RED BUD, Ill. – State Representative David Friess (R-Redbud) has commented on the upcoming Lame duck session, scheduled to begin this Saturday, January 4th.
“We’ve seen in past lame duck sessions how Democrats have used this time to push through bad bills that don’t reflect the will of the people,” Rep. Friess said. “I strongly oppose the misuse of this session to advance harmful policies at the last minute. Illinoisans deserve transparency and legislation that truly serves their best interests, not rushed, partisan agendas.”
A lame duck session Is a time when members of one General Assembly meet after a new General Assembly has been elected but before members are sworn in. In theory, the General Assembly can use this reconvention to resolve legislative matters still lingering from the spring or Veto sessions or address pressing issues that require immediate action.
While spending more time in Springfield to iron out important bills before the new General Assembly convenes may seem like a good idea, the term “lame duck” alludes to one of several flaws of such sessions. Given General Elections take place in November and inaugurations just before the beginning of a new General Assembly in January, legislators who will not serve another term, whether that be due to retirement or losing their election, retain their position until their successor is sworn in. During this period, outgoing legislators continue to legislate in their full capacity despite having no obligation to serve in their constituents’ best interest or uphold promises made before the election. If a Generally Assembly does not adjourn sine die and reconvenes for a lame duck session in early January, lame duck members are given the opportunity to return to the Capitol once more for a few days of scot-free lawmaking.
Not only do lame duck sessions grant outgoing members a chance to legislate without any accountability to their respective districts, they are also a time where bills can pass without broad consensus. During Veto Session, which takes place in November, certain legislation, like tax hikes, requires a supermajority three-fifths vote, or 71 members in the House, to pass. During lame duck sessions, however, Illinois House rules require a mere simple majority of 60 votes to pass any bills discussed on the Floor. Given that outgoing legislators may be more likely to vote on contentious bills due to their lack of answerability, achieving this lowered vote threshold allows for the supermajority party to advance significant pieces of legislation with ease.
In recent years, the majority party has taken full advantage of the lame duck loophole, saving their worst for last. Thanks to the lower vote threshold, presence of outgoing members, and short time frame, State Democrats often reserve the additional days at the Capitol to file thousands of pages of their most costly and controversial bills knowing they are subject to little deliberation and are more likely to pass than if they were brought about under normal circumstances.
Some of the most notable bills passed during previous lame duck sessions include:
- SB 2505 (2011) – Imposed a 67% income tax hike on working families and 46% tax hike on employers
- SB 3531 (2019) Gave a 15% pay increase to the Governor’s appointed bureaucrats
- HB 3653 (2021) – Created the SAFE-T Act, eliminating cash bail and placing unfunded mandates and restrictions on law enforcement
- HB 5471 (2023) – Established Illinois’ unconstitutional “Assault Weapons Ban”
- SB 1720 (2023) – Increased pay for State politicians and created $400 million Pritzker slush fund
- HB 969 (2023) – Created a Supplemental Budget appropriating more than $4.1 billion in fund requests
Beyond calls to end Veto Sessions sine die, House Republicans have historically been vocal in advocating for reform measures that limit the supermajority party’s ability to misuse lame duck sessions or eliminate them altogether. Most notably, former Illinois House Minority Leader Jim Durkin proposed a constitutional amendment to move the date of inauguration from the second Monday in January to the second Wednesday of December and require the outgoing General Assembly to conclude their work by election day. The amendment would effectively end lame duck sessions and only allow the General Assembly to reconvene in special sessions for emergencies if approved by the Governor and all four legislative leaders, however, as one might expect, this proposal was ultimately blocked by supermajority democrats.
With lame duck session scheduled for January 4th to 7th, Illinoisans can expect to see a laundry list of out-of-touch bills filed, rehashed, or passed in the coming weeks. As is the case with most lame duck sessions, taxpayers should prepare to cough up more of their keep in the near future, especially given the estimated $3 billion deficit in the upcoming budget. While Democrats like to keep their cards close their chest before lame duck sessions, looming fiscal shortfalls facing the State and the city of Chicago will likely spur new legislation to make up for these unbalanced budgets by increasing income, property, and sales taxes or reallocating money from other statewide funds.
Early January’s agenda could also include discussions on the State’s ticking pension crisis time bomb. The ongoing issue is a complex one and revolves around Illinois’ $140 billion-plus unfunded pension debt which has strained the state’s budget for years. While, both sides of the aisle seem to generally concur that pension reform is a must in Illinois, the means of fixing the issue may not be so bipartisan. The Tier 2 pension system, which has been in place for more than a decade, sought to address the issue by reducing benefits for new employees, though has all but solved the pension debt crisis. During lame duck, Democrat lawmakers could introduce means of addressing the issue through quick fixes that only prolong the crisis, such as diverting resources from essential State services, increasing the maximum salary used to calculate pension benefits, or simply borrowing more money in true Illinois fashion. While trying to solve issues as intricate as the pension debt crisis during a lame duck session could be harmful, it would not be the first time the majority party has done so.
High-ranking Illinois Democrats have also been vocal about their wish to “Trump-proof” Illinois following the 2024 Presidential Election. In essence, members of the majority party have voiced a desire to create new laws that counteract legislation they proclaim the President elect will usher in over the next four years, many of which revolve around progressive social ideals. Though the supermajority was unable to receive enough support on such bills during November’s Veto Session, they will likely use the lame duck loophole to hastily push through far-left legislation last minute. This could take shape through strict environmental regulations, new burdens on job creators, programs for undocumented migrants, and additional protections for abortion. Whatever State Democrats may do to limit the soon-to-be President’s goals, such measures will certainly be costly to working Illinoisans.