State Senator Donne Trotter, pictured here earlier this month, apologized Tuesday for likening Gov. Pat Quinn and an appointed official to Nazi leaders. (AP Photo/Seth Perlman)

SPRINGFIELD-State Sen. Donne Trotter apologized Tuesday for anti-Semitic remarks he made directed at a member of Gov. Pat Quinn's cabinet in a gaffe that a top Chicago Jewish group condemned as "Nazi-linked name-calling."

Trotter's comment came on the heels of a letter he co-signed sent to Gov. Pat Quinn last week on behalf of the African-American and Latino Senate caucuses pressing Quinn to replace Julie Hamos, director of the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services.

"Hitler supported Goebbels too and his propaganda he was pushing forth during his crusade. So if this is the person, this is the face you want to represent your administration, then we need to get rid of both of them," Trotter told a reporter with WUIS, a National Public Radio station in Springfield.

Hamos lost three grandparents to the Holocaust and is the daughter of a Holocaust survivor.

"I apologize to Director Hamos. My comments were inappropriate and wrong," Trotter said in a statement released by Senate President John Cullerton's office.

"My focus will remain on the egregious disregard toward some of the most vulnerable people in our state: the mentally ill, the profoundly disabled, the sickest the old and young."

Trotter is one of Cullerton's assistant majority leaders and has been a state lawmaker for 25 years.

Quinn's office has said it still backs Hamos as director, but the group of state senators who signed the letter insist on her ousting, pointing to budget cuts for the poor, elderly and disabled.

The Chicago Jewish Federation on Tuesday condemned Trotter's remark.

"Rather than focus the budget discussion on how to make the difficult decisions confronting the Illinois Legislature, state Sen. Trotter instead resorted to distracting, divisive and inflammatory demagoguery," David Brown, Jewish Federation board chairman, said in a written statement.

"His analogy is profoundly insulting to the character of our state's chief executive and one of his top deputies. It also diminishes the reality of the Holocaust and so is shockingly disrespectful - indeed disparaging - of those who fought the actual Nazis and those who were their victims. The people of Illinois deserve much better from our elected officials."

Trottest latest mishap is just one gaffe in a series of recent public relations blunders. Last December, police arrested him after he walked into O'Hare Airport with a .25-caliber Beretta and a loaded ammunition clip.

He "wasn't thinking," Trotter had said. He later pleaded guilty in April to misdemeanor reckless conduct and was sentenced to one year of court supervision.

Last December, Trotter was linked to indicted former Country Club Hills police chief Regina Evans, who was charged in a money laundering scheme involving $1.25 million in state grant funds. The Sun-Times reported Trotter had urged state authorities not to try recouping the money that had allegedly been misspent by Evans and her husband, Ronald Evans.

Trotter was a candidate for ex-Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr.'s seat at the time. He dropped out from that race less than a month later.

Trotter would not comment to the Sun-Times Tuesday, declining multiple requests for an interview from the Senate press box after the chamber had cleared the floor for adjournment.

The override passed on a 44-11 Senate vote, with one member voting present. It needed 36 votes to undo Quinn's veto. Now, the legislation moves to the House for an override vote.

The utility made a hard pitch for Senate Bill 9 as a response to a series of adverse Illinois Commerce Commission rulings on a utility-driven "smart-grid" law that was enacted in 2011 and involved a $2.6 billion upgrade to its transmission network in exchange for a decade worth of annual rate hikes.

"The governor claims in his veto message that SB 9 is an 'unprecedented interference' in the ICC's ratemaking authority. That's simply not true," said Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago).

After the ICC decisions against it, ComEd postponed installation of new smart meters in Chicago and suburban homes and businesses until 2015, though the firm vowed to move up that installation to later this year if the legislation took effect.

Rep. Lou Lang (D-Skokie), pictured in this January 2011 file photo, confirmed Tuesday he is recusing himself from sponsorship of gambling-expansion legislation because of a "perceived conflict." ( AP Photo/Seth Perlman)

SPRINGFIELD-State Rep. Lou Lang cited a "perceived conflict of interest" Tuesday behind his abrupt and surprising decision to end his sponsorship and potential future involvement in gambling-expansion legislation.

The Skokie Democrat informed House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) of the decision on Monday, a move that could threaten any efforts to get Senate-passed gambling-expansion legislation out of the House this spring.

Lang's departure came as the Rockford Register Star reported in its Tuesday editions that the northern Illinois city, which the lawmaker specified in his legislation as a site for a new casino, last summer hired the law firm that employs Lang to handle workers compensation matters and to assist in flooding-related litigation against Rockford.

"It was recently brought to my attention that there may be a perceived conflict of interest between the law firm of which I am of counsel and my sponsorship of the gaming bill because a client of the firm has an interest that could be impacted by the passage of the proposed legislation," Lang wrote.

"To be clear, the law firm's work for the client has no relation whatsoever to any gaming legislation. Additionally, I do no legal work for this client, and I receive no compensation from their relationship with the firm," he said.

"My actions as an attorney and/or a member of the General Assembly have been, at every moment, completely appropriate and totally respectful of all applicable laws and ethical rules," he continued. "There have been no violations of any kind."

Earlier this month, the Senate passed gambling-expansion legislation that would authorize five new locations, including a site in Chicago, Rockford, the south suburbs, Lake County and downstate Danville.

Rockford Legal Director Patrick Hayes told the Rockford newspaper that there was not any linkage between its hiring of Evergreen Park-based Odelson and Sterk and the city's inclusion in the gambling bill Lang has twice passed through the House only to see Gov. Pat Quinn veto it.

Under Lang's sponsorship, the House passed a gambling expansion plan that named Rockford as a site for a new casino in May 2012. A similar measure, also sponsored by Lang, passed the House in May 2011.

Hayes indicated that Lang, who is of counsel to the law firm, did not personally handle any of Rockford's city worker's compensation work, leaving that to two other lawyers with the firm.

The newspaper reported that eight law firms had sought the city's legal work last year, but that Odelson and Sterk was not the lowest bidder. Hayes, in a later interview with the Sun-Times, said the firm was paid approximately $60,000 by the city last year.

Lang did not list the possible conflict involving his employer's work for Rockford on his newly filed statement of economic interest, an ethics disclosure form designed to outline public officials' financial holdings and potential conflicts.

"My economic interest statement asked what professional services I rendered, and I said 'practice of law.' That's all it has to say," Lang said when asked why he didn't disclose the Rockford connection on the form that he filed with Secretary of State Jesse White's office on April 11.

"Understand, a client of the firm and a client of mine aren't necessarily the same thing. I'm of counsel to a law firm," Lang said in an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times.

Lang also defended the timing to withdraw as sponsor of the gambling bill, even though the connection Odelson and Sterk had with Rockford dated back to last summer.

"This is the time I felt was appropriate. I think you know that in all the legislation I've ever had in gaming going back 20 years, I've had Rockford in the bill. There's nothing new here," Lang said.

Lang didn't waver when pressed why he didn't object to the decision by the law firm that employs him to solicit business from a town covered by his gambling-expansion legislation.

"I have violated no ethical rules, and so I'll send you this piece of paper," he said, referring to the letter to Madigan, announcing his recusal from the legislation. "I don't want to discuss it further. That's my public comment."

Lang, who was working the gambling package aggressively as recently as a week ago, turned over sponsorship to state Rep. Robert Rita (D-Blue Island).

In brief comments to the Sun-Times Tuesday, House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) said Lang's departure would not impact the prospects for gambling legislation in the House.

"I think there's no change," Madigan said while walking from the House floor to his Statehouse office.

While Lou Lang (D-Ill) had been the point-person, that's changed with just 10 days left in the legislative session.

It's now Robert Rita, a Blue Island Democrat.

Griffin, a billionaire and CEO of Citadel LLC, scolded Emanuel for the way he settled the Chicago teacher's strike and said the mayor should close even more schools than the 54 proposed, Crain's reports.

Griffin also criticized Gov. Pat Quinn for offering financial incentives for companies to stay in Illinois. Griffin is on the exploratory committee of wealthy Chicago businessman Bruce Rauner as he considers a run for governor.

The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Will Davis (D-Homewood), passed the House Monday on a 71-39 vote, with one voting present, and would require the state's public and private high schools to carry insurance for their athletes with money funded by the schools.

"What we do here in this body is to try to put things in place to try to protect and to help our constituents whenever possible." Davis said. "And this bill is nothing more than trying to do that."

Under the measure, high schools would have to support policies that provide a minimum of $3 million in benefits or five years of coverage, whichever comes first, for catastrophic athletic injuries whose costs exceed $50,000. Davis estimated the plan would only cost school districts between $5-10 per student-athlete.

Still, opposition to the bill -mostly from Downstate Republicans - arose out of fear that many school districts wouldn't be able to shoulder the additional costs, which would be left to the district to decide how to fund.

"I'm telling you, our smaller school districts are going to do away with sports," Rep. David Reis (R-Willow Hill) contested.

"Ladies and gentleman, you've heard many of us say before, our school districts are waving the white flag. No more unfunded mandates...where is it going to stop? We do not have the businesses and the EAV's and the tax base to continue to absorb these."

The bill, which handedly passed the Senate last month, materialized in response to a football injury that left Blue Island High School running back Rasul "Rocky" Clark paralyzed from the neck down in 2000.

Clark was covered by the school district's $5 million insurance policy, but he died soon after the money dried up in early 2012.

"Rocky Clark, before or after he was injured, you know, he didn't just go somewhere and shrivel up and wither away and nobody heard from him," Davis said after nearly half an hour of debate. "He continued to try to coach, not only football but also track. His mother continued to be active. So he was a very special young man.

"And while he's no longer on this earth to see this type of legislation at least get to this point, certainly we appreciate him looking down on us, encouraging us to support this piece of legislation."

Quinn, who attended Clark's funeral wake, has said he supports the legislation.

Nicole Hockley, a parent who lost her child, Dylan Hockley, 6, in the Sandy Hook school shooting in Connecticut, testifies for legislation to ban the sale of high-capacity ammunition magazines during a Senate Executive Committee hearing Monday in Springfield. Fellow Sandy Hook parent Mark Barden, whose son Daniel died in the school shooting, is in the background. (AP Photo/Seth Perlman)

SPRINGFIELD-Three parents - Mark Barden, Nicole Hockley and Francine Wheeler - of children slain in the Sandy Hook massacre on December 14, 2012 testified Monday at the Capitol supporting legislation to ban the sale and purchase of large-capacity magazine clips holding more than 10 rounds. The measure passed the Senate Executive Committee by a 12-3 vote, with two Republicans supporting it.

The three parents are part of a group called Sandy Hook Promise, whose members pledge to honor the 26 students and educators who were shot down and support common-sense solutions to prevent violence. Invited to Springfield by Gov. Pat Quinn, the three parents from Newtown, Conn. met with 22 state senators and took questions from reporters Monday afternoon. The following is a transcript of the interview.

Hockley's opening remarks:

"Thank you for this opportunity to talk and just as way of introduction, we are here along with Sandy Hook Promise to discuss and support Senate Bill 1002. As part of Sandy Hook Promise, I think it's important that you know we're not just a gun-control group. We're not gun lobbyists. Sandy Hook Promise actually looks at holistic solutions and common-sense solutions for all the causes of gun-violence. So, we look very closely at school security and school safety, how we strengthen and build communities, support parenting - good parenting, and also mental health legislation.

"And in fact, one of the other parents and members of Sandy Hook Promise was in Hartford today proposing a new mental health bill for Connecticut that she helped co-author. So I just - I kind of want to position that we are not a gun-control group. We are a common-sense solutions group. But here today, in Illinois, the topic of the day and the topic that we're discussing is Senate Bill 1002 to limit the purchase and sale of high-capacity magazines that have more than 10 bullets.

"It's something that's near and dear to our hearts because in Newtown the shooter that killed our children used 30-round high-capacity magazine clips. And in one of the opportunities where he had to reload, 11 children were able to escape from a classroom. And we're left asking ourselves if he had had to reload more times, would more children have been able to escape or would one of the adults have been able to disarm him. It's a measure that will absolutely save lives.

"And Newtown is an incredibly beautiful, idyllic little place. And if this sort of tragedy can happen there, it can happen anywhere. And we don't want it to happen in Illinois to force you to take action. So that's why we support this bill, in the hopes that we can prevent any of you that have children or loved ones from feeling the same pain that we do every day."

Wheeler: "I don't know why that's an argument, per se, because as Nicole just said, it's a holistic approach. So, I think what I would say to that senator or those senators is that I really agree with you that mental health is a humongous problem. And I for one am going to help try and support the mental health changes that we need in this country as well as limiting high-capacity magazines."

Hockley: "For us, it's not a 'you have to have one or the other.' We're very much about having conversations with 'and' in them. So, it's mental health and school safety and stronger communities and responsible parenting and gun safety. It's those things together. And every step taken is a step taken in the right direction. Today we're talking about guns here. Today in Connecticut we're talking about mental health. It's not a choice between you have to do one thing or the other. These are all things that need to work together. Just some of them come at different times."

Q: A lot of advocates say we should have just as much ammunition as the government to protect ourselves because that's what the Second Amendment says. What are your thoughts on that kind of thing?

Barden: "If that's the case, then we should be armed by the government. Then, where's my M-16? I mean, really, how do you respond to that?"

Wheeler: "Well, you know, we're parents. We're parents. That's who we are, and when the majority of the country write us letters and say how supportive they are and that they reach out to us, the majority of people are wanting to do what's the right thing. What's it worth to you? So, sometimes we can't answer that. We can't answer to that, but we can say, you know, this is how we feel because as parents we're taking responsibility for our children. We're trying to keep them safe."

Hockley: "In addition to that, the bills that we support - including this one in Illinois - they're not taking anything away from anyone. We're not talking about assault weapons bans. We're not talking about confiscation. We don't support those measures. So, people that want to maintain their firearms for whatever reason - hunters, sportsmen or self-defense - they have that right. But with rights come responsibilities, and a limit on high-capacity magazines is one of those responsibilities."

Wheeler: "And our children have the right to life."

Q: Illinois is under a court order to pass a concealed-carry law by June 9. Do you have any stance on that?

Barden: "We're here to discuss Senate Bill 1002. We don't come here with pure emotion and say, 'Oh, you have to make changes.' We do our research. We read up on the issue. We read what the bills do and what they don't do. We try to learn what the various legislation, what the pushback is on it so we can have a reasonable debate and a sensible conversation. So we're not there yet with that particular piece of legislation."

Q: Is Illinois one of many places you've visited?

Hockley: "We've supported different states in different ways in terms of being physically present. Obviously Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, Illinois - I start to lose track. But we've also supported many other states through op-eds and letters-to-the-editor and phone calls and activities in that way, and we have several other outstanding invitations from states. But for us, it's about where can we help the most. Where can we have the biggest impact? Where are the bills being proposed that are the ones that we support and believe will genuinely save lives? And we go where we feel that we can make a difference."

Q: You said you are not a lobbyist group, but are there other groups you are working with?

Hockley: "Some of the states that we've visited have local grassroots organizations within them and we will work with them."

Q: Francine, you didn't testify during committee but became overwhelmed with emotion. If you had testified, what do you think you would have said?

Wheeler: "I'm not sure of the moment you're talking about, but I would say that when you go through something as tragic as this, your feelings change constantly. So, sometimes I was feeling sad that I didn't have gigantic picture of Ben right there. But sometimes I was, um - I was wanting the opportunity to speak, you know, and say - what would I say? I don't know what I would say. But I would probably just say that we have to find a solution, and you know what? It's many solutions. And I would say we're here because we need to find answers, not to fight. I don't want to fight. I want to find solutions. That's why I came. For my two kids. That's why I came."

Q: What difference do you think that would make, for them to see that face?

Wheeler: "I don't' - it was just something I was saying. Well, when I show people pictures of Ben - he was a real person, just as Dylan and Daniel were real boys. And when we meet people one-on-one - we met 22 senators today - we gave them all pictures of our children to say, 'You know what, they died. And we want to honor them by finding some solutions.'"

Q: Do you think you've changed any minds by being here today?

Hockley: "Um, I think we had some good conversations today. Some very open conversations. We don't come in and thump the table and say you have to do this. We're not those sort of people. We don't make demands. You know, the senators asked us our story, and then we asked them what their constituents say, what concerns do you have or what do you like, what don't you like. And it's just about open conversations. So different objections - and some of the objections were purely that senators hadn't had a chance to read the details of the bill yet. So, were manufacturers impacted or not? Well, no, they're not. So, OK, let's have that dialogue and discuss that part of the amendment. But it's been very civil and respectful, and we felt very welcomed here today."

Q: Did you pick who you wanted to see at random, or how would you characterize the group?

Hockley: "They came to us. We were sitting in a conference room, and they knew we were here and they wanted to speak with us. They were very wanting to speak with us. We didn't necessarily seek them out and they were all respectful and listened."

Q: People from both parties?

Hockley: "Yes. And we have to thank them for that."

Q: Is the pace of change, nationally and at the state level, frustrating? And do you think there will be change from where we are today?

Hockley: "There will absolutely be change, and the pace of change - personally, I'm not the most patient person in the world. I'd like all this solved today, or before 12/14 would have been nice. But we say repeatedly that this is a marathon and not a sprint. And any sort of large-scale change takes time, and we appreciate that. You consider civil rights movements, or women's voting rights movements, or gay marriage or even cultural changes like mothers against drunk driving and seatbelt laws. These things take time. And we're OK with that because if we're taking actions now that will save lives, that's better than waiting six months or a year or three years to then start taking actions because how many lives will have been lost in that period? So, we keep focused on the end state, the end goal. And we will take those incremental steps along the way and we're grateful for every step forward that's made."

Q: This is an issue that seems like the effectiveness will come later, long-term. Is that the standpoint you come from?

Hockley: "Yeah, I mean if we didn't - magazines can last 20 years. So let's look at how many lives can be saved rather than, 'Okay, let's wait a year and then it's another 20 years or wait five years and then it's another 20 years.' You have to look at the long-term view of this."

Q: Does it frustrate you that we've gotten to this point, that it had to happen to your children before action was taken?

Barden: "I don't think we can look at it in that perspective. I think we have to look ahead. Like Nicole said, we have to think of those people 20 years from now that will benefit from the changes that we are making today."

Q: What can any of you say what that long-term change should be? Where should restrictions settle, or can you address that at this time?

Wheeler: "Well, I think that because of our holistic approach, it has to be a simple answer for now because it would take many hours to answer that question specifically. But if you can look at this as a more loving and safe place to live in this country - for our generation, for future generations, for our educators, for our leaders, for everyone who lives here - I'll do what I can to make that change. Specifically, we'd need more time."

Hyatt Hotels workers protested outside of Hyatt McCormick Place, 2233 S. Dr. Martin Luther King Dr. in Chicago today. It's just the latest battle in an ongoing feud between the hotel empire and workers who say they've been stuck in a four-year wage freeze.

Carly Karmel of UNITE HERE Local 1 told the Sun-Times about 400 people turned out for the protest today.

The protests come after President Obama nominated Pritzker, one of his top fund-raisers, to be the next U.S. Commerce Secretary.

From the Hyatt Hurts web site: "The Commerce Secretary's first concern should be to create good, family sustaining jobs for all Americans," says Cathy Youngblood, a Hyatt housekeeper who has led a national campaign to elect a hotel worker to Hyatt's Board of Directors. "Under Pritzker's direction, Hyatt has led the hotel industry in a race to the bottom by aggressively subcontracting out career hotel jobs to minimum wage temps. This is not the model that will lead our country to a bright economic future."

State Sen. Kwame Raoul (D-Chicago), pictured here taking questions from reporters Friday at the Capitol, was unable to strike an agreement on his concealed-carry bill to move it through the Illinois Senate. (AP Photo/Seth Perlman)

SPRINGFIELD-A Senate effort to impose restrictive concealed-carry limits on Illinois gun owners failed to surface for a vote Friday as expected even after the legislation was changed to ease opposition from the National Rifle Association.

"One of the realities that I was keenly aware of when I entered this effort was that there are some extremists," said Sen. Kwame Raoul (D-Chicago), sponsor of the gun-control measure. "There are some extremists with some very loyal followings, and they use intimidation as part of their advocacy efforts. And sometimes that intimidation is quite effective."

Both Raoul and Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago) had hinted at a full floor vote after the bill cleared a Senate panel on a 10-4 vote Thursday, but it became clear a consensus had not been reached by Friday.

The bill was at least partly short of votes due to NRA resistance over the legislation requiring Chicago police Supt. Garry McCarthy to vet all permit-seekers in Chicago and allowing local sheriffs to object to any permit application.

Raoul partly gave in to the NRA Friday by removing a part of his bill that would have required applicants to demonstrate "good moral character," a measure criticized for being too vague. But it wasn't enough to get the required 30 votes for passage, and Raoul didn't express a desire to concede much more.

"These are people who, you know, use aggressive advocacy efforts - legal advocacy efforts but aggressive advocacy efforts," Raoul said, alluding to the NRA. "People who rate you by grades as if you were in school."

"And if that means going to the end where there's a stalemate and it'll be up to local municipalities to enact ordinances...they'll see a far worse patchwork that they would have to try to navigate than the compromise that was proposed in my bill," he said.

The possibility of a stalemate appears more likely now as two concealed-carry proposals - one of which was backed by the NRA - already have failed in the House. And with less than a month before a federally mandated June 9 deadline to end the nation's only remaining concealed-carry ban expires, the pressure is piling on the General Assembly.

Senate negotiations with the NRA do not appear to be making headway, and Raoul said he has yet to see the plan that House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) is working on, only that it will differ from Raoul's proposal.

"I'm always looking to forge a compromise with the House," Raoul said. "But I will always have the same priorities that I have."

Meanwhile, Attorney General Lisa Madigan has until June 24 to decide if she wants to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court the federal appeals court ruling that has the Legislature in such a hurry to pass concealed-carry legislation by the end of the month. Gov. Pat Quinn backs the move to appeal.