Week of March 3, 2008

    Last week was once again dominated by committee meetings as Representatives scramble to meet the deadline of passing House Bills out of committees by March 14th. However, there are a couple of pieces of legislation that are on third reading in the House having successfully passed through the committee process and could come up for a vote in the House very soon.

    First, I want to provide a quick breakdown of the gun legislation that is being proposed. Some of these have been proposed before. HB731 would make it illegal for any person to store or leave, within premises under his or her control, a firearm if the person knows or has reason to believe that a minor under the age of 18 (rather than 14) years who does not have a Firearm Owners Identification Card or who is not serving in the military is likely to gain access to the firearm without the lawful permission of the minor's parent, guardian, or person having charge of the minor unless the firearm is secured. HB796 attempts to restrict the sale of guns by stating that no person may sell or otherwise transfer, or have in his or her possession with the intent to sell or transfer any concealable firearm without being licensed. The prohibition does not apply to a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of concealable firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or as a hobby. HB4357 is another assault weapons ban bill that is on third reading and HB4393 would limit legal gun purchases to one per month. As mentioned most of these measures have been pushed prior to this spring. There might be a few differences, but the purpose of the legislation is to limit Second Amendment rights in some manner. I have strongly opposed these bills before and certainly plan to oppose them again.

    HB5615 has been assigned to the Human Services Committee. This is a very controversial proposal which deals with abortion rights. Among other things, this legislation would mandate that the State or any municipality, political subdivision, or other governmental unit or agency shall not deny or interfere with a pregnant woman's right to terminate a pregnancy except in very limited situations. In addition, the legislation provides that the State shall ensure that individuals eligible for State Medicaid assistance, or other State medical assistance, receive financial assistance for “reproductive healthcare”. Finally, the legislation requires that all Illinois public schools shall offer medically accurate, age appropriate, comprehensive sexual health education. The determination for what the “age appropriate” and “comprehensive sexual health education” for students in our local schools would be made by the State Board of Education. I am NOT interested in the State making those decisions for our local schools and will also oppose this legislation.

    Last week, the Governor proposed that the building at Northern Illinois University where the tragic shootings recently took place should be torn down. His plan would call for the replacement of Cole Hall at a cost of about $400 million. This idea has been met with mixed reaction. However, it looks as though this proposal could be on the fast track. I would be interested in your perspective on this issue. The building was not scheduled for any type of replacement on a capitol development basis prior to the shooting incident. There was no significant physical damage done to the building during the incident. The replacement would be performed purely to help the campus heal according to the advocates of this proposal. I am actually an NIU alum and, like everyone, feel horrible about what happened there on February 14th. However, I am not sure this idea has been thought out very well. I really need your input on this one.

    The other proposal which got a great deal of attention last week was one that would raise the state income tax by two percent from three percent to five percent. This is actually a sixty-seven percent increase in the income tax rate. The legislation would also raise the corporate income tax from around four percent to a little over eight percent. Around nine billion dollars of new revenue would be realized from these increases. There would be property tax relief mandated along with the tax increases. Of course, there is no way to sustain the property tax relief if land assessment increases. The net effect would be billions of new revenue to meet state obligations.

    The income tax increase proposal is found in SB2268. This legislation is very similar to an approach taken in HB750 from last year. HB750 is also still alive on the House floor. There is growing sentiment that the state’s fiscal crisis will require some type of tax increase this year. Once again, I am interested in hearing from you on this issue. The state has around $2 billion in unpaid bills and is facing a deficit of at least $1.5 billion next fiscal year. Nursing homes and Medicaid providers are going months without reimbursement and other payments to fund government services are late as well. The governor has proposed more spending without a reliable and sustainable way to pay for the new proposals.

    As the spring session unfolds, I am interested in your thoughts regarding the possibility of raising the income or sales tax in order to meet the state’s obligations. Please let me know what you think about the state fiscal crisis and the best way out. You can write to me at either P.O. Box 125, Hutsonville, IL 62433, or 222-N, Stratton office Building, Springfield, IL 62706, or you can e-mail me at reddyunit1@aol.com. I will also keep you updated on my web site: www.peopleforeddy.com