A recent audit by the Court of Accounts has exposed troubling financial practices at the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA). The report highlights that funds earmarked for scientific research were misappropriated for personal purchases, including electronics, office items, and even non-scientific literature. With a budget of 135.5 million liras in 2023, the audit reveals potential misuse of taxpayer money that raises significant concerns about the accountability of public institutions.

Overview of Auditor’s Findings

The Court of Accounts has rigorously examined the financial dealings of TÜBA. The audit found that funds designated for scientific research had been diverted towards non-permissible personal purchases. This included a variety of items such as mobile phones, smartwatches, office desks, and chairs, which do not align with the intended use of the academy’s budget. Over a period of three years, 41 electronic devices were acquired by the academy, but not one was recorded as institutional assets. This raises alarms about accountability and adherence to the established financial guidelines that govern public institutions.

TÜBA, established in 1993 as a state-affiliated autonomous organization, is charged with conducting scientific reviews, supporting young researchers, and publishing scientific works. The audit indicated a total budget expenditure of 132.6 million liras out of the allocated 135.5 million liras for 2023, which presents serious discrepancies in how the budget is being managed. The findings have led to criticisms regarding the fiscal governance at TÜBA and pose questions about the oversight mechanisms currently in place.

TÜBA’s Justification for Expenditures

In reaction to the audit’s findings, TÜBA officials have defended the controversial purchases, asserting that these expenditures were indeed necessary for research purposes. They described the equipment and furniture as “essential” for adapting to the evolving demands of research in both natural and social sciences. The agency emphasized that in the context of technological advancements, the items procured were crucial for carrying out scientific activities.

Officials also asserted that the logistics of registering such purchases in the academy’s inventory were “practically impossible,” which raises further concerns about transparency. The lack of auditing and oversight may permit misuse of funds, leaving taxpayers questioning how their money is being utilized.

The Problem of Book Purchases

The misuse of funds extended beyond technology and furniture to include books purchased for research support. The audit revealed that many of these books were irrelevant to the researchers’ fields and had no scientific merit. Some of the volumes included self-help and classic fiction, which casts doubt on the academic rigor expected from an institution dedicated to scientific inquiry.

In its written defense to the Court of Accounts, TÜBA insisted that these purchases complied with existing regulations, but the audit emphasized a critical point: any books acquired under research support should be relevant and scientific in nature. The failure to adhere to this guideline further illustrates a troubling disconnect between the institution’s operations and its foundational mission.

Issues with Funding for Research Assistants

Another significant concern raised by the audit pertains to funding for research assistants. Payments were reportedly made based on self-declarations, lacking verification against official employment records. The Court of Accounts highlighted that service records from the Social Security Institution (SGK) were ignored in determining the eligibility of the assistants, which poses a risk of financial support reaching individuals who either do not work or have informal employment arrangements.

In defense of this practice, TÜBA maintained that the majority of these assistants were students engaged in intellectual activities rather than traditional employment roles. They argued that the nature of their tasks made it impractical to categorize them under standard employment regulations. However, auditors have pointed out that the lack of verification creates a vulnerability in the system, potentially leading to financial exploitation of the budget.

Implications of Misuse of Funds

The ongoing issues surrounding the misappropriation of funds at TÜBA raise critical implications for the governance of public institutions in Turkey. The financial irregularities undermine public trust and call attention to the possible need for legislative reform to enhance oversight mechanisms. The report’s findings may not only influence future budgeting decisions but could also prompt a broader conversation about the accountability of public agencies.

In addition, these developments raise questions about the effectiveness of existing regulations designed to safeguard taxpayer money. The emphasis on personal purchasing over essential research functionality suggests a systemic problem that could potentially affect the integrity of scientific research in Turkey.

Summary

The findings of the Court of Accounts regarding the Turkish Academy of Sciences spotlight critical issues concerning financial management and accountability within public institutions. The misuse of substantial funds intended for scientific research raises pressing questions about governance, oversight, and the integrity of scientific endeavors in Turkey. Addressing these concerns will be essential to restore public trust and ensure that future research funding is used appropriately to advance scientific inquiry.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What were the specific findings of the audit at TÜBA?

The audit revealed that funds allocated for research were misused for personal purchases, including electronics and books unrelated to scientific inquiry.

Question: How did TÜBA justify their expenditures?

Officials defended the purchases by stating that the items were essential for research activities, claiming compliance with regulations.

Question: What implications do the audit’s findings have for future funding?

The findings may prompt legislative reforms and a reassessment of oversight mechanisms to ensure responsible management of taxpayer funds.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

In a significant restructuring move, the Trump administration has placed approximately 75% of full-time AmeriCorps employees on administrative leave as part of efforts to overhaul the volunteer agency initiated during the Clinton presidency. This decision affects 535 out of the agency’s 700 staff members and follows the withdrawal of AmeriCorps’ National Civilian Community Corps volunteers from the field. The agency is expected to continue existing, but its operations are set to restart essentially from the ground up, amid concerns over financial mismanagement and accountability issues.

Overview of AmeriCorps Restructuring

In a bold move designed to reshape the AmeriCorps organization, the Trump administration announced the administrative leave of approximately 75% of its full-time employees, totaling 535 individuals from a workforce of 700. The agency, known for its national service programs, is undergoing significant changes as part of an effort to reboot its operations and address longstanding issues. This restructuring decision comes amid a broader strategy to rebuild the agency’s operational framework fundamentally. With this significant staffing change, many volunteers have also been pulled from the field, especially those involved in programs targeted at youth engagement through the National Civilian Community Corps.

The Historical Context of AmeriCorps

AmeriCorps was established in 1993 by former President Bill Clinton as a response to the need for a coordinated national service program that would engage citizens in volunteer efforts across the United States. This initial goal was to create a volunteer force that could assist communities while fostering civic responsibility. Since its creation, AmeriCorps has allocated about $1 billion annually in taxpayer funds aimed at supporting various initiatives. However, the agency has faced scrutiny over the years due to perceived inefficiencies and a lack of performance accountability. The historical context reveals a battle between the original vision for national service and the struggle to maintain compliance with federal spending guidelines and expectations.

Financial Accountability Challenges

One of the foremost concerns surrounding AmeriCorps has been its financial accountability. The agency has failed eight consecutive audits over the past decade, raising red flags regarding its management of taxpayer funds. Republican Burgess Owens, the chair of the House Higher Education and Workforce Development Subcommittee, criticized the agency’s inability to provide a clean audit, asserting that the agency had serious issues with fraud detection. He noted that the 2023 audit included 78 unresolved recommendations, despite previous claims of addressing significant oversights from past audits. The chronic financial mismanagement has not only led to a loss of public trust but has also prompted calls from lawmakers for a restructuring of how AmeriCorps operates.

Priorities Moving Forward

Following the restructuring, the AmeriCorps agency is expected to realign its priorities and focus areas, notably emphasizing diversity, equity, and climate change initiatives. The 2024 annual management report earmarks advancing racial and economic equity as a principal goal. This realignment is designed not only to broaden opportunities for all Americans but also to ensure that AmeriCorps members reflect the diversity of the communities they serve. However, some lawmakers, including Owens, have expressed skepticism regarding the efficacy of these programs amid persistent funding challenges and accountability failures, prompting discussions regarding potential further cuts or reforms.

Future of AmeriCorps Under New Management

As AmeriCorps stands on the precipice of major organizational change, the future remains uncertain. While officials maintain that the agency will continue, this period of readjustment may require a complete reevaluation of its approaches and objectives. Recent calls by lawmakers for the agency to be more closely scrutinized by the Department of Government Efficiency emphasize the urgency of enacting reform. The administration’s commitment to a fresh start may trigger significant changes, but the effectiveness of those changes will depend on the leadership’s ability to implement accountability measures and rebuild public support for the agency.

Summary

The recent decision to place a majority of AmeriCorps employees on administrative leave marks a significant shift in the operational direction of the agency. With a historical backdrop of challenges in financial management and accountability, this restructuring seeks to initiate a new phase for AmeriCorps, reflecting a commitment to readjust priorities and potentially regain public trust. However, the success of these efforts will ultimately depend on the agency’s ability to implement effective reforms and operational improvements in the coming years.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What is AmeriCorps?

AmeriCorps is a national service program created to engage citizens in volunteer work that addresses community needs across the United States.

Question: Why are so many AmeriCorps employees on leave?

Approximately 75% of AmeriCorps’s full-time employees are on leave as part of a restructuring effort initiated by the Trump administration to overhaul the agency.

Question: What challenges has AmeriCorps faced in recent years?

AmeriCorps has struggled with financial accountability, failing eight consecutive audits and facing scrutiny over the management of taxpayer funds.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

The University of Wisconsin’s approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives is under scrutiny following a recent audit by the Wisconsin Legislative Audit Bureau (WLAB). The audit revealed that the university and various state agencies failed to adequately track spending on DEI programs, leading officials to estimate significant expenditures. The audits found discrepancies in the reported spending, with a noted reduction in personnel dedicated to DEI efforts, aligning with a broader political shift against such initiatives in higher education.

Overview of DEI Spending in Wisconsin

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives have become focal points for educational institutions across the United States, and the University of Wisconsin is no exception. The recent audits conducted by the WLAB cover fiscal years 2023 through 2024, highlighting a critical need to address financial transparency in DEI spending. According to WLAB, the estimated expenditure on DEI-related salaries amounts to approximately $12.5 million, while spending on associated offices reached around $40.2 million, although it noted that not all these funds were strictly dedicated to DEI matters.

Breakdown of Audit Findings

The audit unveiled that state agencies and the University of Wisconsin lacked robust systems to track their DEI spending. Specifically, WLAB’s findings indicate that twelve state agencies incurred about $2.2 million in salaries for 47 DEI-related positions. Interestingly, approximately $705,300 was spent on salaries for time allocated to mandatory DEI training as required by Executive Order 59. The relative ambiguity regarding expenditures arises, as WLAB also observed that overlapping costs across state agencies hindered precise accounting.

Additionally, compliance concerns were raised, with a significant number of agencies failing to submit required progress reports to the Department of Administration (DOA) regarding their DEI initiatives. This lack of transparency combined with inconsistent reporting practices led to difficulties in accurately assessing the total spend on DEI programs, complicating the matter for state auditors.

Impact of Political Trends on DEI Initiatives

The political landscape surrounding DEI initiatives has shifted notably, particularly with actions taken by state Republicans to reevaluate such programs. In May 2024, a comprehensive review of DEI spending was launched following a commitment by Republican Assembly Speaker, Robin Vos, to eliminate DEI programs from state-supported education. This political push aligns with similar actions taken during the Trump administration, which sought to challenge the inclusion of DEI frameworks in public institutions.

The University of Wisconsin-Madison is already experiencing the effects of this political shift. Agreements struck with Republican legislators in 2023 have led to significant cutbacks in DEI-related personnel. The number of full-time positions dedicated to DEI has seen a reduction from 123 to just 60 positions in a span of a year, indicating a broader trend towards diminishing these roles amidst increasing scrutiny.

The Future of DEI Programs in Wisconsin

The future of DEI initiatives within the University of Wisconsin and state agencies remains uncertain. The ongoing audit findings emphasize the need for more transparency and accountability, potentially leading to a reconsideration of the value and scale of such programs. As funding limitations and political pressures mount, key university stakeholders face difficult decisions on how best to approach the evolution of their DEI strategies.

The removal of LaVar Charleston, the chief diversity officer at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, in January 2024 due to allegations of poor judgment and fiscal irresponsibility emphasizes the urgency surrounding DEI implementation. The current trajectory suggests that educational institutions may have to redefine their mission concerning inclusivity as they navigate these tumultuous waters. Stakeholders are now tasked with determining the role that DEI will play going forward, in a context marked by significant funding cuts and increased oversight.

Broader Implications for Higher Education

The implications of Wisconsin’s audit findings extend beyond state boundaries, signaling a national trend involving scrutiny of DEI funding in higher education. As institutions grapple with their public missions versus political ideologies, the broader educational landscape faces challenges that may influence funding priorities and institutional policies across the nation.

Many other state universities may watch the developments in Wisconsin closely, potentially mirroring the shifts in DEI funding and staffing levels as lawmakers reevaluate the effectiveness of such programs. If these trends take hold, the educational climate may shift significantly, altering how universities engage with issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion as part of their operational framework.

Summary

The findings from WLAB’s audit regarding the University of Wisconsin’s spending on DEI initiatives reveal a complex and evolving landscape. As political pressures mount and the necessity for accountability in expenditures grows, it is clear that DEI programs across the nation may face reevaluation and restructuring. The implications of these developments could reshape how educational institutions across the United States engage with diversity and inclusion issues, making it a pivotal moment in the future of higher education.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What prompted the recent audit of DEI expenditures in Wisconsin?

The audit was initiated by state Republican officials in May 2024, who sought to evaluate spending practices related to equity programs amid rising criticisms of DEI initiatives.

Question: How much has the University of Wisconsin allocated to DEI initiatives?

According to the recent audits, it is estimated that the University of Wisconsin spent about $12.5 million on salaries associated with DEI positions and an additional $40.2 million on offices serving DEI functions, although not all funds were solely designated for DEI efforts.

Question: What has been the impact of political trends on DEI strategies in Wisconsin?

Political trends indicate a significant reduction in DEI staffing and funding at institutions like the University of Wisconsin, reflecting broader movements across the nation against DEI initiatives in higher education.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

A coalition of Republican lawmakers in California has called for a comprehensive audit of the state’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, amidst a significant budgetary crisis. The program is presently running $2.8 billion over budget, attributed partly to recent legislative changes that allow illegal immigrants to enroll. Faced with escalating costs and the inability to fulfill obligations to healthcare providers, the state’s governor, Gavin Newsom, has sought additional funding, further complicating the fiscal landscape.

Audit Request Sparks Political Debate

In response to the ballooning costs of Medi-Cal, a group of Republican lawmakers, led by Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, has initiated a formal request for an audit of the program. They argue the scrutiny is necessary due to the unprecedented budget shortfall, which has raised alarms about government spending and accountability. The lawmakers have expressed concerns particularly about legislative changes that permitted illegal immigrants to enroll in the program, which they believe has contributed significantly to the rising expenses.

The bipartisan nature of the issue is underscored by the complex relationship between healthcare reform and state budgeting. In the lawmakers’ letter, they articulated their demands for clarity on the impending financial situation, emphasizing the need for transparency in Medi-Cal’s operational costs and enrollment projections. Such an audit could potentially impact future healthcare policies and the perception of fiscal management by the state government.

Medi-Cal Budget Crisis Explained

The Medi-Cal program is experiencing a severe fiscal challenge, projected to exceed its budget by $2.8 billion. Originally, it was estimated that the program would cost around $6 billion for the year. However, as healthcare costs have spiraled, the governor’s office has found it necessary to request an additional $6.2 billion in loans over two separate occasions. This unexpected financial burden has raised questions about the reliability of budget forecasts and the management of public funds.

The onset of issues can be traced back to legislative changes enacted last year, which expanded eligibility to undocumented immigrants. While proponents of the law argue it is a necessary step towards equitable healthcare access, critics maintain that the rising demand has overwhelmed the system and caused unsustainable increases in costs. Health experts have pointed out that although Medi-Cal’s financial issues are serious, they are part of a larger pattern of escalating healthcare costs nationwide, influenced by various factors, including inflation and an aging population.

Political Reactions to the Audit Call

The request for an audit has sparked a flurry of political commentary, with many stakeholders weighing in on the appropriateness of such actions amidst Californian health reforms. Some analysts believe that the evolving political landscape will continue to frame the debate, with Republicans using the budget crisis to critique state governance and fiscal responsibility.

Democratic leaders, while acknowledging the concerns raised, argue that focusing on the Medicaid program’s costs without considering the broader context of healthcare spending is shortsighted. They have pointed to national trends in healthcare expenditures, suggesting that similar issues are not unique to California. As the legislature debates the merits of various strategies to combat the budget shortfalls, the solutions posed range from more stringent cost containment measures to potential cuts in services that could impact healthcare access across the state.

Governor’s Response and Future Projections

In addressing the concerns raised by lawmakers, Gavin Newsom has indicated that the rising costs of Medi-Cal is just one facet of a broader issue facing the state’s healthcare systems. His office has requested additional funding, aligning with legislative efforts to evaluate spending proposals comprehensively. In discussions about future budgetary allocations, the governor has emphasized the need to balance fiscal responsibility with the ongoing commitments to provide essential health services.

Newsom’s deputy has pointed out that the rising healthcare costs are not solely due to the Medi-Cal expansion, citing an array of economic forces affecting healthcare pricing across various states. Moving forward, the administration is tasked with addressing these concerns while maintaining the quality of care and access to necessary services for all Californians. Some proposed strategies include evaluating enrollment forecasts for undocumented immigrants and laying out detailed cost containment strategies.

Implications for Healthcare in California

The financial stress on the Medi-Cal program raises critical questions about the future of healthcare access in California, especially for the most vulnerable populations. As the situation evolves, there may be profound implications for public health policy and fiscal management that extend beyond merely managing costs.

If the overspending continues without rectification, there may be serious ramifications, affecting healthcare providers’ ability to deliver services and the general public’s access to care. The division between opposing political parties could exacerbate tensions in healthcare policy discussions, potentially leading to further polarization on how best to manage Medicaid in California.

Stakeholders across the board—patients, healthcare providers, and lawmakers—are now tasked with confronting the pressing need for a sustainable approach to healthcare financing that adequately serves the populace while remaining financially viable. The decisions made in the coming months will be crucial in shaping the future of Medi-Cal and, by extension, California’s healthcare system as a whole.

Summary

The ongoing financial turmoil within California’s Medi-Cal program underscores the delicate balance between expanding healthcare access and maintaining fiscal responsibility. As lawmakers seek to audit the program amid a significant budget shortfall, both political and practical implications abound. Stakeholders are called to navigate this complex environment, ensuring sustainable healthcare access while addressing the rising costs that have emerged since recent policy changes.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What are the main reasons for Medi-Cal’s budget crisis?

The budget crisis is primarily attributed to a drastic increase in costs related to recent legislation that allows illegal immigrants to enroll, coupled with rising healthcare costs nationwide.

Question: Who is leading the call for the audit of Medi-Cal?

The audit request is spearheaded by Republican Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, along with a coalition of other Republican lawmakers.

Question: What steps is the governor’s office taking to address the deficit?

The governor’s office has requested additional funding through loans and is considering proposals to rein in spending while working to protect healthcare access for Californians.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.

Illinois taxpayers have faced a significant financial burden with expenditures amounting to $1.6 billion for healthcare programs designated for illegal immigrants since 2020, surpassing initial budget estimates by a considerable margin. A recent audit requested by Republican lawmakers highlighted discrepancies, revealing that many individuals enrolled in these programs were incorrectly classified as undocumented, with some actually being U.S. citizens or eligible for federal assistance. The findings not only underscore potential overspending but also raise questions about the management of healthcare programs under Governor J.B. Pritzker‘s administration.

Overview of Illinois Healthcare Spending for Illegal Immigrants

Illinois has seen a substantial allocation of taxpayer funds directed towards healthcare programs primarily for illegal immigrants, totaling around $1.6 billion since 2020. This expenditure has exceeded projections made by the Pritzker administration, raising concern among state officials and taxpayers alike. The Governor’s leadership in implementing these programs came with high hopes to provide necessary healthcare access, yet the financial impact has raised questions about sustainability and effectiveness. This unfolding controversy has prompted a closer examination of how state resources are being utilized in such programs.

Audit Findings: Mismanagement and Overspending

The audit conducted by Illinois Auditor General Frank J. Mautino disclosed critical mismanagement in welfare allocations, notably identifying over 6,000 individuals listed in state healthcare programs as “undocumented” who possessed Social Security numbers. A considerable number of these individuals may comprise legal permanent residents eligible for Medicaid, implying that state expenditures could have been minimized if federal reimbursements were sought correctly. A detailed review indicated that numerous enrollees had been inaccurately classified, thereby costing the state additional funds and undermining the program’s intended purpose of assisting the most vulnerable populations.

More specifically, the audit’s scrutiny of nearly 700 seniors enrolled in the health program revealed that many were mistakenly allocated to a category that necessitated ineligibility, as they fell under the age limit defined by enrollment criteria. In instances where individuals had been misreported due to incorrect birth dates, the auditor noted that rectifying such errors remains critical to fiscal accountability and management integrity. Therefore, the findings pointed to broader systemic issues, indicating that Illinois could have avoided certain financial pitfalls by ensuring accurate administrative practices.

Government Response to Audit Results

In response to the alarming audit results, Republican lawmakers, led by State Senate Minority Leader John Curran, expressed their discontent regarding the financial oversight demonstrated under Governor Pritzker’s administration. Curran emphasized that the report was indicative of “gross mismanagement,” revealing how the program absorbed an excessive amount more than anticipated. In his statements, he articulated concerns surrounding the inclusion of individuals who should not have been enrolled in the programs, indicating that thousands enjoyed free healthcare at the expense of taxpayers. Furthermore, Curran criticized Pritzker’s approach to federal funds, highlighting a failure to seek reimbursements when they could have helped offset expenses incurred on state programs.

The report elicited rapid responses from the governor’s office, yet concrete steps to rectify the highlighted issues remain elusive. Governor Pritzker, under increasing pressure to adjust fiscal policies, revealed intentions to cut healthcare funding for illegal immigrants, asserting the need to alleviate the state’s overburdened financial structure. These proposed cuts are designed to save the state an estimated $330 million as Illinois wrestles with a budget deficit exceeding $3 billion.

Implications of Proposed Funding Cuts

The proposed cuts, which are part of Pritzker’s broader fiscal strategy, coincide with the anticipated reduction of state-funded healthcare programs targeted at noncitizens, including those without green cards. Such actions have raised alarms about the implications for vulnerable communities that rely on these healthcare systems. As part of the Health Benefits for Immigrant Adults program, which has reported an enrollment of over 41,000 individuals, the proposed adjustments suggest a deeper institutional reevaluation of how healthcare resources should be allocated moving forward.

Opponents of the funding cuts argue that they could lead to increased public health risks and unmet healthcare needs among immigrant populations. This resonates particularly with advocates who stress the importance of ensuring that all residents, regardless of their immigration status, should have access to healthcare. The potential reduction in services raises significant ethical questions regarding the responsibility of the state to care for its residents, reflecting ongoing debates about the balance between fiscal responsibility and humanitarian assistance.

The Debate on Immigrant Healthcare in Illinois

The ongoing debate surrounding healthcare for immigrants in Illinois reflects broader national conversations regarding the intersection of healthcare access, immigration policy, and state fiscal management. Despite differing perspectives, Illinois stands as a prominent case study demonstrating the complexities involved when governments attempt to expand safety nets for marginalized populations. Supporters of Governor Pritzker’s programs point out the urgent need for comprehensive healthcare coverage, signifying that overall public health benefits from inclusive policies that support all residents.

However, critics highlight concerns regarding taxpayer burdens and erroneous administrative practices as grounds for tightening eligibility constraints. Striking a precarious balance between sustaining welfare programs and addressing financial realities encapsulates a vital task for lawmakers in Illinois as they navigate impending budgetary challenges and public sentiments regarding immigration-related healthcare policies. The divergent approaches to the issue reflect the multifaceted dimensions that the state must consider moving forward.

Summary

The financial implications of Illinois healthcare spending for illegal immigrants have sparked significant controversy and debate among lawmakers and the public. The recent audit revealing systemic issues in management and enrollment raises pressing questions regarding the efficacy of state resources and challenges the Pritzker administration to recalibrate its approach amid fiscal constraints. This discourse not only illustrates the complexities of immigration and healthcare policies in Illinois but also sets the stage for future legislative actions focused on balancing taxpayer responsibilities with sociocultural imperatives.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question: What prompted the recent audit of Illinois healthcare spending?

The audit was requested by Republican lawmakers who sought to investigate the reported overspending on healthcare programs for illegal immigrants, which had exceeded initial budget projections.

Question: What were the main findings of the audit?

The audit uncovered mismanagement in the enrollment of individuals in healthcare programs, revealing that many were incorrectly classified as undocumented, leading to unnecessary expenditures.

Question: How is the Pritzker administration responding to the audit findings?

In light of the audit, Governor Pritzker has proposed cutting healthcare funding for illegal immigrants as part of a broader strategy to address a significant budget deficit in Illinois.

©2025 News Journos. All rights reserved.