Veto session: the 81st's final flight

DUCKS — lame ducks, sitting ducks, dead ducks . . . but hardly tame ducks. The Illinois General Assembly's 1980 veto session may be the start of the longest-running fowl term on record. The usual post-election lame duck session is one thing. A dead duck session could be something else.

Pat Quinn's Coalition of Political Honesty's victory came in turning a handful of pay-raise protesters into enough cutback petition signers to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot. And Quinn may be vindicated at the polls. The voters may pass the coalition's so-called "Cutback Amendment," reducing membership in the Illinois House by one third, from 177 to 118.

But vindication could breed a bitter, and ironic, revenge. The Cutback Amendment effectively reduced all House members to sitting ducks in this year's elections. If the amendment is passed, the seats of 59 members could be shot out from under them in the election two years from now. Who knows how these representatives will respond? Another pay raise is possible, so is a pension raise.

Regardless of the status of its House members on November 5, the Illinois General Assembly must override or concur with Gov. James R. Thompson's vetoes and amendatory vetoes when the fall session opens November 12 (See "Legislative Action," p. 25). At this writing (late September), it is too early to predict the political priorities, but it is fairly easy to spot the most controversial bills that will appear on the fall session calendar.

Heading the list is H.B. 3614, sponsored by the House Committee on State Government Reorganization, which followed Thompson's executive order creating the nation's first cabinet-level Department of Nuclear Safety. Because of the executive order, the new agency was scheduled to begin operation October 1, regardless of the status of the legislation. Thompson, however, vetoed one provision of the bill, designed to prevent Morris, Illinois from becoming the nation's nuclear waste dump by banning the importation of spent nuclear fuel into Illinois. That amendatory veto sent the entire bill back to the legislature. Sen. Jerome J. Joyce (D., Kankakee), the author of the controversial provision, will make a strong bid to override the governor's veto — and he may find an equally strong ally in House Minority Leader George Ryan (R., Kankakee), who also represents Morris. This is the closest Joyce and other nuclear safety crusaders have come to rescuing Morris, and they will press that advantage. But Thompson argues that only four percent of the nation's nuclear waste has been dumped at Morris to date. And he points out that Illinois, as the nation's number one user of nuclear power, relies on other states for a major portion of the necessary raw materials. He hints that Illinois should at least be willing to dispose of the waste generated in the production of those raw materials. But the odds for a successful override of H.B. 3614 remain uncertain because the governor has already achieved his goal of creating a nuclear safety department.

A close second among the controversial bills on the calendar will be H.B. 3204, sponsored by Rep. Edmund E. Kornowicz, (D., Chicago). Perhaps the key component in the Democrats' 1980 tax relief package, the bill would expand the senior citizen circuit breaker (CB) much further than Thompson considers desirable. The governor, however, again vetoed only one provision, which was designed to offset 75 percent of increased fuel costs by providing outright CB fuel grants for the first time.

Tax relief could be expected to be a relatively dead issue in the weeks immediately following an election. But with winter approaching, the Democrats see the obvious political advantage in attempting to override Thompson's veto of the senior citizen fuel grants. Led by Sen. Richard M. Daley (D., Chicago), and with the help of Comptroller Roland W. Burris, who appears to have become the party's fiscal spokesman, the Democrats contend that the state can well afford the additional $17 million in tax relief since public utilities tax revenue has increased to the extent it now ranks third behind the sales and income taxes. And the Democrats campaigned on a tax relief platform, saying that tax revenue should be returned to the taxpayers. Thompson, of course, maintains that the state can not afford the new fuel grants. He seemed to sharpen the Republican party line when he described the tax relief bills he vetoed as a "growing list of attempts to make the tax system in Illinois serve everything but its primary function — the collector of revenue with which to operate State Government."

The fall session calendars will also contain bills that were eligible but never called for a final vote at the end of the spring session. Heading that list is H.B. 3618, sponsored by Ryan, which would call for worker's compensation reforms beyond those already signed into law (H.B. 3250; P.A. 81-1482). H.B. 3618 is comprised of Republican amendments the Democrats dumped when business and labor agreed on the provisions of H.B. 3250. Another possibility is H.B. 3268, sponsored by House Speaker William A. Redmond (D., Bensenville) and Ryan, a bipartisan bill designed to temporarily ease the tight money market by lifting state-imposed ceilings on interest. And there may be a move to pass S.B. 1812, sponsored by Sen. Adeline J. Geo-Karis (R., Mt. Zion), which would require public busing of students attending private schools.

It is also possible the General Assembly will consider legislative pay

Continued on page 8

2/November 1980/Illinois Issues

The state of the State
Continued from page 2

Veto session: the 81st's final flight

raises and/or pension raises in its 1980 veto session. But the most controversial issue that could arise this fall (aside from nuclear waste and CB fuel grants) is the refinancing of Thompson's four-year road program, which was approved only last year, and the refinancing of the state's unemployment insurance program. At present it is too early to tell what, if anything, the legislature will do on these issues.

Last year's financing plan for roads did not change statewide transportation taxes, but it did jump bond money up $400 million and it did juggle diversions in and out of the Road Fund for a net gain of $5 million. Yet only a compromise between Thompson and Chicago Mayor Jane Byrne pushed the plan through the General Assembly. This compromise involved a new funding formula for the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA), which replaced an annual state subsidy and a gas surtax levied by the RTA with a controversial split-rate sales tax surtax that was later upheld by the Illinois Supreme Court.

Thompson claimed the new plan would result in Illinois' first "move ahead" road program in 25 years, but it has already fallen behind, despite its $1 billion-a-year price tag. The General Assembly is well aware that transportation taxes can no longer keep pace with highway costs. And they know that politically, the RTA remains as much of a roadblock as ever. Despite the new funding formula, the six-year-old RTA is no closer to self-sufficiency.

To salvage his four-year road program, Thompson has drawn up an all-new financial blueprint, which is expected to hinge on a gas tax increase. Obviously, Thompson wants to guarantee that revenue will cover costs. Presumably, he would do it by switching from the current flat rate (7.5 cents) per gallon, to a graduated, percentage rate per dollar. The flat rate has generated less and less revenue as sales have fallen; the graduated, percentage rate would generate more as prices climb.

Unemployment insurance is a question of bankruptcy. Taxes levied on business are grossly inadequate to fund benefits, and Illinois is now nearly $1 billion in debt to the federal government. The loan comes due this fall. Illinois also needs more than a quarter billion dollars in additional federal loans. Legislative action depends on whether the federal government will extend the loans to Illinois and other industrial states in the same situation.

Fifty-nine of the legislative ducks in the Illinois General Assembly may be lame for the next two years. But the issues to be dealt with during the 1980 veto session are guaranteed to keep them active for a few more months.

8/November 1980/Illinois Issues