Illinois Senate Floor Debate — April 23, 1996

The regular Session of the 89th General Assenbly will please come to order. Will the Members please be at their desksz and will our guests in the gallery please rise? 0ur prayer today will be given by Reverend Gerry -- Gerry Comstock, United (sic) (Unity) i Church, Springfield, Illinois. Reverend Comstock. ' i

(Prayer by the Reverend Gerry Constock) ! PRESIDENT PHILIP: I Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. Senator Sieben. SENATOR SIEBEN: r 1 (Pledge of Allegiance, 1ed by Senator Sieben)

Reading of the Journal. l

Senate Journal of Tuesday, April 16th, 1996. PRESIDENT PHILIP: E I Senator Butler.

1 Mr. Presidentr I move that the Journal just read by the Secretary be approved, unless some Senator has some addltions or correctlons to offer.

Senator Butler moves to approve the Journal just read. There bekng no objections, so ordered. Senator Butler. j

Mr. President, I move that reading and approval of the Journals of Wednesday, April 17th: Thursdayz April 18th; Friday, ( i April 19th7 and Mondayr April 22nd, in the year 1996, be postponed, pending arrival of the printed Journals. PRESIDENT PHILIP: i I Senator Butler moves to postpone the reading and the approval I 1  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 of the Journal, pending the arrival of the printed transcript. There being no objectlon, so ordered. Resolutions.

Senate Resolution 193, offered by Senakor Demuzio. It's a death resolution, Mr. President.

Consent Calendar.

Senate Resolution 194, offered by Senator Hendon. And Senate Joint Resolution 92, offered by Senator Lauzen. They're both substantive.

May I have your attention, please? We have a special guest here today, so I'd like to turn the Podiun over to Senator Luechtefeld for the purpose of an introduction. Senator Luechtefeld.

Mr. President and Members of the Senate, I have With me today a young man from Duouoin High School. He Was chosen as the YMCA Youth in Government Governor of the State of Illinois. I've known this man now for a couple of months: and he's an impressive young man. Like to lntroduce him to the Senate todayy and have him say a few words. Name's Ike Minton.

(Remarks by Mr. Ike Minton)

... Bi11s 1st Reading .

House Bll1 l7, offered by Senator Syverson. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 1476, offered by Senators Weaver and Rauschenberger. 2  STATE OF TLLINOJS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 2412 is offered by Senator Parker. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 2421, Senator Peterson. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 2632, presented by Senators Rauschenberger and Karpiel. (Secretary reads kitle of bill) House B111 2737, offered by Senator Watson. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 2751, by Senator Weaver. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 2859 is presented by Senator Watson. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senator Fitzgerald offers House Bill 2900. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 3204, by Senator O'Malley. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 3283, Senators Trotter and 5m1th. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 3380, offered by Senators Philip and Rauschenberger. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 3414: presented by Senator Parker. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senator Petka offers House Bill 3448. (Secretary reads tltle of bill) House Bill 3694, by Senators Rauschenberger and Donahue. (Secretary reads tltle of bill) House Bill 3695, by Senators Rauschenberger and Donahue. (Secretary reads tltle of bill) House Bill 3696, by Senators Rauschenberger and Donahue. 3  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT I 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 (Secretary reads tltle of bill) And House Bill 3698 p by Senators Rauschenberger and Donahue . (Secretary reads title of bill) 1st Reading of the bills.

Senator Demuzio, for what purpose do you rise? SENATOR DEMUZ10 : On a point of personal privilege.

State your point. SENATOR DEMUZ10 : Well, it's my understanding that yesterday one of our Members on this side of the aisle had a -- had a birthdayr and apparently it was her kwenty-ninth. She indëcated that -- to me yesterdayz she Was going to be staying home a1l day, but I think she went to the office and then perhaps played golf. I noticed last night I called her to wish her happy birthday, and she was screenin: the phone calls. She wouldn 't take the call until she knew it Was me. So today is Evelyn Bowlesf twenty-ninth birthday. I'd like to have the Members to recognize that. And, also, there is a cake that's on the Democrat side of the aisle in the front that I'm sure everyone would be welcome to -- to have a piece , and let 's welcome Evelyn -- Evelyn Bowles for her successful twenty-ninth birthday .

Congratulations, SenaEor. And have another wonderful ewenty-nlne years. Sena*or Maitland , for whak purpose do you rise?

Well, thank -- thank you -- thank you very much, Mr. President and Members of the -- of the Chamber. By tbe same token, one of our very distinguished Senators is having a birthday. She happened 4 * ' i STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 1 i to have had hers yesterday . Senator Laura Kent Donahue had 1 . her...tinaudiblelww.btrthdayyesterday, and I understand tbere 1 will be cake available fot -- in recosnition of her birthday as : well, Mr. President. So, Would everybody ptease Wish Senator Donahue happy birthday? PRESIDENT PHILIP: ; Happy birthday, Senator Donahue. Another great twenty-ntne ; nore years. Senator Watson, for what purpose do you rise? SENATOR WATSON: ( Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. A point of personal privilege. PRESIDENT PHILIP: ; State your point. i SENATOR WATSON: ! In the gallery behind us, I have a group of ladies from 1 Fayette County that represent the Hazel Watson Republican I Organization in Fayette County, and Betty Schaab is -- and their group are with us today. And I'd like for them to stand and be recognized, and welcome them to Sprlngfield. PRESIDENT PHILIP: Would the ladies please be -- rise and be recognized by the I Senate? Senator Geo-:arls, for what purpose do you rise? SENATOR GEO-KARIS: k Mr. Presiden: and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, on a POlntofpersonalprivilege. j ( PRESIDENT PHILIP: state your point. SENATOR GEO-KARIS: ! I I want to thank Governor Edgar for declaring Lake County, j I yesterday afternoon, as a disaster area, because We were hit by j the tornados, and finally, the National Science Foundation, or i whatever it is, declared that it was a tornado. First they said ! i 5 I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLX REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23r 1996 it Was a WLndstorlll, and it Nasn't a Windstorm. They 'd have to believe in the *00th fairy# if they thought it Was a Windstorm. I had two trees completely uprooted - they Were about eight feet in diameter - in the backyard. Landed on my house. I saw other devastation, and I want to thank Governor Edgar for declaring Lake County as a disaster area, and thank Representative Churchill for his cooperation. And, also, I'd like to thank Treasurer Judy Topinka whc came to Zion area yesterday and surveyed the devastation herself, and who's making twenty-five million dollars available to the whole State for the disaster areas. And I'd also like to thank John Mitchell and Mr. Coble from our State Emergency Disaster Area (sic), who were very prompt in sending people down to survey the damage. In addition, I Would like to alert the insurance companies, who have adjusters, that their adjusters, most of them, would not go into Zion or other areas till Monday. The devastation took place Friday night. We had no telephones. We had no pdwer. And I Would like to alert those insurance companies to get their adjusters to act expeditiously, because When you don't have power or telephones and can't .get in touch with anyone, it's a very harrowing experience. But:, again, T thank khe Governor for all his efforts in our behalf. PRESIDENT PHILIP : Senator Donahue, the birthday girl. Senator Donahue. SENATOR DONAHUE : Thank you: Mr. President. I Would like to request a Republican Caucus immediately in Senator Pate Philip 's Office . Immediately . PRESIDENT PHILIP : That request is always i.n order. Senator Jacobs, for what purpose do you rise? SENATOR JACOBS : Thank ycu, Mr. President. Purpose of an announcement. There 6 E-. - .. - - - - .  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 will be a Democrakic Caucus immediately in Senator Jones' Office.

Thank you. I'm assuning we will be back here no later than 11:30. Senate will stand at ease, for the purpose of tWo caucuses . (SENATE STANDS AT EASE) (SENATE RECONVENES)

The Senate will please come to order. We're going to do a little paperwork up herez but we -- intention is, in the next ten or fifteen minutes, to go to Constitutional Amendments. So, hope everybody that hears my voice would come out of their offlce and cone upstalrs to the Floor of the Senate. Resolutions.

Senate Resolution 195, offered by Senator Parker and all Members. And Senate Resolution 196, offered by Senator Rarpiel and a1l Menbers. They're both death resolutions, Mr. President.

Consent Calendar. ... Bi1ls 1st Reading.

House Bill 2592, offered by Senator Dudycz. (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 3157, offered by Senator Weaver. (Secretary reads title of bill) Senator Butler offers House Bill 3193. 7  STATE OP ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 (Secretary reads title of bill) House Bill 3658, Senator Sieben. (Secretary reads title of bill) And Senator Dudycz offers House Bill 3668. (Secretary reads title of bill) 1st Reading of the bills.

Page 8 of today's Calender on the Order of Constitutional Amendments 3rd Reading. Senator Watson, do you wish to call Joint Resolution -- SJR 3? Mr. Secretary, read the resolution.

Senate Joint Resolution No. 3, Constitutional Amendment, as amended by Senate Amendment No. (Secretary reads SJRCA No. 3, as amended) 3rd Reading of the resolution.

WAND Channel 17 has asked permission to filn. Is leave granted? Leave is granted. Senator Watson.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. And just to point out to the Membership, that this is SJRCA 3. Now, know that there may be some confusion on this because nost of the nail and resolutions and phone calls you 've been getting from those individuals at the local level and in your educational school system have identifled this as SJRCA 76. Well, because of a -- a parliamentary problem, we had to amend the contents of 76 onto this particular constitutional amendment. 6o, thls is -- what we're debating on SJRCA is aetually What Was in So, just so We nake that straight. This is the nandate legislation. This is the constitutional amendment dealin: with unfunded nandates. Just to give you a little history on this and how wedve 9ot to this particular point: When I first got elected into the Illinois 8  STATE OP ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLV REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 House in 1978, this issue was before us, as it had been for years 1 . I before that. And I recall in 1981, my second term in the Illinois I House, House Representative HBuss' Yourell Was the sponsor of Ehe unfunded constitukional amendment Statutes on -- on mandates, and - - althoughitWasnotaconstitutionalanendment - I beg your 1 pardon - it was a Statute. And we thought at that time, and T I think many people at the unit of local government level felt that I I I this Was going to solve the problem. Well, as We've known now for 1 I several years, thak this has not solved the problem. ItIs only I I I been since 1982 when I came over berer Prescott Bloom then -- the I I -- the late Prescott Bkoom from Peoria sponsored the I 1 I constitutional amendnent similar to wha: we have here today. At a I I later point in time, I became the sponsor. And each year and each l I I Session we've debated this, and we 've gotten close over the years I I in hopefully, khat T think is solving sone of the problens - I #' I financial problems - at the local level of units of government and I I I in our sehools, and that's the underfunded mandates that ue I I dictate onto then . The Illinois Municipal League, to their credit, 1 I I this past July asked our Leaders - Senator Philip, Senator Jones - I I and the two House Leaders to appoint Members to a committee - a I I I task force. And from this particular Chamberz those that were I 1 appointed were myself, Senator Klemm, Senator Fitzgerald: Senator I j I Severns, Senator Trotter and Senator Jacobs, and then from the I 1 House, Representative Churchill, Bkack, Murphy and Representatives l I I ' Granberg, Brunsvold and Novak. And we Were al1 appointed to meet 1 j with other members from various unlts of local government to sit I I down and try to come up with language - a constitutional language I I I - that would meet many of the political objections that we've had I I in the past and still accomplish what we wanted to do, and that, ' I of course, is limit unfunded mandates. We held some eight I I different meetings from July to just this last several Weeks, I ' discusslng this issue, and we've come up with the language that i 9  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day Aprll 23, 1996 you have here before you. As you may recall, in 1992 the General Assembly put a questlon - advisory question - before the elec*orate in regard to their attitude - that being, the voters of Illinois' attitude about unfunded nandates: and that Was in 1992. And the elecborate responded With an overwhelming support of the -- the -- the concept that was present on the ballot at that time. Over eighty percent of the people voted that we should limit mandates of some sort. So, we come today to you in hopes of securing your support for this later -- this latest effort. What we have here today ls a constitutional amendment that contains language that will also include local units of government and school districts. As you kncw, in our current Constitution, it separates education and school districts frcm units of local government. So we have identified that both units of local government and school districts will be affected. This mandate question -- what is this -- what is this issue of mandates and what will this do? Basically, a11 this does is say that we are going to raise the threshold by Which we Will pass a mandate onto a unit of local qovernment and to our schools. We will raise that threshold from a simple majority to three-fifths. The language in here is three-fifths vo*e. That's basically a1l this does. However, there are some exceptionsz and those exceptions include if, in fact, that mandate is funded. And we a11 feel that we 're going to dictate policy nost of us do - that if we're going to dictate policy back to a unit of local government, that we should fund it or it shouldn't be required. Wetve a1l made statements to that effect, in some way or another. So, khis says that we will require funding. funding's not there, then three-fifths vote is required. If there is a federal or State court order or a federal nandate onto tbe State of Illlnois which ultimately must be passed on to that unit of local government or to that school distrkct, that would be exempt. And what happens 10  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSTON SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 When it's exempt? It neans that it just takes a simple majority; ' not the three-fifths. If we want to expand or define a particular erime. Due process was something that many Members of this Chamber had problens with during Ehis last debate: a couple of i years ago. We've exempted that from this. What does that do? That means that it only takes a simple majority, and we can pass i that mandate onto a unit of local government dealin: with due i prccess, not the three-fifths. And this does not have any inpact 1 or limits the ability of the local unit of government or school district to raise revenue. Now, there's been concerns over the ( past about hou thts -- this proposal Would impact the ability of school districts or counties, and eownships, and municipalities eo l f raise revenues. We can impose tax caps. We can -- the homestead exemption issue, the circuit breaker are all issues that are not I impacted by this particular Constitutional Anendment. And one I thing that nany people and our friends in labor brought to us last ! : I Week, and We've heard from others, as to how does this affect i legislation that's gone before this? In other words, how does it I affect that? This does not have any impact. It only has impact i l on those pieces of lesislation that are passed after November 5thr I 1996 Mr. President, I think that this is a reasonable sotution i . : and proposal to solving a problem that has created fiseal necessities at the local level to raise property taxes, to raise I revenues in some manner, and I think that this deserves the consideration of the -- the Illlnols Senate. And I appreciate i your -- the opportunity to answer any questions. é

Further discussion? Senator Jacobs, for what purpose do you rise?

Thank you, Mr. Prestdent, Ladies and Gentlenen of the Senate. Question of the sponsor, please. 11  STATE OF TLLTNOTS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLX REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day Aprtl 23z 1996 i

Indicates he will. SENATOR JACOBS: . ; Senator, just so we make it clear, because I think that too often we get into dialogue that sometimes is not understandable. 2 . 1 Le* me just ask a couple questions straightforward. If a mandate is to be passed without the State paykng for it, we must pass kt J with thirty-six votes; however, we can still pass a mandate With thirty votes, as lon: as We pay for it. Is Ehat correct? !

Senator Watson. i i SENATORWATSON: J Yes# that is correct.

Senator Jacobs. I .

i The -- one of the questlonsr and you alluded to it a llttle I bit earlier in your openlng remarks, cones in the area of some of i thequestionssuchasprevailingvageand--andehose areas, to where there is a feeling from many of our labor friends that to do f I that, ue Will effectlvely be destroying the prevailing Wage. What i ? is your optnion on that? i

Senator Watson. I

My oplnlon, Senator, ls Ehis does no* impac: prevallins wage. ' I That was passed before the Novenber 6th , 1996 prospective language ' of this Constitutional Amendment. i PRESIDENT PHILIP: i i Senator Jacobs. SENATOR JACOBS: 1 : Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate. I 12 I )  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Leglslative Day April 23, 1996 To the btll: Is this a perfect amendment? No, it's not, and I think, Senator Watson, you and I both sitting on that committee knov that there are still -- excuse me -- still some areas of concern, one of those areas being the dlfference between the funding methodology with local governments. And if we do pass a mandate that is funded by the State, whenever we do it for local governnent, they have set dollars, and the dollars then that we we would pass by a funded mandate would be a separate line item with a separate appropriations bill. That's easy. The hard part cones khenever we talk about education. When we come to education, we run into the problem of what I call ''the lottery syndrome,'' to where we will put in money at the top for an unfunded -- for a funded mandate puk khe ncney in at ehe top - and take it out of the Educatfon Fund at the bottom . That's a very genuine concern. It's one that I hope that we Will address Nhenever we if this bill does pass and is approved by the people of the State of Illinois. But this bill did, as you indicated, Senator, receive over eighty percent of the voters? approval in a nonbinding referendum a couple of years ago. It is for that reason that I ask for a Xes vote on a bill that think is a vote for the people. Thank you.

Senator Collins. Senator Collins.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. T have a few questlon of the sponsor, also. Senatory Want you to Walk us through this again. Let's assume that -- let's hypothetically say that in order for us to revise the school aid formula, eo make ie equitable and fair, Which I think everybody in this Statey every school districtr over the years, have recognized that there is a serious need to do that and there are a lot of inequitles when it cones to adequacy in -- of fundins schools and equity throughout the State, and let's just 13  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 assune that lt will cost us five hundred million dollars to do it, or two hundred nillion. And the bill passed by thirty votes in the Senate and House - Ehirty votes. And let's assume now, because I'm -- I'm sure that if youpre going to pass 3, you are going to pass Senate Joint Resolution l8. l8. I Want you to have - - it is so important to think of these tWo together: because on 18 now, you said that in order to increase revenue - sales taxes or income taxes - it follows the same course: You must have three-fifths votes. So now, let's assume that you got thirty votes to revise the formula and you only got thirty votes Eo raise the income taxes to pay for the needed money to revise the formula to meet the test of equity -- equity and adequacy. How, then, will we move to refund educatian in the State of Illinois?

Senator Watson. I guess that's a question.

Wellz Senator, this has absolutely nothing to do with the nechanism by which we fund schools. This is -- funding schools ld not be interpreted as a mandate under this particular i wou i ! Constitutlonal Amendnent. As a resultp the methods by Which we do ! ! that would simply be up to the najority of the Membership of the @ i House and the Senate and, hopefully, the slgnature of the Governor. This would not impact that.

Senator Collins.

Senator, how can you say that this has nothing to do with hoW we fund school districts? This is a mandate. School districts are included in this mandate bill. Right? It applies to local school districts so that anything We do in relationship to schools, and -- be it funding or otherwise, it Would still have to have -- go throuqh this same process. And, see, that's something 14  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislatlve Day April 23: 1996 that hasnft been thought out here, and that's why T tried to propose the amendments that will eliminate school dlstricts from this billw because of the eomplications in -- that's involved in this whole process of us trying to cone up With the right kind of formula and the funding mechanism to fund educatlon in the State of Illinois. The other thing that -- that the proponents talk about that the -- the necessity of doing this is a refer#ndum that Was passed in 1992. And, yes, and it should have. But that referendun was about mandates on local units of government, not school districts. It was not a problem . Itls something that we ought to eliminate. should be separate from this particular -- from school districts, because there is a tremendous problem. And then complicating this problemy you 've got the resolution on 18. And for you to stand there and say that it has no impact: youdre not thinking; youdre not looking at what you're doing here. There is no Way that we can revise the school aid formulas without additional revenue, and then there 's no way for us to do that without raising or coming up with some other revenue enhancers. And you would have to have thirty-six votes to do it. It makes no sense. While I am not opposed -- I am opposed to us inflicting mandates on local units of government and school districts, the practical reality is, you cannot deal with the school districts at this time. You have to deal with the local units of government: and that's how we should deal with it. For that reason, I'm goin; to vote Present.

Senator Luechtefeld, for what purpose do you rise?

For a point of personal privilege.

State your point.

STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 1996 have in the balcony over here on the other side of the aisle the Freeburg Junior High -- St. Joseph's Grade School: 6th, 7th and 8th grade, over here on the left.

Would they please rise and be recoqnized by the Senate? Senator Bernan.

Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, rise in opposltion to this proposed constitutional amendment. Deja vu, Senator Watson. I think we had this similar debate a couple of years ago when you had a -- a simllar amendment. Ladies and Gentlemen, let me tell you why I oppose this. I'm -- I'm eleceed every election ehat I run by a majority of the two hundred thousand people that I represent. They send ne down here with the general idea that I reflect their desires and that when there ls a majority of Senators of the Denocratic Party or a majority of Senators of the Republican Party, the majority is going to prevail in the decision-making process. This bill gtves control to policy maklng to the Minority, because when We decide that something ought to be done at a local level or at the school board level, it's not going to be decided by thirty votes; it's going to be decided by six votes that may or may not be in the Majcrity Party. That is a unique departure from the process that we follow in this Body. And I would suqgest to you that the need for that unique departure isn't justlfied by most of the bills that Would fall under this kind of an amendment. And what we are, in fact, doing is handcuffing ourselves to a process where many, many bills - was going to say majority, but I won't say that - many, many bills are going to have to have either a three-fifths vote to pass or an accompanying appropriation to pay for Now, I know that many of us have been lobbied by our local public officlals and the Municipal League that have urged that this be adopted, but I think 16  STATE 0F ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 that if you stop and think - and I think many of you have done this - if you ask that local public official, HTe1l me the mandate that really gets you outraged, that is a -- the heart of why you think thls has to be adopted,'' most of the time you won't get an answer. It's like apple pie and motherhood. Unfunded mandates are terrible, until it's important to your voters or to your constituents, and then it's then itfs not an unfunded mandate; it's the will of the people. But you dre not golng to be able to differentlate those if we adopt this amendment. I would also point out that this is probably it should be - the Bar Association's number one priority, because this will create more litigation than we've ever seen involving any kind of legislative action because everything is going to be contested regarding its positlon as a mandate and whether it's unfunded or not. would also point out to you that if we're goin: to be honest in thls approach, what we ought to do is tomorrow , if this bill passes, introduce a b1ll to eliminate local municipalities' share of the ' State sales tax: because that is a State fund that We give to local communities without strings attached. We ought to take that noney back and use it to fund the things that We Want the local municlpality to do. I would also point out that regarding school districts, there has been an effort, for example, in the Ikenberry commission to reduce the number of categorical funding mechanisms. This bill is going Eo increase the number of categorlcal funding mechanisms, because every tine We decide that a local school dlstrlc: has Eo do somethlng, wefre golng to have to create a special categorieal fund to do it. So we 're going to have to substantially reduce or, perhaps, even eliminate general State a1d and make them categoricals, to fund a1l of the mandates that you and I and our voters think ought to be passed regarding State policy as it affects local districts. Putting a1l of these things together, this is a wonderful one-liner, but it ain': going to 17  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23y 1996 work. I urge a No vote.

Senator Rauschenberger.

Question of the sponsor.

Sponsor indicates he#ll yleld. Senator Rauschenberger.

Senator Watson, are nonelective local governments covered under this mandate for example: sanitary districts, airport authorities, those level of local government that arenft elected by the people and , therefore: are not closer to the people than We are?

Senator Watson .

The response to that, Senator, would be if they are defined as a unit of local government, yes, in factr they will be. PRESIDENT PHILIPJ Senator Rauschenberger.

Soz this -- this amendment covers nore than just those local governments that, arguably, are elected closer to the to the electorate than we are?

Senator Watson.

Yes, that would be the case, I would assume, if they are, in fact, appointed. Sone are, actually, even elected. If they are a unit of local government defined, yes, they Would be inpacted.

Senator Rauschenberger. 18  STATE OF ILLINOIS' 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGOLAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996

Senator Watson, I know the -- in serving on Education -- on I the Education Committee and -- and your work -- fine Work as Chairman for many -- for two years before that, I know that you realize that one of the most controversial and difficult bills that We passed in the Legislature in a long time Was Chicago school reform. Can you honestly tell this Body whether -- if we had passed this amendment before Chicago school reform, would : ! Chicago school reform be a reality today?

Senator Watscn.

Well, I would assume that it would have taken thirty-six votes to pass that. That would have been probably determined to be a -- : i a Mandates Act Would -- would apply. So it would probably take I ! the thirty-six votes. 1

Senator Rauschenberger.

Senator Watson, based on your recollection of *he Body's ! support of the Chicago school reform, you -- you'd have to agree 1 1 that there wouldn't be no -- we would not have passed Chicago j I school reform if we would have had this Constitutional Amendment passed before.

Senator Watson.

I think lf we voted on it today, it'd get fifty-nine votes, ! but, unfortunately, at the time of the debate, I'm not sure what i th 11 call totally was, but it Was not thirty-six. It's i e ro i totally speculative. We have no idea, looking in hindslght, as to ) how that would have been impacted. 19 i  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GEHERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 '

Senator Rauschenberger.

Senator Watson, in your reading of the amendment, would you agree that for the Chair to make a ruling on whether a bill would requlre thirty-six votes, the bill Would have to be preceded by an appropriation bill?

Senator Watson.

If, in fact, that's an exemptlon, that would be used for the - - three-fifths determinationr the answer to that would be yes.

Senator Rauschenberger. '

So then, in effect, since Member appropriation bllls are certainly not the practice and would be -- as Chairman of Appropriation, I can tell you Would be a fiscal nightmare for us to try to track a11 durin: Session bill action on -- on companion approprlations, you would agree that what Wedre really doing in 1 1 this -- this Constitutional Amendment is elevating a1l local I ! governments, elective and nonelective, to the same speclal status that we've conferred on home-rule communlties under the Constitution?

Senator Watson.

Only in the area of mandates would that take effect.

Senator Rauschenberger. SENATOR RAUSCHENBERGER: ! ; Thank you for the clarifications. Appreciate it. 1 ! ! 20 i I STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 PRESIDENT PHILIP: Senator Jones. Senator Jones. SENATOR JONES: Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. Will the sponsor yield? PRESIDENT PHILIP: He indicates that he will. Senator Jones. SENATOR JONES: Senator Watson: khen you deal with local units of governmentw especially the snall nunicipalities, villages throughout the State of Illinois, and as it relate to police and fire, say, a pension benefits a pension benefit that in the past ke have not passed on anything unless they aqreed to it. So: hoW would it impact if the Municipal League came in and said ''We agree to this pension benefit''? Would each and every municipality who is impacted by such have to slgn off on a waiver? How would that work on a mandate? 'Cause it uould be a mandate. PRESIDENT PHILIP: Senator Watson. SENATOR WATSON: No, I -- it would not require any kind of -- anything remotely close to what you've just suggested. It Nould just simply require a three-fifths vote. We have an agreed-bill process, as you 've mentioned, with municipalities on pensions. If I would assume that if they did support it, then it -- then it would pass, probably, with fifty-nine votes. If, let's say, a certain municipality that maybe has a little more influence in the process decided to oppose it, T would probably think that many of the Members who represented that munlcipality would vote No. As long as it receives the three-fifths vote, it passes. If it doesn't, then -- and we don 't -- and we don 't include the fundingz then it does not pass. PRESIDENT PHILIP: 21  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23# 1996 I 1 Senator Jones.

Soz therefore, What you are saying, in essence, is it would have to be either three-fifths vote -- if it passed by a mere -- a mere thirty votes, even though ninety percent of the municipalities are for it, but those other ten percent could -- could demand payment -- that the State pay for it using the mandate. Am I correct?

Senator Watson.

! Not at all. Itfs -- it's up to the Membership. Those ten i I 1 they influence their particular Members to vote No, then, yes, I I indeed, they may -- they may have an impact. But it's -- they dcn't -- they're not the ones who come to us. It's the Membership who votes on that.

Senator Jones.

Another question, as it relate to schools. If -- if this Body, in is infinite wisdom - I wlsh they had done it -- done it quite some time ago - but if we decided, for the safety of school children, that there should be seat belts on all school buses, if it's not passed by a three-flfths voter thenr therefore, that tbe State would have Eo pay for l*. Am I correct?

Senator Watsan.

If that's determined to be a mandatez yes. In fact, in -- and in my understanding of what Ilve got here before ne in this Constitutional Amendment, I would say: yes, that is a mandate; 22 ' ;  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 then yes, indeed, We would have to fund that, or it passes by a three-fifths vote. Remember: We can still mandate here. We're not limiting our ability to mandate without funding; it just simply raises the threshold from a simple majority to three-fifths. I

Senator Jones.

So what youfre saying, in essence then, that practically any law that we do pass, if a local unit of government feels that it I would cause a riscal impact on this z can see a1z the brzzziant , ! E lawyers in the State of Illinois -- this is a full-employmentr 1 more or less, constitutional amendment for the lawyers because I can see a1l the lawsuits that's going to be filed on this issue, because anythin: that we do here, in some form, is -- is a mandate. Am I correct? i i PRESIDENT PHILIP: . 1 Senator Watson.

We have currently on our Statutes the State Mandates Act. There's been litigation as a result of bills We've passed here. : i So I would assume that if, in fact, We do pass legislation j without, in some people's eyes, fulfilling the obligations of thls I Constltutional Amendment, they have every right to go to -- to a litigation status in order to make that determination. I

One final question.

ï Senator Jones. SENATOR JONES: i i Who'll make the decision as to -- as it relate to a mandate? i Who decides what a mandate is? Who'll make that decision? ' 23 E  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 ;

Senator Watson.

When legislation goes to the Legislative Reference Bureau, in many cases it is already advanced to us with that fact that the State Mandates Ack may apply. There -- then it would become a question -- just as it is on a home rule, it would become a question from the Floor ëf the determtnation has not been made by the Chair.

Senator Geo-Karis.

Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, we finally have a constitutional amendment that provldes for bipartisan support. In the 1992 general election, as Was stated i i earlier, voters statewide were asked whether we should be urged to propose an amendnent to the Constitutlon prohibiting the enactment of any new unfunded State mandates. We had eighty-one -- eighty-one percent of those tbat voted agreed that we should not provide for any mandates if we can't pay for then . This anendment - - this -- this resolution, constitutional amendment, has exceptions, and very good exceptions. It provides that -- there's l an exception to it if *he mandates are fully funded by the State, i including out years; where it passes by Chambers by a three-fifths vcte; where there's an imposltion of a federal 1aw that the local governmen: or school distric: could otherwlse be requlred Eo meet by federal 1aw with no additional State requirements; imposes a -- a federal or State court order with no additional State requirenents; creates, expands or modifies a specifically defined ; crime; limits: regulates the -- the ability of the -- of a local I 1 overnment or school district to raise revenue, it doesn't. Those l I I are the exceptions. And it predates this constitutional I l I 24  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 amendment. It's prospective. What is wrong in havin: bipartisan support to save the taxpayer's money? we get a three-fifths vote if we don't have a three-fifths vote, that's it; but if we have, then we can pass such a mandate. I think we should follow with the dictates of eighty-one percent of the people of Illinols who agree With me on this polnt, and with -- with Senator Watson, and vote for the passage of this resolltion for a constitutional amendnent. I think it's a good one. It's got the safeguards. It's got the three-fifths vote, which even to overrule a Governor's veto we need a three-fifths vote. So I think wedre in line and we 're consistent, and I think lt's a very goad amendment.

Senator Dunn.

Thank you, Mr. President. Question of the sponsor.

He indicates he'll yield.

Senator, I know that every bill We pass has a certain affect on al1 units of local government, cities, counties, et cetera, but I'm trying to recall, in the last ten years that I've been here, a substantive mandate that we want to repeal. What -- what mandate of a substantive nature, in behalf of citizens, would we repealr lf any?

Senator Watson.

As a result of this?

Senator Dunn.

I'n just trying to think in my oWn mind, in the last ten years 25  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 that I've been here. What mandate have we passed of a substantive nature, would we want to repeal?

Senator Watson.

Well, we have -- in many cases, the school districts, When you think of *he policies that we have passed onto local school districts in regards to certification, as Senator Jones mentioned if we did something in the area of school buses, if we are creating policy here that should be decided at the local level. In other wordsr if we are mandating from Springfield decisions that ought to be made by a lccal -- local elected school boardy or a city councilr or a county board, without the adequate fundinç, then those would be those partlcular issues.

Senator Dunn.

So it's a -- it's a philosophical argunent, rather than an economic argument. Is that -- is that correct? It 's a phllosophical argument, not -- not an -- an economic one?

Senator Watson.

Yes, it is a philosophical argument, I would say; that many of us feel that decision making should be made at the local level. Many of us feel thaE a 1oE of Ehe ftnancial problems EhaE local units of government and education has experienced in the last decade or twenty years or so is -- is a result of us saying to them ''You must do this'' and then not funding it. As a result, they have to come up with monies from elsewhere, and therefore programs that maybe they'd rather see continue or nonies go into programs that they'd rather see funded, they have to do What We tell them 26  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Leglslative Day April 23z 1996 to do. And that ought to be a decislon they make.

Senator Dunn.

Well, addressing the economic issue, Senator: When we change the Local Government Distributive Fund, my information is that that nets ln about a hundred million dollars a year to the cities, and the villages, and the counties. Now -- now, what portion -- where do we exceed the hundred-million-dollar benefit to those people in a mandate that is characterized as a tax on the citizens? I1m a little confused there. Could you tell me where where what nandates are not covered by that hundred mlllion dollars a year that we give to the cities and villages?

Senator Watson.

This would be the JULjE 1aw that requlres units of local çovernment to respond to excavating that's bein: done ln a particular area. This could be pensions. This could be pensions is -- is a big one. We've identified since 1982, when this Act took effect, that there's somewhere in the neighborhood of two hundred million dollars worth of mandates that have been placed onto units of local government without adequate funding. And so, we ke# by voting and -- and dictating policy herer create those financial problems at the local level.

Senator Dunn.

Welly Senator, you mentioned pensicns. I don't remember a -- a a municipal pension being passed in the last ten years Ilve been here for city firemen or policemen or or municipal workers. So, in its -- and in terms of education when you talk 27  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 about a school board, education's gotten two hundred million dollars a year every year for the last ten years I've been here and, some years, more. So I guess I'm looking for that gray area where I hear this mandate issue raised as belng a -- a pass-on cost to the citizens, and I'm -- I'm havin: trouble identifying ; ity quite frankly. Unless -- I don't Want to beat a dead dog, but i do you have anything else you want to pass on in regard to that? i ! PRESIDENT PHILIP: 1 Senator Watson.

You may recall that this last Session, the Governor vetoed a bill dealing With pensions for widowsr and we came backr overrode that pension. Senator, that would be consldered a mandate. Certainly school sprinklers would be considered a nandate. I mean, there -- there are -- there 's a litany of some three hundred and seventy-some mandates that we have passed since 1982, since the so-called State kandates Act became part of our Statutes. E i . ; I Senator Dunn. i I I SENATOR DUNN: j Just -- just one comment: ïou know, if there's a school district that doesn't want to pass safety methods for their children in the form of sprinklers, then I think it's our responsibllity to do that for the safety of the children. And if there's some miserly village or county that doesn't want to give the widow of a public servant who puEs his life on the line ( everyday, whether .it be policemen or firemen: then I think We i ought eo override that too. And T don 't really consider that a E mandate; I consider those rights that those individuals have that we ought to be protecting. E

Further discussion? If notz Senator Watson' to close. 28  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION GENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996

Well, just -- in regard to that: it's -- kt's good to get up I and make an emotional plea for those people who are maybe less fortunate, widows, Whatever they mlght be# and werre talking about sprinkler systems, but if we think it's so doggone important, then maybe We ought to send along the money with it. I mean, that's i ' I all this is asklng, is that we truly live up to What we think is important at the local level. If that's what we really, truly believe, then write a check. What is wrong with that? The -- I appreciate the debate and the discussion, and -- and I understand I ! those who expressed some concerns about bringing the Minorlty into I I I the -- the process of -- of mandates. And from -- from my way of thinkingz if we're going to be dictatin: policy, then it shouldn't be a partisan issue. We should be able to work together and be able to pass legislation that will enable our unlts of local i i governnent to function, if, in fact, we feel it's that inportantr by at least a three-fifths vote. I see absolutely no problems Wlth that, and I do not think that we handcufc the process by doing so. 1 And as I mentioned before, I think we need to understand and 1 realize the cost implications of what we do here in Sprinqfield . I think you're right: Yes, indeed: *he Governor of this State has vetoed many pieces of legislation dealing with mandates; we have, i I n this General Assembly, put some restraint on the process of ; i passing mandates onto units of local government and education. I Yes, we've made some progress, but that doesn't mean it's going to continue. So I Ehink a constitutional amendnent is thaE answer. i If we -- if we get elected, and we a11 do - wepre al1 elected for j i some reason or another - I think we have a responslbility to come here to Springfield to make a difference. And I can hear speeches from practically every, single one of us which identified, in some way or another, how we are opposed to mandates in some form. We just heard fron one Senator who said she opposes mandates for 29 E ' STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23# 1996 units of local government. She had an opportunity two years ago ; l to show those colors and vote Yes and support a constitutional -- ' a constitutional amendment. Did she do so? No. She voted Present. So for anybody to ge* up on this Ploor and to give us the impression that they're for one thing and then truly vote ! I somewhere else, ought to -- ought to look back in the record I 1 before they nake statements such as that. We have a I I responsibility to do What the people of our districts sent us here to do. Eighty percent - over elghty percent - of the people of this State sald some form of a constitutional question durin: -- about mandates should be made available to those people at the ' local unit of government. This is a protection for themr and, ! hopefully, so that we Wi11 require less responsibility and less emphasis and pressure on property tax so that we can, indeed, do what many of us say to do, and that's lower the prcperty tax at the local level. I hope that a1l of you Will vote for this and i i support lt. I think it's our responsibility to do so. And thank i I I you. PRESIDENT PHILIP : Senator Watson moves the adoption and approval of Senate Joint Resolution, Constitutional Amendment, No. 3. The question is, Shall Senate Jointy Constitutional M endment, No . 3 be adopted and i I approved. Pursuant to Sectlon 2, Article XIV of the Illinois I Constitutlon, amendments must be approved by three-fifths of the Members elected. Those in favor will vote Aye. Those opposed, Nay. The vo*lng is open. Have you a1l voked who wish? Have you ! a11 voted who wish? Have you all voted who wish? Take the : record. ...the record. Okay. Senate Joint, Constitutional ! : Amendment, No. 3... Yes. Senator Shadid, you... j SENATOR SHADID: I ... turned my key and my lights wouldn't Work. PRESIDENT PHILIP: 30 j  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23# 1996 May I say this? You dll announce that after I announce the results.

No, I didn 't. No. It wasn't -- someone had turned my key.

The -- the record Will so indicated -- that you voted Aye? 1 For the record, you are voting No. The record Will so indicate. Now, Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional (sicl 3, having received the required three-fifths constitutional majority, is declared passed and approved. Senate Joint Resolution 18. Senator Lauzen. Mr. Secretaryz read the resolution. SECRETARY HARRY: I Senate Joint Resolutionr Constitutional Amendnent, No. l8, as amended by Senate Amendnent 1. (Secretary reads SJR No. 18, as amended) 3rd Reading of the resolution. PRESIDENT'PHILIP: ' Senator Lauzen.

.. . president. Thank you, Mr. Presldent. I'm very happy today to present the 1996 Senate tax accountability amendment. Senate Joint Resolution, Constitutlonal Amendment, 18 requires that three-fifths of the General Assembly Members Would have to vote in favor an increase to or a new income or sales tax. It ! does not affect any offset against those taxes or adjustments to the base. Just to open the debate, I'd like to share Nith you a new poll that was conducted by the Americans for Tax Reform, which found the idea of a supermajority requirement to raise taxes favored nearly three to one b'y those who were surveyed. I'd be happy to answer any questions. !

Senator Collins. Senator Collins. ' 31 1  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996

Yes. Thank you, Mr. President and Members of the Senate. Had we not passed a11 of the other resolutions, I would say that this particular resolution would have been one that could have considered supporting. I do think that there should be a majority in terms of raising taxes; howevery this Joint Resolution 18 further complicates the resolution we just passed before it. And 1 - - the sponsor of the first resolution, Senator Watson, and, of course, the sponsor of this resolutionr the sponsors should have sat down and talked about how does one piece of legislation we pass here impacts on another the citizens of the State. We dcn't do that. I mean, that's just plain common sense. And I know someone once said that common sense seldom prevails or visited the halls of governmenty and this is a qood example of that. There is a direct conflict between the implenentation of this 1aw and the one -- the resolution we just passed prior to it. It's just plain commdn sense. It will not work. It Will further complicate and make -- and most certainly more litigation. If if Senator Berman's argument tha: -- that it's going to increase litigationy well this 18 - Senate Bill (sic) 18 - will guarantee more litigations. This is a lauyer's public aid. That's what this is a11 about. And we ought to think carefully before we vote Yes.

Senator Fitzgerald.

Thank you, Mr. Presldent. just wan: Eo rise in support of Senator Lauzen's proposed eonstitutional amendment. It's often been said that the power to tax is the power to destroy, and it -- for that reason, it's appropriate that this Legislature only exercise its taxing powers very sparingly and that a supermajority vote be required. This is an excellent resolution. I'd urge a favorable vcte by everybody. 32  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 ' PRESIDENT PHILIP: Senator Berman. SENATOR BERMAN: Thank you, Mr. Presidentz Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate. I rise in opposition to this proposal. I Would point out to you that if we are -- When we are elected, our votersr whether they want to admit it or not, send us down here to do certain things. Among those things is to spend tax dollars. The other thing they send us down here to do is to raise tax dollarsr beeause you can't do the first thing without the second thing . And what we are being asked to do here is to vote to glve a Minority the control of whether we should act in a responsible manner by raising taxes to do what is right. Nowz Ladies and Gentlemenr I would point out to you that a number of commissions, for example, have determined that the funding of schools is inequitable, and the Governor's Commission, as recently as about a month ago, recommended that there be a -- an income tax increase to properly fund schools and reduce the reliance on property taxes. Now, if that was a highly partisan vote where the thirty-three Republicans were in favor of the Governor's Commission Report and a1l of the Democrats decided to vote No, that responsible piece of action could not take force I because it didn't have thirty-six votes. That doesn't make sense. Why should you, the controlling Partyz with thirty-three votesz have to come over here and bring some votes over to your side when it is a partisan issue. You run on it. You want to campaign on it. You want to prevail on i*, and yet youdve got Eo come over Eo get three more votes, at least, in order to pass it. I would I suggest to you that there is -- that taxes are no different than ï ' every other piece of leglslation that we pass. Sone people like it; some people don't, but a majority of the people are the ones that decide it. And 1et me point out one other thing, from a political point of view, thak a Yes vote on this amendment Will 33  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 ! deliver a certain message. If you're going to change the income I ! tax structure, as I read this amendment, you would need a khree-fifths vote. Today, approxinakely thirteen percent of the State income tax is paid by corporations. When we passed the State income tax in 1970, it was represented that thirty-three-and-a-third percent of income tax revenue would be paid by corporations. If you pass this amendment today, what you are sayin: is that a majority vote will not be sufficient to make the State income tax more equitable as it relates to indlvidual payers. It's going to be harder to change. That's going to be a tough baby for any of us to campaign on, because you are going to then be in the pocket of corporations that want to keep it in an inequitable posture. I urge a No vote.

Senator Geo-Karis.

Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, I have to take issue with two of the prior speakers. I have voted for bills that kere produced by the other side of the aisle. And what's wrong in being bipartisan? You're being bipartisan when you're saying youfre not going to raise those taxes unless you have a three-fifths vote. I don't care what the corporations think. I can tell you what the taxpayers thlnk in my district. Theydre tired of taxation. And we're not here to raise taxes. We're here to allocate taxes properly that we do have. And if we encourage a good workin: climate for buslness and labor, wedll have more business coming in and more labor to have more money to spend and, thus, have more taxes available to us. There's -- and p I -- to think and my prior -- one of the prior speakers said this I is a lawyer's bill. Well, Ifm sick -- sick and tired of it being i i -- having the lawyers bashed. There 's nothing -- a lawyer's bill. This is a people's bill. The people want to get sone satisfaction I J I 34  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 i to know that we are not goin: to put our names on the line on a bill unless we provide bipartisan support, if we dre going to raise any of those taxes. So what's wrong with that? I support this bill -- this resolution for a constitutional amendment wholeheartedly, because I know that's what the people really want.

Senator Demuzio.

Thank you, Mr. President. If the Senator would yield, I'd llke to ask a question.

He indlcates he will. Senator Demuzio.

Senator Lauzen, hoW many times has the General Assembly increased the sales or income tax in the last ten years?

Senator Lauzen.

You know, I'd be happy to go through that list and provide lt. I don't have it at hand right now. Perhaps -- perhaps you might.

Senator Demuzlo .

Perhaps I can tell you. In 1988, 57 to nothing, there Was sales tax reforn . That Was obviously not a tax increase. In 1989, we were here and we lncreased *he surcharge, 30-27 Eo 2. In 1991, we made the educational portion of that permanent, 43-13 to 2. And in 1993, we nade the other part of the surcharge permanent, 38 to 18 to 1. And then House Bill 1470 was the bill - and I forget the year, but it was the year that Jim Thompson was elected to his unprecedented third term as Governor of this State - and there was a twenty-nillion-dollar hole, as I remember, in ; 35  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 the -- in the budget -- or two-hundred-nillion-dollar hole, I beg your pardon, and we had to come back in the General Assembly and pass a -- a temporary bump on the income tax: as I recall. And as I -- and that lasted for eighteen nonths. So we really haven't done very much, and I think there may be others, but doubt I think those are the most significant ones that we have attempted to do. So we haven't done it very often. As I indicated to you in -- in conmittee, even though I serve in the Minority, have really significant problems with allowing a Minority to thwart the will of the Majority. Now, I looked through the Illinois State Constltutional Convention data, 1970, Senator Netsch, et a1r and there was no discussion at all with respect to requirlng a three-fifths vote of the Legislature in order to pass either sales or tax increases. And you know .what I feel is that when youpre in the Minority, you talk. When youdre in the Majority, like you are, you vote. Now, if you don't want the responsibility, being in the Majorityy give it to us. We'11 take We'11 start January 1st of this year. Not a problen. You know, I hesltate to suggest that we ought to be amendlng the Constitution because of the feelings that we have in our communities at the moment. Constitutions are supposed to last a 1ot longer. I Want to concur with what Senator Berman had just said a few minutes ago. You have thirty-three Members on your side of the aisle, in the Majorityz and, therefore, it requtres three Members on this side of the aisle to pass any type of proposal that your anendnent deals w1th. So by khe time you want something and you come over and you bargain with these three people on this side of the aisle and you put together your package, assumin: you have thirty-three on your side, they tell you they want nthis,'' ''thaty'' and whatever. You go back to your caucus, to your thirty-three, and you say: ''Okay, I gok three on the other side of the aisle.'' And they say to you : ''We1l, what did they get?'' And then you tell 36  STATE OF ILLINOTS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 them what the bargain was struck over here and negotiatedr and l your side of the aisle ups the ante because then they want more: i as well. You talk about pork barrel, you talk about Wheeling and ! dealing, you talk about mischief: This is the bill that will ! provide enough mischief for this General Assembly that I do not ! believe is in the public good. Maybe we should have -- maybe you I ! should have come in with an amendment that eliminated one of the I Houses and went to a bicameral legislative body -- unicameral. I Unicameral, not bicameral. We're elected to come here. We have a i sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. We have an oppcrtunity, I i think, to make tough decisions we're elected to serve. And guess I What? A11 these constitutional amendments that are on the -- I : Calendar today, with you guys belng in khe Majority, what you're ! saying is you 've thrown in the towel. ''Ohp I can't do anything I about the mandates that go to local governnent.'' ''ohr I -- I've I got to have help from the Minority. I have to have a ! supermajority in order for these khings to be accomplished in the I . General Assembly.'' The fact of the matter is, is that you don lt ! need a three-fifths. You dre going to have gridlock here. Now, I'm in the Minorlty. I'm arquinq against my position at the moment. Tn a11 due respects to -- to youy I don't think that this I is a proposal that, in faet, will work. And guess What? The most ! important constitutional amendment of - - for decades is still in I i the Rules Committee. It's Jim Edgar's proposal on education that I can't even get a hearing. And we're talking about all the rest of ! this stuff in this Chamber? You guys have got your priorikies I wrong. We're supposed to be the education Leqislature. We're I supposed to be doing something about education in the State of ! Illinois. Wedre supposed to be talking about providing some equity for kids in this State. But now We 're talking about ' three-fifths vote here, we're talking about mandates, We dre I talking abouE merit selection of judges. What about education? ! 37 i  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23r 1996 I A1l this stuff is nothinq buk a smoke screen. I -- I urge a No vote. PRESIDENT PHILIP: f . Senator Hendon. I SENATOR HENDON) I Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in support of SJR l8. I I believey personally, that in order to raise income taxes or sales I taxes in Illinoisr it should take a supermajority. I was Watching I I television the other day, and they said that khe gasoline tax in I Chicago is the second highest in the nation. Only San Francisco l ! has a higher gasoline tax than we do. And they had it on I f television. Dollar eighty-five, dollar eighty-seven a gallon. I Makes no sense at all. I believe Senator Lauzen is doing 1 I something he belleves in, sincerely, fron his heart. The people I ! of this State deserve the right to keep taxes from going up, and I going up, and going up without a -- a supermajority. And I don't l . I believe that this is a Republican lssue and the Denocrats should 1 I be voting the other way. This most certainly is a bipartisan I issue, because everybody pays these taxes. So I am going to vote I 1 Yes on Senator Lauzenfs proposal, hls constitutional amendment, I and I most certatnly hope it passes, and then the people will have I I the opportunity to say Whether they feel that a simple majority I I should be able to raise their -- their taxes or whether it should I t ' know about you, but I l ake a supermajority to raise taxes. J don t I just filed my income taxes and I don't ltke it# because every time 1 I I look -- look up, look like the government, Whether itfs federal, j state or local, Wants more, and more, and more, and more, and more I I of our dollars. And on this side of the aisle, here's an I I opportunity to prove that We are not the tax-and-spend Party. We I I care just as much about the taxpayers of Illinois as the other I slde of the aisle. I'd urge an Aye vote. I I I I 38 1 I I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBL? REGULAR sEssloN SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 END OF TAPE I I TAPE 2 I I I I PRESIDENT PHILIP: I I Senator Butler. ! SENATOR BUTLER : 1 I Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and Gentlemeny I guess this ! is in response to Senator Demuzioy because he was automatically assuming that on either side of the aisle' whether the Democrats are in the Majority or we're in the Majority, that wedre a1l going to vote together. Well, I've seen occaslons herer at least in our caucus, when we couldn't even decide if the -- a majority if today ' Was Tuesday. So I don't know -- I don't know why we paint this thing as we need three votes. That assumes everybody on our side will -- will automatically be in favor of a -- for example, a tax increase. Seems to me, this is bipartisan and you ought to think of it that way, and not just -- not the Minority give up that the Majority is always goinq to vote in lockstep. I thlnk we ought to think as individuals and look at this bill as a -- as -- as an individual bill, rather than the Majority versus the Minority: or ' vice versa. PRESIDENT PHILIP: ' State your point. Let's keep it short. Senator Demuzio. I ! SENATOR DEMUZIO ; I The gentleman mentioned my name in debate. I would like to I I query htm and ask him how many votes he has on this oner on his I Side Of the aisle. I 1 PRESIDENT PHILIP: I . I Three. Senator Demuzio. Senator Dudycz, I apologize. I SENATOR DUDYCZ: I I 39 I  STATE OF ILLINOIS : 89TH GENERAL ASSEMSLY REGULAR SESSIOH SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 I Well, thank youzMr. President. With the passaîe of SJRCA ll8 J -- or 18, ke simply are saying three things) first of all, that we as a -- as a Senate and individually as -- as individual Senators support the concept of requiring an extraordinary majority for raising the income tax and sales tax rates of our citizens; number two, ue're saying that we as a Senate and lndlvldually as individuals Senators support the concept of requiring an extraordinary majorlty for imposing a new income tax or sales tax; and number three: that we as a Legislative Body are giving the public, which we serve and represent, the opportunity to voice their opinion, if they want to restrict our abilities to raise income or sales taxes, or to impose neW income or sales taxes, by requirlng a three-fifths vote of both Chambers. Mr. Presidenty that's true tax accountability and responsible government. And for the Senator on the other side of the aisle, whose name I will not mention in fear that he may stand up on another point of personal privilegey the reason We got a majority in the House and the Senate and in a11 the constitutional offices: in part, I believe, is because you failed - you failed - to pass tax accountability for the people of Illinols. And I -- I hope that we get 59 votes for this SJR, but I believe that the taxpayers and the voters w111 be watching this vote very carefully to see how we, as individual leglslators, vote. PRESIDENT PHILIP: j Senator Palmer. Senator Palmer. 1 1 SENATOR PALMER: 1 ThankyoupMr.President.Aquestionofthesponsor. j

Indicates he'll yield . Senator Palmer. ! SENATORPALMER: J Senator Lauzen, you and I serve on a committee together, the Revenue Committee, is that correct? Where does the mcney come I 40  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLV REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 from for us to deal with the issues that come before us? ! PRESIDENT PHILIP: I Senator Lauzen. '

The citizens of the great State of Illinois. PRESIDENT PHILIP: 1 1 SenatorPalner. j

Thank you. I find it interesting in our discussion over and overagainin this Body about the taxpayer:thatthis isa person, j a corporation sonehowoutside of themix ofwhatelse wehave to 1 1 do in the Stateof Illinois. And Imade that point because We 1 ' have a common- Iwould hope - through taxesand throuqh turning j that into the revenuethatsupportsourschools,our police, all 1 the other common ground that we should have in this State. And I 1 1 I find ie very disturblng that overand overagain we do not make ( theconnectionbetween the money thatcomes inand &ts usage. And 1 when these kinds of bills -- I started not to say anything about I ! thisrbut when I look at the list of opponents and I see on there 1 the schools, all the groups that are concerned about what we talk I i about in this Body about the future of our children, the ''this'' j and the ''thatw'' and yet here we are saying wefre going to make it even more difficult to fund those things that we should have in I f common. And it seems to me this is unnecessary. And it seems to j me we need to make the point With our people that the money -- I : 1 and, yes, we should be accountable, we should be judicious in the I ! use of it, but let us not pretend that at some point, we Will I reach a point where the people do not create a pool of money that I I is used for the comnon good. And this is where I have great ' I difficulty with these bills that keep coming up, that act as if I the Kaxpayer is somehow removed from Ehis whole thing of 1 1 supportlng what is good for a11 of us. I say we should vote No on ' I 41 i !  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRTPT 96th Legislative Day April 23: 1996 this, because youdre noW making it even harder to fund our schools, to fund al1 those things that we should be for. ! ! PRESIDENT PHTLIP: ' Further discussion? If not, Senator Lauzen, to close.

Thank you very much. Again, on the 1996 Senate tax accountability anendment, there's several comments that T'd like to make in closing, addressing some of the concerns that have been I raised byopponents, and I appreciate the proponents' talks. 1 I First of all, as -- addressing the issue of gridlock, if my ears and eyes are any good, my constibuents, and f bet yours, complain that too many of our decisions are made only along partisan lines. It's perceived at home as a good thing Ehat Democrats and 1 Republicans are going to have to come together before we raise ! sales and income taxes, which represent eighty-five percent of the State revenue. And youdre right that it is going to slow down a ! facet of government, but take a look at what werre slowing dovn: . It's tax increases. Even when leqislators do vote for tax increases, I think that they think long and hard. Raistng taxes I ! should be hard to do. Anoeher one of the opponents addressed the Constitutional Convention of 1970. I thought that that was very I interesting. I certainly respect that opponent's experience in ! the Legislature, and he took us back to 1970, which is halfway I ! back to 1950 when the federal income tax burden on the typieal 1 family in -- in the Dnited States was four percent. Now in the 1 1990s, that burden is twenty-four percent. It's gone up six ! hundred percent. That twenEy percent, on a typical family in ! Illinois ' taxable incone in a year, of forty thousand dollars ! i represents the mortgage payment, principal and interest, in nany i families, and the utilities for an entire year. A self-employment ' - - or a self-employed individual who owns a home in Illinois With l a taxable income of thirty-eight thousand five hundred dollarsr ! r ! 42 !  STATE OP ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day ' April 23, 1996 I the next dollar that family earns, more than fifty eents goes to a government. I would submit to that opponent that then is then; now is now . The burden that we've created in taxes requires that l . we pass this anendment, or that we put it -- at least put it onto I the ballot. Also one of the opponents addressed that scme of the i ! exemptions that are in place right now and credits could not be ! changed, because this would be too high of a hurdle. That just is ' I - - does not square with a reading of the bill. Exemptions and ' I offsets would still remain at a fifty-percent simple majority. ! Finally, T had time to call only about thirteen Democratic / Senators yesterday, and I respect the views that were expressed I I and the confidentiality . One person said to me, HYou know, it's ! wrong -- it Would be wrong to oppose this amendment. Hok can you I vote against -- hoW can you vote against this? No one is for tax ! increases.'' Others worried that -- even ny tWo House Members ! voted for this bill. Ninety-nine of the hundred and eighteen 1 House Members voted in favor of this amendment in -- over in the ' 1 , / House. This is a vote that you can proudly take home to your ' ! taxpayers. It shouldn't be easy to take money from families. I l It's citizens' money, not Springfield's. I urge the Members of the Senate, on both sides of the aisle: to vote ïes. ' I PRESIDENT PHILIP) ! I Senatcr Lauzen moves the adoption and approval of Senate Jolnt ' I Constitutional Amendment l8. The question is, shall Senate Joint ! Resolution Constitutional Amendment 18 be adopted and approved. p Pursuant to Section 2, Article XIV of the Illlnois Constibution, I amendments must be approved by three-flfths of the elected I : Members. Those in favor, signify by saying Aye. Those opposed, 1 . 1 . Nay. The voting is open. ...you a1l voted who wish? Have you 1 al1 voted Who wish? Have you a1l voted who wish? Have you a1l ! voted who wish? Take the record. On the question, there are 34 I Yeses, 23 Nays, l voting Present. Constitutional -- Senate Joint l ! 43 l  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 I Resolution Constitutional Amendment l8r failed to received a I three-cifths constitutional majority, ls declared lost. Senate Joint Resolution Constikutional Amendment 25. Senator Dillard. Read the resolutiony Madan Secretary.

Senate Joint Resolution 25, Constitutional Amendment, as amended by Senate Amendment No. 1. (Secretary reads SJRCA l8, as amended) 3rd Reading of this constitutional anendment.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dtllard.

Thank you, Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate. This particular constitutional amendment is one of two this afternoon dealing with nerit selection of judges, a topic that has been around this State for a number of decadesr and nok T believe it is tine to address it. My particular constitutional amendmentdoestwo things:Itestablishes a nerik seleetion of j judgesprocessfortheAppellateandCireuitJudgessolelyforthe 1 County of Cook, and alloWs the Gcvernor of Illinois to appoint Suprene Court Justices With the advlce and consent of this Body, just the Way the President of the United SEates has dane it for a couple of centuries. What welre doin: here, like we do on any of / the constltukional amendments this afternoon - and I believe it's important to remember this - is we're giving the voters the I choice, *he choice to change the Way we elect one-third -- one-third of a governnent of Illinois: the entire Judiclal Branch I for cook County and khe Supreme Court. It is also very important I to remember, Ladies and Genklemen, hhat whlle we may go to merit 1 1 selectlon of judges in Cook County and the Governor and the -- f then State Senate will pick or select the Supreme Court Justices, ! we keep retention in this bill, so if the voters do not like Whom I I 44 !  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 a merit selection panel or the Governor and us have chosen as the I Supreme Courk, they can remove them every six or ten years from J offiee. This proposal, I think, is veryy very fair, and 1et ne 1 just very quiekly tell you - and Senator Petka's, which will follow - the way we select the merit panel is identical for Cook I I County. It'll have seventeen members. Eight will be selected by J the County Board Chairman of Cook County. Four each Will be I selected by the senior residing Member of the Legislature -- of I the Senate, from Cook County - that's currently Senator DeAngelis 1 who's in the Chair - and in the House of Representatives, the I senlor House Member of the opposite party of the Cook County Board J Chairman - Cook County Board Chairman is obviously Mr. Stroger, I today, and the Chairman of the Merit Selection Commission for Cook I County is selected by the Governor. Half are lawyers; half are 1 nonlawyers. It requires a three-fifths vote of this I 't think, l seventeen-member panel to pick a judge. Nothing, I don could be more fair than to require a three-fifthé vote of an almost evenly dieided polltical panel when it comes to selecting 1 judges. Why is this a good amendment? Let me tell you. Let's :et selfish for a minute. I think it's very important and very, f very, I think, apropos to this particular Body, that we now, if I We're going to get selfish, have some kind of input into who goes 1 . on the Supreme Court. And additionally: I think this particular 1 . merit selection plan is good for the Legislature, because j essentially half of its nembers will be selected from Members of a General Assembly. Just two -- just two more points. I believe that this constitutional amendment is extremely important to J minority groups in the State of Illinois and especially the County of Cook. We established subcircuits in Cook County a number of I yèars ago as a Legislature. Those subcircuits are now essentially 1 . filled, and k1th past practices, minorities, for a11 intents and purposes, are finished in the County of Cook from increasing their ) I 45  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 1996 numbers on the bench, even though every day ehat passes, there are more and more qualified minority lawyers to be members of the Judiciary of this State. No African-Ameriean or Hispanic candidate has ever won election in Cook County outside of those subcircuits. So if you're a minority Menber of this Body, I can tell you, your numbers on the bench will never increase without this, and this particular amendment, the way it's set upr requires half of the new judges to be selected from the subcircuits. So the number of minority judges will increase the future. Additionally, historically throughout khis country, minorities have done much better under merit selection than they have through the electoral process. That's -- obviously holds true in Cook County. uhere sixty percent of the African-American judges came through the appointed process, not the elected process. So it is very clear, nationally, the trend is where you have merit selection, you have more and more minorlty nenbers of the bench. And guess, finally, to close - and 1111 be happy to answer any queskions, Mr. Presldenk - in the primary last March: Cook County there were nearly one hundred members or one hundred candidates on the particular ballot for Circuit Judge. zven the most diligent human being cannot know who al1 one hundred of those candidates are. And unfortunately in Cook County - and that's Why we went with Cook County and not the other circuits throuqhout the State the size of the ballot is just too cumbersome. And unfortunately, we picked the voters of Cook County, and I represent a11 of Lemont Townshlp in Cook County - five candidates that were selected in that March primary were rated unqualified by every bar association and scores others -- scores of others rated unqualified by a number of other bar associatlons. So with that, I think it is now time, as most of the editorials have said in the newspapers throughout this Stater to change the way We choose our judges in the County of Cookw and the way we go about choosing our 46 l STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 1 judges for the Supreme Court of Illinois. And I'd be happy to answer any questions. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Jacobs. SENATOR JACOBS: Thank you, Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate. I rise in opposition to this legislation and probably the one to follow. But I -- but I have to really chuckle a little bit, because here we 're saying that nerit selection is going to get rid of the politicians. So what are we really doing? We 're replaclng partisan politics that the people have a choice in saying, W1th partisan politics that is an appointed member by elected officials. A11 we have done in this whole scenario is to cut the citlzenry out of the equation. I think that, in itself, is enaugh reason to vote No on this bill. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins. ' SENATOR COLLINS: Yes. Thank you -- thank you, Mr. President. Question of the sponsor, please. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELTS) Sponsor said he will yield. SENATOR COLLINS: Senator Dillard, What compelled you to make this a statewide referendum, if the inpact of this 1aw was limited only to Cook County? PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGEGIS) i Senator Dillard. 1 SENATOR DILLARD: I I Two things, senator collins. Number one, this lnvolves the i I Supreme Court, which takes it statewide. Secondly, even if you're a business person or a human being that lives in another part of i i 47 I ; i  STATE OP ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 Illinois, you may end up having a case filed against you in the County of Cook. Many people from a11 parts of Illinols go to Chicago to visit and pares of Cook County, so the Cook County judicial system can impact other Illinoisans. And, obviously, you have to have a statewide referendum to change the Illinois Constitution.

PRESIDING OPFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins.

Why did you -- other states have the opt-in provisions. Why did you not delete -- didn't the original bill have the opt-in provisions? Why did you delete that, for other other counties? PRESTDING OFFICERJ (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

Two reasons, Senator Collins. The first was a request of number of our colleagues, from both your side of the aisle and ours, in downstate areas that they not be put in here, but most importantly: as explained in my opening statement, the sheer large sizer the sheer number of judges on our ballot in Cook County is eumbersome. In Dupage County, for examplez we only had two contested races, and, to ne, that leads one to believe that where you only have two contested races, the voters night understand and have a chance to revlew the candidates' credentials better than they would a hundred-some judges in Cook County. PRESIDING OPFICER (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins, would you push your light on? Senator Cpllins.

Senator, the one of the arguments for this process has been that it is hopeful that you would eliminate some of the confustons for the public - the constituents. But looking at b0th of these 48  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 73, 1996 resolutions together, 25 and -- and 27, it -- it appears to me i that you have not made the process any less confusing. As a matter of fact, it has become even more confusing. When -- when -- when the people go to the polls now -- whlch I acknowledge that there / are problems that we needed to solve, legislatively. I am no* pleased with the -- the -- the caliber of people that -- that -- i that often go out there and get elected or clutter up the ballot with no chance of çetting elected. There are problems that needed to be resolved. But once you throw in, through this process, that they have to deal with the merit selection uhere you're talking i i about judicial elections, the retention and things like subcircuits and Supreme Court, now, districts, Which you didn't have beforey further complicates and confuse the voters. And I thou:ht the -- the original intent of thls whole thing, whlch merit selection is to try to ensure that we had the best possible I ! people sitting on the bench, the best quallfied judges sitting on the bench. And, you know, When I came, I've always advocated some I I -- form of merit selection of judges, so I'm not against merit. HoWever, I am against an attempt to take over power. This -- this l - - the way this is structured, this is nothing more than a real I power grab on the Republicans who are looking forward to reapportionment and who is going to control this Chamber for the i next ten to twenty years, starting in the twenty-first century. And that's What this is basically a1l about. The other problem i I'm concerned about is the concentration of power in the hands of 1 Ehis -- Ehls commlEEee -- Commission, who is noE really accountab1e to no one. And -- and -- and to say that noW you Will i I have seven -- one-half of these members selected by the Legislative Body and that you were -- Members and that you were concerned before about the polltics involved, the local ward ; ! committeemen, are you -- are you tnferrkng that the legislators ! are less political than -- than the local elected officials? You ! i . 49 I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 know, wha: makes khat any different? Can you answer that for me?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

Senator Collins, clearly trust, I think, my colleagues here kn the General Assembly, and I will point out that if the Republicans controlled the Cook County Board presidency, you miqht be the one that would be making these appolntments. But I trust our elected colleagues here in the General Assembly more than I do a number of people in a smoke-filled room at the Bismark Hotel. think at least our people -- stand for election, and there is you know, there is accountability on the part of every Menber of the General Assembly, whether they serve in the Senate or the House. PRESIDING OFFICER (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins, would you turn your light on? Senator Collins.

I'm sorry, there's something Wrong with my -- my light and ny mike, so 1'11 try and get through this. There ls accounkability right now on -- on the part of -- of the judges Who's bein: elected , and they are accountable to the citizens of this State. And I think that that's the purest accountability, is to be accountable to the people, not to the leglslators, not to the local elected ofcicials . And -- and you would admit to that, -- -- I hope, Ehat that *he people of thls State or the people of those districts are far better judges of deternlnlng Nhether or not a judge should or should not be reelected. And lf youdre trying to work on the problems that there are -- we a1l adnit that there are problems that need to be resolved. 3ut but I have some serious reservatfons when I hear someone like Pate Philip, who has been so adamantly against merit selection - even before 50  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislatlve Day April 1996 cane here - all of a sudden is going to support merit selection of judges. This is a grab for power, and that's a11 is. It's not going to make anything better. It does not have the ten-year requirement. Any judge now can come out of 1aw school, any person can come out of law schooly and can be appointed through this process. There is no restrictions at all. There is no criteria to ensure that the quality of judges wculd increase if this bill passed. Itîs a power grabr and we ought to defeat it. PRESIDING OFFICER (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

Is the thlnk that was the form of a questicn. I will sayr Senator Collins, it takes a three-flfths vote of these panels. So there is no power grab. Clearly, whatever Party is in control needs the other side to select these judges. And very importantly, as I said at the onset: even though we have nerik selection of judges, these judges stand for retention, so that people in 0ak Park, and your district; Senator Collins, can remove them they don't like them, after a number cf years. PRESIDING OFFICER (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Carroll.

Thank you, Mr. President and Ladles and Gentlemen of the Senate. 1, too, rise in opposition to this because, as I think has already started to be said, this is strictly a power grab. What khey cannok do ln the polls, they try and do (n thetr control of *he General Assembly. There is no question that this is a Republican-political-qelection-of-judges scheme. And lf IE was to be called merlt, I guess woutd have to -- stand for more Executive-chosen Republicans fn tenure. It's the only thing that makes sense Ln the letters of nertt. There is nothlng meritorious about giving the Supreme Court to a Republican Governor, or a 51  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 Denocratic Governor - which will be the next Governor - there is nothing meritorious in saying that the Party not in control by will of the voters is the Party that Wl11 choose the majoriky members of the council. Why, even the Constitutional Conventlon said when there is a vacancy in the General Assemblyy the political Party that elected that person the people chose a person, that person ran under a political banner - that would be the Party that chooses the replacement. I think it's interesting that the sponsor indicated no minorities were elected countywide under the current system. Maybe that's true in Dupage, where that Senator resides. But ask people like Blanche Manning , ask people like Suprene -- federal judge, ask people like Charles Freeman, ask any of the others Who ran countywide and won, who happen to be of minority background. They 've Won in Cook, maybe not in Dupage, but they do win countywide in Cook. And -- and women have been elected. Al1 minori*les have been elected out of Cookr countywide. So I guess, if you're trying to do a power grab, ' just say so. could support this, by the Way, Senator Diltard, with one change, and that is, instead of having khe temporary Presiding Officer of this Body right now choose who's on: as the senior Republican member, since the Democrats seem to be the najorëty Party in Cook, if you'd -- if you'd change that to the senior Member of the majority Party, the senior Democrat, personally would be very supportive, 'cause that Would be me. Thank yau.

PRESIDING OPFICER: (SENATOR DeAXGELIS) Senator Shaw.

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

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Sponsor says he will.

Senator, how many -- how many judges do you have, elected 52  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 ! judges in Dupage County?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard. Senator Dillard?

Senator Shaw, it's a -- it's a handful compared to, obviously, Cook County. Id1l get you the exact answer in just a couple of moments.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Shaw.

While youlre looking for that, would you loak and see how nany ; @ minorities that you've had elected there in the last ten years? i j

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

Well, Senator Shawr T don 't know. But T vill tell you this: In the last election: We had tWo contested races, and one of the winners in the contested races was a minority.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Shaw .

All right. I -- 1 just Want to correct the record here in terms of Cook County. Leslie Southr even though she's fair i complected, but she is a minority. And she ran ccuntywide in Cook 1 county and was nominated. Do you have those fiqures for me yet? i i ! PRESIDINC OFFICER: (EENATOR DeANGELIG) r Senator Dillard. l ! SENATOR DILLARD: ! Senator Shaw, there appears to be fifteen or sixteen Circuit Judges in Dupage Countyr elected.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Shaw. 53  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT i

Would -- would you give us the number of Associates that you have in Dupage County?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

Roughly, it looks to be double the number of Circuit Judges. PRESIDING OFFICERI (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Are you finished, Senator Shaw? Senator Shaw.

Would you give us a breakdown of how many African-Americans and how many Hispanics that you have in Dupage County?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) . Senator Dillard.

On the bencb, I don't have that offhand, Senator Shaw. I'n happy to get that to you, and -- and 1111 give it io you, and we'll see how it tracks our population base as well.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Shaw.

To the -- to the -- to thls resolutton: It'd seen to me that if you 're talking about fairness and merit, what's gccd for Cook I County should be good for Dupage County, if it's gocd gcvernment. And it just -- I fail to understand, as a Member of this Body, why you want to create a different rule for Caok County and have some obscure rules for your own county Where you're elected and live. It just does not make sense. And it'd seem to me that the people 1 in Cook County, the voters in Cock County, they're intelligent. i 1 They know how to elect judges. They've been doing lt for a long I time. But here you -- this resolution only applles to Cook County, only. Tf you're talking about meriez why don ft we do it i 54 ! i  STATE 0F ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day Aprll 1996 statewide? But that's not what you're lcoking for here. As some other speakers indicated, that this an attempt to grab power fron Cook County, take over the Judiciary, not only in Cook County, but as well as the Supreme Court. I think it's unfortunate, and I might want to ask this question: Under this blll, who -- who would be in charge of drawing the maps for these Supreme Courk Justices?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

Senator Shaw, ny particular Constitutional Amendment No . 25 has the Governor appointing the members. J ehink you have to hold that question for Senator Petkay in a few ninutes, on where he has an elected process for the Judges af the Supreme Court from Cook County.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Shaw.

These bills are so similar, till -- you know, theydre a bit confusing. But I think what you should look at herey Senator Dillard, is you shauld revisit this issue, And if you really uant to do the people of Illinois a favor, and particularly those in Cook County, you should Withdraw this resolutian and then go back and redraft it and put al1 of the State in there, as long as wedre going to talk about merit, and then that might be fair. And I'm qolng to consider voking for after you go back and revislt *he issue. But what you should do at the moment, is take this out of the record, and -- and let's go back and sit down. Those of us who live in Cook Cqunty, who -- who elects the judges in Cook County, certainly we should have some input. But no Member of the Legislature, from ny knowledge, over on this side of the aisle had any hands in drafting this resolution. And youlre talking 55  STATE 0F ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGZLAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day Aprll 23, 1996 I about fairness, we should have some input in this. And certainlyy you should take it out of the record. And if you don't take it out of the -- out of the record, I Would urge a No vote.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Demuzio.

Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to pose a question to the sponsor, if I may.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Sponsor says he will yield.

Has thls question of merit selection of judges been to the electorate before?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

YesF it has.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Denuzio.

When Was that, that it Was put? 1

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard . '

We're scurrylng for the Blue Bock, Senator Demuzio, and wej11 i have that answer for you in just a moment.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Demuzio. SENATOR DEMUZIO: 1 It was part of the 1970 Judiclal Article that asked the question as to whether or not individuals wished to have the I preference of election of judges or the appolntnent of judges. 56 i  STATE OF ILLTNOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGDLAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 And T noticed in downstate Illinoiss 57.7 percent said electionz thirty-five percent sald appointment, or I guess you could interpret that as sixty-five percent of the downstate vote Was opposed to the merit selection of judges. I just Wanted to point ; that out to you so you might have that information later on in any argument that you night want to give. Sixty-five percent of downstate voted in the negative.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Molaro .

Thank you, Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen. First of all, i I Want to correct the speaker. I think the Bismark does not have 1 smoking in those rooms anymore. So even though there may be f meeting in those roomsr I think the -- saying it's smoke-filled gives the wrong lnpression. Second of all, I don't know if you do have -- do you have smoke-filled rooms over at Dupage County ë Headquarters over on -- in -- in Wheaton ùn -- wherever thatfs at I agaln, on Wheeling and Willow? I don't know if they share smoke-filled rooms there. Senator Shaw said it -- said ik the best. I cannot for the life of me figure out how a Dupage resident could cone forward and say that the voters of Cook County have no idea what they're doing, but the other voters of the other counties, they 're sharp enough not to make mistakes. So since the voters of Cook County are too -- are just unintelliqent and can't l make a decision on judgesy We're going to have to take it away from themr but leave it for the rest of the county (sic). It just doesn't seem to make sense, but it goes on in this room, and I just wanted to voice that opinion. Thank you.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dunn. SENATOR DUNN: 1 1 Thank you, Mr. President. To the bill: Because I certainly do ' 57  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 not question this Senator or the next Senator's motivation or belief in what he is espousingr but the original suspicion of the appointment of judges goes back in this country ' to the revolutionary time when King George appointed the judges. And we didn't have a very good experience with King George and his appointment of judges deciding the nerits of a case of our citizens. And it wasn't until Andrew Jackson, in the 1830s, that we became comfortable with the electorate and allowed the electorate to select their own judges. And I guess what concerns ne is that when we talk about merit selection of judges, is merit selection of juries nexk? Do we then take away the trust of juries that we accuse of being runaway juries? Or how about, even better, maybe we have merit selection of candidates? How about we have merit selection of voters? Let's see if they, mayber pay 1 . taxes and then give them the right to vote. This -- this is an argument that can be made fron, obvlously, either side. And certainly the selection in Cook Couniy is not perfect, but to say I that it is perfect in Dupage and imperfect in Cook County is a little tough to swallow. I

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Jones. SENATOR JONES: 1 i Thank your Mr. President. Would the sponsor yield?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Sponsor says he will yield.

Senator Dillard, could you give this Body the definition of l ''nerit''? What do you -- what -- what is your interpretatian of I ''meritd'? PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) i Senator Dillard. '

58  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23r 1996 Senator Jones, in the constitutional anendnent it talks about the criteria for -- judicial appointment, and it lists 'integrityr legal knowledgez legal experiencer and judlcial temperament.' That's ''merit.'f

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Jones.

Well, if that's good for Caok County, does lt have any -- I heard you during debate, you talked about merlt selection, and you said must be done in Cook County. Now r you talked about the politics at the Bismark. Could you also tell -- tell this Body: how are the judges selected in Dupage County?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

The way that you do it today in Cook County. But again, to answer your question, the difference is, I know and have met and knew a11 elght people who were running for judgeship in Dupage County. You had a hundred candidates on the ballot, and as smart as you are, Senator Jones, and as -- as politically Well-attuned as you are, I doubt that you knew a11 one hundred candidates ghen you went in to vote.

PRESIDING OFPICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Jones.

Well, you were Ehere in comml**ee when the curren: SEaEe 's attorney indicated that he thought the voters in Cook County were quite intelligent, that they are able to read, and they are able to understand. And when you talk about the Bar Assaciationz for example, you mentioned that several judges were found unqualified. But I wish you Republicans would get your act together, because your potential nonknee for presëdent sakd he doesn't want any 59  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 i recommendations coming from the Bar Association for selecting judges. So when you talk about merit, yougre talking about putting together a Comnission. Let me ask you this one question: Of those members appointed by the Minority and tbe one to be appointed by the Governor, is there any requirement for those members to reside Within Cook County?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Dillard.

Senator Jones, there is no speciftc requirement that has to reside in Cook County. However, I can tell you thisz that the I likelihood of sone of your finest lawyers practlcin: law in downtown Chicago, and perhaps living in Lake County, or somewhere else ln the surrounding metropolitan area, is a likelihoodr and that's why it's not specifically mentioning that they have to reside in Cook County. PRESIDING OPFICERI (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Jones.

Well, that's the problem with thls so-called ''merit selection bi11.'' Nunber one, there is no requirement as such, so they can - - they can reside in Dupage County, Lake Countyz and they, in turn, would be the Majority members of a Commission to decide What i ! the people in Cock County should havey far as judges. And I watched this Body in action, and I watched your votes, and you i spoke about minoritles and so forth. And Ehere was -- there was a I great Supreme Court Justice that came through thls State that was appoknted by a President, and we wanted to honor that individual T I by having, you know, a part of 1-57 named after him . And you're so coneerned about minorlties in the Judiciary, but I didn't see you stand upz Senator Dillard, to say, ''Well this is a great idea. è ! Perhaps we should have this named after that great Supreme Court 1 ; 60 i l  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23r 1996 Justice.'' So don't come to this Body, all of a sudden, talking about your great interest in the minority community. And furthernore - furthermore - When Senator Shaw asked you about Dupage County, I haven't seen you stand up and sayz ''We11, I6m l going to support this minority for election ln Dupage County i because he's a fine lawyer. He Will be a great judge.'' You haven't done that. So don't come here on this Floor talking about p I a11 this hypocrisy as it relate to merit selection of judges. It just does not exist, and -- and this bill should be defeated - l this constitutional amendment - because the only thing you,re l talking about is merit. Merit is in the eye of the beholder, and the eye of the beholderr the people of Cook County, have selected i that judge because they are intelligent enough to vote, as they ' are in Dupage County and the rest of the State of Illinois. i PRESIDING OFFICER: (SEHATOR DeANGELIS) 1 Senator Dillard, to close. SENATOR DILLARD: i Thank you, Mr. President. And I thank you a11 very much for your attention here. If you'll look through the Digest, you'll see that I'm a cosponsor on Probably every nerit-selection-of-judges plan With different nachinattons that there are before thls Body. I don't care which plan goes, but I i can tell you, anything is better than the current system today . Let me just point out that the people who make the appointnents to i i this selection committee have to reside in Cook County, whether itfs Senator DeAngelis or whether it's John Stroger. The people making the appointments reside in Cook County. With respect to I I the appointment, I by the Governor, of the Supreme Court of the I State, I Would submlt khat some of the finest jurists in the history of the World came through an identical process where the i President of the United States appointed those particular judges. Again, I knew every candidate that was up for election on my I 61  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 ballot in the Judiciary, and no natter how good you are, if you resided in the County of Caok, unless you were superman: I doubt that you would know the qualificatlons of a11 of those judges as well. I guess just to close, unfortunately and sadly today, with the world like it is, the judges in the judiciary system of this State are dealing with more and more problems, whether ft be child abuse, whether it be a crime victims type of situatlon, or whether it be deciding where our children go to school. The judges are more important today than every and unfortunately, as we saw in the last election ln March, we are puttingr slnply, unqualifted people on the bench in the County of Ccok, as sad as that is. And I think now is the time to go forward with merit selection. This is an -- the perfect time to move this Ehing forward, and, unfcrtunately, we are up against a time constraint. This is the plan that's before usz and now is the time to do what, I think, many of us have campaigned for, for years. It's tine to put up or shut up as to whether wefre for merit selection of the Judicial Branch of our government.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) The questlon is, shall Joint Resolution -- Senate Joint Resolution 25 be adopted and approved. Pursuant to Sectton 2, Article XIV of the Illinois Constitution, amendments must be approved by three-fifths of the Members elected. Those in favor will vote Aye. The opposed wll1 vote Nay, and the voting ls open. Have -- have a11 voted who Wish? Have a11 voted Who wish? Have a1l voted who wish? Take the record. On that questlon, there are 29 Ayes, 26 Nays, 3 voting Present. Senate Jolnt Resolution 25, having failed to receive a three-fifths constitutional majority, is declared lost. Committee Reports. .

Senator Weaver, Chairman of the Committee on Rules, reports i that the followlng Legislatlve Measures have been assigned: I 1 62 E  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Leglslative Day April 23, 1996 Referred to Executive Committee - Senate Resolution l92 and Senate Amendment No . 1 to Senate Resolution 52; and Be Approved for Consideration - Senate Resolution 52.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Page 8 of the Calendar is the Order of Constitutional Amendments. Senator Petka, did you wish Senate Joint Resolution 27 called? Madam Secretary, read the resolution.

Senate Joint Resolution 27, Constitutional Amendment, as amended by Senate Amendment No. 1. (Secretary reads SJRCA No. 27, as amended) 3rd Reading of this constitutional amendment.

PRESIDING OFEICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Petka .

Thank you very much, Mr. President and Menbers of the Senate. We've just gone through a rather lengthy debate and dlscussion of the merit system of selectlng judges, whlch I believe were primarily aimed at correcting problems caused by the sheer size of Cook County . However, durkng the course of the debate, We heard that -- from some Members that what wedre, in effect, doing is displacing people fron the equation and replacing them with professional politiclans. Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 27 retains some of the language from 25y however differs in the following : The Suprene Court of the State of Illinois would be elected, as opposed to seleckeds from *hree distrlcts. The constitutional amendment provides that these districts Would be -- would be required to be ccmpact, contiguous and substantially equal, but not to such an extent that We wculd dilute the voting strength of any particular ethnic group. I I ! believe that this is an amendment of fundamental fairness for the people of Ehls State. Currentlyr I live in the Third Judicial 63  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 District, or Third Appellate District and Supreme Court District, and the Twelfth Judicial Circuit of Will County. I vote for one Supreme Court Justice. People in Cook County vote for three. I believe it was six years ago that many Members of my side of the aisle worked with some Members from the Denocratic side of the aisle to come up with a plan of subcircuits Which basically set into motion a process by which minorities and suburbanites would be permitted to have more direct control over the judges who would be conducting buslness in their neiqhborhoods. In my opinion, the process has worked fairly well, but certainly needs some improvement. However - however - recent events that have been ! hiqhlishted in the media, and especially in some cf the opinion , ! molders in -- in Cock County ln *he newspapers, have pointed out i j that .the process of election, because of the -- the size of the ballot, because of the unknown quantities of individuals who are running for office sometimes leads to less-than-desirable results. A11 we are attempting to do With this amendment is to permit an election in three districts in Cook County for the Supreme Court and to give people thenselves an opportunity within the County of Cook to decide whether or no* there might be a better way to bring judges to the bench. Andz Mr. President and Members of the Senate, 1911 answer any questlons that may arise.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Presldent and Members of the Senate. Question of the sponsor, please.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Sponsor says he Will yiekd.

Senator, one of the arguments for this bill from the ; proponents has been that by dividing the districts up into -- i 1 64 ! I I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 Supreme Court up into subdistricts, it would afford a greater opportunity for minorities to be elected to the Supreme Court. i But -- but I have a question: In the process of these minorities, are you talking about racial and ethnic minorities or are the ( overwhelming concern here about minoritiesz political minorities? l PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) ( ! Senator Petka . ' i SENATOR PETKA : : ( Senator, the -- the language of the Constitution talks about ( racial and ethnlc ninorities.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins.

Senator, I see you had to smile on that, but -- but isn't the reality of this whole thing that the only minority in Cook County would benefit from this would be political minority, which would be the Republican Party having an opportunity - a great opportunity - to elect a Supreme Court Judge from that -- one of the subcircuits in Cook County?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Petka .

Senator, first of all, I'm not going to presuppose the way that any person or any group of people are going to vote before any election. I think if you would just examine the election hlstory in this State and nation over *he lask thlrty or forty years, you can see that we no longer have a -- a dependable political base that's affiliated with parties. But I do belleve, Senator, that in terms of the electlon of -- of a minority nember to the Supreme Court, that certainly this plan would enhance that and guarantee it -- virtually guarantee it over the -- the life of the Constitution. 65  ! i l STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 i ! PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) I Senator Collins. SENATOR COLLINS: One last question. Who is going to do the appointing? PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Petka. SENATOR PETKA : In terms of the Supreme Court, Senator, there is no appointing to the Supreme Court. It Will be an election, as opposed to a selection. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins. SENATOR COLLINS: Who's going to be drawing the lines? PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Petka. SENATOR PETKA: The General Assembly will be drawing such lines afterz I believe it isy December 1st, 1997. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins. SENATOR COLLINS: So it's -- it's included in this resolution that the General Assembly will, in fact, draw the linesr and -- and how many votes will it take? PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Petka. SENATOR PETKA: Wellr we will not have the same standard as We had in one of our constitutional amendments that Was put out, so it Would require a majority. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) 66  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 Senator Collins.

So -- so -- so what you're saying is, that the General Assembly would draw the lines. And a1l of what We've done and al1 i the resolutions today We talked about needing a three-fifths i votes, but Won't need a three-fifth vote to draw the lines for the I I sub-judicial circuits. Is that What ycubre saying?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Petka.

If *he General Assembly finishes their business before May 31st of any particular year, that is correct. After May 31s* or June 1st, it Will require an extraordinary majority.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Collins. SENATOR COLLINS: k i i Thank you so much. And -- and I -- and I guess that that : concludes my renark, and I would just only say that We should give 1 1 this bill the same fate, the same votes that We did the one prior 1 I to it. This most certainly is not about -- the only minority that's tend -- will gain fron this Wll1 be the Republican minority, which will control the Supreme Court and draw the maps for the next twenty years, and control this State. So I Would urge its defeat.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) fenator Molaro. i ( SENATOR MOLARO : ! i Thank you, Mr. President, Members. Will the sponsor yield for ! a question? i i PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) l Sponsor says he wlll. . SENATOR MOLARO: ! 1 67 I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 ! Does -- does this -- this constitutional amendment call for the merit selection of judges in Cook County? And it...

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Petka.

Senator Molaro, the -- this constitution amendment differs from Senator Dillard, only in the manner of selection and election of the Illinois Supreme Court.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Molaro.

Yeah. So the answer's yes, I would assume? A1l right. Well, just -- just one comment. I'm not going to repeat a11 the other comments we made earlier, 'cause we a1l know how We feel about that. You know, until you got up to spoker I -- you 're starting and I'm finally understanding the stuff about the Supreme Court. T guess on this side of the aisle we can look at it as though it's a takeover by the Republican Party, but it does seem to make sense to me that if you live in a certaln county, you go up there, you vote for one Supreme Court Justice. I'm beginning to see the wisdom of that. Why should I get a chance to vote for three? I - - I will tell you right now cn the Floor, even lf it's a l Republican takeover, because they might :et one the Way they cut p ' j itz I'm beginnlng to think maybe it's unfair to us to vote for I i I amendment comes back that jusE deals wlth that. So that makes I sense. However, I still have to vote Noy because I still can't I I figure out why Cook Coun.ty will be singled out. Noww there are l j Members here who were here When the Demccrats controlled it. 1 i Unfortunatelyr I Was not here at the time. I Would like to knowy and naybe they could point it out or Ne can do it in research, earlier, if there was a Democrat from Ccok County who was passing 68  STATE OE ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 substantive, major changes in the law - which I think *he sponsor will say this ls certainly one; whether you go from elected to nonelected office, that's major - that a Cook County Denocratic Member would go when we had control of the Senate and start making major substantlve changes in Tazewell Countyr or other counties -- Will Couney. I -- I -- you know, and I don 't know how lon: you've been here, if you were here under Phil Rock. Maybe you could ! research how many times a Democratic Member from Cook County would stand up to make major changes strictly in Will County and say, ''You know what, wefre going to make changes Ehere because...'' and give a list of three, or four: or five reasons that he believes is ' correct. If there were a lot of them, major changes, then this -- this doesn't really make any sense. But I just feel that people ' from Cook County are just as lntelligent or non-lntelligent as anyone else, and -- and I don't like that we're singled out. ! Thank you. PéESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Carroll. ! SENATOR CARROLL : Thank you, Mr. Presidenty Members of the Senate. Hopefully I Will have leave to have my prior remarks recorded by reference into this so I don't have to repeat them, but let me just add to i that one thing, since thls is slightly different. And I find it interesting that a gentleman from outside Cook would suggest that @ the *ay to protect racial minorities, the way to protect gender minorities is to change the Way ln which Supreme Court members are elected in the County of Cook and the County of Cook only, because, supposedly, if we go to three separate subsections, We would then be able eo protect and elect a racial minority or a gender minority. Well, the last tlme I looked at the Illinois Supreme Court, there is one woman member. Happens to be elected under the current system in the County of Cook. There is also one 69  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 African-American menber, and only one African-Ameriean member, and that is also elected under the present system from the County of Cook. So it seems to me if you are really sincere in worrying about electing a member of a raeial minority or a member of a gender ninority, *he current system is the one that workss and I would suggest we keep it. END OF TAPE TAPE 3

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Any further discussion? If noty Senator Petka, to close.

Well: thank you very much again, Mr. President and Members of the Senate. First of al1 to the distinguished Senator from Chicago, Senator Molaro: As -- I was a State's Attorney ln Will County khen the 12th Judlcial Circuit included three counties. And when I came to Springfield, the Demccratic Legislature decided that the three-county circuit should become a one-county circult. And, in fact, they did it. And -- it's worked out okay. It's Worked out okay. It's very ironic to myself When I think back, think of some of the remarks that Were nade, some of the remarks that have been made during *he presentation nade by Senator Dillard on his plece of leglslation - people referring to this as a ''massive power grabn. President Ronald Reagan, in -- during h1s first term in offlce, urged and supported and signed legislation which expanded the rights of the voting franchise and created the concept of majority/minority districts. Check it out: The Voting Rights Act. Right now, appointees made by the  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 President of the United States are in the process of systematically undoin: the spirit of the supermajority/minority districts. With this piece of legislation, you have the opportunity, nembers of the Minorityy to build right into the Illinois Constitution a protection, a protection that may be taken away from you by the Clinton nominees on the Suprene Court. Additionally, in my oplnion, based upon the nedia molders in khe City of Chicago, polls that have been takenz this initiative -- or a merit selection inieiaeive, if placed on the ballot, especially for the County of Cook, would enjoy overwhelming support. The three-fifths guarantee that we -- that we place in the merit selection process ensures minority -- particlpation. And quite candidly, you 'll never, ever: ever see a better deal. Currently the Cook County Board Chairman can appoint eight menbers. Which -- looking back to When we first went to the sub-circuit -- subdistrict concept, what we tried to do there is to bring responsibility for judges who are sitting on the bench and doing the work in our neighborhoods back to the people that are most directly affected . We have found some problems with that. But we're still going to require individuals to be selected under nerit selection from some of the sub-circuits, but yet still have an opportunity to get the best of the best. And in terms of the redistricting, my dear colleagues and friends, just read the 1 language of the anendment. rt permits, once and for all, a concept of fairness to be spread, so that your votes will equal my voees ln kerms of *he Supreme Courts khieh is th9 hlghest judicial branch in this State and nationwide in the U.S. Supreme Court. ! Again, this may be your last chance to catch the trainz because you're never going to see another and better deal than this. I 1 urge an Aye vote.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) i The question is, shall Senate Joint Resolution 27 be adopted ! I I I 71 ' ! I i STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 ! and approved. And pursuane to Section 2: Article XIV of the l Illinois Constitution, amendments must be approved by three-fifths of the Members elected. Those in favor will vote Aye. Those opposed will vote Nay. And the voting is noW open. Have all voted who wish? Have all voted who wish? Have a11 voted who i I wish? Have a1l voted Who wish? Take the record. On that question, there are 34 Ayes, 24 Nays. Senate Joint Resolution 27, having failed to receive a three-fifths constitutional najority, is declared lost. For what reason does Senator Mahar seek recognition? SENATOR MAHAR: Thank youy Mr. President. Because of the committee schedule being jazzed-up here this afternoon and we have other Members Who - would normally being serving on Environment and Energy serving on other committees, we -- I don't think we're golng to have a quorum. Soa1lthoseMembers*ho serve on that comnltteey as well I I i as Senators Burzynski, Weaver and Raica, We're going to cancel ' today's meetlng. Handle it next week. . PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator -- Senator Geo-Karis. SENATOR GEO-KARIS: Personal privllege. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) St i ate your... j 1 SENATOR GEO-KARIS: I Mr. President, a polnt of personal privilege. And, Ladles and k i Gentlemen of the Senate, I'd like to introduce a very talented i lady, Who is the -- With Kimberly Financial Services, ny constituent Dorothy Desmond, who is here with the group today. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) I Thank you for visiting With us. Senator Fawell. j i SENATOR FAWELL: ! I E 72 i I I  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Leglslative Day April 23z 1996 Thank you very much. We -- the Transportation Committee will meet immediately after we adjourn, in Room 400. It shouldn't take too long. The controversial bills are being held.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) I Senator Peterson.

! Thank your Mr. President. For purposes of announcenent: The Revenue Committee will meet in Room A-1 - in Room A-1 - at 5 p.m.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DPANGELIS) Senator Cronin. ! SENATOR cRoNzN: The senate Education committee shall meet immediately - ! 3:30 p.m . - in Room A-l.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) ! Senator Rauschenberger. SENATOR RAUSCHENBERGER: ! l This isn'i -- I rise for purposes of an announcement. For those Members who are on the Appropriations Committeey immediately i upon adjournment webll go to Room 212, and we're going to proceed immediately with action on the supplemental appropriation ! requested by the Governor and passed over to us from the Housez followed by hearing subject -- subject matter and bill hearings on State agencies. The agencies have been waiting since 1. I'd ! encourage everyone to come to committee as promptly after Session I ; as possible.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DPANGELIE) Senator Watson. ! SENATOR WATSON: I Yes. An announcement, Mr. President. I know al1 of you are ( anxious about the softball game next week. It's the 30th of I April. We've had a -- we've got a real Winning streak going. q Everybody looks good. I know you've been practicing at home. We I 73 I i  STATE OF ILLINOIS 89TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION SENATE TRANSCRIPT 96th Legislative Day April 23, 1996 do have a practice tonight at 5 o'clock, and I've got maps on Where we 're goin: to practice. And We're going to attempt to practice again tomorrow night. We do these practices in -- in nemory and -- of Pat Welch and Walter Dudycz, both of whon broke fingers at practices in the past. So we -- so we want to continue that -- this -- the practices in their nemory.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Senator Demuzio.

Thank you, Mr. President. I -- I'd like to -- to report to Senator Watson that his... You knowz Senator Watson has two practice fields. He tells the good guys where there are actually practices -- is going to be held, and he tells the other fellows, like me, to go like to the ballpark in Sherman or someplace like that. I was wondering: Are they going to have any foad or anything there in Sherman if we show up at that other practlce field tonight?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DeANGELIS) Is there any further buslness to be -- come before the Senate? not, the -- not, Senator Bomke moves that the Senate stand adjourned until 11 -- 11 a.m., Wednesday, April 5th -- 24th. 74 REPORT: TIFLDAY STATE OF ILLIMOIS 96/10/0T PAGE: 001 89TH GEVERâL ZSSDMBLF 13;V4)2k SENàTE DâILT TRANSCRIPTIOK OF DEBATE INDEX APRIL 23, 1996 HB-OOITFIRSTRE;DING PAGE 2 i HB-2 1k7 16 2FIRSTREâ ADING PAGE 2 3 l HB-2k21FIRSTREADING PAGE 3 1 ' H3-2592 FIPST READING PAGE 7 1 , H8-2632 FIRST READING PAGE 3 H8-2737 FIRST REâDING PAGE 3 H8-2751 FIRST READING PAGE 3 H8-2859 FIRST REâDING PAGE 3 H8-2900 FIRST READING PAGE 3 H8-3157 FIRST READING PZGE 1 H8-3193 FIRST READING PAGE I '2 H8-3204 FIRST REâDING PAGE 3 H8-3283 FIRST REZDING PAGE 3 I H8-3380 FIRST REàDING PZGE 3 ' HB-3R1y FIRST REZDING PâGE 3 I HB-3kq8 FIRST REâDING PZGE 3 ' H8-3658 FIRST READING PâGE 8 1 H8-3668 FIRST REâDING PZGE 8 : H8-3694 FIRST REZDING P26E 3 H8-3695 FIRST READING PAGE 3 I H8-3696 FtRST READING PAGE 3 H8-3698 FIRST READIMG PZGE ) f ! SR-0193 RDSOLUTIOK OFFERED PAGE 2 8R-01jk RESOLUTION OFFERED PAGE 2 SR-0195 RESOLUTIOK OFFERED PAGF 7 ' SR-0196 RESOLUTIOM OFFERED PAGE 7 ! SJR-O0O3 TMIRD REZDING PAGE 8 SJR-0003 ADOPTED PAGE 31 ' SJR-O018 THIRD PEADING PAGE 31 SJR-0018 RESOLUTION FZILED PAGE kv I SJ9-00J5 THJHD HFADTNG PAGE kk SJR-0025 RESOLUTION FAILED PâGE 62 I SJR-0027 THJRD REàDING PZGE 63 ' SJR-002T RESOLDTION FAILED PâGE 72 ! SJR-0092 RESOLUTION OFFERED PAGE 2 ' SUBJECT HZTTER I i SENATE T0 ORDER-PRESIDEMT PHILIP PAGE 1 PRAYER-THE REVEREND GERRY COHSTOCK PZGE 1 j PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PZGE 1 ' p JOURNAL-APPROVED PAGE 1 JOURNâLS-POSTPOMED ' PAGE 1 IMTRODUCTION OF GUEST-SENàTOR LUECKTEFELD PAGE 2 GUEST SPEAKER-MR. IKE HINTON PAGE 2 SENATE STâNDS âT EâSE PAGE 7 SEMATE RECOMVENES PAGE I COHMITTEE REPORTS PAGE 62 ADJOURMHEMT PAGE 7% l ! ! i ' f j I I l