* Tribune…

Gov. Bruce Rauner on Friday used his amendatory veto power to rewrite a bill that would have ended the state’s growing practice of suing prison inmates to recover the costs of their incarceration — effectively killing the legislation, according to the bill’s two sponsors.

The bill from state Sen. Daniel Biss, D-Evanston, and Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, now goes back to the General Assembly with Rauner’s addition of a financial threshold that would be determined by officials at the Illinois Department of Corrections. Inmates who have less than the threshold in their bank or prison accounts would be shielded from the controversial lawsuits.

The General Assembly can accept Rauner’s rewrite, override it or let it die. Biss and Cassidy said Friday they likely do not have the votes to override the veto.

“The bill is dead now because of the governor’s actions, and that is a travesty,” Biss said Friday, noting that the bill had passed the Senate and House with a narrow margin. “He killed a bill that would have eliminated a wasteful and immoral program.”

Umm, they could just accept the amendatory veto. But that won’t happen because Speaker Madigan is almost always dead-set opposed to doing such a thing. So, they’ll either have to draft a bill that conforms to the governor’s AV or drop the whole thing. The attorney general only rarely files these lawsuits, so it’s not a gigantic problem, unless you’re one of the targets.

…Adding… From Sen. Biss…

Hi Rich –

Just saw your post on the Governor’s AV of SB2465. Just wanted to make the point that beyond the practical challenges in accepting an AV, the language here really does gut our bill.

The AV says that right now:

“the State’s power to recover costs is rarely used”

and also that under the bill:

“The Department would establish a standard for determining [a whole bunch of stuff that then determines whether the State’s power to recover costs would be used]”

In other words, right now, the Department rarely uses this power, presumably because they decide not to. Under the AV, the Department would have the authority to decide when to use this power.

Doesn’t sound like a lot of progress to me.

* From the governor’s AV…

We should be proud of the steps we have taken together to reform our criminal justice system. These efforts will reduce incarceration and recidivism rates, help incarcerated individuals to reenter the community and obtain gainful employment, and reduce costs to taxpayers. I thank the members of the General Assembly for being partners in this work.
 
Current law permits the Attorney General to bring legal action against formerly incarcerated individuals to recover incarceration-related expenses on behalf of the Department of Corrections. Senate Bill 2465 would stop this practice altogether. Today I return the bill with specific recommendations for change.
 
Proponents believe that collection efforts hinder an individual’s successful reentry into the community. Many ex-offenders have few if any assets and struggle to find jobs to care for themselves or their families.
 
In practice, though, the State’s power to recover costs is rarely used: the State collected approximately $355,000 total in Fiscal Year 2015. While I agree that this power should be used sparingly and judiciously, there are circumstances when it is warranted. Violent offenders with significant assets should compensate their victims and the State. For example, the State used this power to stop serial killer John Wayne Gacy from profiting while in prison.
 
The changes recommended below would protect low-income persons, while still enabling the State to pursue wealthier or violent offenders. The Department would establish a standard for determining whether a person has sufficient means, whether recovery by the State would inhibit the person’s reintegration into the community, and whether the nature of the crime (such as a violent crime) warrants recovery efforts. The Department’s proposed rules would be subject to public comment and review by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. The State would then be prohibited from pursuing recovery from persons except as allowed by that rule. This strikes the proper balance between protecting taxpayers and facilitating successful post-incarceration reentry.

The Gacey point is a bit weird since the state prohibits inmates from profiting from their crimes, according to the Trib.

* From the twitters…

His comments show he didn't understand the bill. His staff made clear he was afraid to be seen as soft on crime. https://t.co/YipC7kRf8c

— Rep. Kelly Cassidy (@RepKellyCassidy) August 20, 2016