”

"Shh. Shh.”

"… place the family preservation and the reunification. But because the dollar, Representative, because the dollar followed the adoption, and there is a bounty on the child, there needs to be a preponderance of evidence to prove that I am guilty, as opposed to hearsay. You are sentencing me to life without my child from hearsay. Some anonymous person made an anonymous telephone call and made an anonymous allegation. Some anonymous man come to my door at 3 o’clock in the morning to take my child out to who knows where. I don’t know for 48 hours where my child is because of some anonymous person. And if I did have a problem, Ladies and Gentlemen, if I did have a problem, if I was neglectful because I lost my job and my utilities are off and my nosy neighbor called and said that Representative Flowers is neglectful of her children because I know she’s over there without any heat. I know she’s over there without any light. And DCFS comes in and snaps my children. Why can’t they help me, Representative? I’m a mother; I’m in need of help. And the Department of 09300040.doc 26  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 Children and Family Services, that’s not their own private money, that is the state’s money. And as a taxpayer, we are costing the state more moneys by snatching these families. We are… in the best interests of the child… Representative, let me say this to you. By DCFS’ own study, 11 percent of the children that’s brought into this system have been sexually abused and misused while they were in the state’s care. Things that would not have happened to them had they stayed at home in my cold, dark house. They would’ve had my love.”

"Yes, Representative.”

"Oh, Representative, there has been numerous of occasion. This is not my first time bringing this legislative… legislation forth. So, when you ask why is it, I don’t know who you want to recommend, we’re the Legislators. We’re the Legislators. So, I did try to recommend this a couple years ago. And DCFS came to me because they… and this judge came for… Tim Casey came to me. I got the same letter from Justice Martin Bishop. And everybody came to me and says, oh, this would cost too much money. This would do this. I said okay, well, I tried to put together, Representative, a review panel. A review panel would say… I would be able to go to that review panel and say to that review panel, ‘Panel, I love my children. 09300040.doc 27  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 And if I had some assistance, if I could use the family preservation, I can get my lights on, I can get my gas on. And then if I were able to get some daycare money’… because, see, right now the state says I have to have a full-time job in order to get daycare. So, I don’t have a full-time job, I can’t get daycare, so I can’t go out looking for a job. So, everything, Representative, is against the mother. There is not a conscientious fact in this state in regards to the best interests of the family. Now, you cannot separate the child, ‘cause you cannot tell me that in most cases… in 98 percent of DCFS cases, where those families could’ve stayed intact, that DCFS could not have done something about it. But because, Representative, get back to your question, the reason why it has not been so bad. In the ‘80s, late ‘90s, Jess McDonald said it was to his advantage to maintain the children in the system longer, Ladies… Representative. Jess McDonald said it was to his advantage to maintain the children in the system longer to capture the federal dollars. And then we came up with this… the Federal Government came up with this safe… safe adoption plan. And… and because there was 50 thousand children in the system, you know, the road to hell was paved with good intention, so the Federal Government said, ‘Okay, I’ll tell you what. We’re going to give you all some moneys for adoption.’ And so, the pendulum swung the other way. We went from having 50 thousand children in the system, and all of a sudden the headlines read what a wonderful job our DCFS was doing because now we have all of 09300040.doc 28  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 these children in loving, adopted homes. But what they don’t tell you, Representative, there was a bounty on each child. What they don’t tell you, Representative, that these families, their rights was terminated against their will. And all their family needs to do was get some help and they could’ve stayed together. What they don’t tell you, Representative, is that this is really not in the best interests of the child because so many of those children are suffering from the deprivation of a mother’s love. They’re seperat… They’re suffering from mental illness; we’ll give them all kinds of psychotropic drugs. That’s what they don’t tell you, Representative.”

"I can’t answer that, Representative, ‘cause I don’t know.”

"I am aware of a project that was put together by, let me see, Denise Kane. I’m aware of a project where she wanted to put together a model project that will recognize the necessity of in… of involving spouses, relatives, and friends. I’m… I’m aware of what she tried to do in regards to the… the family conference model the… and how they talked about the importance of the family and how New Zealand and the Family Resource Movement… how it’s been successful. I’m aware of that, Representative.” 09300040.doc 29  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Well, Representative, I did speak with them. And as a matter of fact, I had one… one of the young ladies there, she says, ‘Representative, you are 98 percent correct on everything you said.’ But then she finally said, ‘What about the cost?’ And I said to her, ‘What about the cost of the child? What about the cost of destroying a family?’ And then there’s another person whose name I will not call because of… for personal reasons, but I’ll be more than happy to tell you off the record, that she is very much in support of… of this legislation. And she said that she’s called other states and she found out that it was working in other states. But I can say that I also have… I’m glad you asked that question. Because I also have another e-mail here, from someone whose name you might remember… be aware of, and because it’s on this sheet here, I’ll read it. Now, this is from… this is from Betsy Clarke. And you did ask about the Illinois Bar Association and you know Betsy is a part of that. The first word, and I’ll be more than happy to share this with you, it says ‘support’. I know this is a burden for counties, but my limited experience with children and the abuse and neglect system here in Evanston has been so troubling. And the demands on the mother, along with the excrutionary (sic – excruciatingly) slow service to her, made… to her have been 09300040.doc 30  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 made so difficult to achieve reunification in a family that is close and should be reunified immediately troubled me so much that I think it is critical that we offer a right to a jury trial at termination. As an adoptive parent, I can say that issues of rejection for adoptive children are very difficult, even in the most ideal circumstances, where we were selected by our birth mothers and were… and were out of… and where our children have access to their birth families, so rushing to terminate and get to a permanency is a terrible infraction. There is no permanency for children who are adopted since they have all… I’m sorry, there is no permanency for children who are adopted since they have always had to integrate their birth parents into their lives. So, I think it is critical to insure that the termination decision is made in the fairest way possible. And this is by Betsy Clarke, president of the Juvenile Justice Initiative. And I’ll be more than happy to share that with you.”

"Representative, I just read to you what Betsy Clarke said, and she’s a part of that.”

"Well, I don’t know who’s the chairman. I was just invited for the first time and I was too glad to go to speak.” 09300040.doc 31  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"To the Bill.”

"This Bill is on the Order of Standard Debate. We’ve had two people speak in response. There are still six people seeking recognition, Representative Hamos, Black, O’Brien, Lang, Eileen Lyons, and Representative Molaro. We will recognize one more person in response and three people in… in support of the Bill. Representative Lang. Are you speaking in response?”

"I am, Sir. Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, I rise in reluctant opposition to the Lady’s Bill.”

"The timer is on.”

"Sir?”

"The timer is on.”

"Was the timer on for…” 09300040.doc 32  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Yes, Sir.”

"Thank you. I know how much this means to Representative Flowers. I know how hard she works on this and 99.9 percent of the time she and I are in the same place on issues involving welfare of children. But I do think in this particular case, this Bill is not the way to go. And while generally speaking I would support the right to a jury trial in virtually every kind of case for virtually every kind of reason, the overwhelming weight of evidence in this matter seems to be that this is misguided. The Chicago Bar Association, DCFS, the presiding judge of the Child Protection Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, have all weighed in in opposition to this. And I think they have some significant reasons for doing so. In fact, the presiding judge, Judge Bishop of the Child Protection Division, has indicated that this Bill can have profound negative consequences for the very children that the Sponsor is trying to help. The issue of confidentiality is raised. Once you have a jury trial, you’ve now opened up the lives of the children and the families to this jury. It’s now an open courtroom proceeding where anyone could hear what’s going on. And it’s been proposed that schoolmates, neighbors, acquaintances would all learn about a child’s life as a foster child and the circumstances which brought about that child into foster care. Additionally, it creates a limbo for children, according to the judge. It separates a division… the decision-making process into two pieces. A 09300040.doc 33  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 jury may decide that parental rights should not be terminated, but a judge will still later at a hearing have to determine the question of custody. This is not a good result. Today the psychological and psychiatric files of these folks are all confidential. But juries cannot make these kinds of decisions regarding the lives and the futures of children without access to the whole story. And so, psychiatric files, psychological files, personal medical records would all have to be brought in front of this jury. Judge Bishop believes that this Bill will expand the time that it takes for children to have their issues resolved and, in essence, punish the children for the delay that jury trials can take. The question has been raised, what if there are several children and several different fathers? Shall we have a jury trial for each? Yes, I know we’d have to have a separate hearing for each without a jury trial. But these hearings are different than setting up a jury trial for four or five or six different children with some of the same parties and some different parties. Different fathers, different sets of psychiatrists, different circumstances, impaneling five juries, six juries, seven juries to resolve the rights of all the same children that may have all the same foster parents. I think there are some real issues here. The most important issue, of course, is delaying the permanent solution to the problem for these children. We all share a common view on this floor that these children are important and their lives and their futures are important. And as I 09300040.doc 34  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 say, I’ve worked with Representative Flowers many, many, many times, and we share that common view that these children must be protected. It just seems to me though that the weight of the evidence is against this particular Bill. And accordingly, I would urge your ‘no’ votes.”

"Further discussion? Ladies and Gentlemen, we’ve had three people speak in response. Representative Black, O’Brien, Molaro, Feigenholtz, or Davis, would you like to speak in favor of the Bill? Representative Molaro.”

"Thank you.”

"Five minutes.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, obviously what Representative Lang said about that we’re all basically on the same page with the children, I… I think that’s evident here. Even some of the debate, even though it may have got contentious, and… and even though Representative Flowers, when she does talk about this, you could see that it’s very near and dear to her heart. But I think it’s also near and dear to the hearts of the people who are opponents to this Bill. And maybe what happens is we get too far afield. Because obviously, even when the Sponsor was talking about abuse versus neglect… you know, very rarely for environmental neglect do you… do you lose your child, even though, you know, maybe… maybe it does happen. And mostly, it’s cases of abuse. But the point I… I would like to make is, when you talk about the scheme of things in life, nothing is more important than… to you than your child. So 09300040.doc 35  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 when a court wants to come and say we’re gonna take away your child, we’re gonna take away your parental rights, but you don’t have the right to a jury. However, if you go down to Marshall Fields and you steal a $20 can… piece of candy from Frango’s, or whatever Marshall Fields make, you can have a jury trial for that. We feel, here in the General Assembly, that it’s so important, so very, very important of whether or not you should be decided whether you shoplifted a $20 item that we will give you a jury trial by your peers to decide. But if it’s to take away your child and ac… calls you an abuser, you don’t have that right. We think it’s not that important. We should let a judge decide that. Well, why don’t we let a judge decide shoplifting? Why do we give that right under our Code to a jury trial for a $20 piece of candy, but we don’t give you that right if we’re gonna take away your parental rights? We all stand up here and say how important it is, how important that parental right is. How when we, as a state, go in to take it away, we do it with a heavy heart. So, this is just one piece of protection that someone can go to. Now, there’s State’s Attorneys in this room, there’s lawyers in this room, former State’s Attorneys. It is very rare that you go to jury trial. Very, very, very rare. When you have hundreds of thousands of people accused of shoplifting, accused of other crimes, very rare do we go to jury trial. The same thing is gonna happen here. Yes, can someone get up and say, oh, we’ll have jury trial? We’ll have seven different trials with seven different kids. 09300040.doc 36  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 We’re gonna have all this put on the court system. Well, how can anybody say yes or no? Nobody can look into the future. But if you look into the past and see how often somebody’s charged with a misdemeanor and how often it goes to a jury trial, I will submit to you, talk to practicing lawyers. It very rarely happens and it’ll very rarely happen here. But to say I think it’s good public policy for the State of Illinois to say we think it’s just as important when you’re taking away someone’s parental rights as it is for a $20 piece of candy, I think we’re sending the right message. And I would vote ‘aye’.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative O'Brien.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. To the Bill. I rise in…”

"To the Bill.”

"… support of this Bill. … speakers talk. I think that there are often times when judges are in a better position to make a determination than juries. But, in cases from the most complex products liability case to the imposition of the death penalty to getting a ticket for not wearing your seatbelt, we give the individual the choice of whether or not they think a jury can be properly educated regarding the complex matters, regarding the law and all of the evidence. But in a circumstance where we are severing the most basic human tie, that between a child and the child’s parent, we are saying that only a judge can make that determination. That’s just wrong. Families should 09300040.doc 37  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 have an opportunity to have a jury trial for this monumentous decision that’s being made. And it has a definite effect on what is in the best interest of the child. And to say that a jury can’t weigh all of the evidence and can’t figure out what is in the best interest of a child, then the argument should be made that they can’t figure out whether or not a person is guilty or innocent of the crime of murder and should be sentenced to death. If they can’t figure out a products liability case because they aren’t expert engineers. That argument just doesn’t hold water. The fact of the matter is that this is the most fundamental and basic right. To participate in giving life to another human being and then to have the right and that bond severed is supreme. And it should be given the most weight and it shouldn’t matter that it might cost $10 million. There isn’t one child in this state that isn’t worth at least that much. And for that reason, I urge an ‘aye’ vote. Thank you.”

Speaker Hartke: "Ladies and Gentlemen, because of the sensitivity of this issue, we will continue this debate. The Chair recognizes Representative Black. The timer’s on.”

"To the Bill.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Monique Davis.” Davis, M.: "Will the Sponsor yield.”

"The Sponsor will yield." 09300040.doc 40  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 Davis, M.: "Representative Flowers, is there a timeline in which parents are given the opportunity to change or shape their lives before they can get their children back?”

"Representative, a couple years ago we passed legislation that said that a parent had to get their act together within 15 to 18 months, I can’t remember which. But anyway, that was ruled unconstitutional by our Supreme Court.” Davis, M.: "So, Representative Flowers, you’re saying that the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that a timeline that this Body had established for a parent to retrieve his or her child… I read about that case and I believe the judge stated that if the person was a substance abuser and was on a waiting list to receive treatment that that timeline did not give the parent the opportunity to even get into the treatment. Is that correct, Representative?”

"You’re absolutely right. And the lower court judge was Judge Brawka and it was sustained by the higher court. And the reason why, Representative, because DCFS failed to do what it was supposed to do in regards to providing the services. And that is the problem with this entire issue. If DCFS were to provide the services to the parents, then we probably wouldn’t have a lot of the problems that we have now. And in regards to a child being able to testify against its parents, it’s amazing to me now that a parent standing before a judge 10 minutes and a decision has been made without that parent ever being able to put on a case for his or herself. And the only person there that will 09300040.doc 41  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 testify to the best… to the… in regards to the parents, either she’s a good parent or the… or a bad parent, is… that is the child. And DCFS and the court can make the decision, even if the parent would say, ‘Would you please bring my child before me and before you. She will testify that I am not a perfect mother, none of us are, but I’m doing the best that I can. And she loves me and I love her.’ But the court can say, ‘Oh no, we think the best interest of the child is to stay in school and the best interest of the child that she should not be brought to court.’ But then who do… who is there to say whether or not I am or I am not worthy of having my child, some strangers who have nothing or know anything about me?” Davis, M.: "Representative, when this case… or, when these cases go before a judge, can the parent speak or say anything?”

"Representative, the parent in the courtroom… if the parent got notice, according to the studies, because a lot of parents don’t get notice and therefore that’s justification for the states… the prosecutor’s office to say, ‘See, we should go on and terminate the child.’ But often times if a parent is there they are not allowed to speak because the public defender’s supposed to speak for them. And each case lasts… according to the Chapin Hall Report, each case for parental termination lasts less than an hour or short as 10 minutes.” Davis, M.: "Representative, do they take… does the judge take most of his information and facts from a caseworker?” 09300040.doc 42  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"A caseworker that has… can say anything she want and no… if… yes, a judge get all of his or her information from the caseworker. The caseworker could say to a judge, ‘See, here judge, here is the report.’ But the judge or the caseworker that… the caseworker had to get this medical rec… medical record authenticated by, according to the statute, a director or any responsible person that’s working at a hospital. So I’m assuming, even, that a janitor is a responsible person that’s working at a hospital can authenticate that these records are true. But the fact of the matter is, the judge nor the caseworker get a chance to explain to the judge, ‘Well, judge, yes, Mary does have a scar on her arm, but that scar was 10 years old.’ But no, the caseworker say, ‘No, judge, Mary does have a scar’, without the ramification of how long and how it got there.” Davis, M.: "May… to the Bill, Mr. Speaker.”

"To the Bill.” Davis, M.: "We know of… I’ll give you the most recent case where a little boy was in a foster home in my district. Three years old and he was chained to a bed by his foster mother. I doubt very seriously that he was taken from his home…”

"Please bring our remarks to a close.” Davis, M.: "Wow, well thanks a lot. Let me just say that I believe that this is the most egregious crime of our century. And that is to take… to terminate the rights of a parent who has not had a right to go before a jury and have 09300040.doc 43  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 her or his side heard. Many children have been taken out of their homes in Chicago without the parent even given one opportunity to respond to charges. And that is wrong. I urge an ‘aye’ vote.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Collins. Representative Collins.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I just wanted to rise in support of this Bill. Just to tell you a couple of stories… well, one story will do. I used to work as an investigator for child abuse at… with the Department of Children and Family Services as a sex abuse investigator. And a lot of times when those kids come to court, the parents don’t have a right or they don’t get a chance to tell their story to the public defender and the public defender present their case. I think if we had a jury by trial that mother or that father or they would have a chance to gather other relatives there to tell their side of the story that would help them prove to the judge and the court. A lot of times, again, they don’t have an opportunity to get into services because there’s a long waiting list on the free programs and they don’t have money to afford those programs. A lot of times if services was put into that home, those children would be able to stay in the home. And again, there are times when children are taken from the home and the only thing they need is services put in that home to provide a… an environment that is safe for that child. Another thing is when children reach a certain age, they’re not at risk for abuse. I 09300040.doc 44  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 mean, it’s kinda hard to abuse a 13, 14, 15 year old child and they not be able to tell someone. So, when you’re talking about taking those children away… when you put them in placement, they run away and they run back to the home that you took them from. And as children get old enough and they get mobile enough, they go back to their homes. So, what are we saying? We’re saying that regardless of the fact, that children want to be at home with their parents. So we need to put the services into the home so that children will remain safe with their biological parents. Thank you.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Graham. You have five minutes.”

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

"The Sponsor will yield."

"Representative, with all due respect to my colleagues in this chamber, if a parent abused a child, extreme abuse, that child… that case would not even be considered for a jury trial. Is that not right? The parent would probably go to jail off the bat if they had, like, an extreme abuse for a case.”

"The case that Representative Davis enunciated, those foster parents was taken to jail.”

"Taken to jail. So they… their rights would be terminated automatically anyway, right?”

"I don’t think it will… well… well, those… those particular parents don’t have…” 09300040.doc 45  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Rights.”

"So… but, yes. But, no, your… your rights would not automatically be terminated if you are incarcerated for the crime.”

"Okay.”

"So there is a process that you would have to go through. But the chances are, there will not necessarily have to be a termination of parental rights because there is the criminal court.”

"Okay. Having worked in a social services environment, I’ve dealt a lot with children had… that had been removed from their homes. And I had to go to court on a lot of times, bringing details to the judge as the progress of how the mother was doing. If the mother was doing well 80 percent of the time and probably doing bad 20 percent of the time and she’s reached the end of the time where DCFS would be eligible to pay for the services, at that point they would probably be saying… they would move for adoption of the child. But I think that a jury trial would be necessary so that they could probably determine… at that point… we’ll say that the mother has done fairly well during 80 percent of the time, let’s extend this mother’s time on this particular program. However, if the mother wanted to prove to us that she absolutely wanted her children back, then she would have to go out and find those services for herself and bring back that documentation. Oftentimes when mothers have substance abuse problems, they have to go to a legitimate place to have drops done, 09300040.doc 46  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 counseling services done that were outside of the family. So I think this is an excellent Bill. I think it extends the… the rights of the families. Sometimes judges see a thousand cases a day, and sometimes they don’t get a chance to organize their thoughts and separate all the issues that they’ve seen. So, I think that a jury trial will be necessary…”

"Shh. Shh.”

"… so that they can break down and see all of the facts involving the case. A lot of times the caseworkers do bring information to the judge, but then you also have those caseworkers who are just hard and tough on crime in the first place and they’ll bring negative information to the judge. And sometimes the judge does not send out investigations to verify that information. And sometimes independent advocates are able go in to sort out that information. So, I stand in strong support of this Bill. Thank you.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Eileen Lyons. Representative Lyons.” Lyons, E.: "Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would ask for verification if this Bill receives the requisite number of votes.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? Further discussion? Since no one is seeking recognition, Representative Flowers to close.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I want to bring to your attention…” 09300040.doc 47  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Excuse me. Ladies and Gentlemen, please give the speaker your attention. Please. Shh. Thank you.”

"I… I would like to bring to your attention an article that was in the USA Today. And this was written by… it’s an editorial, written by Hillary Clinton and Tom DeLay. And just to summarize it, they were talking about the Fisher story, that’s the movie that was made of the young man who spent his life in the… in the foster system and then he went on to the army to become very successful. And the Federal Government… the Fisher story should spark broad reform on… on the foster care system, which needs to be changed one community at a time so that no more children will fall through the cracks. Despite our political differences, she and Tom DeLay agree that we are committed to working together so that the children, like Fisher, do not languish in the system. The Federal Government now gives states almost $7 billion annually to protect children from abuse and neglect, placing children in foster care, and provide adoption assistance. But, Ladies and Gentlemen, guess what she said. She said and he said that the timing was off. Most of the money goes to the… to the state for use after a child is removed from a troubled home. Instead, it should be used to provide for more preventive resources to keep children out of foster care. And then, Ladies and Gentlemen, I want to say to you that President Bush said, in his budget for children for 2004, he says we… we can find a bi… we must find a bipartisan solution to reform the way we finance our child welfare 09300040.doc 48  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 system. We want to give the states an option to change the way foster care is financed by keeping these children in the homes. Ladies and Gentlemen, I also want to bring to your attention as we speak… as we spre… as we speak, our Supreme Court… our Supreme Court is acknowledging the fact that we have some problems. And they have put together the Supreme Court of Illinois, the Special Supreme Court Committee on Child Custody Issue. They’re having a public hearing and a subcommittee on the termination of parental rights. There is a problem, and our Supreme Court knows that this must be addressed. And more importantly, I want to bring to your attention the law bulletin imposed time limit on custody cases. See, some of you have asked and talked about the delayed process, how the jury trial would have a delayed process. Jury trials does not exist today. And there are children that has been languishing in the system all of their lives. They were taken from their mother’s womb and they went to the Department of Children and Family Services. They left the Department of Children and Family Services, and init… eventually, according to studies, most of the children… 80 percent of the people that’s in our Department of Correction is from the Department of Children and Family Services. And I want to bring to you another article from the Supreme Court. It says this is a clarion call for reform. That’s what our Supreme Court is saying. And I must also bring to you, Ladies and Gentlemen, what Jeb Bush. Jeb Bush realized… he realized that civil court…” 09300040.doc 49  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Shh.”

"… was the lowest form of court. And that’s the reason why, Ladies and Gentlemen… that’s the reason why these cases are drug on and on and on. Because it’s just civil court and we are just talking about poor people’s children. So therefore, there is no rush. But, you know, I must say to you that Jeb, the Governor of Florida, said that a criminal is sentenced for a season. He’s given 5 to 10, 10 to 15. Parental termination is for life. It’s for life, Ladies and Gentlemen. And we… he said in his state that we must make reasonable efforts to bring the civil up to the criminal, to put some time limits for the best interest of the children. Also, I have to say to you another law bulletin. It says little law is practiced in the courtroom of these children. And what we’re doing to our children is unconscionable and is unconstitutional, Ladies and Gentlemen. On behalf of the children, I want to ask how long must they suffer. On behalf… on behalf of the children, Ladies and Gentlemen, the courts… our courts have been asking us for the last 25 years. Legislators, it’s your job. It’s your job. You need to speak. Can the people… the poor people whose rights are being terminated, can they or can they not have a jury trial? Ladies and Gentlemen, it’s time for us to stand up to the bat and say ‘yea’ or ‘nay’ on behalf of the children. And I urge an ‘aye’ vote.”

"The question is, ‘Shall the House pass House Bill 1507?’ All those in favor of the Bill will vote 09300040.doc 50  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 ‘yes’; those opposed vote ‘no’. The voting is open. Please vote your own switches, there has been a veri… verification requested. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 59 Members voting ‘yes’, 50 Members voting ‘no’, 7 Members voting ‘present’. Representative Flowers.”

"Mr. Speaker, I would like to put this Bill on Postponed Consideration.”

"Your request will be granted. Put this Bill on Postponed Consideration. On page 25 on the Calendar, on the Order of Third Reading, appears House Bill 218. Representative Beaubien. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Representative Beaubien.”

"Is there any discussion on House Bill 218? Seeing that no one is seeking recognition, the question is, ‘Shall the House pass House Bill 218?’ All those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed vote ‘no’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk… Have all voted who wish? Representative Giles. Have all voted who wish? Mr. Hassert. Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 89 Members voting ‘yes’… Mr. Novak. Mr. Novak.”

"Yes, Mr. Speaker, you did not tell the Clerk to take the record, and I was coming back here to change my vote.”

"I’m sorry, I did.” 09300040.doc 52  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"No, you did not. You did not indicate to the Clerk to take the record, and I would like to switch my vote.”

"We’re checking the tape, Mr. Novak. It’s the Chair’s decision to dump this Roll Call. There will be no discussion and we’ll go right to our Roll Call. The question is… Mr. Clerk, dump the Roll. The question is, ‘Shall the House pass House Bill 218?’ All those in favor will vote ‘yes’; those opposed vote ‘no’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Froehlich. Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 67 Members voting ‘yes’, 46 Members voting ‘no’, 4 Members voting ‘present’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On page 26 on the Calendar, on the Order of Third Reading, appears House Bill 361. Representative Davis.” Davis, M.: "… It’s a four-year study of traffic stops in the State of Illinois by law enforcement. For each stop for a traffic offense, whether a citation is issued or not, information regarding the name, address, gender, and race of the person stopped shall be recorded, as well as the alleged traffic violation, the make, the year of the car, the date and time of the stop, the location of the stop, and whether a search occurred, and if so, was it by consent. Law enforcement will forward this information to the Illinois Department of Transportation in a manner prescribed by the Illinois Department of Transportation, and at times prescribed by IDO… IDOT. IDOT shall then 09300040.doc 53  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 analyze or contract with another entity to analyze the data, looking for stati… statistically significant aberrations. A law enforcement officer information and driver identification information is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.”

"Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Mr. Parke, discussion on House Bill 361.”

"The Sponsor will yield."

"To the Bill.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Millner.”

"To the Bill.” 09300040.doc 55  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Further discussion? Since no one is seeking recognition, Representative Monique… Representative Black.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Washington.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the Sponsor relinquish?”

"The Sponsor will yield." 09300040.doc 59  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"I ju… I want to raise a question. Ms. Davis, if an Amber Alert is in effect, would the officer be subjugated between a decision of going on with the most important emergency in terms of priorities? How would that work?” Davis, M.: "Any emergency of a criminal nature or any emergency involving the Ambular… Amber Alert does not require the officer to fill out anything. This Bill only relates to vehicle… the Vehicle Code… the Illinois Vehicle Code. It does not relate to the… it does not relate to criminal pursuit by an officer and it does not relate to an Amber Alert.”

"So you’re saying… I mean, there’s room for common sense. An officer knows Amber Alert is more important than…” Davis, M.: "Simple traffic stops.”

"… gathering their information, right?” Davis, M.: "Absolutely, Representative. Simple traffic stops is what this Bill represents.”

"To the Bill. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say… and I always respect my colleagues on the other aisle. I really admire a lot of what they say. But I think I’m speaking from the position of a victim of racial profiling. And I think I got my colleague when it comes to being a victim of racial profiling. And I think the example he gave was a good example in his mind and a lot of people’s mind, but it was an extreme example. And I just want to say, speaking to the Bill, that unless you’ve really gone 09300040.doc 60  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 there, you really probably can’t fathom the unnecessary detainment, stops, deaths, that have resulted in death of somebody reaching for something, something that was shiny. The number of African-American and Latino deaths that have been a result of officers whose mentality is one not to serve and protect, but one to serve and abuse those who they don’t like for various nationalistic reasons. And then to that aspect, I speak to the Bill. And I thank Ms. Davis for coming up with a Bill that kinda curved that. And I’m hoping that the colleagues in this room, even if they don’t understand it, would have the sensitivity enough to understand the wide range of abuse that some of us go through just to be called Americans. It’s not where you can just take it for granted. Some of us pay daily to earn the right to try to be like everybody else, to pursue like everybody else, with equal access and equal justice for all, as we do it in the Pledge of Allegiance. But the reality of that, versus the content of the words, are quite different. So I stand in support of this legislation because what it does, and I hope that you will join us in doing so. There’s a lot of pain in the State of Illinois due to racial profiling. And I’m asking you to join me in being one of the painkillers, to offer a solution to discourage and to deter officers who do this on a day-to-day basis and get away with it. Thank you.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Brady.”

"The Sponsor will yield."

"To the Bill.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Lou Jones.”

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

"The Sponsor will yield."

"My… my comments are to the Bill. You know, first I want to commend the Sponsor for working so hard for the last three or four years on this legislation. And I would like for the Body here to know that if you have never, never been stopped on the highway for racial profiling, you don’t have a clue as to what that person goes through. I was stopped at 1 o’clock in the morning by a female cop for no reason at all. I identified myself, I told her who I was, I told her where I worked. And this is about six months ago, it did not make any difference to her. She couldn’t even give a reason why she stopped me and my friend at 95th and the Dan Ryan. It’s a horrible feeling. I did not know… all the time the lady was talking to me she 09300040.doc 65  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 had her hand on her gun. I went to go into my compartment in my car to get ID. to show her that I was a State Legislator. It did not make any difference. She told me not to move. She detained me for over 45 minutes. And for the people in this chamber don’t know, I am a diabetic and I’ve been a diabetic for 16 years. And I had a diabetic reaction while that lady detained me for 45 minutes. And I informed her that I also was a diabetic and I informed her what was going on with me. She did not care. At that point I told her to do whatever she had to do, but I was gonna use my cell phone and call the district and ask for another officer to come out here. And I did just that. When another officer came out she was also a female, she was a sergeant, she had a white shirt on. And she asked her, ‘Why did you stop this lady?’ And she could not answer her. She said, ‘I don’t know why two women would be out in the street at 1 o’clock in the morning on a Saturday night.’ That would… that did not make any sense. It was not any of her business. I think all of us was elected to come down here to Springfield to aptly protect the citizens of Illinois. And grant you, there might be some more work that has to be done on this Bill. I would hope that the other Legislators on the other side of the aisle and on my side of the aisle would want to work with this Representative and make it safe for all people, no matter race, color, creed, or religion, out there driving their vehicles. Monique, I commend you and I urge everybody an ‘aye’ vote.” 09300040.doc 66  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Lang.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. I rise in support of the Lady’s Bill. Representative Davis has been working on this for some time and she’s done a serious study of how this should work. She knows what we need to be doing, and I think we all know that this goes on in our state. To say that it doesn’t go on would be folly. The story that Representative Jones has just told you is just one of thousands that could be brought to this floor. And this is a serious problem in the State of Illinois, one that must be addressed. I think Representative Davis has thought this out carefully. She’s proposed it several times, but she’s made changes along the way. And now I think we have a piece of legislation we should all be supporting. If we’re true to our oath of office that we’re supposed to be supporting the Constitution of the State of Illinois, a Constitution that says that we should be providing freedom in our state in a nondiscriminatory way, I don’t think you can be voting against this Bill. I would urge ‘aye’ votes.”

"Further discussion? We have Sacia, Froehlich, and Soto, and then we’ll go to a… a conclusion. Representative Sacia.”

"The Sponsor will yield."

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative Froehlich.”

"To the Bill.”

"Further discussion? Representative Soto, the final questioner.” 09300040.doc 72  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Thank you, Speaker. To the Bill. Okay, what I want to say is this is a great Bill. I stand in support of this Bill. I had an experience myself a few years ago where I was stopped because they thought that I’d look like a gang member. Could you believe that? Well, I can’t. But, it would happen. I had my children with me, they were terrified. The way I was treated was so unfair. So I stand in support of this Bill and I urge this General Assembly to support it. I don’t know why we are having so much debate on an… on a Bill like this on racial profiling. Maybe it’s not important to you, but let me tell you, it’s important to the minorities that sit in this General Assembly. So I urge your support and I thank you for your support.”

"Representative Davis to close.” Davis, M.: "Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to thank all the Legislators who are working with me, the Members of the committee. And I’d like the Body to know that I… this Bill is almost 100 percent similar to the Bill coming over from the Senate. I am working with them and I think this is the piece of legislation that probably gets everyone on- board on the same page. And I would thank you for an ‘aye’ vote.”

"The question is, ‘Shall the House pass House Bill 361?’ All those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed vote ‘no’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Holbrook. Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On 09300040.doc 73  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 this question, there are 70… excuse me, 80 Members voting ‘yes’, 28 Members voting ‘no’, 9 Members voting ‘present’. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, on House Resolution 161. Mr. Clerk, read the Resolution.”

"Representative Saviano on the Resolution.”

"The question is, ‘Shall the House adopt House Resolution 161?’ All those in favor signify by saying ‘aye’; opposed ‘no’. In the opinion of the Chair, the ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Representative Joyce, for what reason do you seek recognition?”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Point of personal privilege.”

"State your point.”

"Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, April mark… marks the month of Alcohol Awareness Month. We have with us today from the… the Illinois Drug Education Alliance, the board members Christi Creamer and Andy Sonneborn and a lot of the children from across the state involved. I’d like them to please rise and be recognized and welcomed to Springfield.”

"Welcome to Springfield. The Chair recognizes Representative Brady. For what reason do you seek recognition?”

"State your point.”

"Welcome to your State Capitol. The Chair recognizes Representative Eddy. For what reason do you seek recognition?”

"State your point.”

"Welcome to Springfield. Ladies and Gentlemen, the Chair would like to make an announcement. Approximately at 1 o’clock the Chair is going to be moving a series of Bills from Second to Third. We anticipate this to take about an hour and a half. So, when we start that movement, Members should be aware that they’re free to have lunch, but return in about an hour and a half after we start. We are not going to be in recess; we are not going to be adjourned. But the Chair has some perfunctory things to do to move Bills from Second to Third. So you should be aware of that. On page 26 on the Calendar, on Third Reading, appears House Bill 1116. Representative Kosel. Representative Kosel. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Representative Kosel.”

"Is there any discussion? Seeing that no one is seeking recognition, the question is, ‘Shall the House pass House Bill 1116?’ All those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed vote ‘no’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 115 Members voting ‘yes’, 1 Member voting ‘no’, and 0 voting ‘present’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On page 27 on the Calendar, appears House Bill 1191. Mr. Brosnahan. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Representative Brosnahan.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 1191 is better known as the sunshine litigation piece of legislation. This Bill has been around 09300040.doc 80  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 for a number of years. This is the… the third General Assembly that I’ve introduced this Bill. I know my colleague in the House, Lou Lang, has also been the Chief Sponsor of identical legislation in the past. House Bill 1191 is a relatively short Bill. It’s a straightforward Bill. I also realize, though, it has been the subject of great debate in the House. The purpose and goal of this legislation is to prevent future injuries to the public and to prevent needless deaths from occurring by opening up sealed court cases and sealed settlements that conceal public hazards. The… the thrust of this Bill is actually in paragraph (b). It states that no court shall enter an order or a judgment that has the purpose or effect of concealing a public hazard or any information concerning a public hazard, nor shall the court enter an order or a judgment that has the purpose or effect of concealing any information that may be useful to members of the public in protecting themselves from injury that may result from the public hazard. There are many examples where sealed settlements or sealed judgments have exposed members of the public to injuries and to deaths. There are many, many examples, asbestos is one. The Ford Explorer with the… the Firestone tires where there was tread separation. That was another example. But there are many, many examples out there. I’ve worked on this legislation for a long time. Amendment #3 does try to address the concerns of some of the opponents. Amendment #3, which became the Bill, removed the word ‘person’ from the definition of public 09300040.doc 81  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 hazard. So, right now this Bill does not apply to persons. Thus, the Bill does not apply to nurses, dentists, physical therapists, physicians, pharmacists, or podiatrists. For the purpose of legislative intent, this Bill does not apply to the care, treatment and procedures provided by nurses, physicians, and other healthcare professionals. But there are safeguards in this Bill. This Bill protects trade secrets; it protects information that’s not actually related to the public hazard. I believe this is the direction that the State of Illinois should be going. This is a public safety issue. I would urge its passage and I would be happy to answer any questions.”

"Is there any discussion? The Chair recognizes Representative O'Brien.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I, too, rise in support of this Bill. Unfortunately, we are dealing in a corporate world, in a world where… that doesn’t always look out for the best interest of consumers. And this Bill is a small step in the right direction to make sure that when there are fundamental problems that are a public hazard that the public will have access to them. And I commend the Sponsor for making every effort possible to address the concerns of… of the opponents to this legislation to clean it up to make it very, very tight. I think he’s done a wonderful job and I would certainly urge an ‘aye’ vote. Thank you.”

"The Chair recognizes Representative Hultgren for further discussion. Representative Hultgren.” 09300040.doc 82  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"The Sponsor will yield."

"Sure, Randy. The Amendment #3 became the Bill; it’s the… the exact original Bill. Except what Amendment #3 did, it removed the word ‘person’ from the definition of public hazard. And that was an objection that was raised by some of the opponents of this legislation. They thought that the word ‘person’ was… it would make the Bill too broad. So that’s why we… we added the Amendment #3.”

"Well, with… the Bill applies to… are any devices, an instrument, a procedure, or a product, or a condition of 09300040.doc 83  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 a device, an instrument, a procedure, or a product that is… that is caused or is likely to cause injury. If somebody, you know, does not want their medical records… does want… not want to grant open access to their medical records, they don’t have to. They would tell the judge, or whoever this is in front of, they would object to it. And with good cause they… that could be protected, just like trade secrets would be protected. We only want to have access to the information necessary to protect the public from a… from a public hazard.”

"Well, I mean, obviously there’s some things that I… I don’t think a judge would release, regardless of whether the… the person makes an objection or does not make an objection. But there… there is a balancing test here. And the person, if he does not want these records or the product or certain research development or… where there’s trade secrets they will tell the judge and… and show with good cause why it shouldn’t be exposed to the public. And the judge would… would listen to the arguments and that’s where the balancing test comes in.”

"No, it applies to all civil cases that come before a court. It doesn’t have to… doesn’t have to be just settlements either.”

"Absolutely not. And the reason, to me, is quite simple. When two parties… if they file a lawsuit in a courtroom, what they are basically acknowledging is that the private remedies didn’t work. I think when someone files a lawsuit in court, those people should have a diminished expectation of privacy because they are asking the court for intervention. So, that’s why I don’t think it’s a disincentive. And… and, Randy, I’m not sure, when you say disincentive, I’m not sure if you meant a 09300040.doc 85  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 disincentive to settle cases. But if you do, I would disagree with that as well. I think there are many reasons why there will be no chilling effect on settlements or… or anything of the sort. I mean, a trial, in and of itself, is gonna bring more publicity to the… to the parties, especially the defendant. Trials also cost a lot of money for both sides. And when you go to a… whether it’s a jury trial or a bench trial, if you decide not to settle the case, then what you’re doing is you’re exposing your client to even, maybe, higher damages. So, I definitely don’t think this is… would serve as a disincentive to settle cases. Does everyone know the trial lawyers support this legislation? Trial lawyers, they don’t want to try a case necessarily. They’d… they’d rather settle cases. They don’t want to spend all those weeks in courtrooms. So, this is definitely not a… a, to me, a disincentive to settle the case.”

"Randy, this legislation does not, in any way, affect the attorney/client privilege.”

"Well…”

"Well, thi… this legislation would apply to any discovery that’s tendered or… sure, it would absolutely apply to that. But it does not affect the attorney/client privilege. This does not get to confidential discussions between a… an attorney and his client. In no way does that Bill affect that sacred privilege.”

"I don’t think this would discourage research and development whatsoever. I mean, if there is some research and development going on that has… that has caused injuries to the public or… or possibly has caused death to individuals and we think there’s a public hazard, then does this Bill apply to that? Yes, it does. Absolutely. But… but there are safeguards in this Bill. If you’re talking about trade secrets, if you are talking about preventing a competitor from learning information that you’re doing during that research and development, then that’s when you go to the court and you tell the court this is why it should not be disclosed, because we have competitors out there that may want to take a look at this information. If you can prove to the court that it does not… it’s not necessary to disclose that information, then the judge wouldn’t disclose it. This is only the information necessary for the public hazard. So there… I think there are safeguards in there that it would protect research and development.”

"Randy, the only thing I can tell you is that the information that I got from the Coalition for Consumer Rights, they’ve indicated to me that there are 16 states out there. And I have the… the list of all the states: Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, North Caroline, New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, Washington. That these states have either passed legislation or that they’ve done it by judicial rule. I don’t have any legislation in front of me to read off to you, but I… I have heard from the opponents just this week that that’s not the case. I can tell you though that there is a… rules in California that took effect on January 1, 2001. The rules were adopted by the California Judicial Council, which prohibits the sealing of any records filed in a court case merely upon agreement of the parties. Under the new rules, stealing of court file documents will be… will be frowned upon. So, that’s done in California by judicial rule. So there have been some states out there that have taken action. I wish I had the other statutes to show you, but I don’t. So… but I’ve heard the same things you did, that there’s a discrepancy whether other states have… have done this.”

"Changing gears just a little bit, another question. Would this require businesses to keep documents and information after a settlement for a period of time?”

"That Bill do… this Bill does not address that.” 09300040.doc 89  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"But the thought is, doesn’t this Bill open up companies and in… I guess mainly just businesses to potential litigation if anything were to be determined. To me, it still seems like a very broad definition of public hazard. But if anything that a business is involved in that potentially could be seen as a public hazard, they could be forced to make public any information that would relate to that public hazard, again, definition being very broad. To me it would seem like that that would cause companies, in order to cover themselves, to keep, you know, literally millions of pieces of paper and information and research and discovery with the thought that potentially this could be used against them at a future point. Don’t you think that’s true in this case?”

"I mean, again, the Bill doesn’t address the keeping of records. But I think a company, if there are records there that deal with a public hazard, and… you know, if we can expose those records, that we could save lives, we could prevent further injuries from happening, then I… I think it’s worth the cost of those companies to… to maintain those records and to… to turn ‘em over if they have to, if a court so decides.”

"One last question and then I’d like to speak to the Bill. What guarantee do we have from this legislation? It seems like we are putting a significant onus on business - and a significant step on business here. And yet, it’s all with the thought that we’re trying to protect the public, which is very important. But what guarantee do we have 09300040.doc 90  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 that… that the public is really going to get the… the information of the potential public hazard? Does this Bill address that specifically of getting information about a public hazard to individuals? Or does it just open it up for the trial lawyers?”

"No. I mean, I believe that it would expose the information necessary to reveal a public hazard. A judge would have to make that determination. A judge… it would be an in camera inspection, it wouldn’t be an open court. He would go through the documents and the judge would decide what would be privileged information that wouldn’t be disclosed, and he would determine what information that would be released to the public to show the public hazard. So, that would be up to the… the judge to make that determination.”

"To the Bill.”

"To the Bill.”

"Thank you. I want to thank the Sponsor for answering some of the questions that I have. I think this is a difficult issue. I do want to thank the Sponsor for the work that he’s done as far as… I do think the Amendment is a step in the right direction. I still think the Bill is very dangerous. If we look at… if I could ask each of you to look back, even over the last couple weeks, at the number of Bills, one by one, that individually… you know, maybe you can make an argument that it makes sense that… this might be a good idea. This might be something that helps the public in and of itself. And yet, you know what? 09300040.doc 91  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 There is a cost to business. For each one of those things, there’s a cost to business. And I would argue, too, that this has a significant cost to business. If you look at the keeping of documents that businesses have, and even individuals have here in the State of Illinois, some of our corporations, I would argue with you, spend thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars, monthly just in retaining information with the possibility that they might be held responsible at a later date. They’d have to come up with a specific piece of paper that might relate to what someone might define as a public hazard somewhere down the line. This is going to have a significant cost to business. And you pile it on top of all of the other pieces of legislation, universal healthcare, mandates, leave bills, all these things in and of themselves, you argue that maybe they’re a good idea. But put together, Ladies and Gentlemen of this House, this is going to cost us jobs in the State of Illinois at absolutely the worst time. We’re already losing jobs here in the State of Illinois. We need to turn that around. We need to protect the jobs that we already have. We need to say it’s important for our businesses to want to stay in Illinois. And I would argue, too, that this, along with the many other things that we’ve passed here in the State of Illinois in this Legislature this year, hurt business, hurt jobs. All the best intentions of every piece of legislation that we’ve passed that sound good don’t add up to anything if the people in our district don’t have jobs, 09300040.doc 92  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 don’t have places to go to work, don’t have an income to be able to take care of their families. I want to encourage each one of you to take a look at that. Take a look at the multitude of… of different pieces of legislation that have been passed this year that hurt business, that add a cost to doing business here in the State of Illinois. We already have a difficult time encouraging businesses to want to come and stay here in Illinois, and this is absolutely the wrong step that we should make at this time. I also want you to think about, and many of you maybe aren’t familiar with the court system, but we do have in our court system many, many, thousands of cases that are filed each and every year. And it is in the best interest of our court system for the parties of those lawsuits to be able to get information, to gather information before they pro… proceed and clog up the court system, to be able to get any information that might relate to that case with the thought that that information would be kept private within that discussion, within the negotiation of possible settlement or preparation for trial. I would propose to you, as you read through this Bill, Ladies and Gentlemen, that this would have a chilling effect on the discovery process here in the State of Illinois. And it would further clog up the court systems. Many of these major cases that come before our courts have literally millions of pieces of paper that are part of that lawsuit. And for each and every one of those pieces of paper, for the individual who have to go before the judge and say this 09300040.doc 93  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 should remain private, this can go public, and for a judge to be able to make that determination, this would grind the court system to a screeching halt. And I would ask you, again, I want to state that it’s my understanding reading through the Bill that there is really no other state. Florida passed a law back in 1990. It’s a little bit… it’s similar, but I think this goes further than that. No other state has passed legislation that goes this far, according to my research. And I would strongly encourage the Members of this House to think about this. Think about the burden that we’ve already placed on our businesses. Think about the people in your districts that need jobs, that need work. And I encourage you, again, with all due respect to the Sponsor of this and his hard work, this is the wrong time to do this. And I want to ask you… I’m gonna be voting ‘no’ and I ask you to vote ‘no’ as well. Thank you very much.”

"Further discussion? Ladies and Gentlemen, there are four people seeking recognition: Lang, Rose, Meyer, and Eileen Lyons. Please keep your remarks brief. Representative Lang.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. I rise in support of the Gentleman’s Bill. It’s a Bill that I’ve carried in the past. You know, we can talk all we want about the dangers to business and we can talk all we want about the court system. But this Bill isn’t about those things. This Bill is about protecting people from harm. Imagine if someone has taken some sort of pharmaceutical 09300040.doc 94  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 that turns out, through research, to have da… injured someone, to be a dangerous product. Or some motor vehicle, which has happened before, that blows up if you tap it in the rear. Imagine if cases were settled and no one found out about these things. And so, we’ve had dozens and dozens of cases settled on products liability matters where court records have been sealed. And research and evidence that has come out of those cases, or could’ve come out of those cases, that would help save our constituents from harm, pharmaceuticals that… that damage or vehicles that blow up. Imagine the danger to our people if we continue to allow these court records to be sealed. All this says is court records should not be sealed where there’s proof of an in… dangerous product or dangerous instrumentality or dangerous machinery. That’s all the Gentleman’s trying to do here. And I would submit that if you were the next person to drive that Ford that used to blow up when it was tapped in the rear, you would want to make sure that the research that was out there on that vehicle was available to you so you maybe wouldn’t buy that car or maybe that company would be a little more careful. There’s much evidence on the record that some manufacturers, this is certainly not an indictment of all, some have said, ‘Well, we know this is a dangerous product. We know there’s some real problems with this product or this piece of machinery, but we have calculated through our actuaries that it’s cheaper for us to pay settlements than it is to fix the product.’ There’s something wrong with that, and I think 09300040.doc 95  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 this Bill is appropriate to protect our citizens in products liability cases. ‘Aye’ votes are appropriate.”

"Further discussion? Representative Rose.”

"The Sponsor will yield."

"No. Actually, Representative, there’s been some pieces of legislation in other states that have been introduced or have been talked about, including this one because this Bill’s been around for a number of years, that would make the amount of the settlement discoverable. We did not put that in this Bill. And in committee, whenever I’ve been asked that question over the last few years I’ve introduced this Bill, my position has always been that the actual amount of the settlement, the actual amount of the verdict, if it’s a jury trial, does not really go to the existence of whether there’s a public hazard or not. So that Bill does not say that you… the judge has to disclose what the amount is.”

"No, there is not.”

"I don’t believe it is too broad. I mean, we… like I said, we’ve worked on this legislation in the past. I mean, there’s some opponents to this legislation, we have given them every opportunity in the world to present other language to us. The only Amendment we ever received was from the Medical Society, but they have not come to us with different language. So, I… I do not think this is too broad.”

"I’m sorry, Justin (sic – Chapin), I couldn’t hear that example.”

"Well, if there’s a private agreement that conceals a… you don’t even go to court, but there’s a private agreement between two parties and the intent of that agreement or the effect of that agreement is that it conceals a public hazard. Under this Bill, that would be considered against public policy in the State of Illinois. Now, how is somebody basi…”

"No, it has nothing to do with filing a notice with the Clerk. I guess there… the reason… the only way it would kick in is if you make a private agreement with somebody, there’s a private contract, part of that contract you don’t disclose the public hazard or the other party cannot speak about it. And then, let’s say, somebody reneges on that agreement. Let’s say you renege on your agreement part of that private contract, and the other party then goes to court and says, ‘Hey, I have this contract with an individual, he reneged on it, I want the court to enforce it.’ Basically what the court would be saying is, ‘We’re not gonna enforce it because it conceals a public hazard.’ But you know, there’s no onus on the… the people that go to the Clerk’s Office and file a notice that it’s a public hazard.” 09300040.doc 98  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"It would apply to discovery, yes.”

"What happens in many cases, my understanding… and I really haven’t practiced civil law too long. But my understanding when it comes to discovery process, what happens in a lot of these cases is they’ll ask the judge for… protective orders, even at the discovery stage. They ask for protective orders; they will not give over certain information unless there is an agreement not to divulge that to… to other parties or to the public or what have you. So, this Bill would apply to that. If there is… if a party is trying to prevent a disclosure of certain discovery materials… you know, you tell the party we’re not gonna give this to ya, unless you agree not to share it, then, yes, this Bill would apply. So it’s not just settlements.”

"The judge would still have that discretion. There would be an in camera inspection. Obviously, in your situation, it would be a party that would be opposing that request to make it public. So, then you… it could be an in camera inspection and the judge would have that discretion to either prevent it from being disclosed or to disclose it if he thinks it concerns a public hazard.”

"Yes, if there was a sealed settlement, then yes, under this law it would have to be disclosed.”

"Not that I’m aware of.”

"No, I do not… I don’t believe so at all.”

"What I… what I’m saying is I don’t think we’re… we’re changing anything. We’re not having a negative effect on the ADA. Right now, where the law is, we’re 09300040.doc 100  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 saying that there could be signed… or sealed settlements or sealed discovery protective orders. What this Bill does is we’re… we’re saying that if the intent of that sealed settlement or the protective order is to conceal a public hazard, you can’t do it. What it’ll… Would it apply to a case involving those disabilities? Yes, it would apply if it involves a public hazard.”

"Yes, that is the goal. But there’s also an overriding interest for the public’s safety. If we can prevent future injuries and future deaths, then you know what? That… that interest overrides those of privacy.”

"To the Bill.”

Speaker Hartke: "Further discussion? This piece of legislation… This piece of legislation’s on Standard Debate. We have had two people speak in response, one person a proponent of the Bill. We will hear one more response and one more proponent and then go to close. Representative Lyons, Leitch, Meyer, and Slone, in that order. Representative Slone, are you a proponent of the Bill?”

"No, Mr. Speaker. I would like to take point of personal privilege, if possible.” 09300040.doc 102  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

"Not now. Representative Lyons, are you a proponent of the Bill? Representative Leitch, are you a proponent of the Bill?”

Speaker Hartke: "Forget it. Representative Myers (sic – Meyer), you’re a proponent? Your response. You may speak in response.”

"The Sponsor will yield."

"The Sponsor will yield."

"Yes, Amendment #3 removes the word ‘persons’ from that definition.”

"In light of the concerns from many of the opponents. They thought this legislation was too broad. I have told the opponents over the years that I would work with them if they gave me language. And that was one of the Amendments that was… was offered to me this year. And that’s why we put that in there. We just tried to tighten 09300040.doc 103  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 up the language of public hazard to remove some of the opposition.”

"Again, we removed the word ‘person’ because the… the opposition said it was too broad. You’re right; it doesn’t apply to members of the clergy. But again, that was brought up in committee where they pointed out the problems with that. In a lot of those cases, it just wasn’t doable, I guess. And that was in response to the complaints from the opponents. We thought that the main thrust of this legislation, it always was going to be the main purpose of it, was to get to those cases mainly involving products liability. It was never… the overall intent was never really to focus on the word ‘person’; it was always products liability. And we thought it was a good faith attempt on our part to work with the opposition to remove some of their opposition; that’s why we did it.”

"I would strongly disagree with the… with the prior speaker. This is not a step backwards; this is a giant step forwards. Products liability cases have resulted in needless… thousands of needless deaths, needless injuries. I mentioned a couple before where this would apply to. It would apply to asbestos cases, it would apply to those Firestone tires cases, collapsible lunchroom tables in schools, jammed fuel tanks… Chrysler fuel tank cases, the Bjork Shiley heart valve that used to fracture or crack, that was in 1980, collapsible baby cribs where there were sealed settlements and children died down the line. If those settlements weren’t sealed, maybe we would’ve saved more lives. So, to say this is a step backward I… I take 09300040.doc 105  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 great exception to. This is definitely a step in the right direction. It’s moving forward. The whole goal of this is to save lives and prevent further injuries, and that’s what this Bill accomplishes. If it… if we could’ve made it even broader to include ‘persons’, I would’ve done that. But that was an accommodation on our part to… to work with the opposition, that’s what we did. Maybe we’ll be back here a year from now adding ‘persons’ to it. I don’t think so, but… I mean, I… I wanted to include ‘persons’ in there, but we didn’t as to show a good faith to work with the opposition.”

"Representative Brosnahan to close.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate all the debate in the House. I appreciate all the questions in committee. We worked on this Bill for a long time. I’d like to, once again, thank Representative Lang for his leadership on this issue. I know he had this Bill for a couple years before I did. And, again, this is a public policy Bill. It’s good public policy. It’s meant to 09300040.doc 106  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 protect our public from needless deaths and injuries. And I would certainly urge an ‘aye’ vote. Thank you.”

"The question is, ‘Shall the House pass House Bill 1191?’ All those in favor signify by voting ‘yes’; those opposed vote ‘no’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Representative O'Brien. Have all voted who wish? Representative Coulson. Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 71 Members voting ‘yes’, 44 Members voting ‘no’, and 1 Member voting ‘present’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, what is the status of House Bill 1091?”

“Mr. Clerk, what is the status of House Bill 1091?”

“Move that Bill back to the Order of Second Reading for the purpose of an Amendment, at the request of the Sponsor. House Bill 1360.

“Move that Bill back to the Order of Second Reading for the purpose of an Amendment at the request of the Sponsor. Ladies and Gentlemen, we are to go to the order of moving Bills from Second Reading to Third Reading. As I announced earlier, this will take some time so Members should feel 09300040.doc 107  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003 free in the next hour to have lunch or to take a nap or whatever you’d like to do. Please be back on the floor and… or listen in your offices for… you to return to the floor. We’ll try to give you about 10 minutes notice. About 2:30 we should be finished. House Bill 248, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. House Bill 314, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading.”

“House Bill 315, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. House Bill 316.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.” 09300040.doc 108  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 422, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 552, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 553, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk.

“House Bill 555, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 556, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. House Bill 557, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“House Bill 558, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 559, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 560, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 561, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 562, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 563.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 564, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 567, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 568, Mr. Clerk”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 569, Mr. Clerk.” 09300040.doc 111  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 570, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 571, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 572, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 575, Mr. Clerk.”

“Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 576, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill." 09300040.doc 112  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 577, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 578, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 579, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 580, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 581, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill." 09300040.doc 113  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 582, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk."

“House Bill 583, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 584, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 585, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk."

“House Bill 586, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 587, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 588, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 589, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 590, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 591, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 592, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 593, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 594, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 595, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 596, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 597, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 598, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 599, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 600, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 601, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 602, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 603, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 604, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 605, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 606, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 607, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 608, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 609, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 611, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 612, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading.”

“House Bill 613, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 614, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 615, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 616, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 617, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 618, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill." 09300040.doc 120  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 619, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 619, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 620, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. House Bill 621, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 622, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 623, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 625, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 626, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. House Bill 6… Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 627, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 628, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 629, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 630, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.” 09300040.doc 122  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 631, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 632, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 633, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 634, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 635, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill." 09300040.doc 123  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 636, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 637, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 638, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 639, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 640, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 641, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.” 09300040.doc 124  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 642, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 643, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Second… Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 644, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 645, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 646, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill." 09300040.doc 125  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 647, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 648, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 649, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 650, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 651, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 652, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.” 09300040.doc 126  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 653, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 654, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 655, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.” Clerk Bolin: “House Bill 656, the bill’s been read a second time, previously."

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 657, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill." 09300040.doc 127  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 658, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 659, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 660, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 661, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 662, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 663, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.” 09300040.doc 128  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 664, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 665, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 666, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 667, Mr. Clerk…”

“Third Reading.”

“Representative Hannig in the Chair.”

“668, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 129  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 669, read the Bill, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 670. Read the Bill.”

“Third Reading.”

“House Bill 671, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 672, read the Bill, Mr. Clerk.”

“Third Reading. … Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 671.”

“Third Reading.”

“Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 672.”

“Third Reading.” 09300040.doc 130  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 673.”

“Third Reading."

“Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 674.”

“Third Reading."

“Mr. Clerk, read 675, House Bill.”

“Third Reading."

“Read House Bill 676.”

“Third Reading."

“Read House Bill 677.”

“Third Reading."

“Read House Bill 678.” 09300040.doc 131  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“Read House Bill 679.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 680.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 681.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 682.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 683.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 132  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 684.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 685.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 686.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 687.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 688.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 689.” 09300040.doc 133  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 690.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 691.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 692.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 693.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 694.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 134  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 695.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 696.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 697.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 699.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 700.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 701.” 09300040.doc 135  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 702.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 703.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 704.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 705.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 706.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 136  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 707.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 708.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 709.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 711.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 712.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 713.” 09300040.doc 137  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 714.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 715.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 716.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 718.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 719.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 138  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 720.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 721.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 722.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 723.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 724.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 725. Excuse me. House Bill 726.” 09300040.doc 139  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 727.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 728.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 729.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 730.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 731.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 140  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 732.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 733.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 734.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 735.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 736.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 737.” 09300040.doc 141  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 738.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 739.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 740.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 741.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 742.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 142  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 743.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 744.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 745.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 746.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 747.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 748.” 09300040.doc 143  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 749.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 750.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 752.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 753.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 754.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 144  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 755.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 756.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 757.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 758.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 759.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 760.” 09300040.doc 145  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 761.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 762.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 763.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 764.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 765.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 146  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 766.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 767.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 768.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 769.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 770.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 771.” 09300040.doc 147  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 772.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 773.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 774.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 775.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 776.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 148  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 777.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 778.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 779.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 780.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 781”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 782.” 09300040.doc 149  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 783.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 784.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 785.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 786.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 787.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 150  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 788.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 789.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 790.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 791.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 792.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 793.” 09300040.doc 151  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 794, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 795.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 796.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 797.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 798.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 152  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 799.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 800.”

“Third Reading.”

“House Bill 801.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 802.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 803.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 804.” 09300040.doc 153  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 805.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 806.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 807.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 808.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 809.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 154  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 810.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 811.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 812.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 813.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 814.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 815.” 09300040.doc 155  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 816.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 817.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 818.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 819.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 820.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 156  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 821.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 822.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 823.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 824.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 825.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 826.” 09300040.doc 157  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 827.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 828.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 829.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 830.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 831.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 158  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 832.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 833.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 834.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 835.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 836.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 837.” 09300040.doc 159  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 838.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 839.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 840.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 841.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 843.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 160  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 844.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 845.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 846.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 848.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 849.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 850.” 09300040.doc 161  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 851.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 852.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 853.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 854.”

“House Bill 855. Excuse me, 854 is Third Reading."

“House Bill 855.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 162  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 856.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 857.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 858.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 859.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 860.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 861.” 09300040.doc 163  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 862.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 863.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 864.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 865.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 866.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 164  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 867.”

“Third Reading.”

“House Bill 868.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 869.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 870.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 871.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 872.” 09300040.doc 165  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 873.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 874.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 875.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 876.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 877.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 166  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 878.”

“Third Reading."

“878.”

“House Bill 879.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 880.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 881.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 882.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 167  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 883.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 884.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 885.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 886.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 887.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 888.” 09300040.doc 168  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 889.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 890.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 891.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 892.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 893.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 169  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 894.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 895.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 896.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 897.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 898.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 899.” 09300040.doc 170  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 900.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 901.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 902.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 903.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 904.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 171  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 905.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 906.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 907.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 908.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 910.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 911.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 913.”

“Third Reading.”

“House Bill 914.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 916.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 917.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 918.” 09300040.doc 173  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 919.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 920.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 921.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 922.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 923.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 174  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 924.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 925.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 926.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 927.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 928.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 929.” 09300040.doc 175  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 930.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 931.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 932.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 933.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 934.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 176  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 935.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 936.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 937.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 938.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 940.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 941.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 942.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 943.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 944.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 945.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 946.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 178  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 947.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 948.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 949.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 950.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 951.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 952.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 953.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 954.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 955.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 956.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 957.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 180  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 958.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 959.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 960.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 961.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 963.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 964.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 965.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 966.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 967.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 968.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 969.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 970.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 971.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 972.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 973.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 974.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 975.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 976.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 977.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 978.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 979.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 980.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 981.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 982.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 983.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 984.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 985.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 185  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 986.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 987.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 988.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 989.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 990.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 991.” 09300040.doc 186  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 992.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 993.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 994.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 995. House Bill 995.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 996.”

“Third Reading." 09300040.doc 187  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 997.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 998.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 999.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 1000.”

“Third Reading."

“House Bill 1001.”

“Third Reading."

“Representative Hartke in the Chair. House Bill 1002. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1203 (sic – 1003). Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read…"

“House Bill 104… 120… 1004. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1006. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1007. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1008. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1009. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“Mr. Clerk, House Bill 1010. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1011. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1012. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1013. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1014. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1015. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1016. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1017. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“Third Reading. House Bill 1018, Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill." 09300040.doc 191  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“House Bill 1019. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1020. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1021. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1022. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1023. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill."

“House Bill 1024. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.” 09300040.doc 192  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 40th Legislative Day 4/2/2003

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“House Bill 1025. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”