Illinois Supreme Court hears capital construction case

The Illinois Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments today about the constitutionality of the state’s $31 billion capital construction program. It heard the case in a building set to undergo a $14 million capital-plan funded renovation. An appellate court ruled earlier this year the plan violates the state constitution’s “single subject rule,” which says a bill can encompass only one topic. The state has appealed that ruling to the high court. Assistant attorney general Robert Huszagh says the plan’s programs – and their funding sources – accomplish one overall goal.

“Raising the revenues, using those revenues to do the work, but also making sure the work has a public benefit collectively,” he says. “In this case, it’s better roads and bridges.”

The appellate court ruled there were too many things pushed in one piece of legislation that were too loosely connected to the overall construction program.

Chicago Blackhawks owner and liquor distributor Rocky Wirtz brought the suit against the state in 2009, his underlying message being he didn’t like “unfair” liquor taxes to help pay for the plan.

Sam Vinson, representing Wirtz, says the appropriations bill funding the plan is also unconstitutional. He says all the funding sources were “logrolled” into one bill, one such unpopular example being the liquor taxes. Logrolling is a term used when undesirable provisions are propped up in a piece of legislation by passage of more popular initiatives.

“It doesn’t have to be in the same bill, they don’t have to be tied together. It’s the kind of thing, in the long run, that can bankrupt the state,” he says.

Huszagh, in response, argued the plaintiffs did not bring that argument before the Appellate Court, and therefore cannot argue it before the Supreme Court.

It’s unclear when the Court will rule on this matter.