Illinois Senate Floor Debate — February 7, 1996

The reqular Session of the 89th General Assembly will please come to order. Wlll the Members please be at their desks and will I our guests in the galleries please rise. Our prayer today will be given by Pastor Rick Wenneborg, Chatham Christian Church, Chatham, Illinois. Pastor Wenneborg.

(Prayer by Pastor Rick Wenneborg)

Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. Senator Sieben.

(Pledge of Allegiance, led by Senator Sieben)

Reading of the Journal. Senator Butler.

Mr. President, I move that reading and approval of the Journal of February of Tuesday, February 6thy be pcstponedy pending I arrival of the printed Journal. 1

senator' Butler moves to postpone the reading and the approval 1 of the Journal, pendtng the arrival of the printed transcript. There being no objection: so ordered. Committee Reparts.

Senator Rauschenbergerr Chair of the Committee on Appropriations, reports Senate Bills 1260, 1261, 1262: 1263, 1177 and 1347 Do Pass. I Senator Butler, Chair of the Ccmmittee on Commerce and Industryy reports House Bill 1470, the First Conference CommikEee I Report, Be Approved Por Consideration.

Messages from the House. SECRETARY HARRY;  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 I A Message from the House by Mr. McLennandz Clerk. ' Mr. President - I am directed to inform the Senate thât ! E the House of Representatives has concurred with the Senate in the 1 passage of a bill of the following title, to Wit: i I Senate Bill 1122, With House Amendment No. 5. ! i j j i Passed the House, as amended,February 6th, 1996. j 1 PRESIDENT PHILIP: ! 1 Introduction of Bills.

l Senate Bill 1461, offered by Senator Raica. : ' (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1462, offered by Senator Farley. 1 (Secretary reads tttle of bill) Senate Bill 1463, offered by Senator Rauschenberger. ! (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1464, offered by Senator DeLeo. 1 I (Secretary reads title of bill) 1 Senate Bill 1465 , offered by Senator Dillard. : : (Secretary reads title cf bill) . 1 l Senate Bill 1466, offered by Senator Dillard. ! (Secretary reads title of bill) 1 i Senate Bill 1467: offered by Senator Donahue. , (Secretary reads title of bill) 1 I Senate Bill 1468, offered by Senator Dillard. ' (Secretary reads title of bill) i I I Senate Bill 1469, offered by Senator Dtllard. ' ; (Secretary reads title Of bill) ' 1 Senate Bill 1470, offered by President Philip . ! 1 (secretary reads title of bill) I ! ' Senate Bill 1471: offered by Senator Barkhausen. I I i (Secretary reads titl ' e of bill) i Senate Bill 1472, offered by Senator Raica. 1 I I 1 1 i :2 E 1  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislatlve Day February 7r 1996 1 ! ! (Secretary reads title of bill) : i I Senate Bl11 1473, offered by Senator Wccdyard. I ' (Secretary reads tltle of bill) I Senate Bill 1474, offered by Senator Raica. (Secretary reads title of bill) j ! Senate Bill 1475, offered by Senator Raica. ' ' : i (Secretary reads title of bi1l) Senate Bill 1476, offered by Senator Hawkinson. ' I (Secretary reads title of bill) I Senate Bill 1477, offered by Senator Hawklnscn. I (Secretary reads title of bill) ! ! Senate Bill 1478, offered by Senator Weaver. i (Secretary reads title of bill) ' And Senate Bill 1479, offered by Senator Dunn. ; (Secretary reads title of bill) I j . j lst Readlng of the bllls. 1 ë I E PRESIDENT PHILIP: I j ( Senator Demuzlo, for what purpose do you rise? SENATOR DEMUZIO: l : Thank your Mr. President. I'd like the record to reflect th#t Senator Molaro is absent today due to illness and that Senatdr Carroll is still out of the country attendlng a sympcsium, as 'l announced yesterday.

The record will so indicate. Senatcr Geo-Karts, for What purpose do you rise? 1

Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, theèe ; will be a Republican Caucus immedlately after this morningr 1 s ! Session at Senator -- Pate Philip's... l PRESIDENT PHILIP: 1 That's always tn order. Senator Demuzio. i 1 ! 13 i I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT I 73rd Leglslative Day February 7, 1916 ;

t : ! j j 1 Could you enlighten us as to perhaps what the schedule might ! be? ; 1 1 PRESIDENT PHILIP: j E Yes. We -- we intend on going into a caucus; hcpefully, we'i1 1 I i 1 be out by l1:30y so we would stand in recess till 11:30. I -- .1 ) would hope that we Would take -- probably take up the workmen's #- I I mean, unemployment insurancer and that would probably be it f6r .; ' the day. Senator Demuzio. I SENATOR DEMUZIO : ' 1 ...you have -- do ycu have any idea about the -- will we be ' j here tomorrow and -- and Eriday now, or is that going to be I 1 perfunctory? . 1 PRESIDENT PHILIP: I 1 I -- I would thlnk this: At this pcint, we'l1 probably be in tomorrow morning at 9, prcbably be here for an hour cr two. The House has sent some stuff over; I'n not sure what we're going to ! l do with it yet. But Frlday's perfunct anyway. Senator Jaccbir for what purpose do you rise? I I I

1 Thank you, Mr. Prestdent. Therebll be a Democratic Caucus (n I I Senator Jones' Office inmedlately. k PRESIDENT PHILIP: 2 Thank you. The Senate will stand recessed till 11:30 a .m. I (SENATE STANDS IN REcEss) ' ' 1 i (SENATE RECONVENES) i ' 1 j I PRESIDENT PHILIP: . : ! i i ' 14  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 1$ 1996 The Senate will please come to arder. Introduction of Bills. I

j ' Senate Bill 1480, cffered by Senator Trotter. 1 (Secretary reads title of bill) : Senate Bilk 1481, by Senator Carroll. I (Secretary reads title of bill) I E 1 Senate Bill 1482, by Senator Hendon. p (Secretary reads title of bill) t i House (sic) Bil1 1483, by Senator Hendon. 1 ! (Secretary reads title of bill) 1 Senate Bill 1484, by Senator Hendon. I I (Secretary reads title of bill) I ! Senate Bill 1485, by Senator Cronin. (Secretary reads Lltle Of bill) j I : i Senate Bill 1486 is offered by Senator Raica. i 1 (Secretary reads title of bill) i ; ' Senate Bill 1487, by Senator Raica. ' 1 (Secretary reads title of bill) ' I Senate Bill 1488 is presented by Senators Garcia an2 ! i I de1 Valle. . (Secretary reads Eitle of bill) ' l Senate Bill 1489, by Senator Lauzen. (Secretary reads title of bill) I Bi11 1490. ... (Secretary reads title of bill) I i ... Bill 1491, by Senator Lauzen. I (Secretary reads title oë bikl) senate Bill 1492, by Senator Lauzen. : I (secretary reads title of b1l1) 2 I : I I i Senate Bill 1493, by Senator Parker. . ! (Secretary reads tltle of bill) I Senate Bill 1494, by Senators Fitzgeraldr Philip anj ; i 5 !  STATE OP ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT i 73rd Legislative Day February 7r 1996 ' . ; Rauschenberger . I i (Secretary reads title cf bill) I I Senate Bill 1495 is offered by Senator Fitzgerald. ' I 1 (Secretary reads title of b111) d Senator Molaro offers Senate Bill 1496. 1 (Secretary reads title of bill) ' I Senate Bill 1497, by Senator Cronin. E 2 (Secretary reads title of bill) I Senate Bill 1498 is presented by Senator Berman. ! tsecretary reads title of bill) ' 1 Senate Bill 1499, by Senatcr Dunn. : (secretary reads title of bill) ' Senate Bill 1500: by Senator Woodyard. ' (Secretary reads title of bill) I Senate Bill 1501, by Senator Garcia . (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1502: by Senator O 'Malley. I (secretary reads title of bill) ' j And Senate Bill 1503, by Senator Peterson. (secretary reads title of bill) . lst Reading of the bills. ' PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) I Resolutions. . I . I

Senate Joint Resolution 76, Constitutional Amendment, offered I by Senators Watson/ Fitzgerald, Klemm, Jacobs and Geo-Karis. ' 1 . PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) 1 1 Ladies and Gentlemen, if I could have your attentlon please. Rules Committee is -- is presently meeting. They will conclude : I their work in -- in a few minutes. The next order of business i : i will be the Supplemental Calendar, and on that Calendar is Housè i I Bill 1470. So for thcse of you who are within the sound of my I I ! ' l i l 6 !  1 STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 i voice, I would invlte you to the Floor as quickly as possiblç. q Introduction of Bills. ; E SECRETARY HARRY ; . 5 : i ! 1 Senate Bill 1504, offered by Senator Petka. 1 ' I (Secretary reads title of bill) ! I . Senate Blll 1505 is presented by Senator Rauschenberger. I ! (Secretary reads title of bill) ! I . 1 Senate Bill 1506, by Senator Rauschenberger. ! i (Secretary reads title of bill) I . I ! House (sic) Bill 1507, by Senator Rauschenberger. (Secretary reads title cf bill) : i 1 I ë Senate Bill 1508, by Senator Rauschenberger. 1 , 1 ( (Secretary reads title cf bill) 1 ! : ' ' Senate Bill 1509 is presented by Senator Parker . : j : I E (Secretary reads tltle of bill) . ' 1 i Senator DeAngelis offers Senate Bi11 1510. : : ' (Secretary reads title of bill) 1 i E Senate Bill 1511, by Senatcr Syverson. 1 : 1 . (Secretary reads title of bill) 1 E ! E Senate Bill 1512, by Senator Dudycz. 1 . 1 1 (Secretary reads title of bil1) 1 1 : 1 i Senate Bill 1513, by Senators Maitland, Parker and Watson. 1 1 ! ë (Secretary reads title of bill) : ' Senate Bill 1514: by Senator Bonke. j l ' ! (Secretary reads title of blll) j ! i i Senate Bi1l 1515 ls presen*ed by Sena*or Madigan. i j i I (Secretary reads title of bill) ' I ; ! ' j And, Senate Bill 1516, by Senator Geo-Karis. I ; ' y (Secretary reads title of bill) : . t . lst Reading of the bills. : ' PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) I a.. Reports. : 1 I 4 . 7  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 1 ' i SECRETARYHARRY: ' I j : Senator Weaver, Chair of the Committee on Rules, reports the ! following Legislative Measures have been assigned: Referred to 1 the Committee on Appropriation - Senate Bill 9117 to the Committse on Commerce and Industry - the Motton to Concur With Houée Amendment l to Senate Bill 21; to the Commlttee on Environment and Energy - Senate Bills 1390 and 13917 to the Committee on Executike I - Senate Bill 1386) to the Committee on Insurance, Pensions and Licensed Activities - Senate Bill 1222) to the Comn ittee on I Judiciary - Senate Bill 1388; to the Committee on Lccal Governmen't and Elections - House Bill 6827 to the Committee on State ! Government Operations - Senate Bills 1385: 1387 and 13897 and Be 1 Approved For Consideration - House Bill 809 and Senate Amendment l to House Bi11 809. '

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) l A11 right. Ladies and Gentlemen... Ladies and Gentlemen, op l your desky on Supplemental Calendar 1, Conference Committe: I Reports , is House Bill 1470. Mr. Seeretary, do you have on file 1 # I conference committee repcrt on House Bill 1470? :

Yes, Mr. President. Pirst Conference Conmittee Report cn House Bill 1470. . PRESIDING OFFICER: (SEHATOR MAITLAND) . Senator Lauzen. '

Thank you, Mr. Presldent. Ladies and Gentlemeny just threè minutes of background concerning unemployment insurance. Thii' j issue is about more than money; it's about people in the State o) 1 ! Illlnois. More jobs paying higher wages will sekve so many of thq : ; problems that Illinois citizens face. The solution provides a j ' substitute for welfare, an alternative to crime, a tax base fo/ 1 j ' effective public education, and a source of self-respect where ' j ' I . 8' I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 1996 I family members can take care of themselves rather than turnipg dependent toward government. Although the long-term solution för I economlc self-reltance depends... PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) $ ! Excuse me, Senator Lauzen. Ladies and Gentlemenr Would y9u please give the Senator your attention, please? Senator Lauzen.

Thank yau. Althaugh the long-term solution for economk 'c self-reliance depends on education, in the short run creating 1a climate of individual opportunity requires cutting the cost of doin: business in Illinois relative to other states and other countries. The more money Iklinois businesses spend on taxes ahd 1 mandated insurances the less cash flow is available for highe' ;r wages, benefits, and productiviéy enhancements. Reducing th: e unnecessary unemployment insurance burden on emplcyers cuts th' e cost of doing business in Illinois and creates the climate tq : achieve the benefits for our people of more jobs paying higher wages. Basically, al1 Illinois employers pay an average of percent on the first nine thousand dollars they pay their employees. This rate goes up to 8.2 percent on the hlgh side, and down to .6 percent on the low, depending on Ehe amount of unemployment compensation benefits paid out on an employer's account. Then, generally, when a -- a worker is laid off through no fault of his own or her own, they receive unemployment compensation. These benefits increase each year by the wage inflation index. In 1991, when the most recent chaages eo thil Unemployment Compensation Act were made, was projected that the trust fund would hold about nine hundred million dollars at *hq end of 1995. This was agreed to by employers and organized labor as a suëficient balance before the legkslation was passedy I However, the trust fund has swollen to sixteen hundred and seventy-five million dollars or seven hundred million  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSTON SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 employment taxes overpaid in the past several years. We propose to gradually reduce this unnecessary surplus by a hundred and thirty million dollars ln 1996. The basic decision to be made by pollcy makers today is: Whlch will help workers in Illinois more? To return a hundred and twenty-eight millicn dollars into tée productive economy or leave these funds in a savings account in Washington, D.C., financin: the federal deficit? By reducing the taxes paid on each employee by about fifteen percent, a hundred! and twenty-eight million dollars will stay in the Illinois economy in 1996. One final note before answering questions: We should differentlate between this action today in 1996, which 1: basically tax relief onlyr and the action needed for 1997 and beyond, which is to renegotiate and reform the Nhole Unemployment Insurance Act, as far as benefits and eligibilitiesr al1 those kinds of things. So I would think that it's helpfulr as We consider this today, to consider what we do in 1996, Which has tg do with the rates, and 1997 and beyond, which has to do with reforming the whole system itself. Thank your Mr. President.

PRESIDING OFPICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Is there discussion? Is there discussioa? Senator dek Valle. I'm sorry. Senator Garcia.

Thank you, Mr. President. Would the sponsor yield for a couple of questions?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Indlcates he wtll yëeld, Genator Garcka. SENATOR GARCtA: Thank yau, Mr. Prestdent. Senator Lauzen, would you explain' khe purpose of the speed bump that you alluded toy that the. current legtslationr in effect, Would trigger, and why it Was put' fn there and how it relates to thks bill, please?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) 10  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GEHERAL ASSEMBLY ' RCGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Leqislative Day February 7, 1996 I Senator Lauzen. 1 SENATOR LAUZEN: ; How the -- how the speed bumps operate is, about four years : ago When there was an agreement between labor and management and I i . I employers, b0th sides put into the bill incentives to come back tp ! I the neqotiatin: table by *he end cf 1996. Speed bump is basically I that if we take no action in the second -- and this is a question i I that you're asking about legislation that's needed that is not I What wefre talking about today. But to answer your questioh specifically, the taxes go up for employers, which drives them to 1 the negotiating table; benefits go down to people receiving thè 1 benefits, again givlng labor and management an incentive to get i ! tcgether tc negotiate what the next phase in 1997 and beyond. But I E I would remind you that what we 're talktnq abaut today is l I something separate, which is about 1996. I : I PRESIDING OFFfCER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) : I Senator Garcia. SENATOR GARCIA: , I Thank you, Mr. President. Since the concept of the speed bump and management or employers and workers and labor getting tcgether I to ensure that there is an agreement, a compact, that is good for j everyone in Illlnols - for business and for working people - if 1 . it's a good idea in general, why was labor, why were wcrkers, why was our side of the aisle, not consulted in crafting this bill? : We just concluded a Democratic Caucus, and everyone on this side of the aisle wants to consider, wants to save moneyr for small i businesses especially, if it is true that this fund is overfundedr. if it is tco generously healthy, we would consider -- we want to' l ; I send money back to save employers, especially Bmall businesses'. ! same money. Why aren 'E we being consulted? We want to do that.1 : I have hundreds and hundreds of small businesses in my districtt 6 that I want to help. Why was I excluded from the possibility of l 11' i  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEXBLY REGULAR SESSIOH SENATE TRANSCRIPT i 73rd Legtslattve Day February 7, 1996 1 discussing anagreementonthat,thatcould bebipartisan? / ;

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzeny before you answer. Ladies and Gentlemen, this J is a critical -- critically inportant issue . Very feW are listenin: to the dtscusslon between the two speakers. I'é i ; I absolutely going to instst that the conferences be kepb to a i ninkmum, and if any discussions are necessary, you keep those i discussions at a low tone, and please give the courtesy to the i sponsor and those answering (sic) the questions. Senator Lauzen. SENATOR LAUZEN : I Thank you. Senator Garcia, I understand the importance cf the j agreed-bill process, and I know that there are some circumstances 1 when the aqreed-blll process is selected by the various leaders in 1 the Governor's Office, the -- both -- both Houses of the i ! Legislature. However, when ycu say that you Nere excluded, I I personally called at least eighty-five percent of our colleagues I on the Democratic side of the House approximately three weeks agor I with an offer to -- and this is personallyr so I -- thts is nat l secondhand. I picked up the phone. I called your office twice, left two messaqes. So -- and I was ready to send over the same J information that I çave my Republican colleagues so that you'd . i I have the benefit of that. I also believe that ln 1970, that was the last time that the agreed-bill proeess was used - when it was j I a Democratic Governor, b0th Majorities in the House and the Senate f i - and it was labor's decision at that time to not select the ' agreed-blll process. As amatteroffact,theAFL-CIOpasseda j resolution in 1992 that Sally Jackson referred to ln -- the -- the. Director of the Illinois Chamber of Commerce referred to in the' ( ) committee meeting yesterday, that it was labor's posl*ion that j they were goin: to opt cut of that -- or recommend to opt out. i j Finally, and it gets to the heart of what you 're asklng aboutr' ! labor has resisted what many consider just commonsense fiscal l I 12 I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7: 1996 nanagement: Why give veto power to one group to stop pragress for eleven million people in the State of Illinois?

PRZSIDING OFPICER: (SENATOR MAJTLAND) Senator Garcta.

Thank you, Mr. President. First of all, Senator Lauzen, With a11 due respect, 'cause I have great respect for you and for your convictlons on principle, I think that I speak and I understand the English languagev even though it is my second language, a little bit better than your average person. I Would have returned your phone calls if had been aware of it. But that's neither here nor there. To the bill -- or one final question and then 1'11 speak to the bill. If thts bill is enacted, will businesses, employers, receive a refund or a check in the matl as a result of it?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

The answer is no .

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Garcia.

To the bkll: Mr. President, Senator Lauzen, and Ladies and Gentlemen, would be willing to revisit the trust fund of the unemployment insurance trust fund if is true that it (s overfunded, and needlessly overfunded, because I represent a district that has thriving commercial strlps al1 throuqh it hardworking peopler and they are people who get up very early in the morning and sometimes the last ones to go to sleep because theyfre workin: overtime. I have entrepreneurs all throughout my . dlstrict that are successful that woutd ltke to save some monies on their unemployment insurance premiums and taxes. However, I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBL? REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 I 1 wouldliketocomeupwithacampromise,anagreement,that could j enable us to do that. And I think that if it is true that there is tco nuch mcneyr we could have done that. But I'm also cognizant, Senator Lauzen, that as a result of this btll: we aren't likely to create hundreds or thousands of ne% jobs in the ' j Illinois economy, because the savings of your average -- ycur average-size business is nct going to be that large. Your average employerin the State of Illinois is approximately slxteen to j seventeen people per business. And it's my understanding that the annual savings, as a result of this bill - average savings - is J likely to be between five and stx hundred dollars, hardly enough to create that many new jobs:unless you're going to create a 2 handful of minimum-wage jobs ahd not likely to result in wage increases for people who need to make better wages to make a living wage. And I think lt's important to polnt that cut. I would like to pass a bill that could result in givinq money back to people if, in fact, this trust fund is overfunded , but I'm also ) concerned about the future in our State's ability to have an adequately funded unemployment insurance fund.And if there is f money to be given back, I Would have liked to have been part of it. Thank you very much. That's why I cannot support this bill.

PRESIDING OFPICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further dlscussion? Senator del Valle. SENATOR dEL VALLE: l Thank you: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairmany just a couple of minutesagoyoulndicatedthat you wanted everyone's attention f because this is an important issue. Ycu used the word ''criticaln: and J would agree with ycu. AndI think that itbears repeating J that there wasn't much time given here by this Body, by the. ccmmittees, fcr deliberaticn on this importanty critical issue. 1. i understand that we are under -- based on the proponent's posttion, ' under time constraints here, and I understand the reasons why. I 1 14  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 3ut the fact is that this is a critical issue. Today's Trëbune gusiness Section has two mentions of two companies, two groups, that are cutting back jobs. Samsonite to cut jobs, consolidate. Then it also mentions that January job cuts reach two-year high. U.S. employers slash ninety-seven thousand jobs in January; thé highest monthly total since January of ,94. It seems that a day doesn't pass that we don't pick up the paper and We read about downsizing, we read about layoffs, we read about job cuts. And yet, here we are today talking about basically raiding the employment insurance trust fund, and we're saying thls and trying -- we're attempting to do this at a time when all polls lndicate that there is a lot of anxiety out there, that there is a lot of uncertatnty out there. Why are sentors feeltng anxtety? Why are young workers anxious? For the same reason: they both wonder what's going to happen with the Social Security trust fund. People are concerned abcut the future. People are concerned about the unfunded liabllity in our pension funds. People are concerned about whether or not they're going to able to rely on the programs that governmeat established foE the purpose of thelr securtty. And here We are talking about doing somethinç that many experts say we shouldnft be doing. The amount recommended by *he Jolnt Employers is almost cne billicn dollars less than what is recommended by the U.S. Department of Labor, in terms of what should be in that trust fund. 3ut here we are talking about reducing the rates, and that reduction is not going to translate lnto job creation. We a1l know Ehat. Whc are we kiddin: here? We know that that's not going to happen. It's going to gc -- the few dollars that the employers are going to save are going to go into their pcckets. They're going to get: under the currene formula, over a hundred and twenty million dollars in reductions even if we do nothtng. Wha are we kidding here? Who are we trying to convince that we're doing something that's good for 15  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT ! 73rdLegislativeDay February7,1996 1 business? And this is not a labor issue - organized labor lssue. Mcst of the individuals -- many of the indivlduals who will be laid off and who will have to apply for unemployment insurance are not union workers. They're gcing to be affected down the road. Now, some of you will say: ''Wellr that -- this legislation doesn't da that; this legislation doesn't reduce benefitsz'' but 1'11 take you back to where We were, not that long agor when we had to borrow from the federal government and We had to come to the table and we had to reduce benefits for employees -- for laid-off employees, and we had to increase the rate in order to get ourselves out of the red. We did that. And now we want to take an action that may point us in that direction again, and, folks, we are looking at a recession down the road . Whether you think sa or notr I think we are. And that's going to affect -- are we going to came back here and reduce the benefit levels for people as a result of not having enough funds in the trust fund? That's probably what we 'll end up dcing. Where's fiscal responsibility? Senator Lauzen, you preach and you talk about fiscal responsibility. I say to you that the fiscally responsible action to take is to leave that trust fund as it is. Leave it as it is so that we are able to pay out the benefits that have to be pald out to the hardworking men and women of this State.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further discussion? Senatcr Palmer.

Thank you, Rr. Presidenk. Question of the sponsor.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Indicates he will yield r Senator Palmer. SEN 1 ATOR PALMER: Senator Lauzenr you and I have talked by phone, sc some of my questions should not surprise you. First of all, I wanted to ask j you, where in this b1ll is the language that says that these : 16  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 dollars will be returned to the Illinois economy rather than to employers and therefore will: as your openlng speech said, create jobs and more income fcr the State of Illinois?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

Senator Palmer, I respect your question. Naturally, as those dollars are saved, rather than sending fifteen, sixteen percent more into Washington, D.C., those dollars stay in the Illinois economy. Initially it is in the form of dollars saved for emplcyers, but then you have to answer the question of what will those employers do with those funds. Even as Senator de1 Valle said, they go into someone's pocket, well they don't go into the pocket and stay there. They either get spent the economy or invested in the local bank, rather than being shipped out to Washlngton: D.C.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Palmer.

You and I disagree cn that, and 1'11 get to that in my closing remarks. Second question: The trigger - is there a trigger in this legislation that will ipmediately respond to a change in the economy that creates a downturn and that will negatively affect employment with the possibility of more people being unemplcyed and, therefore, more calls on the trust fund?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

The answer is yes. And I think that What you're asktnq about is a concern that we sharey that We have safety of the trust fund itself. There are several pieces. Number one: in l99kr 1992, labor agreed with employers that a -- to a formula that Would 17 ' STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 . I result in nine hundred million dollars being ln the trust fund. So that was given, at that time, as a fiqure, and ncw it's at - as I mentioned before - 1.6 billion. Pu* into place was better forecasting . An actuarial department was put in and then the ' trigger mechanlsms serve as another safety net. We've also made an adjustment in what We're proposing today to keep the funds at a i level: according to the best forecasts availabler to keep it at five hundred and twenty-one nillion or above. i PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Palmer. i SENATOR PALMER: Senator Lauzen, are you famlliar with the U.S. Department of ; Labor's recommendation - and I believe this was criginally proposed during the Reagan administration - that the unemployment i I trust fund shculd be equal to 1.5 times the State's greatest ( benefit, the payoutsr in the largest amount of payout - that was ' 1983 for the State of Illinois, during which time the State paid l . 6 blllion dollars out in unemployment? Therefore, logicallyr if i j that is accepted, we are not oversubscribed; we are: in factz under-subscribed. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAHD) Senator Lauzen. SENATOR LAUZEN: ; Two responses to that: Nurber one, constder the incentive that the federal government has to overstate the need in that : trust fund. Xcu knou that theydrl gotng Eo be recelvlng Ehese funds and using them to finance the federal deficit. So there's - - a skeptical person might say they have a built-in incentive to overestimate. That'd be one point. A second point is, according ! I to the Associated Press, on November 26, 1995: marked to quote: Illinois officials have never accepted the higher standard that I you're referring to. They say it fails to recognize that since 1 I 18  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSIOH SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7: 1996 1987: State 1aW has prcvlded for flexlble taxes and benefits during a recesslonr and that reduces the need for large reserves. I

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Palmer.

Mr. President. To the bill: Senator Lauzen, I'm glad you ... used the words ''skeptical personr'' because I think that describes me. I certainly find this seductive - the logic of it. However, i if it were limited to givlng back the lump sum of the two hundred million or Whatever the dlfference between what was agreed to, there might be some interest in this. However, that's not what's i happenlng here, and I think people need to understand this. This gets really into changing a formula that was agreed upon in an earlier year between labor and commerce. And as far as I understand it, there is no agreement to sit down tcgether and to do What the speed bump was supposed to trigger, and that was to i sit dcwn in this year and review again and ccne back to the table and make decisions of common interest. I am skeptical, secondlyr because this is like that old saying, Hlf it walks like a duck, it must be a duck.'' This is a trickle-down, again. It's another part of a pattern that is very disturbing to me, that we've had in ' this Body - the attacks on workers' comp ., the Structural Work Act, and all the rest of this. If you put this as a package together, I think it is a very dangercus way to go, and I do not agree with it. And I think that this is a tlny change, but it is criEical and one Ehat ls golng to have Eremendous effects on i everybody. And I think its danger is that it is so seductive. I say we vote No on it. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) I Further discussion? Senator Syverson.

! Thank you, Mr. President. A couple questions o' the sponsor. 19 I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLX REGDLAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7: 1996 Pirst of a1l...

PRESIDING OFEICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Indicates he will yieldr Senator Syverson.

The -- khe conments that were made about borrowing of -- hoW they had to borrow funds back in the seventles and eighties because there was a deficit there. What Nas the reason that deficit was created in the first place?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

My understanding of what occurred at that time was that the State of Illinois was under the mistaken impression that we could tap into federal funds without having to pay back. When there was the double-bounce in the recession at about that time: the the federal government changed lts mind, said, ''Not only are you going to have to pay back What you have -- what you 're barrowing thls year, but What you did in previous years witb interest.''

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Syverson.

Did not *he Legislature also increase benefits to Workers and ncL increase the tax on employers, thus creating what would be a - - a disaster?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

Yes. That was the last tlme that we departed from the agreed-blll process. Some of those measures were put into 1aw at that point.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Syverson. 20  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMSLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 SENATOR SYVERSON: j i As far as trust funds go, compared to what other states like I ourselves - industrial states or even all the states across the : United States - how does Illinois' trust fund compare to them? PRESIDING OFFICER I : (SENATOR MAITLAND) I senator Lauzen. 1 SENATOR LAUZEN: l I If -- if I'm not mistakenr our fund balance is approximately i I fifth in the ranklng of the industrial states. ; PRESIDING OFFECER I : (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Syverson. 1 I SENATOR SYVERSON: j Okay. I just rise in -- in support of this bill. I think i it's been stated very well that this is putting money back into ' I the economy. It's not going to have any effect on workers. i Beneflts - this year are going to increase over las: year. The i E trust fund at the end of the year is still going to be able to pay out one and a -- one and a half years' wcrth of benefits, which is i i mcre than forty-five other states have the ability to do. And I i I think this is one more step in making Illinois a more competttive I place to do business. Thank you. i PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) I Further discusslon? Senator Collins. i SENATOR COLLINS: 1 Thank you. I'm goin: to be brief because I think most of my questions have been answered. Bu* -- but, Senator, 1 want to I know, given that you -- When you -- When you opened you said that i under the speed back (sic) 1aw agreement that was agreed to four i years ago, that business and labor was to ccme back ta the table : tbe end of this year to actually talk about renegotiation and : looking at lowerLng -- raising taxes and lowertng beneflts, w(ll that process take place this year? Do you have any intentions of 21  STATE OF ILLIVOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 doing that? !

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

i Yes. j

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator collins ! . i

Well, Senatory if you are going to do that, what is the 7 urgency of pushtng this bill forward right now? Wby not -- because we are dealing - - and then it could become -- if we -- if 1 we dld that, why would it be necessary for us to push this bill j ! right now? ' PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) ; I senator Lauzen. I SENATOR LAUZEN: ' I appreciate the question. Agatn, it gces back to the fact that if we don't have the declsion by -- I believe it's Friday on i I February 9th, weîre not going Eo be able to send out the forms ! that people use tc pay it outr and that's for the 1996 unemployment compensation taxes. So that's why it has an i imm ediate reason to get action right now. And the speed bumpsr I and the reason why we have to# you knowy go back to work on that, E the speed bumps take effect on January lst of 1997. So we have that time to sit dcwn and figure out, well, what can we put I together in the respect of, you know, eltgibility, you know, qualifications - what the benefits are, what the tax rates are. i ! I

PRESIDING OEFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Collins. é i

( On a further questiony are you indicating that with the ! passage of this bill there -- there would be a two hundred and 22  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislatlve Day February 7: 1996 seventy-five million dollars' benefit to to business?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

My -- my understanding is that based on where we were going to be under current 1aw versus where we are now, it's approximately a hundred and twenty-eight mlllion spread acrcss all buslnesses, not just large but also small the whole gamut is covered.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Collins.

The reason I I would like for you to actually, you know, say loud enough the record so that people can hear it, because there seemed to be actually a misconception about just hcw much money you dre talking about herey because part of that a hundred and twenty-four million dollars - they would have already experienced it anyway, terms of benefits gained. So it -- it's not actually the two seventy-five; it's more like the two two fifty-oney think, or somethlng like that.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further discussion? Senator Klemm.

Well, thank youy Mr. President. Some years ago when I was involved ln this over as a House Member, management and labor made a promise, really. We had said at the time, when we found out tha: Ehe federal governmenk was golng to charge us interest and we had these millions of dollars behind because of the economy turnaround, we saidr ''Let's do something to prevent this in the future,'' and we did. We agreed - both sides - that we would build up thës trust fund to approximately nine hundred mtllion dollars, and we have done that. ...fact, we not only have built it up to that figure, but we've almost doubled a hundred -- or, one 23  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 I billion six hundred million dollars in a trust fund . Businesses tcok the money out of their operations and paid into the trust k fund . They kept their promise and they dld it. Nobody has gone without the benefits; the economy has turned araund ; we're moving I ahead. We don't need a trust fund just for the sake - of that amcunt - to say we have it. Why not allow those dollars to come i back to businesses, such as miney to help employees, to help i expansion, to help us create more opportunities? And we still have the safety net; We still have the triggers involved that if it i does go lower, it would automatically be increased. We don't have to continue this again, as we did years ago. I think wedve built j the safeguards in 1t. And you know what we did before would i happen; if it did go low , we would increase the amount the businesses had to pay into it regardless, whether we had the i triggers or not, but werve butlt it in. I feel confident that thls is the rtght thing to do, not just for businesses, because . it's going to turn out for their employees and the economy itself. I think this vote is lmportant for a1l of us and our communities 1 I to vote Yes.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further discusston? Senator Bernan. I

Thank you, Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate. ! I've listened very carefully to the debate. Let me state for the record why I am not going to vote Yes. First of all: I think that i small businesses in my community are -- have been mtsked by the . newspaper accounts. They think they're going to get a check, and they're no* going to get a check. That's number one. Number two, this is a reducticn that's spread out over three years. I'm concerned, speaking on behalf of employed persons and persons who ; may beccme unemployed, that if this bill passes, they have lcst a very important bargaining chip, a very important leverage point, : I 24  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 I to bring management to the table. And what I mean by that is this: There was an agreement in 1992. 80th sidesr labor and managementy sat down and worked out a plan that extended for four j years pkus. Things change. We find on one hand that there's more money accumulated than they thought would accumulate in 992. But ! as Senator del Valle pointed out and others have pcinted out, there's an awful lot of scaling back, of layoffs, of unemployment, that may not have been anticipated in '92. I'm not an expert in this and I would daresay that there's very few people cn this i Floor that are experts on this. The best people to negotiate and I reach conclusions is labor and management, at the same table. If we pass this bilk now: we're goin: to be giving management back a lot of money and not giving the employees any leverage to force kabor to sit down and reexamine what's going to happen in '96, '97, $98, .99, at least. If -- if we were sincere about; as i I Senator Lauzen says - and I don't doubt his sincerity, but he doesn't call the shots - if we were sincere about forcing i nanagement to sit down with labor and look at this from a ''you planned this; ycu work this out for the next twor three, four years'' - manaçement and labor - then what we should have done is to probably started a one-year refund, not a three-year refund, a one-year refund so that there would at least be an incentive for I management to sit down ln 1996 and negotiate with labor and for labor to negotlate with management. By the passage of thls billz I those incentives disappear, and all we're goin: to rely upon is . Ehe good falth of boEh sides. I don't think thab's smart legislation. I don't think that's smart public policy. We ought I to keep incentives available for b0th sides to sit down and I negotiate together. Voting Yes takes away that incentive. That's why I am not going to vote Xes.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further discussion? Senator Bomke. 25 '  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996

Oh! Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in support of this ! i bill. It would seem to me, and nct surprisinglyy that only one I side of the aisle was listening to the Governor's State of the State Message when he said unemployment is down; he did not say it was up . In fact, he said there are over three hundred thousand . k more employed today than there were over a year ago. This is a very good bill. This bill sends a message throughcut the country i thatwasstarted lastyearwith tort reform, the repeal of the / Scaffold Act, and ncw the reduction in the uninsurance (sicl trust : fund. A very good bill. I want to commend Senator Larson (sic) for his hard work in the sponsorship cf this bill. It -- it would appear to me that it's a win-win situation: a win for the j ' employer and a win for the emplcyee. The employer through I expansions; the employee through better benefits. Thank you, Mr. i I Speaker. PRESIDINC OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) I Further discussion? Senator Jacobs.

Thank you, Mr. Presidentr Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate. i Would the -- would the sponsor yield for a question or a few questions? I I

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) . ! Indieates he will yield, Senator Jacobs.

And I know we bve weat over this a couple times: but I -- 1 still haven 't got it clear in my mind . What was your reasoning to I reduce the rate rather than to give back the lump sum to the small business people, which I think is -- is what they -- a 1ot cf those small business people are anticipating?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen. 26  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GEHERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 I SENATOR LAUZEN: Thank you, Senator. I -- you knowr I -- I really canft speak ! . fcr what the -- what press reports have done. You know that that's beyond any of our responsibilities or constructive control. j The -- the reason -- it's a very practical reason for havlng -- I yau know , rather than going through the extra administrative work of sending back a refund -- and by the way, I'm sure that the d i employers' groups would prefer whab was suggested earlier, Which I would be send back what there is in that fund over, and it 5 l I wouldn't be two hundred million; it'd be seven hundred mlllion. And I'm sure that clients who -- who I serve - small business i I clients - wculd love to have that check. But from a practical standpoint of getting this job done with the least cost to the i taxpayers, just adjusting the rate down is -- is going tc get that I job done of gradually bringing it down. Alsor I think that it gives us more flexibility. If something bad does occur in the ( I economy, We can recover more quickly. I PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) j I Further discussion? Senatcr Jacobs. SENATOR JACOBS: Yeah. I -- I look at this and -- and it's being sold -- you i know, and a lot of us on this side, you know, really have some -- scme sympathy for the issue, but it's being sold as job creation; ! E it's being sold foc smatl business. Correct me if I'm wronç. The actual savlngs -- if -- if I -- if I am a store owner and I have I I *en employees - *en employees - how many employees I'm -- am I gotng to be able to hire at that six-dollar savings per week? i I PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) I Senator Lauzen. SENATOR LAUZEN : Welk, I think that when -- When you take a look -- and my -- i my figure is not s1x dcllars per week, but 1'11 do -- 1'11 think i i 27  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day Eebruary 7, 1996 through what you dre referring to. But I -- I get your pointr that i it's -- even if it were, cn average, thirty-one dollars and fifty cents per employee across the State of Illinois, each small piecer of course, is not gotng to solve, and I know that you wouldn't be proposing that there 's one magic bullet that's going to create 1 full emplcyment, more jobs. But it is true that in -- in composite of putting al1 those thirty-one dollars fifty cents, it is true that it is better to have a hundred and thirty nillion I dollars in this economy, rather than shipping it off to ' Washingtcn, D.C .: where it's not useful to the Illinois economy - it finances the federal deficit. E I

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Jacobs. SENATöR JAcoBs: j i Wellr I agree. I -- from that standpoint, you don't get an argument out of me. I guess my problem I have still is that if you would have said onetime shoty don 't mess with the rate, don't l i i - - dcn't go halfway on what we did, and that's what we did. Is it true or is it nat true that because We dùd not revistt the other side of the equation, which are the employees' benefits, that next ; i year the employees' benefits, in factr will go down from what they are this year - they will be reduced? PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) I Senator Lauzen. SENATOR LAUZEN: j i That Would only be the case if labor and management don't come back to the table to negotiate the next step. What we're talking abcut - and againr I think it's occurred maybe two or three times; : I been mentioned in the debate - that what we're talking about taday i is 1996 tax relief. And it's true that we have to sit down together. Now, from a1l the reactions that I've -- I've perceived so far from organized labor, I'm not very encouraged with labor's ! 28  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 : I enthusiasm. I've gone to listen to what the ccncerns might be and how We can -- I even met with fifteen local labor leaders in my i district, and twelve out of those fifteen, after about a twenty-, ' thirty-minute discussioa -- where it was a ccld reception tn the I 1 beginning, twentyr thirty minutes later, twelve of those fifteen people were at a consensus that, yes, let's do this in 1996, : I those speed bumps -- if we fail to get together, those speed bumps hit, it'll be the failure of both labor and employers to sit down E together, but that has to do with what's already been created in l i the 1aw for 1997 and beyondr not in this year.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Jacobs. ë i SXNATOR JACOBS: I Well, açain, I have a lot of good friends on the other side of the aisle. I think that my record is pretty clear, that I've -- i I've voted for a lot of business ideas and business votes I have i I given, but you knowy it appears to me that if we Would dlscuss things mcre: if there would be more rapport back and forth - and I : don't know how in the hell We'd do this, but somehow it's got to j I be done. Beeause I think we could,ve come up with a bill that I would have given probably fifty-eight to fifty-nine votes on thls. And that's a problem I think that We're experiencing. And if i we're trying to put people in a box to where one side gces this i way and one side goes that way, that becomes petty politics, and I don't llke Eo play Ehose games. But let me just say in closing k ! that for a 1ot of reasons, I'm going to vote Na on this bill: but I 1 I think the fact that -- that the provision that we're going to give the money back over a period of time and it's going to be reinvested in the ccmmunity -- President Reagan just celebrated his eighty-fifth btrthday, and I think that this is a belated birthday present to the trickle-down theoryr and just for that 29  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 : reason alone, I'd want to vote No.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Curther discussion? Senator Geo-Karis.

Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, I think we'd better lcok at this with common sense. Labor and business are partners whether they like it or not. You cannot produce anything if you don't have labor, and you cannot have labor if you don't have business. Sa they're both involved Whether they like it or not and they fre both partners. We keep forgetting that. So if we get -- we cut dcwn and get -- get some relief for the employers here, what are we doing? We're nct doing anything drastic. None of the benefits are going to be cut or -- or frozen under this proposal. This is a ccmmonsense proposal, because you cannot just kill the goose that lays the golden egg. We want business to remain in Illinois. We want more business to come to Illinois. We want labor to be more satisfied. You're not gcing to be dotng it if you just look at it one-sided. And all I -- been hearing frcm the other side is one-sided arguments. Not once have any of you said, ''We11, you cut off a hundred and twenty-nine millicn dollars; you still have plenty af money in that trust fund; we won't have to borrow from the federal government.'' Not once. A11 you can think about is what sounds good in sound bites for the newspapers. I feel it's fair for both, and I speak from i experience because I'm one of those legislators who worked in a factory for -- for very small amounts. So I'm not antiunion. Union resulted from bad management. But be senslble. Good union i pecple understand the need for compromise. And I think this is a i ! gocd bill and I rise in support of it.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Demuzio, for what purpose do you arise, sir? !

30  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 1996 On a point of perscnal privilege.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) State your point, slr.

I'd like the Senate to recognize that we've been graced today with the chairman of the Cook County Board; that's the hcnarable John Stroger who is here with us today.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Sirr welcome to Springfield. Nice to have you here, Senator Demuzio.

Thank you -- thank you, Mr. -- Mr. President. I Would like to pose a question, I might, to the sponsor the btll, Senator Lauzen.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Indicates he yield, Senator Demuzio.

Senator Lauzen, at what point does the fund automatically kick we are reducing by, let's say: ninetyr two ninety-six, two seventy-six: whatever that number isr and I -- escapes me# over the three-year period, as I recallr assuming that we have a recession, and help us -- God help us that we dondtr at what point would the fund -- what amount would the fund go down to before we would kick in for higher rates?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

I'm sorry I did not -- the last wordr before kicks for What?

PRESIDING OFFICER : (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Demuzio.

STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislatlve Day February 7, 1996 ls there a cap at a level that the fund cannot go below? Is eighty million dcllars?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

Okay. If you 're describing the trigger points -- first of all, in the projections used by the besty and I believe some of the best in the countryr forecasters, at no time, even including a 1998/99 recession, does this fund go below five hundred and twenty-one million dollars. But as far as my understandëng of hcw trigger mechanism works, at the two-hundred-million dollar level, benefits freeze. At the eighty-mtllion-daltar level, the tax there's an automatic jump up in the tax rates that employers pay.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Demuzlo.

Well, let me ask ancther question here. On these fancy machines we bave on our desks here, on page 22, there is a provision in your bill, this House Bill 1470, that -- says that the Director shall make available to an elected federal official the name and addresses of an indivldual or entity that is located within the jurisdiction from which the official was elected and that, for the most recently completed calendar year, has reported to the Department as paying wages to workers, where the lnformation will be used in connection with the federal official's duties -- the offictal's (sic) duties of the official and that the official request the informatton in writing. By what purpose are we commanding the Department to give to a federal elected official any federal elected official that type of information?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) senator tauzen. 32 i STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSBMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 : ' j SENATOR LAUZEN: j Senator, I -- : have to tell you that my persanal feeling on 1 that is that, if it had been my chcice alone, I wouldn't have that on this bill. 5ut I can explain the background of what's -- I what's occurring. That's been -- this -- that provision that you're referring to refers to the Hastert amendment, or has been 1 referredtoastheHastertamendment. We have -- and -- and 1 actuatly I've experiencedsomeofthissamekindofobstaclesin some of my own work fcr canstituents and I'd bet you that youfve 1 I experienced a lot more trouble in your years in -- in doing business with some of the agencies of State and even federal : government. Denny Hastert had legislationthatwascallingto 1 repeal the trip reduction of the Clean Air Act that was going to requtre employers dfa hundred employees ormoretomake certain I 1 investments that were very expensive. The Illinois EPA made -- took a list -- asked for a list fo: -- from the Illinois Department of Employment Security, to notlfy those people that they had to get into immediate compliance. Yetr Denny Hastert knew that because lt was based on faulty information: that it Was going to be repealed. He went to IDES to get the exact same list I so that he could tell the exact same people who had been nottfied that, 'Well, we're coming up cn arepeal;ifyouholdoffon 1 l investing the ncney, ycu may -- you know, you nay not waste that I money'' He -- it was refused. It's been about an eighteen-month . 1 struggle. I have two other examples, twc different agencies, but ! for the sakeoftime,Iwon't--youknow,maybeafterdebatewe j could talk about that. But he 's been Working on it for eighteen months. Naturally, this is an Illinois Department of Employment i I Securëty bilk, so it's placed on here. 1 PRESIDING OEFICER: (SENATOR KAITLAND) I Senator Demuzio. 1 SENATOR DEMuzIo: i i 33 '  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day Febrdarx 1996 What's the penalty if the Director refuses to comply with the 1aw and furnish such a list? What's the sanction?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Lauzen.

That's a gcod question. The penalty on the Director? I think that their Director is required to do it. And -- and what happens if the Director -- that's a that's the first time in the three months of going through that and especially over last three, four weeks that I've been aware of this, that's been asked. So I don't know the answer to that question.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Demuzio.

Well, Senatorr with all due respect, this is your blll; you didn't want this provision in there, you didn't have to accept Maybe we cut off the Director's nose or earlobes or something he -- if he doesn't comply. So my guess is that the only penalty provision in here is if, in fact, a federal elected official apparently uses lt for some other purpose than for which he was requiring Let me just make a -- a statement to -- to you When we talked about, and I've heard from b0th sides of the aisle, with respect to the agreed-bill process: I was cne of those few people that was around here in 1975 when that -- agreed-bill prccess was scrapped, and there were a number of us whc had wished that had not been over the -- over the years that we had been here. Now, since 1992, guess it that we're back into the agreed-bill process again and that we are scheduled in some time this year because of the benefits -- schedule, I guessr concludes in 1998 at a two-hundred-and-thirty-dollar levely that somehcw or other we -- we have to go back in that sunset provision and renegotiate. The problem I think you got in 1992 is that we had an agreement 34  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIFT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 between labor and business in this Stater that they agreed to everything that -- that we have currently been dalng. And what youdre doing now is ycu're chanqing one side of the agreement versus the other side. And I think that's where the problem comes in. There are a 1ot cf us who -- who believe that we ought to keep the agreed-bill process in effecty and I'm a strong suppcrter of that, might add, because of that experience in '75. But it just seems to me that wedre changing the rules cf the game herer and it just seems to me that this is something that we ought not to be doingy because whoever is power is going to be able to -- to dictate what the benefits, what the rates, will be without -- with -- for one side or the other. And it just seems tc me that welre setting up ourselves for more retribution in the future.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further dlscussion? Senator Watson.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Presldent. I've got a lot of friends in my area who -- who are members of organized labor and -- and I've - - they -- they question me. They get the same mailing lists and the same voting reccrds that are sent out on a11 of us, and they always come in and they say, ''Frank, you knowz why are you so antilabor?'' And even go -- I get invitations to go into labor hallsr and I do that a lct. I think that's important. think that's a respcnsibility I have as an elected official. And I :et the same question; 'Frank, we're told that youdre just antilabor.'' And so pose a question. say, ''How many of you are workinq?'' You know, and hands go up, few hands here or there, but there 's a 1ot of them that don't. say: ''We11, why is that? Let's talk about why is that youdre not working today . Would you like to work?'' Everybody 's hand's up . What do we need to do this State to put everybody work? Well, we're not 35  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 trying to be pro-business here in the General Assembly and on this 1 issue; wedre trying to be pro-job and job creation. I remember when I was in Centralia and Dennis Whetstone was there, who is the Director of the Department of Commerce and Community Affairs, who's the -- who's the job-creation arm of State government. Re's out there in the trenches every dayy flying a11 over this ccuntry trying to bring industry to this State, and jobs for the people I i that we represent. And he said: I can't tell you what an impact that this State has seen since the legislation dealing with tort reform and the repeal of the Scaffolding Act has had, as far as l I ! his phone ringing from the business community outside of Illlnois, i I wanting to kncw what's happening in Illinols. We like what we see. We like what we hear. We sent a strong messaçe to the I business community throughout this country and throughout this I I I world- weareinaworldwide,global economy - that we mean J business here in Illinois and we want to see you come here and I 1 bring your factory and bring your jobs, who can ultimately employ I the very people who are opposed to what we're trying to do today. I i That's my speech. I give it to them in the labor halls. Well: a ! 1ot of guys come up after I give that speech and they say: ''Frank, l ! you know, maybe you're not a11 wrong. Maybe We need to be looking i at some changes, and maybe we ought to be sttting down and talking about some meaningful change in workers' compensation costs, in unemployment compensation costs, in the business climate in Illinois, so that I can provide for my family. Maybe we ought to be doing that.'' My answer to that: HCall your labor leaders. Call them. Tell them to sit down and discuss it.'' Do they? Generally, no. I've been very involved in my dlstrictz and I kncw many of you have too, all of us, in economlc develcpment. And I try to help bring work and jobs. And 1'11 sit down with that I individual from Connecticut or New Jersey or California and say: ! ''We 'd like to have you locate your industry in my district or in I : ( 36 I I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 I our State.'' And they say, ''You know, there's a 1ot of good Lhings about Illinois. You :ot a great educational system , great transportation networks; you're centrally located; you 've got good ! recreation for the people that would work herer but one thing you don't have in Illinois isz unfortunatelyr a climate that is competitive with Missouri, Icwa, Wisconsinr Indiana, Kentucky.'' It doesn't matter. Every single time you compare our costs of doing business in Illinois with some -- one of our neighboring states, I we lose. And business - that's a decision they have to make when they relocate or where they expand, is those kinds of costs. And I think that's important, in the name of job creation, that we make Illinois a positive state in which to bring jobs and work. Now, in southern Illincis, al1 of you know What's happening there. i I mean, we're under tremendcus econonic distress. And that, too, l brings me to the point that this is not -- should not be a partisan issue, and I hope it isn't. I've gct a feeling it Won't be. I've gct a feeling that this is going to create some suppcrt on both sides of the aisle, and I hope so, because this should not be a partisan issue at all. Somebody got up and talked about they were concerned about the loss of bargaining chlp. My concern is the loss of the job, and that's what we ought to be concerned ' abcut, and that's why we ought to be voting for thls. And this is a pro-job piece of leglslationy and that's why we ought to be voting Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. !

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further dtscusston? Senator Cullerton. SENATOR CULLERTON: E Thank your Mr. President, Members of the Senate. I would just ! like to address that portion of the bill that does not have anything tc do with unemployment comp . Senator Demuzio had spcken about it earlier. The sponsor of the legislation indicated that there's a pcrtion of this bill that he doesn't like, and if it was i 37  STAQE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 up to hin, Lt wouldn't be in there . The sponsor - if it was up to I the sponsor. Which makes me wonder who's driving this traln. We are passing a crazy bill to have included in it a provislon that j ' allaws for us, the State Legislaturer to tell the federal ; ccngressmen that they can get a list which is now prohibited from I I them obtaining - a list of the businesses in their district. Oh! But they can't use it for political purposes. I bet ycu they coukd use it to or send a letter saying that they voted ëor this bill. I bet you they could do that. And we c'an't get it. The State Senators can't get it. The congressmen can get it. Now, I - - I really like Congressman Hastert. He -- I served with him in the Hause; he's a great guy. And I just can't understand why we ; are putting this in here. Nowr the spcnsor happens to be -- tk I happens to be your congressman, and I bet you, after carrying this ' bklk for him, he's probably gotng to return your call, and you probably can get the list from him . But what about your seatmate? Fitzgerald 's go* to call Crane. He ran agalnst him in the primary. Hawkinson's got to call Lane Evans. Bomke's got to call Durbin. I've got tc call Flanagan. This is not fair. You get to i call ycur congressman; he'11 give you the list and you can send / . out a letter saylng, ''Hey, I sponsored thls bill, this great unemployment compensatkon b(ll.'' But -- you ean get that ltst frcm him , but we can't get it unless we ask our congressmen. That is just crazy. So I would say that this should not be a partisan bill - I agree wlth Senator Watson. But, you knowr the agreed-btll process is not when Pate and Lee agree. The agreed-bill process is not when Pate and Lee and Dave and Greg i ! agree. And the agreed-bill process is not when Pate and Lee and Dave and Greq and Jim agree. There's a certatn advantage to you i to invite in the other side, the people that are affected by this. Invite them in. Have them sit down. If you feel that they 're vetoing progress, as you said befare, in your opinion, then tell 38  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 i them that ''I'm sorry, we can't talk to you anymore because youlre vetoing progress.'' But there's nothing wrong with inviting them in and having them there. Now what this bill does, and it's been, I think, fairly admitted, it does affect a portion of the business communities' portion of the speed bump, which is supposed to kick in. And I know that there's a reason to pass it right now before a certain deadline, but it does affect the equation. And I think that for that reason, it's unfair. And I -- and I would think that if we reject it today, that you can then, as the sponsor of the bill, tell the pcwers that be that you want to take this silly provision out that you don't even agree with, and then we can vote for a clean bill, which is what you had tried to pass in the first place. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR M/ITLAND) ! I Further discussion? Senator Welch. I

Thank you: Mr. President. I wanted to respond to Senator Watson's proclaiming this to be a pro-jobs bill. I find that very ironic, and it's a very brcad categorization, which basically has been used all of last year by that side of the aisle: and now it's being used again thts year. Anytime we have a bill that cuts back benefits for working men and women, well, it's a pro-jobs bill because emplcyers have to pay less. You know, last year we -- we rolled back rights from ccllective bargaining; we had bills cutting back workers' compensation benefits. Those were pro-jobs bills, because they cut the benefits employers had to pay. Now we hear in the naticnal level there's -- there may be a cut in the minimum wage. Another pro-jobs bill that's going to help workers. Well, it's not just a question of how nany people are working in the State of Illinois; it's a question of the quality of life. And if you're only making four dollars and fifty cents an hour, you don 't have a very good quality of life. You know, Senator 39 !  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 Watson said he goes ln his union halls and says, ''Yeah, we could all be employedv'' and that's right - we could all be flipping burgers at McDonald's or one of these other places and being paid four twenty-five an hour, but that's not the questton. We can be like Mississippi, if we want to be. Wefve managed to do that as far as voter registration and as far as fundinq education. I don't think we want to be like Mississippi when it comes to employee rights. So what we've got here is an attempt, once again, to reduce benefits to employees. We could have probably great employment in the State of Illinois. A1l we have to do is reduce everybody to the minimum wage and pass a right-to-work bill, because that is where this movement is headin: - is passing right-to-work legislation. We keep taking away benefits from employees and call it a pra-jobs movement, when it's really not. It's reducing the quality of life of Lhe State of Illinois; it's reducing good-paying jobs that allow individuals to buy homes and buy decent cars, and it's something that wefre goin: to have to stop before it goes too far. And today is another step in the wrong direction. Thank you.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further discussion? Senator Hendon.

Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to express my disappointment that we're going tc be giving power to congresspeople that we won't even have ourselves, and it -- it makes no sense to me. And I talked to Senator Lauzen about that, and T know that if he had his way, it wouldn't be in there elther. But all of us should -- should really think abcut that anytime we pass legislation and we're giving authority and pawer and access to another branch of government that we're not even reserving for ourselves. I would like to be able to mail something to the I businesspeople in my district, explaining my vote. Now, I -- no ! 40  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 ! one is one hundred percent correct on this issue. I wish that we I did have an agreed-bill process. This would be a much more i prcductive Chamber lf Republicans and Democrats sat down and worked on bills together. I wasn't here when perhaps the Democrats didn 't do the Republicans right. So, ycu know, when you get revenge, ycu're getting revenge on scme people who had nothing to do with mistreatment that ycu may have felt in the -- in the past. This particular bill is a -- a very close call for me, and I really wish that we would get back to the agreed-bill process, where people sit down together and work on the things that are important to the people in this State. And I simply do not see that happening, Mr. President. So that's a1l I have to say about this. I hope that we would really get back to doing that so that we can get back to helping people in this State by a -- a nonparttsan level. And al1 of this one side against the other nakes no sense; it's damaging to the people of the State of Illinois: and I slmply don't know why we can't get together.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further discussion? Senator Jones.

Thank you, Mr. President. Will the sponsor yield?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Indicates he will yield, Senator Jones.

Senator Lauzen, you mentioned about the agreement as it relate to managemenk and labor, the two-part agreement. Could you Eell this Body what the two parts were in that agreement, as it relate to unemployment and the trust fund?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) S I enator Lauzen. I S ! ENATOR LAUZEN: j senator, I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to, but ! : 41 I !  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 labor and employers agreed in 1991 and '92 that the employers were ' going to be responsible for increastn: benefits over the next four years and a trust fund formula -- or, trust fund balance formula that would result in about nine hundred million dollars being in that fund at the end of 1995. 80th of those commitments have been kept, plus seven hundred million dollars. And what we're proposing in this legislaticn is that we want to get a -- a hundred and thirty millicn dollars of that swollen surplus back into the economy SO that people have -- so that that economy is -- has more dollars so that people have more jobs paylng higher j I Wages.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Jones. END OF TAPE TAPE 2 : i i I

Well, on that two-part agreement, because it goes back a little further than that: when we had problems with the -- with the trust fund, one part of the agreement was that that formula would be put in place. The other part of the agreement would be that the employees, labor, took a reduction in benefits. That was the other part. So what is happening now in this legislation is that you're dealtng with one part. And -- and I have no problem Lf you say off the top we're goëng to take two hundred or two hundred and seventy-five million dollars and give to businesses. That's not what -- this is what -- not what is happening. Youdre actually changing the formula equally as well. But you are taking 42  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 care of one part ; the other part where the employees took a reducticn in benef1ts, nothin: is happening there. So as a result; way -- way this bill has been presented to the business community and the people of the State of Illinoisr they think that they 're going to get a windfal1 of money . And what 's so shock in: to me, as I listen to the debate frcm the other side of the aisle, it is remarkably different from what the Governor said in his State of the State Address. He said the business climate in Illinois is beautiful. Matter of fact, Motorolar for example, is l i expanding in Oak Brook. I mean: McDonald's is creating seven thousand new low-paying jobs. Motorola is expanding. U.S. Robotics is going to invest seventy million -- dollars for a new facility in Morton Grove and Mt. Prospectr adding three thousand jobs. And a1l downstate in Senator Watson's area, businesses are expanding. So, therefore, the formula is not hurting anyone . The business climate in Illinois is doing well. And when you talk about the two sides coming together to negotiate, if you dc nct bave the power to sit down and negotiate for working conditions, for health care, for -- for insurance, if ycu don't have the power tc do it, buslness ls not going tc give it to ycu. Weire not antibusiness on this side of the aisle; ue are pro-business. But by the same token, everyone should be able to sit dcwn at the table as equaks. And E see a lot of folks tn the gallery here who are down here on some other labcr issue, and I wish you would pay very attentlon to what is happening, because scme of you may reside in some of the districts that people are voting on this issue. And it's issues like this when you strip away the rights of the working personr when you take away thelr health care benefits, when you take away their unemployment benefits, when you chip and chip and chip, eventually you will have it all. You will have a right-to-wcrk state. There will be no such things as unions. This sc-called trlckle-down theory - Reagan trickle-down 43 1 I I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE THANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 theory if we give these businesses ehis money through a cut, they're going to relnvest The sponsor has stated there is not one word in thts bill that says that the bustnesses in this State will expand, will give increased wage benefits. All they 're going to do with this money take this money, put in their pockets, go to Floridaz have a better vacation, but not one dlme - not one dime - will go to help the worktng people the State of Illinois. is a bad bill. a terrible bill. And for the Members on this side of the aisle, 1et me say this one thing to you: Sure this should not be a partisan issue. It shouldn 't be, but when you begin to strip away the working rights people piece by piece by piece, if you don't stand now on this issue of unemployment compensation you don't stand on this issue right here, then you're giving them everything that they want to do harn to the people of the State of Illinois. This is not going to help expansion of businesses. nct going to create any jobs. The sponsor said not the bill; it's not gcing happen. urge a No vote.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further discussion? Senator Butler.

Thank you, Mr. President. won't repeat much of what has been said: simply because think we've covered the subject pretty thoroughly. Senator Cullerton said it was a crazy bill, and he's exactky right. a crazy bill that we shouldn't even be discussing half the lenqth of time we've devoted This is one of those bills where rhetoric reigns supreme. ïou can say outrageous things and and and there is some hope that somebody believe Yesterday, at our Commerce and Industry Committee meeting, I asked one cf the leading labcr people the State of Illinois what he wculd feel comfortable with in a warst-case scenario. And he said he'd like to see a pay-down of 44  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRA/ISCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 about a hundred and fcrty -- cr a mlllion dollars a month over a cne-year period. And by my calculations, that's about, let's just say, 1.4 billion. Now, keep that number in mind l.5 billion dollars. This bill, at the end of this year, with all of the the pay-downs will be l.6 billicn dollars: so we're at least a hundred to a hundred and fifty million dollars over the worst-case scenario . Now, where is -- where are the benefits cut? I can't see This -- our aim to protect the workersr make sure there is money there in the wcrst case. Now we 've got a hundred to a hundred and fifty million dollars more than the than the worst-case scenario. And I would appreciaEe the closing, I'd I'd like Senator Lauzen to address this whole point, whole rhetoric, about benefits being cut. They are not being cut. And, Chris: I'd appreciate it if you'd you'd spend some time, because this false -- this phcny this phony element has been raised over and over again.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Further discussion? Senator Lauzenr to close.

Thank you, Mr. President. Well, it's -- it's hard after a debate like this to know exactly where to start, but let me just first say that the spcnsors have done their best and our best to take b0th labcr's and employer's concerns to heart. No matter -- and I appreciate Senatcr Butler's invitation to address this idea about benefits being cut. No matter how many times people say on this Senate Floor Ehat benefits are belng cut under Ehts bill, say that that's just not true. There are I can't say it any mcre clearly than, under this bill, there are no benefits being cut. More -- even more, over the last four years, under the agreement that's been put together and agreed by both labor and management, benefits have increased twenty-one percent. So I do know that I have respect different points of viewr 45 i ! STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 especially as we come together to serve a1l the people in Illinois, but it's just not an accurake statement to say in any way that -- that benefits are being eut by this bill. Here 's our ! - - here's -- and 1et me handle cne other concern that was ! . ! expressed by several Senators, opponents tc the bill. You know: there's not a person in this Chamber who hasn't experienced what I experienced, and we experience every day, when people request to have amendments put on our bills. Would we rather have a clean i bill? Of course; we would: and that's what I was addressing as -- ! as I answered the question. I acquiesced to the request because f saw the need that different bcdies of government have to work together. It 's a legitimate request. The penalties that have ! I been put in place are severe. To answer the question that was i ë asked about what are the -- what's the penalty for a Directar nct ! complying: Number one' the person can lose their jcb; number two, there's a Statute, 5/33-3, for official misconducty where there's I severe penalty there. But more importantly, if a federal elected 1 official misuses this information, it's a Class B misdemeanor, ! which means a person could go to jail for using a list thatr if you want to use it for some cther use, you can go to Dun & Bradstreet, very inexpensively: to get that job done. I think that that is a -- a nanufactured issue; it's nct a big deal. So I here 's our dectsion today: If you vote Yes, you're saying that i ! ! Illincis workers are better off if we keep a hundred and thirty , million dollars in the Illinois economy . President Cltnton - Bill ! Clinton - has said that you can't have capitalism without capltal. Here is a chance for us to have a hundred and thirty millicn dollars of capital going through the eccnomy in Illinois. When I I went to meet at the union hall with fifteen labor leaders, as I ! said earlier, and I -- I understood the cold reception that I initially received from friends cf mine, but after the twenty, I I thirty minutes that we talked about the issue, twelve out of those ! i 1 i 46  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day FebruarY 1996 fifteen people came to the consensus HLet's have that money here, where we have a shot at having a piece It's very important for our jobsr for our pay, for our benefits, for investment in Illinois, that we have that money working through the eccnomy. If ycu vote No on this bill, you're sayin: that What we ought to do with a hundred and thirty million dollars is that we ought to ship it to Washington, D.C. to sit in a bank account to finance the federal deftcit. think that that's bad that's a bad choice. There was there was one argument used yesterday opponents this bill that I found very strange, think even incredible. They said that -- in the committee hearing - and this is this is incredible to me - they said that workers in Illinois have been shortchanged l.l billion dcllars of benefits that they could have received over the last four years. Well ncw, when you actually thought about what was being said there, people were saying that we should have paid out billion dollars of benefits. But why didn't that happen? The reason that those benefits weren't paid out in unemployment was that people were working. just hope that opponents to this legislation aren't saying to the good people of Illinois that they would rather have pecple on unemployment compensation rather than having a job so that they can take care of their -- their -- their families. There is -- there is no one who I get a chance to talk to my district that makes a decision that way . Finally, I say that let's pass this tax relief today and begln the larger project of unemployment insurance reform tomorrow. If labor management resists passage of the 1997 reforms, it's going to be either of thcse parties' responsibility for a decrease in benefits in what occurs in 1997 and beyond and an increase in taxes that drive jobs out of the State of Illinois.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) The question shall the Senate adopt the Conference 47  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLV REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day Februafy 1996 Committee Report on House Bill 1470. Those in favcr will vote Aye. Those opposed vote Nay. The voting is cpen. Have all voted who wish? Have a1l voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Take the record, Mr. Secretary. On that question, there are 34 Ayes, 16 Nays, 7 Members vcting present. The Senate does adopt the Conference Committee Report on House Bill 1470, and the billy having received the required constitutional majority, is declared passed. Senator Fawell, for what purpose do you arise?

I inadvertently pushed my button No and I'm -- I Wanted to vote Yes on that bill.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Fawell, the printed record will show your intention. Ladies and Gentlemen, on your desk now is Supplemental Calendar 2, House Bills 3rd Readlng I'm... Out of the recordz Mr. Secretary. Ladies and Gentlemen, I could have your attention please. We dre going to have one other possible -- there will be at least one other agenda item that we have to deal with this afternoon. is not quite ready to -- to move. And so, think we're going to mcve into our our second-grade class on computers. And so, the Chair directs may I have your attention please. The Chair directs that the Sergeant-at-Arms and the doorkeepers request those persons the gallery, the Floorz the side hallways and the press areas to retire from the Chamber. And the Senate will stand in recess until the call of the Chair. sorry. Senator Weaver, for what purpose do you arise, sir?

For the purpose of an announcement, Mr. President. There'll be a Rules Committee meeting at the anteroom .

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR MAITLAND) Senator Weaver indicates a Rules Committee at 1:30 in the anterocm. Senate stands recess. 48  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 (SENATE STANDS IN RECESS) (SENATE RECONVENES)

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senate Will please reconvene. Committee Reports.

Senator Weaver, Chair of the Conmittee on Rules, reports the following Legislative Measure has been assigned: Approved for consideration - Senate Amendment 2 to House Bill 809.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) We'l1 be going to the Order of House Bills 3rd Readtng on the second -- or Supplemental Calendar No. 2, House Bill 809. The Calendar has been distributed to everyone. Supplenental Calendar Nc. 2, House Bill 809, 3rd Reading. Mr. Seeretaryr has there been a change of sponsorship on that bill?

Yesr Mr. President. The sponsorship has been changed frcm Senator Rausehenberger to Senator Woodyard.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Let the record show reflect -- so reflect. Senator Wccdyard, do you wish this bill be returned to 2nd Reading for the purposes cf amendment? Senator Woodyard seeks leave of the Body return House Bil1 809 to the Order of 2nd Reading for the purpose of an amendment. Hearing no objecklon, leave is granted. On the Order of 2nd Reading is House Bill 809. Mr. Secretary, are there any Floor amendments approved consideration?

Amendment No. offered by Senator Luechtefeld.

PRESIDING OFPICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Luechtefeld. 49  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Leglslative Day February 7, 1996

Yes, Mr. President. I move to table Amendmen: 1. !

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Luechtefeld moves that Amendment No . l be tabled. A1l ; those in favor, signify by saying Aye. Opposed, Nay. The Ayes f ! have it, and the amendment is tabled. Any Floor -- further Floor ; amendments?

; Amendment No. 2, offered by Senator Luechtefeld .

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Luechtefeld. I

Yes, Mr. President. Amendment No. 2 would -- would -- would fund the Amtrak for the remainder of this fiscal year to -- 2.5 l million dollarsr which would take us through to the next fiscal year, July 1. I move for its adoption.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Any discusston? Senator Demuzio.

r Well, I -- I just rlse in suppcrt of the amendment. And I would ask the Chair if you might ring the bell and alert the i Members that wedre back in Session again and ready to do business. And be happy to -- to rise and support Senator Luecheefeld 's amendment. PZESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) ' Any further discussion? ...Luechtefeld has moved to adop: Amendment No . 2. A1l those in favor will say Aye. Opposed, say 4 No. The Ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted. Any further Floor amendments? I

i No further amendments reportedy Mr. President.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) 50  SQATE OP ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 2996 3rd Reading . Introduction of Bills.

Senate Bill 1517, cffered by Senator Walsh . (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1518, by Senators Shadid and Hawkinson. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1519, by Senator Fitzgerald. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1520, by Senator Fitzgerald. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1521, by Senator Fttzgerald. (Secretary reads title cf bill) Senate Bill 1522: by Senator Philip. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1523, presented by Senator Butler. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1524, Senator Sieben. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1525, by Senator Severns. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1526, Senator Woodyard. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senator Barkhausen presents Senate Bill 1527. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1528, by Senator Sieben. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1529 is presented by Senator Woodyard. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1530, by Senator Karpiel. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1531, Senator Walsh. (Secretary reads title of btll) 51  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIFT 73rd Legislatlve Day February 7, 1996 Senate Bil1 1532, Senator DeAngelis. ! j ! (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1533, Senator Cronin. ! tseeretary reads title of bill) I Senate Bill 1534, by Senatcr Cronin. I tsecretary reads title of bill) I Senate Bill 1535, by Senator Fawell. ! : fsecretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1536, Senator Madigan. I I (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1537, offered by Senator Mahar. I (Secretary reads title of bill) : .. . Bill 1538, offered by Senators DeLeo, Jones and others. i (Secrekary reads title Of bill) i Senate Bill 1539, by Senator Walsh . l (Secretary reads title of bill) Senate Bill 1540 is offered by Senatcrs Sieben and Jacobs. ! (Secretary reads title of btll) ' Senate Bill 1541, presented by Senator Bomke. I (Secretary reads title of bill) ' Senate Bill 1542, presented by Senator Cronin. : (Secretary reads title Of b11l) ! SenateBill1543:bySenatorMaitland. 1 1 (Secretary reads tttle cf bill) 1 Senate Bill 1544, Senator Rauschenberger. (Secretary reads Eitle of bll1) I ' And Senate Bill 1545, by Senator Sieben. ! (Secretary reads title of bi11) ! lst Reading of the btlls. i

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) ( Any further business to come before the Senate? Any further business? If nok, Senator Geo-Karis moves that the Senate stand I 52  STATE 0F ILLTNOJS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 73rd Legislative Day February 7, 1996 adjourned until 9 a.m., Thursday, February 8th. I i i I 1 1 1 ! I 53 !: .. Tl;!' SJPORT:TIFLDAY STZTEOFILLINOIS 96/02/23 PAGE: 001 8jTH GENERZL ASSEHBLY 11:28:35 SENâTE DAILY TRANSCRIPTION OF DEBATE INDEX FEBRUZRY 07, 1996 RECZLLED PâGE 49 OTHER PAGE :9 COMFERENCE PAGE 8 FIRST READING PâGC 2 FIRST REZDING PZGE 2 FIRST PFJDJNG PAGE 2 FIRST READING PAGE 2 FIRST READIPG PAGE 2 FIRST REZDING PAGE 2 FIRST READIMG PAGE 2 FIRST REZDING PAGB 2 FIRST REâDIVG PâGE 2 FIHST READING PAGE 2 FIRST READIMG PâGE 2 FIRST REZDING PAGE 2 FIRST READIMG PZGE FIRST REZDING PZGE FIRST READING PAGE FIRST REZDING PAGE FIRST READIMG PAGE FIRST READING P2G: FIRST READING PZGE FIRST READING PAGE FIRST REZDIMG PAGE FIRST REZDIMG PAGE FIRST REZDING PZGE FIRST READIMG PAGE FIRST REZDIMG PZGE FIRST REâDIVG PâG: FIRST REZDING PAGE FIRST READING PâGE FiRST REZDIMG PAGE FIRST REZDING PZGE FIRST READING PZGE FIRST REZDING PâGE FIRST READING PAGE FIRST REZDING PZGE FIRST RERDIVG PAGE FIRST REZDIMG PZGE FIRST READIVG PAGE FIRST REZDING PZGE FIRST READING PAGE FIRST READING PZGE FIRST REZDING P2GE SB-1502 FIRST READING PZGE SB-q503 FIRST READiNG . PZGE SB-150R FIPST PEADING PZGE SB-1505 FIRST REZDING PAGE SB-1506 FIRST READIMG PAGE SB-1507 FIRST REZDING PZGE SB-1508 FIRST REZDING PAGE s:-1509 FIPST HEADIMG PAGE SB-1510 FIRST READING PAGE SB-1511 FIRST READIVG PZGE SB-1512 FIRST READING PâGU SB-1513 FIRST READIMG PZGE SB-151# FIRST PEZDfVG PAGE SB-1515 FIRST READIMG PAGE SB-1516 FIRST REZDING PZGE SB-1517 FIRST REZDIHG PZGE SB-1518 FIRST REZDING PâGE SB-1519 FIRST REZDIVG PAGE SB-1520 FIRST REZDING PâGE SB-1521 FIRST RERDIVG PAGE  A .x ' EEPORT: TIFLDAY STàTE OF ILLINOIS 96/02/23 PAGE: OO2 89TH GENERZL ZSSEMBLY 11:28:35 SENATE DAILY TRANSCRIPTION OF DEBATE INDEX FEBRUARY 07, 1996 58-1522 FIRST PEADING 58-1523 FIRST READING SB-152k FIRST READING 58-1525 FIRST READING 58-1526 FIRST READING 83-1527 FIHS? READING 58-1528 FIRST READING 58-1529 FIBST REâDING 88-1530 FIRST READIMG SB-1531 FIRST REZDING 88-1532 FIHST PEADING 58-1533 FIRST READIMG SB-153k FIRST READING :8-1535 FIRST RE2DfMG 58-1536 FIRST READING 33-1537 FIRST READING 58-1538 FIRST READING 58-1539 FIRST REZDiNG SB-15y0 FIRST READING SB-1541 FIRST RE2DI:6 SB-1542 FIRST PEZDING SB-15y3 FIRST REZDING SB-15RR FIRST READING SB-15R5 FIRST REâDING SJR-0076 RESOLUTION OFFERED SUBJECT HATTER SENATE TO ORDER-PRESIDENT PRILIP PZGE > PRZYER-FZSTOR RICK RENPEBORC PAGE = PLEDGE 0F ALLEGIANCE PAGE = JOURNàL-POSTPONED PZGE = COHHITTEE REPORTS PAGE m HESSAGES FROH THE HOUSE PAGE a SEMATE STZNDS IN RECESS PAGE = SENZTE RECONVENES PAGE r COHHITTEE REPORTS PRGE & SEMRTE STANDS IN RECESS P2GE => SENATE RECONVENES PAGE =a COHMITTE6 REPORTS PZGE =c ZDJOPRNHENT PACE &x