 |
| Exclusive insight from the Illinois Policy Institute Check out the newest episode of The Policy Shop podcast for a conversation about how Springfield turns a bill into a law here. This edition of The Policy Shop is brought to you by Jordan Ryan, senior director of government affairs. The General Assembly is returning for veto session this week, which has us thinking about what’s on the table (namely, enacting the congressional map). While 5th grade civics curriculum in Illinois might cover how federal bills become a law, we think it’s fairly safe to say that hardly anyone in Illinois could explain how it actually works in Springfield. But who can blame us? The TL;DR version is that to get legislation passed, you have to 1) introduce a bill, 2) pass that bill out of committee, 3) pass both chambers of the General Assembly, and 4) get the governor’s signature on the bill. Voila, you’ve effected change. But the reality is much more convoluted. Just take a look at this process:  Spelling it out: Here are the steps a bill is to take under the Illinois constitution. (Buckle up; it’s a long journey)1. Representatives introduce bills in the House and Senators introduce bills in the Senate. Bills are designated as either House Bills or Senate Bills, depending upon the original sponsor.2. After the bill is introduced, it is said to be on “first reading.” All bills must be “read” to the chamber in which they are introduced three times. The Clerk of the House or Secretary of the Senate must merely read the bill number and its title aloud. 3. On to committee: House bills are initially assigned to the Rules Committee and Senate bills are given to the Assignments Committee. These groups look at each bill that is introduced and decide if it will be assigned to another committee and if so, to which committee. There are 29 standing committees in the Senate and 49 in the House. 4. Committee hearing: During a committee hearing, the bill’s sponsor explains the bill to the committee members, who can then ask any questions they may have. Amendments to the bill are heard in committee in the same manner. Amendments are legislative proposals that make changes to a bill. They can be as small as making a technical change to correct a spelling error in the original bill. They can also replace everything in the original bill and completely change what the bill does. 5. Committee vote: After all of the testimony, the committee votes to either recommend or not recommend a bill. A simple majority vote is required in order to pass a bill out of committee. If the bill does not receive the required votes, it remains in committee where it can either be voted on again at another time, or, more likely, it will simply die there. 6. Floor Process: Ok, we’ve made it through the first five steps and now the bill goes before the entire chamber. The bill is now on its “second reading.” The title and bill number are again read to the chamber and the clerk or secretary also informs the membership if any amendments have been filed. Bills that are on second reading can still be amended. Regardless of whether there is an amendment, the full chamber must vote to pass the bill to keep it alive. 7. The bill next moves to “third reading.” The title and bill number are read for a third time; at this point discussion and a vote on the bill (with all amendments) take place in the full chamber. The chamber can vote to approve or not to approve a bill. In general, a simple majority vote is required to pass the bill. 8. If the bill is approved, all amendments, if any, that were adopted are incorporated into the text of the bill. This version, called an “engrossed” bill, is then sent to the second chamber. For example, if the House approves a House bill, it then moves to the Senate. 9. In the second chamber, the engrossed bill needs to go through the same process it did in the previous chamber (Steps 2-7). 10. Ok, we’re ten steps in now. The bill has passed one chamber and it is now up to the second chamber to determine the trajectory of the bill. If the second chamber passes the same version of the bill as the engrossed bill (meaning, no amendments were adopted in the second chamber), then the bill has passed the General Assembly and is sent to the Governor for his signature to sign the bill into law. If, however, the second chamber added any amendments to the bill, it must return to the house of origin because the bill must pass both houses in the exact same form to be sent to the Governor. 11. Let’s say the second chamber adds amendments to the bill. The house of origin (where the bill began) then has two options: First, it can vote to add the amendments and send the bill to the Governor. Second, it can also vote not to concur on one or more of the amendments. If this occurs, the bill returns to the second chamber. This is where it gets messy, more committees are involved and reports issued. After all of this is sorted out, it goes (finally) to the Governor. 12. At last! The Governor has the bill! Now what? First, the Governor can choose to do nothing. If no action is taken within 60 days after the bill reaches the Governor, it automatically becomes law. Second, the Governor can sign the bill into law exactly as it is. Third, the Governor can veto the bill, either in full or just in part, making specific suggested changes. 13. If the Governor sends a partial veto back, the General Assembly has a few options: It can do nothing. If so, the bill is considered dead, even in the case of an amendatory veto. It can override the veto. If three-fifths of the members in each of the chambers votes to override the veto, then it becomes law in the form in which the bill was originally sent to the Governor In the case of an amendatory veto, the legislature may agree with the recommendations made by the Governor by a simple majority vote in each of the chambers. If this happens, the bill becomes law. Taking shortcuts: Instead of the arduous, direct process outlined above, our elected officials often find ways to skirt the rules using two primary methods: 1) Attaching an idea to a shell bill that has already gone through three readings (more on what that means below) in the assembly. 2) Tack on an amendment to an existing bill that can contain substantive language that pushes their policy idea forward while skipping much of the typical process. As you can see, it takes quite a bit for a bill to become a law. That’s why rushed bills passed at the last minute are rarely a good idea. Take for example the FY 2022 budget. Pritzker had to veto the original budget due to drafting errors. The General Assembly had the wrong effective date so a portion of the money wouldn’t have been able to be spent until next year. Simple errors like that can hold up necessary bills like budgets. “We have a legislative process that is designed to give transparency and allow people to have input in that process but instead of embracing this, what we see (from the majority party) is a continuous desire to operate through an expeditious process, in the dark of the night, without any transparency that results in things like this: chaos,” said state Sen. Jason Barickman, R-Bloomington. What’s the result? It allowed Pritzker and legislative leaders to claim they passed a balanced budget without tax increases. A closer look showed both claims were false: the budget contains at least a $482 million hole and a $655 million tax hike. Illinois lawmakers have nearly perfected the Madigan-era tactic of waiting until the last hours of session to publicly share the budget for the new fiscal year. As the former House speaker’s adage goes: negotiate in secret, vote when it is too late for opposition. How do we ensure the process is working for the people? One solutionlies in ensuring lawmakers have time to read what they are voting for – and in providing increased visibility for voters. Reform would require all bills be read aloud on three different days in their final form before they are passed by the General Assembly. This would slow down lawmakers from shoving through bills and allow time for public input. For taxpayers to have more of a say, we must officially open up the lawmaking process to more debate and transparency. |
