Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Open thread
Next Post: Misguided Insurance Regulation Proposals Could Increase Premiums For The Majority Of Illinoisans
Posted in:
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
Two major proposals backed by Gov. JB Pritzker did not advance out of legislative committees before last week’s passage deadline.
Sen. Suzy Glowiak Hilton confirmed that she won’t be advancing her legislation supported by the governor that would dissolve townships with populations below 5,000 (SB2217), and eventually abolish townships with populations below 50,000 and lower the petition threshold to 5% from 10% to put a township abolition on the ballot.
“We’re still having conversations,” the Western Springs Democrat said. Pritzker did not highlight the proposals during his State of the State address, but they were included in his budget book. Township officials throughout the state have bombarded legislators with their negative opinions of the legislation.
But Pritzker took a much bigger hit last week.
The governor has trumpeted his plan to allow community colleges to offer four-year baccalaureate degrees during his State of the State address, on numerous national TV programs, big-time podcasts and a tour of the state.
Well, that proposal (HB3717) was not called for a vote in the House Higher Education Committee last week after fierce opposition from four-year universities, as one top Pritzker administration official and some Pritzker allies hovered outside the hearing room for hours.
The chair of that committee, Rep. Katie Stuart, D-Edwardsville, did her best to downplay the significance of the committee’s refusal to take up the bill, saying, “I think that there’s a way that we can make sure that this is very narrowly tailored to meet what’s not being met with the four-year institutions.”
Stuart, a member of House Democratic leadership, also said the legislation as written could “collapse” the student base of minority serving institutions like Chicago State and Northeastern Illinois University.
It’s routine during committee passage deadline week to advance bills to the floor that need more work, with the promise to not move the bills until all issues are worked out. That committee courtesy is routinely given to even the lowliest of legislators.
The indignity of denying that routine courtesy was heaped upon unpopular, ineffectual governors in previous years. But Pritzker is a popular billionaire governor with perceived national ambitions. Yes, he’s trying to accomplish a very difficult task of passing bills that have failed in years past, but not getting his legislation to the floor during crunch week is quite the rebuke.
So, what the heck is going on? On a basic level, several sitting legislators previously served in township government. Many others are strong political allies of township officials. And others believe that townships deliver services at lower costs than counties. The townships have successfully fended off efforts to get rid of them for decades, so they have a tried and true oppositional playbook.
As far as the community colleges are concerned, the universities years ago successfully fended off an attempt by then-Sen. Andy Manar to allow community colleges to offer four-year degrees in nursing. Manar is now Pritzker’s deputy governor.
The Higher Education Committee is filled with members who have universities in their districts, which is mainly why they serve on that committee. Southern Illinois University Edwardsville is in Chairperson Stuart’s district, after all.
But these Pritzker defeats seem like much more than that, and they come just a couple of months after House Speaker Chris Welch refused to advance a Pritzker-supported bill to regulate the wide-open intoxicating hemp industry.
The governor’s office downplayed the significance of the setbacks, saying there was still plenty of time to pass something before adjournment. But they clearly made a strong late push to get the community college bill to the House floor. They insisted they had enough votes to pass the bill, but those alleged proponents didn’t lift a finger to pressure the committee chair to advance the legislation.
The hearing finally ended shortly after what I’m told was a tense meeting between the governor’s chief of staff and the House speaker’s chief of staff, during which the speaker’s chief urged the governor’s chief to convince her boss to lay out his priorities to Welch, which, of course, the governor already did during his State of the State and budget address. Welch’s chief was told that this move was not helpful, to say the least.
What the universities did was pure gangsta. They clearly out-muscled the governor. Pritzker may not like it, but the universities showed that the negotiations would be on their terms, at least in the House, unless the governor can convince them to back down.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 8:29 am
Previous Post: Open thread
Next Post: Misguided Insurance Regulation Proposals Could Increase Premiums For The Majority Of Illinoisans
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Legislators put special interests over the good of the people, is what happened. Gotta have those patronage jobs, and can’t for one second even think of letting students earn a degree more cheaply, no, gotta keep the cartel going, keep out the competition.
Comment by Perrid Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 8:59 am
==The legislation as written could “collapse” the student base of minority serving institutions like Chicago State and Northeastern Illinois University.==
CSU has vwery similar racial demographics as Olive Harvey College which is right down the street. Both schools are 85% Black/Hispanic. Wilbur Wright College serves a higher percentage of Hispanic students then NEIU.
If CSU and NEIU are worried about community colleges cannibalizing their student base, maybe they need to up their game.
Comment by City Zen Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 9:00 am
The community college bill is one that sounds good in theory, but makes no sense when you consider the demographic cliff, enrollment issues, and financial struggles at most of the universities in the state.
Comment by Chicagonk Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 9:22 am
Agree with @City Zen. If the universities are worried then maybe they need to take a look at themselves and ask why they should be worried. If a kid can get a 4 year education cheaper then I’m all for that. Perhaps the universities that are worried should ask themselves why they can’t offer the same product at the price a Community College can offer it.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 9:38 am
Repeating the gist of a comment from a few days ago: It is insane to me the level of power individual tiny sub units have in Illinois. The idea that individual state universities or colleges are lobbying against each other is asinine. I’m not even talking about whether they are successful, but just the fact that it happens at all.
Comment by Homebody Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 9:50 am
Community Colleges are lean and efficient and react seamlessly to community needs. Four year Universities contain layers of bureaucracy with glacial decision making processes.
Undergrads and their parents are crushed financially underwriting dynamics that have nothing to do with undergraduate education.
The pressure on the four years is healthy and long overdue.
Comment by Um, no Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 9:56 am
“makes no sense when you consider the demographic cliff”
I really wish this was getting more overall coverage. I understand why it isn’t, because it’s boring and something that happens over a drawn out period of time.
It’s like a pot of water boiling. For a long time it seems like nothing is happening, then all at once there is a large change in conditions. The pot of water started boiling in 2008-2010. Much of it has already worked through elementary schools. The boiling point for colleges really hits in about 2026 thru 2028. It doesn’t stop boiling after that period either, boiling will just become the expected state going forward.
Unfortunately, Most of our institutions both public and private are still coasting on past experiences as a reliable predictor for the future. When that model changes, the unfortunate and predictable response is one of defensiveness and digging in their heels more to protect their mini fiefdom than focusing on their primary purpose.
That being said, I still think it is a good idea for 4-yr degrees to be available from local institutions, instead of centralized specific locations. That too is a model based on the past which is no longer as useful as it was previously.
If a local institution can provide this educational service with equal or even greater quality then there is no reason to hold back from making this change to allow 4-yr degrees to be provided locally.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 9:57 am
Both bills come down to the same thing … people protecting their fiefdom’s
Comment by RNUG Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 10:05 am
===Community Colleges are lean and efficient and react seamlessly to community needs.===
Some of y’all don’t appreciate the difference between Econ 101 and Econ 422.
English 102 and English 467.
Astro 201 and Astro 357.
Some of y’all should take the basic macro economics course at a community college and then take the same basic macro economics course at a 4 year program and see what the difference is.
Comment by Candy Dogood Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 10:08 am
=Some of y’all should take the basic macro economics course at a community college and then take the same basic macro economics course at a 4 year program and see what the difference is.=
The difference is dramatic. The community college course is taught by a Masters prepared adult in a classroom of 25 with individual attention.
The 4 year taught by a 24 year old grad student with zero real world experience in an auditorium of 200.
Per usual the CC a dramatically erred experience and value.
Comment by Um, no Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 10:25 am
Most community colleges get more than 50% of their funding from property taxes. In that sense, many are better funding than some of the regional 4 years. The state will not commit to funding 4 year degrees at community colleges so that leaves increases in tuition and or property taxes. So, not necessarily cheaper than the 4 years.
Comment by Chicago Voter Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 10:31 am
My take is that Pritzker was wrong on the community college bill. Enrollment in 4-year state universities (other than U of I, ISU and SIU-Edwarsville) is on a steep downward path. The proposed bill would have pushed some of them (Western and Eastern) into crisis territory. Chicago State has been in crisis mode for years.
Not sure the term gansta is the best here. The interested parties worked together to achieve their goals. By the same token, the governor failed to make the sale for his ideas.
Comment by Friendly Bob Adams Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 10:40 am
==Most community colleges get more than 50% of their funding from property taxes. In that sense, many are better funding than some of the regional 4 years. The state will not commit to funding 4 year degrees at community colleges so that leaves increases in tuition and or property taxes. So, not necessarily cheaper than the 4 years.==
This is simply not true! But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of your argument.
Comment by Magic Dragon Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 10:45 am
Setting the higher ed policy debate aside, the real news here is the tension between the Governor and Speaker.
I thought with the passage of time, the Gov’s office might let bygones be bygones over the hemp bill. But the chief-of-staff interaction described in Rich’s reporting kinda destroys that assumption.
Hard to guess where this is heading. The budget vote last year proved the Speaker doesn’t exactly have an iron grip on his caucus. Will the Gov’s people try to exploit that? It’s hard to see how and to what end, but they may simply feel a need to strike back. I suppose not making campaign donations to Welch-controlled funds and instead contributing directly to members would be the simplest way to do it. But that likely would have to wait until summer.
Comment by Roman Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 10:56 am
===Per usual the CC a dramatically erred experience and value. ===
Argument noted, but it doesn’t sound like you’re actually comparing the content and difficulty of the courses or anything that demonstrates the actual educational properties of the courses — or which specific 4 year program is having their introductory economic courses taught by graduate students.
That didn’t happen where I went to school — care to name and shame?
Comment by Candy Dogood Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 11:09 am
==My take is that Pritzker was wrong on the community college bill. Enrollment in 4-year state universities (other than U of I, ISU and SIU-Edwarsville) is on a steep downward path. The proposed bill would have pushed some of them (Western and Eastern) into crisis territory. Chicago State has been in crisis mode for years.==
You’re missing the point here…The reason many of our state’s four year’s are in crisis mode is because today’s students are making more economical choices about their education. CC’s offer just as much if not more educational value at a fraction of the costs.
Comment by Magic Dragon Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 11:20 am
Love JB, but that doesn’t mean he’s always got it right. I think the arguments made here against the community colleges offering four year degrees are on the mark. Upgrade curricula, ensure transfer of credits, and tee up the students to transfer to one of the 4-years for a year to take a degree from the major institution.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 11:23 am
Roman,
= Hard to guess where this is heading. The budget vote last year proved the Speaker doesn’t exactly have an iron grip on his caucus. Will the Gov’s people try to exploit that? It’s hard to see how and to what end, but they may simply feel a need to strike back. I suppose not making campaign donations to Welch-controlled funds and instead contributing directly to members would be the simplest way to do it. But that likely would have to wait until summer.=
Are you saying the Speaker is suppose to support every bill the governor proposes or be afraid the governor won’t donate money for political campaigns? If so, this is asinine. The House is a co-equal branch of government, and it’s suppose to act as a check on the governor. I would imagine the Speaker’s caucus and the Speaker’s constituents appreciates a Speaker with a backbone. While the governor is running around the country acting like a presidential candidate, maybe he should spend some time acting like a governor. Just a thought.
Comment by Constitutional Scholar Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 11:30 am
Candy Dogood is on point. The quality of teaching and learning that occurs when a PhD professor is a published researcher differs from the quality of teaching and learning that occurs when an MA professor teaches a textbook with no actual professional experience other than in teaching.
As to the GA teaching introductory courses, this occurs when a program grants PhD degrees, and is almost always limited to PhD candidates who are working on their professional skills through a dissertation. It is disingenuous to suggest MA students are teaching freshman courses unsupervised, or even under supervision. That is the rare exception to the rule (except at Community Colleges).
As to the funding model, quibbling over what proportion of funding Community Colleges receive from local taxation bodies does not negate the fact that community colleges do in fact receive a significant proportion of the tuition revenues through local taxes, which are used to offset tuition costs for local students.
Converting an AA degree to an BS or BA degree would not be a cost-free option. To suggest so is nonsense. State appropriations would be increased, as would the costs associated with new infrastructure. And then the hiring of PhD faculty would increase costs. Imagine then potential add-on costs associated with creating residential housing.
While it might sound as if I am opposed, I am not. But like many things political, the absence of a plan with an explicit budget, and contengencies regarding the existing players in the higher education market place is sorely missing at present.
Gov. Pritzker’s plan can work. Indeed, it should still be in process, because some labor markets need immediate attention regarding nursing, social services, and I would include elementary teaching. But a plan has not been worked out sufficiently to receive a vote a present.
Comment by H-W Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 11:32 am
Many moving parts here, but a couple of important points:
The cost of attending an in-state university in Illinois began to go up in the early 2000’s as the state cut funding (state funding was cut in 1/2 by the time Rauner was elected). This resulted in significant increases in tuition and an out-migration of graduating HS seniors. (Illinois is now one of the worst states in this category.) Increased state funding for the public universities could reverse that trend and off-set the demographic cliff.
Community colleges were created to provide local post-secondary opportunities for residents in the district. The need in the 1960’s (2-yr tech degrees and transfer courses for university-bound students) is not the same as the needs today (many tech degrees now require more than 2-years, a shortages of spots in 4-yr nursing programs, the high demand for low-cost workers in Early Childhood Ed, etc). Allowing CC’s to grow in some high-demand areas makes sense.
The universities have had to fight for dwindling state resources for 25+ years. Things have improved over the last 5-10 years, but everyone in higher ed is, unfortunately, scrambling for needed resources.
If higher ed were recognized as the foundational economic driver that it is and if the public were willing to provide adequate funding for the whole system, then, I think, these fights would probably go away. The roles the CCs and Universities play are different and should be complementary, but with very limited resources, we can expect these battles to continue.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 11:57 am
Local community college property taxes were supposed to be used for physical infrastructure, insurance, legal services, security, and some other specific expenses but not teacher salaries and expenses related to running classes. Teacher salaries were supposed to be paid by tuition with state match per credit hour (which the state has usually paid only a fraction of what they owed to the community college.) The community colleges COULD rent space to 4-year nursing programs, but they might be concerned about finances. If the state runs low on money, the rent does not get paid, and that messes up the cc’s budget. They cannot simply raise their property tax to cover it.
Comment by Dupage Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 12:05 pm
== Are you saying the Speaker is suppose to support every bill the governor ==
Please re-read this snippet from Rich’s piece:
“The indignity of denying that routine courtesy (of calling the bill in committee) was heaped upon unpopular, ineffectual governors in previous years. But Pritzker is a popular billionaire governor with perceived national ambitions. Yes, he’s trying to accomplish a very difficult task of passing bills that have failed in years past, but not getting his legislation to the floor during crunch week is quite the rebuke.”
This, of course, came on the heels of a similar and much more prominent rebuke on the hemp bill.
The Speaker is under no obligation to support any initiative of the Governor. But usually a legislative leader who is politically aligned with a governor finds a way to ensure the governor saves face when his legislative initiatives are in a bit of trouble. For whatever reason, the Speaker did not extend that courtesy here. Which naturally leads to speculation about what the political fallout will be, particularly given the fact that the Gov’s folks are known to have sharp elbows.
Comment by Roman Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 12:16 pm
=Argument noted, but it doesn’t sound like you’re actually comparing the content and difficulty of the courses or anything that demonstrates the actual educational properties of the courses — or which specific 4 year program is having their introductory economic courses taught by graduate students.=
The data simply does not support this argument. The University of Illinois’ own data indicates that In their Junior year students that started at the U of I had 3.21 grad points averages at the U of I and CC transfers had 3.15 GPA’s (for work at the U of I as a Jr.).
The $60,000 different in total cost for the first two years for the 0.6 difference in GPA as a Junior isn’t something I would put on a billboard. When the dramatically higher % of first time college participants at CC’s figured in the cost difference is even more embarrassing.
Your argument is the same, stale elitist drivel supporting four year cost bloat for years. Try again.
“Noted” - thanks Timmy Mapes - LOL
Comment by Um, no Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 12:34 pm
==The cost of attending an in-state university in Illinois began to go up in the early 2000’s==
Which generally coincides with the ramp up of pension payments. If you saw what goes into state university pensions today vs 2005, you’d see exactly where every new dollar spent on high ed goes.
Comment by City Zen Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 12:35 pm
Roman it looks to me like the Speaker is allowing his members to have a say in how issues are handled. But I get your point. Is this courtesy just given to a governor? Did the Governor call the Speaker to ask for a courtesy? By my read of Rich’s article, the Governor’s position is that he communicated his priorities to the Speaker via a speech. Who’s being disrespectful to who here?
Comment by Constitutional Scholar Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 12:48 pm
== If you saw what goes into state university pensions today vs 2005, you’d see exactly where every new dollar spent on high ed goes. ==
This often gets overlooked in the higher education funding debate. I suspect if you adjust things for inflation, the state is spending every bit as much on higher ed now is it did 25 years ago. The difference is back then no pension payments were being made for higher ed employees and now they are. MAP funding is a heck of a lot higher now too.
Comment by Telly Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 12:48 pm
JBP would rather not fight than risk losing a fight in public. It’s what makes him both popular and easy to ignore.
Comment by SWSider Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 2:00 pm
Community Colleges need to focus on careers not requiring a college degree. Expanding them to grant B.A.’s was not thought out. At least not very well.
Comment by Mason County Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 2:19 pm
I would question how lean and efficient Community College District 508 (i.e. “The City Colleges of Chicago”) is in comparison to other districts.
It has the only unelected Board of Trustees in Illinois. All of the trustees are mayoral appointees.
Comment by Gravitas Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 3:43 pm
===Your argument is the same, stale elitist drivel supporting four year cost bloat for years. Try again.===
I don’t have to try anything. The Governor’s bill died in committee. My big question at this point is really more focused on what it is about graduating from SIU Edwardsville that makes their degree holders champion turning community colleges into 4 year degree granting institutions once they are elected to the legislature.
===The $60,000 different in total cost for the first two years ===
We’re either looking at different cost of attendance estimates, or you’re not factoring in roommate board for community college.
Comment by Candy Dogood Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 6:11 pm
==As to the GA teaching introductory courses, this occurs when a program grants PhD degrees, and is almost always limited to PhD candidates who are working on their professional skills through a dissertation. It is disingenuous to suggest MA students are teaching freshman courses unsupervised, or even under supervision.==
H-W, you are usually on point, but not on this one. MA/MS students fill a very large number of TA slots at universities. While they may not be the instructor of record, they are certainly teaching “lab” and “seminar” sections of courses that meet with the PhD professor once or twice a week in a large lecture hall with hundreds of other students. Those smaller breakout sessions are where a lot of learning occurs in the form of group discussions and lab work. As an undergrad, I was taught by MA/MS students in many of my courses and as an MS student, I taught 3-4 sections of up to 20 students each every semester - the supervision was minimal (a weekly meeting with the head TA who was also an MS student). My spouse teaches at a university and this is still the case, especially for intro courses.
I currently teach at a CC in Illinois. I and my colleagues are much more focused on (and, frankly, better at) teaching than many university faculty who focus on research. With respect to “professional experience,” many of us worked in our field prior to becoming full-time faculty. That work is often as relevant (if not more so) to our undergrad students than the university faculty experience doing niche research (which is typically more relevant to upper-level undergrads and especially to grad students).
Comment by Pot calling kettle Monday, Mar 24, 25 @ 8:41 pm