Today’s number: 1 hour
Thursday, Jan 29, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The House passed its rules yesterday 70-46. One Democrat was absent. All Republicans voted against it…
Republicans objected to the rules, saying they lack transparency and give too much power to lame-duck legislators. Representative Ed Sullivan, a Republican from Mundelein, wants to extend the time period that information is posted online before legislators can debate a bill. The rules require only a one-hour notice before a hearing.
“I want to talk a little bit about the voice of the public, those that we serve, and what their voice is within the rules, and their ability to have more transparency,” Sullivan said.
House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie disagrees and says an hour is plenty of time.
“There is every opportunity for the public to participate in the first place in our budget debates through committee hearings, so I would urge that ours is a transparent, accountable process, and I see no reason for any changes,” Currie said.
Obviously, an hour is not “plenty of time.”
The new rules are here.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 12:47 pm:
I get chastised fir going with the easy, low hanging fruit, but…
“Thems the rules…”
- econ prof - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 12:50 pm:
“plenty of time”? What a joke.
- Bob the Slob with a Cushy State Job - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 12:52 pm:
I take an hour long nap at my state job and it never seems long enough.
- OneMan - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 12:52 pm:
Did you see what happened at COD, no way are we giving folks more time to review actions…. They should be glad we are giving them an hour…
- Formerly Known As... - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 12:52 pm:
Seriously?
When the rules are bogus, the process is bogus and the end results of that process are bogus.
One hour is unnecessarily short notice and reason for concern. It may not cause a problem 95% of the time, but that 5% of the time it does cause a problem it will be a big one.
- Formerly Known As... - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 12:56 pm:
All rules are not good rules. This is not a good rule.
==Did you see what happened at COD, no way are we giving folks more time to review actions== Quote of the day by @OneMan.
- Been There - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 12:57 pm:
===Obviously, an hour is not “plenty of time.”====
Ed is worried that an hour is not enough time? They will be lucky to get 2 minutes on May 31st when they waive the rules.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 1:01 pm:
No, an hour is not enough time. However, anyone who’s been around the building at the end of May knows things move pretty quickly. In recent years, the only tool available to the GOP has been the stall tactic, running out the clock so they can get a seat at the table on June 1.
The General Assembly exists to pass legislation, to get things done. This rule will help get things done at the last minute. It’s not ideal, but when has politics ever been about ideals?
- 75th district - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 1:04 pm:
more noise.
- CircularFirin'Squad - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 1:13 pm:
GOPies forgot to mention these were the rules then created for the reign of terror — if it ain’t broke ….
- Demoralized - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 1:15 pm:
Isn’t this the same argument that happens every 2 years? Can we just pull out the transcript of the last one and enter it into the record?
- A guy - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 1:17 pm:
Reckoning Rep. Curries point of view; why do you even need an hour. The intent of this rule runs counter to any public comment or participation. Why not just make it 5 minutes. It appears that there would truly be no material difference.
Gotta win elections to fix stuff.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 1:22 pm:
===Gotta win elections to fix stuff.===
I think the usual response by the Dems is that the rules passed, mirror Speaker Daniels’ rules. Just saying.
If I’m the HGOP, I wouldn’t worry too much about the rules;
I would worry about all the green lights they need to put in the board for things they would never be a “yes” for in the past few GAs.
“Who isn’t ‘green’?”
“Who is voting against the Governor?”
“Who?” “Who?”
Owls will be in season again….
- walker - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 1:29 pm:
Not new rules. Old rules, first passed (by Republicans) around 30 years ago. Nothing has changed.
Every new assembly, someone make the old argument just to get noticed.
As to notice: all of these things go thru committee hearings, open to public input, prior to reaching the floor. Everyone knows that’s where most debate actually occurs.
- reading is fundamental - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 1:36 pm:
The Senate has ZERO notice requirements and no one seems to complain.
Sullivan’s comment isn’t accurate if you read the rules dealing with notice. The one hour notice period occurs long after the language appears online, usually days or weeks.
- Rod - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 2:06 pm:
There were some changes to the House rules relating to Executive reorganization orders of the Governor issued under Article V, Sec. 11 of the Constitution. I cannot determine if they are substantive or mean more than they appear to.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 2:12 pm:
=== I cannot determine if===
Subscribe.
- Norseman - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 2:32 pm:
Transparency is in the eye of the beholder of power.
I so wish the Supreme Court had not ruled that the procedure and structure requirement for a legislative initiative was conjunctive. The notice period is so in need of change, but changing the structure is unnecessary.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 3:00 pm:
How sad!
Her political position required that she make a remarkably stupid statement. That is so unfair! She knows that an hour is not long enough, but felt that she could not state the obvious because it might cause political problems within her group.
So she said that!
Politics is so hard!
- 100 Miles West - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 3:32 pm:
This always makes me laugh. Most good staffers on both sides of the aisle can look at a 1000 page appropriations bill and tell you pretty quickly what has changed. The same goes for legislation. Sometimes something slips past unnoticed. But someone was usually told not to notice it. The hour looks bad to the general public, but to the denizens of the Statehouse, they can work with the hour.
- Why I Don't Like Currie - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 3:43 pm:
She may or may not be a wind-up doll–really hard to tell given the company she’s forced (or perhaps chooses) to keep. But, at some point, you’ve sold out, and when you start saying stuff like an hour is an eternity, well, you’ve sold out. And a sell-out is a sell-out is a sell-out. Doesn’t much matter whether you started out trying to do the right thing.
- NorthbyNorthWest - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 3:50 pm:
I see Guzzardi has now voted for Madigan and the rules. I remember there was speculation that he would not be taking those votes.
Probably a smart move on his part and he can pursue the progressive agenda without having to deal with a Madigan vendetta.
- Norseman - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 3:56 pm:
In your dreams 100 miles. Doesn’t happen in reality. Been there.
- 100 Miles West - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 4:04 pm:
Norseman, been there too. Just my experience working in the upper chamber. We didn’t need no stinking hour.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 4:09 pm:
100, we’ve had a real problem for years with legislation passed in too much of a hurry - as in the tax hike bill. Stuff needs to slow down.
- 100 Miles West - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 4:11 pm:
Rich, yes, slowing down can be good. Things were a bit better before Pate shortened the session.
- Smitty Irving - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 4:38 pm:
Unless the GOP publicly repudiates Pate Philip and Lee Daniels this smacks of Lt. Renault from Casablanca.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 4:47 pm:
===publicly repudiates Pate Philip and Lee Daniels===
Oh, c’mon. There are maybe 6 or 7 current legislators who were around in 95-96.
President Pate used to complain all the time about what Rock did to him to justify whacking the Democrats, then President Emil did the same about Pate for the same justification ends. Drove me nuts.
Enough, already. Ancient history. The Democrats could change those rules any time they want.
- Illinoisian - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 4:58 pm:
Isn’t this what Mike Bost was so upset about? Bills being rushed to the floor at the last second without giving legislators enough time to read them before voting? How can we pass good legislation when our legislators don’t even know what they are voting on.
- dr. reason a. goodwin - Thursday, Jan 29, 15 @ 9:16 pm:
The notice thing is bad, but I’m uncomfortable with anyone’s proposal to limit the power of “lame duck” legislators. If you are elected you get to serve your full term. You responsibilities and power should not be diminished by an election for a completely separate term of office.