81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION PRESIDENT · la Thank you, Mr. President and members of the Senate.:4 rise in support of House Joint Resolution 104. After lengthy 15 discussions

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY

REGULAR SESSION

JUNE 29, 1980

PRESIDENT:

The Senate will come to order. Will the members please

be in their seats. Will our guests in the gallery please rise.

Prayer this afternoon by Senator John Davidson. Senator.

SENATOR DAVIDSON:

(Prayer given by Senator John Davidson)

PRESIDENT:

Reading of Ehe Journal. Senator Johns.

SENATOR JOHNS:

Thank you, lœ . President. I move that reading and approval

of the Journals of Monday, June the 23rd, Tuesday, June...lune

the 24th, Wednesday, June the 25th, Thursday, June the 26th,

Friday, June the 27th and Saturday, June the 28th in the year

1980 be postponed pending arrival of the printed Journals.

PRESIDENT:

You have heard the motion. Is there any discussion? note all

in favor signify by saying Aye. opposed. The Ayes have

So ordered. Messages from the House.

SECRETARY:

Message from the House by Mr. OlBrien, Clerk.

Mr. President am directed to inform the Senate

the House of Representatives has concurred with the Senate

in the passage of a bill with the following title, to-wit:

Senate Bill 1662, with House Amendments 1, 2: 3, 4:

5, 6, 7 and 10.

A Message from the House by Mr. OlBrien, Clerk.

Mr. President am directed to inform the Senate

the House of Representatives refused to concur with the Senate

in the adoption of their amendments to bills with the following

titles:

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

18.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

2b.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

House Bill 821, with Senate Amendments 1 and 2.

929, with Senate Amendments 3 and 4.

2710, with Senate Amendment 2.

1.

2.

2723, with Senate Amendments 1, 2, 3 and 4.

3038, with Senate Amendments 1 through l4, 16, 17

and l8.

House Bill 3084, with Senate Amendments 3,

l0, l1, 12, l4, 15 and

3197, with Senate Amendments l and 2.

3289, with Senate Amendment 4.

A Message from the House by Mr. O'Brien, Clerk.8.

Mr. President am directed to inform the Senate9.the House of Representatives refused to recede from theirl0

.

Amendment No. 1 to Senate Bill 934, and the Speaher has appointedll.

the members of the Conference...and requests a first Conferencel2.

Committee...and the = fe c ce...e the Speaker has appointed thel3.

members on the part of the House.l4.

On Senate Bill 1404, a like message with Senate Amendmentl5.

No. They request a First Conference and the Speaker hasl6.

appointed the members on the part of the House.l7.

like message on 1480, and Senate Amendment No. 3.l8.

They request a First Conference, and the Speaker has appointedl9.

the members on the part of the House.20.

A like message on Senate Bill 1505, with Senate Amendments2l.

2 and 4, requesting a First Conference, and the Speaker has22.

appointed the members on the part of the House.23.

A like message on Senate Bill 1510, with Amendment No...24.

House Amèndment No. 4 and requesting a First Conference. and25.

' the Speaker has appointed the members on the part of the House.26.

A like message on 1613, with Amendment No. and the...27.

requesting a First Conference, and the speaker has appointed28.

the members on the part of the House.29.

A like message on 1616: with House Amendment No.30.

requesting a First Committee of Conference, and the Speaker3l.

has appointed the members on the part of the House.32. .

like message on 1632, with House Amendment No. 2033.

k*

6*

%*

N*

1.

1.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

requesting a First Conference, and the Speaker has appointed

the members on the part of the House.

A like message on 1726, Senate Amendments 1: 5 and- .

or House Amendments, rather. They are requesting a 'First

Conference and the Speaker has appointed the members on the

part of the House.

A like message on l7...Senate Bill 1747, with House

Amendment 1, requesting a W rst œ nference, and the Speaker

has appointed the members on Ehe part of the House.

A like message on 1752, with House Amendment requesting

a First Conference, and the Speaker has appointed the members

on the part of the House.

A like message on 1760, House Amendment 2, requesting

a H rst Conference, and Ehe Speaker has appointed the members

on the part of the House.

A like message on 1812, with Senate..oHouse Amendments

and requesting a H rst œ nference, and the Speaker has

appointed the members on the part of the House.

A like message on Senate Bill 1828, with House Amendments

4 and requesting a First Conference, and the Speaker has


And a like message on Senate Bill 2000 with House Amendments#

and 2, requesting a Pirst Conference, and the Speaker has


PRESIDENT:

Senator Donnewald, for what purpose do you arise?

SENATOR DONNEWALD:

Well, yes, !V . President, would...on the messages received,

I would move to accede to the ..-accede to t- Messa> f= the Hou- mna get

the Conference CommikEees on the way.

PRESIDENT:

A11 right. The question is shall the Senate accede ko

the request of the House that a Conference Committee be appointed

3

1.

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

14.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

l9.

20.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

with respect to Senate Bill 934, 1404, 1480, 1505, 1510, 1613,

1616, 1632, 1726, 1747, 1752, 1760, 1812, 1828, and 2000.

A1l in favor signify by saying Aye. A1l opposed. The Ayes

have The motion carries and the Senate does accede to

the request to appoint Conference Committees. Resolutions.

SECRETARY:

Senate Resolution 621, offered by Senator Mitchler. It's

congratulatory.

Senate Resolution 622, offered by Senator Sangmeister.

It's congratulatory.

And, Senate Resolution 623, offered by Senators Mitchler

and a11 Senators, and a death resolution.

PRESIDENT:

Consent Calendar.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DONNEWALD)

Resolutions.

SECRETARY:

Senate Joint Resolution 123, offered by Senators Rock

and Shapiro.


Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

Thank you, le . President and Ladies and Gentlemen of

the Senate. There are two Senate Joint Resolutions up there;

would ask for the...that they be read in, and I would move

to suspend the applicable rules so that these can be reported

to.-.to the Secretary's Desk on the Order of Resolutionse so

that theyRll show up on the Calendar tomorrow.

SECRETARY:

Senate Joint Resolution l24...a1so offered by Senator

Rock.


Well, the motion...motion is to suspend the rules on b0th

4

1.

2.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

of these resolutions, kn order that they may be considered

immediately. They will be placed on the Secretary's Desk

for.v.on tomorrow's Calendar. Is there leave? Leave is

granted. Senator Mitchlery for what purpose do you arise?

SENATOR MITCHLER:

le . Presidentm..Mr. President and members of the Senate,

on the Order of Resolutions, on the...in the Executive Committee

is senate Resolution 565 and Senate Resolution 566, and I spoke

to President Rock and I would...move that b0th of those resolutions

be discharged from the Senate Executive Committee and placed

on the Secretary's Desk, Resolutions on the Calendar. I spoke

this morning with...


. o osenate Resolutions 565 and 566, Senator Mitchler moves

that they be discharged from the Committee on Executive and placed

on tomorrow's Calendar. Is there leave? Leave is granted.

Senator Maragos, for what purpose do you arise?

SENATOR MARAGOS:

rise for a form of a motion. Senate Joint Resolution

118 is in Executive: and I would like to have, at this time, a

Motion to Discharge Executive and have it passed today,

possible; so I could have it in the House tomorrow, so .. .it's

a resolution dealing with the question of..aof memorializing

the Fresident and the Olympic Committee to allow the Olympic

Games to be held in the country of Greece in the future, and

I would...that's...that's...


senator Maragos moves to discharge the Executive Committee

from further consideration of Senate Joint Resolution 1l8 and

those in favor of that indicate by saying Aye. And those opposed

Nay. The Ayes have it. Now, Senator Méragos moves for the

adoption...moves for the adoption of Senate Joint Resolution

118. Those in favor indicate by saykng Aye. Those opposed.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

5

1.

2.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

12.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

3Q.

3l.

32.

33.

The Ayes have it. The Senate Joint Resolution is adopted.

Senator Maragos.

SENATOR IG M GOS:

I would also like to have leave for a11 the Senators

to become joint sponsors of that resolution.


The record will so show...order of Resolutions on the

Calendar, page two, Secretary's Desk, Resolutions. House

Joint Resolution 104, Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

Yes, thank you, Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen

of the Senate. I have just filed...


Will the Senate please be in orderz Proceed.

SENATOR ROCK:

. . .this is the joint resolution as requested from the

House leadership, with respect to setting up a committee to

propose an argument against the proposed amendment to the

Illinois Constitution to alter the size and manner of election

of the House of Representatives. I have placed with the

Secretary, an amendment which should be adopted, because it

calls for the reporting date, instead of being today, that

the reporting date will be tomorrow. And I would move the

adoption of Amendment No. l to House Joint Resolution 104,

and then ask that that resolution be adopted and sent back to

the House.


Senator Bloom.

SENATOR BLOOl4:

Whyv..a question of the sponsor. Why should we be put in

the position of commenting on the size ind composition of the

House?

FRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DONNEWALD)

6

1. senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

By Statute, we are required to, when there is a public

referenda, under Article IV of the Constitution, we are required

to put together a committee to propose the arguments against

the proponents...now, we went through this whole thing the

other day. The proponents submit their argument to the

Attorney General and then both are given to the Secretary of

State and they are mailed out to a11 the electors.


Is there further discussion? Senator Mcllillan.

SENATOR MCMILLAN :

Well, I apologize if I wasn't listening fully, because

it was a resolution; but what are we about to vote on, that's

my question.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DOIOIEWALD)

We are considering a amendment to postpone...senator

Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

Yeah. The amendment...the original reporting date for

the committee to report back to b0th Houses was the 29th day

of June. It's too late; today's the 29th day of June. So,

my amendment, which is under consideration right now, says

June 30th; and I would like that adopted, and then we can

speak to the resolution.


.. .Is there further discussion? The question is shall

Amendment No. l to House Joint Resolution 104 be adopted.

Those in favor indicate by saying Aye. Those opposed. The

Ayes have it. Amendment No. is adopted. Are there further

amendments?

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

18.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

SECRETARY:

No further amendments.

7

FRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DONNEWALD)

Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:).

4. Now, I would move for the adoption of House Joint Resolution

5. 104, and what it does, it sets up a twelve-member committee,

6. three from each side of the aisle in each House to sit down

7. and write the argument against the proposed Constitutional

g. initiative concerning the size and the manner of elecEion

9 of the House of Representatives.

lc. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DONNEWALD)

lz Senator Rhoads.

12 SENATOR RHOADS:

la Thank you, Mr. President and members of the Senate.

:4 rise in support of House Joint Resolution 104. After lengthy

15 discussions with the Senate President two days ago, we de-

termined that this is a mandate under the State Statutes that16.

were passed last year. The SEate Board of Elections will17.

select proponents who will write arguments in favor of al8.

Legislative initiative that came on by..mcame on by petitionl9.

it does, in fact, get on the ballot; and that argument20.

will be submitted to the Attorney General for fairness and

accuracyy and then they will be printed and published pursuant22.

to State law. Were it not for the fact that we had another23.

Constitutional Amendment also on the ballot, we would go...be24.

going to considerable expense to do this; but since we have25.

another C onstitutional Amendment explanation going out in26.

addition to this one, the head of the Index Division of the27. .

Secretary of State tells me that they can put it into the same28.

booklet, mail it at the same time; and although there will be29.

some added cost, it won't be as expensive as it otherwise would30.

be# so, 1...1 urge an Aye vote on House Joint Resolution 104.3l.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DONNEWALD)32. .

Senator McMillan.33.

8

1.

2.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

SENATOR MCMILLAN:

Well: le . President and members of the Senate, I rise

in opposition to House Joint ResoluEion donît claim

to be an authority on that particular part of the Constitution,

but I see no way why the Legislaturo quite apart from rur

particular or individual views on the question, should be cast

with the responsibility of writing the argument against the

proposed amendment to the Constitution. I could understand it

if we had responsibility for doing both the proponents and the

opponents, but it seems highly inappropriate and, in fact, a

very unwise act as far as I am concerned for the Legislature

to be placed in this position and to take on that responsibility.

firmly believe we ought to...to defeat House Joint Resolution

104 and T would ask for a roll call at the appropriate time.


Senator Keats.

SENATOR KEATS:

Thank you, Mr. President. I just pose a question to the

sponsor of the amendment. I am sitting here looking at our

Constitutiow and we are being told that we need to do this;

wo as the Legislature, have to take a position in opposition to

a constitutional amendment. I don't mean to be cynical, but

I'm sitting here reading the Constitution, I've got it right

in front of me and 1:11 be doggoned if I can find where it

says, we, the Legislaturq nust be put in the position of opposing

a Constitutional Amendment that some of us happen to support.

Could someone explain to me why this has to be done, when it

doesnît seem to be written in law?


Senator Rock. Do we have leave for Channel 20 for

permission to video tape? Leave is granted. Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

Welle we...we passedr last year, a bill which says we have

9

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

1l.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

to do this. It's in the Statute.


Senator Keats.

SENATOR KEATS:

Could you please give us, or tell us, how and why we

are only doing opposition; because, as look at the Constitution,

the wording is simple, we are to send them somethkng. Now,

perhaps, we should check the Statute, but I have to admit at

this point, I cannoty number 1, see any need for us to take a

position in opposition to many of our wishes; and number 2,

the mandate is certainly unclear that we do anything at all,

and perhaps your staff could explain to us why this needs to

be done.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DOAWEWALD)

Senator...senator Rhoads.

SENATOR RHOADS:

Well. Senator Keats, if I may takd the liberty of speakkng

to that point. We did research this in great detail about two

days ago when I first raised Ehe question, the same questions

that you and Senator McMillan are now raising with regard to

this resolution. Number 1, we are writing the opposition...not

we, but those members of the General Assembly who are, in fact,

opposed to it, will be appointed by l eadership on b0th sides,

and they will write the arguments in opposition. That is mandated

by the Statute that was passed last year, to take the opposite

side of the question on this initiative affecting the Legie ative

Article from Ehose who proposed the petition and who are getting

the petition on the ballot. They will dictate the form of the

ballot, the ballot question, thatls governed by Ehe petition.

They will also write the arguments favor and the explanation

of the ballot question. The reason we're not writing :0th sides

of the.mgof the question is because this wasn't proposed by the

General Assembly. If it hai been proposed by the General

l8.

l9.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

10

1.

4.

5.

6.

Assembly, we would write pro and con arguments. As a matter

of fac t, in theo..in the o ther onstitutional mendment that

Senator Rock sponsored, e did write pro arguments and that

will be mailed out at the same time.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENA QDR DONNEWALD)

Senator Keats.

SENATOR KEA % :

Would you mind, > nator Rhoad k, could you pe > àps get

sore one to quote the Statutes? I mean, we have attorneys on

this side who are saying, I1m sorry, that interpretation is

just plain in errorr and the second factor that I think weshould look at is number k p kf you are correct, which is open

to question, of course, I would never want to quarrel with my

friends; but the second part is, if you are correct, one thing

remember from Constitutional Amendments that !* passed in

1977 or 8, I guess it was 8 , was the Senate and the House

ihen DAed on whether or Y t these vere acntm te. And if this is

e be included this quickly, what welre saying is this will

be written by pe opl e we don't agree with and you and I will

not get another chance to look at it, and will be % nt out

under you and my name without us getting to check it. think

that is certainly unreasonable and not within the Statute, if

the Statute claims we should write so> thing at all.


Senator Rhoads.

SENA K R RHOADS:

Well, the...if Senator Rock's resolution passes, a...a

> port is draftedg and if I'm not miste èn, A na M r Rock, that

report co= s br k to us for approvc or disapproval. That...

that is the.oothat is the procedun . Andq.wand, Se nator Keats,

now, you know, I'd be happy to co> over there and talk to you

about this, but our-.vour staff c oun- l has looked at this,

e xtensively; staff counsel on bo th sides. So, don't make a

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

10.

3l.

32.

33.

11

2.

).

4.

6.

7.

$.

9.

l0.

1l.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

2b.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

representation here that...that you don't.oayou know, when

you donlt know what youîre talking about. We...we have checked

this out very thoroughly two days ago.


Senator Keats.

SENATOR KEATS:

Mr. Senator, I know you to be an honest man, because

you're not a lawyer, but you know, if youdve got three lawm rs,

youpve got four opinions. Now, what we're saying is, 1 et's

be sure before we run this resolution out and number two,

you My it comes back to Legislature, well, there's a good

chance we will not be having a regularly scheduled % ssion

time to deal with..oin order to get it al1 printed and sent

out. I mean there are certain complications involved, and

then we'll go from there. Let's hold it up until we get this

solved.


Se nator Knuppel. Oh, I'm...yes, Senator Knuppel, you're next.

SENATOR KNUPPEL:

Well, m gm ttably, I don't knowm..didn't notice when

this legislation passed, but regrettably, wedre caught in a

no-win position, because on these petitions, I'm sure the people

will believe that...that we've been...even though we've been

trapped into it, that that is the position of everybody in this

Body; that welre anti the petition, rather tian pro. That doesn't

speak for a11 of us. I'm...I'm personally in favor of the

petition. I'm ac tually in favor of a unic ax ra1 Legislature .

think that's what the Statute says. think it's very regrettable.

I think that whatever goes out of here damn well ought to be

approved or disapproved by a1l of us, because I'm...I'm afraid

that the thing will be written inaccurately, because the House

is involved, and I khink that the Senate and the m-mhers appointed

there should be very, very damn careful what goes into it.

12

1.

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

!3.


Senator Geo-Karis.

SENATOR GEO-KARIS:

Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate,

I think that the...the only fair thing to do is to approve

this resolution as amended, because you and I all know, here,

that the Quinn petitions have gotten a 1ot of publicity, very

one-sided, the people a1l think that Quinn is rightr and the

only way theylre going to know the difference is if they have

a comparison. Now, have constituents in my area who do not

want to cut down the Legislature, because they feel it'll

cost the taxpayers far more money...far more money for staff

and then the....Legislators who will be remaining, will be

wanting far more salary. There are a lot of things that can

be done, and I think they should be done. The only fair thing

to do is to give the opposite side. And I haven't taken a

position either way on this issue, and I support the resolution.


Senator Weaver.

SENATOR WEAVER:

A question of Senator Rock.


Indicates...senator Rock indicates he will respond.

SENATOR WEAVER:

Senator Rock, if at K> tbx in the future, there comes

a petition before us that a11 of us in the General Assembly

agree to, who would we get to write the dissent?


Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

The dissent in that instance is, in fact, not necessary;

and that is just the position we have been in with respect...

to the Constitutional Amendmentp which we, in fact, passed.

13

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

13.

l4.

l5.

16.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

passed out of this Body unanimously, and passed the House

with only 2 dissenting votes; so, there were, in fact, no

opponents. That's the one with respect to the right of...

shortening the period of the right of redemption.


Senator Weaver.

SENATOR WEAVER:

Theny is there anyone who writes a dissent to be sent

out along with the explanation from Ehe Secretary; or in that

case, is there no disseut?

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DOIG EWALD)

Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

In that case there is no dissent.


Is there further discussion? Senator Grotberg.

SENATOR GROTBERG:

A parliamentary inquiry on a different matter entirely,

but we.w.we have Conference Committees, do we..mcan we sneak

out and qo to them.e.or are kze going to recess for those?

That's what I wanted to ask.


1111...1:11 defer to Senator Rock. Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK :

No: think at this point, it's the intent of bothm..l

spoke with the Speaker and the Majority Leader a little earlier.

They intend to work for a couple of hours this éfternoon, and

not recess for Conference Committees. I suggest that that

probably would be a better procedure, also, for us, 'cause

the way the Calendar looks, frankly, we shouldn't have to be

here much beyond six o'clock, if...once we start through the

Calendar, and then wepll come back in at nine olclock tomorrow

morning and, we have just, in fact acceded to sixteen requests

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

1.

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

18.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

!3.

from the House for Conference Committees; and those are..onow

having been formed, those are ready to go at the call of the

respective Chairman.


Senator Grotberg.

SENATOR GROTBERG:

Thank you, Mr. President. You did not leave it clear in

my mind; the four-thirty, five: five-thirty tonight meetings

should be shelved 'till tomorrow? Is that...?


Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

No, I'm not suggesting that at all. A11 I'm...I think

you can judge what's on the Calendar and where you have to

be or should be at them..any given moment.


Let your seatmate know. Senator Keats, for what purpose...

did you wish recognition? Senator Keats, getting back to the

order of business.

SENATOR KEATS:

Just a clarification, after being told I don't know what

I'm talking aboutz which I was sure glad to be told. Ifve got

a copy of the Constitution, I've got a copy of the Statute, and

you can tell me where it says welre supposed to write this...

mean, I've got it right here. I'm sitting here looking at it.

got.oour staff looked at the part. It just plain does not say

it is the responsibility of the Legislature to take a position

on opposition, period. Here's the Statute and here's the

Constitution. Please, somebody tell us why we have to take a

position in opposition to this amendment.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DONNEWALDI'

Sen4tor Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

15

1.

3.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

24.

2b.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

1...1 don't think anybody ever suggested that we

have to take a position in opposition to this amendment. That,

I suggest to you, is a matter for your own personal choice,

if an d when that proposed amendment gets on the ballot. What

the Statute that we did pass says, however, is that the minority

of the General Assembly, if Ehey so desire, or the opponents of

an amendment to Article IV of the Constitution, submitted by

petition, if they so desire, may prepare a brief argument against

such amendment. the case of an amendment to Article IV of

the Constitution, initiated pursuant to Section 3'of Article

V the proponents shall be those persons so desig'natèd atXI ,

the time of filing. assume that's Mr. Quinn and his followers.

And the opponents...and the opponents shall be those members

of the General Assembly opposing such amendment, period. Now,

that's what it says, and the Speaker and the Minority Leader

are numbered among the opponents, and they have asked that we

address and consider a House Joint Resolution to see if we can

find six members of the Senate who are also opposed and who

will help them write this argument. And I suggest to you, that

it's not an unreasonable request. We have, for a long time,

been in favor of arguments for and against virtually everything,

and we ought to be in a position to find six members of the

Senate, three appointed by the Minority Leader and three by the

President, who can, in fact.o.prepare an...an argument against

this proposed amendment.


Senator Keats.

SENATOR KEATS:

Number 1, you did read out loud, and I#m looking at it in

front of me, the word is may; the word is not shall, the word is

may, and if...if we are in disagreement and if there is a minority

positionr the Legislakure, which may in reality be a Majorityposition. I won't argue one way or the other, mean, you know,

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l1.

l5.

16.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

it's not a point to be argued. Then, how can it be listed?

And you know the format and you remember seeing theoo.ccn-

stitutional Amendment the same way I did, on the last set of ballots

in '78, where it says, you know, the General Assembly explains

pro and con. Well, in this case, youdll have the opponents

say yes and the General Assembly says no, and that's how to

explain it. That is not the correct position. And with the

wording of may in the Statute, and wedre both looking at

Section 103, Publication of Amendments, Arguments, et cetera,

and that's Section 2. If it's a may.o.if welre going to have an

opposition, we should have a minority report that might, in

reality, disagree with some of what the opposition says. If

wedre to have it all, which is a may.


Senator Bloom.

SENATOR BLOOM:

Well, thank you, Mr. President and fellow Senators. Senator

Rock, to get back to my original question, without al1 the other

stuff. It seems to me that the intent of the Statute could be

fulfilled by a House resolution. 1...1 still get back to my

original question, why should the Senate be put in a position

of commenting on the size and composition of the House? Follow?


Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

The Statute says, ''and the opponentd argument shall be

adopted by the General Assemblyo'' If the General Assembly does

not adopt the opponent: argumentz there is no opponent: argument

that will be submitted to the electors of this State.


Senator Keatse for the third or fourth time.

SENATOR KEATS:

1...1 wouldn't call it the third or fourth time, Mr. President.

2.

).

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

l9.

20.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

This is, would think, a debate back and forth. You mentioned

sonething, Mr. President.o.youlre saying there will be no opposition

published. I do say, tongue in cheek, on this resolution that

has had some mild controversy, there will be some opposition, I

am sure. And what I am saying is, if it's not mandated clearly

that the Senate need not be doing or that we should have some

background in terms of the minority position here, or majorityposition, whichever it is, why must the Senate take this position?

the House wishes to oppose 1et them. I see no reason why

we should be doing


Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

A11 I'm...al1 I'm suggesting is what the Statute suggests;

that if the opponents wish to have an argument in opposition,

that has to be done by action of the General Assembly. The

opponents, who number among them the Speaker and the Minority

Leader and many, many others, have made this request of us.

think it's a reasonable request, and I think House Joint Resolution

104 should be adopted.


A11 right. There has been a request..mjust a moment, there

has been a request for a roll call. Senator Rock may close he

so desires.

SENATOR ROCK:

Yes, thank you, Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen of

the Senate. It seems to me we.v.it's much ado about nothing.

We are in a position that we know that the proponents will submit

theirw..their argument in favor of that proposal, assuming it gets

on the ballot to the Attorney General, who shall in turn give it

to the Secretary of State to be printed and published. The

opponents are members of the House in the main, and they have

requested General Assembly action on an argument against. It

18

just seems to me, only in...fair, that if something is going to

be published and promulgated under the aegis of the Secretary

of State, that we ought to have...we ought to afford the opportunity,

for those who oppose to also have their views printed and

distributed. That's a11 the House is requesting of us at this

6. time and I would urge the adoption of House Joint Resolution 104.

7. PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR DOIG EWM D)

g The question is shall House Joint Resolution 104 pass. Those

in favor vote Aye. Those opposed Nay. The voting is open.oathose9.

voted who wish? Have a11 those voted who wish? Take the record.l0.

On that question, the Ayes are 34, the Nays are 8, 5 Votingll.

Present. House JoinE Resolution l04 is adopted. On the Orderl2.

of Secretary's Desk, page two, Concurrences. May I have thel3.

attention of the membership? Senate Bill 569, Senator Berman.14.

Senate Bill 1378, Senator Sommer. Senate Bill 1500, Senatorl5.

Jerome Joyce. Senate Bill 1578, Senator DeAngelis. Senatel6.

Bill 1624, Senator Nimrod. Senator Nimrod. This is on the

Order of Concurrences, do you wish recognition? Senator Nimrod.l8.

SENATOR NIMROD:l9.

Thank you, Mr. President. I seek leave to...I ask that we not20.

concur in House Amendment No. 1. What this is, is a restoration2l.

of two positions, and we can't seem to reach any agreement; so,22.

I would suggest we send it back so we can get in a conference on it.23.

PRESIDING OFFICERZ (SENATOR DONNEWALD)24.

Senator Nimrod moves to nonconcur in House Amendment No. 125.

to Senate Bill 1624. Those in favor say Aye. Those opposed say26.

Nay. Voting is open...or noz we don't need that.

SECRETARY:28.

No...No.29.

PRESIDING OFFICERZ (SENATOR DONNEWALD)30.

Motion carries. The Secretary shall so advise the House.31.

Senate Bill 1640, Senator Grotberg. 1640. Senate Bill 1642,32. .

Senator Regner. Senate Bill 1650, Senator Nimrod. Senator Nimrod.!3.

SENATOR NIMROD:

Yes, Mr. President, I would ask that we not concur in

19

1.

2.

3.

2.

).

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

2 6 .

.2 7 .

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

Amendment No. 4. And this amendment is an additional of...


Now, Senator, for the sake of being orderly, would you

restate your motion for concurrence of whatever amendments might

be affected, and then ask for a nonconcurrence.

SENATOR NIMROD:

. . .al1 right. Why don't we say we concur in Amendments 1

and 2.


Do you.o.do you wish to.e.do you wish to...

SENATOR NIMROD:

want to handle the others individually, I can.


. . .a11 right. Wedre going.ogyou're moving for concurrence?

Youlre moving for concurrence of Senate...or House Amendments No.

and 2?

SENATOR NIMROD:

and 2.


Is there discussion? The question is shall the Senate

concur in House Amendmentsm.osenator Bowers. There is a request

for explanations of House Amendments 1 and 2. Senator Nimrod.

SENATOR NIMROD:

Thank you, Mr. President. What this is is a transfer bill,

and what these do is transfer within the line items.o.Amendment

No. transfers eleven thousand five hundred within the Fiscal

'80 appropriation for Historical Libraryy and Amendment No.

makes a transfer totaling of...fifty thousand within the appropriation

for the Department of Personnel. There's no new money in these

two amendments.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR BRUCE)

Senator Carroll is recognized.

SENATOR CARROLL:

20

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

13.

l4.

l5.

l6.

18.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

Thank you, Mr. President and Ladies and Gentlemen of the

Senate. We join with Senator Nimrod in seeking concurrence in

House Amendments 1 and 2; these two transfers in the two departments

mentioned and would urge that the Senate do concur with House

Amendments 1 and 2 to Senate Bill 1650.


Further discussion? The motion is to concur in Amendments

and Further discussion? The question is shall the Senate

concur in House Amendments l and 2 to Senate Bill 1650. Those in

favor vote Aye. Those opposed vote Nay. The voting is open.

Have al1 voted who wish? Have a1l voted who wish? Take the

record. On that question, the Ayes are 52# the Nays areo . othe

Ayes are 53, the Nays are none, none Voting Present. The Senate

does concur in House Amendments 1 and 2. Senator Nimrod.

SENATOR NIMROD:

Thank you, Mr. President. I would now move that we not concur

in Amendment No. 4. Amendment No. 4 is an appropriation of four

hundred thousand dollars, that's been added in for construction of

a district headquarters in the Illinois Department of Transportation,District No. 6. I would move that we not concur.


The motion is to nonconcur in House Amendment No. Is there

discussion? senator Demuzio. The motion is to nonconcur.

SENATOR DEMUZIO:

Yes...thahk-you, Mr. Prpsident, and members of the Senate.

Parliamentary inquiry. Can another member make a motion to

concur? If so, I would move to concur kn Amendment 4 to.o.to

Senate Bill 1650.


Wellz Senator Nimrod is the sponsor, and I think the better

procedure might be to allow him to proceed with his motion to non-

concur; and if that is not successful, then the Chair will be faced

with the problem of what happens if someone else wishes to, in fact,

1.

2.

3.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

18.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

concur. The motion before the Body is on a nonconcurrence. If

Senator Nimrod is not successful, we will face the question of. . .

of what happens on a concurrence. Is there discussion? Senator

Demuzio.

SENATOR DEMUZIO:

W:11, ehank you, Mr. President. I wish to rise in opposition to

the nonconcurrence on House Amendment 4 to Senate Bill 1650.

What precisely this amendment does, is provides four hundred

thousand dollars for the initial planning and development of a

highway headquarters...a District 6 Headquarters in Jacksonville.

There has been a study that has been made by the Capital

Development Board that has recommended the site to be in Jackson-

ville, it is a substantial savings to taxpayers of about a quarter

of a million dollars per year. It will provide better service to

the people of this district, by virtue of the fact that it will

be located in the center of the main district foro o .for highways.

And, it is also supported by the Governor's Office, who has the

support, as well as the Illinois Department of Transportation.

I can remember in the last Session, we were talking about a

State Police Headquarters that was to be in my district: also;

and I can remember that the good Gentleman from Springfield got

that too; with a study that had recommended the site be in

Carlinville. This is a...a matter of concern, not only to me,

but also to al1 of the members of my district; Representative

Riley, a member of the opposite party of myself, who attached this

amendment to this bill is supportive of this, and I would ask my

colleagues on this side to nonconcur in...to vote No on this. ..

on this nonconcurrenceoooto vote No on this nonconcurrence. Thank

you.


Further discussion? Senator Davidson.

SENATOR DAVIDSON:

Inquiry. Friday, think it was, we had a position where

22

1.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

1l.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

the sponsor of the bill moved to nonconcur or concur or, I forgot

which it was, and the ruling at then.oothe sponsor of the bill

has control of the bill and it was taken out of the record in

relation to that vote when it went contrary to what he wished.

Is that still the order of the day?


No. The Chair did not rule that waye Senator Davidson.

Senator schaffer took his bill out of the record and later

decided, in fact, he wished to nonconcur, and that...we pro-

ceeded in that way, and we avoided, in fact, explicitly a

ruling on that question. For what purpose does Senator uimrod...

I would point out to the Chair that we are on tne motion to non-

concur, that is before the Body, not any rulings dn that moticn.

SENATOR NIMROD:

Well, Mrp..president. The only thing I would say is that

I still have two more concurrencesa.otwo more amendments on this

that I have not even addressed. Would that not still leave that

bill in my control until I do something about those two other

amendments?


Well, Senator, I would advise, againy that we are on a

nonconcurrence motion on Amendment No. 4, and it might be best

to dispose of that and find out where we are before we speculate

as to where we are. The motion is on a nonconcurrence. Discussion?

Senator Davidson.

SENATOR DAVIDSON:

Mr. President and members of the Senate, I rise in support

of the motion to nonconcur. This project has been kicked aroundand talked about. You a11 have received notice that the road

projects in your districts are being' cut down because of the lackof toad funds. Four hundred thousand dollars is not much; but it's

the opening gun of 4.8 million: up to six million, depending on

who you're talking to. Comes strictly out of the Road Fund; mgney

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

23

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

13.

l4.

l5.

16.

18.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

2b.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

that should be going to highway repairg the potholes you want

fixed or a road bridge you want fixed. I urge al1 of you to

vote to nonconcur.


Further discussion? Senator Knuppel.

SENATOR KNUPPEL:

Well: the place where we've got to build the highways is

west central Illinois. We got to get those swinging vines out of

the trees and so forth, and that's where it ought to be. They

ought to be on the job. They ought not to be driving back and

forth. Thisoo.this Highway Department in Jacksonville will be

one hell of a lot closer to the problem. I could tell you a couple

of jokes, but I don't think they'll do here.


Further discussion? Further discussion? Senator Demuzio.

SENATOR DEMUZIO:

Yeso..apologize for rising a second time, but I would like

to point out that the study that was.o.that recommended the

State Police Headquarters to be in my district, was a substantial

savings to the taxpayers, and Senator Davidson now, was talking

about money out of the Road Fund. You know, whenever the facility

is going to be built Sangamon Countyr right here in Springfield,

itgs always good government, and it goes someplace . elsee itgs

always pork barrel The study has clearly indicated that this is

where the District 6 Headquarters ought to be and I would ask my

colleagues on this side to vote No on theo..on Ehis motion.


Senator Nimrod may close. Senator Davidson.

SENATOR DAVIDSON:

Since he addressed me by name, I don't like to rise a

second time, but there's a few other items. One, is you're al1

talking about, there is no...there's not enough funds in the

Road Fund, first thing; so, we sure shouldn't be building new

).

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

!3.

buildings . Secondly, the other little item is , you ' re going to

move Ehis headquarters that should be in the center; then , those

Gentlemen who live in other. . eand women who live in oEher districts ,

where the headquarters is at the f ar edge of the district, such as

Paris and Streator and Dixon and a f ew other places better start

demanding about another f if ty million dollars to build new head-

quarters to move them to the center of the district . The majority

of the work , the majority of the people live in the west . . .the eastside of this highway district, and if there ' s going to be con-

struction , they move a construction engineer on site, 'as they

do everywhere else , I urge you Eo vote to nonconcur .


Further discussion? Senator Nintrod may close .

SENATOR NI!4ROD :

Thank you p Mr. President. I . . .1 just might remind my f ellow

Senators that I look at this rather objectively. I don ' t livei S ringf ield and I don ' t tive in Jacksonville, but I have takenn p

a look at what the problem seems to be here . In f act , there is no

study that recommends that there will be any savings . I 've read

both the Capital Development Board report and the Illinois Depart-

ment of Transportation reports. The thing that bothers me is that

seems that we are going to spend six million dollars to build

a building , when, f act, a building can be bought right here in

springf ield, with thirty thousand foot more space than what they ' re

even talking about; a buflding that. was . . .that would have f if ty

years of lif e and use for the interest that it would cost to sell

the bonds . In other words y f or sixty. . mfor six hundred thousand

dollars , you can buy a total building that would do the job . Youknow, when you ' re talking about some things that are close , that # s

one thing; but when you're talking about something that ..costs

you ten times more to do the job, it really disappoints me. I'vehad...I went to the people that were involved on my own, and has

been sent to the Secretary of Transportation and I can tell you

25

1.

2.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

k7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

3û.

3l.

32.

!3.

right now, I've Xt blueprints and plans that meet al1 the

specifications for existing facility, that for one million

and a half dollars, you can have a building that gives you

a life of fifty years, and provides a11 the needs. We will

not be displacing a hundred and fifty familiesz for which

the State would have to move the people; and by the Eime you're

through paying the interest on the bonds for six million dollars,

you're talking about over nine million dollars that youdre going

to have to spend. It seems Eo me that that's a total waste of

taxpayers' doney, and when weRre talking about fifty years, we

can't say thato.owhether the roads are going to be built on one

end or the other end. It seems to me that this is :best suited

to be here, with facilities that are already here, and not dislocate

families which, in fact, would have to put on the distance of

traveling alone backand forth to the employees. The Highway

Engineers are opposed to this, the people have been coming to me,

theyfre opposed to it. I think we ought to do that which is in

the best interest of the State employees; that which is in the

best interest of the State taxpayers; and I think that which is

in the best interest of the State, and I think we ought to not

concur, and I would so ask for supportoo.in not concurring in

this Amendment No. 4.


The motion is to nonconcur. Those in favor will vote

Aye. Thosq opposed will vote Nay. The voting is open. It's

on a nonconcurrence, a majority vote will prevail. Have al1voted who wish? Have a11 voted who wish? Take the record.

On that question, the Ayes are 25# the Nays are 30. The motion

to nonconcur is lost. For what purpose does Senator Demuzio

arise? For what purpose does Senator Nimrod arise?

SENATOR NIMROD:

Can we have a verification of the'Noesvsince we better find

out who's here today? A verfication of the negatives?

26

).

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

l9.

20.


There has been a request for a verification of those who

voted in the negative. Will the members please be in their

seats. There's been a request for a verification of those who

voted in the negative. Members be in their seats. The Secretary

will call those who voted in the negative and will you please

respond when your name is called.

SECRETARY:

The following voted in the negative: Berman, Bruce, Buzbee,

Carroll, D'Arco, Daley, Demuzio, Donnewald, Egan, Gitz, Hall,

Johns, Jerome Joyce, Knuppel, Lemke, Maragos, McLendon, Nash,

Nedza, Nega, Netsch, Newhouse, Ozinga, Philip, Sangmeister,

Sa' vickas, Vadalabene, Washingtony Wooten, Mr. President.


Senator Nimrod, do you question the presence of any member

who voted in the negative?

SENATOR NIMROD:

Senator Nash.


Is Senator Nash on the Floor? Standing by Senator Carroll.

SENATOR NIMROD:

Senator Daley.


Is Senator Daley on the Floor? Senator Daley is at Senator

Shapiro's desk.

SENATOR NIMROD:

Senator Buzbee.


Senator Buzbee waso..l'm sorry. Is Senator Buzbee on the

Floor? Senator Buzbee? He's in..ohe just came ouE of the phoneboothz Senator.

SENATOR NIMROD:

Okay, take this out the record.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

3ô.

3l.

32.

33.

27

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

lû.

ll.

12.

13.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

PRESIDING OEFICER: (SENATOR BRUCE)

Well, you canlt take it out of the Senate record, Senator. . .

SENATOR NIMROD:

Yeah, it's my bill, Mr. President...


. . .No, Senator. I announced the roll call. We have never

allowed a Senator to withdraw it...

SENATOR NIMROD:

. . .well...we1l, let me tell you, I hav' e two amendments that

are still left that I haven't called yet, and I have the right

to withdraw...


. . .we11, Senator, I don't care what you do about the other

two amendments...

SENATOR NIMROD:

Oh, Okay. Well, this one, that's right...


.. .The Body has acted on this amendment and the

Chairs way to rule on this, on a verified roll call on -the

motion to nonconcur, there were 25 Ayes, 30 Nays, and the motion

to nonconcur is lost. Further action? For what purpose does

Senator Demuzio arise?

SENATOR DEMUZIO:

Yes. I more to concur on Amendment 4 to Senate Bill 1650.


For what purpose does Senator Nimrod arise?

SENATOR NIMROD:

I move to take it out of the record...l ask to take the

bill out of the record. Itfs my bill, Sir.


Is thereo..senator Nimrod, there ate two pending motions.

You do not desire to take any action on those at this time, is

that correct?

22.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

28

1. SENATOR NIMROD:

I do...I do not desire to take


All right. The bill will remain on the Calendar on the

Order of Concurrence with two amendments yet to be acted upon.

Senate Bill 1664, Senator Sommer. Senator Sommer is recognized

on Senate Bill 1664 with House Amendments 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

SENATOR SOMMER:

Mr. President and members, I move to nonconcur on a11

House amendments.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR BMUCE/

The motion is to nonconcur in House Amendments 2,

5 and 6. Is there discussion? A11 in favor say Aye. Opposed

Nay. The Ayes have The Senate nonconcurs with the above-

mentioned House amendments. SenaEe Bill 1707, Senator Rupp.

Senate Bill 1710, Senator Coffey. Senate Bill 1713, Senator

Bloom. Residential Wholesale Fishing License. No. Senate...

House Bill 276, Senator Sangmeister, Sales Tax on a'nonconcurrence,

with your Senate amendment. Do you wish to recede or to...yes,

Senator. Senator Sangmeister is recognized on page four of your

Calendar, on Nonconcurrencew..Nonconcurrence with Senate amendments

to House Bill 276.

SENATOR SANGMEISTER:

Thank you, Mr. President and members of the Senate. The

motion will be to recede from Senate Amendment No. to House

Bill 276. For your information, this is the Sales Tax Relief,

which removes one more cent from the Sales Tàx on food and drugs.

frankly, even as a Senate sponsor, do not think that this is

the right way to go. We have passed over in the Houseg they

receded froh the amendment they put on over there. As a result,

the removal of the Sales Tax, by way of categories, is already

on the Governor's Desk. We have reached an agreement whereby

this one should also go there, but I say, I hope, in doing so,

any action at this time.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

19.

20.

23.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

29

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

16.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

2:.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

that the Governor will take a good look at the three proposals,

and this is not the one that I think he ought to sign; but he

ought to have the opportunity to make his own decision. And,

Senator DeAngelis, this is youro..your day in the sun, fella,

youdve been waiting a long time for this. 1111 defer to Senator

DeAngelis on the motion. No. A11 right. Theny at this point,

the motion has been made.


The motion is to recede, which will be final passage, on

House Bill 276 and Senate Amendment 1, attached thereto. Is

there discussion of the mo'tion? Senator Rhoads.

SENATOR XHOADS:

Ifm sorry, Senator Sangmeister, Senate Amendment No. l

was, what?


Senator Sangmeister.


Well, what happened is, I amended into Representative

Darrow's Bill my categorical removal; over in the House, he

amended the one penny off into mine. We're b0th receding on

each side, so that our pristine, original intents of the bill

will reach the Governor's Desk. This is a one penny off.


All right. And Lindsay Gedge, Channel 3 News has requested

permission to film the proceedings. Is there leave? Leave is

granted. A1l right. The motion is to..othe question is shall

the Senate recede from Senate Amendment No. 1 to House Bill

Senator Walsh, did you wish to...senator Walsh.

SENATOR WALSH:

Just to urge my colleagues on this side to support Senator

Sangmeister's motion. What this does is just extend them.otheprogram begun last year by taking an additional penny off the

Sales Tax and I urge your support.

30

1.

2.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.


Further discussion? If not, Senator Sangmeister, you

may close.


Wellz thank you again. I think the Governorz obviously,

should have the alternative to do what he wants, but again in

passing this; and I urge all..oeverybody on this side to vote

for this bill; but I would say to the Governor, if he should

be listening, that I would hope you take a good look at the

categorical removal rather than this pdnny.

PRESIDING OFFTCER: (SENATOR BRUCE)

The question is shall the Senate recede from Senate Amendment

No. 1 to House Bill 276. Those in favor vote Aye. Those opposed

vote Nay. The voting is open. Have all voted who wish?

Have a11 voted who wish? Take the record. On that questiong

the Ayes are 52, the Nays are 1, none...l Voting Present. House

Bill 276, having received...the Senate does recede from Senate

Amendment No. 1 to House Bill 276, and the bill, having received

the required constitutional majority, is declared passed. HouseBill 2823, Senator Berning.

(End of Reel)

31

REI:L #2

1.

2.

3.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

2b.

26.

28.

29.

!0.

3l.

32.

33.

Wedll alert the membership as soon as we conclude here,

webre going to go back one more time through the Concurrences,

Secretary's Desk. But we are on the Order of Non-concurrences

on page 4 of your Calendar. Senator Berning is recognized.

SENATOR BERNING:

Thank you, Mr. President, and members of Ehe Senate. House

Bill 2823, was the Inheritance Tax Deferral Billp identical in

most respects to Senate Bill 1497. However, at the request

of Senator D'Arco, when 2823 was before the Senate, 1...1 pulled

it back to 2nd reading and an amendment was attached which

raised the percentage by which the countiés would be reimbursed

from four percent to five percent. And I should add,this was

with the agreemënt of the House sponsor, Representative Pierce.

The bill was then passed and sent to the House, they now have

refused to condur in Senate Amendment No. 6 and the House sponsor,

Representative Pierce has advised ïe that he is agreeable to

our receding from Senate Amendmeht No. 6. and so, I would

therefore, move you, Mr. President, Ehat the Senate recede from

AmendmeAt No. 6.


Discussion? Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

Thank you, Mr. President, and Ladies and Gentlemen df the

Senate. I rise in opposition to the motion to recede. We did.

I thought, have an agreement on the Floor of this Senate, that

when the bill as...was in' troduced it increased the Cook County

share only one percent. It just seems to me this was the amend-

ment that was offered by Senator D'Arco that raised the rest

of the counties a like amount. thought the amendment was a

good one then, and I think it's a good one now, and for us to

recede, simply isn't the way to go. would oppose the motion

to recede.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

13.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

2n.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.


The discussion is to recede, and that will be final passage.

Further discussion? Senator Netsch.

SENATOR NETSCH:

Again, thank you, Mr. President. In light of the noise on

the Floor: was attempting to determine exactly the effect of

Amendment No. 6. I gather it...senator Berning, thi s is the

amendment that deals with increasing the amount of the county

share of the Inheritance Taxy is that correct?


Senator Berning.

SENATOR BERNING:

Yes, from four to five percent.


Senator Netsch.

SENATOR METSCH:

And your potion is that the Senate retreat from the. . .from

that position, and in effect leave the county share at four

percent State-wide where it is right now, is that correct?


Senator Berning.

SENATOR BERNING:

Yls.


Further discussion? Senator Bowers.

SENATOR BOWERS:

Well, because of Senator Berning's location in this State,

I1m a little confused on this motion. If I understand it correctly,

Senator Bqrning, and I would ask first if youfd yield to a question .

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR SAVICKAS)

Senator Berning.

SENATOR BOWERS:

Well, I want to ask the question if hefll yield.

33

1.

2.

3.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

ll.

l2.

13.

l4.

l5.

16.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.


Hedll yield.

SENATOR BOWERS:

If...if we take this amendment off, that will, in effect,

mean that Cook County will collect one percent more than the

rest of the counties in the State, or getone percent more of the collecG oM

than the resE of the counties of the State. Is that-..Ehat's

the way itb been explained, seems to me.


Senator Berning.

SENATOR BERNTNG:

No.


Senator Bowers.

SENATOR BOWERS:

Then youdre taking off the one percent for b0th Cook County

and downstate, ii that correct?

SENATOR BERNING:

Yes.


Senator.- is there further discussion? Senator D'Arco.

SENATOR D'ARCO:

Well, thank you, Mr. President. I thought we were a1l

agreed that this was a good amendment, in facty Senator McMillan

was the first to rise when we presented the amendment and he

did, fact, say that it was much more equitable because we

were giving a11 the counties in the Stàte of Illinois a one

percent increase and not just Cook County. Now, I don't seewhy we should recede from an amendment that is agreeable for the

entire State of Illinois in te rms of the precentage increase.


Senator McMillan.

SENATOR MCMILLAN:

34

Mr. President, and members of the Senate. If at any

2. point we were discussinc changing the percentage of Inheritance

3. Tax kept by the counties, I'm sure 1, in fact, did say, that

4 if weîre going to- .to change it, it ought to be changed for

5 a1l counties. The question here, is not that. It is

6 wise that we recede from this amendment, it is wise to leave

the bill in the form in which we...we worked on it and passed7.

it. And it is wise to take off this amendment which creates8.

a lot of controversy and...and causes a 1ot of problems. So,9.

I support the motion to recede.l0.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR SAVICKAS)ll.

Senator Martin.l2.

SENATOR MARTIN:l3.

A question for the sponsor.l4.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR SAVICKAS)l5.

He indicates he will yield.16.

SENATOR MARTIN :17.

What would be the fiscal impact on the State changing itl8.

State-wide from four percent to five percent? How much revenuel9.

would switch from the State to counties?20.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR SAVICKAS)2l.

Senator Berning.22. .

SENATOR BERNING:23.

Senator, I can't tell you. That was an...this was an amendment24.

which was offerdd on the Floor of the Senake when we were on25.

passage stage, pulled it back from 3rd to 2nd to put the amend-26.

ment on. No one raised the question as to what the impact would27.

be, and I didnit undertake personally: actually had no time28.

to check to see what it would cost the State. So, I can't29.

tell you.30.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR SAVICKAS)3l. .

Senator Martin.32. .

SENATOR MARTIN :33.

35

1.

2.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

lc.

ll.

l2.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

18.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

Wou1d...I believe it was Senator D'Arco, then who was

the originator of the amendment. Would you have any idea ,

Senator D'Arco?


Senator DlArco.

SENATOR D'ARCO:

No, I donlt know what the fiscal impact was, the whole

discussion...the whole discussion involved the fact that Cook

County was getting the extra one percent, and the rest of the

State wasnlt. So, we took the amendment off, and put on an

amendment so the one percent applied for the entire State of

Illinois for all the counties in the State. And I don't know

why we should recede from that, because it is mgch more equitable

and it is fair for a11 the counties. We wanted the Office of

the Public Guardian in Cook County to get the extra one perceht

because al1 other offices for the Office of Public Guardian are

funded by the Statë except the Office of Public Guardian in

Cook County. So, we thought this would be a...a fairer way ko

distribute the money so they would be funded equitably also.

And I worked long and hard on this amendment.


Senator Martin.

SENATOR MARTIN:

Well, I understand' senator D'Arcofs position. I think for

some of us it...you know maybe we'd favor al1 counties getting

a percent more, and certainly not just Cook. But it is rather

difficult to make a decision like that without knowing'the

fiscal impact. It...in other words, it might be a very responsible

vote, or an irresponsible one. I understand why you wanted it

on for Cook County, and I understand that you then agreed to

1et it for the rest of the State. But somehow...do not have a

fiscal impact of..-of a change in State revenues makes it a very

difficult decision for some of us to make.

36

1.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

lô.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

21.

22.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

3:.

3l.

32.

33.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR SAVICFAS)

Senator Gitz.

SENATOR GITZ:

Mr. President, and members of the Senate. I have a question

of the sponsor. But before I ask that question, T think I

can speak directly to Senator Martin's question. The fiscal

impact of adding an naaitinnnl one perceht for the balance of the

State is about l,2 million dollars. The total impact per year

I'm told is six million dollars. Now, those are the best

figures that I have available. think that takes care

of the question. Now, my question to you Senator Berning,

initially I was a little bit concerned about this amendment

because I wanted to be sure that we were not establishing a

differential for Cook County, as opposed to the balance of the

state . Now, this amendment has language of plus one percent

of such revenue collected by each county. And as I read from

Amendment the only difference is, is the one percent collected

in Cook County is earmarked, it is earmarked to the Office

of Pdblic Guardian of each county. Therefore my query to you

is, is what is the difficulty with this amendment? Why are

we going back and taking it off? What is going to be the next

plan of action?


Was that a question, Senator? Senator Berning.

SENATOR BERNING:

Senator Gitz, repeat, Amendment No. 6 was offered after

I agreed to pull the bill back from 3rd reading, we put it on.

I had no objection to we moved the bill back to 3rd reading

and it passed. It is Ehe House which has...and I should add:

I conferred with the House sponsor to be sure that he had no

objection to my beinging it back from 3rd for this amendment.He assured me he had none. We then did pass the bill, it goes over

d h House refuses to concur. The House sponso'rto the House, an t e

37

1.

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

suggested to me that we recede, and pass the bill. I really

have no objection to refusing to recede if that's the will of

the Body, 1'11 be delighEed Eo participate in a Conference

Committee in an effort to see whether we can agree to leave

on, or whether we should agree to take it off. Just by way

of historical background, 1et me point out to you, that it

was a little over a year ago, as I recall, thàt we raised the

county's share of the Inheritance Tax from two percent to four

percent. The Governor vetoed that, we overrode the veto about

a year ago...not quite a year ago. We have as yet no real

experience in what the revenue will be at the four percent,

which is one reason perhaps that the figures on the six...

the five percent would be at bestzestimate. But 1. . .1 moved

to recede in concurrence with the House sponsorfs çequest.


Senator...

SENATOR BERNING:

Why donît we take a vote, Mr. President...


Well, Senator, we would, but we have a lot more discussion

on it. Senator Walsh had sought recognition. We still have

Senator Egan and Senator Wooten. Senator Egan.

SENATOR EGAN:

Yes, thank you, Mr. President: and members ofkthe Senate.

Well., Senator Berning, thatds...that would have been my request,

that you do not accede to the House wish, and your motion then

should not be to.-.to recede, it should be to non-recede- .not

to recede. That would be my request of you and I thought that

was the position that you were in when the bill left the Senate.

I would hope that you would maintain that position.


Senator Wooten .

SENATOR WOOTEN:

38

1.

3.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

' 1 5

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

Thank you, Mr. President. Just a question. In which

LIS publication is the explanation for this? I can't seem

to find it.


The Secretary informs me it was in the one that was put

out yesterday. Is there further discussion? If not, SenatorBerning.

SENATOR BERNING)

Well, Mr. President. 1...1 also don't find it in any one

of these bulleEins we have. It is on page 4 of the Calendar

under Non-concurrence. I thought I was acceding to the position

of the House sponsor and the Senate sponsor of Senate Amendment

- No. 6. But apparently there's been a change of attitude, so

I therefore move you Mr. President, that we...we refuse to recede

from Amendment No. 6, and ask for a Conference Committee.


You've heard the motion. All those in favor signify by

saying Aye. Those opposed. The Ayes have it. The Senate

refuses to recede from Amendment No. 6, and the Secretary will

so inform the House. Well, we will start now: back at the Order

of Secretary's Desk, Concurrence on page 2, with Senate Bill 569.

Senate Bill 1378, Senator Sommer. Senate Bill 1500, Senator

Jerome Joyce. Senate Bill 1578, Senator DeAngelis. Would

you read the motion. Senator DeAngelis.

SENATOR DeANGELIS:

Mr. President, and Ladies and Gàntlemen of the Senate . I

move that we concur with the House on House Amendment No. 1 and

No. 4.


Senator Buzbee.

SENATOR BUZBEE:

Welly SenaEor...DeAngelis, youfre getting sneakier a11 the time.

That's the second time you've tried to sneak this through, and I've

been luckl in that I've caught you bokh times. You already knew,

39

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

1l.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l:.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

good, I'm glad you knew, because I didn't. I strongly objectto this concurrence. I think we ought to vote No. This is

an area where we made-..we made some very good selective cuts

in the operations of this agency, plus the fact the other amend-

ment, Senator, that youbre asking to be concurred in, is the

one that has been worked out in the Education Package with

the Governor, where they have agreed to not accept that amendment

and you're going to...ldve forgotten the exact dollar amount,

O that I don't have my book open, but it's something like

twelve million dollars now over.


That wasn't a question Senator, it was a statement. Senator

Regner.

SENATOR REGNER:

Well, Mr. Presidentr and members. I ari- to concur completely

with Senator Buzbeee and just inform Senator DeAngekis, thisisn't a partisan matter, it's a matter of right versus wrong.

And I think that we should not recede from...or should not

concur with the House amendmehts to this bill. an agency

that's operated probably the most poorly compared to any other

agency in the State. Total incompetence. It's twenty thousand

students thatw.if it defaulted on the guaranteed loans, they

do virtually nothing about And I certâi nly think we should. ..

should not throw good money after bad.


Senator Hall.

SENATOR HALL:

Thank you, Mr. Presidente and Ladies and Gentlemen of the

Senate. Senator DeAngelis, it looks like you've run head on to

the Big Four. Now, would you please tell me, what do these amendments

do?


Senétor DeAngelis.

1.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

10.

1l.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

21.

22.

2$.

26.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

SENATOR DeANGELIS:

Thank you, and I apologize. I wasn't trying to sneak anything

through, because I know that the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

are laying in the bushes on this one too, and I would say ône

thingy that I am now able to identify one of the- oFour Horsemen,

Senator Buzbee, you have now become the Horseman of Pestilence,

because you have stomped to death this agency continuously.

had no hope of sneaking this through knowing some of your

. . .your very strong feelings regarding this. However, in dealing

with the concurrence on this amendment, there's no such thing

as twylve million dollars. What we're talking about is, one,

apd increase, and two, a cut. The increase on House No. 1, is

for operations of a hundred and ninety-nine thousand three

hundred dollars. Senator Buzbee, amonq others, has been very

critical of the operation, but in not allowing them enough money

to operate properly we will back...we will be back here again

next year and make Senator Buzbee's criticism a self-fulfilling

prophesy. House Amendment No. 4 is a redùction of forty-seven

thousand one hundred dollars. The net on this one is a/proximately

a hundred and fifty-two thousand dollars. I don't know where

Senator Buzbee came up with a twelve million dollar number, but

still move to concur with these two amendments.


Is there further discussion? Senator Johns.

SENATOR JOHNS:

Senator, just wanted you to know, I'm with you.PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR SAVICMAS)

Senator Buzbee.

SENATOR BUZBEE:

I'm not at a11 surprised at the last comment. I would...

I would like to point out, expect that kind of comment,by the

way, from this point forward, and I welcom e it. I would like

to point out that the Personal Services cut we took in Ehe Illinois

SEate Scholarship Commission: the ISSC has been computerizing many

41

1.

2.

).

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

of their student grant program applicatkon processing activities.

This has resulted in the need for additional computer programmers

and data processing analysts. In...in effect, the activities of

the Grant Division have been transferred out of the division and

its workload has declined. But a corresponding reduction in

Grant Division head count has not occurred. Now, that's typical

of this agency, they transfer functions out of one...one section,

but they donlt ever bother to transfer the monies out of that

section. Vacant positions, the ISSC has requested l.3 new

GRF comput6r technician positions, however, two computer Eechnicianpositions were budgeted for FY'-80, one of the positions was

filled on June 16th, 1980, the other is still unfilled. New

positionspthe ISSC has requested 8.3 new General Revenue funded

FTE positions, only l.3 of these new positions are directly

related to improvinq the services provided students. And none

of these positions are to be phased in. Also, of these

GRF positions are for the Office of Informational Services.

This office administers Federal progr ams, and funding should

be provided by Federal not GRF dollars. Budget forms,

the ISSC failed to provide the Senate with budgetary information

in the proper format. Information regarding Personal Services

was insufficient to determine the numher of new positions requested,

and the source of funds for these positions. The necessary

clarifications that were required, were not received until after

the ISSC appropriation bill was heard in committee. Travel,

a comparison of the ISSC'S maximum lodging reimbursement rate

and meal per diem allowances with those of other agencies, shows

that the ISSC travel expenses are reimbursed at a higher level.

The ISSC FY-'8l GRF appropriation request for travel is thirty-

one percent greater than the FY-'80 expenditures and fifty-nine

percent greater than the FY-d7g.p.expenditures. In equipment,

the ISSC FY-'81 GRF appropriation request for equipment is three

hundred and fifty-six percent greater than the FY-'80 expenditures,

42

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

16.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

and five hundred and fifty-four percent greater than the FY'79

expenditures. Now, if you tell me that's an efficiently run

operationr I1m sorry, I just will have to disagree with you.

And 1...1 beH e ve we were absolutely correct: if perhaps

if we were a little too overzealous in one or two positions,

we can work that out in a Conference Committee. But to try

to restore all the things this agency wants, you will simply

be saying to them: that's a1l right folks, you go right ahead,

you disregard what the General Assembly says to you in the

appropriations process, you give...unauthorized raises, you

hire unauthorized positions, you buy unauthorized equipment,

that's okay, weîll go ahead and we'll give you al1 the money

you need to pay for a11 of it. I suggest to you, that a No

vote is in...in the offing, or should be in the offing on this

concurrence motion.


Senator Rhoads.

SENATOR RHOADS :

If I may direct a question to Senator Buzbee. Senator ycu...

you read off a great deal of material there, but was that...are

you speaking to these two Hcuse amendments or were you speaking

. . .do you take the position that is desir able to get this

into a Conference Committee for its own sake?


Senator Buzbee.

SENATOR BUZBEE:

The answer yes to.both of your questions. First of all,

my...my remarks were addressed to the..-to the additions that

the department...or rather the House put back in. But secondly,

I think that we can best work it out by going to a Conference

Committee, perhaps allow them one or two df the positions they're

requesting or whatever: I don't know at this point. But I think

we ought to be able to sit down and work out some kind of a

2.

3.

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l8.

l9.

20.

compromise other than just saying we're going to accept everythingthat the agency wants that the House restored.


Senator Rhoads.

SENATOR RHOADS:

Well, it seems to me, as Chairman of the Appropriations 11

Committee of the Senàte, your position would ordinarily be that

this bill ought to be in the shape that it left the Senate; but

that's not your position,you want to tinker around some more

if we get it into Conference Committee, right?


Senator Buzbee.

SENATOR BUZEEE:

Noy I would be perfectly satiéfied if it...kf we left it

in the shape that it left the Senate. But I live in the world

of political pragmatispyand it is my belief that they have

enough folks in the House whc, for whatever reasonr are willing

to restore a substantial amount of money to them. Being the

political pragmatisththat I am, compromise may be the best

way out, but if I had my way, I think we ought to leave it just

the way it left the Senate.


Senator Rhoads.

SENATOR RHOADS:

Well, one final question then. Since, I understand there

is controversy...revolving around the office operations and

so forth, but sinc+ Ehe major controversy each year seems to

be with the grants and the awards, and the cash flow problems,

do you think in the.-.in the form in which the bill left the

Senate, that we would avoid, in your opinion a supplemental

request by the agency next year?


Senator Buzbee.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

44

1.

2.

SENATOR BUZBEE :

Well, that's a...that's a hydra-headed question. First

of all, as you very well know, the funding level right now

in the...in the grant request is at the two thousand dollar

level. You are sponsoring the 'egislaGon which would grant

that. That bill is in a Conference Committee I believe. There

is disagreement between the Governor's Office and some of the

advocates that whether we go from nineteen hundred or two

thousand at the funding level. The way the appropriation request

is in this bill at Ehe moment, itfs at the two thousand dollar

levelr which I submit to you is premature, and we ought to

wait and see what happens with your bill before we make that

decision on the appropriation. And the second question, of

course, is, is one that I have had untold hours of conversation

with. Several other members of this Body have had untold hours

of conversation with the Illinois State Scholarship Commission,

including Senators Martin, and Regner, and Netsch, and Buzbee,

and Newhousey and several others, IIm sure. We have indicated

. . .some of us have indicated to them that we think what they

ought to do is to put a cap on the total number of dollars that

they are going to allocate for scholarships. Because if they

don't do that, then we're going to see a continual request for

supplemental appropriations for grants. They have not assured

us of anything yet, in fact, when we do get assurances...when

I get assurances on some questions, you get assurances exacGy

the opposite way from them. You and I know what wekre talking

about because wedve had that situation. But at this point, that

questio-n is. ..in limbo. My principal objection at this moment

is to the operations restoration. My principal objection at

this moment is noE to the grants dollars, although I think we

are too high with that question that I adaressed earlier the two

thousand visza-vis nineteen hundred grant limitation.


4.

5.

6.

:.

9.

1û.

1l.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

2b.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

45

1.

2.

).

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

14.

l5.

l6.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

2$.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

Senator Newhouse.

SENATOR NEWHOUSE:

Thank you, Mr. President, and Senators. I'd simply like to

add at this juncture, 'cause I can think of no better time

to mention it, when we asked for the second supplementary ap-

propriation for the Scholarship Commission this time, I re-

presented to this Body that I would not come before this Body

for a supplementary again for that organization. That presupposed a

reasonable level funding for this- -for this agency, and we desperately

tried to pull together those involved agencies and people to

attempt to come up with some recommendations. As you know,

'was late in the Session, and we came up with something extremely

late, too late, as a matter of fact, to do what needed to be

done. simply like to say right now, that the private schools

whose tuition is going up and whose costs are going up, and the

fact that there is a recession during which time there will be

an increase in the nllmher of applications, have impacted upon

this area in such a fashion that there will be a substantial

shortfall With the present.- with the present appropriation.

And having assumed that this would not be the type of appropriation

that went out of here, I made khe commitment that I did, I suspect

that I will be back before you sometime during the next Session.

So, I simply want to make those comments now, so you will under-

stand what the rationale is, what the reasons were and how

desperately we scramble to attempt to prevent that occurence.

Thank you, very much.

PRESIDING OFFICER; (SENATOR SAVICEAS)

Is there further discussion? If not, Senator DeAngelis may

close debate.

SENATOR DeANGELTS:

Thank you. Let me first point öut to the members of the Body,

that this...these amendments have nothing to do with the grants,

I think therefs a little bit of confusion. Secondly, if we were to

46

1.

4.

5.

6.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l7.

l8.

19.

20.

2l.

22.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

accede to Senator Buzbee's wishes, we would be granting this

agency in terms of GRF operations: an increase of about

percent: in an agency or an operation that Senator Buzbee feels

is not being run adequately. T here is a new director coming on

board, I think we ought to give him the opportunity. don't think

the House amendments are unreasonable, and I ask for your support

in the concurrence of the two House amendments.


The question is, shall the senate concur in House Amendments

l and 4 to Senate Bill 1578. Those in favor vote Aye. Those

opposed vote Nay. The voting is open. Have al1 voted who wish?

Have all voted who wish? Take the record. On that question,

the Ayes are 20, the Nays are 31. None Voting Present. And

the senate does not concur in House Amendments l and 4 to Senate

Bill 1578, and the Secretary 'will so inform the House. Senate

Bill 1640, Senator Grotberg. Senator Grotberg. On Amendments. . .

House Amendments t, 6 and...1, 6, and 7.

SENATOR GROTBERG:

Thank you, Mr. President. I move that the Senate does

concur amendments as ciked for khe Department of Corrections.

Amendment No. 1 restores a million one hundred and seventy-six

thousand in Personal Services. Amendment No. 3, restores :wo

hundred and fourteen thousand dcllars in operating funds to East

Moline, Menard, and M Adalt Insfitution Travel Services. Amendmeht

No. 4 reduces the School Contractual Services line by five hundred

and sixty-seven thousand, and.-oh thank you, Mr. President, I'm

glad I was stopped in midstream. think we should take it from

the record.


Take it out of the record. Senate Bill 1642, Senator Regner .

Senate Bill 1707, Senator Rupp. Senate Bill 1710, Senator Coffey .

Senate Bill 1713, Senator Bloom. Senate Bill 1799, Senator Bruce.

Senate Bill 1799, Senator Bruce.

47

1.

2.

3.

SENATOR BRUCE:

Thank you, Mr. President, and members of the Senate. I

would move that we non-concur with House Amendments l and 2 to

Senate Bill 1799, in that they are dealing with the Group

Insurance Program and we need to clarify the language. Both

of these amendments,l think, are going to be costly, even

though our staffs do not think so, I've talked at least to the

Republican staff, and indicated this..-this could cost us some

forty thousand dollars to insure about ten people. So, I would

move that we non-concur in the two House amendments.


Youdve heard the motion. Is there any discussion? If not,

those in favor indicate by slying Aye. Those opposed. The

Ayes have it. The Senate does not concur in Amendments No.

1 and 2 to Senate Bill 1799, and the Secretary will so inform

the House. Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

12.

13.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

2:.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

Yes, my suggestkon ks that we run the supplemental, go

through the Supplemental Calendar.


A1l right, Ladies and Gentlemen, on the Supplemental Calendar,

Supplemental No. 1, on Sunday June 29th. On the Secretary's

Desk for Concurrence is Senate Bill 1662, Senator Grotberg.

Senator, we are now on the Supplemental No. 1 Calendar. Senate

Bill...House Bill 821, Senator Hall. Now this is...these are on

Non-clncurrence, a11 following bills will be on Non-concurrence.

Senator. Hall on House Bill 821.

SENATOR HALL:

Thank you, Mr. President, and Ladies and Gentlemen of the

Senate. I refuse to recede' from House Bill 821, and ask that

a Conference Committee be appointed.


Senator Hall refusew..torecede from Senate Amendments and

2 to House Bill 821: and request a Conference Committee. A1l those

48

2.

3.

4.

in favor indicate by saying Aye. Those opposed. The Ayes

have it. The Secretary will so inform Ehe House. House Bill

929, Senator Bowers. Senator Bowers.

SENATOR BOWERS:

I etzld nrve W Wvly, Mr. President, that we not recve frcxnSenate' Amendments No. 3 and 4 to House Bill 929, and ask for a

Conference Committee.

PRESIDING OEFICER: (SENATOR SAVICKAS)

Youlve heard the motion. Those in favor indicate by saying

Aye. Those opposed. The Ayes have it. The Senate refuses to

recede from Amendments 3 and 4, and the Secretary will so inform

Ehe House. House Bill 2710, Senator Nedza. Senator Nedza.

SENATOR NEDZA:

Thank you, Mr...thank you, Mr. President. I also refuse

to recede and would so move and ask for a Conference Committee.


Youdve heard the motion. Those in favor indicate by saying

Aye. Those opposed. The Ayes have The Senate refuses to

recede from Senate Amendment No. 2 to House Bill 2710, and the

Secretary will so inform Ehe House. House Bill 2723, Senator

Bowers.

SENATOR BOWERS:

Thank you, Mr. President. At this kime I would move that

we recede from Senate Amendment No. 5. And I would just saythis, this was Senator Bruce's amendment, it...it provides for

the deduckibility of the Personal Property Replacement Tax, its

.already been adopted on another bill, and I think it would be

in order to have something like fifty some votes to recede.


sehator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK:


Senate. This debate on Ehe subject of the Corporate Personal

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

16.

17.

18.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

49

1.

2.

).

4.

Property Tax has been going on al1 semester. I thought Senate

Amendment 5, frankly was a pretty good one, and I think we

ought to refuse to recede and get it into conference.


Is there further discussion? If not, Senator Bowers may

close debate.

SENATOR BOWERS:

Well, thank you, Mr. President. I would just like to tell

the Body what's going on here. We do have...we do have the

. ..some other amendments on there: and obviously the-- these

amendments were accepted by the House, and theylre opposed by

an awful lot of people, and that's the sole purpose of getting

it into the Conference Committee. The big one, of course, is

the deductibility provision.-.l'm sorry, the big one is Ehe...

the Investment Tax Credit, couldn't even think of it, with

the fifty-fifty provision between the replacement fund and the

State Income Tax. That's the big fuss here, and thatls exactly

why we want...they want to get it into a Conference Committee.

If we can get thirty votes to recede, this bill goes to the

Governor's Desk, and that's where belongs, and I would

certainly hope that we, at least, have thirty votes to recede,

that's...the other amendment has already been adopted. Therels

no reason for iE at all, and I would therefore renew my motion.


The question is, shall the S ënate recede from Amendment No.

5 to House...House Bill 2723. Those in favor will vote Aye.

Those' opposed will vote Nay. The voting is open. Have a11

voted who wish? Have a1l voted who wish? Take the record. On

that question, the Ayes are 34y the Nays are...20. 1 Voting

Present. The Senate recedes from Amendment No. 5 to House Bill

.. .for what purpose does Senator Rock arise?

SENATOR ROCK:

After youdve announced, I would request a verification.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

50

1.

2.

5.

6.

7

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

16.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.


The Senate recedes from Amendment No. 5 to House Bill 2723.

And the bill having received the required constitutional majority

is declared passed. A request for a verification of the positive

roll call. 'For what pur#ose does Senator Bowers arise?

SENATOR BOWERS:

Wells Mru President. At least on our side of the aisle,

there are a number of members in Conference Committee right at

the moment', and Ilm sure that's going to happen a11 through this

Session. And I would ask leave of the Body to give us a little

bit of time to get them up here from Conference CommiEtee. Theyfve

a1l indicated how they want to vote on this issue, and they are

about the business of the Senate, and I don't think quite

equitable to...Eo knock them off of the roll call when they are

about the business of the Senate- .


Well, Senator...

SENATOR BOWERS :

I know itgs going to happen again, and would just ask fora little time.


Senator, this comes up every..-every Session at this time,

every year, and if...it's up to the sponsor to decide if the

members are present and in their seat to vote if he should call

his bill. Senator Rock has requested a verification. Will al1

Senators be in their seats. The Secretary will read the affirm-

ative votes. For what purpose does Senator Rhoads arise?

SENATOR RHOADS:

Just a request, if webre going to verify, could the bell

be rung: please.


Why sure, Senator. Mr. Secretary.

SECRETARY:

51

3.

1.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

1'0 .

l l .

1 2'.

1 3 .

l 4 .

l5.

16.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

The...the following' voted in the affirmative: Becker,

Berning, Bloom, Bowers, Buzbee, Coffey, Davidson, DeAngelis,

Demuzio, Friedland, Geo-Karis, Gitz, Grotberg, Jerome Joyce,

Keats, Knuppel, MaitlandyMartin, McMillan, Mitchler, Moore,

Nimrod, Ozinga, Philip, Regner, Rhoads, Rupp, Sangmeister,

Schaffer, Shapiro, Sommer, Vadalabene, Weaver, Wooten.


Senator Rock, do you wish to question any of the affirmative

roll call? The roll call has been verified, and the Ayes are

34, the Nays are 20# ahd l VdtG g PYsc t. For what purpose

does Senator Bloom...the Ayes are 34, the Noes' are' 20.

Voting Present. The Senate does recede from Amendment No. 5

to House Bill 2723. For what purpose does Senator Bloom arise?

SENATOR BLOOM:

Having voted on the prevailing side, move to reconsider...


Senator Bloom moves to...having voted on the prevailing

side.--to Table...moves to reconsider. Senator Rhoads moves

to Table. A1l those in favor indicate by saying Aye. Those

opposed. The motion...the motion to reconsider is Tabled. Any

further discussion? House Bill 3038, Senator Coffey. Senatcr

Coffey.

SENATOR COFFEY:

Mr. President, and members of the Senate. I would like to

refuse to recede from Senate Amendments 2, 6,

9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 18.


You've heard the motion. Is there any discussion? If not,

those in favor...senator Rhoads, for what purpose do you arise?

SENATOR RHOADS:

I assume the second part of the motion is to request a

Conference Committee, right?


52

1.

2.

).

4.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

1l.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

Senator Coffey.

SENATOR COFFEY:

Yes, and Ild like to request a Conference Committee.


You've heard the motion. All those in favor indicate by

saying Aye. Those opposed. The Ayes have it. The Senate refuses

to recede from the adoption of Amendments No. 2, 4: 5: 7, 8,

9, l0, l1, l2, l3# l4# 16, l7, and 18, and a Conference CommitEee

has been requested. The Secretary will so inform the House.

House Bill 3084, SenaEor Coffey.

SENATOR COFFEY:

Yes, Mr. President, and members of the Senate. I would

also like to refuse to recede from Amendments 2, 5, 8, 10,

12, l5, and 16: and ask for a Conference Committee.


Youdve heard the motion. A11 those in favor indicate by

saying Aye. Those opposed. The motion carries, and the Secretary

will so inform the House. House Bill 3197, Senator Mitchler.

House Bill 3289, Senator Gitz. House Bill 3289, Senator Gitz.

Senator Gitz.

SENATOR GITZ:

Mr. Presidentr I move to recede from the Amendment at issue.

I believe itfs Amendment No. 4.


Senator Gitz moves to recede from Senate Amendment No. 4.

Is there àny discussion? Senator Walsh.

SENATOR WALSH:

Well, Mr. President, and members of the Senate. This is

final action on this bill, I wonder if the 'Gentleman could explain

just what he intends to do.

PRESIDING OFFICER: (SENATOR SAVTCKAS)

Senator Gitz.

SENATOR GITZ:

53

1.

2.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

1l.

12.

l3.

l4.

l5.

l6.

17.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

Senator Walsh, the issue here has been the langupge

which was the six month delay on investment bearing accounts

for custodians of public funds. This was originally offered

to the Body the other evening at the request of one of Ehe

State Represnetatives. I mentioned at that time, that the

State Treasurer was not very pleased with the language, and I

mentioned to the Body at that time why the amendment was before

them: wnich is that in terms of interest on checking accounts,

that procedure is not allowed by administràtive rule until

the first of the year. In consultation with the State Treasurer

since then,he has indicated that there are other means available

to take care of the problem in terms of transfers, and that he

himself has a program. mentioned the other night to the Body

that it was the will of the Body, there were arguments on both

side, and if they chose to put it on, fine, if they chose not to,

that was okay,ztoo. The House said no we don't want the amendment

as a whole. And 1, frankly, think, that there are much more

important p<pvisions within the bill, that we should nèt have

to go to Conference Committee, and that is why I1m making the motion

to recede.


Is there further discussion? The question is, shall the

Senate recede from Amendment No. 4 to House Bill 3289. Those

in favor will vote Aye. Those opposed will vote Nay. The voting

is open. Have a11 voted who wish? Have a1l voted who wish?

Take the recrod. On that question, the Ayes are 47: the Nays

are none, and l Voting Present. The Senate recedes from Amendment

No. 4 to House Bill 3289, and thbibill having received the required

constitutional majority is declared passed. The Chair recognizes

Senator Rock.

SENATOR ROCK :


Senate. It appears we have done about as much as we can do today.

2:.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

1.

2.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

l0.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

l5.

16.

l7.

l8.

l9.

20.

2l.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

3l.

32.

33.

There are Conference Committees currently scheduled, I'm told

that there will be a whole raft of them scheduled commencing

at nine ofclock tomorrow morning. So, if there's no further

business öt announcements, I move that the Senate stand adjourneduntil Monday, June 30th, at the hour of 9:0û a.m.


Youdve heard the mction. Those in favor indicate by saying

Aye. Those opposed. The motion carries. The Senate stands

adjourned until Monday morning, 9:00 a.m.

55ky

Documents

81st GENERAL ASSEMBLY REGULAR SESSION PRESIDENT · la Thank you, Mr. President and members of the Senate.:4 rise in support of House Joint Resolution 104. After lengthy 15 discussions