Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Lt. guv applicants listed *** Kirk on offense; LG updates
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* Yikes…
Picture this scene: Six or seven police officers struggle for a half hour on the floor with an uncooperative man while a phlebotomist repeatedly jabs the man’s hand with a needle, trying to draw blood.
It’s not a pretty picture. But it’s one you could see in Illinois if a bill that last week passed out of an Illinois House committee becomes law.
As the law stands now, police — even with a subpoena — are not allowed to use force to draw a suspect’s blood. House Bill 4969 would change that, allowing “all necessary and reasonable force” to obtain a blood sample.
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Keith Farnham (D-Elgin), says he introduced the bill at the request of the Kane County state’s attorney’s office, which has staged occasional “no refusal” weekends since 2008 to crack down on DUI suspects who refuse Breathalyzer tests. […]
The scene described above — cops fighting a suspect for a blood sample — did in fact take place in Arizona, where the man was left with a hand so swollen he couldn’t use his thumb. Former Cook County Judge Daniel M. Locallo, who sits on the Illinois State Bar Association’s Criminal Law Section, calls it an example of “frontier justice.”
Farnham barely won his race last year, so apparently he thinks he has to look super-tough on crime and cooperate fully with his local prosecutor to win this time around. But this seems to be a bit much, no?
* Here’s an interesting populist notion…
Legislation pending in the Illinois House would prohibit businesses from hiring based on a person’s credit history to spare people who lose their jobs and their homes from being “double victimized” when they can’t find new work, its top supporter said Monday.
“Can you imagine you’re someone who, at no fault of your own, you lose everything — you’re laid off, you can’t afford your mortgage so you lose your home — and then when you’re trying to get back on your feet, you got companies running credit checks on you while you’re looking for jobs?” said Rep. Jack Franks (D-Woodstock), chief House sponsor.
I have a pretty good life, so I really can’t complain about much. However, I’d like to see some legislation to stop mobile phone companies from running those over-long explanatory messages (often with several-second pauses) during voice mail messages. I’m pretty sure everybody knows how to leave a message at the beep. I’m also pretty sure that those several seconds add up to huge profits when taken in the aggregate.
* It might also be nice if not-for-profits that don’t tell the truth about their lobbying expenses be somehow penalized, but I won’t hold my breath, especially considering the subject of this particular story…
Chicago Children’s Museum officials said they plan to amend the museum’s federal tax filings to reveal its City Council lobbyists and how much they were paid in recent years after the Tribune asked why it had failed to do so.
According to council members, several professionals were hired to lobby aldermen — who in June 2008 sided with Mayor Richard Daley and approved a controversial plan to build a museum in Grant Park.
But those lobbyists weren’t disclosed, as required, on the museum’s Internal Revenue Service reports for a two-year period ending June 30, 2008, according to recent not-for-profit filings at the Illinois attorney general’s office.
“It was an administrative error, and we are currently amending those tax returns,” said museum spokesman Natalie Kreiger.
That’s a pretty big error.
* Related…
* Meeks’ School Voucher Plan Moves Ahead: His voucher proposal would allow parents of students in the academically lowest 10 percent of Chicago Public Schools to have the option of sending their children to a private school, if space is available.
* Possible red-light camera ban faces Senate hurdle
* Illinois Primary Might be Moved Again
* Legislators take aim at new FOIA
* Recorder has risen quickly: Relationship with Hoffman has helped county official
* Ties to Jay Hoffman help Madison County recorder — just 31 — rise quickly in political circles
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:00 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Lt. guv applicants listed *** Kirk on offense; LG updates
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Rich, didn’t you have a Blagojevich “clout list” at one time? I thought that Jay Hoffmann had a few people on that list, given his close relationship to Blago. Was Kyle Anderson (the new Madison County Recorder) on this list?
Comment by Steve-O Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:08 am
“I’m also pretty sure that those several seconds adds up to huge profits when taken in the aggregate.”
They do add up, and it is intentional by the phone companies. I will have try and go back and find the article, but I saw it described by a phone company executive as a “revenue strategy.”
That and text messaging fees are the phone company boondoggles. Text messaging costs them near-0, yet they charge 10 cents per?
Comment by George Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:23 am
I’ve always wondered why some companies insist upon hiring recruiters with MBAs, who then proceed to identify the “best qualified” candidates–not based on experience or interviews, but by first filtering out people based on their credit rating and then whether they graduated from college and if so, where their school ranks. On the other hand, when it comes to looking at folks from overseas, they’ll fawn over anyone from any school without even checking to see whether such a school exists.
It’s odd, too, that the same folks also design, develop, and conduct Corporate training programs, but they never take that learning into consideration in searching for qualified candidates.
Doesn’t sound as if such hiring practices require alot of thinking, nor as if these folks have alot of confidence in the development and learning opportunities they offer to our workforce here in the US.
I’m for anything that levels the playing field.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:31 am
the DUI law is assine and will just lead to millions of dollars in lawsuits for brutality. If I was the nurse I would refuse to draw blood from someone who was uncooperative.
Comment by fed up Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:35 am
The forced blood sample is way of the top. The Kane County state’s attorney obviously isn’t one of those limited-government Republicans.
If you refuse a Breathalyzer, you automatically lose your license already, I believe.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:36 am
==I’d like to see some legislation to stop mobile phone companies from running those over-long explanatory messages==
Rich-
David Pogue had a series of blog entries about this last summer.
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/how-to-bypass-stupid-voicemail-instructions/
Comment by bcross Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:42 am
Interesting story. It’s probably still out there if someone wants to look for it. A country that received thousands of Illinois jobs not too long ago boasted about having to recruit and retrain (on the job with pay) a woman who had retired more than 10 years ago because they were desperate to find “qualified workers” based on the demand from the US. They clearly stated that she had NEVER EVER worked in IT before–and never even touched a PC until she started her training.
What was the last story you heard about older people in the workforce here?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:43 am
What I can’t understand is why Bill Brady has not issued a press release stating his intention to pick up and sponsor the forced blood sample bill on the Senate side.
Comment by Moving to Oklahoma Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:50 am
“If you refuse a Breathalyzer, you automatically lose your license already, I believe.”
You do — but it’s a suspension for a fixed period of time, which most attorneys will agree is not nearly as bad to have on your record as an actual DUI conviction. That is why the practice of refusing breath tests has become more common, which in turn has led to the rise of “no refusal” DUI test tactics.
Comment by Secret Square Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:59 am
There are two sides to this. First, driving is a privilege, not a right. So, there is a certain level of “implied consent” when operating a vehicle.
With that said, the criminal side of it needs to be clearly separated from the administrative side. The administrative side would involve the SOS suspending your license. The criminal side would involve the DUI conviction. If the cops do their jobs properly and not try to cut corners, the state’s attorney doesn’t have to be armed with a failed breath test to obtain a conviction.
A DUI arrest also takes the cop off the streets for a minimum of 2 hours to process that suspect. If they’re driving them to a hospital and trying to force them to submit to a blood sample, you can probably add an additional hour or so to the time they’re taken off the street.
I think a better solution is for the SOS to step in with an administrative action to require anyone who refuses a breathalyzer to have special DUI license plates on their vehicle for the next year, or be denied registration renewal.
Comment by Steve-O Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:15 pm
>>“It was an administrative error, and we are currently amending those tax returns,” said museum spokesman Natalie Kreiger.
Comment by Northsider Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:17 pm
Wow, not sure what happened there, but the rest of my entry @ 12:17 said:
Um, yeah. Next they’ll forget that you have to staple, not clip, the cover sheets to their TPS reports.
Comment by Northsider Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:19 pm
School vouchers are fine until the State does not have the money to honor them.
Comment by DeKalb Dragon Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:31 pm
Unruly, uncooperative arrestees unwilling to give blood samples?
Gaggles of officers fighting and potentially getting hurt in the process?
Excuse me, isn’t that why God created Tasers, MACE and Pepper Spray?LOL
Comment by PalosParkBob Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:46 pm
Enable law enforcement to draw blood from arrestees?
In light of situations like the missing teenage California jogger and the neighboring sex offender suspect, I say go for it. Having the blood and DNA may solve and suppress crime more quickly.
Comment by Conservative Republican Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 1:09 pm
“as the law stands now” is a semi-misleading statement. As Illinois Statutory law says now, that may be true. However, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in several cases that if a state can show a compelling need for a suspect’s blood (proof of a DUI was specifically affirmed as a compelling need in one case), the blood test is not an unreasonable search and seizure because the procedure is so common-place, minimally risky, and minimally invasive.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 1:32 pm
What if the state can show a compelling need for a suspect to answer questions. Does the right to remain silent get thrown out the window. An interview is common place minimally risky and minimally invasive. I think compelled evidence is a slippery slope
Comment by fed up Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 2:10 pm
It is MY blood - MY property!
Governments should not have a right to strap you down and take it from you without concent. This is being done to make a determination based on a test. As a result, this ridiculous act of invasion is justified to these people.
Change the damn test and keep your mitts off me!
Your credit history is your business too. Unless you work with money, it should remain your business.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 2:17 pm
The picture of law enforcement holding someone down to take blood forcibly is not one we would want to see on the 6 o’clock news. And, rest assured, we will. All the squad cars having cameras should be helping, don’t you think? We have all seen the video of some srunk moron falling all over himself on those cops! shows.
BTW, Jesse White could lead the way, as he has done so well in the past, to have the law providing for a suspended license for refusing a sobriety test beefed up. A longer suspension, for example. License plate suspension. Make the punishment for not cooperating strong enough to minimize the benefit of refusing. This is a practical matter. Work it from the other end. Taking up the valuable time of 6 cops to wrestle with some drunken idiot can be handled differently.
I believe there may be good cause for an employer to need financial info on an applicant if it involves malfeasance or missappropriate. There could be a way for that info to be made available to the employer. The rest of it is not appropriate - don’t kick us when we are down!
Comment by dupage dan Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 2:34 pm
RM - I completely agree with you regarding the extended vm message following a person’s greeting on their cell phone. It goes through 5,599 options when all you want to do is leave a dog gone message! I have found that sometimes if you push “*” or “1″ it bypasses the greeting.
Comment by 2010 Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 3:04 pm
I’m amazed that the Children’s Museum thought somehow they hadn’t done any lobbying. Geez Louise! As someone making a fraction of any of the top people at the Children’s Museum, but who nonetheless has the pleasure of signing a 990, it’s not an ambiguous question. Yes, the auditor prepares the form, but you’re supposed to read it before you sign it, remember? And then you tell the auditor to fix it. Before you file it. Pretty simple, really.
Comment by Ann Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 3:56 pm
On the prospective employee credit report issue, there is more than meets the eye. No doubt the poor guy or girl who has lost everything shouldn’t be double penalized. What about the employee who is on verge of losing everything. Might the employee be at best distracted or at worst vulnerable to temptation depending on the job?
Comment by What's in a name? Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 4:06 pm
What’s in a name? - “Might the employee be at best distracted or at worst vulnerable to temptation depending on the job?”
I think that is too strong of a statement. A thief is a theif and just because you are poor does not make you a thief or tempt you to become one.
Comment by NO JUSTICE Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 4:47 pm
No Justice- Your point is well taken. The job responsibilities and the potential for mischief need to be considered. I agree with you that being poor doesn’t make you more likely to be crooked. I think someone who is about to lose there house or other asset may be particularly vulnerable at a particular moment in time. I agree we should paint all potential employees with the same brush on the other hand there may be legitimate reasons why a credit report may have value and we shouldn’t thoughtlessly remove this tool.
This isn’t an issue I would fight to the death over, I just thought the proposed legislation may be broader than it should be.
Comment by What's in a name? Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 5:42 pm
I’m starting to think this Meeks cookie is pretty OK. He first got my attention at the vote on bye-bye Blago….remember…(”We’ve got this thing called impeachment, and its golden”…)?
Vouchers are a good idea, but hard in the implementation. Starting with the lowest 10% performing schools is a great idea. Who can argue
that its better to sentence the kids who want to achieve to failure then give up only 10% control?
Comment by Park Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 7:50 pm
Do offshore resources go through the same background checks, including use of credit reports, that US workers go through?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:44 pm