Illinois House Floor Debate — February 16, 2016

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Please let the record reflect that Representative Charlie Meier is excused today."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my privilege to present House Resolution 913 to honor our friend and former colleague Raymond Poe today. We’ve not had a chance yet to honor him for his service and it’s my pleasure to do that today. I first met Representative Poe when I was a young reporter at the local television station here in Springfield. I then went on to work with him as a staff member here in the General Assembly. Always a Gentleman, honest, and sincere he was always someone I looked up to for his service and love for our district. Raymond Poe was born in Lincoln a few decades ago to a family that was producing food for World War II and 09900103.docx 4  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 raising children for the challenging world that would follow victory and war. He has always put central Illinois and its farm heritage first returning to Sangamon County after studying in Chicago to take on the increasingly challenging demands of modern art… agriculture. As devoted to agriculture as Representative Poe was, he has dedicated his life to serving his neighbors. He served as a member and eventually as president of the Williamsville School Board, and as president of his local Farm Bureau, and the Lincoln Land Farm Supply. In 1994, he was elected to the Illinois House of Representatives where he served for 11 terms. He always worked to bring all sides together on key issues facing our state. As both a farmer and expert in agriculture policy, Representative Poe was appointed to the House Agriculture Committee. He returned to the panel in 2013 in the 99th General Assembly widely respected by the entire farming and agriculture community for his expertise. The House of Representatives was brought to both joy and sadness in November of 2015 by the news that one of its most respected Members would mov… be moving on as the newly appointed director of the Illinois Department of Agriculture. The Members of the House of Representatives will miss Representative Poe as a friend. We will miss the generosity of him and his family, and most of all, we will miss the shining example of moral and physical courage that he has demonstrated to his neighbors, friends, and colleagues over the course of his career and especially in the last few years. We recognize that Representative Poe is and always will be our friend. We also know that foremost in his heart are… are 09900103.docx 5  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 some of the members of his family and friends here in the chamber with us today: his wife, Carol, his children; Lance and wife, Angela, Cheryl Lynn and her husband, William; Collette and her husband, Joe and grandchildren, Celine, Charles, Allie, Grant, Christian, Mason, Ava, and Blaine and one great-grandchild, Lily Schultz; his sisters, Kay, Joyce and Marie and beloved mother Sarah to whom this House wished a happy 99th birthday last year. We commend the honorable Raymond Poe for his service to the Illinois House of Representatives and the residents of central Illinois. We congratulate him upon his selection as the director of the Illinois Department of Agriculture with the knowledge that Illinois farmers can have no better friend in a challenging time. We urge Director Poe to visit the Illinois House of Representatives often, to share the priorities of his department and share his family recipe for fried chicken. Thank you very much, Representative Poe, for your service. I know I have big shoes to fill both literally and figuratively in this chamber and in this community. Thank you very much."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Director Poe, it is wonderful to have you back here in this chamber today. You know, when Raymond came back last March after he'd been gone for a few months his first day back was my first day in the House of Representatives. So, I kind of got overshadowed a little bit by my friend, Raymond Poe, the day that I came in, but we… there couldn't have been a better reason to celebrate than the day that he came back last March 3. I got him a little bit of a one-up though. When he was named director of 09900103.docx 6  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 Agriculture, Farm Week… on the front page of Farm Week it had a below-the-fold photo or below-the-fold story of Representative Poe getting his new gig at Agriculture, but I got an above-the-fold photo with me and a bunch of turkeys at a turkey farm in Tremont? So I beat you on that one, Raymond. I've known Raymond Poe for more than 20 years. When he first ran for the Illinois House of Representatives in 1994, I was a young staff person on the campaign of one Ray LaHood when he ran for Congress and Raymond and I have been traveling in the same circles ever since then. He is someone that I was honored to… to serve and have the same suite of offices here in the Stratton Building and somebody that's been a real mentor to me as I've moved into my new role in the House of Representatives here. He is truly a giant in Sangamon County from being on the school board to being involved with the Farm Bureau to being… his family being involved in the catering business. There's no one in our area of the state that does not know Raymond Poe and the impact that the Poe family has had on our community here. Raymond, you're going to be… you're going to be missed here, but we know you're doing great things at the Department of Agriculture. It's great to see your family here and so many friends and supporters from the area. I'll say we'll miss you here, but I… I don't think the chickens around here will probably miss you being gone much because… there's… I… I don't smell any chicken being served today behind the… behind the doors there. But good to have you back here, my friend, and… and Godspeed. You're going to do a great job at Agriculture. Thank you."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I really don't ever recall a finer Member of this chamber than Raymond Poe. He's got a wonderful sense of humor; we know he's an outstanding cook, and he also has spectacular political skills. And I say that because, like Tim, I remember that Primary that Raymond was in. And we were all being assured, Lee Daniels was telling us, others were telling us, everyone except Jim Fletcher; a neighbor, that his opponent would win and Fletcher said no, he won't. If you think he won't win, then you don't know Raymond Poe. And how true that… that was. So, Raymond, I just cherish our time together here on the floor and wish you Godspeed and thank heavens you're still at the director… the director of Ag and will do an outstanding work for the people there. Thank you."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Director Poe, seatmate, friend since you started. I was… had two years when you started. It’s a bitter-sweet moment. Bitter because you have left the Illinois House, but sweet because you will be an outstanding director of Agriculture and you will do even more good on a statewide basis. You did tremendous good in your district, but now it's statewide and from that standpoint it becomes acceptable what was really bitter-sweet. Lots of things have been said, important, but with you as director of Agriculture, farmers in Illinois have a friend, agriculture as an industry has a friend, but all of Illinois; consumers, producers, businesspeople, all have a friend, and someone that knows the importance of agriculture. You have been that kind of friend. If you had a problem, a need, a question, assistance on 09900103.docx 8  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 something in the middle of the night, you're the kind of guy we could call and I did a time or two. Whether it was car trouble or… or just whatever, but you were always there for all of us and I… I personally called on you late at night those times and that's very much appreciated. It's to the Governor's credit to seek you out, to put someone with the experience, the background, the confidence, the commitment, the dedication to this department. You set an outstanding example. We all shared in the trial that you faced a few months ago, but you did it with such courage, and dignity, and determination. You set that bar very high and thank God for the outcome and that you're back with us. So, today, I join as my colleagues saying it's bitter-sweet, but it… for the greater good. The position you're going to fill no… fill now or are filling now it just benefits everyone. So, I'm thankful that we’ve had the time together as a colleague, but look forward to many years even now in this new position. Thank you, Director Poe. It's been an honor."

"Thank you ver… thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I'd just like to say thank you to Raymond for all you've done for not only for our caucus but for also the entire State of Illinois. You have been a tremendous leader and Sara does have big shoes to fill. And just want to thank you and talk just briefly from a northern Illinois woman's point of view. When I came down here, how you reached out to all of us especially the women, bipartisan, both sides and how you and Carol inviting us over to dinner to your home and just making us at ease with you all the time. So I want to say thank you for that, and Carol also. And especially for the butter cake because we all miss that, too, but thank you very much, Raymond, and best of luck in your new job as director. Thank you."

"Hey, Ray, let me just first say that I'm just glad you're with us. I really am 'cause I hate to admit it, but there was a time a few months back that I'm not sure if you were going to be with us, and you know what, God bless you, man. You have overcome something that a lot of people have not been able to do and it's because of your determination, your love for your family, and your love for this state; it's what's kept you alive. I really believe that, Ray. A lot of prayers here, too, kept you there too. It all works. I just… I was appointed at the end of 1994. I bring this little moment where 09900103.docx 11  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 I first met Ray Poe. It was my first day in Springfield. I was the spry age of maybe 30 years old, not as gray, more naïve than I am now, but I recall running into you not knowing that you were a Representative and your wife, in Springfield, asking you the question, where's the State Capitol? You gave me a response that really embarrassed me and you really put an exclamation point on it and deservedly so. So I've done a lot of really embarrassing things in… in my life and that's one of them, but I just had to remember the response you gave me is something that I don't think I can say on the record, but it was sure as hell was pretty funny, but Ray, I just remember that first moment. I know you do too. But I will say this, Ray, that Ray and I, when I took this position, we had this internal scrum match in which… you know, for Leader and it was Ray and I. And I will just say this that you should wish you have a Gentleman like Ray, any of you, to oppose you or to run against you for office. We talked a lot, and you know, it's an adversarial process. We talked but we joked and kind of… kind of figured out where we were at, and you know, it was a little bit of a card game going on… a little poker game going on at the time with that, between Ray and I. But he did… you know, we came to a conclusion the night before we were going to take the vote and I've said this to Ray before, but Ray, what you were able to do was to unfracture a caucus and to bring us back together as a caucus when you made the Motion to support me as the new House Republican Leader. Greatly thankful for that. That meant more than just that moment. What it did for our caucus was something that I don't know if you realize how important it was, but I will say this, 09900103.docx 12  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 we hear this a lot in… in politics, we hear it in sports, the old expression that, you know, good guys finish last. Well, not in this case. With Ray Poe, in that race, good guys finished first. I just want you to know that, Ray. And Ray, my one regret, everybody talks about the chicken, is that with your absence on… from the House of Representatives on to the Department of Agriculture I'm afraid that I'll never be able to see my dear friend Ronnie Wait again 'cause I know no matter what part of the world he's at when you're making chicken he finds a way to get here. So, as I said, that is my one regret, but Ray, thank you for being a friend of our caucus, the Democrat Caucus, your constituents in the Sangamon County region, but also, thank you… your family for allowing us to take you away from them in some very difficult times. God bless you, my friend."

"I shrank a little. Again, thank you for all the nice things you've said. Thank you to the family and friends. And is Sara here? Feigenholtz? Sara and I are the las… was the last two in 1994. There was 27 of us and she'll be the last one in that class that's still in the General Assembly. So, thank you, Sara and most of the time it's been a pleasure, but one thing about it we could always talk our differences out and served on committees and did a good job. So, thank you. And… 09900103.docx 13  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 and it is a humbling experience and I thank you for that. And I guess the words of wisdom would be, don't stay too long. Thank you."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like the chamber to recognize some guests from my hometown of Morton, my alma mater Morton High School. In the gallery behind me, we have some really accomplished young men and women. We have Jeff Neavor, the leader of the marching band, and they are Class 2A State 09900103.docx 17  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 Champs 11 years in a row. And also we have Coach Jamie King of the boy's 2A golf team. They are State Champs 2 years in a row. Please give them a warm welcome."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A point of personal privilege."

"Like to indulge the… the Body. This evening is the Annual Pork Producer Reception and for the first time in over 30 years we’ve incorporated our trade show into the reception. So it's a great way to meet pork producers and see the modern day equipment that's used to produce them and have a great, great pork chop. So that's tonight at the Prairie Capital Convention Center not at the hotel where it's usually at. So I encourage you to stop by."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's my honor and privilege to recognize a guest with us here today. Dr. Gayle Saunders, if you could stand and be recognized. Dr. Saunders is retiring 09900103.docx 19  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 from Richland Community College after a presidency that lasted from 2001 until today. Dr. Saunders spent over 31 years as a community college administrator and 37 total years in higher education. On top of that, she received a number of awards: in 2004, the Athena Award; 2006, the YWCA Woman of the Year Award; in 2007, the Salute Honoree for Partners in Education and in 2014, the Herald & Review's 20 over 50 Award. I think that actually should read 20 under 50 Award. If… if you take a look at Dr. Saunders resume, you'll be amazed at her accomplishments, but if you take a look… if you stop of… at Richland Commun… Community College just off of I-72 in Decatur, you'll see first-hand the accomplishments, the expansions that have grown under Dr. Saunders' leadership. She's actually facilitated over seven expansions on that facility not to mention the first carbon sequestration plant in the entire United States with the cooperation of ADM. She's als… also ensured a number of other private/public partnerships which have caused great accolades to be bestowed upon the community college. If you take a look at Richland Community College, it is the ideal that we set for all community college systems and it's been ranked as one of the top community colleges in the entire nation because of Dr. Saunders' leadership. I recognize her today, thank her for her leadership and thank her for growing our community by growing and inspiring minds. Thank you, Dr. Saunders."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Point of personal privilege. Actually, a point of parliamentary inquiry. I believe some notes were filed with respect to this Bill."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A few inquiries of the Sponsor, if you wouldn't mind, Sir?"

"Thank you. Representative, how is it that you come to determine that a fiscal note is inapplicable with respect to your Bill, Sir?"

"Well, that… that's all well and good, but I’d like an answer to my question. Substantively, do you… is it your position there was no fiscal impact on your note… on your Bill?"

"With all due respect, Chris, why is it inapplicable? Can you please give me the rationale behind your conclusion?"

"Sir, have you asked any financial resource? Have you… have you asked the… the Office of Budgment… Budget and Management, COCGA (sic-COGFA) or any outside third party service with respect to whether there's a fiscal impact on your Bill?"

"I'm sorry?"

"And why not, Representative?"

"Well, is… wouldn't it be prudent, Sir, to ask and make those inquiries before presenting your Bill? There is no emergency, right? Isn't it more prudent and better process to get potential fiscal impact prior to repre… to presenting the Bill of this consequence, right now?"

"Well, I said… Chris, with all due respect, there are two proposals and you're asking, actually, we're in the middle of negotiations actually, the matter is before the Labor Relations Board and you're going to… you're asking I think for something that would disturb the status quo and have a new arrangement. We know that there are fiscal parameters from the Governor's perspective and from AFSCME's perspective. Certainly, with those parameters, you could ask the effect of COGFA and/or the Budget… the Office of Budget… Budget and Management what the affect would be if it were A or B, or the realm of which both proposals are made. We know there's a fiscal impact. It's just to what extent. And I'm asking why you haven't gone to that length and made that inquiry. There is no adjacency here."

"And I assume, Sir, with the Speaker's indulgence, that both these would be taken as one vote, I'm assuming. Mr. 09900103.docx 24  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 Speaker, there's two notes. Or are we taking two items separately?"

"All right. Then I will reserve any questions with respect to the pension note that was filed. I… I will conclude by simply saying it is incredible that a Bill of this consequence, that is this important has not been given any fiscal analysis, has not been given any… and by the way, I appreciate it, Mr. Mapes. Thank you for the head gestures. I'll watch for those type of gestures when Members of your Party speak. This is an important Bill and it requires financial analysis not guessing. There's no reason for the… for this Bill to proceed right now. Thank you, Mr. Speaker."

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

"Representative Welch, when you were presenting this Bill in Labor & Commerce last week, there was a little bit of a discussion and a dispute as to how much this Bill actually costs. And if I remember correctly, there were Members of my caucus saying that essentially, you know, it's $1.6 billion, maybe it's upwards of $4 billion and I distinctly remember the AFSCME gentleman saying, oh no, it's no more than $25 million per year. So my question to you is, do you know the cost of this contract since you don't want fiscal notes to be applicable? Do you personally know? Have you analyzed this? Do you have any idea? Because that's not… that's not even in the ballpark. I mean, $25 million is basically a rounding error on, you know, a billion dollar appropriation. So I'm 09900103.docx 25  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 just curious if you know that number and if you don't know it, why is it so inappropriate to not take the time and find out definitively for the taxpayers of the state how much this Bill really costs."

"Well, we know that you guys are not used to never talking about costs, but yeah, we would like to know the cost of this."

"Well, here's what we do know. We do know that AFSCME asked for 11.5 percent pay increase at a cost of over 1.25 billion over four years. We know that in some cases employees are going to get a 29 percent pay increase. We know that there's a 25 percent increase in longevity pay for state… staff aid employees. We know there's still only a 37.5 hour work week after which overtime is paid. We know that health insurance is costing us more. Your side has even admitted that. So, why not take the contract provisions that AFSCME has asked for and cost them out? And then, come to us and say, well, you know what, it really is only 25 million a year. 'Cause I'd like to see if it really is only 25 million a year or is it 09900103.docx 26  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 more like multiple billions of dollars that are going to cost us over the next four years. And oh, by the way, the pricing out a contract for one year is a ridiculous idea. The contract, if it only lasted for one year that would be fine. This is a multiyear contract. We need to know the multiyear cost of that contract. And so for you to sit there and pretend that a fiscal note is inapplicable just… it's… it's an incredible disservice to the taxpayers. It's just an incredible idea. I… I can't even believe it."

"You're… you're pretending that there's not physical contract details, real details that we already know and have been negotiated with and you're pretending that those don't have real costs. So to the Bill… or to the… to the discussion here. I absolutely disagree. I think everybody should know how much this costs. I had a Bill that basically said taxpayers should know what these costs are ahead of time before anything is finalized. And I… I still feel the same way. We should understand how much government's going to cost us before we get involved in contracts where we promise too much and can't pay for it which is exactly the situation Illinois is in now because we have an unbalanced budget since at least 2001. Thank you."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. May I inquire of the Sponsor?"

"Thank you. Representative, why is it that a pension component to your Bill is inapplicable?"

"Well, I don't know what Bill you're referring to, but I suspect yours has to do with contract negotiations with state employees, which necessarily means a pension component. Is that something I'm making up?"

"Pension com… contributions are not subject to state employee con… contracts? There not part of compensation?" 09900103.docx 30  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Yes, I know that, Sir. That's why you're presenting your Bill. And I'm asking you why a pension component, why a pension note, is inapplicable to a cu… to a dispute that has compensation at its core, or at least an element of compensation at its core."

"You haven't answered that."

"I'm asking you why a pension component is inapplicable. How have you made that determination?"

"I'm not."

"I'm asking you to tell me what your analysis was."

"Yes, Sir, and if we get to a contract, there’ll be a pension expense associated with it. We both know that there is… there are offers from the Governor's Office and there are offers from AFSCME. There are pension components and pension costs that derive there from and I'm asking you if you've done any analysis and if you sought any analysis from either cofs… COGFA or the Office of Budget and Management?"

"And why not, Sir?" 09900103.docx 31  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"I'm not asking you to guess. To the… the note, Mr. Speaker. The Gen… the Gentleman is simply erroneous. He's mistaken when he says that some fiscal impact of both pensions and the overall costs associated with his Bill are inapplicable. They are indeed very applicable. There's real dollars at stake and the idea that this analysis is not pertinent to the overall debate is nonsensical. Anywhere but here, folks would have asked for the fiscal impact. Anywhere but here, folks advancing this initiative would've sought what pension expenses are. But instead, because we're in the political heightened season, we're at a rush to move forward on something we don't know its expense. Vote 'no'. Thank you, Mr. Speaker."

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

"Representative, some of the things we're asking right now probably should have been the subject of analysis before today. And so, that's the point of the discussion that we're having right now. Since the failed override of Representative Smiddy's version of this Bill, it's been five and a half months. So in five and a half months, are you telling me that nobody has taken to an… put any type of analysis of the fiscal impact or the pension impact of this Bill and what it would be? Is… is that your belief?"

"Okay."

"Well, and so this Bill kind of goes into, right now, we're debating pensions… you said in your debate with the previous speaker that pensions aren't subject to collective bargaining. Are wages subject to collective bargaining?"

"Are wages or pensions the direct result of whether wages go up or down?"

"No. Well… well, right now, I'm just asking you a very simple question. Wages are part of the collective bargaining process; therefore, they would be part of this Bill. Pensions are a direct result of what happened to wages, whether they go up or down, right?"

"Well, right now, I'm just asking you a simple question. Do wages affect pensions?"

"Exactly."

"I'm asking a simple question."

"Do wages affect pensions in any way?"

"Okay. So, we're asking for a simple analysis. What happens if wages go up or down? That would be part of this analysis. Don't you think the Body would be better off if we had that information ahead of us to make a better educated guess on what's going to happen, before we vote for this Bill?"

"But we are guessing because we don't have an analysis…"

"…so I agree with you actually, Representative."

"Okay. Well, thank you."

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

"Representative, what is the purpose of a pension impact note?"

"Well, I'm curious. I mean, you're… you're making the Motion that it's inapplicable here. What, in your mind, is the purpose of the pension note?"

"The purpose of the pension impact note is to determine the impact on the pension system. Why do you believe that it's not… not applicable? How would you define the purpose of a pension impact note?"

"I'm sorry?”

"I'm not asking you to guess about it. You don't have to personally file a pension impact note. What… what do you believe the purpose of the note is? Why does that Act exist in… in statute?"

"You're really getting inapplicable."

"What's your basis for ruling it inapplicable? You must have a definition in mind."

"Would it be reasonable to say that one of the purposes of a pension note is to help us determine that impact, to help us give study towards that? Would you say that's a fair 09900103.docx 35  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 analysis to say that a… that a pension impact note helps us better understand the pension impact?"

"So in this case, if you're saying we don't know what it is, wouldn't it be a good idea for us to at least make a few steps towards better understanding it?"

"Wouldn't most analyses be subject to some level of speculation? We make the best… the best inferences we can, given the current circumstances?"

"Would… Wouldn't any analysis be subject to some degree of making the best decision you can, the best analysis possible, based on current information?"

"And… and perhaps, that's better than no analysis at all. Perhaps an analysis based on the current circumstances, understanding it's not perfect, is better than simply ignoring all analysis because they're not final."

"The pension impact note legislation says, the pension impact note is for any legislation or Amendment that a 09900103.docx 36  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability determines would result in an increase in benefits or an increase in costs to the pension funds. Are there circumstances… are there circumstances resulting from this legislation that could potentially result in increased benefits or increased cost?"

"There is a circumstance under which the legislation we're discussing today though could have an increase in benefits or an increase in costs to pension funds. There's a circum… there is a potential outcome of this legislation that would result in that. Isn't this precisely what the Pension Impact Note Act was passed to address?"

"Of course, any legislation that's pending before this Body is could and not would. That's the very basis of a deliberative Body is that Bills brought before this chamber are not accomplished yet. They have to go through a legislative process; they have to be sent to the Executive Branch for action. Every Bill that comes before us is speculation, is a possibility. It's not a forgone conclusion. The very purpose of the pension impact… pension note study is to determine what that impact could be based on our action today." 09900103.docx 37  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"I appreciate that, Representative. And… and as we debate it on the floor, I think it would be in all our best interest to have as much of the facts as we possibly can, as much of the… based on current information, the information that's available to us, is a critical part of us making an informed decision on behalf of our constituents. That's precisely why this Act was put into place to begin with, and that's precisely why this pension note is applicable today. Thank you."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield? So I haven't quite understood…"

"Thank you. Sorry, it's been a while. Representative, I… I was distracted here. Could you explain to me why you think the pension note isn't applicable here, again, please?"

"Well, okay. But this… this underline… this Bill deals with union contracts that have payroll as part of the compensation, it is collectively bargained for under this practice. So, how does that not impact somebody's pension?" 09900103.docx 38  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Well, I would… right. My colleague here suggests that maybe we tried to get good analysis. And here we are, I mean, we're… we're well known down here in… in Springfield for continuing to try to do things but with no objectivity, and no facts, and no data, we're just careening from crisis to crisis and this is another example of that."

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

"Thank you. Now, Representative, we… we had this in committee yesterday and I… I got my Irish up a little bit on the gentleman who was with you. But I mean, I… we were talking about speculation. I have in my hand a letter from Miss Roberta Lynch, who's the executive director of AFSCME Council 31, who's talking about wages; year one, thousand dollar bonus; year two, 2.25 percent increase; year three, 3 percent increase; year four, 3 percent increase. So thi… this isn't speculative in terms of the impact on pensions. I mean, this is calculable, pretty quickly. Can't our pension experts get their… get their shot at this and tell us exactly what this will cost us?"

"Well, no. But Representative, we… we get notes back all the time that talk about the potential cost to the state of a particular piece of legislation. Give us a potential, give us at least the outside. Hey, what are we… what are we looking at possibly here? And we know full well that if we get an interest arbitration, the in… the interest isn't going to come out at zero. I mean, it's going to come out more than zero; there's going to be a cost here. Give us a range so that we've got some idea in the midst of this budget crisis. Wouldn’t… wouldn’t we want to know? I mean, the number that you said… don't get numbers, but I mean, it… this is all about numbers. That's what a pension note’s for. Isn't it? I mean, that… that's the whole point of giving us some time here to figure this out."

"And… and counselor, you know full well a leading question when you hear it. But if… if you'd prefer, I can go to the Bill, or the… the Amend… the note, rather."

"Okay. Look, I… we… we have specifics. They're right here, from AFSCME, in a letter that is public. We've got step increases. We've got health insurance, modest increases in premium and annual deductibles, but maintain current health care framework. We've got, you know, all of the regular steps 09900103.docx 40  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 and things like that. So we have numbers that our pension gurus can go and… and look to and figure out. So certainly this note is applicable, and we should allow our experts to come back with numbers, prior to, you know, waiving all of these things that are helping us in this terrible budget crisis, to try to… to have some modicum of control over our numbers. I mean, we… we made a comment, the numbers are no… you know, that… that they don’t matter. The numbers are all that matters. So again, please vote 'no'. Thank you, Mr. Speaker."

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

"Hey, I'm trying to catch up to speed on all this stuff. I appreciate what the… the Representative to my left just outlined. I am not a counselor like Representative Breen from… from Wheaton. Can you explain exactly…? 'Cause I am confused here. I mean, it’s always speculation when you're… when you have these fiscal notes. It's never… it's… it's often, you know, there's a grey area there. Can you… can you kind of explain why the pension note doesn’t apply to… in layman's terms to a nonlawyer, please?"

"I… I'm trying to hear you, clearly."

"So, right. But this… this obviously… this Bill would potentially impact pensions. Are you telling that that Code… I don’t have the Code memorized, Representative, so I’m asking. I… So, are we saying that the… the Code for the pension note doesn’t allow for any discussion on fiscal impact towards the pensions?"

"I… I'm tryin… I had simpl… I was just trying to just clarify whether that… whether that Code has anything to do with impact on pensions, not just changes to the pensions. Those are… those are two different questions. Because clearly, any negotiation that happens with ASFCME is going to have an effect on pension and pension funding, and how much we need… we need to spend on pension… pensions. Obviously, any negotiation that happens impacts pension. I don’t have the Fiscal Pension Note Code memorized, and I'm… I'm guessing most of us on the floor don’t. That's why I was asking for the clarification. Now you're telling me that that pension note, that pension note Bill, the Act has nothing to do with impact on pensions from a fiscal standpoint. Because clearly… clearly we deal with estimates in… in this chamber. We're… we're always… there's always, you know, what you call… when somebody calls speculation, somebody calls… else calls… calls a guesstimate. But you make the best… you know, we're dealing with a lot of stuff here. We're… we're this deep, and we're a mile wide. We don’t… we're… we're dealing with mental health, education, pensions, a million different things. So it's hard to… it's hard to know everything about everything. And that's why I'm asking, that's why we depend on the speculation or guesstimates, as you call it, we need that information to make a good decision. And that's why I would like to see that note addressed. I'll leave it at that. Thank you very much.”

"Thanks. Mr. Speaker, will the Sponsor yield?"

"Thank you. So I'm also reading the pension impact note myself, and I do note as a pervious speaker said that it does… if… if it affects a continuing appropriation, then it is fair game for a pension note. And I think it’s important to realize that when you're looking at this section… Well, first of all, to the Sponsor of the Bill, would you say that salaries and benefits do affect pensions?"

"Okay. Would you say that…"

"Well, okay. My question was though, do salaries affect pension?"

"Yeah, of course, they do, right? And what we're talking about is the con…"

"You know, the AFSCME representative is pretty willing to put out his own number but now won't give us any of the more impact on that number. He was willing say 25 million a year."

"And so why don't we find that out."

"Well, he promised…"

"…me information, specific information on what they think the cost of their side, their proposal would be. He promised that to myself. He promised that to Representative Phillips, who was sitting next to me, and I haven't seen that yet. I think all taxpayers should see it. But back to the idea that a pension note is inapplicable. If you actually read under Section 3, Part (b) of the pension note legislation, the pension impact note for any legislation or Amendment that the Commission on Government forecasting and Accountability determines would result in an increase in benefits or increased costs to a pension fund established under Article 3 or 4 of the Illinois Pension Code may demonstrate the fiscal impact of the legislation being considered on selected individual municipalities and pension funds. So, here you go again. I mean, we… we can definitely find out the impact of the pen… of what this should be financially with respect for taxpayers. So right there, if it's going to have a fiscal impact, if it's going to affect a continuing appropriation on pensions, then we have a right to know it according to the 09900103.docx 46  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 Pension Impact Note Act. So I don't know why… why the rush to pass this legislation today. Why not give us some time, get the numbers from both sides and make a decision as to whether or not we can economically afford this at this time. Because while you're talking about a process, that process of interest arbitration never takes into consideration and nor the arbitrators required to ever think about the economic impact. So it behooves us to insert the economic impact at some point in the process, and I say we're doing that right now by requiring a pension note and a fiscal note. Thank you."

"Thank you, Speaker. Inquiry of the Sponsor of the Motion."

"Representative, in your conversation, I think with a number of inquiries from our side, and particularly even from the last person who spoke, you talked about the underlying Bill that you're seeking to remove this pension note from as being just about process and not about the contract because we don't have a contract. Did… did I understand that correctly?"

"Okay."

"Right, but this is about the question of whether or not this note is applicable. So, I just want to make sure I first 09900103.docx 47  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 understood what you had said. And I think you agreed that you're describing this as a process. In a comment that you made to another person who raised questions about the applicability of the note, I think you used the phrase that this could go to an arbitrator, and we might see something totally different in terms of a contract. I mean, maybe not exactly those words, but certainly words to that effect. Is that… did I understand that correctly?"

"And if that's true, if this process creates the ability for an arbitrator to create to a contract, which could have provisions, and if those provisions could have an impact on the liabilities of the pension system, that, to me, seems that it's certainly qualified. So even though, I would agree with you, this Bill is about the process, the underlying Bill on which the note is, but that process creates a mechanism, and that mechanism then would be able to in… certainly in some cases and certainly within the cases bounded by the… If we go to arbitration, as I understand it, usually that requires each side putting forward what their position is and the arbitrator then reacting to the points between that. So we've set boundaries through those two positions as it relates to what the potential impact in salaries and in this case, those salaries would have associated with them a pension cost. So I guess I don’t understand. Maybe you could help explain to me why that process doesn't in itself create a potential impact on the pension fund."

"But as I said, if we go to arbitration, each side is going to put forward where their position is with the arbitration. So there are going… though we don't know what the end point is, we would certainly have boundaries, and I use my own personal experience. I have filed on past Bills to address the pension systems here in Illinois. They have gone. They had pension notes filed on them. And there's been an analysis done of those Bills, and that analysis has then provided… They don't know exactly… So for instance, if in one of those things, there is an offer for people to switch from a defined benefit to a defined contribution on a voluntary basis. Well, they don’t know how many people will choose that, but they make reasonable assumptions based on the bounds of the limits of the Bill to say, well, we know it's not going to be less than this, and it's not going to be more than this. And they then provide a reasonable range of outcomes. So I would contend that, in this case, the sides of the dispute over the contract will put forward their positions to an arbitrator. Those then provide the bounds and just as has happened with pension Bills that I have filed and have pension notes put on them, we would be able to use the same procedure and analyze how this process would be impacted based on the bounds set by the two sides in the dispute. What am I missing here?"

"But I… but I thought that during the arbitration…" 09900103.docx 49  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"…but you… but the two sides…"

"But for arbitration, isn't it the case the sides are going to put forward to the arbitrator what their position is, and the arbitrator is going to look at those two. I mean…"

"…they're not…"

"…they're not going to be changing."

"Well, they… in arbitration it's usually based on what the last offers are at the time things go to arbitration. So in this case, do you think it could just be anything all over the map? This… this doesn't seem reasonable. I think we have a good idea, at least from both the memos we’ve seen from the union and the memos we have seen from the Governor's Office what the bounds of their… of their positions are where disputes are. So, I… I really think there is applicability in this note. And I would urge a 'no' vote. Thank you."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Sponsor yield for a few questions?"

"Representative Welch, do you know… can you explain to me what a State Mandate Act is?"

"Yes. Can you tell me what you believe the State Mandates Act is, and what it holds?"

"Well, I… I simply asked what you thought the State Mandates Act provided and holds. You went on to what your commission is doing, which is all well and good. I… le… let's just here… let's agree that a mandate is an official order or a commission to do something. Is that a fair definition of a mandate, an order or direction to do something?"

"Okay. So see we're… we're… this is bipartisan right now. So we agree on what a mandate is; it's a direction or a commission, an order to do something. Your Bill says, mediation of outstanding issues shall be indicated and shall be required. So your Bill is a mandate; it orders the parties to do something, and so by definition this is a mandate. And I've asked if you've gone through the analysis of under the Mandate Act. Care to comment, Sir?" 09900103.docx 52  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Okay. So, would you agree that the Mandate Act is applicable…"

"…in this instance?"

"Tell me why?"

"You didn't actually."

"Repeat it then. Maybe I… I didn’t hear you."

"Well, it… it is. Except that this… the unit of government is the State of Illinois. It mandates; your Bill uses the word ‘shall’ and we agreed what a… what a definition of a mandate is. And I would direct your attention and commend for your reading your Bill which sa… which utilizes the word ‘shall’ which is a mandate, Sir. So with all due respect, your Bill is a mandate by definition, and it mandates the state to negotiate in a different realm with its collective bargaining unit, in this instance AFSCME. Do you care to dic… take issue with that?"

"No."

"I have a problem with…" 09900103.docx 53  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"…the mandate and you not…"

"Oh, my gosh…"

"Well, to… to the note, Mr. Speaker. That was nonresponsive response was basically an agreement by the… the good Sponsor, when he can't get out from the fact that his Bill is a mandate. It's a mandate on the State of Illinois, and it… the… the note is absolutely applicable. And so instead of saying why it wasn't, he… it kind of an ad hominem attack on what he thinks I promote or don't promote. The ad hominem attack notwithstanding, the good Gentleman did not answer the question. The fact of the matter is, it is an escapable. This is a mandate and the note applies. Vote 'no'."

"Thank you. Will the Sponsor yield?"

"Representative Welch, I got a bold prediction I'm going to make. I think you're going to get 60 votes today. Okay?"

"All right."

"No."

"No. Just preliminary question. I don't recall you were the Sponsor of the Bill back in September. What happened? Why are… why have you switched sponsorship?"

"All right. But the previous Sponsor performed. Not sure why, I'm just kind of curious why you switched. Why Mr. Smiddy has now ceded the Bill to you?"

"Well, that's a good answer. Okay. All right. So…"

"…Representative Welch, you and I have known each other for a long time, so we'll try to have a civil dis… accord… debate as we can, in the spirit of what the President of the United States preached last week. Bipartisan, cooperation…"

"…civility. So I think we're going to have a, you know, a healthy debate today. I want to talk first and foremost about the… what I believe are the constitutional powers of this Governor, previous Governors, and future Governors. Article IV, Section 8: The Governor shall have the supreme executive power, and shall be responsible for the faithful execution of the laws. My question to you, do you believe that the Governor of Illinois has the supreme executive power to negotiate and sign labor contracts on behalf of the citizens of Illinois?"

"Does your Bill, if you place this in the hand of a arbitrator for interest arbitration, doesn't it take it out of the hands of the Governor?"

"Nevermind."

"The question was that it takes it out of the… this… this…"

"…process takes it out of the hand of the Governor." 09900103.docx 58  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"This…"

"…this is such a great Bill. Why wasn't this placed upon Governor Quinn, who clearly had problems with Council 31 with his negotiation? Why was this Bill not used back then, and why didn't your Party…"

"…pass the Bill back then?"

"All right."

"Well, we'll get to that in a few minutes."

"Okay. Now getting back to the arbitrators, you have one that's picked by management and one is by labor. You have a 09900103.docx 59  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 third, if they can't reach an agreement, then the Labor Relations Board selects one. Now I asked the question last spring of the Representative from Rock Island, do you know how many arbitrators are in that pool that could be selected?"

"Fifty-four."

"Fifty-four."

"And of those 54, only 2 were appointed… or came at a time when… under Governor Rauner. Did you know that?"

"Well, it's true."

"I'm…"

"…telling you right now."

"So 52 of them were kind… came from the past two admi… past two administrations. Governor Quinn, Governor Blagojevich, Democrat appointees, who, I think, have a difference of opinion on how these negotiations… they should go. So the point I'm making is that I think that what you're doing is that you're going to allow, and I think this is wrong, an opportunity for an individual to be selected from the Labor Relations Board that could, I mean, as far as I'm concerned, I believe it's… it… being from a pool of previous… from the previous admis… administrations, I think is not a wise way to move forward, in any event. I just need to know, 09900103.docx 60  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 again, what… just explain to me why you… you, I think you… you kind of danced around a little… not danced, excuse me, you mentioned it. Why are we changing the law? Why are we doing this right now, Chris? Why is it important that we do it at this moment?"

"Yeah. Maybe with the police and fire…"

"…pub… and you know… you know, public safety. There's some reasons behind it. One, they don't have the ability to… to strike. And that's why they're given a little extra… little more leniency within the Code. Now it's my impression is that we have this Bill, right now, before us because Council 31 doesn't like the fact that Governor Rauner is exercising his rights, and I emphasize 'his rights', under the tolling agreements that was entered into by both parties. And I have 09900103.docx 61  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 the tolling agreement right here, on September 9, 2015, which states, The parties may either mutually agree that an impasse exists, or if a dispute exists with respect to the existence of an impasse. The parties agree to submit the matter to the Labor Relations Board. This states that the… either one of the parties has that opportunity to go to the Labor Relations Board and seek a declaration of whether or not impasse exists. This is what both AFSCME and the Governor signed off on. What's the problem?"

"Well, none of them filed a slip in support of this in committee. The only one that filed their support in committee was AFSCME."

"All right. Now, I think it's not prudent that we move with this legislation. I think we need to let the parties live up to the obligations that they signed on in September, which states we're going to seek a… some… a declaration from the Labor Relations Board to determine whether or not an impasse exists. And we're talking about negotiations that have had 60 days… 67 days of meetings, 24 negotiating sessions, and approximately 300 proposals. Now, at what point does this have to come to an end? I think the administration 09900103.docx 62  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 has shown enough, these parties have been at it for quite a long time. And the fact is they're just not going to agree. That is what this tolling agreement's about. And that's what they negotiated for. Let me ask you, when… at what point do you believe there would be an impasse?"

"I… I disagree."

"Does AFSCME believe that this document, the tolling agreement, is advisory? That there's nothing binding to it?"

"All right."

"Sure it does." 09900103.docx 63  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"What it's going to do if it becomes law, it's going to… basically, it's going to preempt anything that the administration is seeking under an agreed-upon process with AFSCME back in September. So, I disagree with you, Representative. And as far as I'm concerned, and to me, this legislation says, never mind to the tolling agreement that was negotiated between both sides. But I… let me ask you this. I think there's a better way to going about this. Why don't we just change the Constitution? I just referred earlier to what the Governor's supreme executive power is. I think it's easier just to amend the Governor's power for circumstances like this. Your side of the aisle routinely puts constitutional questions on the ballot. And I'll help you write the… the language, too, Representative. Don't you think that's a better way going about it, as opposed to going through another slugfest here in the chamber?"

"I think it's a direct conflict with the Governor's authority and I disagree with you. It takes him out of, what I believe, is his inherent role to negotiate labor contracts, as every other Governor has, on behalf of the taxpayers of Illinois."

"Has AFSCME voted on the Governor's contract?"

"Have they given up their right to strike? Have they voted on that?"

"Okay. Now, recently there was an unfair labor practice filed by the administration."

"Now, we're both lawyers. Now would you agree, that a ULP is similar to filing a complaint in the Circuit Court? Similar thing; we're seeking some type of determination from a third party on what is believed to be a wrong. Would you agree that a ULP is similar to a complaint in nature?"

"Thank you. Let's get back to last year… last year in September. We did, I think… as far as I'm concerned a similar Bill 1229, correct? That was the Bill we talked about earlier, changed the sponsorship. We did that last November, correct?"

"What's the difference between 1229 and 580? Any difference at all?"

"Could you please explain to me the technical change 'cause we know words mean something in this process?"

"If you need some time, come back." 09900103.docx 65  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Could you explain to me what was the… why was that necessary?"

"Okay."

"So, 1229 came about in the last minutes. Let's talk about before… override was last September, but 1229 first popped it's head up in waning days of the last General Assembly in the end of May, correct?"

"Thank you. And… let's be perfectly honest. 1229 came about because of AFSCME's dissatisfaction with negotiations with the Governor, correct? With the current… with the contract negotiations, correct?"

"All right. Well, I disagree. Now the unfair labor practice was filed on January 15 of this year. You first sought action on this Bill in committee last week on February 11, approximately three weeks from the filing of the ULP, correct?" 09900103.docx 66  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Now you and I as lawyers, don’t we both agree that upon a filing of the complaint, or in this case, a ULP, that certain rights vest with the parties. Wouldn’t you agree as a matter of law?"

"Would you agree that, attorney to an attorney, that certain rights vest upon the filing of a complaint, or a process… a procedure we agree that a ULP is like filing a civil complaint? Don't we believe that certain rights vest upon that filing?"

"All right. Well, we… we'll explore a little bit more of that."

"All right. We talked initially about interest arbitration. Refresh my memory again about what, in this particular case, interest… interest arbitration is going to do to these negotiations."

"No."

"Fifty-two of the 54 are under the previous Governors, 52."

"All right."

"All right."

"Well, let's agree that this process before the Labor Relations Board has already started. This administrative quasi-legal process has started, correct?"

"Yes. Is this arbitrator… let's… let's be perfectly honest with each other. If we get to that point and if there is going to be one arbitrator selected by the Governor, one by Labor, they're never going to come to an agreement. So, what's going to happen is that you're going to… one person will be selected to make the decision, the person who will play God. They are only allowed to decide upon the last offer from each side, correct?"

"Not under this Law. Not under the session that you're… I believe that you're… you're trying to amend, you're taking the police, and fire, and public safety, and putting this particular process into that section. That doesn't say it in the Law; I don't believe it does." 09900103.docx 68  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"I dis…"

"Look…"

"It doesn’t work because what happened is that Council 31 has decided that what was going to work, which was an agreement on a tolling agreement on how they were going to move forward, they've decided to abandon it and to force legislation. Force legislation down the throats of taxpayers in Illinois. I don't think it's right. Is this arbitrator an elected official?"

"The person, if they get to that point, which I believe if we, if this goes down this path, there won't be an agreement. See, that one person is making a decision on whether or not there's… which I still need an answer for. That sole arbitrator is picked from the panel."

"They have one of two proposals to pick from, correct?"

"Under this process though, this arbitrator, if we get to that point, does not have the authority to reconcile both proposals. That's my problem with this."

"All right. Let's move on a little bit. Let's, lawyer to lawyer, this is a significant change in the law, correct?"

"This is not…"

"And here's my response to… that’s your point. What this legislation does is some… it's significant. And it goes back to my original comments. It takes the Governor out of in… his inherent role to negotiate on behalf of the people who elected him, the people of the State of the Illinois, the taxpayers of Illinois. So you'd… you would agree with me. This is not just a minor procedural change. This is a sub… substantive change in law, correct?"

"Under the… I think I’m going to go back to the tolling agreement. The Governor was given it and so was AFSCME, given the… both the right, to seek a declaration from the Labor Relations Board of whether or not impasse exists. He didn't break a promise. He's just exercising the rights of a document of… of an agreement that he agreed upon with AFSCME. So, but 09900103.docx 70  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 let's get back to it. This is a substantive change in the law. Taking the Governor out of his inherent role to negotiate contracts on behalf of the State of Illinois. This is not some procedural change, a little procedural change. This is a substantive change. Would you agree?"

"Could you ask… could you please answer my question?"

"This is a substantive change in Law."

"All right. Let me ask you this. Representative, I know you file complaints. I do. Mr. Sandack, we all file complaints. We defend complaints. I… I don’t know… you’ll have plenty of time, Mr. Sandack. If… Let me just. If you filed the complaint in the Circuit Court, and you found out after the fact shortly afterwards that a law was changed that would have compromised your client's interest, and you knew that that legislation was specifically filed for that situation against you, how would you feel as a lawyer?"

"No."

"How would you… I'll tell you what. I'd be mad as hell. I would be mad as hell because that’s the type of stuff that we shouldn’t be doing at all. It flies in the face of fair play. It flies in the face of due process. We've already got a proceeding that is already existing that was filed about a 09900103.docx 71  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 month ago on a process that started… on a process that you and I agreed is similar to filing a complaint in the court of law. And to change the rules of the game after the complaint was filed when we both agreed that rights vest upon the filing of the complaint, I don’t think is right."

"They're in everybody's district."

"Well, why don’t they go to the Labor Board and… determine… and… and they're going to say that there's no impasse. They have a right to do it. They have the every legal right under this tolling agreement to exercise, nothing's impaired. But again, there's an agreement in place, in which, I think we have to be… I have to… we can't disregard."

“I disagree.”

“It… just… this is just the opposite; it preempts it. Absolutely preempts it 100 percent. And let me ask you this. Let's go back to this tolling agreement, signed by both parties. Would you agree… it's… it is a contract?”

“This agreement is a kin to a contract, correct?"

"Yes, thank you. It’s… a contract is a voluntary arrangement between two or more parties that is enforceable law as a binding legal agreement. This is a contract. Give me one second. So what you are doing with this legislation… let's be… be perfectly honest with each other… that you want to have this legislation retroactively apply to a process, a legal proceeding, which we both agreed upon on the floor, between… loc… Council 31 and the Labor Relations Board and the administration. So, you want to have this legislation retroactively apply to the process of the negotiations between the parties, correct? Correct?"

"No, retroactively because we already have a process in place, which is going to… which this legislation preempts the tolling agreement."

"It is… The longer it goes out, the worse it gets for making an argument on whether or not this is an ex post facto law. Do you believe that it is fair to change the rules of the game, midstream?"

"Well, thank you. But I also believe that there's something called a contract where parties have to live up to the obligations of what they sign and what they agree to."

"And what this Governor has done nothing other than say we need to determine, I want somebody else to determine whether it's an impasse after 300 proposals have gone back and forth, there's been 60 meetings, 27 negotiating sessions, at some point there's got to be an end to this. So I will just say this. I believe firmly that this legislation would have a retroactive implication upon this process and also what's going on at the Labor Relations Board, ex post facto violation. Whether it's our Federal Constitution or State Constitution it says the same. This goes back years and years and years, decades, centuries ago of how our Founding Fathers have said this is bad process. And let me start with Thomas Jefferson, we all kind of think he was a good guy, the sentiment that ex post facto laws… ex post facto laws are against natural right is so strong in the U.S. that few if any state Constitution have failed to prescribe them. The Federal Constitution interdicts them in criminal cases, but they are equally unjust in civil cases, which we have right 09900103.docx 74  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 now with the process before the Labor Relations Board. Let me also talk a little bit about what our Supreme… U.S. Supreme Court has said about passing legislation which is clearly intended to have a retroactive implication or effect. And this is the United States Supreme Court who in 2012 in an immigration case called Vardelis V. Holder which upheld longstanding U.S. Supreme Court policy in case law. Here's what they say in the majority opinion, the presumption against retroactive legislation embodies a legal doctrine centuries older than our republic. Several provisions of the Constitution, the court noted, 'embraced the doctrine among them the ex post facto clause, the contract laws of the Fifth Amendment. Here's what our Illinois Supreme Court also said, in Alegis V. Novack, No new law shall be construed to repeal a former law or any right accrued or claim arising before the new law takes effect. Save only the proceedings thereafter shall conform so far as practical through the laws enforced at the time of such proceedings. The proceedings which was… were filed in January when the unfair labor practice was filed, a civil legal proceeding. We talk about contracts, there's a thing called the contract clause also, it's also in our Constitution; it's in the State Constitution, it's in the Federal Constitution. Section 16, No ex post facto law or any law impairing the obligation of contracts or making of an irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities shall be passed. We have a tolling agreement that was negotiated in good faith because it was signed by both the administration and also Council 31. It stated that we have a process in place for one party to determine whether or not impasse should be… 09900103.docx 75  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 of whether or not impasse exists. This legislation directly conflicts with that contract, completely in violation of the contracts clause that we have in under our Illinois Constitution but also unfairly and unconstitutionally retroactively applies as an ex post facto law to this process which started back in January. So, here we are again, Ladies and Gentlemen, we went through this process last… last September, last… last March, last May, clearly the intent of this I will suggest… I don't suggest strongly… it's about politics not policy. Relieving at the end of the day under this Bill the rights of an unelected arbitrator to decide whether or not the State of Illinois taxpayers should be imposed upon with an additional $3 billion, possibly, spread over three years of spending on a labor contract. And that's a person who's never been elected to office, when we do have a person who's elected of office who is the Governor of the State of Illinois. I know some of you have strong feelings about it, but the fact is he has authority under our Constitution and I believe wholeheartedly that he has the inherent right… the inherent right to negotiate on behalf Illinoisans and taxpayers, everyone in this state, a contract of this nature. And I think to… to cut his legs off at this stage after a legal proceeding has already started it's not what this state and this country is about. And I would request a 'no' vote.”

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

"So, Representative, let's take a step back here and let's talk about the here and now. As you and I stand here debating your Bill, State Government, albeit many will argue has some impairments and some challenges that are special and unique to our existing times, government's running, correct?"

"And state employees whether covered by the AFSCME contract, another collective bargaining unit, or not covered by a collective bargaining unit, they're working and being paid, correct?"

"And there has been no strike by AFSCME or the other unions that are collectively negotiating or were collectively negotiating with the Governor. Isn't that correct?"

"And so, too, the Governor has not locked out anyone including, but not limited to, AFSCME members and the other unions negotiating or maybe not negotiating with the Governor. There's been no lock out, isn't that correct?"

"All right. Well, I want to make sure we have the record of proceedings and the status quo agreed upon and we do because there was some invective language by yourself with respect to where we are. Yeah, you gave Leader Durkin a little bit about you're standing up to this Governor, and you know I… I appreciate that. That's some interesting context. But as you and I stand here, there's no shutdown of government, correct?" 09900103.docx 77  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Well, I'll get to that; I think that's fair."

"But there's no shutdown is there?"

"Well, let's… let's talk about that."

"Well, let’s… It's a fair point. You're getting a little ahead of me. You're… you're a good attorney who's not being a good witness right now. So here's the thing, Representative, there was a tolling agreement. In fact, I believe there were three, is that correct?"

“Okay.”

"You're not going to let me ask the questions and I'd appreciate if you would simply answer what I ask. And I will get there, ‘cause I… I'm going to be very brief. So there is at least one tolling agreement, isn't that correct?"

"I would suggest there was many… there… there were more, but irrespective. There was a signed agreement with respect to the process, which in no small part held no lock out, no strike, we're going to take talking. Isn't that right?"

"Okay. How many times did the parties meet? Do you know, Representative?"

"Well, if I told you it was a lot, like 60 times, would that surprise you?"

"Okay."

"That's fair. But you're not the Governor and neither am I, but that's fair. You have an opinion that there should be more meetings; that's not unfair. However, the tolling agreement, which you may have in front of you says, the parties can agree that they're at impasse, or either party can ask for determination of impasse. That was the basis of the bargain in the last tolling agreement or the only tolling agreement. Isn't that correct, Sir?"

"So the agreed upon process, which you think should continue forward, fair, but that's Representative Welch substituting his perspective into an analysis that frankly, Sir, you and I aren't part of. The tolling agreement was between AFSCME and the other unions, and the Governor's Office. Isn't that correct?"

“So, your…”

"Well, I'll get to that, because it… it obviously does. It supersedes it and preempts it is my suggestion." 09900103.docx 79  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"So the agreement that the parties had said either party could go and seek a determination from the labor board, that an impasse has occurred. Isn't that what the agreement says?"

"I need you to speak up."

"Thank you, Sir. And the Governor has done just that, isn't that correct?"

"Hold on. Let's not get ahead of ourselves again. So as you and I stand here, as you and I stand here, the Governor has taken from the agreement signed by AFSCME and others to a procedure saying, I believe there's an impasse. I'd like you to say yes or no. That's the extent of the inquiry right now. Isn't that correct."

"So if the board disagrees with the Governor and says they take a Welchian-like approach and say, I believe more should occur. That would be the ruling and they’d have to go and negotiate some more. Isn't that correct."

"Okay. So, notwithstanding the process agreed upon by the parties, you have filed your Bill, and I do say it preempts because and it is retroactive, I commend for your reading your Bill, Sir. If it was, if it becomes law whether by Governor's signature or by override, it has not only a perspective three year reach, it has a retrospective reach 09900103.docx 80  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 with respect to the proceedings now being engaged in, whether or you like them or not, but they would apply to AFSCME and the other unions. Isn't that correct?"

"Well, then let's not do it. Let's put… let's put your Bill aside. Let's get fiscal impact. Let's get a pension impact. Let's slow it down, and let the proceeding that the parties agreed to, go forward. There's no need for your Bill then, Sir."

"But why? It doesn’t apply to the current negotiations."

"But time out, Chris."

"To what?"

"I'm sorry? Including…"

"So, okay. So I… I hate to be…"

"So, it would apply to the AFSCME unresolved situation assuming it was unresolved. Yes or no?"

"Chris, I need you to ans… what I answer, ask what I… what I ask you. Is it your contemplation, as a Sponsor of 09900103.docx 81  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 this legislation, that if there is no signed agreement between the Governor's Office and AFSCME, and if your Bill became law, that it would apply to the current situation?"

"So it is retrospective, Sir?"

"Okay. It is mine. Let's talk about contract impairment. So you say, and I think you said it to me twice, and to Leader Durkin, that the tolling agreement isn’t preempted if your Bill becomes law. Explain to me how that works."

"So, explain to me… so… how it works from a practical standpoint. I… I read… I've heard you read that statement, so let's make it apply, hypothetically, to the… to the situation that I think you'd want to have happen. So your Bill becomes law, one way or another. AFSCME and the Governor have not reached an agre… a contract. How does your Bill… how does your law, then work?"

"And how does that not affect the tolling agreement, which says any party, once they think there's impasse, can get an adjudication of that, and then if they're presumed correct, proceed accordingly under existing law. How does that not impair that existing law and contract?"

"So, what… wait a minute. Hold on. Go back. If there's no impasse, say again?”

"The parties continue to negotiate."

"Right."

"Correct. But the relationship with the… but there is existing law, Chris. Counselor, there is existing law that fills the void of what goes on next. We don’t live in the abstract. We live in the concrete world. We know that if there is an impasse declared, there is no contract, there are rights the parties have under existing law. Correct? Your fifth… Bill 580 would impair existing law, and retroactively apply a new set of rules to the existing situation. That’s the bottom line."

"Well not an existing contract…"

"Good policy. So…" 09900103.docx 83  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Well, I… I, look it, Representative, you and I can have an agreement that we think the parties should still be at the table, but we weren't elected to be the Chief Executive Officer of the State of Illinois. I think because you said it two or three times, your legislation seeks to impart your worldview and substitute your judgement for that of the Executive. And I can agree with you that you disagree with them, but I can't agree with you with changing the rules midstream, actually, fourth quarter, 11th hour. You name the analogy; it's really late. And you want to make an impactful change to the procedures and the substance of this dispute. Isn’t that correct?"

"Well, I'll ask the questions."

"I'll ask the questions, Representative, and I think the record belies your point. I think the record of 60 meetings, I think the record of 3 tolling agreements, I think the record of attempted negotiation and using the procedure, pursuant to the contract each party signed, is fair. You may not think it's fair, but then again, no one elected you Governor. Let's talk about your experience. You said, as an attorney, interest arbitration has worked. Let's be clear, Representative. When you were involved, you were involved as an advocate for one side or the other, isn’t that correct?"

"Sorry?"

"You were a school board president. Did you ever seek to change the rules of engagement with your teachers and the teacher’s union and say, you know what, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to change the rules right now. We can't get an agreement, but we're going to go to interest arbitration. You can’t strike. You can't strike. Did you ever do that as school board president?"

"No, you didn’t."

"And why… and why is it, Sir…"

"…that your Bill only goes for three years. If you believe that this is good policy, if you believe that the… in the propriety of this procedure, let it go ad infinitum. Why three years?" 09900103.docx 85  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Why three years?"

"To the Bill, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen, I respect the Gentleman very much. He is a thoughtful, articulate, really smart guy, but there's no chance he believes in the propriety, in the legitimacy of changing midstream the rules of engagement, because he didn’t do it when he was the Chief Executive, school board chairman. He never said, you know what, let's go to interest arbitration now. Mr. Welch seeks to substitute his judgement for that of the Chief Executive of Illinois, because he thinks, in his objective… right, come on, he's subjective, position, that it's not fair where things are right now. It's not fair. Well, taxpayers may disagree with Representative Welch. Taxpayers elected Governor Rauner to be the voice at the chair at the table for negotiations. The idea of trying to switch the arrangement now, for three years only, is disingenuous. This is the most cynical piece of legislation I have seen in my tenure in the General Assembly. Vote 'no'."

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

"So Chris, I would admittedly tell you that I'm not a trial lawyer, so you're in good shape today. I'm… I'm at a 09900103.docx 86  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 disadvantage, so I will just try and answer some real simple questions to you about your Bill. Does your Bill have a title?"

"Yeah."

"Well, it sort of looks like the Open Day on Governors Act, the way it appears. The Open Day on Governors Act, but maybe not. I'm curious about all the questions that have been asked today, and some of the half-answers, or no-answers. And I don’t… I don’t necessarily blame you, I'm just curious. Because I'm hoping this is not a Bill we have to pass to then understand, and that seems where we are today. Do you agree or disagree with that?"

"Well, I guess we have to pass the Bill, and then we'll really know what it's about, we'll finally understand what the implications are because we haven’t got too many clear- cut answers today."

"Okay. Well, let me… let me begin…"

"Yeah. No, I’m…"

"Your answers were fine. I don’t know that we… we came to any conclusion in committee, and we probably won't today, but let me talk about interest arbitration a minute. By the way, I disagree with your… your numbers when it comes to hit and misses, and who does well and who doesn’t. Maybe school boards do that well, but I'll tell you, in business, that just doesn’t happen. That number doesn’t exist."

"Okay. Well,…"

"…I heard you made some comment…"

"Well, that must be in Indiana."

"Let me… let me ask you this question about your Bill. Will the interest arbitrator, as you understand the concept, take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and take a separate oath that he will uphold and faithfully execute his duties?"

"Precisely. And therefore, he would not take the oath of office. Is that not correct?"

"And who is an interest arbitrator responsible to, Chris?"

"I can't hear you, I'm sorry." 09900103.docx 88  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Yeah. But they don’t… they're…"

“Okay.”

"Sure. Okay. But you… you did answer my question…"

"…that they don’t take… they don't take an oath of office; they're not elected officials. So that brings me to my next question. What if both sides don't approve of what an interest arbitrator is doing? What's the remedy?"

"Well, what if… well…"

"What's… what's the remedy? What’s the remedy?"

"Well, that would be… would that be in Federal Court?"

"Okay. All right. See, I… I'm… you're… you're helping me out a little bit here today. So, a commission. Will the arbitrators be paid a commission?"

"Well, how would they be compensated?"

"Chris, I'm sorry, I can't hear you, I really, I apologize."

"Yes."

"Thank you, Speaker. I'm not sure I know where I was, but I think we were talking about compensation… compensation for an interest arbitrator."

"Okay. What vested responsibility, and I say vested responsibility, would an interest arbitrator have?"

"Well, I… I would assume, let… let's just assume that to be a given. What vested responsibility? Where does that person get his authority?"

"Doesn't get it from the General Assembly, does it?"

"Does that apply both to public and private entities?"

"Yeah. Are you familiar, Representative, with the Supreme Course… Supreme Court case the Department of Transportation versus the American Railroad Association?"

"Handed down in March of 2015."

"Basically said that there's a thing called constitutional avoidance and that you can't do that, but you can't cut a Constitutional Officer out of their job. Are you aware of that?"

"Well…"

"Well, sure you are."

"That's exactly what you're doing. You're trying to take a Governor down and the U.S. Supreme Court says you can't do it. And matter of fact, not only are trying to avoid the Governor, you're trying to do it in a rather obnoxious way. Because the Governor is vested with certain powers, just as we are, just as the Supreme Court is. So let me walk through this, just a moment with you. I know you're not familiar with it, but the principle of accountability that the court talked 09900103.docx 91  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 about in this particular case. How does that apply? How does the principle of accountability apply to an interest arbitrator?"

"Well, I… I'm…"

"…I'm just asking. If you don't answer, I understand."

"But they're just ordinary citizens. Isn't that correct?"

"They’re just… Yeah… they're just ordinary citizens. That's my point, Representative."

"Are you familiar with the oath and commissions clause?"

"Okay. That also says that you can't make a Constitutional Officer irrelevant when he is defined by the Constitution to do certain things. It says you can't do it. Are you familiar with that?"

"Well, you can disagree with the Supreme Court."

"Sir, you can disagree with the Supreme Court. You don't need to disagree with me. Isn't it true, that by your Bill, that you are trying to lay a penalty on the Executive Department because you personally don't like the way they've negotiated?"

“Well, we’re not shutting down.”

"I don't… I'm not shutting it…"

"Well, you know I do and…"

"Yeah. I… I get the passion, Representative. But let… let's just stick with the questions here because, so far, there's a very, very pivotal case here that you're not aware of and bringing this Bill, I thought you would be. So, let's just… let's get rid of the hyperbole and all of the good stuff that goes with it. Let's just stick with facts here. Isn't it true… isn't it true that one of the things that this Supreme Court says was that you can't penalize the Chief Executive for doing his job by trying to carve out a piece of his job? Isn't that true?" 09900103.docx 93  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Well, it does apply here."

"This is right on point…"

"…this is right on point."

"Well, if you haven't read it, you wouldn't know I guess. Let me ask you something else. Does the Constitution say anything about binding arbitration? Does our Constitution here say anything about binding arbitration?"

"Not that I'm aware of either, not… not one thing. Matter of fact, it doesn't say one thing in respect to what the Governor does, that he has to have binding arbitration, doesn't even suggest it. Doesn't even suggest it. Are you familiar with the term private non-delegation, the private non-delegation doctrine?"

"You're not. Well, that's essentially saying that you can't delegate a responsibility that belongs to somebody duly elected to a position by passing legislation that carves that constitutional responsibility out. Are you aware of that?"

"Well, I don't think the Governor's, you know, I think he would be happy to stay at the table; that's not the issue. But let me keep running through here, we have a bit more to get through. Let me ask you this. Isn't it true that your Bill is an attempt at compromise force… a compromise forcing mechanism to bring the Governor to a position that you believe is agreeable to all parties?"

"It's not a mechanism?"

"Chris, I… I couldn't agree with you more. Well, I'm trying to… to bring to you and I'm going to close out here real quick, 'cause I know you don’t know the case, and it's… it's kind of silly to go through this thing that you are not familiar with, but essentially this case basically says what you're doing here today doesn't cut legal muster. And this has been upheld. So, I, you know, I… I think you're headed off in the wrong direction, but let me just say this. This is a compromise forcing mechanism, and that's not the way I think we should be operating. In short, if we were to have one to one… one man to one man conversation, it would seem to me that we would be one man short here. And that would be those people who don't want to negotiate further. They don't like the terms; they don't like the… terms plus maybe some work restrictions. And so, they have decided that this isn't something they can do, but that's why you keep negotiating. That's why you keep negotiating. There are check points in 09900103.docx 95  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 the Constitution and you just mentioned before that one of them in ours is not interest arbitration, that's what this case says also. So we're trying to inhibit the Governor from doing his job by something that really is not permissible, at least that's what the U.S. Supreme Court says, and so that in my view makes it a bad policy judgment. Not necessarily yours, because I know you're carrying the Bill for somebody else, but a bad policy judgement. I might tell you, just to quote from the case, that the Justices said, 'There's not even a fig leaf of constitutional justification,' for trying to substitute interest arbitration where a citizen like you and I takes over the responsibility of spending taxpayer dollars, taking money from people who can't afford it, the taxpayer body, to, in some way, promote their contract. So what we're trying to do here, again, is we're trying to withdraw the Governor from the mix so that he can't… can't have a word in it anymore so that we can get this contract done. And this, this Supreme Court case says, can't do it. In fact, as I said before, they quote, 'It's the most obnoxious form of government.' I'm going to close by saying this. Private dispute resolution has a place, but it doesn't have a place in a… a system that has a Judiciary, a Legislature and a Governor. We all have separate purposes and when we start incringing… infringing on those purposes, then we're asking for something other than a democracy. And I think that's just where you're headed, and I hate to see that because it's simply not right. Lastly, I would say this, that the whole concept here… the whole concept here that we can't get this done is simply, I think, a figment of someone's imagination 09900103.docx 96  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 who says that arbitration is better than negotiation. Negotiation is 250, 280 years old in this country and has worked just fine until people don't get their way. But I'm telling you this, Chris, what you're doing is unconstitutional for many different reasons, you need to read the case. I'm not going to vote for your Bill, obviously, and I would recommend that the rest of the Body do likewise. Thank you, Mr. Speaker."

"Mr. Speaker, to the Bill. I have a novel idea; why doesn't AFSCME simply submit the Governor's proposer… proposal to its membership and have them vote on it? Why don't they do that? If they don't ratify it, then it's back to the drawing board. If they ratify it like 17 other unions have already done with over 80 percent ratification in many cases, then we've got a contract and we've settled this dispute. Why not do that? I think it's because the AFSCME leadership is afraid their membership is smarter, more nuanced and less political than they are. I think they don't want a deal. I think they would rather or prefer to keep their union membership in the dark as to what is really going on. So I'm not going to talk about this interest arbitration deal; I'm going to talk to the union membership. This is what happens when your contracts are out of sorts, when we can't afford it, you get laid off. You get laid off. That's what happens when you can't have a reasonable contract that the taxpayers can afford. This is exactly what happened to municipalities in 2009 at the… after the 2008 con… crash. Municipalities who could not afford the contracts laid off staff. And AFSCME is not listening to its union membership, but they can. They can submit Governor Rauner's proposal to their membership and have them vote on it, up or down, yes or no. You keep deciding for them rather than letting them decide for themselves. You think you're smarter than them and they're citizens of the State of Illinois, they understand taxes, they understand what they're getting, they understand the pensions that they're receiving, they 09900103.docx 99  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 understand job security and that's what they want. Perhaps they also are interested in other provisions, oh, like merit pay or maybe moving up based on your abilities and not how long you've been there. Maybe they like the… those provisions in the contract too; regardless, I say, AFSCME, the ball's in your court. You submit it to your membership and give them an up or down vote. Thank you."

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

"Thank you. Representative, just a… so that I'm… I'm clear on the process here, we've got a… there's a 30-day mediation requirement in the Bill, correct?"

"After which you then go into… either party declares an impasse and you're pushed into arbitration, right?"

"Right. But presumably we would move in… they would move into arbitration as soon as they have the opportunity given to them by the General Assembly here, otherwise, what's the point of the Bill?"

"Okay. Once… once they move…"

"Right. We presume they're going to go into interest arbitration though that's the whole point of this. How does the panel then get put together?" 09900103.docx 112  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"Fair enough. Now, I had… I had a time on a municipal board where we dealt with interest arbitration a couple times, and it was the understanding of our folks that whenever you go to interest arbitration, I… they didn't know of a time when there had ever been a reduction in a contract, a future contract awarded by an interest arbitrator. Are you aware of any time an interest arbitrator has ever reduced a benefit under a contract or… in sum?"

"It… it could, hypothetically, somewhere in the country, least never in Illinois as best we know. So, yeah, there's… there's been talk… I mean, one… one of the problems too is the factors that in interest arbitration, well, they will look at. And… and there's a concern, particularly on this side of the aisle, that the… the budget process will be ignored by an interest arbitrator and… and I know from my time on the municipal board that there was never any concern for our budget at the municipal level. We were assumed to be a piggy bank from which an unlimited amount of money could be extracted. Is there any protection for the taxpayer in this process?"

"Right. So they Sub 3." 09900103.docx 113  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"And… and haven't you openly advocated for higher taxes… additional revenue for the state?"

"But it’s fully within our power to increase the taxes to whatever rate we… we so desire, short of everyone moving out of the state. I mean, isn't it? That… we have a full unlimited power to do that."

"Yes, it was."

"Okay. So really this Sub… h(3) doesn't even apply here. So really, the welfare of the taxpayers is not going to be considered at all. So with that as a backdrop and understand that interest arb always results in either the status quo or better for the union, what happens if… if and likely when the Governor rejects the interest arbitration decision, if this Bill goes into effect?"

"Well, okay…"

“… the interest arbitrator’s got to make a decision…" 09900103.docx 114  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016

"No, I…"

"Sure, and they're professionals and every single time it's been considered anywhere else in the State of Illinois and presumably around the country, believe that the taxpayers don't really have a seat at the table. You've got unelected arbitrators making decisions that we here in this General Assembly are normally charged with making. I mean, that's what… we are the ones who are supposed to be defending the taxpayers and the interest of the State Government. But again, so you got to get a decision. What happens, the Governor rejects the decision?"

"Back to the panel. Now throughout that entire thing though, the existing… the status quo contract stays in effect the whole time."

"Now, maybe I'm a cynic and I know someone else in… invoked the President and others have invoked the President repeatedly, but when I see a Bill that gives an interest group status quo or better when everybody else is getting cut, that sounds like a special deal. And when I hear, oh wait, well, the Governor can reject it. It'll go back to panel. The same process starts over with the same group of people and the same result then comes out and he rejects it again. So in… the extent of the Bill is still 2019. So from now to 2019, at 09900103.docx 115  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 absolutely worst, they get the exact same contract terms, the same step increases, pay raises, same health insurance at a very low price, the same stuff that we enjoy here in the General Assembly. They get all of that at worst instead of negotiating in a place where we all know… and actually, at this point, Mr. Speaker, I'm going to the Bill. I mean, look, at this point we know full well that we can't keep on the current course. Our budget won't allow it, our finances won't allow it, our people won't allow it. People are moving out of my district in droves; they're going to other states because they don't want to be a part of financing a corrupt and out of balance government. And so when we have this Bill that essentially gives a heads… heads I win, tails you lose deal to any group in this state, it's unsustainable, it's unfair and it's unjust. I urge a 'no' vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker."

"Mr. Speaker, will the Sponsor yield."

"I'll try to be quick. I got a quick question for you. Can the General Assembly delegate its power of taxation arbitrators?"

"How about its power of appropriations?"

"Okay. This is what we're doing here. I'm going to ducktail off of what the previous Representative said and go right to the Bill. If this passes, here's our choices. Higher taxes, layoffs, cuts to social services, or a mix of each. We're essentially giving away our power of taxation and 09900103.docx 116  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 appropriations to arbitrators. We have the courts running our budget. Everybody has to give. I haven't seen the give yet here. Everybody's going to have to give. The budget’s upside down. I don't know where all this money’s coming from. So, if you want to vote for higher taxes or layoffs or cuts in social services you can vote for this bill. I urge a 'no' vote. Thank you."

"Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the Bill. Mr. Speaker, I have had many, many conversations with numerous state workers, and I have to tell you that I firmly believe that I have spoken personally with some of the hardest working, most passionate state workers that our state has. They care very deeply about our state, just like everyone in this Body cares very deeply about our state. And Mr. Speaker, they are frustrated. And I understand their frustrations; I sincerely do understand their frustrations. Both sides are frustrated with each other. Both sides have said and have felt like the other side hasn't negotiated in good faith. But Mr. Speaker, there's a pathway for… that both sides agreed to that if they get to this position how to properly proceed down that path. Now, I sincerely believe that both sides need to collectively bargain in good faith and reach an agreement that is fair to all concerned. I, also, sincerely believe that it is not a good idea to have an all or nothing arbitration. I don't think that's a good idea to either side. I can tell you this, that there is frustrations and I've had numerous conversations and one thing that both sides can agree to, this is fact, both sides both agree on this. They both say that the other side isn't telling the truth. That they both can agree to. We aren't in the room. We weren't in the room; we haven't been in the room. This isn't our fight in the Legislature; we don't belong in that room. Now I will say this that I do believe, at the end of the day, I do believe that both sides will end up going through this process and I do think that both sides will ultimately be back at the table, which is something that 09900103.docx 124  STATE OF ILLINOIS 99th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSCRIPTION DEBATE 103rd Legislative Day 2/16/2016 the Sponsor thinks should happen and… and I think that ultimately they will end up back at the table. We don't belong in this dispute. And I hope that at the end of the day we can start to… to talk about the things that we really ought to be focused on, mainly, the fact that we are… don't have a budget and we're eight months into the new fiscal year. Hopefully, those can be the conversations that we focus on and put our attention towards. Thank you, Mr. Speaker."