CAT Tracks for July 22, 2012

...of time and energy:

From the Springfield State Journal-Register...

Link to the Original Story

New law lets Illinois jurors turn down pay.

The Associated Press

People who serve on juries in Illinois are now required to accept small payments for their time, but that's about to change. Gov. Pat Quinn signed legislation Friday that gives jurors the option of refusing the money if they don't need it. The law takes effect in January.

Current law requires counties to pay jurors from $4 a day to $17.20. They can also get money for mileage and child care.

But the lawmaker behind the change, Democratic Sen. Susan Garrett, says some people don't want to take the money, especially when local governments are struggling.


The bill is SB2492.

CAT Tracks Editor's Note:

On second thought...

I should be excited!

By saving all this money, maybe the State of Illinois will give up on their efforts to take back my pension...

...and maybe the Governor will keep the Tamms prison open (although the General Assembly had already appropriated the money for that; the Mighty Quinn simply chose not to use it.)

I mean, there is no limit to the possibilites...

...of what we could do with all of this turned-down money.

Heck, it might even pay for the paper used to print up the new law!

On third thought...

I see a major battle brewing between local governments!

When a school teacher does jury duty, s/he has to report that amount to the district that they can deduct said jury-duty pay from their regular pay check.

If a teacher should turn down said pay...

...will the school district go ahead and deduct the jury-duty pay anyway. I mean..."You had the opportunity to save us money and you refused. That was YOUR choice. OUR choice is to save money...and deduct said amount from your next district paycheck."

Hey, there might be a potential here for Robbins et al to recoup their impending losses due to CSD #1 settling their Seven Years War with James Gibson!

My fourth and final thought:

The premise behind the law was that it would allow people who didn't need the money to decline it.

Teachers who don't need the money?