[MUSIC] >> Welcome to Capital View on WSIU.

I'm Brian Sapp.

The state of Illinois announced some higher education, announced higher enrollment at Illinois public universities this week.

But there were some drop offs in graduate school numbers.

We'll kind of tell you about that.

And Governor Pritzker wants the General Assembly to tackle rising home insurance rates.

We have Peter Hancock from Capitol News, Illinois, and Jeremy Gorner of the Chicago Tribune joining us this week to talk about these issues and more.

Gentlemen, welcome to the program.

>> Thanks for having us.

>> So we're going to start.

It's been top of mind last week.

Enforcement, immigration, immigration enforcement in Chicago.

Uh, the scenes have been pretty chaotic.

Uh, there was reporting last week that the Border patrol and Gregory Bovino the the leader, the face, so to speak, of the enforcement that they were leaving.

They said they weren't leaving.

But now we have some reporting, Jeremy, that you did, that the Texas National Guard is leaving.

Are they done?

What's where do things stand with the enforcement there in Chicago?

>> I think I think the well, the influx, um, Brian, of what we saw of federal immigration enforcement personnel in Chicago has died down.

Um, and it's going to die down probably a little bit more, I would expect, if it hasn't already.

Um, there's always an immigration enforcement presence in big cities like Chicago.

It's just not as visible as we've seen in the last couple of months.

There clearly was, like I said, this influx of, um, of agents, you know, from, uh, from Border Patrol and from Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

And you know what?

Gregory Bovino, the commander for Border Patrol, um, is doing now.

I mean, there's videos of him surfacing in Charlotte, North Carolina.

That's where.

That's an indication that that's where Border Patrol is making us their next mission a priority.

It obviously it was just Chicago.

So there's clearly more visibility of those agents and officers now on the ground in Charlotte where they're ramping where they're ramping up the mass deportation missions.

Of course, we saw what happened in Chicago.

Um, a lot of communities came out against Bovino.

And, um, his officers, um, they responded with tear gas.

Um, you know, uh, you know, pepper balls.

And, you know, there were court hearings in federal court about their tactics.

Um, while, of course, the federal government saying that they were under attack by citizens as they're trying to do their jobs.

But we've seen less of that in the last week because they've left.

And coinciding with that is, um, you know, if you recall, the Trump administration wanted to send National Guard troops to Chicago, essentially to protect federal property, including the federal agents, while they're doing their immigration enforcement work in Chicago.

Well, we just learned the other day that the Texas National Guard, which was deployed to the southwest suburbs of Chicago, to an Army reserve base, they're leaving as well.

So, um, we'll so we'll see what happens with.

I'm not sure exactly what their next mission is, but what we know is that the National Guard's presence in these cities has been contingent on whatever federal immigration enforcement, um, operations, whatever exists.

And right now, it appears, um, Charlotte, North Carolina, for now is ground zero for those operations.

So we'll see what happens.

I have no idea about National Guard presence in North Carolina, but that remains to be seen.

>> Yeah, we'll have to see, um, what they do with that.

And I haven't seen much reporting of the threats.

You know, they're And telegraph their their moves there.

Um, do activists I know that trying to resist these immigration enforcement raids and all the disruptions do they feel.

Have you got a sense that they feel like they've succeeded on moving things on, or is it just a matter of people trying to get their own messaging out?

Where do kind of the activists.

>> I know that's a that's a good question.

I think all of the above, Brian.

I mean, you know, the, um, because if you look in, um, in Broadview, which is in the western suburbs of Chicago, there's an ice facility and there are still protests.

There's still protests there.

Um, that's been an ice facility for years.

I mean, in 2009, the Tribune did a story getting where, um, our immigration reporter at the time got a rare tour of the place, and, but but I think we've seen in recent months protests outside that facility because of the influx of these federal agents.

And even though that influx has died down, we're still seeing protests.

They're still trying to be heard and get their word out.

And I think they probably do see it as a success, that they've been able to bring visibility to the issue because of that.

But we've also heard, you know, there's reporting out there that suggests that Bovino and his agents may come back to Chicago at a later time.

So I think that, you know, people in the community who've been really active on this issue feel hopeful that, okay, um, you know, the presence has died down, but it, it it could come back at any time because the Trump administration has made it very clear that he's making these deportations a priority of his.

>> I think it remains to be seen.

Everybody seems to want to.

It's all about messaging so much recently, it seems like in in our discourse.

So hopefully we can kind of let things settle down and see where, where things stand.

Um, we're going to move on to another topic.

There is a received press release this week in my email box, and I know that and others that enrollment numbers are up around the state in public universities.

Peter, you did a story on that.

Can you tell us what did the numbers say?

What can we learn from them?

>> Total enrollment, what's called the headcount enrollment actually reached a ten year high.

Uh, it was just under 190,000 students across the 12 major campuses, uh, in the Illinois public university system.

Uh, that kind of reverses a trend.

Uh, Illinois has been fighting, uh, two major forces here.

One is the declining birth rate, which is.

So there are fewer students to be had out there.

And the other is that Illinois has been losing students to other states because of the affordability.

Uh, Illinois has, uh, arguably has been chronically underfunding higher education for a long time.

Uh, when you compare the tuition and fees rates.

The overall out of pocket cost to going to school in Illinois with some other states.

Illinois doesn't come out all that great.

Uh, but the Pritzker administration really pounced on this because, uh, they have been trying to pump more money into higher education, both in terms of the base operating costs, you know, the general fund appropriation to universities, uh, for their operations, as well as the funding of, uh, financial aid programs like the Map grants, the monetary award programs, which is a need based financial aid package, as well as the Aim high merit based scholarship program.

Uh, so they've been, uh, combating it on that level, uh, trying to get, you know, the overall out of pocket cost of going to school in Illinois down.

And so they're saying that they've had some success here.

Uh, overall, I, you know, uh, It was largely driven by growth in undergraduates, especially in incoming freshmen.

Uh, they saw, you know, about a 3% growth in the undergraduate class.

Um, there was, uh, simultaneously that was partially offset by a disturbing decline in graduate school and professional school enrollment.

It was about a little more than 1% overall decline, uh, but most notably a big decline in international graduate school and professional school.

So fewer people coming to Illinois, uh, to become to go into medical schools, law schools, uh, engineering, you know, graduate schools.

Um, and Pritzker administration blames that directly on the Trump administration and its immigration policies, saying they are making it more difficult and less attractive for people to come here from other countries.

And that could have long term costs here in Illinois.

>> Okay, Jeremy.

As we were talking, you did some reporting going to Macomb and Charleston.

What did you learn?

And what are you seeing in the numbers?

Kind of across the state?

>> Well, I mean, you know, basically what Peter said, I mean, the ten year trend appears to be, um, it's obviously going upward.

Um, it's, you know, improved drastically.

You know, you've seen these single digit increases year by year, um, that we've seen in, in enrollment numbers.

Um, but as far as, like, uh, when you talk about like, Western Illinois University, Eastern Illinois University, um, you know, the report came out yesterday was ten year numbers.

But when you look at, you know, and I did a story in the summer, we were looking at 20 year numbers where you saw early 2000.

These regional universities were just booming in enrollment, like Western Illinois in 20, in, uh, 2004, they had 13,500 students.

Now they're down to under 6000.

Um, eastern Illinois, same thing.

They were around 11,600.

Now they're under 8000.

I, you know, and, um, yeah, it's like what Peter said, a lot of it has to do with tuition rates being jacked up here in Illinois.

Um, a big percentage of high school graduates are going to other states.

Um, you know, but also, um, you know, you know, so what these universities are really trying to do is kind of at the same time, they're trying to market themselves more to make it more appealing.

And what's helping, you know, are the Map grants aim high, um, pro program, you know, these, um, grants that that the governor's office has really been pushing.

But at the same time, you're looking at the University of Illinois system.

They've been booming in enrollment.

Um, so that's, you know, that's kind of the thing where you have the regionals, who are who've been losing enrollment.

U of I has been really, um, really been increasing the last 20 years.

But nonetheless, this, um, you know, U of I, of course, is internationally known.

I mean, they have programs there where that draw enrollment from around the world, you know, more so than the regional, um, colleges.

But but at the same time.

Yeah.

What's been going on in the last this report obviously is very hopeful for even the regional universities.

But again, um, like Eastern and Western are still kind of trying to find their way, um, to attract more students.

And it hasn't been easy for them.

>> Uh, toss in here from my experience here at Southern Illinois, I went to school here and there were 20 plus thousand students on campus.

And then, you know, I've come back recently and, you know, all these I've been in another state, so I've not kept up.

But all these changes have had an impact here.

Uh, we've seen a trend.

You know, this year we held steady.

I think we lost like five students.

But I think a lot of that does have to do our numbers with the graduates were were lower.

But the you know, we the university has really been putting on that press.

You said like marketing and working on, you know, getting getting students here and hopefully, you know, at least holding steady.

And you know, we can see and also meeting the work, the needs of the workforce.

I know that that's been a factor too.

One thing I wanted to touch come back to you on Peter was you talked about the governor touted, you know, their investments into this.

There were some the last couple weeks, um, some unions were talking about some money that they felt that the governor could share and release back to the colleges.

Is that money that is available?

And what kind of effect would that have do do the parties think?

>> Well, overall it's you're talking about about $25 million.

Um, the the legislature this year authorized ostensibly a 3% increase in, uh, general funding for, uh, the universities, but only 1% of that was guaranteed.

The other 2% was held back.

Uh, the language was that it could only be spent or committed upon written approval by the governor.

And the governor has not released that extra 2% or $25 million.

Um, the governor is saying that, uh, because of uncertainty in Washington, the entire state budget is in question.

And outside of education, K through 12 and higher education, he's directed other state agencies to prepare themselves for a possible 4% cut.

Uh, but in the meantime, for higher education, he's holding on to that 2%, uh, mainly because of the uncertainty in Washington and what's happening with higher education and spending and education spending overall there.

Uh, so, yeah, the the union, uh, it's, uh, the University Professionals of Illinois, which is part of the Illinois Federation of Teachers, uh, has come out and said that they, uh, want the Pritzker administration to release that money.

A lot of them spoke at the latest Illinois Board of Higher Education meeting, which was held up in the Chicago area.

Um, but so far, the the Pritzker administration is not letting go of that money, at least not yet.

>> Okay.

Well, we'll see how the trends continue.

And if they can, uh, you know, continue to have this good news.

Um, moving on to our next topic.

Um, the General Assembly has been wrapped up for a few weeks now, and the dust is settling, looking at issues that were covered and weren't, uh, tackled.

One of those was, um, the governor had asked earlier this year after, uh, I believe it was State Farm was going to raise home insurance rates.

And Jeremy, you reported that the governor still wants to bring that back, even though it was sounds like it was on the table by the General Assembly.

But then they didn't have enough votes.

What's the governor want?

And does he think is he going to be able to get it this spring?

>> Yeah.

Um, so basically he renewed his call for legislation requiring these insurance companies to to really better justify and or justify and disclose reasons behind steep, um, homeowners insurance rate hikes.

Um, this was a proposal that was stalled by the Illinois House.

It got 56 votes.

It needed 60 to pass, um, while it passed with, um, really good support.

I mean, it was like 41 to 15 out of the Senate.

So overwhelming support almost.

I don't know, it's overwhelming, but pretty high support there.

Um, and, uh, you know, a big reason, a big problem here that, um, you know, that Pritzker has with it is just like other advocates who want to see change, is that when it comes to homeowners insurance, they want to put in a provision that, um, would prohibit insurance companies in Illinois from jacking up rates if they're deemed to be, um, the word is, um, you know, is if they can't be excessive, um, they can't be inadequate and they can't be unfairly discriminatory.

That's that's language that's pretty common in, um, other facets of insurance in terms of, of insurance regulation, but not homeowners insurance in Illinois.

And, um, so a 27% increase, of course, is something that, um, you know, for something that Governor Pritzker has really railed against, he basically said that, you know, we're one of the very few states that doesn't have limits on what they can charge in that respect, increases like 27% in a single year ought to be reviewed by a state regulator.

Um, he wants to make sure they're not just price gouging, but the insurance companies have said that the rates are necessary, um, to keep insurance more affordable.

There have been, um, you know, a big number of extreme weather claims in Illinois alone, uh, last year.

Um, and, of course, you know, the rise in inflation really kind of led to all of this.

And we've also saw, um, $4.2 billion was paid out in California, for example, for the wildfires that happened earlier this year for homeowners insurance claims.

So basically, what State Farm, you know, said, you know, when I went to them about the when I went to them, um, with the governor's comments, um, you know, they basically said that instead of tackling the root of the problem, which was inflation and more weather related losses, the way they see it, that's, um, Required them to increase these rates.

The governor should, um, you know, really focus on making the insurance insurance market more competitive.

Like they weren't really disputing what the governor was saying.

Um, as far as oversight goes, um, except except they were saying that they did try to justify what they were doing by filling out, um, an actuarial report.

I think it was like 32 pages, which which State Farm says explains why they wanted to raise homeowners insurance rates by 27%.

After the story ran.

Um, I got contacted by the Illinois Insurance Association, which is not really too thrilled by what the governor said.

Um, you know, they've they think that the governor is misleading people.

Um, and they're basically trying to say that kind of reiterating what State Farm said is where there is that, except they're saying that there is that we don't want people to think that there isn't oversight of what we're doing in this state because there is.

But, um, they're really trying to kind of push back on this idea of the legislation because they said that this legislation could really, um, could really make insurance a lot more expensive in terms of what they're trying to do.

Um, you know, a big reason that the that the Democrats didn't push for this in the House to pass, why it didn't pass was because, um, well, Thaddeus Jones, he's head of the House Insurance Committee.

He was disappointed that, um, this legislation did not include auto insurance rates in the legislation, in addition to homeowners insurance rates, which there was previous legislation that included both of those elements.

This legislation only included homeowners insurance rates.

Um, but um, Democratic leadership in the General Assembly says they're going to try to work on, um, not just the homeowners insurance rates and go back to the drawing board of the spring, but also, um, ways to lower auto insurance rates.

>> Okay, that was my question there.

I had that written down about the car insurance because I've seen, um, Giannoulias has been having Secretary of State's been having a lot of informational meetings talking about the car insurance rates.

So I guess we'll have to see as they go forward and see if they can kind of cobble that bill together.

Because those numbers in the Senate sound interesting.

Like that was a pretty large number.

Yeah, yeah.

Large number of people together.

Um, okay.

We've got about six minutes left.

And so I wanted to tackle our last, last, um, topic here, the Illinois Department of Corrections.

I believe they've been doing this a little bit, um, in a limited circumstance, scanning inmate mail.

Um, but then this year, they expanded that to cover all prisons.

Um, the it came up a couple months ago, kind of kind of made a blip.

Um, when they the Joint Committee on Administrative Of rules.

It seemed to be bipartisan.

We're questioning what the Department of Corrections were doing.

Um, Peter, you've done a couple of stories on this.

What's what is the policy and what have been some of the questions, and where does that policy stand?

>> Well, this was really driven by correctional workers in the state prisons.

And their complaint was that mail was getting in a paper that had been soaked in chemicals, uh, including, uh, illegal drugs.

Uh, it gets inside the prison where prisoners can set it on fire and inhale the fumes and get high that way.

Uh, that in some prisons, the density of the smoke is dank, um, acrid smoke was just permeating, uh, the cellblocks and making it a dangerous place to live and work.

And so, under pressure from the union as well as some other quarters, uh, the Department of Corrections adopted what's called an emergency rule.

That means it's a rule that they can adopt, uh, on a short term basis without going through a lot of public hearings to electronically scan inmate mail.

Uh, they scan it into, like, uh, you know, images like a PDF, and they distribute to the inmates, uh, little tablets that they can use to read their mail electronically, but they don't get a physical copy of it.

This raised all kinds of alarm bells, uh, among attorneys, for one who say they're entitled to, you know, their mail is supposed to be privileged.

They're allowed to communicate with their clients, and it shouldn't be screened or scanned by the prison, as well as by family members and loved ones of the inmates who say, you know, that they don't like their mail being scanned and that their, you know, their husbands, fathers, sisters, mothers, whatever want to, is, you know, the physical piece of mail that comes in.

They thought that this was violating their civil rights in a number of different ways.

And so the thing about emergency rules is that they can only stay in place for 150 days.

They then either expire or they have to be replaced by permanent rules.

And those have to go through the whole public hearing, public comment, legislative review process.

And so we're in that process now.

Uh, I recently had a public hearing.

They took a lot of public comment on the proposed permanent rule.

They got a lot of pushback, not only from legal advocates, but as well as family members who say they just would really prefer, uh, the Department of Corrections abandon this altogether or drastically revise what it is that they're doing.

There's also a legislative oversight panel called the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules.

Charles J. In legislative speak, uh, that had has been looking at this, uh, when they first saw the emergency rule, they were, uh, raised a formal objection and just said, you know, be on notice that lawmakers do not like this, but that didn't necessarily stop it from going into effect.

Uh, but lawmakers are continuing to look at this, and it will come up again at their December meeting.

That's when the corrections department is supposed to have the final draft of its proposed permanent rule.

Uh, we'll get a look at it in early December and see what lawmakers and others have to say about it at that point.

>> Jeremy, um, when it comes to this rule.

Have you, um, heard much from like, prison staff?

Have you heard?

Because, uh, Terry Bryant is a former she's a state senator, and she's been kind of lobbying on behalf of the former corrections workers.

We've got about a minute left.

What have you heard?

>> Well, I just know that, um, you know, a big reason that this, um, rule came about was because of this report from AFSCME, the which the union that represents many of these prison workers.

And it was like a 14 or 15 page report.

It came out last fall.

Last fall, uh, 2024.

Um, and really, there were there were a lot of testimonials from prison workers, um, who were anonymous and talked about just rampant drug use in the prisons.

And it was interesting because, you know, in Peter's story, he talked to the ACLU, to Ben Rudolph and the ACLU and said, yeah, we don't there's no evidence that this like these questioning is what evidence is there that this is actually coming through the mail.

And that's really been a very contentious issue here.

Is is the mail the culprit here?

But Terry Bryant, you know, she used to work in IDoc, the Senator Bryant.

So she's obviously, um, echoes what FEMA has kind of said about all of this and, um, you know, is concerned about the safety of corrections officers.

And she's talked to me about, um, just stories.

She's heard about corrections officers getting sick because of their exposure to these drugs.

But likewise.

>> I have to wrap you up there, Miss Bryant.

Talk to me as well about that.

We'll have to just see what happens in December with this.

That's it for this week's edition of Capital View.

Thanks for joining us.

Peter and Jeremy, thanks for joining us.

We'll see you in a couple of weeks.

[MUSIC] [MUSIC]