As a mother of six and grandmother to 12 and a product of public school education, I am deeply troubled by the Chicago Board of Education’s recent decision to urge Gov. JB Pritzker to reject federal funding from the Education Freedom Tax Credit that expands school choice for Illinois families.
This reckless decision proves that if President Donald Trump and Republicans are for something, Illinois Democrats are against it, even when it helps our children and empowers our families.
This commonsense legislation creates new opportunities for scholarships that help make quality education more affordable. It enables parents to choose the school — public, private, charter or otherwise — that best meets their child’s unique needs. No child should be trapped in a failing school simply because of their ZIP code.
Yet, unfortunately, the Board of Education and Mayor Brandon Johnson would rather slam the door shut on these opportunities than allow families real options for their children. Illinois Democrats continue to prioritize political control over our students. They care more about the numbers of students enrolled in failing schools than in educating our students and being held accountable for their schools’ failures to educate them.
As chair of the Illinois Republican Party and a proud mom and grandmother who always puts children first, I call on Pritzker to reject this shortsighted resolution and embrace the opportunity to give every Illinois family the educational freedom they deserve.
Our kids’ futures are too important to sacrifice for partisan ideology.
— Kathy Salvi, chair, Illinois Republican Party
Use of force by Chicago police
The Tribune’s in-depth coverage of a recent federal court hearing concerning the consent decree that is designed to guide reform of the Chicago Police Department (“Snelling rebuffs call to probe use-of-force incidents,” April 15) ought to raise alarm in the mayor’s office and for every Chicagoan. As the Tribune reports, the superintendent and CPD leadership acknowledged that use-of-force incidents have risen in recent years. CPD also publicly recognized that police officers are more likely to use force against Black and Brown than white Chicagoans.
To be sure, this recognition and the public acknowledgment are critical. In previous reporting, including by the Tribune, the superintendent claimed that there was not an increase and that the numbers only reflected more such incidents being recorded.
As we all know, the only way to solve any problem is to admit it exists. And a problem certainly exists. Use-of-force incidents are up about 75%. In 2025, officers shot at least 20 people, compared with 12 people the year before. And Black and Latino people continue to represent at least 90% of the victims of police force — the same percentage as before the consent decree.
But having acknowledged an increase in the use of force by CPD officers, Superintendent Larry Snelling rejected any call for further analysis of why these numbers are increasing, arguing that it would “take out the human element.” This is unacceptable.
Every Chicagoan must understand that the consent decree process was adopted seven years ago in response to the murder of 17-year-old Laquan McDonald, who was shot 16 times by a CPD officer. This event led to a full-scale investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice that found Chicago police systemically use unreasonable excessive force. After seven years, and millions of tax dollars spent on the decree, it is disheartening to hear CPD’s leadership refuse to investigate why use-of-force incidents are increasing or commit to fixing the problem. The Consent Decree Coalition, which ACLU is a part of, initiated a process to compel CPD’s compliance with the consent decree, but so far, the department has rejected or failed to substantively respond to our proposals to reduce force.
More Top Picks Best Induction Ranges
Now it is time to hear from Mayor Brandon Johnson. Does he believe that CPD should commit to using less force — especially against people of color — in our city?
— Alexandra Block, director, Criminal Legal System and Policing Project, and Michelle Garcia, deputy legal director, American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois
Accountability for insurers
For working people, every dollar matters, especially these days with rising costs and an uncertain economy. So when auto or homeowner insurance premiums suddenly jump without warning, it can throw an entire household budget into crisis.
For working families, retirees, tradespeople, service workers, public employees and everyone living paycheck to paycheck, these surprise increases force impossible choices: paying the mortgage, filling the gas tank or keeping legally required car insurance.
That’s why Senate Bill 1486 is such important legislation for working families and organized labor. In March, the Illinois House approved the legislation. The measure is currently under consideration in the Illinois Senate.
SB1486 would bring long-overdue accountability to an industry that has operated for too long without meaningful oversight in Illinois, which is one of only two states that does not require state regulators to review rates set by insurance companies. The bill would require insurance companies to provide 60 days’ notice before raising premiums by more than 10%, giving families time to plan instead of being blindsided.
Just as important, it would prohibit excessive, inadequate or unfairly discriminatory rates — helping ensure workers are charged based on real risk, such as their driving record. If consumers were to get overcharged, the measure would require insurance companies to issue a rebate.
SB1486 also would prevent Illinois policyholders from subsidizing disasters in other states, protecting local families from corporate cost-shifting schemes that pad profits at consumers’ expense.
For older Illinoisans, retirees and working seniors, expanding access to defensive driving courses would make discounts easier to obtain and help keep safe drivers on the road.
Working people have spoken clearly: Insurance should be affordable, transparent and fair.
Now the Illinois Senate must stand with labor, retirees and middle-class families by passing SB1486 and putting working Illinoisans ahead of insurance company profits.
— Tim Drea, president, Illinois AFL-CIO, and Robert Reiter, president, Chicago Federation of Labor
Complaints about ‘book bans’
Regarding the April 12 letter “Fighting book banners,” some clarity on the topic would be helpful.
In the plain meaning of the words, there are no banned books in America. Our Bill of Rights and jurisprudence have ensured this. With limited exceptions (libel and incitement), citizens can publish and read just about anything they want.
Also, we live in an era of unprecedented access. Anyone with an internet connection and money can have a book at their doorstep in a few days.
No physical library can hold every book. Millions of titles are in circulation, and millions are published in the U.S. every year. Someone must decide what is on the shelf. For private institutions, this is not a problem; if some private library wants to stock the collected illustrated works of the Marquis de Sade, good for it.
However, public librarians have an additional duty — to respect the beliefs and sensibilities of their community. This duty is even greater in schools. This leads to contention and the inaccurate use of the term “book ban.” It seems this is just a way of saying, “I’m not allowed to use taxpayer money to place my preferred, controversial book in front of your kids — and I don’t like that.” A more accurate, neutral term is “discretion.”
Parents, taxpayers and community leaders should all have a say in establishing local standards. They will and should be different in, say, California versus Utah and Chicago’s Lakeview neighborhood versus Peoria. Librarians should respect a highest-common denominator standard when considering which among the many choices should populate shelves. There is enough time-honored literature for all age groups; school libraries don’t need to be on the cutting edge of social trends.
Librarians have an important role to play but should not be the only voice in these decisions.
— John George, Glenview
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].