Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Open thread
Next Post: House Speaker election coverage roundup
Posted in:
* Capitol News Illinois…
Body cameras would be mandatory for all law enforcement agencies under the law. Larger agencies would be required to have cameras in place by Jan. 1, 2022, and all agencies would need to have cameras in place by 2025.
Any municipality or county whose law enforcement agency does not comply would have its Local Government Distributive Fund contributions from the state reduced by 20% each year until it meets the requirements. The LGDF is the portion of state income tax revenue that goes to cities and counties.
Law enforcement groups, including the Illinois Fraternal Order of Police and the Chicago FOP, have referred to the Black Caucus legislation as the “Defund the police bill” because of this provision, a notion repeated by Chief Black, of Crystal Lake.
[House Criminal Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Justin Slaughter] and other members of the Black Caucus have disputed the characterization, given that law enforcement agencies are given time to comply and do not have funding cut outright.
* Tribune…
House Democrats also accused law enforcement groups of spreading misinformation about the proposals, citing a Facebook post from the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association that labels the legislation the “defund the police bill.” The post falsely claims that the bill “completely eliminates felony murder immediately” and makes other misleading claims, lawmakers said.
Rep. Kam Buckner of Chicago called the post “a sensational hit piece,” and Rep. Anne Stava-Murray of Naperville, who is white, asked Ogle County Sheriff Brian VanVickle, testifying Sunday on behalf of the sheriffs association, to have it removed. VanVickle said he would discuss the matter with the organization’s staff.
* SJ-R…
[Senate Majority Leader Kimberly Lightfort] told The State Journal-Register: “We’re in the midst of trying to strike a balance between those who say, ‘Defund the police,’ all the way to those who say, ‘Don’t do anything at all.’”
She added: “We’re trying to strike a balance where we can have some good, solid reforms that can be very helpful and beneficial to Black Americans but also allow our communities to remain safe. We’re pro-safety. We’re pro-police.”
* But voters don’t do nuance and opponents are not letting up. From the Illinois FOP’s dot points…
• Defunds any department that does not comply 100% with the draconian requirements of the legislation
* Sen. Jason Plummer…
“We should call this what it is, a blatant attack on the police profession and an underhanded attempt to defund our law enforcement.”
* Rep. Andrew Chesney and Stephenson County sheriff David Snyder…
These proposals by “Defund the Police” reformers simply increase costs and too-often treat alleged criminals better than the victims as well as the law enforcement officers sworn to protect and serve the public.
* Illinois House Republicans’ dot points…
Creates costly new mandates on our local law enforcement with threats of reduced funding if they do not comply.
* Member of the Eastern Bloc…
This is a punish the police bill. (Senate Amendment 2 to HB 163)
It will not make communities safer.
It puts our…
Posted by State Representative Blaine Wilhour - District 107 on Friday, January 8, 2021
* Deputy Senate Republican Leader…
Sign the petition below to express your opposition to House Bill 163, which threatens the law enforcement profession by effectively defunding police departments across Illinois. https://t.co/fQbLd5kZY0 pic.twitter.com/EgLyAVlwyK
— Sue Rezin (@SenatorRezin) January 11, 2021
* Yet, I don’t think a word was spoken last month when this happened in Washington, DC…
GOP leaders over the past week defeated efforts to help states and cities that are facing cutbacks to public safety and other services because of the pandemic-caused budget crisis. They claimed this would amount to what Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called a “blue state bailout.” In reality, it was more of a “blue bailout” — and police in blue and red states alike are now on the chopping block.
“Despite the clear evidence that shrinking revenue in cities across the country is leading to job loss and the reduction of critical services like public safety,” the bipartisan U.S. Conference of Mayors protested this week, “Congress chose to turn its back on first responders, police, firefighters and other essential workers.”
This isn’t theoretical. In large part because of the federal government’s months-long refusal to help, localities across the country are involuntarily defunding the police in real time.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 3:05 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Open thread
Next Post: House Speaker election coverage roundup
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The progressive chants all summer and fall was ‘defund the police’. They invented the term. The irony is thick now that it is being used to describe with holding state funds for non-compliance of a state law. This fund diversion is not new, also happens with pensions.
Comment by Nagidam Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 6:08 am
Mandating Bodycams is long overdue. They are necessary to help good cops do their jobs.
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 6:25 am
That’s the ball game.
By not supporting state bailouts in *only* the context of Coronavirus, you are also supporting defunding the police and pushing to the crippling of your state, including Illinois.
That’s what McConnell, ironically, was saying about his own state, Kentucky, a state like Illinois with real fiscal challenges exacerbated by the virus.
It’s prolly not an accident that I default to hurting, punishing, forcing deep, painful cut to downstate, where tax eating is at its height… and legislators are pushing for “cuts before more taxes”… just don’t… close a prison, a university, DNR facilities… you know, tax eating things…
But, then there’s the “back the blue”… the old, angry, white, that can’t reconcile that state funding, when reduced also does mean “defunding the police”… can’t… can’t grasp budgets.
Voters don’t do nuance. Budgets do understand shortfalls and cuts due to shortfalls.
Adults need to realize slogans to incite division sometimes run amok against the truth of what a fiscal want actually entails.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 8:17 am
I’ve seen police departments using their official department Facebook pages to urge people to lobby against this. My opinions on the merits of the legislation aside, and I’m certainly no attorney, but it’s hard to see how this doesn’t at least border on prohibited political activity.
Comment by Zim Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 8:20 am
Currently, it seems, Republicans are leading efforts to defund schools, hospitals, seniors, people with disabilities, mental health services, roads and bridges, and public safety.
Comment by Ok Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 8:46 am
Will Chicago also face 20% reduction for failure to release bodycam footage?
Comment by Put the fun in unfunded Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 8:51 am
@Zim
===but it’s hard to see how this doesn’t at least border on prohibited political activity.===
Lobbying for or against a proposed piece of legislation is actually covered by the 1st amendment. This is not prohibited political activity. People/groups are not supporting of opposing a political candidate when posting about the bill.
Comment by Nagidam Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 8:56 am
That’s the message. The GOP has done and will likely continue to do more to defund the police and firefighters and teachers than anything proposed by the Dems.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:15 am
It is always easier to tie compliance to new funding as an incentive, rather than removal of funding as a penalty. New funding is in short supply, so here we are.
Comment by thechampaignlife Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:19 am
==These proposals by “Defund the Police” reformers simply increase costs==
Yet not a peep from Jason or Sue when Chicago (and the state) set aside hundreds of millions to settle police misconduct cases.
Comment by Jocko Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:27 am
“But voters don’t do nuance and opponents are not letting up.”
While the proponents of police reform might be disappointed by this, I doubt that they are terribly surprised.
The opponents of police reform have never approached the issue with an excess of honesty or integrity.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:29 am
“Larger agencies would be required to have cameras in place by Jan. 1, 2022, and all agencies would need to have cameras in place by 2025.” Body cams should have been mandatory in 2015, when Kwame Raoul was chairman of senate judiciary. This should have been done five years ago, now this bill gives another five years, allowing police criminals to hurt a few more people, and it’s being portrayed as a huge struggle. Time for the police unions and their enablers to get out of the stone age and face the light of day.
“…Ogle County Sheriff Brian VanVickle, testifying Sunday on behalf of the sheriffs association, to have it removed.” These rural “you’re not from around here” counties are a big part of the problem. Police crimes and harassment don’t just happen in Chicago, and there is less news coverage in the small towns. Giving the hicks five more years to be dragged into the 21st century is a mistake. They will milk it out until the last day they can get away with hiding.
Comment by Payback Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:30 am
Indivisible Chicago, which is backing a new Speaker, still calls for defunding the police on its website.
As long as there are groups still calling for defunding the police, this line of attack will continue.
Where do the 21 stand?
Comment by Ferris Wheeler Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:32 am
I don’t think penalties will work - I think increased funding for body cams and other needed equipment should be considered, funded by cuts to lobby supported BS programs and dumb studies about useless concerns. Why do you think gun sales are up in Illinois
Comment by Jack Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:36 am
==Creates costly new mandates on our local law enforcement with threats of reduced funding if they do not comply.==
I don’t know if I’ve ever agreed with a GOP talking point, but this seems like a fair and responsible criticism. That being said, body cams are extremely important and should be required. As with everything in IL, the question always boils down to where does the money come from?
Comment by Born Adjudication Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:44 am
I’m glad there were well funded police in DC last Wednesday. They did a fantastic job in my opinion. There are extremists on both sides not just the left and not just the right. Defund if they don’t get body cams? There are plenty of poor municipalities that would struggle to comply and to defund on top of that puts them deeper in hole.
Comment by Swimdad13 Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 9:55 am
=== There are extremists on both sides not just the left and not just the right.===
This was an insurrection of the government, not a “both sides” issue.
Saying so not only shows you are clueless, it’s your downplaying of terrorist acts. Full stop.
Beyond police in DC, the national guard to put down a insurrection was required.
In Illinois, the budgetary matrix of mere math indicates that cutting or being unable to fund is defunding, be it the muni governments, and in turn law enforcement.
If state legislators who are against “defunding” but still propose “defunding” can’t grasp that, the factual aspect to it will find them eventually
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 10:01 am
==Lobbying for or against a proposed piece of legislation is actually covered by the 1st amendment. This is not prohibited political activity. People/groups are not supporting of opposing a political candidate when posting about the bill.==
@Nagidam Again, I’m not an attorney, but I’ll just leave things at saying that 50 ILCS 135 seems to imply that this activity is problematic if it occurred on government time. Units of local government also have their own ethics ordinances that mirror state statute. From what I’ve seen of a number of them, they generally prohibit the use of public resources to advocate for candidates and on questions of public policy.
Comment by Zim Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 10:07 am
“As long as there are groups still calling for defunding the police, this line of attack will continue.”
This line of attack by opponents of police reform predates Indivisible Chicago, Black Lives Matter, and the 21st Century.
As does blaming the proponents of police reform for the dishonestly of the opponents of police reform.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 10:37 am
==I’m glad there were well funded police in DC last Wednesday. They did a fantastic job in my opinion.==
A fantastic job doing what? They almost had the line of succession killed by traitors.
Comment by Google Is Your Friend Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 10:54 am
@misterjayem -
You are wrong. There have been proposals around for decades to reduce the local’s share of tax revenue. No one ever accused them of defunding the police before, the argument was always that it would raise property taxes.
There is nothing dishonest about pointing out that people who want to defund the police, want to defund the police. Ask Speaker Pelosi, she has repeatedly pointed out that the Defund the Police mantra ain’t helpful.
I support the bill, but this is how the game is played.
Comment by Ferris Wheeler Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 11:23 am
=There is nothing dishonest about pointing out that people who want to defund the police, want to defund the police. Ask Speaker Pelosi, she has repeatedly pointed out that the Defund the Police mantra ain’t helpful.=
So long as you accept the reality that, at the national level at least, the GOP is actively working to defund the police. Ask Mitch McConnell about the “blue state bailout” lie. Kentucky is the single largest recipient of government spending per tax dollar in America. Hypocrisy has no boundaries with these people.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 12:08 pm
What does “defund the police” mean?
Does it mean funds should be re-directed?
Does it mean the Public does not want militarized Police acting as Slave catchers breaking down our doors.
Defund the Police was a poor choice of words that opened the door to disingenuous purposeful “criticism”…when everyone actually knew what was meant.
Comment by Dotnonymous Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 12:32 pm
“Defund the Police was a poor choice of words that opened the door to disingenuous purposeful ‘criticism’… when everyone actually knew what was meant.”
There is no formulation of language that can perfectly immunize one against the effects of someone else’s willful dishonesty.
That’s one of dishonesty’s chief features.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 1:18 pm
MrJM, so very true. I just ask that we make their job a little harder next time.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 1:25 pm
What is the state going to do with the 20% reduction in LGDF for those found in non-compliance? I couldn’t find anything on this and didn’t get to listen to all the discussion.
Comment by JustaThought Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 2:53 pm
Bodycams are great and i support them however we have to be realistic about the cost. Not just the up front cost of purchases but the massive amount of data storage that is required to keep these for an agreed on amount of time. It is interesting that Democratic lawyers want the police to have less rights than convicted felons. The same group that wants to keep employers from asking about Criminal Convictions want unsubstantiated anonymous complaints to be used against police indefinitely.
Comment by Johnny99 Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 2:58 pm
==It is interesting that Democratic lawyers want the police to have less rights than convicted felons.==
How do you expect people to take you seriously when you serve up such hyperbole?
Are police in prison? Are they prevented from voting while in prison? When released do they have to pay restitution? Are they banned from getting a student loan? Are they allowed to carry a gun?
Comment by Muddy trail Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 6:19 pm
“No one ever accused them of defunding the police before”
The opponents of police reform have always claimed that any legislation that might reel police in will ultimately leave departments penniless and helpless.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, Jan 11, 21 @ 7:46 pm
I wonder if the senators that voted on this will expect all that police protection when the next set of riots come ?
Comment by Mr T Thursday, Jan 14, 21 @ 7:34 am