Illinois House Floor Debate — May 27, 2004

“The hour of 2:00 having arrived, the House will be in order. The Members will please be in their seats. Members and guests are asked to refrain from starting their laptops. Turn off all cell phones and pagers, and rise for the invocation and for the Pledge of Allegiance. We’ll be led in prayer to day by Lee Crawford, the Assistant Pastor of the Victory Temple Church in Springfield. Reverend Crawford.”

Speaker Hannig: “And we’ll be led today in the pledge by Representative Nekritz.” Nekritz – et al: “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” 09300135.doc 2  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

Speaker Hannig: “Roll Call for Attendance. Representative Currie.”

“Thank you, Speaker. Please let the record show that Representative Delgado is excused today.”

“Representative Bost.”

“Mr. Clerk, take the record. There are 115 Members answering the Roll Call, a quorum is present. Mr. Clerk, please read the Committee Reports.”

“On page 31 on the Calendar, under Motions in writing, House Bill 1269. Representative Eddy is recognized.”

Speaker Hannig: “The Gentleman withdraws his Motion to reconsider. On Page 18 of the Calendar, under the Order of Concurrences, is House Bill 5415. Representative Connie Howard. Representative Howard on the concurrence Motion.”

“Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I move that a… we approve the concurrence of that Motion that simply says that rather than the president of the board being able to have a replacement that there will be no designee.”

“Okay. The Lady moves that the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 5415. And on that question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Parke.”

“She indicates she’ll yield.”

“We’re talking about the county board president in Cook County.”

“Well…”

“Why did we zero in on that person and not include others?”

“I don’t have the foggiest idea why. Perhaps they did not ask to be included. This… this particular piece of legislation is only about that one person having a seat on that particular authority.”

“It’s my understanding that is not a salaried position.”

“I really don’t have the answer to that, whether or not there will be travel expenses available.” 09300135.doc 8  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“My understanding that there will no expense, just that someone addition… in addition to the persons who are already represented on the board, one additional person would be able to be represented.”

Speaker Hannig: “Is there any further discussion? Then Representative Howard to close.”

“Yes, I think everybody has heard the… the debate and I just ask for ‘aye’ votes. Thank you.”

“The question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 5415?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. This is final passage. 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 87 voting ‘yes’ and 27 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. And Representative Dunn is recognized on House Bill 6760. Okay. Out of the record at the request of the Sponsor. Representative Bailey is recognized on House Bill 6811 on the Motion to Concur.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Senate Amendment #1… a Motion to Concur. The Amendment makes clear that for those persons who committed the qualifying crime prior to June 1, 1996, must only register if they are incarcerated on the 09300135.doc 9  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 effective date. In a prior analysis that we had… this would exclude those prior offenses. I Motion to Concur. Take it out of the record.”

“Okay. We’ll take this out of the record at the request of the Sponsor. On the Order of Concurrence is House Bill 578. Representative Turner. Let’s take that out of the record. Representative Mitchell is recognized to concur… on a Motion to Concur on House Bill 830.” Mitchell, B.: “Thank… thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House, House Bill 830 is… I move to concur with the Senate. It extends the TIF from 23 years to 35 for the Village of Heyworth in McLean County. Appreciate an ‘aye’ vote. There’s three different Bills.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 830?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 114 voting ‘yes’ and 1 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Black, for what reason do you rise? Did I cover up your name again?”

“Thank goodness.”

“Yes, state your point, Representative.” 09300135.doc 10  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“So, the Gentleman moves to… the Gentleman withdraws his Motion to Discharge on HJR 75. Thank you, Representative Black. On page 16 of Calendar, under the Order of Concurrences, the Chair recognizes Representative Saviano on House Bill 2981.”

“Yeah. The Gentleman moves that the House concur in Senate Amendment #2. Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #2 and shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk take the record. On this question, there are 115 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #2. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, what is the status of Senate Bill 1553?” 09300135.doc 11  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

Speaker Hannig: “Return that Bill to the Order of Second Reading at the request of the Sponsor. Representative Mitchell on House Bill 831, under the Motions to Concur.” Mitchell, B.: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 831 I move to concur. Again, it’s an extension of a TIF in the Village of Heyworth. There’s three of them. This is the second of three. Extends it from 23 to 35 years and we have all the letters of support.”

“The Gentleman moves for the… moves that the House concur in Senate Amendment #1. Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. This is final passage. 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 113 voting ‘yes’ and 2 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. And now, Representative Mitchell on House Bill 832.” Mitchell, B.: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is the third of three. Again, it extends the TIF in Heyworth, the Village of Heyworth which is in McLean County, from 23 to 35 years. And I would appreciate the House’ support.” 09300135.doc 12  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

Speaker Hannig: “So, is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 832?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 112 voting ‘yes’ and 3 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Coulson is recognized on House Bill 4612, on the Order of Concurrence, page 17 of the Calendar.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #2 to House Bill 4612 and shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk take the record. On this question, there are 113 voting ‘yes’ and 2 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #2. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On page 17 of the Calendar, Representative Morrow 09300135.doc 13  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 is recognized on House Bill 4856, under the Order of Concurrence.”

“Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I move to concur on Senate Amendment #1. As I began to explain yesterday, it amends the Rental Property Utility Service Act, requires a landlord whenever there’s an agreement to do so to pay for any water, gas or electric service throughout the term of the lease and to do so in a timely manner so that there isn’t any interruption in those service. It allows the tenant in the event of an interruption the option of terminating the lease. In the event of a termination of the lease the landlord would still be required for any services used on the term of the lease. I’ll be glad to answer any questions.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 and shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 115 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Bill Mitchell is recognized on House Bill 5157, on the Order of Concurrence.” Mitchell, B.: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Bill 5157 is an initiative of Representative Jim Watson who is ill today, so he asked me 09300135.doc 14  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 if I would present the Bill. Representative Watson is a veteran of Desert Storm and he sponsors this Bill which would create the Illinois Veterans’ Home Fund checkoff on the 2004 income tax return form. And I would ask the House to concur in Senate Amendment #1.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 and shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 113 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Bailey, did you have a chance to get caught up on House Bill 6811? Okay. So, the Lady from Cook, Representative Bailey, on House Bill 6811.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I Motion to Concur on Senate Amendment 1 to House Bill 6811. Basically, it changed the… the year requirement that it provides that persons who are at least 17 years of age at the time of the commission of an offense and convicted of first degree murder under the age of 18 before June 11, 1996, where… are required to register as a sex offender. And the previous Amendment was January 1, 1986. And I move to concur with this Amendment.” 09300135.doc 15  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur… excuse me, Representative Black.”

“She indicates she’ll yield.”

“I believe a sex crime has to be involved, Sir.”

“No, it has to be a offense with sex involved but it moved the year requirement. The crime that happened before June 1 of ‘96 where as before I believe I had it at 1986.”

“Representative Monique Davis.” Davis, M.: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“She indicates she’ll yield.” 09300135.doc 16  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 Davis, M.: “Representative Bailey, this is for young people 17 and over or 17 and under?”

“It… who is at least 17 years of age at the commission… at the time of a crime.” Davis, M.: “Well, let me just… let me ask this question. It says, currently the Illinois Sex Offender Registration Act deems that an individual convicted of murdering a child after 1996 be classified as a sex offender, so they don’t really need that. If a person commits murder of a child they’re classified as sex offenders?”

“If they were convicted of first degree murder under the age of 18 prior to June 1, yes, of 1996.” Davis, M.: “They are sex offenders or they’re child murderers, which one?”

“If you’re… it’s a… if you are convicted of murder and the offense and it involves sex offense, yes, you are con… you have to register as a sex offender.” Davis, M.: “Okay, so your Bill changes it how?”

“The time… the year. It moved it from June… January 1, 1986 to June 1, 1996.” Davis, M.: “So if they committed murder of a child…”

“It actually stopped it from… it originally it would’ve went retroactive and we moved it up to 1996 so it would not pick up those prior offenses.” Davis, M.: “Okay, so you’re saying even though they committed these crimes before 2004, we will go back and they will have to register as sex offenders if their crime was in reference to…” 09300135.doc 17  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“If you committed a crime in 2004 as a sex offender, you… you do have to register.” Davis, M.: “But you’re saying we’re gonna go back and pick up those who committed crimes by… since 1996?”

“They have to register as a sex offender. Yes, Ma’am.” Davis, M.: “Okay. I’m gonna support your Bill but I believe… believe you may get charged with ex post facto, in other words committing a crime… I mean, setting a law for people who have already committed the crime. So, this will probably not, what shall I say, meet constitutional muster because it would be ex post facto. However, I do agree with your concept and I will support your Bill. But it’s very unusual to pass laws against people who… for crimes they’ve already committed. And I do commend you for attempting to solve the problem of children who commit sex crimes. Representative, thank you.”

“Representative Bailey to close… to close.”

“Thank you and I ask for an ‘aye’ vote.”

“The question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 6811?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On the question, there are 112 voting ‘yes’, 0 voting ‘no’ and 2 voting ‘present’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Turner. Is Representative… Turner prepared… Mr. Clerk… Yeah, there he 09300135.doc 18  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 is …is recognized on House Bill 578. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Turner. That’s on page 14 of the Calendar, under the Order of Concurrences, House Bill 578. Mr. Clerk.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Assembly. I apologize, I left the folder in my office but we’re gonna do the best we can here from the floor. Amendment #1 basically deals with the time that… it deals with the funds from the Capital Litigation Trust Fund and it allows the State Appellate Defender’s Office to be able to draw down monies from the Capital Litigation Fund as a result of a change in the death penalty reform Bill last year. I think it was House Bill 852. We changed the time framework in which one could apply for funds from the Capital Litigation Fund. This corrects that inequity. It does not increase the amount of money coming into the fund. It has no real fiscal impact. It just allows… it creates an oversight that was created as a result of the death penalty reform legislation that we passed last year. And I move for the adoption of Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 578.”

“Is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Vermilion, Representative Black.”

“He indicates he’ll yield.” 09300135.doc 19  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Representative, I’m not sure. I did get the same booklet that you got that listed about 200 or more plus funds. It may be in the consideration, but to answer your question, I think it’s one that’s been thought about. Let me put it to ya that way.”

“No.”

“That’s absolutely correct.”

“That’s corr… that’s absolutely correct.”

“Thank you, Representative.”

“Is there any further discussion? The Lady from Cook, Representative Monique Davis.” Davis, M.: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“He indicates he’ll yield.” Davis, M.: “Representative Turner, you… when you changed the date in which a person can file, is this beneficial to them?” 09300135.doc 20  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“I didn’t hear you, Representative.” Davis, M.: “According to our analysis, the amount of time given to a person to file a petition is that… is this beneficial? Who is this benefiting?”

“This… this works, and for the most part it’s helping the State of Appellate Defender’s Office which would be working on the behalf of defendants. This fund is used by both the prosecutor and a defense attorney but it’s in dealing with capital litigation cases. So death penalty cases would be where this fund would be utilized. What happens currently is that once they go through the… and I’m trying to think of the exact legal term. It… it…” Davis, M.: “Okay. Thank you very much.”

“Right. It just clarifies what is currently there at this point. And so it extends that period of time where these cases… it gives the ability a little… a little more time in terms of when they can apply for the use of funds from this Capital Litigation Fund.” Davis, M.: “And then if… if… I guess an inmate decides to file a petition, he has 3 years to file it?”

“In death penalty cases he has 3 years. I think in a nondeath penalty cases this would allow… right. He has 3 years if he chooses not to file a direct appeal. So, this would extend the time.” Davis, M.: “So, this last appeal that has to be filed within 3 years, is that an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court or…?”

“What happens is, once a verdict has been issued the person can either file a direct appeal or he can…” 09300135.doc 21  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 Davis, M.: “But who is… who is… the 3-year deadline is for him to appeal to whom or what organization or what authority?”

“It’s… it’s the period of time that he has to file the petition. So, he has 3 years to file to ask for a post- conviction hearing on that particular case, to go back into his case. So in other words, if there was new evidence or something that came about during his appeal, that first appeal, this would still allow them the 3 year’s time framework to then bring that new evidence up to…” Davis, M.: “Currently, what’s the time frame?”

“Currently, it’s 3 years.” Davis, M.: “It’s… it’s 3 years now?”

“Right. It’s 3 years currently.” Davis, M.: “So, we’re… we’re…”

“It doesn’t change that… it doesn’t expand that length of time. But it’s when the 3 years start.” Davis, M.: “We’re not lengthening it and we’re not shortening it, is that correct?”

“No. We’re just clarifying it, that’s correct.” Davis, M.: “Do you think 3 years is enough time?”

“Right. Pardon?” Davis, M.: “Do you think 3 years is enough time?”

“Well, that’s… that’s been agreed upon between defense attorneys and the prosecutors at the same time.” Davis, M.: “And the public defender’s office is approving?”

“Right, they’re all onboard on this.” Davis, M.: “Thank you, Mr… I mean, thank you, Representative.”

“Yeah.” 09300135.doc 22  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Representative Granberg.”

“Would the Gentleman yield?”

“He indicates he’ll yield.”

“Representative Turner, I’m just curious, we have a situation in my district where the Capital Litigation Fund has been accessed by a defense attorney and his investigator so far to the tune of one and half million dollars and the trial is still ongoing. And the case has been pending for 7 years. This is four times the amount that’s normally utilized in a capital litigation case. Are there… are there… do you plan to have any type of standard for withdrawal from the account in the future in terms of legislation, what standards a judge might use in which to make a payment to the defense attorney and/or the investigator?”

“I believe that it’s already established what the procedure is in what the parameters are in terms of these funds. They’re supposed to be reasonable and prudence (sic-prudent) and they’re also determined by the judge before any of ‘em are approved. And so, I’m familiar with the case that you speak of, I know that it’s currently being reviewed at this point. But the way this fund was initially set up it’s the judge who will determine as well as… before he… and approve any expenses before it’s then sent on to the State Treasurer. Of course that situation is a little different in Cook County but it… it’s not different in one sense that it still has to be approved by the county treasurer before it can then go on to the State 09300135.doc 23  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 Treasurer. So, the… the reasonable and prudent in terms of expenses is still a major factor and that does not change that.”

“Thanks, Representative. In fact, I would look forward to working with you on possibly definin’ that a little further, because… and I think one of the problems we had in our situation was the judge was reluctant not to authorize the payment because he didn’t wanna risk being overturned on appeal again. And I think that was the consideration, so when you talk about reasonable and prudent I think sometime the judge… the judge involved might be… might be worried about being overturned. So I appreciate your intention and look forward to working with you on it.”

Speaker Hannig: “Any further discussion? Representative Lindner.”

“He indicates he’ll yield.”

“Right. That’s correct.”

“That is correct, Representative.” 09300135.doc 24  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“That is absolutely correct.”

“That’s absolutely correct.”

Speaker Hannig: “Is there any further discussion? Representative Turner to close.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You’ve heard the comments and questions asked earlier. And I just move for the adoption of Senate Amendment 1 to House Bill 578.”

“The question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 578?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 113 voting ‘yes’ and 1 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment 1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Black is recognized to concur on House Bill 718.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 718?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 115 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Burke is recognized to concur on House Bill 742. The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Burke. Representative Burke on the Motion to Concur.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Members of the House. Senate Amendment #1 that I’m asking for concurrence on is regarding a grocery store that is a minimum of 31 thousand square feet of floor space in a single story building. The grocery store is located more than 90 feet but less than 09300135.doc 26  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 100 feet from a high school that opened in 1928. And the sale of alcohol is not the principal business. The Bill would allow the insurance, pardon me… the issuance of a liquor license at a premises in an outdoor patio area that is attached to the premises that is located in a municipality with a population of over 300 thousand and it is within 100 feet of a church. So long as the sale of alcohol is incidental to the sale of food, the sale of alcohol is not the principal business. Premises is less than 1 thousand square feet. The premises is owned by the University of Illinois. The premises is at least 20 feet but not more than 40 feet from the church space used for worship and the principal religious leader at the church has indicated his or her written support for the issuance of the license. And I’d ask for the Body’s favorable consideration.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendments #1 and 2 to House Bill 742?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 64 voting ‘yes’, 49 voting ‘no’ and 2 voting ‘present’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendments #1 and 2 to House Bill 742. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Kelly is recognized on House Bill 837 on the Motion to Concur.” 09300135.doc 27  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I Motion to Concur House Bill 837 with the Senate Amendment to the House Bill. This Bill annexes land from Madison, Streamwood and Hoffman Estates to the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District. It also amends the district’s leasing statute to extend its ability to lease property to institutions of learning. Current statute restricts this ability to institutions of higher learning. The district can also lease various properties with no current corporate use to park districts, municipalities, colleges and universities. This Amendment will allow the district to lease to any academic institution of learning and accommodate a high school wishing to lease district land. I can answer any questions.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 837?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 84 voting ‘yes’ and 31 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, i s hereby declared passed. On page 18 of the Calendar, under the Order of Concurrence, is House Joint Resolution 34. Representative Turner is recognized. The Gentleman from Cook.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Resolution is a Resolution that deals with organ donor… organ donors and 09300135.doc 28  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 how that process is to work. Trying to… it was a Senate Amendment which changed the date in terms of when we were going to… let me apologize. It says that the date in terms of when the task force will report back to the General Assembly was 2003, but there was an Amendment that we attached which changed that date. And basically, we need this for clarification of how the organ donor program will operate. And I move for the adoption of House Joint Resolution 34.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Joint Resolution 34?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 115 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur on Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a… this Resolution, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Joe Lyons is recognized on House Bill 1080 on the Order of Concurrence, page 16 of the Calendar.” Lyons, J.: “Thank you, Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I didn’t realize we were gonna be doing this today but that’s great that we are. Thank you. Senate Amendment #2 which was added in committee earlier today would add language to the security count definition by expanding the definition to include an investment management or custody account with a trust company or a trust division of a bank 09300135.doc 29  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 with trust powers. So, it was an initiative of the Illinois Bankers Association, an Amendment to the TOD Act, the Transfer On Death Act, that would make all… well, it is necessary to allow an investment management or custody account to have a beneficiary designation that will take affect upon the death of the owner. The bottom line is, as… if you were to purchase a securities instrument, you’d have a death beneficiary which would bypass the probate part of the county law and this would do the same thing for a trust department of a bank. Second part of this Bill, now the Senate Amendment #3 which we added was initiated by the Corporate Fiduciaries Association and provides related… and provisions related to anti-lapse provisions identical to House Bill 4594 which we passed by Representative Beaubien and the Senate… Senator Dillard introduced in the 93rd General Assembly. And this basically keeps us in… puts the Illinois Law in tandem and in… for the Federal Code. So, I’d be happy to answer any questions or if there are any or…”

“Is there any discu…” Lyons, J: “…Representative Beaubien would take the Second Amendment, if necessary.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendments 2 and 3 to House Bill 1080?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there 111 voting ‘yes’, 0 09300135.doc 30  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 voting ‘no’ and 3 voting ‘present’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendments 2 and 3. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Lang is recognized on House Bill 2220 on the Order of Concurrence.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. As I think some of you know, the nursing home industry, like others, have been beleaguered by costs. But the nursing home industry by statute has been locked into state reimbursement since 1999. So whenever they ask the state for reimbursement for legal costs that are supposed to be reimbursed, they get reimbursed as if it was 1999. This Bill would change that date to 2002, only for liability insurance. So, this industry, understanding that we have a real crisis on our hands, has not asked that we go to 2005 figures. They have not asked that we count all of their costs. They would just like their additional costs of liability insurance to be refrozen at 2002 levels. Their cost for liability insurance has gone up more than 300 percent since then and they ask us for this help. I know that all of you agree that despite some differences we may have on the value of nursing homes in Illinois, we can all agree that they’re an important part of the health care resolution that we have. In many communities in Illinois nursing homes are thinking about closing, some have. We need to provide them this small bit of help to stay open. I would ask your concurrence on an Amendment that passed the Senate 59 to 0.” 09300135.doc 31  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“On that the question, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative Parke.”

“He indicates he’ll yield.”

“I have heard 17 or 18 million dollars, but let me add that the department also said in committee today that they may just simply delay the payment cycle by 2 days. And by delaying the payment cycle simply by 2 days they won’t have to worry about the cash. It’ll just be into the delay.”

“I don’t have an answer for that, Representative.”

“Correct.”

“Only the department and they said it was only simply a matter of cost. And after they raised the problem of cost 09300135.doc 32  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 they said, ‘No big deal, because we’ll just delay the payment cycle 2 days and pay for it.’ So in the end, there was no debate relative to the public policy of it. It did receive 8 of the 9 votes in committee.”

“The Lady from Cook, Representative Mulligan.”

“He indicates he’ll yield.” 09300135.doc 33  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Actually, she didn’t vote ‘no’, she voted ‘present’.”

“What she…”

“What she said was she didn’t particularly like the Bill, but when the department indicated that they could take care of this without actual hard cash today and just simply delay the payment cycle for 2 days, the Representative voted ‘present’.”

“I would just… I would just simply ask you, Representative, when these nursing homes close where do you wanna put these people?”

“When these nursing homes close because of the costs that we’ve locked in at 1999 rates where are we gonna put all of these folks that are in these nursing homes?”

“The answer is ‘no’ and I’ll tell you why. As you know how strongly I feel about human service providers and how we need to provide more dollars to them. But none of… none of the human service providers that we care about were frozen by statute at 1999 levels. They have been frozen for 5 years at a certain level by statute. No one else has had that problem and they deserve a little relief.”

“Representative Hamos.”

“Thank you, Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. I’m echoing some of the sentiments already expressed. I do have a concern about this Bill but will probably support it. But I do want to put on the record something very, very important for us to think about because hopefully, today we are going to vote on Senate Bill 2880, a comprehensive long-term care reform program. And that is the way we oughta be thinking about long-term care in the State of Illinois. When we are putting $18 million into the nursing home side, which is really a $36 million appropriation with Medicaid funding, we should also ideally be putting money on the community-based side of long-term care. That is the principle that Senate Bill 2880 stands for. And I think from this point forward, although this is a bad budget year, this is what we must do. And those of us who are standing here today and are willing to support this on behalf of the nursing home industry have… have a requirement from the nursing home industry that from this point forward they will support community-based alternatives to truly rebalance that system. And for all the nursing home operators who hear about this who are listening, we want you to know that we want you to be part of that approach, but if we’re willing to support this half we have to have support for the other half. And that we… is a principle that we have to put on the record beginning today, each and every time. Thank you.”

“Representative Bellock.” 09300135.doc 36  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Representative Franks.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanted to see if the split screen worked if I stand close to my seatmate here. And I’d also like to move the previous question.”

Speaker Hannig: “Okay. You’re the last one seeking recognition. So, Representative Lang to close.”

“Thank you for the debate. I appreciate an ‘aye’ vote.”

“And the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 2220?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 110 voting ‘yes’, 1 voting ‘no’ and 3 voting ‘present’. And the House does concur in Senate Bill… in 09300135.doc 37  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 2220. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Mautino is recognized on House Bill 1075.”

“Thank you, Speaker. I move to nonconcur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 1075.”

“So, the Gentleman moves to nonconcur in Senate Amendment #1. All in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the House nonconcurs in Senate Amendment #1. Representative Smith is recognized on House Bill 722. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? Representative Smith.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. I move to concur in Senate Amendment #1. This is an issue that has been before us last year and has to do with the transportation of mental health patients by our county sheriffs. We passed legislation last year which would remove that responsibility from the sheriffs and unfortunately, the Governor vetoed that legislation because of the price tag. What’s happened since then, we… in discussions between the Sheriffs’ Association, the administration, the Department of Human Services, we’ve reached an agreement represented in this Amendment which will significantly reduce the cost to the state. The cost now would be approximately 1.2 million and we’re hoping actually that we can dedicate some of the proceeds from the sale of the former Zeller Mental Health Center in Peoria into a special fund for this purpose. I know of no 09300135.doc 38  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 opposition to this legislation. It is an agreed Bill, as I said, with the administration, the Department Human Services. I’d be happy to answer any questions.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the House concur in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 722?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 115 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And the House does concur in Senate Amendment #1. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Gordon, for what reason do you rise?”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Sir, I was recorded as a ‘no’ vote on House Bill 578. I would like to be recorded as a ‘yes’ vote on that legislation.”

“The record will reflect your intentions. And let’s return now to House Bill 1075. Representative Mautino. The Chair’s advised that you have a Motion to Concur with Senate Amendment #2 on House Bill 1075. So would you like to make that Motion?”

“Sure. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Bill before us is House Bill 1075. A few moments earlier we had nonconcurred on the first Amendment. A lot of you have contacted me, that will be receded. This leaves the… the language here is… it will allow the Department of Insurance and the Office of Special Deputy to seek reimbursements based on estimation of case developments of known claims. And we 09300135.doc 39  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 had a full hearing on this. We’ve met with the… with the Minority Spokesman, Members of the committees. I know of no opposition. Appreciate an ‘aye’ vote.”

“Okay. Just for a clarification, the Gentleman just nonconcurred with Senate Amendment #1 and now were going to… he has asked us to concur with Senate Amendment #2. Is there any discussion? Representative Franks.”

“Thank you. Questioning parliamentary procedure?”

“Yes. State your point.”

“I understand that we’ve now nonconcurred with Senate Amendment #1. I’m reading Senate Amendment #2 and the first line refers to Senate Amendment #1. And I’m wondering now if the way this Bill is written with Senate Amendment #2 whether it’s gonna pass or whether it’s gonna do what it wants to do. When you read this, Amendment #2 amends House Bill 1075 as amended with reference to page and line numbers of Senate Amendment #1 on page 1, line 4.”

“Okay. Let’s take this Motion out of the record ‘til we can clarify the… the status of how the Amendments line up. On page 8 of the Calendar… excu… Representative Mautino, for what reason do you rise?”

“With leave of the Body, I would move to reconsider the nonconcurrence Motion on 1075 for Senate Amendment #1.”

“Okay. So the Gentleman moves to reconsider the vote by which the House nonconcurred in Senate Amendment #1 to House Bill 1075. All in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the House 09300135.doc 40  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 reconsiders the vote. Representative Reitz is recognized on Senate Bill 797. Mr. Clerk, would you read the Bill.”

“Representative Reitz.”

“Thank… thank you, Mr. Speaker. House Amendment #1 is… is the language we talked about, the Truth in Employment Act. The intent of this is trying to get to people that are not paying on subcontractors, not paying taxes into the State of Illinois. It’s language that we worked on similar to a House Bill that we had earlier and heard in committee. And this becomes the Bill.”

“Is there any discussion? Representative Meyer on the Amendment.”

“He indicates he’ll yield.”

“House Bill 4883.”

“Nothing, it’s still… it’s just still…”

“Because of the timing basically, we… the Senate is not hearing House Bills so we put this Amendment on a Senate Bill.”

“A number of… according to our fact sheet, the… a number of business organizations that I’m sure are listed on yours also.”

“In discussions with them, there… we… we’ve got down to really two concerns that they have that we were working on, tried to address those in an Amendment. And it did not come up to a complete agreement on that but one was the number of… the number of days. The Bill says that they will file the name of the subcontractor with the Department of Revenue on the first day, on the day that they actually hire that person. That will be addressed in Amendment #3. And the second part is what… and the second part, well, let me get Amendment #3… was the notice. They… they thought that we should have some type of hearing. It basically says and this was in committee with Representative Winters mentioned the process to have a hearing and we’ve also addressed that in Amendment #3. The third concern was not from the industry but from the committee. But what… I’ll get to that in Amendment #3. But the two concerns that we had that would’ve had them go neutral, we’ve addressed one of those on the hearing and we’re doing that according to the way the Department of Revenue would do… would proceed with the hearing. The… the other one about the number of days they would… they had requested and I can address this also in Amendment #3. But there’s just two problems that… that the industry would’ve went neutral on, we addressed one of those. But the industry is still opposed to this 09300135.doc 42  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 because of the filing of when they have to file these reports.”

“We can… we’re still on 1. But the concerns that the industry had in trying to work out with them they would’ve went neutral on these two issues that are addressed in number… Amendment #3, we weren’t able to accommodate them, the industry’s request on one of those issues. But… so they’re… so they’re still opposed. They’re still opposed to that. I think the industry, in discussions with them, overall they think that this is something that is good. They just have a problem with the way they have to report it now. But… and they think their… the Amendment that they offered would’ve made it easier and better for the people that actually comply with the law.”

“I think that’d be easier once we get the entire Bill put together.”

“Is there any further discussion? Then all in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

“Representative McKeon.”

“Sorry, Mr. Speaker, I was looking for my notes. House Amendment #2 makes two administrative changes to the law. It amends the Child Labor and Day and Temporary Labor Services Enforcement Fund to include the phrase ‘prevailing wage’. This is a request by the Attorney General and we’ll make it consistent with federal legislation, allows 40 percent of the civil penalties recovered under the Prevailing Wage Act to be deposited into the fund for purposes set forth in the Child Labor Law. It does not make any change to civil penalties, fees, or fines. And additionally, this Bill does not change or make any appropriations. I’d appreciate your support in adopting Amendment #2.”

“On the Amendment, Representative Meyer.”

“Indicates he’ll yield.”

“I… Representative, I can’t hear you, maybe the Speaker can get a little order in the chamber. Mr. Speaker.”

“Yes. We did find that put the Amendment germane to the Bill but addresses a different subject within the same title.”

“So, we’ll have the parliamentarian look at the Amendment for germaneness, Representative. Are there any other questions you’d like to raise while he takes a look?”

“We will do that.”

“Okay.”

“Any further discussion? Then all… all in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’… excuse me, Representative Black.”

Yes, state your inquiry.”

“That’s correct.”

“Okay. All in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

“Representative Reitz on Amendment #3.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Amendment #3 was discussed a little bit, previously. It changes the reporting period from one day to three days after the subcontractor is hired. And it also changes language that we addressed in committee at the request of some of the committee Members and the industry that sets up procedures for hearings and they shall be in acco… in accordance with the Illinois Income Tax Act. The third change replaces the million dollar reserve that’s in the Bill with the language that the monies necessary for the department to carry out the powers and duties of this Act. And I’d be happy to answer any questions.”

“Is there any furth… is there any discussion? Then all in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

“Third Reading.”

“Mr. Clerk, would you read the Bill.” 09300135.doc 46  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Representative Reitz.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ve… we’ve had a little bit of debate on this. This is… this is the… the intent of this is to create the Truth in Employment Act. It’s to try and go after subcontractors that are not paying taxes is the main intent of this Bill. Tried our best in… in negotiations with the industry not to penalize the contractors that are doing… doing their job and paying taxes and are good employers. We have with… with the industry we’ve included language that would… that would specify that the information for… by Revenue be confidential. One of the other changes we’ve taken out an unsuccessful bidder lawsuit. We’ve changed language from Revenue, a number of things from Revenue, but for the industry’s part we’ve made a number of different changes we moved through. Industry would have been neutral on this was our indication had we been able to make the filing period at the first of the year and then quarterly thereafter and then every three days for anyone that violates the Act. The Amendment that we ended up with was basically that everyone would file three days after they hire a new subcontractor. So, I think this Bill will help take care of… of contractors that have subcontractors that are not paying taxes to the State of Illinois. And that’s what we’re trying to address and I’d be happy to answer any questions.” 09300135.doc 47  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Mr. Clerk, would you read this Bill please.”

“And the Gentleman on… is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Vermilion, Representative Black.”

“Yes. State your inquiry.”

Speaker Hannig: “Mr. Clerk, can you read the fiscal note? Okay. Representative Black, the Clerk is searching for the fiscal note and coul… would you like to proceed with some other questions?”

“I’m advised, Representative, by the Clerk that it is filed. That… there just…”

Speaker Hannig: “Okay. Why don’t we take Representative Black’s advice and take this out of the record and we’ll come back to it in a few moments, Representative Reitz? Okay?”

“Okay.” 09300135.doc 48  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“I’m advised that a former Member, Judge Kent Slater, has joined us and he’s over by Representative Daniels’ desk. And welcome back to the chamber. On page 10 of the Calendar, Mr. Clerk, is Senate Bill 1906. Representative Slone? There she is. Representative Slone, would you like to move it from Second to Third? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. 1906. Senate Bill 1906. Page 10 of the Calendar.”

“Representative Slone.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. We’ve discussed this Bill on several occasions. With Amendment 3, which removes one paragraph of the Bill, the last remaining objections to the Bill are handled and there is no remaining opposition to the Bill. I would appreciate your positive consideration.”

“And on… on a Floor Amendment #3, the Lady moves for the adoption of the Floor Amendment. And the Gentleman from Vermilion, Representative Black, is recognized.”

“She indicates she’ll yield.” 09300135.doc 49  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“That’s correct, Mr. Black.”

“Any further discussion? All in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it and the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, would you read the Bill?”

“Representative Slone.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 1906 has appeared before this chamber previously as House Bill 6848. It does create a task force that will look into the possibility of providing priority funding for local governments that work together to plan their land use and transportation. I would appreciate your ‘aye’ votes.” 09300135.doc 50  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 110 voting ‘yes’, 5 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, let’s return to Senate Bill 797 and you’ve read the Bill. Is that correct, Mr. Clerk? Okay. So, we’re…”

“Okay. Representative Reitz is recognized on House… on Senate Bill 797.”

“Thank you. It’s good to get back to this. And the fiscal note has been filed. I could probably answer that, also. Do you want the Clerk to read the notes or…?”

“Well, why don’t you go ahead and open and then we’ll allow Representative Black and others to ask questions.”

“Thank you. Let this Bill be open.”

Speaker Hannig: “Is there any discussion? Representative Black.”

“Mr. Clerk, would you read the fiscal note.” 09300135.doc 51  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Ther… there are… there’s a process in here for the employer to pay fines, if they’re fined in violation of this. And just for the record too, I’d like to actually be able to say open this Bill on every Bill if that’s okay. If you could, check on that. But…”

“Now… now that you’ve clarified that, it… it is… that is true.”

“I haven’t. So…”

“The… the department… and well, once when they promulgate rules they will have that. But contractor is… is responsible for basically saying these people work for me. These are independent contractors that… that are not 09300135.doc 53  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 part of my firm and they… and they worked on this job for… for my contracting agency.”

“Department of Revenue.”

“Representative Monique Davis.”

Speaker Hannig: “Is there any further discussion? Representative Reitz to close. Representative Reitz, you can now close.”

“Thank you. We shall now close this Bill. Thank you. No, I appreciate it. I think this does go a long way. We’ve had a good negotiations with the industry trying to craft a piece of legislation. As I said, I think other than one point… one point on the filing when… when the people file on this, had we been able to accommodate that 09300135.doc 55  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 we would’ve… the industry would’ve went neutral on this Bill. I will appreciate the concerns and the… the questions and will, ya know, we’ll try to talk with the Senate Sponsor and make sure that they address the… the fiscal impact from the Department of Revenue, but I appreciate an ‘aye’ vote.”

“The question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 70 voting ‘yes’ and 45 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Is Representative Saviano in the chamber for Senate Bill 2108? Okay. Well, let’s move down the Calendar to Senate Bill 2247. Representative Dunkin. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill. Okay. Representative Dunkin, we’re advised that there’s still a Motion to Table remain… that’s in the Rules Committee. So we should probably wait on this Bill until the Rules Committee sends your Motion out and then we can come back to it. Okay? Okay. So let’s return to, Mr. Clerk, to Senate Bill 2108. Read the Bill, please.”

“Third Reading. Okay. So we moved that Bill to the Order of Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 2299.”

“Representative Saviano.”

“Is there any discussion? Then all in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

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

“Representative Saviano.”

“Is there any discussion? The Lady from Cook, Representative Krause.”

Speaker Hannig: “The Gentleman from Knox, Representative Moffitt.” 09300135.doc 58  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“He indicates he’ll yield.”

Speaker Hannig: “Any further discussion? Representative Saviano to close.”

“The question is, ‘shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 106 voting ‘yes’ and 8 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received the Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 2617.”

“Representative Saviano.”

Speaker Hannig: “All in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. The Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

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

“Representative Saviano.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 114 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, would you read Senate Bill 2547 for Representative Slone. Representative Slone, 2547.”

“Representative Slone, on the Motion to Table.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. I move to table Amendment 1.”

“The Lady moves to table Amendment #1. Is there any discussion? All in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the… and the Motion carries and the Amendment is tabled. Any further Amendments?”

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

“Representative Slone.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This Bill makes a change in the law regarding the experience rating of employers under the Unemployment Insurance Act if they get an increase in their rating because the employer is actively on duty with the air… with the Illinois National Guard or the Armed Forces. Under the current law, an employer who has to lay off some of their employees because the employer is going into active duty service may have their experience rating and their in… therefore their insurance payment raised when they come back from serving in the our Armed Forces. And we would 09300135.doc 62  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 like to change the law so that that no longer occurs. I would be happy to answer any questions.”

“Is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Parke.”

“She indicates she’ll yield.”

“I’m sorry, Mr. Parke, what was your… I couldn’t hear the end there. What was your question?”

“I believe so, Mr. Parke. I think that the problem was primarily with the Amendment which we just tabled. And I think without that language everyone is fine with the Bill.”

“That’s my understanding, yes.”

“Representative Currie.”

“I have an inquiry of the Chair. The Calendar seems to say that there was a Motion to Table Amendment #1 and that the… that that Motion was recommended for adoption but I don’t see that we tabled the Amendment.” 09300135.doc 63  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

Speaker Hannig: “We just did table the Amendment, Representative Currie. Then we moved the Bill to Third…”

“Just now?”

“Yes.”

“Okay. Thank you.”

“And we’re reading it on Third. Okay. Is there any further discussion? Then Representative Slone to close.”

“I would appreciate your ‘aye’ votes. Thank you.”

Speaker Hannig: “The question is, ‘shall Senate Bill 2547 pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 115 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, would you read Senate Bill 2788.”

“Representative Turner? Representative Turner, do you wish this to move to Third Reading? Okay. Third Reading. And on page 4 of the Calendar, under the Order of Senate Bills-Third Reading, is Senate Bill 728. Representative Joyce, 728. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Representative Joyce.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 728 allows companies that have billboards to get fair market value when municipalities come in and decide to take those billboards down by using zoning changes. This is not eminent domain cases, it does not affect eminent domain. It is only in zoning cases. It… it protects companies’ assets and allows them to receive fair market value for their loss. I’d be happy to answer any questions.”

Speaker Hannig: “And on that question, the Gentleman from McHenry, Representative Franks.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“He indicates he’ll yield.”

“Representative Joyce, nobody wants to see expropriation without renumeration, but I’d like to know what the fair market value… Isn’t that a good word, I learned that in college, twice. But how are… how was one determining the fair market value? What’s the amortization schedule? Is it based on the length of the most recent contract or is it based on some other factor?”

“It’s the length of the existing contract in place…”

“That’s…”

“…and the value of the land.”

“Well, the value of the land is really noth… I mean, there’s very little land used for a billboard. It’s, ya know, probably 20 square feet if you’re looking at that 09300135.doc 65  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 bottom. But are you looking at… really at just the contract term?”

“Well, it depends on… it depends on what the zoning change does, Representative Franks. It’ll be…”

“Well, let’s assume for the sake of argument that the zoning disallows future billboards, okay, in that area. I can tell ya, in McHenry County, we have a blight of these things. Other counties have been much more proactive and they’ve limited where these can go, but in McHenry County it’s everywhere and it’s really an eyesore. So, let’s assume for the sake of argument that McHenry County tomorrow determined that we’re not gonna have anymore billboards. How would this Bill affect that decision?”

“Well, if they… if they did… if they did… did away with billboards through zoning changes, right now, as it stands today, those billboards would have to stay up for a minimum of 5 years, period. It would go through a court process, negotiated and they would get time, as opposed to if this Bill were to pass, they could come down tomorrow after fair compensa… compensation was negotiated between the two parties.”

“Okay. So, what you’re doing here is shortening the time frame to take down these billboards, if a… if a county would so choose.”

“If a county would so choose to provide fair… fair market value compensation at the time, as opposed to the existing process which just allows the billboard company to continue to have the billboard up for the length of 09300135.doc 66  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 whatever is determined by a court in a negotiated process with the municipality through the zoning board which is appointed by… and the biggest problem here, Representative Franks, is you have a company that goes in and has an asset, builds an asset along… in line with the zoning practices of a municipality. And then you could have a regi… a regime change, whatever, political change, whatever you wanna call it and this new administration, which also would control the zoning board, would come in and say, oh, you know what, we don’t want to have that anymore. All of your investment is going to be gone. So, that’s the point of it, ya know.”

“I understand what you’re trying to do and I’m wondering is this an ‘either/or’. Could you say, listen, and instead of us paying you for this, we’re gonna give you 5 years to keep selling your space. Would that be an option in this Bill?”

“That’s… that already is an option.”

“Okay. I guess, my question would then go back to…”

“This allows to… allows the community to get rid of it right now, allows the company to receive just compensation and fair market value rates instead of just saying, hey, maintain this for the next 5 years under existing contracts.”

“Well, that’s my real issue. The fair market value, I think that’s… now we’re gettin’ to the details. ‘Cause I’m reading here in the Bill and it says, ‘with respect to the off-premises outdoor advertisings, signs shall not be 09300135.doc 67  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 determined by amortization of the value of the signs over a period of time nor by any other amortization method of calculation.’ So, what I’m trying to figure out is how we’re going to determine fair market value. Because quite frankly, if you’re just looking at the cost of building the sign, it isn’t much, ya know, it’s some plywood and some lumber and maybe some lights.”

“But if…”

“But I’m wondering, how are we going to determine the fair market value here because I certainly don’t wanna overpay.”

“In the same way that they determine the amortization process today, through the courts, based on the existing contracts.”

“So, they’re based on the existing contracts.”

“Yeah. Right now, they go to court based on what the existing contract is and the value of the location, obviously, you know, if it’s a higher traffic area or something like that.”

“Can I ask you what the genesis of this Bill is?”

“Well, we went to LRB and…”

“No, that… Why did you bring it forward? I guess I should ask. I’m just trying to figure out why we need this when we already have a way to…”

“It’s to solve a problem for business owners.”

“Okay. All right. Thank you, Sir.”

“Thank you.”

"Representative Black.” 09300135.doc 68  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

"He indicates he’ll yield.”

"No, it is not, not today. The way it works today is you go through a process, through a court, a minimum of 5 years…. Instead of receiving the fair market value for your loss as a business owner, you go to court and you are given a… a 5-year extension to keep that up. But in the end, they can take that down. It does… the grandfather does not last anymore.”

"This addresses zoning change, not contract changes.”

"And I can’t… but I… I would imagine that this Bill is fair to all of the 20 companies, not just 1.”

"Correct. Yeah.”

"I think that… I think that’s… I think you have to factor all those issues in, whether it’s location, the cost, the outlay, if someone just purchased. And I think companies can provide that information and… and then you go into that process.”

"Zoned out.”

"I… I don’t know if I would make that assumption.” 09300135.doc 70  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

"Right.”

"And… and a court, in fact, rules today.”

"To… today, you do not.”

“I think with this… this would… this would give the landowner an opportunity to get money from the billboard company after they have gotten their money based on the fact that they had an existing contract. So, I think… I think that this helps the landowner collect because of their… be… as long as they have an existing contract.”

"Okay. Well, you know, good luck collecting that.”

"No. That’s correct.”

“That’s correct.”

"Thank you.”

"Representative Fritchey.”

"Thank you, Speaker. To the Bill.”

"To the Bill.”

"La… Ladies and Gentlemen, ya know, a lot of communities have tried to deal with the proliferation of billboards that have come on, it’s kind of like a swarm of locusts. What this is really the… an attempt to ameliorate the situation, not through the use of any fancy logarithms, but simply by a straight amortization of the fair market value of the money that was invested here. There’s a cacophony of debate on this issue. It’s very straightforward. It helps the municipalities do what they wanna do. It provides the billboard companies with fair 09300135.doc 72  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 compensation for what would otherwise be a taking. It really is a simple, nonconfrontational, noncomplicated issue. I’ve dealt with this issue specifically in my other career. It’s common sense and I urge an ‘aye’ vote. Thank you.”

"Representative Mathias.”

"Can you repeat the last part of your question?”

"No, no, I… I think under this Bill the municipality maintains the option if they wanna grandfather someone in, they can continue to grandfather people in. It’s… it’s just a matter of… of those municipalities do… that do not wanna grandfather someone in a nonconforming use… zoning 09300135.doc 73  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 use, then these… these persons would be entitled to compensation as opposed to time amortization. So, I think it’s… with this language, we still allow municipalities to grandfather companies in.”

"I… I believe just… just as the amorti… amortization of time is done today, it would ultimately go to a court. I believe the cost, the capital outlay, the value of the location, along with the length of the existing contract would all be key factors in determining the fair market value.”

"Representative Meyer.”

"Any further discussion? Representative Joyce to close.”

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. I would urge an ‘aye’ vote.” 09300135.doc 74  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

"The question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 67 voting ‘yes’ and 47 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, what is the status of Senate Bill 1005?”

“Okay. Return that Bill to the Order of Second Reading at the request of the Sponsor. And on page 5 of the Calendar is Senate Bill 1648. Representative Saviano. Does the Gentleman wish us to call that Bill? Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

Speaker Hannig: “Mr. Clerk, would you read this on Third Reading?”

“Okay. So the Gentleman has opened, is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 115 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, read… on page 8 of the Calendar, read Senate Bill 943.”

“Okay. Mr. Clerk, let’s take this out of the record. Representative Bradley, for what reason do you rise?” 09300135.doc 76  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Mr. Speaker, on House Bill 1080 it was my intention to vote ‘present’ on that and I think my switch was not accurately reflecting that. I’d ask it to reflect that.”

“Okay. So, the record will so reflect. On page 31 of the Calendar under… excuse me. Okay. Mr. Clerk, let’s return to the Order of Senate Bills-Second Reading. Senate Bill 943. And on the Amendment, the Gentleman from Cook, Representative McAuliffe will present the Amendment.”

“Is there any discussion? Then all in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

“Representative McAuliffe, would you like to present Amendment #3 on behalf of Representative Hoffman?”

“All in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

“Third Reading. On Supplemental Calendar #1, under Senate Bills-Second Reading, is Senate Bill 184. Mr. Clerk, would you read the Bill.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 324.”

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 520.”

“Representative Hamos, do you want that moved to Third? We just had ‘em…. Is that a note request, Mr. Clerk? So that’ll have to remain on Second. So… so that will remain on the Order of Second, Representative Hamos. And let’s go to Senate Bill 2404. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

Speaker Hannig: “Mr. Cler… Third Reading. Representative Mautino, for what reason do you rise?”

“That Bill needs to remain on Second. On Senate Bill 2404 we’re awaiting a… a Amendment to be added, a Floor Amendment.”

“Okay. So, that’s what we’ll do. Mr. Clerk, return that to the Order of Second Reading at the request of the Sponsor. Okay. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 955.”

“Representative Currie on Floor Amendment #3.”

“Thank you, Speaker and Members of the House. This is a modification of the Bill as it was already amended. That makes a person ineligible run… to run for township or ward or committeeman if… if convicted of a felony, not an infamous crime. The idea is to limit the prohibitions to felony convictions only because a conviction for a infamous crime encompasses a lot more than felonies, in fact, quite a lot of misdemeanor offenses and there are questions as to the constitutionality of the broader proposal.”

“Is there any discussion? Then all in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?” 09300135.doc 79  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Third Reading. Mr. Clerk, read the Rules Report, please.”

“On the Supplemental Calendar #1, under the Order of Resolutions, is House Joint Resolution 75. The Gentleman from Vermilion, Representative Black.”

“Representative Fritchey.”

“Thank you, Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“He indicates he'll yield.”

“Representative, I think it may be helpful for some of the newer Members for them to understand exactly what it is they’re voting on here because it… it gets somewhat convoluted. A… a ‘yes’ vote would be a vote to deny the increase. And a ‘no’ vote would, in essence, be a vote to accept the report and accept the increase. Is that correct?”

“Well then, I’m… I’m not setting you up here, Bill, I’m just making sure that everybody gets this ‘cause there’s been confusion in the past. So, now in the report… in the report this year this only… this deals with just the cost-of-living increase or cost-of-living increase and a raise as well?”

“And those… the ‘03 and ‘04 would cover the cost-of- living increases which we did not get by virtue of action of the Governor? Is that correct?”

“All right. And then, pending our action does this still need… does the Senate take separate action on this or does this go over there?”

“Okay. Thank you.”

“Representative Winters.”

“He indicates he'll yield.”

“Representative Lang.”

“Thank you. Will the Sponsor yield?”

“He indicates he'll yield.”

“Representative, I’m not opposed to your Resolution. I intend to vote for it. But this is the second or third year in a row we’ve… we’ve rejected the pay raises which we probably ought to do. But has there been any consideration given to doing something with the fact that when we reject the pay raises we’re also rejecting pension increases? Is there someway to separate that out to reject the cash but… but allow those who would have been included in this report to get the benefit of the pension bump?”

“Thank you.”

“Representative Parke.” 09300135.doc 84  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“He indicates he'll yield.”

Speaker Hannig: “Representative Black…. Excuse me, Representative Molaro.”

“Will the Sponsor yield?”

“He indicates he'll yield.”

“Representative, there anything in the Resolution that would make sure that the questions just asked by Representative Parke or your fine presentation of the Resolution that would make sure that the… what we are doing here right now is disseminated to all public outlets, Internet or the press? ‘Cause I gotta tell ya, if we were doing just the opposite, we’d probably hit the front page of the paper tonight. So, I… I don’t know if there’s any press listening, whatever it may be. I just hope that they would give this the same what we’re doing here today in this tough economic times, which I think is a nice gesture that they would treat it the same way that if… just in case your Resolution went the other way where it would be. So, thank you.”

“Representative….”

“Representative Black, you can close.”

“The question is, ‘Shall House Joint Resolution 75 be adopted?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed vote ‘nay’. 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 103 voting ‘yes’, 8 voting ‘no’ and 2 voting ‘present’. And this Resolution, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 3338, please.”

"Let’s let that remain on the Order of Second Reading. Turning the page on the Supplemental Calendar, under the Order of Resolutions, is House Joint Resolution 87. Representative Miller. Representative Miller on House Joint Resolution 87.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. House Joint Resolution 87 simply states that… opposition to closing of Tinley Park Health… Mental Health Center. I ask for a favorable vote.”

"Is there any discussion? Then all in favor of the Resolution say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Resolution is adopted. Mr. Clerk, we have 09300135.doc 88  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 House Joint Resolution #90. Representative Hassert, would you like to present that?”

"Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall the Resolution be adopted?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed vote ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 114 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And the Resolution is adopted. House Joint Resolution (sic-House Resolution) 973, Representative Verschoore.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Gentlemen… Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. What this Resolution does is urges the Department of Central Management Services to consider the need of the state employees, retirees and their dependants and the economic need for the state in any decision regarding the selection and the administration of the Vision Care Benefit Plan for the state employees and retirees. When we were in discussions with CMS it was brought out that if they went with the new provider for eyeglasses that there are eight places in the state that do the grinding of lenses and the frames, plus there’s a much better network of optometrists for our people to go to. If we go with the new plan or if CMS goes with the new plan, all those jobs go to Baltimore, Maryland, and we will have a much smaller choice of where we go to get our eyes tested 09300135.doc 89  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 and everything. That’s what the House Resolution, if adopted, it would stay. Is to keep what we have. And I would urge a ‘yes’ vote.”

"Is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Jackson, Representative Bost.”

"He indicates he’ll yield.”

“That’s not what was said in committee when we had the… when we had the CMS people in. They said that it would go to Baltimore, Maryland.”

“Evi… evidently, because it’s not here. So, from what they’re telling us or when I was in committee they said that they would lose it. And they’re not saving that much money to do away with… there’s… there’s eight places. I don’t remember the exact number of employees, but the number of employees that we would lose would be a much greater loss to the State of Illinois than what we’d gain.” 09300135.doc 90  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Thank you.”

"Representative Meyer.”

"Representative Verschoore to close.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would ask for an ‘aye’ vote.”

"All in favor of the Resolution say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Resolution is adopted. Senate Joint Resolution 75, Representative Giles. Is the Gentleman in the chamber? We’re gonna go back to the ordinary Calendar, page 7, is Senate Bill 2536. Representative Jefferson. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Representative Jefferson.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. What this Bill does is amends the State Appellate Defenders Act, provides that the State Appellate Defender may hire investigators to provide investigative services to appointed counsel and county public defenders. It also provides that investigators be employed by the Death Penalty Trial Assistance and Capital Litigation Division of the State Appellate Defender. Should be authorized to inquire with the Law Enforcement Agencies Data Systems to ascertain whether their potential witnesses have a criminal background. Provides that the authorization apply only to information held on the state level and should be used only to protect the personal safety of investigators. Provides 09300135.doc 92  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 that any information that is obtained through this inquiry may not be disclosed by the investigators. And I would urge an ‘aye’ vote.”

"Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 114 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 2794.”

"Representative Soto.”

“Thank you, Speaker and Members of the House. Senate Bill 2794 requires the Department of… the Department of Public Health to develop a comprehensive statewide asthma management plan to reduce the rate of hospital… hospitalizations due to asthma and facilitate the effective management of asthma in a person with asthma. Requires the department to implement programs to meet objectives of the statewide asthma management plan. Provides for the use of monies from the Tobacco Settlement and Recovery Fund to implement the statewide asthma management plan. And this is subject to appropriation. And I urge an ‘aye’ vote.”

"Is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Parke.” 09300135.doc 93  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

"Representative Turner.”

“Yeah, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have an inquiry of the Clerk.”

"Of the Clerk?”

“Yeah.”

"State your inquiry.”

“Could you tell me who were the Sponsors of this Bill?” 09300135.doc 94  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

"Representative… or Mr. Clerk, could you… could you read the names of the principal Sponsors?”

“Did you… did I understand you to say that Representative Parke is one to sponsor this Bill? Well- intentioned or…”

"Representative, I think the Clerk read the…”

“Parke.”

"…names.”

“Yeah, I was just curious. Thank you, Representative.”

"Rep… Representative Parke, your name was used in debate, for what reason do you rise?”

Speaker Hannig: "Thank you, Representative Parke. Representative Black.”

"Me… me, too, Representative. Representative Soto to… Soto to close.”

“Thank you. First of all, I just wanna let this General Assembly know that Representative Parke picked up the Bill before I did, just transferred it over to me. So, he was the original Sponsor that picked it up here in the General Assembly. And I am so happy that he is on this Bill. And I urge an ‘aye’ vote. Thank you.”

"The question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 114 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 2820.”

"Representative Bradley.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a Bill that would address the problem with many areas of the State of Illinois not having a uniform Residential Building Code. It would provide that there should be a code included in the contract. And in case there’s not a code included, it provides for a default code which would be set by this 09300135.doc 96  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 statute. So, I would ask for an ‘aye’ vote. I know of no opposition to the Bill.”

"Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 111 voting ‘yes’, 3 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, would you read Senate Bill 2880?”

"Representative Hamos.”

“Thank you, Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen. I’m proud today to have an opportunity to debate Senate Bill 2880. Many of you… maybe most of you are already cosponsors and you know what kind of hard work went into this 32-page Bill. This is the Older Adult Services Act and it is a comprehensive look at our long-term care system. This… this Bill in a nutshell provides that the Department of Aging will be the lead agency for the kinds of activities that we will be undertaking pursuant to this Act. That we will be identifying priority service areas to look at the uniden… to look at the unmet needs of older adults in the State of Illinois, to look at the services that are needed in many of your communities that have not been prioritized before. This Bill calls for a major restructuring of the long-term care system. And in this Bill we are looking at 09300135.doc 97  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 long-term care as any… anything from being able to stay in a home to having community-based services and to the kind of nursing home care that is needed as we face the future. This Bill will also provide for a nursing home conversion program to look at empty beds and the possibility for taking some of those beds offline and… and using them in other kinds of ways that we know that seniors are expecting in their communities. And then finally and importantly, this Bill also sets up the Older Adult Services Advisory Committee which is a very significant committee that will be formed at… by State Government to look at… to do all the planning issues and implementation issues as we move forward. As you may know, this Bill has the widespread support of most every group that deals with older issues… older adult issues. And I especially want to recognize AARP and the Health Care Association for the really important work they did in creating consensus around this effort. I’m available to answer any questions and I… I seek your strong ‘aye’ support.”

Speaker Hannig: "The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Parke.”

"She indicates she’ll yield.”

“Yes. It also has Amendment 3.” 09300135.doc 98  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Yes, it does.”

“They are… the Long-Term Care Ombudsman, an organization that we admire and respect, is now neutral on this Bill. We have worked very closely with them to assure them that we will, in the future, work very hard to get additional funding for that organization to strengthen it even further.”

“Well, no, I don’t, but, Representative Parke, the way that this Bill is written it is revenue neutral and what is now needed we know so well is a major planning effort to move forward. And as we develop those plans and as funds become available, we will want to make sure that the entire long-term care system will benefit from additional resources. So, until we engage in that planning effort we don’t really know what it’s going to cost. But, I do know that with the baby boomers’ population aging we will have significant need for a restructured and balanced long-term care system.”

“Well, and that is why, as I mentioned before, the Older Adults Services Advisory Committee which is… has representatives from every part of the long-term care system and the senior care system is going to be a very important component of this planning process. The Department of Aging is named as the lead agency, but if… if we had today a billion dollars it wouldn’t be so easy to figure out where to put it. The planning is a very important process embodied in this Bill and that, I think, will create a road map or a blueprint for how to direct new resources as they become available.”

Speaker Hannig: "Is there any further discussion? Representative Hamos to close.”

“Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. Thank you for your attention and for your interest in this discussion. I think this really is the Session that made significant 09300135.doc 100  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 headway at looking at this restructured long-term care system. And I look forward to your ‘aye’ support.”

"The question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 113 voting ‘yes’ and 1 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 2961.”

"Representative Munson.”

"Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 114 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having 09300135.doc 101  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 3201.”

Speaker Hannig: "Representative Morrow. Senate Bill-Third Reading.”

“Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Bill 3201… Amendment #1 becomes the Bill. It creates the Nuclear Safety Law of 2004, whereby the Illinois Emergency Management Agency, IEMA, assumes powers and duties previously vested in the Department of Nuclear Safety, DNS, by various Acts. This Bill was introduced by IEMA as a cleanup Bill to implement the Governor’s executive order of last year which con… consolidated DNS into IEMA. Most… the Bill contains most of the existing statutory language that pertains to DNS. Aside from cleanup language, the Bill makes two substantive changes. It expands IEMA’s authority escort, spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste to include authority to escort radioactive materials. It provides for the appointment of assistant director by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate and shall serve a term of 2 years. I’ll be glad… I’ll be glad to answer any questions…”

"Okay.”

“…Mr. Speaker.”

"And is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Vermilion, Representative Black.” 09300135.doc 102  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

"He indicates he’ll yield.”

“It… it doesn’t close it, it codifies it. It allows IEMA to charge for a escort of… of this type of product.”

“I’m sorry… I’m sorry, Representative. Representative Black, will you repeat that again?”

“Representative Dunkin.”

“Representative Black, I can make a lot of other comments… I could… I could make a lot… a lot of other comments about Representative Dunkin, but you know, I’m trying to keep my mind clear.” 09300135.doc 103  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“I… I really couldn’t answer that, Representative Black, because this… we’re basically following the executive order of the Governor.”

“Yes. This is a Bill requested by the Governor, yes.”

“No, I don’t think it’s that.”

“I don’t think so. I don’t think so.”

“Who… that… who would? The Governor?”

“The Governor already has that.”

“With the advice and consent of the Senate.” 09300135.doc 104  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Well, I’m the one that’s a lame duck.”

“And I… I would appreciate your letter of support being on my desk tomorrow.”

"Representative Dunkin.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

"He indicates he’ll yield.”

“Now, my name was… my name was used twice in debate, if I can recall. Someone referred me to a Dunkin Donut, a donut hole. And I resent that, Bill Black. You owe me and my district an apology. I’ve been here for 2 years. Yeah.”

"Representative Black.”

"Representative Millner. Okay. Representative Morrow to close.”

“Yes, I just ask ‘aye’ votes on Senate Bill 3201. Just… just to bring some seriousness back… back to the chamber. The Executive Director of IEMA, Bill Burke, has 09300135.doc 105  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 done a fantastic job as the director of IEMA and I know he’s gonna do a fantastic job with this new responsibility. I’ve known Bill for over 25 years and he’s an outstanding gentleman. He’s done a fantastic job with all the emergencies that we’ve had within the State of Illinois.”

"The question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 91 voting ‘yes’ and 22 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. Representative Mitchell, for what reason do you rise?” Mitchell, J.: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I inadvertently pushed the ‘red’ button on Senate Bill 2880. I would like to be… I’d like the record to reflect that I wish to vote ‘yes’ on that Bill.”

"Okay. The record will so reflect.” Mitchell, J.: “Thank you.”

"Representative Giles, would you like us to do Senate Joint Resolution 75? Okay. Representative Giles. That’s on Supplemental Calendar #1.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Senate Joint Resolution 75 is… is language that came from the Senate on a usual basis. These Resolutions… the waiver Resolution comes… the language comes from the Senate. And the Members in the House, we have the opportunity to either vote up or down on the 09300135.doc 106  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 recommendations. In this particular Resolution, the… there were about… there are six Resolutions that… that we’re asking to deny for the waivers of the School Code mandates. In this particular legislation, just briefly, we got Ridgeview School District 19 dealing with the driver’s education fee approval for only one year and denied for the remaining 4 years. Rutland School District 230, Wallace School District 195, Summit 104, Waukegan 60 and Steeleville 138. And we’re asking that these particular waivers to be denied. So, we’re asking for a ‘yes’ vote to deny these particular waivers.”

"And on the Senate Joint Resolution 75, the Gentleman from Vermilion, Representative Black.”

"Yes, state your inquiry.”

"Mr. Clerk, could you tell us the status of any Amendments that were… that were debated on this Bill? He’s gonna double check in a moment just to be sure.”

"Representative Giles, do you know the answer to that question?”

“Thank you… thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Black, there were… Amendment #1 that was drawn on my behalf, but we did not adopt that Resolution in committee.” 09300135.doc 107  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

"Yes, he indicates he’ll yield.”

“That’s correct. And that’s only six waiver requests that I have listed here…”

“…that I just briefly went over. Therefore, the remainder waiver requests that are asked for they will be approved. That do not effect those waiver requests. Just the six… the ones that we’re dealing here now. We’re…”

“The State Board of Education requests that we will approve those particular waivers or disapprove those particular waivers. So…”

“…so… so what we have here is a list of individuals… a list of the various waivers that the school district asked for this Body to deny. And there’s only six. And so, when we vote… if we vote ‘yes’ and pass this particular Resolution out of the chambers today, that means just only 09300135.doc 108  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 this six Resolutions will be denied and the rest will be approved.”

“And… that’s correct.”

“No. A ‘yes’ will… a ‘yes’ will deny… allow those other waivers that was requested to be granted. Representative Black…”

“…once again, these are the only ones that are being denied.”

“What we’re addressin’ now.”

“That’s correct.”

“And… and… and let me just say this, Representative. If we take no… if we take no action on any of these requests, then everything is approved.”

"Representative Monique Davis.” Davis, M.: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield?”

"He indicates he’ll yield.” Davis, M.: “Representative Giles, how many P.E. waivers are granted with this ‘yes’ vote?” 09300135.doc 109  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Representative, I believe… I think there were… if I’m not mistaken, I believe, there’s approximately 21.” Davis, M.: “Twenty-one granted P.E. waivers?”

“If I’m not mistaken. I may be incorrect, but I believe it’s somewhere in that ballpark.” Davis, M.: “So, the Senate has already approved these waivers?”

“That’s correct. The Senate recommendations were not to deny those particular waivers. And they have listed here six to be denied.” Davis, M.: “Well, we may… I mean, we’re gonna have to vote for it because if… even if we don’t vote for it that means the waivers are granted. However, I think this Body should take note that the Heart Association is very much opposed to us continuing to grant physical education waivers when we have documented information about the health of our children, the growth of… I mean the increase in obesity. I just think it behooves us to at some point make a decision not to grant P.E. waivers because people can offer physical education in classrooms. There’s so many ways to offer physical education. And sometimes, I find educators think that all physical education is… is someone moving or playing a game when there’s so much more involved in physical education in the curriculum. Mr. Chairman, I understand that we’re desire… you are desirous of a ‘yes’ vote on this waiver and that means the Senate and the House will be in concurrence? Is that correct?”

“That’s correct, Representative.” Davis, M.: “Thank you.” 09300135.doc 110  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

"Representative Mitchell, Jerry Mitchell.” Mitchell, J.: “Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the Sponsor yield?”

"He indicates he’ll yield.” Mitchell, J.: “Representative Giles, for the benefit of the Body could you read the school districts that are involved with it? We… we have quite a few Representatives that are not on the Elementary & Secondary Education Committee that really aren’t sure whether they have districts involved in the denial process. If you… if you pay attention to the districts that Representative Giles reads then you will know whether or not there is a school district in your legislative district that has requested a waiver and it might make a difference on how you vote on this issue.”

“Thank you, Representative, for asking me to reclarify the school district. Once again, it is Ridgeview, CD… SUCD 19, that’s Senate District 53. That particular waiver’s dealing with the driver ed fee approval for only 1 year and denied for 4 years, the remaining 4 years of that particular waiver that we grant, previously. The Rutland School District 230, once again, that’s Senate District 38. That is… that particular waiver is dealing with the limitation of administration costs. Wallace School District 195, once again that the Senate District 38 dealing with administrative costs. Summit School District 104, that’s the Senate District 11, once again dealing with administrative costs. Waukegan School District 60, that particular… Senate District 30. That particular substitute… 09300135.doc 111  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 that waiver is dealing with substitute teacher. And Steeleville School District 138, that’s Senate District 58.” Mitchell, J.: “Thank… thank you, Representative. And folks, remember, that a ‘yes’ vote denies the waiver that was requested for these school districts. A ‘no’ vote allows the waiver to take place in the district. Would appreciate… those districts there would appreciate a ‘no’ vote. However, these are the only districts that the Senate sent to us and there is a problem that… that Representative Giles and I have both discussed. That we get this Bill so late that there’s no way to modify it or change it. Representative Giles had an Amendment, but then realized that if we amend this Bill in any way it will never get through the process. So, we’re gonna try to address that next year. Representative Giles, thank you.”

"Representative Giles…”

“Thank you, Rep…”

"…to close.”

“Thank you. Once again, we takin’ direction from the Senate. These are recommendations from the State Board of Education. And we’re asking for a ‘yes’ vote to deny these particular waivers. Thank you.”

Speaker Hannig: "The question is, ‘Shall the Senate Joint Resolution #75 be approved?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. 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 09300135.doc 112  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 this question, there are 98 voting ‘yes’ and 9 voting ‘no’. And the Resolution is adopted. On page 12 of the Calendar, under Senate Bills-Second Reading, is Senate Bill 3007. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

"Representative Howard.”

“Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. This… Amendment #6, I think, eliminates all opposition. It was filed at the request of my colleague, Chapin Rose, in order to resolve ambiguities in Section J of the Criminal Identification Act as amended by previous action taken on this… this Bill. The ambiguities were resolved by combining Sections H, I, and J into Section H and renumbering references accordingly. The Amendment retains all of the revisions of Senate Amendment #1 and House Amendments #1, 2, 4 and 5. There are three substantial changes that this Amendment makes. Number one, H-2(b)(4) adds language clarifying how first offender drug probation for Class IV felony drug possession is to be treated, an issue that was not addressed in J. Because the probation is technically a nonconviction, it would have been immediately sealable. The new language makes it clear that probation is to be treated as a conviction for the purposes of sealing so that individuals must wait 4 years to have it 09300135.doc 113  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 sealed. The second substantive change, H(3), C(2) and D(2) were amended to expand the definition of ‘supervision’ to include ‘felony supervision’. Although, technically, supervision for a felony is not allowable under the law and the change should be downgraded to a misdemeanor first, according to my… my colleague, Representative Rose, some courts in Illinois do allow felony supervision anyway. The purpose of the felony supervision is so that if a person violates court supervision they are on the hook for a felony sentence and are subject to 1 to 3 years in prison rather than subject only to a misdemeanor sentence of up to 1 year in jail. These changes treat felony supervision just like misdemeanor supervision for the purposes of determining the waiting period for a sealing. Change #3, H-7(a) now spells out the basics of what must be included in a petition for sealing, something that was omitted in the underlying Public Act. The requirements laid out here are based on what the Cook County Circuit Clerk now requires, but gives local clerks flexibility to require additional information. I ask for ‘yes’ votes on this Amendment.”

Speaker Hannig: "The Lady moves for the adoption of Floor Amendment #6. And on that question, Representative Rose.”

"To the Amendment.”

"Representative Sacia.”

"On the Amendment, Representative Jefferson.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members of the House. I rise in support of this legislation. This is a great piece of legislation. So often as Legislators we are in charge of individuals’ lives, we’re the one’s to decide whether they succeed in life or fail. This is a great piece of legislation to give them a chance to get back into society, become productive citizens and to take that invisible ball and chain from around their necks that continues to hold them down, if, in fact, we don’t pass this legislation. Let’s do this. This is the right thing to do. The fair thing to do. The equitable thing to do. We oftentimes talk about inclusion, equality and all the other things that go with, but as Legislators we often are the ones to 09300135.doc 117  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 stand in the way of getting these individuals back into society. So, I do stand in support of this legislation. I commend Representative Connie Howard for this piece of legislation. It’s great. If, in fact, we’re fair about this and we wanna make sure that these individuals have an opportunity to succeed and cut down on the recidivism rates, I think we all need to stand in support of this piece of legislation. I commend you, Connie Howard. Good job.”

Speaker Hannig: "All in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

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

"Representative Howard.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Bill expands the kind of offenses that allow a person to apply for the sealing of their criminal records. I just want to make certain that we did hear my colleague who emphasized that we are not talking about expungement, but we are talking about sealing. The distinction being that when you have a record sealed, law enforcement remains… continues to have access to it. So that, we’re asking that certain records be sealed. It specifically allows those who have successfully completed their sentences or those who have other arrests 09300135.doc 118  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 or court records for misdemeanor and felony prostitution and misdemeanor and low level drug possession felonies to appeal to a judge to seal their record. If the records are sealed, only law enforcement and public prosecutors will have access to the underlying list of offenses. The public will still be able to see that a person has a record, but will not be able to see what the record actually contains. The point is this, there are many people who have, unfortunately, gone into the prison system and when they come out, even having paid their debt to society, they are not able to get a job. This is about employment. This is about attempting to get people to be… be productive citizens again and to not revert back to negative ways. So that if you give them a job they can support their families and they can become productive citizens like the rest of us are. I ask my colleagues to please find it within your hearts to give me a ‘yes’ vote on this Bill. Senate Bill 3007.”

"Is there any discussion? The Gentleman from Cook, Representative Molaro.”

“Thank you. Will the Sponsor yield for a question?”

"Yes, she indicates she’ll yield.”

“Thank you, Representative. Just… just so there’s clarification so after we pass this people will know. On certain expungements and I know this is sealing as opposed to expungements. When you expunge certain records or even misdemeanor records or whatever it may be, when you’re then asked the question on some form for employment, after an 09300135.doc 119  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 expungement, you can say if you were ever arrested or convicted, you could legally say, no, I was not because that was expunged. So, now this is sealed. And if the intent is to allow people to move forward in their life. So, I have… I have this drug conviction. I get convicted of a low level drug felony. It’s 18 years later. Sixteen years ago I had it sealed. Now, I apply for a job and they ask were you ever convicted of a felony, do I have to answer ‘yes’ or could I answer ‘no’ because it’s now 16 years later and this has been sealed?”

“Representative, you can answer ‘no’. Unless… unless there is a… it is a situation where… where a criminal background check is required by law. If that is the case, you cannot say ‘no’, but other than that, you can say ‘no’.”

“And those… those were delineated by one of the other Representatives. And I wanna… and the reason I think this is very, very, very, very important is what a lot of new people who are hired by HR people, personnel people, the way they go about sometimes to… to show why they were hired, they’ll go out there and get applications and try to catch people in lies. And here’s a great employee, they go back 4, 5 years, see that there was a record because they’re just gonna start pulling stuff and they’ll fire these people for lying on their application. So I wanna make it absolutely clear that unless it’s required by law… if you have this sealed you can vote… you can say ‘no’ on 09300135.doc 120  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 your application and you would be following this particular law now? Is… that’s correct, right?”

“That’s correct.”

“Thank you very much.”

Speaker Hannig: "Representative Flowers. Representative Flowers, do you wish to ask questions or make comments on this Bill? Okay. Representative Flowers.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Lady yield?”

"The Lady indicates she’ll yield.”

“Representative, just for a point of clarification because I know a lot of our constituents is gonna be calling our offices thinking that this is applicable to them. This is dealing with prostitution, drugs and it’s a certain kind of drugs. It’s the marijuana. And then there’s the Class IV felony for cocaine. Are those the only crimes that’s applicable that will be sealed as far as felonies are concerned?”

“Representative, only prostitution and low level drug offenses like possession.”

“So…”

“Only includes possession…”

“…So, other…”

“…not dealing.”

“…other felonies that’s out there…”

“Are not included.”

“…despite the fact these men may have served their time and have not had any other problems, they too must have their records still open and cannot be sealed?” 09300135.doc 121  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“This, unfortunately, will only help those individuals who have the…”

“The low-level crime…”

“…charge or a case of prostitution or possession of those drugs that we talked about.”

“Thank you very much, Representative. I just wanted some clarification. Thank you.”

"Representative Gordon.”

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

"She indicates she’ll yield.”

“Just… just for clarification’s sake, Representative. I… I’m reading in our analysis that this is gonna cost the State Police… it would cost $885 thousand to update their computer system. Is that right?”

“That’s what they’ve indicated to me, yes.”

“Okay. And… and the money is subject to the ICC permission to release that fund, is that right?”

“No. That is… that is not in the Bill.”

“Okay. Where does the money come from?”

“We have a plan that we’re currently implementing to get the money into the budget. But, do keep in mind that the State Police have a year after we get… after we identify funds to… to do this.”

“So, if the State Police don’t get their funds would they… then they would never have to do this or… I don’t… I guess I don’t understand. If the funding is never there, what happens?” 09300135.doc 122  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Representative Gordon, the records will be sealed at the local level, but the State Police then will not seal them until after they have gotten their computer system into shape to do so.”

“Is… is the only reason that the State Police are proponents of this Bill is because there’s a possibility of funding for their computer system to implement the information?”

“It’s my understanding that the State Police are neutral on this Bill.”

“Okay. Thank you.”

"Representative Howard to close.”

“My colleagues, as you know, I am very passionate about attempting to help individuals who I believe deserve a second chance, a second chance to be able to become productive citizens and hopefully not to resort back or revert back to behavior that got ‘em into trouble in the first place. I think if we give them this kind of help we will certainly maximize the possibility that they will not get in trouble. And I think that we as a state in the long run will benefit. I ask for your ‘yes’ votes.”

Speaker Hannig: "The question is, ‘Shall Senate Bill 3007 pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 72 voting ‘yes’, 39 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On 09300135.doc 123  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 Supplemental Calendar #2 is Senate Bill 334. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Okay. Let’s hold that on the Order of Second Reading. Mr. Clerk, what’s the status of Senate Bill 955?”

“Return that to the Order of Second Reading at the request of the Sponsor. And Representative Currie is recognized for a Motion.”

“Thank you, Speaker. I move that we suspend the posting requirements so that Senate Bill 431 can be heard in the Committee on Public Utilities and Senate Bill 451 in the Committee on Transportation.”

“You heard the Lady’s Motion. Is there any discussion? All in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Motion is adopted. Back to the regular Calendar on page 10. Mr. Clerk, on the Order of Second… Senate Bills-Second Reading is Senate Bill 2241. Would you read the Bill, please?”

“Representative Fritchey.”

“I ask you, Speaker in the interest of time, can we come back in about five minutes? I got caught off-guard here. I appreciate it. Thank you.”

“We’ll take this out of the record for a few moments. Okay. Representative Hamos, for what reason do you rise?”

“Thank you, Speaker. My… my button was not functioning and I wish to be recorded ‘aye’ on Senate Bill 3007. Thank you.”

“The record will so reflect your intentions, Representative. On page 28 of the Calendar, on the Order of Resolutions, is House Resolution 853. Representative Bassi.”

“The Lady has moved for the adoption of House Resolution 853. Is there any discussion? All in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it and the Resolution is adopted. On page 7 of the Calendar is House Bill, excuse me… Senate Bill 2349. Representative Rita.”

“Representative Rita.” 09300135.doc 125  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. This is… this isn’t something new to address this House with this Bill. This measures corrects the double whammy problem that happens to tax cap counties. Something we passed last year and the Governor had an Amendatory Veto on it and we worked through the summer with him and as it stands now it’s an agreed Bill. Answer any questions.”

Speaker Hannig: “The Gentleman’s moved for the passage of Senate Bill 2349. Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall this Bill pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk take the record. On this question, there are 109 voting ‘yes’, 1 voting ‘no’ and 1 voting ‘present’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. On page 2 of the Calendar, under House Bills-Second Reading, is House Bill 4895. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Representative Joyce.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Ladies and Gentlemen of the House. Floor Amendment 2 corrects the flaws in the language from Floor Amendment #1 and becomes the Bill and 09300135.doc 126  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 makes the original changes that we wanted to make which was recommended by the committee. And I move its adoption.”

“Is there any discussion? Then all in favor of the Amendment say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Amendment is adopted. Any further Amendments?”

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

“Representative Joyce.”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, this is a minor language change that gave options to a judge when deciding custody. We just add another line. It is all agreed to. I know of no opposition. And appreciate an ‘aye’ vote.”

“Is there any discussion? Then the question is, ‘Shall House Bill 4895 pass?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Mr. Clerk, take the record. On this question, there are 111 voting ‘yes’ and 0 voting ‘no’. And this Bill, having received a Constitutional Majority, is hereby declared passed. And now on page 10 of the Calendar, we’ll return to the Order of Senate Bills-Second Reading, Senate Bill 2241. Mr. Clerk, read the Bill.”

“Representative Fritchey.”

“Thank you, Speaker, my colleagues. We are all very aware of an issue that is confronting all of our districts. And that is the exodus of doctors from this state. Now, why they’re leaving and what caused the problem that’s leading them to leave is a subject of much debate and conjecture. The fact of the matter is that there seems to be a consensus that we need to do something to address the issue of medical malpractice liability and litigation in Illinois. Floor Amendment 1 to Senate Bill 2241 is not the ultimate solution. I will candidly admit that to you. What it is, is this, it is a significant step in the right direction. It is the product of discussions from a number of interested parties. The doctors were at the table. The hospitals were at the table. The lawyers were at the table. Legislators were at the table. There has been a lot of give and take. What is most telling about a piece of legislation, this piece of legislation, is who is against the Bill. And let me tell you from the get-go who is against the Bill. The Illinois Trial Lawyers are against this Bill. The Illinois State Medical Society is against this Bill. The Illinois Hospital Association is against this Bill. Why? Well, they will tell you a number of reasons, most of which will say that it either goes too far in certain areas or it doesn’t go far enough in other areas. What I’d like to do and because I’m sure there’s 09300135.doc 128  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 gonna be questions on this, is give you a synopsis of what this Bill does and what we’re trying to address. There are three principal areas that we have tried to tackle in this Bill. The issues of insurance reforms, regulation reforms and civil law reforms. In the area of insurance reforms, we are now enabling the director of insurance to review and reject proposed increases, rate increases, and recommend rate reductions, something that has never been done in the past 20 or 30 years in this state. We would require a rate review public hearing if there’s a rate increase proposed in excess of 10 percent. We would make actuarial data available to encourage new market entrance. Ladies and Gentlemen, especially my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, we talk about competition, we talk about trying to lower insurance premiums. How do you get your insurance premiums down? Get more insurers into this state. The insurers are not coming in here because of our litigation climate. They’re not coming here because they don’t have the information they need to be able to adequately write insurance coverage in this state. We want to make that information available to them, this Bill would do that. We would allow the director of insurance to compress rates based on a relative basis for all classes of doctors. We would take some of the burden off our medical professionals by requiring med-mal carriers to offer deductibles thereby reducing premiums. We would mandate minimum insurance coverage or self insurance equivalent. And we would authorize counties to create their own medical malpractice 09300135.doc 129  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 insurance companies. From the insurance standpoint, Ladies and Gentlemen, the doctors will tell you, your editorials will tell you that it’s the insurance premiums that are driving doctors out. We are taking a number of steps to take that issue on, head on. From the issue of regulation of doctors. It’s tough for us to weed out and sanction the bad doctors. And like any other profession some are better than others. But it’s tough to do that if you don’t have the resources. What we would do is increase the number of investigators, coordinators and public members on the disciplinary board. We would allow DPR the authority to refuse to renew a doctor’s license. We would increase the statute of limitations. We don’t want the department to rush to a bad judgment or to rush to no judgment because of time constraints. So we would allow… increase the statute of limitations for disciplinary actions. We would allow the department to disclose disciplinary information to law enforcement agencies in the event of an ongoing criminal investigation. We would provide immunity from prosecution for providing alleged doctor negligence information to the disciplinary board. And we would allow for the expungement of doctors’ disciplinary records for administrative matters. So if the doctor has a fine for the late filing of his application, we’ll allow them to expunge that. Ladies and Gentlemen, a lot of these things that the doctors will now object to are items that they came to the table with and they wanted in there and by god there in there. With the respect to civil law. Certificate of 09300135.doc 130  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 merit. Medical malpractice lawsuits are very unique in this state. They are the only lawsuits in which the plaintiffs are required to file a certificate of merit by an individual in the field who says there is merit to this claim. That certificate of merit will now be reviewed in camera by a judge and that judge will make the determination if that lawsuit should even be allowed to go forward. We’re strengthening that in this Bill. We are going to allow a limited number of extensions to the issue of respondents in discovery. For those of you that don’t know, when a med-mal case gets filed, rather than name everybody under the sun as a defendant, you have some individuals that you think will have information. You name them as a respondent in discovery rather than have those individuals be on the hook for some undetermined amount of time we’re gonna limit that period now to 18 months. Do the trial lawyers want to do that? No, they didn’t want to do that, but it’s in this Bill. We’re gonna implement a program that’s a pilot program from a Kentucky VA hospital called ‘sorry works’. What does that do? It helps unclog the court system by telling doctors and hospitals if you made a mistake, own up to the mistake, make a fair settlement for that mistake and everybody can go on with their lives. We’re gonna provide that a doctor can be what he or she always is and that is a human being. We’re gonna allow a doctor to tell an individual I’m sorry that you had bad outcome for your surgery and they don’t have to worry that their show of remorse, their sincere show of remorse, 09300135.doc 131  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 will be used against them in a court of law. So those types of sincere expressions will no longer be admissible. We’re gonna have increased use of arbitration in med-mal cases. And we’re gonna expand immunity for health care professionals, including ret… retired doctors who provide free medical clinic treatment. Ladies and Gentlemen, I can talk about this more at length, I will as we go forward. In the interest of the Body’s time, I’d be happy to answer any questions.”

“The Gentleman has moved for the adoption of Floor Amendment #1 and on that question Representative Winters is recognized.”

“Yes. You will be so granted, Representative, you’re within your rights.”

“He indicates he’ll yield.”

“Let me… let me…”

“The precise language today is that the doctor is qualified by experience or demonstrated competence in the subject of the case. What it would now state is that that the doctor is familiar by experience with the standard of care, with the methods, the procedures…”

“…and the treatments relevant to the allegations against the defendant. As far as how that gets determined, Representative, the judge, the trier of fact in this case, is going to be the first individual to see this certificate of merit. That judge will have an in camera review and that judge will be the person that makes a determination whether or not the individual is qualified to present a stand… a certificate of merit and whether the certificate of merit is…”

“…a… a…”

“But… but… it and I’m not trying to interrupt you but I do want to clarify this point because it is important. There are two prongs right now, either one of which there either has to be a demonstrated competence or simply qualified by experience. If the doctor is qualified by experience today, that, in and of itself, is… is sufficient for the certificate of merit. The… the demonstrated competence is an alternative standard. What we have said is that we are taking that standard and we are making it tighter. We can have a semantic disagreement over which one is… is a tougher standard. We believe that the one we have today is a tougher standard.”

“That’s a fair statement.”

“Well, the plaintiff’s attorney is the one that has retained the expert to make the opinion…”

“…and… and… the individual that has access to the qualifications of the doctor, yes, somebody does and that’s the judge.”

“I… I would submit to you that that is the same judge that will presiding over the case and we… and we put these cases before juries of lay people with no specific expertise…”

“…and that’s the underpinning of our judicial system.” 09300135.doc 135  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“The very existence of the certificate of merit is a hurdle that does not exist in any other type of tort lawsuit. All right.”

“With leave of the judge, a new certificate can be filed or the case can be dismissed.”

“It’s actually not a fair statement. These are… we’re not even at the pleading stage at this point. This is simply the filing of the certificate of merit for whether the suit can be filed and proceed.”

“Y…”

“That would actually be at the discretion of the judge. But the… there is a scenario once the plaintiffs would, in fact, be able to retain a… a either a different individual or refile that certificate of merit just to get to the point of being able to file the lawsuits.”

“Well, we could agree to…”

“…we can agree to disagree with that.”

“Yes, that is correct.”

“And… and… and if the judge can keep granting multiple extensions at… at…”

“It… Representative, I’m gonna assume that it’s an innocent misstatement. But the law today is that there is no cap on how long respondents in discovery can be held in.”

“We are putting… we are…”

“…we are putting a maximum of 18 months for the respondent in discovery period.”

“They have no greater nor no less protection of their personal assets than do you or I or any other individual sued in tort in the State of Illinois. David… and excuse me, Representative…”

“Let me… let me, if I may… if I may finish. If the interest is preventing… in trying to encourage settlements and preventing cases from going to trial, one of the biggest enhancements to getting cases settled is the fact 09300135.doc 139  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 that an individual in the State of Illinois be it a doctor, a farmer, an accountant, a shop keeper, if you get sued for a tort your assets are personally on the hook. And we…”

“Is that… is that this Bill maintains the law as it is today.”

“We are… we are maintain…”

“We are maintaining the same level that exists today which keeps doctors on the same playing field as any other…”

“…defendant in a tort case.”

“If you were to protect their personal assets you are gonna have more cases go to trial because that doctor is gonna have no incentive and he’s gonna… force this case to go to trial. Whereas, you realize a n inherent conflict 09300135.doc 140  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 many times between the interests of the doctors, the interests of the hospitals, the interests of the insurance companies. We are trying to come up with a situation in which, it’s not the lawyers coming out on top, not the doctors coming out on top, not the hospitals, the patients and the families in this state that are… they’re at risk. This is not a downstate issue. As I’ve told people in the…”

“As I’ve told people, I’m… I’m from the northside of Chicago. I have doctors in my district that are practicing without insurance. I have doctors in my district that have folded up their practice because they can’t pay… and it’s not just Illinois, it’s happening in a lot of states and we could debate another day why this is happening. The issue is, are we going to take a step forward today, not to fix the problem forever, but to start on the road to recovery.”

“As…”

“But not by insur…”

“But not by insurable reason, which is how they want this information. Most states today make this information available. If you want competition, you want more insurance companies to come in…. They’re not fleeing the state because they cant make money. They’re not coming into this state because they don’t know how to price the… because they don’t know how to price these policies because we have a pre… there’s a protection put on the actuarial data and I’ll tell you what, the lobbyist for the… for his 09300135.doc 142  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 speech today was very honest. He said that’s our priortery information, we don’t want to give it…”

“…up because it puts them at a competitive disadvantage. Do you want to maintain their competitive advantage or do you want competition and lower rates for doctors?”

“Then you…”

“Then your choice…”

“Then your choice… your choice is clear then.”

“Then you can choose… you have two choices on that issues. Choose to protect at these rates or choose to have lower insurance premiums for your doctors by having competition in the state. One or the other.”

“The department…”

“The director testified today that the way they have their informa…”

“Rep… Representative…”

“I apologize.”

“I don’t think that was a question, I think that was just a statement. Representative Winters, could you bring your remarks to a close, please?”

“Representative Miller. Representative Miller. Okay. Representative Mathias.”

“He indicates he’ll yield.”

“I believe that if we can pass and apply this legislation as it’s presented today that we will start to streamline the litigation process, that we’ll increase competition in the insurance industry, that we will make it 09300135.doc 145  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 more amenable for companies to come in and write coverage in Illinois. And… and we give the director the ability that she does not presently have to roll back rates or to put the halt to rate increases which she believes that are excessive. We do not have that ability today. If doctors are leaving because of insurance premiums being too high, this addresses that issue. Representative, you and I have talked about this. I made the comment today, I made the comment in committee. It is not a final step. But we owe it to our doctors, we owe it to our constituents who may be patients one day to start to move the process forward. This Bill starts to move the process forward.”

“That… that… that’s simply one arrow in the quiver. What I’m saying is, that in virtually any industry increased competition results in lower costs, lower charges. I believe that this will increase competition for a number of reasons in the insurance industry in Illinois.”

“I… I… I believe that this legislation will make Illinois a better place for insurance companies to do business in the med-mal arena. Yes.”

“I… I think that you just need to look at this empirically to say again, if you create it… if you create a situation where more companies can compete on an even playing field that will inherently drive down prices.”

“Wi… without this… we… we have had specific insurance companies say that this is the type of legislation which will encourage them to come back into Illinois.”

“I apologize.”

“I… I believe that you would find doctors in your district and mine and around the state who would recognize in the fact that ‘cherry picking’ is a euphemism for 09300135.doc 147  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 writing lower rates and that if there are lower risk areas and specialties and specific doctors that can be written for lower rates that they will do then I gotta tell ya what, if I’m a good doctor with a good practice I’m okay at being cherry picked.”

“Well, ya know what, and I’m glad you said that and that goes into the enforcement area, because the Medical Society asked for a lot of things to be in this legislation and there in here because they recognize that rates for all doctors can be disproportionately high because of the acts or actions of some bad doctors. So how do you address that? You have more investigators, you have more enforcement powers, you have the ability not to renew licenses. You have all these powers that do not exist today that the doctors said, hey, you know what, this would 09300135.doc 148  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 help us, this would help lower premiums if we could do this and we recognize that, ya know what, you’re right. And we’re gonna put all that in the legislation. The doctors wanted more enforces, we got more enforcers. They wanted the ability to refuse to renew, we put that in there. They wanted broader violations regarding drugs, that’s in here. You wanted… they wanted an increased statute of limitation, that’s in here. They wanted changes to mandatory reporting, that’s in here. They wanted peer review committee immunity, that’s in here. They wanted department disclosure of information to law enforcement, that’s in here. These are all things which will weed out the bad apples in the practice and in turn reduce prac… reduce rates for all doctors. You are right. Doctors are paying disproportionately high numbers. We need to go after the bad ones. The doctors hit it right on the head. The Med Society had a ton of great ideas and that’s why they’re in this Bill.”

“You are…”

“Rep… Representative, all the major groups would actually disagree with you. Unintentionally, you argued very eloquently for why this Bill works. You said everybody needs to give until it hurts. All the parties sat at the table, all the parties suggested what they wanted on the table. We set the table and now they’ve all walked away. The trial lawyers said this hurts. It’s tort reform and we don’t like it. The doctors say this hurts, there’s no caps in it. We don’t like it. The hospitals say, it hurts, we don’t like it. If your idea of a good solution is one where everybody has to share the pain, this is the Bill. If you are waiting for a piece of legislation that is sponsored by the trial lawyers and opposed by everybody else, that’s not gonna move. If you’re waiting for one that’s sponsored by the doctors and opposed by anybody else, that’s not gonna move. The one that’s going to work, is if you get them all onboard and I don’t see that happening soon or we have none of them onboard and we don’t answer to the special interests, we don’t answer to the doctors, to the lawyers, to the hospitals, we answer to our constituents and that’s what we’re trying to do here.”

“Representative, could you bring your remarks to a close, please?” 09300135.doc 151  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004

“Representative Bost.”

“To the Amendment.”

Speaker Hannig: “Representative Franks, the Gentleman from McHenry.”

“Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question.”

“Gentleman moves the previous question. The question is, ‘Shall the main question be put?’ All in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. The main question is put and Representative Fritchey to close.”

“Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen. This is truly a piece of legislation on which reasonable minds can disagree. It’s easy to be emotional on this issue because all of us care about medical provisions in our various communities. We all have different ideas about how to get there. From a political standpoint, if you’re worried about a repercussions of a ‘yes’ vote or a ‘no’ vote let me tell you something. If you vote ‘yes’ and you have an opponent they may well use your ‘yes’ vote against you. If 09300135.doc 154  STATE OF ILLINOIS 93rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 135th Legislative Day 5/27/2004 you vote ‘no’ they may well use your ‘no’ vote against you. So, rather than take a vote based on political opportunism, let’s think about what it is we have the opportunity to do here. Are you… do you wanna wait for another Bill this Session? You’re not gonna get one. That doesn’t mean to take this one because it’s the only one you’re going to get, but there’s a step that we can take right now toward getting the solution. We can go home. We can continue to work on the problem but th… say that we have done something in the meantime to try to fix this situation. Folks, I’ll respect you however you vote on this, as we all will. I believe it’s a good step in the right direction. I believe that we have come up with a piece of legislation that extracts concessions from the lawyers, from the doctors, from the hospitals. Doesn’t make Illinois a perfect place but it makes it a little better place for all of us. I request an ‘aye’ vote. Thank you.”

“The Gentleman moves that the House adopt Floor Amendment #1. There’s been a request for a Roll Call vote on this as well as a verification. So the question is, ‘Shall the Amendment be adopted?’ All in favor vote ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. 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 37 voting ‘yes’, 71 voting ‘no’ and the Amendment fails. Any further Amendments?”

“Representative Fritchey, do you wish to take this out of the record at this time? Okay. The Gentleman wishes to take the Bill out of the record. Representative Currie is recognized for a Motion. Representative Currie moves that House Joint Resolution 90 be reconsidered. All in favor of the Motion to reconsider say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Motion to reconsider House Joint Resolution is adopted. Representative Smith, for what reason do you rise?”

“Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe on a point of personal privilege. Someone lost a checkbook in the men’s room. There’s no name on it. I’m taking bids.”

“Representative Black, for what reason do you rise?”

“Representative Miller, for what reason do you rise?”

“On Senate Bill 2241, just wanted to announce a potential conflict of interest.”

“Thank you, Representative. Mr. Clerk, would you read the schedule, the committee schedule, for the rest of the day.”

“Are there any announcements? Okay. At this time Representative Currie moves, that allowing perfunctory time for the Clerk, that the House… excuse me… Representative Black, for what reason do you rise?”

“Yes, state your point.”

“Thank you, Representative Black. Mr. Clerk, would you read the Agreed Resolutions.”

“Representative Currie moves for the adoption of the Agreed Resolutions. All in favor say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it and the Agreed Resolutions are adopted. Representative Currie now moves, that allowing perfunctory time for the Clerk, that the House stand adjourned until tomorrow Friday, May 28, at the hour of 10 a.m. All in favor of the Motion say ‘aye’; opposed ‘nay’. The ‘ayes’ have it. And the Motion is adopted and the House stands adjourned.”