Overcast
61°
Crystal Lake, IL
Overcast|Forecast »

Gambling, pensions 2 lame-duck session possibilities

Text Size: AaAaAaAaAa

As constituents shake off their hangovers Jan. 1, state lawmakers will be packing their bags for a weeklong lame-duck session in Springfield.

The Illinois Senate plans to reconvene Jan. 2, and the House the following day, and both are scheduled to meet daily until the new General Assembly elected last month is sworn in Jan. 9. All existing legislation not signed into law dies with the end of the old General Assembly and the start of the new one.

The lame-duck session is important to state lawmakers for two reasons.

First, the number of votes needed to pass legislation goes back to a simple majority rather than a three-fifths majority, or a difference of 11 votes in the 118-member House and six votes in the 59-member Senate. And secondly, lawmakers leaving office can be persuaded to approve controversial legislation without fear of political repercussions.

The session in recent years has become a dumping ground for controversial legislation that intentionally does not get addressed in the fall veto session. Lawmakers in the last lame-duck session in January 2011 approved the largest income-tax increase in state history, abolished capital punishment, and approved civil unions.

The last session especially raised accusations of Illinois-style quid pro quo – six of the 12 lame-duck lawmakers who approved the tax increase have since ended up with state jobs and higher, pension-boosting salaries. Two of them had campaigned against a tax increase before losing their 2010 election bids. Thirty-five state lawmakers are leaving office next month.

The following are a few of the issues that did not get tackled in the fall veto session that wrapped up last week, but will likely be addressed in the lame-duck session:

Gambling – A compromise might be reached on a gambling expansion bill that would be palatable to Gov. Pat Quinn.

Quinn in late August vetoed a bill allowing five new casinos in Illinois, including one in Chicago, and video gambling machines at horse-racing tracks. He cited a lack of oversight and what he called an inadequate share of new revenues slated for public education.

The fact that powerful House Speaker Michael Madigan is getting involved raises the possibility that a new bill is in the works. Madigan, D-Chicago, has recused himself from the gambling issue in past years to avoid a potential conflict of interest with his law firm. His spokesman has since said without further explanation that the conflict has been resolved.

Previous Page|1|||

Reader Poll

How concerned are you about the overuse of antibiotics?

Very
Somewhat
Not at all