* House committee hearing on the new budget…
Transcript…
House Deputy Republican Leader Tom Demmer: We talked about the $1 billion capital [program], the ARPA dollars going to capital projects. How are those capital projects chosen?
House Majority Leader Greg Harris: Through the normal process by which all capital projects are chosen.
Demmer: What is that process?
Harris: The members make requests and departments make requests and they are fulfilled within an order depending on the category. For instance, IDOT has a five-year plan. Members might have a request, but they have a first, second and third priority and as funds are available they would be funded.
Demmer: Do you know if any requests came from Republicans for those projects?
Harris: Not off the top of my head, no.
Demmer: So, we have a billion dollars of new capital projects that have been available, but it appears that it was only known that those projects were available or eligible for requests from Senate Democratic and House Democratic caucuses?
Harris: Certainly would be happy to come talk.
* Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police press release excerpt…
The trailer bill to the SAFE-T Act, filed and released today on the last day of the spring legislative session, addresses many of our most egregious concerns in the law.
Therefore, the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police supports the trailer bill, HB 3443 SA 5, while acknowledging a concern that the unresolved issues be addressed in a timely manner in the months to come. As a reminder to our members, in January 2021 we strongly opposed the original law, HB 3653 and urged Governor Pritzker to veto it. But he signed it on February 22, 2021, and ever since, we have been in negotiations with the sponsors, Senator Elgie Sims and Representative Justin Slaughter, on a trailer bill. Those negotiations intensified in the last three weeks. We asked the sponsors for an ability to fix language that was either ambiguous or impractical to implement, and we communicated with ILACP members regularly about our desired changes. The trailer bill language addresses most of those concerns and makes training and implementation much easier moving forward.
What the group claims are improvements…
• Body cameras
o Removes the provision that said an officer cannot view his or own video before writing a report.
o Removes the provision that makes it a felony to violate department policy on body cameras.
o Improves the language (in our favor) about what would be a felony for violation of state law regard to use of body cameras. Must be intentional, willing, and a clear attempt to obstruct justice. Eliminates a felony offense for inadvertent mistakes or problems with cameras.
o Clarifies that law enforcement agencies that are in universities, park districts, conversation districts, forest preserves, railroads, etc. (any agencies that are not municipal or county) have a mandatory date of January 1, 2025, for implementation of body cameras.
• Use of force
o Removes the ambiguous language about letting someone flee if they can be apprehended at a later date. The “apprehended later” idea was reinserted in a different place in the trailer bill, but in a different way that initially seems more palatable. We are continuing to review and discuss this.
o Addresses the concern that it was unclear what an “imminent threat” might be when it comes to using deadly force, and removes the undefined idea that a serious crime must have “just” been committed. The word “just” has been removed from the law.
• Chokeholds and tasers: Addresses the definition of chokeholds and removes the provision that says you cannot target the back with a taser.
• Most new training requirements: Now effective January 1, 2022, instead of July 1, 2021
• Obstructing and resisting officers: Clarifies that you can arrest someone for obstructing without an underlying offense. Separates resisting from obstructing.
I may update this post.
*** UPDATE *** From the BIMP…
To provide for the expeditious and timely implementation of the Coronavirus Vaccine Incentive Public Health Promotion authorized by this amendatory Act of the 102nd General Assembly in Section 21.14 of the Illinois Lottery Law and Section 2310-628 of the Department of Public Health Powers and Duties Law, emergency rules implementing the public health promotion may be adopted by the Department of the Lottery and the Department of Public Health in accordance with Section 5-45.
- Annonin' - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 3:41 pm:
So Deems is looking for free stuff? Very funny. The GOPies are a laugh riot
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 3:44 pm:
Were the Raunerites going to vote for the budget?
Would the Raunerites vote for the budget if the monies would be allocated “equally”?
It’s a question for the caucus of no.
- DTAG - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 3:47 pm:
How many republican in congress, heck even the Illinois delegation voted for ARPA?
- Unconventional wisdom - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 3:51 pm:
=Demmer: So, we have a billion dollars of new capital projects that have been available, but it appears that it was only known that those projects were available or eligible for requests from Senate Democratic and House Democratic caucuses?=
For all practical purposes this is a one party state and it is controlled by the Democrats. They have the power and they will use it as they see fit. That’s the way the game is played these days.
Will that change? Only if Republicans can get control of at least either the Senate or House or Governorship. And I don’t see that happening even in the distant future.
- @misterjayem - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 3:57 pm:
“Obstructing and resisting officers: Clarifies that you can arrest someone for obstructing without an underlying offense. Separates resisting from obstructing.”
Can’t imagine the boys in blue ever abusing this.
– MrJM
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 3:58 pm:
=== For all practical purposes this is a one party state and it is controlled by the Democrats. They have the power and they will use it as they see fit. That’s the way the game is played these days.===
lol
The Raunerites continually vote red on infrastructure bills, budgets, but show up to ribbon cuttings and tout projects they voted *against*. If the Raunerites want the spoils, Raunerites should vote for their creations
Also?
Also, winners make policy.
But, this is arguably the must humorous…
=== Only if Republicans can get control of at least either the Senate or House or Governorship.===
When Rauner *was* governor, Rauner vetoed THREE budgets, hurting programs, infrastructure, this whole state, and you want they type of ridiculousness… again? That’s some dark comedy.
===And I don’t see that happening even in the distant future.===
Illinois is better off right now with the Raunerites on the outside… looking in… while still voting no.
- Out of Illinois - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:03 pm:
I thought Governor Pritzker had to govern the entire state, not just the parts that voted for him? Aren’t there Democratic votes even in areas that have a Republican representative? Shouldn’t they get some of these funds for projects as well?
- Lucky Pierre - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:04 pm:
Republican districts don’t pay taxes to the State?
Who knew?
- Blake - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:15 pm:
It would be one thing if Republican members didn’t make requests, quite another if they were not informed of needing to make requests.
- Ashland Adam - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:15 pm:
Where was Rep. Demmer on the Fair Tax?
- Perrid - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:15 pm:
College Grad, ass long as there are still members of the general assembly in office who aided and abetted in blocking the state from having a budget for 2 years, I vote we keep banging this drum. The state lost billions of dollars and people throughout the state faced immense hardship for no reason, and it was only possible because of Republican support for Bruce Rauner
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:18 pm:
===Just curious===
No you’re not.
===statute of limitations===
It helped tremendously, the Republicans who voted for the constitutional amendment in favor of labor. That helped.
The thing is… and I’ll use small words and go slow for you and your alleged “curiousity”… when you think about the Raunerites voting against higher education, social services, voting with Ken Dunkin, and these same folks now claim budgets are important, school and higher education is important… and forgetting the damage, or as others say “we need to move on”, or you trying to out three brain cells together to guess a “statute of limitations”… the Trumpkins who embrace racist thinking, insurrectionists, and conspiracy theorists… those same Raunerites aren’t pushing back on that either.
When a brand is hijacked, then hijacked again by some of the worst elements to democracy… there needs to be a mea culpa and an understanding that the hypocrisy and damage continues, and votes are unhelpful and obstruction is cheered…
… you may be able to “move on”, have a statute of limitations, but you want to discuss folks, their voting records… tell me… what has changed since 2015?
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:20 pm:
- Out of Illinois -… - Lucky Pierre -
Winners. Make. Policy.
You have GA members voting red against their districts, their state, the people… you can hold Pritzker “accountable” at the ballot box.
(Hashtag) Democracy.
- low level - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:25 pm:
Demmer and the GOP were going to vote yes if projects were located in their districts? I tend to doubt it.
- Pot calling kettle - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:31 pm:
===For all practical purposes this is a one party state and it is controlled by the Democrats. They have the power and they will use it as they see fit. That’s the way the game is played these days.
Will that change? Only if Republicans can get control of at least either the Senate or House or Governorship. And I don’t see that happening even in the distant future. ===
Here’s a thought - If your brand is “government is too big” and “government should play no role in improving people’s lives,” then you probably don’t have any projects, right? Instead of constantly voting “no” and complaining about the unfairness of it all, why not participate in the process? Acknowledge the important role government plays in the lives of your constituents, propose appropriate projects, and support the revenue for the entire package.
- College grad - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:31 pm:
@OW- This arrogant sense of superiority you have is fascinating. I truly hope the housing bill passes so that you can finally afford to move out of this website’s comment section that you seem to have resigned yourself to living in.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:33 pm:
- College grad -
So you understood my response, you didn’t like it.
Ok.
Good luck.
- Leslie K - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:39 pm:
@ MrJm @ 3:57
Respectfully, the change to obstructing/resisting charges may not be the point to take issue with here. They are two entirely different concepts, yet are currently the same ILCS charge. “Resisting arrest” is only a valid charge if there is an underlying basis for an arrest (i.e. it can only ever be an additional charge). Obstructing can legitimately be the sole charge (for instance, trying to defeat the arrest of someone else by physically interfering).
But far too many people currently get charged with only “resisting,” usually for obstreperous behavior that is neither resisting nor obstructing.
Adding clarity to the law by separating the two concepts should force officers to more thoroughly articulate the alleged conduct, hopefully making it more clear that being lound and annoying is not a crime. (Hopefully)
- Anon221 - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:40 pm:
Page 349 of the BIMP starts the details of the COVID “lottery”- Sec. 21.14. The Coronavirus Vaccine Incentive Public Health Promotion.
- 47th Ward - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:48 pm:
That’s a good point Leslie. I thought immediately of domestic disputes, in which someone may be resisting arrest while others, for a variety of reasons, obstruct the process. In that case, as in others, the third party is committing a crime. There is a difference worth noting in the law and hopefully it helps cops sort these bad situations out.
- Unconventionalwisdom - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:49 pm:
Why do posts responding to OW rarely get posted?
- Annonin' - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:57 pm:
Attacking Mr/MS OW seems a little harsh — especially as we approach joyous bipartisan finish. The bigger question is why Deems even get any attention.
- 47th Ward - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:57 pm:
===Why do posts responding…===
Because this isn’t Facebook?
- Occasional Quipper - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 4:57 pm:
== and I’ll use small words and go slow for you and your alleged “curiousity”… ==
@OW, I think you are extremely knowledgeable about Illinois politics, and I usually feel I’ve learned something after reading your posts. But I think you sometimes let your disdain for Rauner and Trump (who are both no longer in office) unduly influence the tone of your posts.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 5:01 pm:
=== sometimes let your disdain for Rauner and Trump===
With respect,
===… you may be able to “move on”, have a statute of limitations, but you want to discuss folks, their voting records… tell me… what has changed since 2015?===
Again… with respect.
- Moe Berg - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 5:06 pm:
== Rauner and Trump (who are both no longer in office) ==
Our state and country will be living with the consequences of their tenures for far longer than the length of their single terms.
They earned Oswego Willy’s contempt (and that of anyone who is repelled by pathological narcissists) and we should not soon forget the destruction and suffering they caused.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 5:08 pm:
=== Why is that relevant to a discussion of issues as long as the posts are not profane or not attacking someone.?===
I’ll make you a deal, you start a blog I won’t comment on it.
Hope you’re well.
- Suburbanon - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 5:10 pm:
If you read carefully about the infrastructure funds, IDOT 5-year plans got priority so there is considerable money flowing to GOP districts. They just aren’t getting “member specific” requests. Plus most roads and bridges are in Downstate so GOP will be getting lots of ribbon cuttings too.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 5:34 pm:
=== Did not realize this was your blog.===
(Sigh)
You’re complaining about my comments. I won’t comment on your blog.
I’m moving on. Yikes, man.
To the post, this specifically;
=== Demmer: So, we have a billion dollars of new capital projects that have been available, but it appears that it was only known that those projects were available or eligible for requests from Senate Democratic and House Democratic caucuses?
Harris: Certainly would be happy to come talk.===
Was Demmer committed to put votes on this if his caucus got projects?
If not, what are we really talking about?
If so, make that list, have a presser, on stairs, in front of the governors office abd make that commitment… we’ll be green, all 18, 21, 25 members… we get these projects.
That’d get some play too I’d imagine.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 31, 21 @ 5:54 pm:
I have no time or patience today to deal with some of you. Either you stick to the topic at hand, and only the topic at hand, or you’ll be banned. Last warning.
- Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Jun 1, 21 @ 1:06 am:
===but it appears that it was only known that those projects were available or eligible for requests===
Chiming in late here for reasons, but I would wonder why capital project requests that Republican legislators felt were needed for their district had not already been made regardless of the additional funding. It sounds like that most of the capital spending is being directed to accelerating the schedule of existing projects and that this is a complaint of “well, if I had known about the extra billion dollars maybe I would have thought that bridge needed repair, or the state might want to develop a public facility in my district to meet our future needs” rather than “I have identified these potential projects and made the request so that they’re in the pipeline for when funding becomes available.”
Just silly business. I can’t fathom the expectation these legislators have that other people are going to represent their districts for them while they continue to prioritize a dim-witted ideology over the needs of their constituents.
===Must be intentional, willing, and a clear attempt to obstruct justice. Eliminates a felony offense for inadvertent mistakes or problems with cameras.===
I think this is going to get some officers in trouble as it creates the temptation to consistently have mistakes or problems which a savvy attorney, especially in a civil case, can turn into a pattern that suggests an intentional effort to obstruct justice.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Jun 1, 21 @ 5:25 pm:
To the Demmer:
If Leader Demmer and Leader Durkin weren’t reaching out to Leader Harris and Speaker Welch to ask about possible GOP votes for the budget and possible GOP capital projects, that’s really on Demmer and Durkin.