* The Illinois Policy Institute has some House rule change ideas. I agree with some, disagree with others, partially agree on a couple. But, interestingly enough, there’s almost no mention of the Senate’s rules, which are nearly identical to the House’s except for term limits, and the new House rules would change that provision, too. Apparently, it’s fine that the Senate has this rule but it’s not nearly enough when it comes to the House…

Like the Senate, the Illinois House Rules should limit the term of the speaker to no more than five General Assemblies, so the state does not have to see generations pass without a change in leadership. There is cause for optimism on this front: term limits for legislative leaders is one reform that made it into the recently proposed House Rules resolution. It’s an important step, but all of the above reforms should be considered to truly ensure that the legislative process is fair.

* Again, the Senate has the same rules…

Under the House Rules, the speaker appoints each committee chairperson, positions that come with a generous stipend of over $10,000. The speaker can grant and withhold these positions to reward loyalty and punish opposition. For example, former Rep. Scott Drury was denied a committee chairmanship after he did not vote to re-elect Madigan as speaker in 2017.

Committee chair positions should not be used as the speaker’s carrot and stick to influence lawmakers. Committee chair appointments should be approved by a majority vote of the House. House members should eliminate the seniority requirement that members be in their third term to serve as a committee chair.

Madigan couldn’t have done that to Drury without his caucus’ tacit support. He was despised by just about everyone except for the people who loved using him as an example of “Because… Madigan!”

Meanwhile, in the Senate, former Sens. Heather Steans and Andy Manar lost their appropriations committee chairmanships because they picked the wrong horse in the leadership election a year ago.

* There is no odd-numbered-year rule for the Senate Assignments Committee, so the House’s new rules are an improvement…

A recent resolution proposing changes to the House Rules would require the Rules Committee to refer all bills to a standing or special committee during odd-numbered years, and all appropriation bills during even numbered-years. That is certainly an improvement on the status quo. But any time a piece of legislation has enough support that a majority are willing to see it moved out of the Rules Committee, a handpicked minority should not be allowed to keep it from getting a fair hearing. A majority vote should discharge a bill from the Rules Committee and send it to the appropriate substantive committee.

* The Senate doesn’t have this, either, but I’m not sure it would work. You call your bill when you have the votes. This seems like a tactic to delay the passage of needed bills until the number appears on a schedule…

The rules allow the speaker to change any order of business at any time; there is no requirement for a schedule to be set in advance. This means that hundreds of bills can be on the calendar, and only the speaker knows for sure which ones will get a vote that day.

Lawmakers should have an idea of the votes coming up so they can debate and act on the legislation intelligently. The rules should require a schedule set in advance that can only be changed with the approval of a majority of the House.

* Once again, no similar demand is made of the Senate…

The Illinois Constitution requires that all bills be read by title on three separate days before they can be passed, but lawmakers use shell bills to get around this requirement. These bills are designed to be amended later, usually by removing a word in the Illinois code and replacing it with the same word. Once a shell bill is read on two separate days, it can be amended to include substantive changes. Lawmakers will insert whole pieces of unrelated legislation into shell bills after they had already been read into the record three times, technically meeting constitutional requirements. […]

The House Rules need to be changed so all bills must be read by title on three separate days in their final form. Lawmakers need time to understand what they are voting on – as the spirit of the constitution intended.

* The Senate President can replace committee members if they have an “unforeseen absence from the Capitol at the time of the committee hearing”…

The speaker can temporarily replace committee members if they are “otherwise unavailable.” This can be done to protect members from votes that would be controversial in their districts or to get more favorable results. For example, WBEZ reported that in 2014, the speaker substituted certain Democratic representatives on the House Environment Committee to achieve a unanimous vote in favor of a measure Exelon wanted to pass.

Members should not be switched in and out of committees for political reasons. Temporary replacement should be prohibited unless the member has a conflict with another committee meeting or has an excused absence from session.