Mount Prospect, IL - With national Fire Prevention Week (FPW) occurring from October 4-10, the nonprofit Illinois Fire Safety Alliance (IFSA) encourages Illinois residents to practice fire safety and prevention throughout the entire year.

The theme for 2015 FPW is "Hear the Beep Where You Sleep." According to the National Fire Protection Association, which sponsors FPW, roughly half of home fire deaths result from overnight fires when most people are asleep. Smoke alarms alert residents of a fire so they can safely escape. Working smoke alarms reduce the risk of dying in a fire by half.

"This year's Fire Prevention Week message is a great reminder to homeowners that smoke alarms should be installed in every bedroom, outside each sleeping area, and on every level of a home," says IFSA Executive Director Philip Zaleski. "And it's important to make sure smoke alarms are tested monthly and have their batteries replaced twice each year to make sure they are functioning properly."

Zaleski notes that a good reminder to change smoke alarm batteries is when homeowners change their clocks to "spring forward" an hour when Daylight Saving Time (DST) begins in the spring and "fall back" when it ends in the fall.

For information about smoke alarms and FPW, the IFSA recommends visiting FirePreventionWeek.org.

Fire Prevention Week Luncheon & Awards

As part of its annual outreach during FPW, the IFSA is hosting the 75th annual Fire Prevention Week Luncheon on Thursday, October 8, from 10:00 a.m.-1:30 p.m. The event is sponsored by the Illinois Fire Sprinkler Coalition and will be held at Bobak's Signature Events (6440 Double Eagle Drive, Woodridge, Ill.). Last year's event attracted over 500 members of the Illinois fire service.

In addition to the luncheon, the event also highlights and honors those who have gone above and beyond in fire safety and burn prevention. The IFSA will present the following recognition awards:

Corporate Responsibility Award: Nicor Gas

Life Safety Award: Alan Isberg (retired Fire Marshal, Elburn & Countryside Fire Protection District), Rebecca Merten (Public Health Administrator, Effingham County), Orland Fire Protection District

Special Recognition Award: Kathy Supply (formerly of Loyola Medicine), Wayne Luecht Memorial Award: Larry Matkaitis (former Illinois State Fire Marshal)

In addition, keynote speaker and retired ComEd employee Dave Schury will speak about an electrical explosion that inflicted burns to 30 percent of his body in 2000 and his advocacy for burn survivors and workplace safety. Schury is the founder of the From Tragedy to Triumph Foundation, which has raised and donated over $120,000 in college scholarships to young burn survivors in Illinois.

Over the past 12 months, the IFSA Board of Directors accepted nominations for the following awards. The Board is pleased to announce the recipients:

Corporate Responsibility Award: Nicor Gas

This award is given to a corporation that has responsibly gone above and beyond the norm by providing fire safety or burn prevention education to the public. For nine years running, Nicor Gas has provided natural gas safety education through its Gas Safety Program at dozens of fire departments across northern Illinois, which is then distributed to consumers.

Life Safety Award:

This award is given to an organization, department or individual that has achieved a pattern of excellence in bringing life safety into the lives of others.

Alan Isberg (retired Fire Marshal, Elburn & Countryside Fire Protection District). Isberg is one of three winners as a result of his passion and commitment to making life safer for members of his fire department and his community. He hosted CPR classes for over 1,000 students, developed public education programs reaching tens of thousands of civilians, and created a safe community through strict adherence to fire and life safety codes.

Rebecca Merten (Public Health Administrator, Effingham County). Merten put together a persistent effort to thwart off a proposed ordinance to legalize fireworks in Effingham County. She questioned those on the County Board, who employ her and who were in favor of the ordinance, and stood up for the safety of the citizens of Effingham County. She even hosted a press conference on behalf of the Illinois Rural Health Association to speak about the dangers of fireworks. Although the ordinance ultimately passed, her efforts were not in vain as the ordinance was much more in line with the state's law on fireworks.

Orland Fire Protection District.  The fire district continues the success of its annual Kid's Fire & Life Safety Camp, exposing school-aged children to safety lessons dealing with potential hazards around their homes and schools. The half-day camp, which runs for four consecutive days, provides fun and entertaining ways for children to learn the safety message.

Special Recognition Award: Kathy Supple.  This award is given to individuals who have established a pattern of excellence through a fire safety or burn prevention program that they developed and have shared with other public educators.  Formerly with Loyola Medicine and serving on the IFSA Board of Directors for the last five years, Supple has promoted IFSA's mission of fire safety and burn prevention through public education.

Wayne Luecht Memorial Award: Larry Matkaitis.  This award is granted to an individual who has established a pattern of excellence through a fire safety or burn prevention program that has benefited the public outside of his or her jurisdiction. It must be a person who has excelled in his or her duties while leading the fire service to recognize public education as an important tool, and is judged by peers to possess the qualities and superior work ethic that others strive to emulate. Matkaitis had a significant impact on fire safety and burn prevention throughout the state of Illinois during his tenure as State Fire Marshal. He worked diligently to enforce life safety codes and was courageous in his attempt to establish a requirement for fire sprinklers in new homes even though he faced powerful opponents.

ABOUT THE ILLINOIS FIRE SAFETY ALLIANCE: Since 1982, the Illinois Fire Safety Alliance (IFSA), a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, has been promoting and disseminating fire safety and burn prevention materials and resources. The IFSA also hosts a variety of support programs for burn survivors including the Young Adult Summit, Family Day, and Camp "I Am Me," a unique weeklong camp for children who have experienced severe burn injuries. For more information, visit www.IFSA.org.

###


Revisions to Trial Scheduling and Discovery Plan Forms (September 25, 2015)

These amended forms are temporarily adopted and effective immediately. The forms will become permanently effective November 25, 2015.

Order (78 kb)


Fillable and savable versions of the forms will be posted soon.

Rule 23.5 - Form 2 (354 kb)


Rule 23.5 - Form 3 (430 kb)



Amendments to Iowa Court Rule 35.14 for Reinstatement of License After Revocation (May 18, 2015)

Order (37 kb)


Chapter 35 (103 kb)



Amendments to Iowa Court Rule 31.16 for Registration of Foreign House Counsel (May 18, 2015)

Order (30 kb)


Chapter 31 (96 kb)



Revisions to New and Amended Rules Governing Court Interpreters (May 18, 2015)

Chapters 47 and 48 of the Iowa Court Rules

Order (45 kb)


Chapter 47 (8 kb)


Chapter 48 (7 kb)



Adoption of Clarifying Amendments to New Discovery Rules and Forms (April 1, 2015)

Order (116 kb)


Revisions to Ch. 1 Rule 1.500 Discovery Amendments (140 kb)


Revisions to Ch. 1 Rule 1.507 Discovery and Inspection (139 kb)


Revisions to Ch. 1 Rule 1.906 Discovery Amendments Trial and Judgment (126 kb)


Trial Scheduling and Discovery Plan: Rule 23.5–Form 2 (631 kb)


Trial Scheduling and Discovery Plan for Expedited Civil Action: Rule 23.5–Form 3 (1941 kb)



In the Matter of the Basic Skills Course Requirement for Newly Admitted Attorneys (January 21, 2015)

Basic Skills Course Requirement
Effective immediately

Order (420 kb)


Rule 41.12 Basic skills course requirement (151 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Chapter 46 of the Iowa Court Rules (December 18, 2014)

Certification of Shorthand Reporters
Effective immediately

Order (68 kb)


Chapter 46 (102 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rules 31.3 (December 16, 2014)

Required Examinations
Effective immediately

Order (35 kb)


Rule 31.3 Required examinations (157 kb)



Adoption of New and Amended Rules Governing Court Interpreters (December 4, 2014)

Chapters 47 and 48 of the Iowa Court Rules
Effective July 1, 2015

Order (177 kb)


Chapter 47 (326 kb)


Chapter 48 (219 kb)



Revisions to Expedited Civil Action Rule and Recent Amendments to Iowa Discovery Rules (October 30, 2014)

Order (92 kb)


Revisions to Ch. 1 Expedited Civil Action Rule 1.281 (27 kb)


Revisions to Ch. 1 Discovery Amendments (65 kb)


Joint Motion to Proceed as an Expedited Civil Action: Rule 1.1901–Form 18 (18 kb)


Notice of Civil Trial-Setting Conference: Rule 23.5–Form 1 (40 kb)


Trial Scheduling and Discovery Plan: Rule 23.5–Form 2 (74 kb)


Trial Scheduling and Discovery Plan for Expedited Civil Action: Rule 23.5–Form 3 (71 kb)



Adoption of Expedited Civil Action Rule and Amendments to Iowa Discovery Rules (August 28, 2014)

Order (1195 kb)


Ch. 1 Expedited Civil Action Rule 1.281 (300 kb)


Ch. 1 Discovery Amendments (439 kb)


Expedited Civil Action Certification: Rule 1.1901--Form 16 (220 kb)


Expedited Civil Action Certification: Rule 1.1901--Form 17 (221 kb)


Joint Motion to Proceed as an Expedited Civil Action: Rule 1.1901–Form 18 (176 kb)


Health Care Provider Statement in Lieu of Testimony: Rule 1.1901–Form 19 (238 kb)


Ch. 23 Time Standards for Case Processing (220 kb)


Notice of Civil Trial-Setting Conference: Rule 23.5–Form 1 (208 kb)


Trial Scheduling Order and Discovery Plan: Rule 23.5–Form 2 (310 kb)


Trial Scheduling Order and Discovery Plan for Expedited Civil Action: Rule 23.5–Form 3 (312 kb)



In the Matter of Interim Rules to Govern the use of the Electronic Document Management System (August 15, 2014)

Order (80 kb)



In the Matter of Probate Forms in Chapter 7 of the Iowa Court Rules (June 17, 2014)

Amended forms to take effect permanently August 16, 2014

Order (43 kb)



In the Matter of Probate Forms in Chapter 7 of the Iowa Court Rules (May 23, 2014)

Order (53 kb)


Chapter 7 Title and Contents (140 kb)


Probate Forms (286 kb)



In the Matter of Chapter 25 of the Iowa Court Rules (April 29, 2014)

Further amendments to rules and forms of Chapter 25
Effective May 1, 2014

Order (43 kb)


Chapter 25, Rules for Expanded News Media Coverage (246 kb)


Chapter 25, EMNC forms (562 kb)


Summary of Amendments to Chapter 25 (203 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Division III of the Iowa Court Rules (April 25, 2014)

Order (45 kb)


Rule Changes for Law Student Registration & Lawyer Reporting Dates (98 kb)



In the Matter of Chapter 25 of the Iowa Court Rules (April 2, 2014)

Effective May 1, 2014

Order (115 kb)


Chapter 25, Rules for Expanded News Media Coverage (245 kb)


Chapter 25, EMNC forms (512 kb)


Summary of Amendments to Chapter 25 (201 kb)



In the Matter of Chapter 17 of the Iowa Court Rules and Self Represented Litigant Forms for Disestablishing Legal Parent (March 26, 2014)

Order (73 kb)


Rule 17.200 Family law forms for dissolution of marriage with dependent children (129 kb)


Form 212: Joint Statement on Legal Parent (501 kb)


Form 213: Motion to Disestablish Legal Parent (504 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rules Regulating Student Practice (March 21, 2014)

Order (29 kb)


Rule 31.15 Student Practice Rule (152 kb)


OPR Memo Re: Amendment of Student Practice Rule (65 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rules Regulating Continuing Legal Education (March 21, 2014)

Order (28 kb)


Chapters 41 and 42 (176 kb)


OPR Memo Re: Distance Education Changes as Adopted (65 kb)



In the Matter of Adoption of New Chapter 17 Forms for Applications to Modify Child Support in the Iowa Court Rules (March 6, 2014)

Order (406 kb)


Rule (127 kb)


Forms (1451 kb)


Guide (492 kb)



In the Matter of Chapter 17 of the Iowa Court Rules and Adoption of New Forms for Dissolutions of Marriage with Children (December 19, 2013)

Order (79 kb)


Divorce Forms for Self Represented Litigants With Minor Children (4394 kb)


Guide to Representing Yourself in an Iowa Divorce Case with Minor Children (543 kb)


Chapter 17 of the Iowa Court Rules (153 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Division III of the Court Rules Regarding the Client Security Trust Fund (November 26, 2013)

Order (160 kb)


Office of Professional Regulation Memorandum (118 kb)


Chapter 39 and 40 (141 kb)



In the Matter of Adoption of New Forms for Dissolutions of Marriage with no Minor Children (November 6, 2013)

Order (60 kb)


Divorce Forms for Self Represented Litigants With No Minor Children (2415 kb)


Guide to Representing Yourself in an Iowa Divorce Case with no Minor Children (445 kb)



In the Matter of Interim Rules to Govern the use of the Electronic Document Management System (October 22, 2013)

Supervisory Order (66 kb)


Rules 16.302, 16.320, 16.701 (132 kb)



In the Matter of the New Rule of Juvenile Procedure (October 16, 2013)

Juvenile Procedure 8.36

Order (125 kb)


Rule 8.36 (253 kb)


Standards of Practice (309 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rules Regulating Admission to the Bar (August 22, 2013)

Effective immediately

Order (25 kb)


Chapter 31, Admission to the Bar (214 kb)



In the Matter of Adoption of Clarifying Comments (June 13, 2013)

Iowa Rule of Professional Conduct 32:1.13
Effective immediately

Order (61 kb)



In the Matter of Iowa Court Rules New Chapter 26 (June 4, 2013)

Rules for Installment Payment Plans and Other Court Collection Activities
Effective July 1, 2013

Order (253 kb)


Chapter 26 (294 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rules Chapter 9 (May 9, 2013)

Child Support Guidelines
Effective July 1, 2013

Order (69 kb)


Chapter 9, Child Support Guidelines (2035 kb)


Child Support Guidelines Review Committee Final Report (2595 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Rules of Appellate Procedure and Organization and Procedures of Appellate Courts in Chapters 6 and 21 of the Iowa Court Rules (March 5, 2013)

The Iowa Supreme Court has approved rules governing electronic appellate processes. The rules, to be contained in the Chapter 16 court rules pertaining to EDMS, are prospective only. The court will announce an effective date for the rules and for implementation of electronic filing in the appellate courts at a later date.

Order (63 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Rules of Appellate Procedure and Organization and Procedures of Appellate Courts in Chapters 6 and 21 of the Iowa Court Rules (March 5, 2013)

The Iowa Supreme Court has amended the rules of appellate procedure contained in chapter 6 of the Iowa Court Rules and has rescinded and rewritten the rules governing the organization and procedures of appellate courts contained in Chapter 21 of the Iowa Court Rules.
Effective May 3, 2013

Order (74 kb)


Chapter 6 and Chapter 21 (116 kb)



In the Matter of Adoption of an Emeritus Pro Bono Practice Rule (March 1, 2013)

The Iowa Supreme Court has adopted an emeritus pro bono practice rule (Iowa Court Rule 31.19) that encourages retired or retiring Iowa attorneys, including attorneys licensed in other states, to provide volunteer legal services on behalf of legal aid organizations serving low income persons in Iowa.
Effective immediately

Order and Rule Amendments (323 kb)



In the Matter of New Rule of Civil Procedure (December 6, 2012)

The Iowa Supreme Court has approved the addition of rule 1.1702 to the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure providing a uniform process for interstate depositions and discovery.

Supervisory Order (157 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to the Iowa Court Rules (November 8, 2012)

Forms Regarding Appointment of Counsel
Temporarily adopting the attached forms, effective immediately. Forms permanently take effect January 7, 2013.

Supervisory Order and Forms Regarding Appointment of Counsel (294 kb)



In the Matter of Iowa Court Rule 31.16 (Sept. 13, 2012)

Registration of House Counsel
Effective immediately

Order (49 kb)


Chapter 31 (272 kb)



In the Matter of Standard Forms of Pleadings for Small Claims Actions (Sept. 13, 2012)

Chapter 3 of the Iowa Court Rules -- Form 3.27:Verification of Account
Effective immediately

Order (90 kb)


Chapter 3, Form 3.27 (45 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to the Iowa Court Rules Governing Lawyer Advertising (August 28, 2012)

Effective January 1, 2013

Order and Chapter 32 (1114 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rules 35.17 and 42.1 (August 24, 2012)

Effective immediately

Order, Rule 35.17 and 42.1 (66 kb)



In the Matter of Amendment of Iowa Court Rule 35.1 (August 24, 2012)

Effective immediately

Order, Rule 35.1 (56 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rules Regulating Admission to the Bar (July 13, 2012)

Effective immediately

Order, Rule 31.11(3), and OPR change to rule 31.12 (119 kb)



In the Matter of Chapter 13 of the Iowa Court Rules (July 5, 2012)

Supervisory Order, Chapter 13 (516 kb)



In the Matter of Chapter 13 of the Iowa Court Rules (June 29, 2012)

Order, Chapter 13 and Forms (1418 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Rules of Appellate Procedure (May 21, 2012)

6.1005 Regarding Frivolous Appeals and Withdrawal of Counsel (Including Related Changes to Other Rules)
Effective immediately

Order (147 kb)


Rule 6.1005 (194 kb)



In the Matter of Standard Forms of Pleadings for Small Claims Actions (May 7, 2012)

Chapter 3 of the Iowa Court Rules is rescinded effective July 1, 2012, and revised Chapter 3 is adopted. Until July 1, 2012, parties may use either the current pleadings forms or the new pleadings forms.

Order (129 kb)


Chapter 3 -- Small Claims forms (711 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rules Regulating the Practice of Law (May 2, 2012)

Amendments concerning the attorney disciplinary process, client trust account reconciliation and record retention procedures, continuing legal education, and the bar exam.
Amended effective immediately

Nunc Pro Tunc (59 kb)


OPR Rules Revisions (Strikethrough version) (4618 kb)


OPR Rules Revisions (Final version) (396 kb)



In the Matter of Amendments to Iowa Court Rule 32:7.4 (March 12, 2012)

The Court adds Veterans Law to the list of fields of practice and specialization.

Order (80 kb)



Iowa Courts Rules

The Chief Justice has signed a supplemental order specifying the effective date of the amendment to Rule 41.3(2)

Supplemental Order (35 kb)



Iowa Court Rules (February 20, 2012)

Amendments concerning the attorney disciplinary process, client trust account reconciliation and record retention procedures, continuing legal education, and the bar exam.
Amended effective immediately

Order (183 kb)


Amendments (10043 kb)


Summary of Amendments (87 kb)

PORT BYRON, Ill. -State Rep. Mike Smiddy, D-Hillsdale, joined local volunteers and community leaders to provide meals and resources at the 'Stand Down for Homeless Veterans' event, held September 17 through 19 at the Q.C.C.A. Expo Center in Rock Island.

"We owe our freedom to those who have served, and I'm proud that our community stands behind them and embraces the 'Stand Down for Homeless Veterans' event and to help veterans get the support they deserve," Smiddy said. "I'd like to thank 'Bridging the Gap Quad Cities' for their commitment to serving homeless veterans in our community, and for allowing me to join them for this important event. I invite everyone in our community to look for ways to help those who have served our country."

'Bridging the Gap Quad Cities' is a local not-for-profit dedicated to serving veterans in the community, and connecting services at a variety of levels. The 13th annual 'Stand Down for Homeless Veterans' event offered food, clothing, grooming, medical testing, support programs, legal assistance and employment counseling. 'Bridging the Gap Quad Cities' partnered with other local non-profits to host the event, and Smiddy attended the event to serve hot meals to local homeless veterans. Residents who wish to contribute to the organization or volunteer should contact Mike Malmstrom, co-director of 'Bridging the Gap Quad Cities' at 309-269-2012.
Sen. Grassley made the following statement today regarding Pope Francis' visit to Washington, D.C.  The text of the statement can be found below and the video can be found here.

"This week, I had the second opportunity in my life to be in the presence of a pope.  This visit was an historic one.  Pope Francis made his first trip to the United States and a pope addressed Congress for the first time in history.

"I attended the White House ceremony on Wednesday welcoming the pope to our nation's capital.  The ceremony was spectacular, with more pomp and circumstance than even ceremonies for presidents of other countries.

"This morning, Pope Francis gave a strong speech that was well received by Congress.  He talked about the American spirit and the American dream.  America, as he says, is still a land of dreams for many people.  And he's right.

"He also talked about the state of our world today, how violent conflict seems to be increasing, and the challenges we as a nation and as a people face.  He said that these challenges call for a renewal of that 'spirit of cooperation' that has done so much good in our country's history.

"He mentioned four Americans who have contributed to this: Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day, and Thomas Merton, and spoke of their contributions to American society.

"I appreciated the opportunity to hear from Pope Francis.  Even if I don't agree with him on all matters, as fellow Christians we do see eye-to-eye on the essentials.  It was inspiring to hear a leader of such high esteem."
It's déjà vu all over again, again - Congress seems to be ignoring the gathering fiscal storm clouds. The most immediate of these is just around the corner: if lawmakers do not pass legislation to fund federal programs by September 30, the government will shut down.
What is a government shutdown?
Many federal government agencies and programs rely on annual funding appropriations made by Congress. Since the government's fiscal year starts on October 1, a government shutdown will occur if Congress does not pass appropriations bills for next fiscal year by September 30. In a "shutdown," federal agencies must discontinue all non-essential discretionary functions until new funding legislation is passed and signed into law. Essential services continue to function, as do mandatory spending programs.
What services are affected in a shutdown and how?
Each federal agency develops its own shutdown plan, following guidance released in previous shutdowns and coordinated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The plan identifies which government activities may not continue until appropriations are restored, requiring furloughs and the halting of many agency activities. However, "essential services" - mainly those related to public safety - continue to operate, with payments covering any obligations incurred only when appropriations are enacted. In prior shutdowns, border protection, in hospital medical care, air traffic control, law enforcement, and power grid maintenance have been among the services classified as essential, while some legislative and judicial staff have also been largely protected. Mandatory spending not subject to annual appropriations, such as for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid also continues. Other example of activities that continue are activities funded by permanent user fees not subject to appropriations such as immigration services funded by visa fees.
Although a number of programs are exempt, the public is still likely to feel the impact of a shutdown in a number of ways. For example:
  • Social Security and Medicare: Checks are sent out, but benefit verification as well as the issuance of cards would cease. While unlikely to happen again, in 1996 over 10,000 Medicare applicants were temporarily turned away every day of the shutdown.
  • Environmental and Food Inspection: In 2013, the Environmental Protection Agency halted site inspections to 1,200 different sites that included hazardous waste, drinking water and chemical facilities. The FDA delayed just almost 900 inspections.
  • National Parks: During the 2013 shutdown, the National Park Service turned away millions of visitors to more than 400 parks, national monuments, and other sites. The National Park Service estimated that the shutdown led to over half a billion dollars in lost visitor spending nationwide.
  • Health and Human Services: The National Institutes of Health would be prevented from admitting new patients or processing grant applications. In 2013, states were forced to front the money for formula grant programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (cash welfare).
  • Internal Revenue Service: In the event of a shutdown, the IRS, which verifies income and social security numbers, would again not be able to perform this service. In 2013, a backlog of 1.2 million such requests potentially delayed mortgage and other loan approvals. As well billions of dollars of tax refunds were delayed.
Is the government preparing for a shutdown?
The administration has held a conference call with senior officials to discuss agencies' preparations for a possible shutdown.  OMB indicated that agencies will be following similar procedures to the 2013 shutdown with plans updated for this year.  Those updated plans have not yet been made public like they were in 2013.
How would federal employees be affected?
If agency shutdown plans are similar to those in place in 2013, the last time there was a shutdown, approximately 850,000 of 2.1 million non-postal federal employees would be furloughed. In 2013, most of the 350,000 civilian employees of the Department of Defense were recalled to work within a week. Furloughed employees would not be allowed to work and would not receive paychecks. While Congress has historically granted back pay, it is not guaranteed.
How and why do mandatory programs continue during a shutdown?
Whereas discretionary spending must be appropriated every year, mandatory spending is authorized either for multi-year periods or permanently. Thus, mandatory spending generally continues during a shutdown. However, some services associated with mandatory programs may be diminished if there is a discretionary component to their funding. For instance, in both the 1996 shutdowns and the 2013 shutdown, Social Security checks continued to go out. However, staff who handled new enrollments and other services, such as changing addresses or handling requests for a new Social Security card, were initially furloughed in 1996. In 2013, a more limited amount of activities were discontinued, including verifying benefits and providing new and replacement cards, but processing of benefit applications or address changes continued. At least one major mandatory program would pause: the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, commonly known as "food stamps"). The USDA indicated they would not be able to administer the program during a shutdown this year because contingency funds that were used to administer the program during 2013's shutdown have been exhausted.
How many times has the government shut down?

Since Congress introduced the modern budget process in 1976, there have been 18 "funding gaps," where funds were not appropriated for at least one day. However, before 1980, the government did not shut down, but continued normal operations through six funding gaps. Between 1981 and 1994, all nine funding gaps occurred over a weekend, and government operations were only minimally affected.
There have been three "true" shutdowns. The first two happened in the winter of 1995-1996, when President Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress were unable to agree on spending levels and shut down the government twice for a total of 26 days. The third was in 2013 when the House and Senate standoff on funding resulted in a 16-day shutdown.
Does a government shutdown save money?
While estimates vary widely, evidence suggests that shutdowns tend to cost, not save, money. For one, putting contingency plans in place has a real cost. In addition, a number of user fees and other charges are not collected during a shutdown. Contractors sometimes include premiums in their bids to account for uncertainty in being paid. And although many federal employees are forced to be idle during a shutdown, they have historically received back pay, negating much of those potential savings. OMB official estimates of the 2013 government shutdown found that $2.5 billion in pay and benefits was paid to furloughed employees for hours not worked during the shutdown as well as roughly $10 million in penalty interest payments and lost fee collections.
How can Congress avoid a shutdown?
There are essentially two ways to avoid a government shutdown - by passing appropriations or a continuing resolution (see below question on "What is a Continuing Resolution?"). Theoretically, the House and Senate Appropriations committees are supposed to pass 12 different appropriations bills, broken up by subject area and based on funding levels allocated in a budget resolution. Often, these bills are combined into a larger "omnibus" or "minibus" set of appropriations.
This year, no appropriations bill has been passed by both chambers. The House Appropriations Committee has passed all twelve bills, but only six - Defense, Military Construction-VA, Energy-Water, Homeland Security, Commerce-Justice-Science, and Legislative - have made it through the full House of Representatives. Meanwhile, the Senate Appropriations Committee has passed all bills, but the full Senate has not passed any of them.
What is a Continuing Resolution (CR)?
A continuing resolution temporarily funds the government in the absence of full appropriations bills, often by continuing funding levels from the prior year. Traditionally, CRs have been used to give lawmakers a short period of time to complete their work on remaining appropriations bills while keeping the government operating. CRs sometimes apply to only a few categories of spending, but can also be used to fund all discretionary functions, and can be used for an entire year.
CRs differ from normal appropriations bills in that they often "continue" the funding allocations from previous bills at the prior year's rate or a formula based on the prior year's rate. Even when overall funding levels have differed, lawmakers have often simply scaled up all accounts by a percent change in spending rather than making individual decisions on spending accounts. However, CRs often do include certain "anomalies," where specific items are increased or decreased to work around some problems that would occur from continuing the previous year's policies, or "policy riders," specifying certain statements of policy.  Colloquially, a "clean CR" does not contain policy riders or politically motivated changes to funding levels.
How often does Congress pass CRs?
Congress frequently passes CRs when it is unable to agree on appropriations, and occasionally multiple CRs are necessary to fund the government for an entire fiscal year. They have also sometimes been relied on during Presidential transition years. In FY 2001, for instance, a series of intense congressional negotiations leading up to the 2000 elections led to a series of ten one-day CRs. In total, Congress funded the first three months of that fiscal year with 21 continuing resolutions.
Not surprisingly, CRs have been quite prevalent in the past few years, being used to fund the government entirely in FY 2011, when eight CRs were passed; in FY 2013, when two CRs were passed; and in FY 2014, when two CRs after the government shutdown bought time before final passage of the Ryan-Murray agreement. Even the less-contentious FY 2015 funding negotiations necessitated three CRs before passage of the CROmnibus appropriations bill, which still contained a CR for Homeland Security. The most recent year when a full-year appropriations bill passed and no CRs were necessary was 1997.
What are the disadvantages of using CRs?
Continuing resolutions have several negative implications on the budget's overall efficiency. CRs usually continue funding at the past year's level without any regard for changing policy needs or the value of each program within an agency. Using a continuing resolution wastes hundreds of hours of careful consideration and program evaluation incorporated into each agency's budget submission. For instance, the President's budget annually proposes a list of eliminations and reductions of programs that are duplicative or ineffective; a continuing resolution will continue to fund these unwanted programs. Finally, the use of continuing resolutions disrupts activities within agencies, makes it difficult to plan or start future projects, and costs staff time to revise work plans every time the budget changes.
How is the House addressing funding?
As of September 24, the House has debated and passed a bill that would defund Planned Parenthood, which press reports suggest is demanded by many conservatives to be a part of any government funding bills. The House has not voted on a CR. No official bills nor time frame for votes are available at this time. The White House has threatened to veto the bill that defunds Planned Parenthood.
How is the Senate addressing funding?
As of September 24, the text of a short-term CR (funding the government through December 11th) has been released with cloture votes scheduled, but it includes language defunding Planned Parenthood. Press reports suggest that specific language will not be able to get the 60 votes necessary to advance the bill and a regular CR will then likely be voted on extending government funding until mid-December.
How does a shutdown differ from a default?
In a shutdown, the government temporarily stops paying employees and contractors who perform government services, whereas in a default the list of parties not paid is much broader. In a default, the government exceeds the statutory debt limit and is unable to pay some of its creditors (or other obligations). Without enough money to pay its bills, any of its payments are at risk?including all government spending, mandatory payments, interest on our debts, and payments to U.S. bondholders. While a government shutdown would be disruptive, a government default could be disastrous.
How does a shutdown differ from "sequester"?
A government shutdown closes down non-essential government operations due to lack of funding, whereas sequester or sequestration is shorthand for the reductions in discretionary spending caps in place that constrain the total amount of funding for annually-appropriated programs.
The first example of sequestration was included in the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. The current version of sequestration is a product of the Budget Control Act (BCA) that resolved the 2011 debt ceiling negotiations. The BCA called on a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (the "Super Committee") to identify at least $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years, and set in motion the sequester if it did not identify at least $1.2 trillion. The Ryan-Murray Bipartisan Budget act negotiated around some of the sequester caps for FY 2014 and 2015; however, that agreement ends on October 1 and the full sequester-level caps return. FY 2016 appropriations, which are being negotiated at the moment, need to be at or under those caps if they are not changed.  If appropriations bills violate those caps, then across-the-board cuts are enforced in January. CRFB has released a separate plan to deal with the sequester caps called the Sequester Offset Solutions (SOS) plan.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley made the following statement after the Justice Department failed to provide a substantive response to a Sept. 14, 2015, letter sent by Grassley and Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Chairman Ron Johnson.  Grassley and Johnson asked Attorney General Loretta Lynch for answers about whether the Justice Department would deem a proffer session as a waiver of a witness's Fifth Amendment rights and whether the department has an ongoing criminal inquiry related to the witness.  The Justice Department's response failed to address any of the senators' questions.

Here is Grassley's statement.

"The Justice Department is giving us less information than normal when they should be giving us more, so that we can make an informed decision about whether to seek an immunity order.  You know it is getting a little absurd when someone at the Justice Department is apparently leaking details to the press about an investigation that the department officially refuses to admit to Congress that it is conducting.

"In light of the details reported in the media, the committee will be seeking more information about the State Department's attempts to regain possession of the email records that should have remained at the State Department in the first place.  The FBI should also provide clarity on how it will handle the emails now that they have been recovered from the server.  Allowing an independent authority to search for records that were requested by Congress, the Inspector General, the press, and the public years ago, and then providing the records to the appropriate requesters, would be a welcome move in transparency."

Des Moines, September 23, 2015- On Wednesday, October 14, the Iowa Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Newton. The proceeding will take place in the Newton High School Auditorium, 800 East 4th Street South. The oral arguments are open to the public and will begin at 7 p.m.

http://www.iowacourts.gov/For_the_Media/news_releases/NewsItem77/index.asp

The Iowa Court of Appeals today posted opinions to the Judicial Branch website.

http://www.iowacourts.gov/About_the_Courts/Court_of_Appeals/Court_of_Appeals_Opinions/

Purchasing contracts to be signed on Thursday in Iowa

(SEATTLE, Wash.) - Iowa Gov. Terry E. Branstad yesterday met with Chinese President Xi Jinping and Chinese governors from the provinces of Sichuan, Chongqing, Zhejiang, Shandong, and Shaanxi in Seattle, Wash.  Their conversations were during the Third Annual U.S.-China Governors Forum and Dialogue, which was arranged by the Chinese Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries and the state of Washington.   In addition to Iowa, the states of California, Michigan, Oregon, and Washington also participated.

During the forum, Branstad highlighted Iowa's leadership in agriculture, advanced manufacturing, renewable energy and financial services, and stressed the importance in finding stability and predictability in regulations related to trait approval for products and services.  As a leading agriculture state in the nation, Iowa farmers produce food, fiber and fuel that are exported to China.

Last year, the United States shipped $24 billion worth of agriculture products to China, and $14 billion of that were soy exports.  That same year, China was Iowa's 4th largest export market with exports of manufactured and valued goods exceeding $946.4 million.  Overall exports to China for the first six months of this year are up more than 63% over that same period in 2014, moving China to Iowa's third largest export market.

"The state of Iowa has enjoyed a long lasting friendship with our sister state Hebei and with President Xi.  We are proud of this relationship and the quality of our goods and services that are exported to China," said Branstad.

SEE A PICTURE FROM LAST EVENING OF GOV. BRANSTAD AND PRESIDENT XI HERE

SEE THE PICTURE FROM 1985 THAT GOV. BRANSTAD PRESENTED TO PRESIDENT XI

As a follow up to these meetings in Seattle, a large Chinese commercial delegation will travel to Iowa on Thursday to sign more than a dozen contracts to purchase soybeans and health products.

Lt. Governor Kim Reynolds expressed her appreciation for the Chinese delegation's visit to Iowa.  "We are excited to welcome the Chinese commercial delegation to Iowa.  The signing of these contracts will highlight our world-class agricultural commodities throughout Iowa while delivering quality products to the Chinese people," said Reynolds.

The contract signing event will occur on Thursday, September 24, 2015 at 12:15PM at The Embassy Club?Downtown (666 Grand Avenue-34th Floor, Des Moines, IA).  Lt. Gov. Reynolds will be present for the contract signing ceremony and the event is open to the press.

###
Branstad encourages public engagement in reforming Iowa criminal justice practices
(Des Moines) - Public meeting dates for the Governor's Working Group on Justice Policy Reform today were announced after Gov. Terry Branstad announced the formation of the group at the Iowa Summit on Justice and Disparities on August 28, 2015.  The summit was organized by the Iowa-Nebraska State Conference of Branches for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).
The purpose of the working group is to research and make policy recommendations related to reforms in Iowa criminal justice practices. The group will consist of a core group of experts on justice polices, and have the access to all state agencies and resources for information and assistance.
The public meeting dates are as follows:
Thursday, September 24, 2015
1:00
G9, Robert Ray Conference Room at the Iowa Capitol
Topic:  Mental health/drug courts and jury pool selection 

Wednesday, September 30, 2015
1:00
G9, Robert Ray Conference Room at the Iowa Capitol
Topic:  Juvenile records and prison/jail phone rates

Thursday, October 15, 2015
1:00
G9, Robert Ray Conference Room at the Iowa Capitol
Topic:  Subgroup updates and open discussion with public 

Thursday, October 29, 2015
1:00
G9, Robert Ray Conference Room at the Iowa Capitol
Topic:  Review of subgroup proposals and final strategy recommendations
The members of the working group are as follows:
-Adam Gregg - State Public Defender
-Dr. Roxann Ryan - Commissioner of Public Safety
-Betty Andrews - NAACP's Representative
-David Boyd - State Court Administrator
-Alan Ostergren - County Attorney's Representative
-Kevin McCarthy - Attorney General's Representative
-Jerry Bartruff - Director of the Department of Corrections
-John Hodges - Chair, Iowa Board of Parole
The working group members will set aside three hours for each meeting.  The meetings could end before the conclusion of the three hours allocated if there are not further comments from the public, stakeholders or working group members.
The Governor's Working Group on Justice Policy Reform will present a written report to the governor, stakeholders, and the public in November, so that the Iowa Legislature can consider these recommendations in the 2016 legislative session.
###

Grassley Pressing for Details about Discipline Disparity between Whistleblowers and Supervisors who Retaliated

WASHINGTON - Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is pressing for answers about what appears to be an unusually low number of FBI employees disciplined for retaliating against whistleblowers.  In contrast, whistleblowers are often disciplined as reprisal for reporting wrongdoing.

Grassley said that the difference in the number of disciplinary actions points to a long standing double standard between high-ranking officials and other employees that has been a part of the culture at the FBI for years.   Grassley added that the disparity suggests that the FBI favors employees who retaliated against whistleblowers more than the whistleblowers themselves.

In a letter sent this week to FBI Director James Comey, Grassley noted that since 2004, the FBI has disciplined only five employees for retaliatory conduct, and no individual has been punished for such retaliatory conduct since 2012. Grassley contrasted those figures to the much higher number of employees who have claimed they suffered reprisal for reporting wrongdoing at the Bureau.

"This discrepancy merits continued oversight over the FBI's discipline of those who retaliate against whistleblowers, because punishing such retaliators is necessary to change the culture of the Bureau and to send a clear message that retaliation will not be tolerated," Grassley wrote to Comey.

Grassley held a hearing on March 4, 2015 about whistleblower retaliation at the FBI.  The hearing brought to light a Government Accountability Office report that the Justice Department had dismissed a large number of otherwise valid reprisal complaints from the FBI based on technicalities.  Many of these cases were thrown out because FBI employees had reported wrongdoing to their direct supervisors, which curiously does not "count" as a protected disclosure under the Justice Department's current regulations.

A copy of the letter can be found here.

NOTICE OF COMMITTEE HEARING

The Senate Committee on the Judiciary has scheduled a hearing of the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest entitled "Oversight of the Administration's FY 2016 Refugee Resettlement Program: Fiscal and Security Implications" for Thursday October 1, 2015 at 2:00 p.m., in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

By order of the Chairman.

Bipartisan Group of Senators File Legislative Fix to Ensure Inspectors General Have Access to All Agency Records

WASHINGTON - United States Senators Ron Johnson, Claire McCaskill, Chuck Grassley, Joni Ernst, Tammy Baldwin, Tom Carper, John Cornyn, James Lankford, Susan Collins, Kelly Ayotte, Mark Kirk, and Barbara Mikulski filed a bipartisan substitute amendment to S. 579, the Inspector General Empowerment Act of 2015. The new language includes a provision addressing an opinion from the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, which allows the Justice Department, and potentially other agencies, to deny access to records sought by the Inspector General.

The Inspector General Act of 1978 authorizes each Inspector General to access "all records" in their agency's possession in the conduct of an oversight investigation or audit.  However, on July 20, 2015, the Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion arguing that other provisions generally restricting the "disclosure" of certain kinds of information override the "all records" provision of the Inspector General Act.  The Office of Legal Counsel reached this conclusion despite clear and recent language enacted in response to the controversy over these very access issues. The Department of Justice's fiscal year 2015 Appropriations Act prohibited the agency from denying the Inspector General timely access to records.  The only exception was for any "express" limitation in the Inspector General Act.

The July Office of Legal Counsel opinion requires the Inspector General to obtain agency permission to access certain documents in the ordinary course of its oversight work, and reverses the presumption of the Inspector General Act that inspectors general have unfettered access to any and all information they deem necessary for effective oversight.  The broad opinion also left open the door for other agencies to rely on it to deny their inspectors general access to documents.

The opinion was met with swift opposition from Congress.  Senate leaders on the Judiciary Committee and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and House leaders on the Committee on the Judiciary and Committee on Oversight and Government Reform sent a letter to the Department rejecting the opinion's interpretation of the Inspector General Act and pressed the Obama administration to provide legislative language that would ensure inspectors general receive unfettered access to all agency documents. The Chairman and Ranking Member of the Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations Subcommittee also sent a letter to the Justice Department saying that the Office of Legal Counsel's interpretation of Section 218 was completely wrong and counter to Congress's clear intent.

As a result of discussions with the inspectors general community, the Justice Department, and others, the bipartisan group of Senators have agreed on legislative language to ensure inspectors general are able to access all agency documents.  The substitute amendment amends the bipartisan S. 579, the Inspector General Empowerment Act, which was reported unanimously out of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee earlier this year, by adding the agreed upon language on inspector general access to documents. S. 579 provides some much-needed authorities for inspectors general to ensure they can perform their watchdog responsibilities in an efficient and independent manner.

Chairman Johnson said, "I am pleased that a bipartisan group of senators came together to make clear once again that inspectors general must have unfettered access to all agency documents. I am committed to working with my colleagues to pass this commonsense bill through the Senate to ensure that all inspectors general have the authority and the statutorily mandated independence they need to perform their watchdog responsibilities."

Chairman Grassley said, "The Justice Department opinion is contrary to the law and to the reason Congress created inspectors general - an independent overseer of the executive branch.  We couldn't have been more clear last year to ensure inspectors general received access to all documents, but the law seems to have been ignored.   The action we're taking with this new legislation leaves no room for misinterpretation."

Senator McCaskill said, "This legislation would help address a troubling decision by the Justice Department that undermines our watchdogs' ability to exercise critical oversight. Inspectors General are the eyes and ears of the public, helping to guard against the waste and abuse of their tax dollars, but they can't do that job effectively without access to agency documents?so I'm pleased to work with a bipartisan group of my colleagues to help restore that access."

 

A copy of the substitute amendment is here.

###

Pages