Cook County Public Defenders Blog

Archive for the 'In The News' Category

Assistant Public Defender, Martha Marie Fitzsimmons (1952-2010).

Saturday, February 20th, 2010

flag-at-half-staff

 

Wake and Funeral Mass Arrangements for Martha Fitzsimmons

 Wake:  Thursday Evening    February 25th, 2010 McDonough Hall  (Gleason Building)  2nd floor 1101 Columbian Avenue Oak Park, Illinois  60302

Visiting hours: 6 pm through 9 pm At 7:30 pm, there will be a special service with prayer, sharing memories, and music. Everyone who wishes to share a “Martha story” is asked to write up a reflection and bring it on Thursday evening to share with family and friends. All stories are being collected to create a memory book for Rafa.  

Memorial Mass:  11 AM  - Saturday , February 27th, 2010  St. Giles Church  (Columbian and Greenfield) Oak Park, Il. 60302

 Reception:  McDonough Hall immediately after the service.

Some thoughts on Martha from Larry Spivack, President of the Illinois Labor History Society and Regional Director, AFSCME Council 31 and an AFSCME organizer who helped start this Local.

About 25 years ago Martha Fitzsimmons joined a zealous group of advocates. They were Cook County Public Defenders, but they were more than that. They were a band of activists who sought to bring a Union to the Public Defenders Office. In doing so they were able to bring a much greater sense of dignity to the job, not just in material terms, but also in creating a sense of community that had been lacking for some time. By September of 1987 a ground breaking Agreement between the Public Defender and AFSCME’s newest affiliate, the Cook County Public Defender’s Association had created something almost unimaginable: It was a contract between the parties that made a pathway for a financially durable career as a Public Defender and made an organization that lives to this day with one of the best contracts for attorneys who are sometimes referred to around the country as the Peoples’ Lawyers. Public sector lawyers around the country can, in part, thank Martha Fitzsimmons if they have competitive wages and benefits.

 

This Agreement would not have been reached or lasted as long without Martha Fitzsimmons. Martha was a hard bargainer, known to never mince words or to compromise without cause. Despite her strong opinions and ideas, Martha was one of the few who walked the walk and lived by her own words. Martha stayed active in the Union for the entirety of her career. If not out front on a bargaining committee or on the leadership team of the local union, Martha was a steward the entire time AFSCME represented our office. She was always a resource for younger attorneys who realized the idea of union representation was a natural role for an Assistant Public Defender but had no idea how to get there. Martha’s actions in helping build the union into a vibrant institution is not unique, but nevertheless unusual when it comes to Attorneys. Martha was one of the few who made the connection between unionization and social justice for the indigent and less fortunate. For Martha, defending the Constitution and defending her union contract were one in the same. And it wasn’t just about making more money. The connection to good working conditions and an office that promoted career service and the best criminal defense attorneys anywhere is not a simple concept to conjure. But Martha understood this quite well.

 

It may seem a bit hyperbolic to compare Martha to some of our early heroines in labor history. Mother Jones who fought to end child labor and the dehumanization and  degradation of coal miners; Elizabeth Gurley Flynn who helped bring justice to textile workers; Delores Huerta who struggled for farm worker’s rights or even Jane Adams who marched in nearly every worker’s cause. But we would be remiss if we didn’t think of Martha Fitzsimmons when we think of some of the women today who have advanced the cause of workers in general and women and children in particular.

 

I am sure that Martha will be remembered by many of her clients for how she helped them. It is my hope that any PD who has benefited from Martha’s lifetime of service to the office and her union will realize that their standard of living today, their ability to provide a extraordinary service to “the people” is in a large part, due to a women named Martha Fitzsimmons.

Cook County Casts Votes for Qualified Judges!

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

The local is very proud to announce (unofficially) that several of its members have been elected to judical seats in the primary election held on February 2, 2010.  In addition, two former members of this local are also winners in the election.

 

Mark Levitt – winner of the Democratic primary in the 4th Judicial Subcircuit, Lake County.  Mark has been an assistant Cook County public defender for almost 20 years and was lead counsel in the ”Browns Chicken” case.  Mark will face a Republican challenger in the general election.

Terry MacCarthy- a supervisor and former member of the local won Full Circuit Bronstein seat in the primary.  He has no Republican challenger in the general election.

Daniel Gallagher- Dan, an assistant at 26th Street was uncontested in the primary and will face a  Republican challenger in the fall.

Ann Finley Collins- A member of the Homicide Task Force, won in a race with many qualified challengers including two sitting judges.  Ann will not have a challenger in the general election.

Judge Jim Epstein – a former public defender who helped organize the local twenty years ago has won a seat on the 1st District Appellate court (McNulty vacancy).

Judge Geary Kull -  another former public defender, was in a very heated race and it still might be too close to call because he has a slim lead of abut 80 votes based on the vote totals available as of  2/3/10 at / 8:00 a.m.

Best of luck to all the winners and thanks to the members of this local who spread the word to  the voters in Cook County to vote for and elect the best of the bunch.

No Unfair Taxes for Health Plans for Working Families

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

The health care reform debates recently have included some discussion of health care plans being taxed.  Here is a very thorough explanation of some recent developments on this issues from Henry Bayer and Roberta Lynch:

As you know, over the past year the American labor movement, along with tens of thousands of our fellow citizens, has been working to make health care available and affordable to everyone.  With strong leadership from President Obama, for the first time since the enactment of the Medicare Program in the 1960’s, Congress has tackled the challenge of reforming the American health insurance system.   

 

This has been no easy task.  Although Medicare, a government-run health care program that covers every senior citizen in our country, has proven tremendously successful and popular, right-wing ideologues and employers teamed up to attack any effort to expand government involvement in reshaping our health care system.  They spread misinformation and managed to confuse many people about what health care reform would mean for the average citizen. 

 

The fact is that health care in America has become big business for the insurance companies who make huge profits and exert enormous control over who gets health care and how it is delivered.  There is no way to reform the system without taking on their power and profits—and only government has the ability to do that. 

 

After months of Congressional debate and widespread public discussion, both houses of Congress have now passed bills that would vastly expand access to health care and would help to rein in the soaring costs of health care.  This legislation would prevent insurance companies from denying coverage for preexisting conditions.  It would make sure that workers who lose their jobs don’t lose health care coverage.  And it would make health care affordable for those who make too much to qualify for Medicaid, but don’t get coverage through their employer, providing health care to some 31 million people who now don’t have it. 

 

These are the common elements which both bills share; there are some differences between them, however, that are still in the process of being worked out.  One of the biggest differences has to do with how expanded health care coverage would be paid for.  The House bill would tax individuals with higher incomes; the Senate bill would tax higher-cost health insurance plans.  

 

The labor movement believed that the House version was preferable, but the Senate has been unyielding in its refusal to tax the wealthy, so we have focused our efforts on trying to reduce the impact that the Senate’s plan to tax higher-cost health plans would have on working families.  (While the tax would be on insurance companies, it has been widely acknowledged that it could be passed on to the employers who purchase plans and ultimately in some part to the workers in those plans.)

 

Over the past few days, President McEntee and other labor leaders have been in meetings with the White House and they announced late yesterday that an agreement has been reached which, we believe, will be incorporated in any final bill that comes before Congress for a vote.  This agreement means that working families will not be unfairly taxed.  It includes the following provisions:    

 

*         State and local government health care plans and health care plans negotiated under collective bargaining arrangements will be exempted from the tax entirely until the year 2018

 

*         The threshold above which the tax would be applied was raised to $24,000 for family coverage and to $8,900 for individual coverage.   (The general range of plan costs for AFSCME members in Illinois is between $15,000-19,000 for family coverage, well below this threshold—and individual coverage is also much lower). 

 

*          Dental and vision benefits will be excluded from the calculation of the threshold. 

 

*          The threshold will be increased if the rise in coverage costs between 2010 and 2013 is higher than forecast.

 

*          The plan increases the threshold for plans that cover retirees and workers in certain high risk occupations.

 

 

All Americans, both union and non-union, will benefit from this agreement because it raises the threshold level and exempts dental and vision benefits.  It ensures that plans dominated by women and older workers, which tend to be more costly, are protected.  It also protects plans covering retirees and workers in high risk jobs. 

 

As is customary with legislation like this, workers who negotiate health care benefits through their union will have a transition period to allow labor and management time to negotiate new terms.  Among the laws with similar transitions are:  The Family and Medical Leave Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, COBRA Health Care Continuation, the Mental Health Parity Act and the Pension Protection Act of 2006.

 

Public employer plans are also protected during the transition, as state and local governments continue to struggle with the Bush Recession.  By exempting their plans from increased taxes, state and local governments will not have to strap taxpayers with more service cuts, which could throw our economy back into another recession. 

 

With this agreement in place, the labor movement can continue its vigorous advocacy for the passage of historic health insurance reform legislation that is a vital step forward in creating a health care system that meets the needs of all Americans.

AFSCME Responds to Haitian Disaster

Thursday, January 14th, 2010
As the scope of the disaster in Haiti becomes clear, with reports now that hundreds of thousands may have died, the AFL-CIO has assembled a list of ways we can help:

You can help workers in distress by donating to the Solidarity Center’s Earthquake Relief for Haitian Workers’ Campaign. Click here to make a donation and learn more about how the center is working to help Haitian workers.

The TransAfrica Forum, a longtime ally of the union movement, suggests donations to two organizations already providing aid on the ground in Haiti: Partners in Health and Doctors Without Borders

The 150,000-member National Nurses United issued an urgent call last night through its nationwide disaster relief network to recruit nurse volunteers to assist Haiti. Twitter updates use the hashtag #HaitiRN

Search and rescue teams from Fairfax County, Va., and Los Angeles County, Calif., made up of members of Fire Fighters (IAFF) locals 2068 and 1014, are preparing to head to Haiti to aid in the rescue efforts. Other teams are likely to follow.

 

Centenial Celebration for the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

Monday, January 4th, 2010

allcovers

Put January 29, 2010 on your calendar because a free symposium will be held at Northwestern University School of Law to celebrate 100 years of examining the criminal justice system. All assistant public defenders are invited.

Dennis Urban Retires After 35 Years of Service

Thursday, December 31st, 2009

The assistant public defender who held the number three rank in union seniority has retired after almost 35 years of service to the citizens of Cook County.  A retirment lunch, hosted by the local,  was held in honor of Dennis Urban’s retirement on December 30, 2009.  Brother, Michael Davidson delivered a spirited address to the attendees at the luncheon recounting the years that Dennis has been with the office.  Heck, Tiger Woods was born the year Dennis Urban became an assistant public defender.  On behalf of the union, best of luck to you Dennis! 

Update from the Department of Risk Management regarding UniCare HMO – 12/17/2009

Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009
This is an update regarding the transition of County employees covered by UniCare HMO which has withdrawn from the Illinois market, necessitating a switch in coverage for those County employees who had elected Unicare as their health insurance provider. We are pleased to announce that effective January 1, 2010, these employees will be covered by a new Blue Cross/Blue Shield HMO plan with a comparable network named “Classic Blue”. A chief concern has been whether employees whose primary care physician is in the Northwestern Faculty Foundation Medical Group would be able to continue seeing their designated physicians. The answer is yes: the new network will include Northwestern.

There may be a small number of employees whose primary care physician is not in the network. We are going to be identifying those employees and they will be provided with the option of switching to the PPO to continue utilizing that doctor should they chose to do so.

In the meantime, we are providing attached letter (PDF) that will be sent to affected employees next week with their new insurance cards. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Department of Risk Management / Employee Benefits at 312-603-6385 or visit our website for additional information as it becomes available.

Resurrection wants to sell West Suburban and Westlake Hospitals

Wednesday, December 16th, 2009

Resurrection wants to sell

West Suburban and Westlake Hospitals

Now is the time to

make our voices heard!

Resurrection management recently announced that they are starting negotiations on the possible sale of West Suburban and Westlake Hospitals with for-profit Vanguard Health Systems.

In its statement, Resurrection said it would remain committed to employees and the communities surrounding the hospitals.  But there are many questions that must be answered.  Several state agencies need to review the proposal and assess its impact before the deal moves forward.

By working together, we can make our voices heard during this process. Together, we can work to insure that:

  • The quality of patient services is improved
  • All services are maintained
  • Patients and caregivers come before investor profits
  • Employees’ jobs are secure and current wage and benefit levels are maintained

You are invited to a meeting to discuss steps we can take to insure that West Suburban and Westlake patients, employees and community interests are protected.

OPAHA Meeting

When: Monday, January 11th at 7 pm

Where: Austin Boulevard Christian Church

634 N. Austin Blvd, Oak Park, IL

Oak Park/Austin Health Alliance (OPAHA)

A coalition of South Austin Coalition (773/287-4570)

the Oak Park Coalition for Truth and Justice (www.opctj.org)

and HEART/AFSCME (www.reformresurrection.org)

Background

On November 24, 2009, Resurrection Health Care announced plans to sell two of its eight hospitals to Vanguard Health Systems, a for-profit company.  Both hospitals, West Suburban Medical Center, in Oak Park, and Westlake Hospital, in Melrose Park, have struggled financially in recent years.

Vanguard owns MacNeal Hospital in Berwyn and Weiss Memorial Hospital in Chicago, in addition to hospitals in Texas, Arizona and Massachusetts, several of which are unionized.   Founded in 1997, the company is based in Nashville, Tennessee.

OPAHA questions:

Same promises, same failures? When Resurrection acquired West Suburban Medical Center in 2004, many residents were hopeful that their community hospital would benefit from promised investments and new management.  While RHC did build a new emergency room, most of the changes at West Sub were for the worse – cuts in staffing, reduction in services to the community and no improvement in management (but big improvements in CEO compensation!).

Who pays for the profits? Vanguard is purchasing West Sub and Westlake hospitals in order to make a profit.  But these hospitals are currently losing money and Vanguard will have to pay taxes on these hospitals, which means their expenses will be higher.  So what would new management do in order to turn a profit at these hospitals?  One study found that wages at for-profit hospitals are lower that wages at nonprofit hospitals.  And Vanguard has a history of cutting services and closing low-performing hospitals.

Respect for workers’ rights? For more than 6 years, employees at Resurrection have worked to form a union to have a voice at work and improve patient care.  RHC management has waged an expensive and aggressive antiunion campaign in response.  Vanguard should be held to a higher standard.

What about access and accountability? Non profit hospitals are accountable to state laws related to “charitable trust.”  This means they are legally required to operate the hospital in accordance with its charitable mission.  In addition, there are also specific requirements for providing and reporting on community benefits. For profits may say they have a “mission,” but they have no legal obligation to conform to it.

We need to work together to get answers!

The Oak Park/Austin Health Alliance was formed by the South Austin Coalition Community Council (SACCC), the Oak Park Coalition for Truth and Justice (OPCTJ) and AFSCME Council 31.  Our goals are to make sure that uninsured residents have access to care, that the hospital provides much-needed services to the community, and that workers are allowed to organize without fear of retaliation.

Should Judges Take Donations From Lawyers?

Friday, December 11th, 2009

Here is an article that appeared recently in the Daily Herald, written by Josh Stockinger.  It has been reprinted here with permission.

Three Kane County judicial candidates in the Feb. 2 primary say they’re limiting or refusing campaign contributions from attorneys to avoid the appearance of bias in the courtroom.

The rest, however, say the move amounts to little more than a publicity stunt, and is reflective of the candidates’ own insecurities about making impartial decisions.

The debate ensued after Republican David Akemann and Democrat John Dalton issued news releases pledging to forego attorney donations out of ethical concerns.

Associate Judge Robert Janes, another of the six candidates running for the bench, said he, too, is addressing the issue by limiting attorney donations to $50. His fellow Republican candidates, Thomas Patrick Rice, D.J. Tegeler and Associate Judge Leonard Wojtecki, and Democrat Michael C. Funkey, meanwhile, are not.

At issue is whether a campaign contribution could present a conflict of interest – or the appearance of one at least – if the donor ever argues a case in front of the candidate.

“The citizens of Kane County have the right to a fair trial and an impartial judge,” said Dalton, an Elgin attorney, in his news release. “Accepting contributions from attorneys would bring my independence and integrity into question.”

On the other end, Wojtecki noted judicial candidates are legally able to collect donations from anyone and are elected partly on their reputations for impartiality.

“Isn’t Mr. Dalton really saying he can’t be impartial here?” he said. “I know of no lawyer or judge who is going to throw away their career for a campaign contribution.”

Added Tegeler, a Geneva attorney: “My ethics are not to be bought. If I ever feel down the road I need to recuse myself, I’ll do it.”

Matt Streb, associate professor of political science at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb and the author of “Running for Judge,” said attorney donations have long been debated in judicial elections, but the evidence as to whether there is any effect in the courtroom is “decidedly mixed.”

Streb said judicial candidates often receive less media coverage than other candidates and have fewer political issues than candidates in most races. So they rely on those who know them best – fellow lawyers – to help them get the word out.

“Most people don’t have a lot of information about these candidates when they walk into the voting booth,” Streb said.

Judicial races are nonpartisan in most other states, Streb said, and some campaigns outside of Illinois are publicly financed.

When voters receive more information on candidates, they’re more likely to vote rather than skip the ballot item, known as “voter roll-off.”

“It’s not always clear what constitutes a conflict of interest,” Streb said. “There could be some positives to money in judicial elections. And there’s a whole bunch of reasons why it might be a bad thing. It’s equivalent to a student’s parents funding one of my research projects and then me having that student in my class. The question really comes down to how large is the donation.”

Janes said he has capped campaign contributions at $50 an attorney, and he will not accept donations from courthouse employees, such as bailiffs, clerks, prosecutors and public defenders.

“We cannot believe that anyone could reasonably believe a judge would be interested by such a modest contribution,” he said. “I’m confident the election will be decided upon the candidates’ qualifications and not their campaign war chests.”

Akemann said he believes refusing lawyer donations is “what the citizens want and deserve,” and that entails “avoiding the appearance of any impropriety.”

Rice, a Batavia attorney, called the debate “ludicrous” and a “ploy” for publicity. He said judicial candidates might as well refuse all donations, according to his opponents’ philosophy, because anyone could wind up in a courtroom at any time.

“I may be the only one who has the guts to tell you this, but you have to take the money,” he said. “Until we have (nonpartisan) merit selection, you have to have a campaign that costs money. Attorneys know who they prefer, and they know who’s honest and who’s good.”

Funkey, a private-practice attorney who has worked for the village of Elburn and Aurora Township, said he hopes to avoid finding out who contributed to him by making fundraising a separate function of his campaign office.

“It’s not fail-safe,” he said. “But I’m doing everything I can to make sure I’m not aware of who’s giving me contributions. I would certainly not allow it to be a problem with my candidacy or performance on the bench.”

Locating Inmates at Cook County Jail

Monday, December 7th, 2009

It appears that the Cook County Department of Corrections’ website is up and running so now you can locate individuals housed at Cook County Jail, without calling jail records,  by going to the following website:

http://10.127.145.63/search/

or when not using the County’s ethernet, try

http://www2.cookcountysheriff.org/search/