Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Thursday, May 21, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller

* The Senate just voted 37-19 to pass HB 218…

(T)he possession of 15 grams or less of cannabis is a civil law violation punishable by a minimum fine of $55 and a maximum fine of $125;

The bill will be held in the chamber until a House “trailer bill” is eventually passed by the Senate.

…Adding… Press release…

The Illinois Senate approved a bill 37-19 Thursday to remove criminal penalties for possession of a small amount of marijuana. The measure, which was approved by the House of Representatives in April, will now be sent to Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) for his signature.

HB 218, introduced in the Senate by Sen. Michael Noland (D-Elgin) and in the House by Rep. Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago), makes possession of up to 15 grams of marijuana a civil law violation punishable by a $125 fine. Individuals will no longer face time in jail, and the civil offense will be automatically expunged in order to prevent a permanent criminal record.

“Serious criminal penalties should be reserved for individuals who commit serious crimes,” Rep. Cassidy said. “The possibility of jail time should not even be on the table when it comes to simple marijuana possession. Criminalizing people for marijuana possession is not a good use of our state’s limited law enforcement resources.”

Under current Illinois law, possession of up to 2.5 grams of marijuana is a class C misdemeanor punishable by up to 30 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $1,500; possession of 2.5-10 grams is a class B misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and/or a fine of up to $1,500; and possession of 10-30 grams is a class 4 felony punishable by up to one year in jail and/or a $1,500 fine. More than 100 localities in Illinois have adopted measures that reduce penalties for simple marijuana possession.

“We hope Gov. Rauner will sign this important and broadly supported legislation,” said Chris Lindsey, a legislative analyst for the Marijuana Policy Project. “This is a sensible alternative to Illinois’s needlessly complicated and draconian marijuana possession laws. It’s time to stop destroying people’s lives over possession of a substance that is undeniably less harmful than alcohol.”

Illinois marijuana laws disproportionately impact communities of color, according to reports released by the Institute for Metropolitan Affairs at Roosevelt University in May 2014 and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in June 2013. African Americans in Illinois are 7.6 times more likely to be cited or arrested for marijuana possession than whites, despite using marijuana at a similar rate, according to the ACLU.

“This legislation is long overdue in Illinois,” said Rev. Alexander Sharp, executive director of Clergy for a New Drug Policy. “Simple marijuana possession does not warrant harsh criminal penalties that can turn someone’s life upside down. Laws should protect people, not cause more harm to them than the activity they’re intended to prevent.”

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have removed the threat of jail time for simple marijuana possession.

44 Comments

Union blasts Rauner’s contract proposals

Thursday, May 21, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Doug Finke obtained an AFSCME Council 31 bargaining bulletin. Harsh stuff...

A May bargaining bulletin from the union obtained by The State Journal-Register, also said the administration is seeking “deep cuts to health insurance benefits” that the union said could drive up employee costs by more than 500 percent.

“This week the administration made all too clear how little value it places on the work we do,” the bulletin said. “The governor’s negotiators presented the AFSCME Bargaining Committee with a lengthy list of economic proposals that amounted to a massive assault on the standard of living of every state employee.” […]

* The administration wants a salary freeze for the length of the contract.

* Rauner wants to eliminate step increases available to workers during their first eight years on the job and wants to take back longevity pay that is awarded to workers who no longer qualify for step increases.

* The administration is seeking to reduce vacation and holiday time off.

* The governor also wants to eliminate additional pay for working in maximum security facilities, being called back to work and for continuing education.

* Meanwhile, from the Law Bulletin…

A state appeals panel rejected a union challenge Tuesday to a law that took collective bargaining rights from some state employees, such as general counsels and chiefs of staff.

In a 21-page opinion, a 1st District Appellate Court panel said the law was legitimately aimed at making government more efficient and did not infringe on employees’ due process or equal protection rights.

Affirming an Illinois Labor Relations Board ruling, the appellate panel also said the law did not violate state constitutional prohibitions against arbitrary legislation or delegations of power from one branch to another.

Concerned by the rising number of high-level state employees in unions, lawmakers two years ago gave the governor powers to prohibit thousands of them from joining unions.

Section 6.1 of the Illinois Labor Relations Act authorized then-Gov. Patrick J. Quinn “to designate up to 3,580 [s]tate employment positions collectively within [s]tate agencies directly responsible to the [g]overnor” and exclude them “from the self-organization and collective bargaining provisions” of the law.

* The opinion is here…

It was reasonable for the legislature to make a determination that the Governor’s participation was warranted to remove certain high-level managers from collective bargaining units so that he could effectively run his executive department as he sees fit. The Governor is in the best position to know which employees’ positions entail policy-related and discretionary responsibilities and which do not. Rather than inefficiently micro-managing the process itself or requiring the Governor and the ILRB to go through the lengthy classification process for each employee, the General Assembly gave the Governor an efficient tool to reassign employees whose positions he believed were incompatible with collective bargaining unit membership. Giving the Governor the authority to classify those from whom the State demands undivided loyalty as unsuitable for collective bargaining unit membership is a reasonable method to achieve the direct objective of section 6.1. […]

If AFSCME’s arguments are correct, meaning that the individuals are not actually managers, AFSCME has provided no reason why the individuals cannot simply file a clarification petition to be reclassified as public employees thereby reobtaining collective bargaining unit membership. It seems as though AFSCME is simply trying to have it both ways: for the individuals to keep their managerial status and the benefits that come along with that; and also to keep their collective bargaining unit membership and the benefits that come along with that. […]

AFSCME argues that section 6.1 unconstitutionally impairs the collective bargaining agreement that was in place when the statute was passed… [But] the established procedures for adding or removing positions from the collective bargaining unit have long been in place and a reclassification of employees does not constitute a breach or an impairment of an existing collective bargaining agreement. The individuals here had no vested right, constitutional or otherwise, to remain in the unit until the agreement expired and changes to their status were foreseeable. Once an employee is reclassified as a managerial employee, he or she loses the right to any benefits flowing from the agreement going forward.

Seems reasonable. Thoughts?

[The headline on this post was changed and the Finke story was added above.]

143 Comments

*** UPDATED x1 *** Dems to Rauner: You do the cutting

Thursday, May 21, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Vinicky looks at the Democrats’ upcoming budget proposal…

Insiders, including legislators, say the Democratic version is shaping up to contain cuts too, but drastically smaller ones. Rep. Ken Dunkin, D-Chicago, who chairs the House Higher Education Appropriations committee, says universities will see cuts of less than ten-percent.

“This is where our talent gets trained and educated, and for us to dismiss them in a such a way — or to write them off … is not the right message that we need to send,” Dunkin said.

What appears to be missing from the equation, so far at least, is a way to pay for that spending, given that it’ll be the first full budget year with the new, lower tax rates. Democrats could be content to send Gov. Rauner a budget that dares him to make the drastic cuts he’d outlined.

While there’s been no action on revenue enhancers like a higher income tax rate, retirement tax, adding a sales tax to services (as Gov. Rauner had promoted during his campaign), there are revenue options.

Gambling is a possibility — a legislator involved with those negotiations say a proposal with five casinos (in Chicago, Lake County, the south suburbs, Rockford and Danville) is shaping up. The House Speaker, Michael Madigan, is also keeping alive a “millionaires’ tax”; a constitutional amendment that could lead to the surcharge on income over a million dollars advanced out of a House committee. It’s opposed by Gov. Rauner and his business allies.

* And…

While Democrats say a revenue hike is needed, they insist they won’t do it without the GOP.

That sets up a scenarios where Democrats send Rauner a budget without deep cuts or any tax increase. Basically, leaving it to Rauner to sign — or slash (that could put both parties in a political pickle. Democrats may look like the out-of-control spenders their critics paint them to be; Rauner could look like the cutthroat, out-of-touch millionaire. Will it be that Democrats throw the governor a hot potato, or will they play into his hands, making it easy on Rauner to throw the gauntlet?).

“What I think will happen with the budget is … we’ll pass one,” Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia, D- said. “And people need to realize that we just give directive to the governor on .. how to spend the money. It’s up to him to write the checks. And he can take our advice or he can ignore us.

“That’ll leave things “in a big mess,” Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno says.”The fact of the matter is, if they do that, the governor will manage it and that will hurt the very constituents they’re talking about wanting to help. So it’s very incongruous. I think it’s very cynical. They need to get to the table and have a very serious discussion about reforms.” And then, she says, Republicans will have a serious discussion about raising taxes that could stave off cuts.

But that’s only after Rauner’s pro-business, anti-union agenda advances.

Thoughts?

*** UPDATE *** Erickson…

While Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner’s budget blueprint called for a 31 percent cut to universities in the fiscal year beginning July 1, the Democratic proposal would pare the reduction to 6.5 percent, the Herald & Review Springfield Bureau has learned.

The potentially positive change for higher education is among a number of alterations Democrats are expected to highlight when they begin debating their spending plan in the closing days of the spring legislative session.

Republicans said university officials should remain wary of the Democratic budget since Rauner could veto all or parts of the plan if it is unbalanced.

“That’s a facade budget. That’s not going to be the budget at the end of the day because the governor is not going to sign that budget,” said Republican state Rep. Dan Brady of Bloomington, who represents Illinois State University.

* Flannery…

Sources also told FOX 32 News that the Democrats may call for spending up to $37 billion. Gov. Rauner said the state has only about $32 billion for next year.

So if that budget passes, the Governor could sign it. He has the power to spend only for the services he thinks the state can afford.

Or, Option 2: Rauner could veto it outright.

Democrats would then need a supermajority to override his veto. But that would leave the governor with the Democrats budget and he again would spend only on the services he thinks the state could afford.

Or, Option 3: He could go line by line vetoing the parts of the budget he doesn’t like, which the Democrats would have to override line by line.

* Related…

* CTU to rally against Rauner turnaround plan: The Chicago Teachers Union is sending a delegation to Springfield this morning to lobby state lawmakers for more money, more benefits, cheaper housing and child care for union members, and higher taxes to pay for it all.

* Our Crazy Treatment of the Mentally Ill - Prison cells have replaced mental institutions.

89 Comments

*** LIVE *** Session coverage

Thursday, May 21, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Constantly updated news via ScribbleLive, brought to you by The Illinois Kids Campaign Watch it happen as it happens…

4 Comments

« NEWER POSTS