(light music) (dramatic music) - Welcome to "Capitol View" on WSIU.

I'm Jeff Williams sitting in this week as we take a look at what's making news around the state in Illinois politics.

And to help guide our discussion this week is Alex Degman, State House reporter for WBEZ and for our Illinois public radio stations, and Jason Piscia, director of the Public Affairs Reporting program at the University of Illinois Springfield.

Gentlemen, welcome.

- Hello.

- Hi.

Thanks for having me.

- It has been another busy news cycle with the end of the spring legislative session fast approaching.

We've got more candidates and potential candidates jockeying for Illinois' soon-to-be-open Senate seat.

We're gonna get to that, but before we do go there, I would like to begin the show by remembering former Illinois Governor George Ryan.

He died last week at the age of 91.

He was Illinois' 39th governor, in addition to serving as Lieutenant Governor and Secretary of State.

He certainly had an interesting tenure in Illinois politics.

Alex, you've been reporting on Governor Ryan's passing this week.

How do you think George Ryan is going to be remembered?

- Well, as with a lot of things with Illinois politics, it really depends on who you talk to.

Because even scanning social media after we learned that Governor Ryan passed away, it really ran the gamut.

Some people were remembering the really good things about the fact that George Ryan was a really old-school politician.

And even if you didn't agree with him necessarily, he got things done.

And I think if you look at his political track record, he did get things done for the state of Illinois.

He was able to work with a lot of people even though he was a Republican.

Now, you mentioned that he served in a lot, he served in a lot of roles.

He also served as a state rep and he also served as House Speaker.

And I think a lot of that experience gave him just a really good handle on how the legislature works, working on so many levels.

However, there's also the dark side.

There was the scandal that kind of embroiled his tenure as Secretary of State with the so-called, we in the media call it the License for Bribe scandal.

That was one of the, you know, I hate to show my age here, but that was one of the first major news stories that I was really aware of as a middle schooler in the Chicago area.

So it kind of stuck with me.

And that's kind of how I remember George Ryan.

But then, you know, later on, you learned about his humanitarian side, and him looking at Lura Lynn one day and saying, "Geez, how can a guy who's not guilty of anything wake up every single day and think that he's gonna die?

Like, how can that happen in America?"

So with that, he decided that with a few days left in his term as governor, he was going to clear death row and abolish the death penalty.

So I guess it really depends, because yeah, and then also, you gotta remember that when he was, in fact, and I'm getting a lot of this from an interview that he did with WDEZ in 2020 about his book, where he talked about ending the death penalty.

But, you know, we also asked him about the things that happened in his term that he would rather forget, and whether he feels like he's moved on, whether he feels remorse, and he told us flat out, you know, no, I mean, I had nothing to do with what happened to the Willis children.

I have no remorse for anything that happened in my term.

So George Ryan was a tough politician, but he'll be remembered for both good and bad, I think.

- Yeah, I wanted to, I'm gonna show my age here as well, I mean, I think Illinois's last execution was Andrew Kokoraleis in 1999, what was in the Tamms Supermax Prison down here in deep Southern Illinois.

And I remember, as a reporter at that time, helping to cover that execution.

Following that execution, The governor talked about how difficult it was to make that final decision.

He was the final arbiter for this individual.

And he talked about how difficult that was.

You talked a little bit about the humanitarian side on that.

Jason, do you think, was the governor's decision on this moratorium, did it kind of signal a sea change, not only in Illinois, but in other places around the country in terms of how the death penalty is viewed?

- I think so.

I mean, when you think of what a typical Republican, you know, prior to all this, what a typical Republican, their stance on the death penalty was, you know, let's do it, let's go for it, it's a good idea.

It's a way to carry out justice for terrible things that have happened.

But George Ryan basically said, you know, to paraphrase a quote that he once said, was, you know, how the heck am I supposed to be the guy that makes the decision on who lives and dies?

And I think that was a sea change.

It added the moratorium in Illinois, and then as you know, Governor Pat Quinn shepherded through, putting into the law, ending the death penalty in Illinois.

And I think, you know, I think, just in general, you don't hear as much about death penalty cases around the country.

And there's questions about how humane that is and if that's the right way to handle criminal justice issues.

So yes, I do think it did cause a change that we're all rethinking, you know, what is the role of the death penalty in our society today.

- Mm-hmm, what do you think the governor, how he will be remembered from your time reporting in Springfield as well?

- Yeah, I mean, I agree with Alex.

It's a mixed bag.

And, you know, we also, we face these questions anytime someone of notoriety passes away.

you know, I think, to the people who look at the big picture, they're gonna look at his service to the state and this death penalty moratorium, and just his rethinking of that whole issue.

But then to some who may have just a passing interest in what's going on in state government, they're gonna remember the big headline of, you know, this license for bribe scandal that led to him serving time in prison for all those years.

And that's definitely, you know, a negative mark on his legacy.

But, you know, the moratorium is there to balance it out as well.

- All right.

Well, shifting gears a little bit here, the candidate pool for Dick Durbin's soon-to-be-open US Senate seat continues to grow; on the Democratic side we have Lieutenant Governor Stratton, and I think now Congresswoman Robin Kelly have officially or were soon to officially announce that they are in the race for that Democratic nomination.

There are also a couple of other names that are making the list.

Alex, are we gonna need a scorecard to handicap this race for this US Senate seat?

- You know, we might, because we're at the point now where everybody's starting to announce.

We can say officially that as of this taping, the people who are officially in the race, on the Democratic side, we have Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton, Congresswoman Robin Kelly did announce this week, and Raja Krishnamoorthi also announced this week.

I'm expecting, given the pattern of how this is going, we may see a decision from Lauren Underwood soon.

And by the time this program airs, we may have a decision.

So make sure you stay tuned to your local news websites, of course.

But then we also have some Republicans that have entered the race.

And we don't really usually pay a whole lot of attention to Republicans in the US Senate race, just given how the seat has been over the last 20 years or more.

But we do have R. Cary Capparelli, a businessman; then we also have Doug Bennett and someone named John Goodman: not the actor.

But there's a pretty big race forming already.

And I do imagine that we're gonna have more people on the Republican side, and some more Independents stepping in as well.

And we're still also waiting to hear some decisions from a couple of Democrats.

And we also learned this week that State Treasurer Mike Frerichs has decided that he's not going to try to go to Washington.

He's gonna stay here.

- Mm-hmm, at what point do both Republicans and Democrats, do they go through and they do the political calculus to determine if it is worth spending the money getting into the race for the US Senate, especially if they already hold a secure seat, congressional seat, given the close margins in both the House and the Senate.

At what point do you think does that enter into this equation of do I run or do I not run.

'Cause it's a tremendous amount of money that whoever does run is going to have to raise in this particular race.

- Well, I think, in this race specifically, that calculus is already in play.

And I think it has been even before the people who are currently entered into the race started thinking about running.

And the reason for that is Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton was ready to go.

She announced within 24 hours of Dick Durbin's retirement announcement.

And that's, even though, you know, obviously, we had been asking her for weeks: Are you gonna run, are you gonna run?

And she obviously wouldn't say until she actually announced.

But then soon after she announced, which was quick, she racked up some pretty big endorsements: Governor JB Pritzker is behind her, sitting US Senator Tammy Duckworth is behind her.

And when you're talking about calculus, whether you have the name recognition and the money to compete, you know, that's a pretty big part of it.

You need the name recognition from big-time supporters that people have heard of, plus, maybe people who can help bankroll, like, for example, Governor JB Pritzker.

Then you look at people like Raja Krishnamoorthi, who's a sitting congressman, you're right, and he's pretty popular.

You know, I went to go see him, and, well, not him specifically, but I saw him working the room at the Cook County Democrats Pre-Slating event last month.

And there wasn't a person he didn't know.

He was shaking hands and saying hi to everybody.

And, you know, he ran out of time, he had to go.

So he's pretty well known, but he's also raising a lot of money.

I think, as of March 31st, he had already raised about $19 million.

And I may be off by a couple of million dollars, but that's a lot of money to raise for a congressional seat that's pretty safe for you.

So we started thinking in the news media a while ago, okay, he's gotta be doing something.

And that is part of the calculus behind it.

He started to raise a lot of money, because he might not have the backing of JB Pritzker or Tammy Duckworth.

So that was part of it, and that's part of what went into that.

And then you have Lauren Underwood who has not announced yet, but we expect that she will.

And she has the name recognition as well.

She started to be in the news a lot for her, I guess some people in the media are calling them tussles with people like Kristi Noem and folks like that.

So she's starting to be on this Democratic side of we need to do something, and I'm going to be loud about it.

And, you know, yes, to answer your question and to bring this full circle, yes, whether you have the money and the name recognition to run is absolutely part of the calculus.

- Has there been an estimate yet on how expensive this US Senate race may get?

- Not that I've seen.

But I don't know whether Republicans are going to target this seat yet.

I haven't looked into that.

And if they do, there could be a little bit more money.

But I don't know if they consider this a seat that they can get in the Senate, - But I still think it'll be an expensive race even in the Democratic primary.

- Oh, sure.

- You know, JB Pritzker hasn't dropped his money into the race yet.

And I do wonder, it's definitely an apples to oranges comparison, but a lot was made last year when sort of the Democrats chose Kamala Harris to replace Joe Biden without really getting any input from voters.

And again, it's a different situation, but with Duckworth and Pritzker already putting all of their weight behind this candidate, you know, you have to wonder, are they sort of undercutting the voters, and how are the voters gonna react to that?

Will they, you know, rebel against the powers that be and pick one of underdogs a as they're viewed now to be the Democratic nominee.

- Yeah, Senator Durbin has said that he was not going to weigh in on this race, at least he was going to reserve that.

Do you think there's gonna be a point where he may actually make an endorsement?

And what kind of an impact do you think that would have on the race?

- Alex, I'll defer to you.

I don't know.

I mean, you know, Durbin is usually good with his word, and he said he's not interested, but I don't know.

- Yeah, I would agree with that.

Durbin is usually pretty good at his word.

And this is a race he doesn't necessarily have to make an endorsement, I don't think.

And certainly, I'm sure somebody would be happy to have it.

but I think, Dick Durbin, as we saw during the run-up to his announcement that he wasn't seeking another term, he kind of likes to play it close to the vest.

And he doesn't really like to, he doesn't really like to get into things that he doesn't need to be in, especially when he's on his way out.

I mean, it's already going to be a really contentious primary.

And because of this primary, there's going to be jostling in a lot of other areas of government, like the US House and even the State House.

So, yeah, I think Dick Durbin's gonna stick to his word, and he's probably not going to endorse.

But again, he doesn't need to.

- Mm-hmm.

Well, in the meantime, the clock keeps ticking down toward the end of the spring legislative session.

It is now obviously less than a month away.

Friday, I believe, also, is the deadline for major bills to be entered into the opposite chambers this week for consideration.

I know there are several major bills still pending, including the budget.

And also, we've seen some changes in revenue estimates from the Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability, or CGFA, if you like to throw around the acronyms.

The capitol spending planning also has undergone some evaluation.

Education is asking for more money, both K-12 and higher education.

Jason, where do we stand in terms of the state budget and all the financial prognostication?

- A lot of different directions to go here.

But first with, you know, the latest financial projections by CGFA, as you mentioned, which is sort of the independent forecasting group that works for the legislature.

You know, they've put out a few revisions already of how much money they think the state will collect in tax revenue for the upcoming fiscal year.

They've adjusted it again to increase that estimate by about a quarter of a billion dollars in their latest projection.

But still, it's about half a billion dollars below what the governor's office thinks the state is gonna collect in revenue in the upcoming fiscal year.

So, you know, the governor's office has its own budget people that work on the numbers as well as the legislature.

So while that seems like it's good news that the revenue projections are up, still, CGFA is projecting that it'll be, you know, lower than it needs to be to fill all the spending needs that the state has.

However, the wild card in all of this that is gonna, you know, make the budget negotiations sort of an unknown is the federal government.

As we've talked in the past, the Trump administration, at the drop of a hat, could decide to cut federal funding to state government in Illinois and other states.

And that's money, you know, that's in the budget, that's planned on.

And if it goes away, that'll cause problems.

Tariffs are another issue that is a wild card as well.

You know, will the increased tariffs on the various goods and services that come into the state, will that slow down spending, and will that affect tax revenue as well?

So those are a couple of wild cards that sort of, you know, it's interesting to, and, you know, encouraging for some people to see these projections get better.

But again, with the volatile situation we're in with the federal government, anything can happen.

- Mm-hmm, and in the state budget, typically, it usually does come down to the 11th hour.

We've had the luxury or the state has had the luxury the last few years where the budget has been, I think, relatively stable and relatively balanced, so to speak.

Is this gonna be a more difficult budget process as lawmakers try to decide what goes into that final mix in the next, you know, 20 days or so?

- Well, sure, I think this is going to be certainly difficult than it's been within the last few years.

And that's just a function of state finances being where they are.

You know, Jason mentioned there's still a roughly half billion dollar gulf between what the legislature thinks they have to work with and what the governor thinks that they have to work with.

So, you know, I could foresee a scenario where, you know, the legislature makes a budget that's based on what they think that the state's gonna take in.

And the governor could say I don't like this.

I'm gonna veto this and we're gonna have to do it again.

That hasn't happened for a while, at least not since I've been here.

But there are pressures this year, like you said.

Like Jason mentioned, there are pressures for education funding.

We've seen rally after rally down at the Capitol because of this.

There are pressures over, there are pressures over healthcare spending for undocumented immigrants.

And there are just pressures over, just like Jason said as well, like, I'm repeating a lot of what Jason said, but, you know, that's the reality of state government right now.

There's a lot that we don't know.

And even though the state budget normally does come down to like the final hour, this might be the final hours to final hours.

I mean, we're probably gonna be getting down to the penny.

- Yeah.

I know one of the bills, and we can talk about this as well, as some of the other legislation is still pending, I know that the jury is still kind of out on one of the bills that the governor has been behind, and that is allowing the state's junior institutions to offer four-year bachelor degrees, and the impact that may have on the higher education system as well.

Jason, is there any concern do you think on the higher education system, on how that may play out and how that may affect funding that's going into the higher education system as well in the state?

- Yeah, definitely.

And to preface this, I am a University of Illinois employee here at UIS, but I can keep this as objective as I can.

But yes, there were some four-year institution presidents, university presidents from public schools at the Capitol within the past week testifying against this idea of allowing community college to offer four-year bachelor's degrees.

This is something that the governor included in his State of the State/Budget Address in February.

It sounded like the governor's intent with it was to, you know, make it more convenient for people who are in high-demand industries where we need people, like nurses and teachers, and maybe they don't have a four-year institution in their area that they can get to easily.

So the community college would fill that need.

Predictably, four-year state school presidents are concerned about this.

There are already many enrollment issues at state universities across Illinois.

And, you know, we don't want to, and, you know, those universities don't want to, you know, have anything else working against them to cut enrollment.

You know, I think the intent of this idea was to help people who live in rural areas who don't live near a university.

I think it's less of a concern here in Springfield, for example.

I can, you know, look out my window here at UIS and almost see Lincoln Land Community College just down the road a few hundred yards.

You know, I don't think there's any concern about Lincoln Land needing to do a four-year nursing degree or a four-year teaching degree, because we offer those here.

So I think there's maybe some confusion on the intent and how far it'll go.

There's some language written into the bill that indicates that community college boards have to make a good enough case to show that they're not duplicating services of a four-year school in their area.

But again, it's been a bit of a blur on how all that would work, what all that would mean.

And the four-year state school presidents concerned about it and then talking about it.

- Mm-hmm.

Something else that, I'm just moving through the system right now, The Illinois Gaming Board has proposed new rules that would prohibit credit cards to fund sports wagering.

I think the rules are now under review by the general assembly's joint committee on administrative rules.

What's the potential impact on here?

'Cause that would apply to all the state's casinos and gaming operations.

- Right, so this rule already applies to other forms of gaming, you know, online gaming; and in casinos, you can't use a credit card to fill your account to bet away.

And this just adds sports betting to that.

It's, you know, a financially responsible step that the state wants to take to prevent people from, you know, running up hundreds or thousands of dollars in credit card debt for gambling needs.

Now, obviously, there's other irresponsible things you can do with your money that don't involve credit cards.

You can empty out your bank account and your savings account, and all those are concerns as well.

But this is just another, another possible way to help fix, prevent people from ruining their financial standing by sports wagering too much.

- Mm-hmm, is there any potential revenue impact on the gaming industry as a result of this particular change, do you think?

- There might be a small one, 'cause it is very convenient if you've ever, you know, gone on to FanDuel or any of those apps.

It's very convenient just to put in your credit card.

But, you know, you can also attach, you know, the alternatives are, you know, a wire transfer from your checking account or a PayPal account that's tied to your checking account.

And those are just as easy to connect.

So it's maybe one little speed bump in the road toward putting a wager on your favorite team, but I don't think it'll be a big effect.

People love to wager their money on sports, and this will keep it going.

- Mm-hmm.

Gentlemen, in the three minutes or so that we have left, as you kind of gaze out and look ahead, Alex, what are you looking at?

What are you hoping, what are you seeing, what are you wanting, what are you gonna be following in the next week or so?

- Well, this is the time of year when I start to worry a lot about the budget.

But then I remember that we still do have, you know, a few weeks left, and there could be things that are brought up.

And one of the things that got a lot of attention a few weeks ago was the homeschool bill, the bill that would seek to regulate homeschooling in Illinois really for the first time.

And there's been some work going on behind the scenes on that bill.

So I do think that we're gonna see this again.

I don't know what form it's gonna take, but we're gonna be watching out for that.

And, you know, it's funny we're talking about measures to prevent people from entering their credit card information for sports wagering, 'cause I'm also following a measure that would let people basically play blackjack on their phones through a process called iGaming.

And that's the process where there would be essentially live dealers at Illinois land-based or boat casinos, and, you know, you could just play blackjack on your phone.

You know, if the state would lose any money from the credit card bill, they might gain a little bit more with this.

And there's still a little back and forth about who would benefit from this and who wouldn't, because you have some casinos saying that they would benefit from this, and then others saying that they would hurt them.

So a lot of work to do there.

And then weirdly enough, you know, we haven't really talked about this lately, but I still think that there may be a play by the Bears to get some money, because there is some movements in Arlington Heights.

They've been meeting with the new mayor.

They've been working out tax deals with the school districts.

They're coming to terms with that.

So, you know, they're closer than they have been.

And I think they may be starting to put their eggs in that basket.

So, you know, 11th hour, I wouldn't be surprised.

So I'm watching that too.

- Okay, Jason.

- Yeah, a few things, not necessarily legislation happening in the State House, but a few news items we haven't mentioned yet.

Governor Pritzker, as we're taping this, announced today that he's issuing an executive order to restrict the collection and sharing of autism-related data for Illinois residents.

This is in response to RFK Jr., the Federal Health and Human Services Secretary saying he wanted to collect data about autism around the country to do a large study of it, to see if there's any sort of credence to the thought that there's some environmental factors involved in the causes for autism.

Governor Pritzker doesn't want Illinois to play with that, and is gonna, you know, restrict the federal government from getting any of that data about autism in Illinois.

Related to that, Pritzker has also announced that he is going to testify in Congress next month, I think June 12th, in front of a congressional committee, to talk about federal immigration issues.

The Chicago's mayor went in front of a committee like that recently.

And so, again, this is another example of Pritzker sort of increasing his national profile for a possible presidential run.

And a lot of people think it's gonna happen.

So we'll see where that goes.

- All right.

Jason, I'll let you have the last word.

Thank you both, Jason Piscia and Alex Degman, for joining us.

I'm Jeff Williams.

Thank you for joining us for this week's edition of "Capitol View."

(stately music) (dramatic music) (dramatic music continues) (dramatic music continues) (dramatic music continues)