Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: COVID-19 roundup
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* Capitol News Illinois…
The Illinois Senate is gearing up for a debate over a package of ethics reforms, possibly as early as this week, but it’s one that Republicans say doesn’t go far enough.
Senate Bill 4, which moved out of the Senate Ethics Committee on April 21, is a package written largely by legislative Democrats that would enact new rules governing lobbying, campaign fundraising, who can serve on political committees and the operations of the General Assembly. […]
That bill reportedly has been the subject of negotiations between the chairs of the Senate and House ethics committees, Sen. Ann Gillespie, D-Arlington Heights, and Rep. Kelly Burke, D-Evergreen Park. But Gillespie indicated Monday that further changes may be made before the bill comes up for a vote. […]
Senate Republicans, however, argued in a news conference Monday that while the Democrats’ bill has some good reforms, it falls short of the kind of ethics legislation that they say Illinois needs.
* Rep. Mike Zalewski’s “shot and a beer” bill has found a new home as a House floor amendment to Senate Bill 104…
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, from June 6 , 2021 through July 10, 2021, a retail licensee may offer a single drink of alcoholic liquor at no cost to a customer as part of a publicly advertised promotion to encourage participation in any COVID-19 vaccination program if the customer provides proof of COVID-19 vaccination received at any time. Drinks may be provided under this Section only from 12 p.m. through 10 p.m.
House Speaker Chris Welch has signed on as a co-sponsor of the underlying bill.
* This Republican-sponsored Senate bill (Anderson) had its deadline extended to May 21st by the Democrats and then yesterday the Democrats agreed to waive the posting requirements so it could be heard in committee today…
Amends the Fireworks Regulation Act of Illinois. Provides that the storage, possession, sale, and use of nonfireworks shall be permitted at all times throughout the State. Requires regulation of nonfireworks, including their storage and sale, to be consistent with the standards set forth in the National Fire Protection Association’s Code for the Manufacture, Transportation, Storage and Retail Sales of Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles, 2006 edition. Provides that the amendatory provisions do not apply to the City of Chicago. Defines “nonfireworks”.
* This bill has struck a nerve…
When a West Side preschooler was banned by his school from wearing his hair in braids, his mother resolved to take a stand against the school’s hair policy.
Though the school, Providence St. Mel, has not backed down, the family’s fight to wear their Black hair with pride has inspired a state bill that would bar schools from discriminating against students based on their hairstyle.
The bill drafted by Sen. Mike Simmons (7th) with the Illinois State Board of Education would require schools to remove any language from their policies and handbooks that prohibits students from wearing Black hairstyles. The bill was overwhelmingly approved by the state Senate last week and will now move to the House.
High-profile incidents of schools and workplaces cracking down on Black hairstyles — including one in North Carolina last week where a softball player was forced to cut her hair during a game — have pushed more states to pass laws to ban hair discrimination. California, New York and New Jersey were the first states to adopt versions of the CROWN Act — Create a Respectful and Open Workplace for Natural Hair — and several other states have adopted or considered similar measures.
* Other stuff…
* At long last, a new Illinois energy bill is likely imminent
* Advocates highlight support among voters to keep parental notification of abortion law intact
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 2:21 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: COVID-19 roundup
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I’m astounded that there is still this issue with people’s hair. I thought that was pretty much over after the 60’s. The fact that there are still some on this kick just baffles me.
Comment by ddp76 Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 2:25 pm
On the statewide lobbying bill: moving that to the State just like campaign finance is at the state makes perfect sense to me. A centralized database would be great for the public instead of having to look at multiple databases.
Comment by Just Me 2 Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 2:25 pm
Hair styles which incorporate beads should be fine in any classroom. But the same hairstyle with beads on an athlete can cause injury to the wearer and to others on the floor when the beads become jarred loose and unexpectedly fall during a game. I hope this is taken into consideration. Safety first.
Comment by Responsa Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 2:32 pm
I’m hoping that the Energy bill is not a done deal. There are a lot of things wrong with it on a variety of levels.
Comment by Cardinal Fan Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 2:42 pm
Dress codes are stupid in general, but I don’t understand why we want to forbid dress codes for hair specifically. Seems like an overreaction.
Comment by Perrid Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 2:42 pm
I don’t understand why anyone could be for regulating someones hair. Honestly, people tend to express themselves through the way they dress, do their hair, etc. What gives anyone a right to regulate that?
Side note: what are the chances we don’t have to go to Missouri or Kentucky for fireworks next year?
Comment by CMZ Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 3:02 pm
Hairstyles, tattoos, piercings. All fine and good until maybe that interview comes up and your freedom of expression might need to be tempered a bit.
The scenario is not quite the same thing but this line from Jerry to George might apply. “And you want to be my latex salesman”.
Comment by don the legend Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 3:20 pm
Providence St. Mel-that a public school? Or one to which parents choose to send their children?
Comment by snakepliskin69 Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 3:58 pm
re: SB2170 “non fireworks”
It was my understanding that bills in the general assembly could not explicitly target or exclude specific cities. The smallest geographical delineation allowed was counties and their populations. Which is why laws in ILCS usually refer to “counties with more than 1MM population” when Chicago was being targeted or excluded from some bill or law.
I’m sure it is possible I’ve misunderstood something, or this isn’t considered targeting even though the bill explicitly mentions the city of Chicago for exclusion to amendments.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 4:13 pm
@ snakepliskin69
It’s a private school, to which parents choose to send their children. You’d think that if parents choose to send their children there with their hair in braids it wouldn’t be an issue, but apparently you’d be wrong.
Comment by CEA Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 4:43 pm
==It’s a private school, to which parents choose to send their children==
What’s your point? This whole hair regulation thing is ridiculous. I’m not one to yell racism at every turn but in this instance, school policies throughout the country regarding some of these hairstyles are racist.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 4:48 pm
People, especially white people, have got to stop policing black people’s hair. First it was the Afro, now it’s braids. If it takes a law to stop it, it takes a law.
Comment by Rasselas Tuesday, May 18, 21 @ 8:49 pm