Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Kia and Hyundai really need to fix this problem now
Next Post: Illinois Credit Unions Oppose Regulatory Fee Increase
Posted in:
* Crain’s on some overlooked testimony yesterday by ComEd exec Scott Vogt…
The 2016 Future Energy Jobs Act is best remembered for the bailout of two nuclear power plants, which funneled more than $230 million of revenue annually to Exelon thanks to surcharges on monthly electric bills statewide.
That was just one portion of a heaping plate of revenue. While most of the focus — and controversy at the time — was on the nuke subsidies, the value of that law to Exelon’s utility subsidiary, Commonwealth Edison, was an estimated $1.8 billion. […]
But what likely accounts for the surprisingly lucrative aspect of FEJA for ComEd is that it was allowed for the first time to profit on its investments in energy efficiency — programs designed to help households and businesses use less power. Those programs existed before FEJA, but the charges to ratepayers were mere pass-throughs and included no profit kickers. […]
Asked to react, ComEd spokesman Paul Elsberg declined to discuss the $1.8 billion estimate. But, he said, “Without commenting on specific witness testimony, the bottom line is that FEJA provided substantial benefits to customers served by all electric utilities across Illinois, including by significantly expanding energy efficiency programs that have saved ComEd customers more than $7 billion on their electric bills, preserving nuclear plants that provide 24/7 carbon-free energy and the thousands of jobs associated with them, spurring new investment in renewable energy projects, and funding programs that train workers for clean energy jobs.”
* Hannah Meisel on the 2011 Smart Grid law…
But the utility’s fortunes really turned with the passage of the Energy Infrastructure Modernization Act in 2011 – another of the laws central to the government’s theory of ComEd’s alleged bribery scheme. Included in that law, also known as “Smart Grid” legislation, was an overhaul of the way consumer electric rates were calculated. The new process, known as formula ratemaking, created a new tool for ComEd to recoup what it said was the true cost of running and improving electric service for its customers in northern Illinois. […]
However, the 2011 law included a provision that automatically “sunset” the formula rates a few years after they first took effect, necessitating ComEd to go back to the General Assembly to ask for the renewal of formula rates.
Toward the end of Vogt’s lengthy testimony on Monday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Julie Schwartz asked Vogt “what control” the sunset provision gave Madigan “over ComEd’s financial future.”
“A fair amount,” Vogt said.
He loved sunsets more than any southwest Florida resident.
* We talked yesterday about the Senate Democrats’ 2018 TV ads that pushed legislative leader term limits and mentioned Madigan by name. The Sun-Times has the full exchange, but here’s a telling excerpt where Madigan is mulling what he’s going to say to then Senate President John Cullerton…
MADIGAN: And number three, John, do you understand the position you’ve put me in? In terms of do I do something or do I do nothing. So, do I just do nothing about this or do I do something about it?
You did not want to be on the receiving end of that sort of message. Whew.
* Speaking of which, here’s the Tribune…
Illinois state Rep. Bob Rita told jurors in the “ComEd Four” bribery trial Monday that former House Speaker Michael Madigan for years had “total control” of the state General Assembly and ruled his fellow Democrats “through fear and intimidation.” […]
Rita also said Madigan was “very good at raising money,” and that his control of the purse strings come election time made members dependent upon his support for their political survival.
Rita said Madigan valued “loyalty to himself, to the caucus, to the party” above all else. He said he counted himself as among Madigan’s loyal supporters in the 18 years they served in the House together.
Asked how Madigan typically exercised his power, Rita paused for a second before saying flatly, “Through fear and intimidation.”
* Hannah Meisel…
And when asked by Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah Streicker if he’d personally experienced that aggressive tactic, Rita responded, “yes.”
If anyone gets angry at Rep. Rita for saying what he said, they must’ve either forgotten that Madigan wanted people to fear him, or they were part of his mechanism. It’s just how things were done. Nobody ever denied it. He deliberately cultivated the image.
* Jon Seidel…
Federal prosecutors planned to have Rita testify about McClain’s role in the gaming legislation. They alleged in a court filing that Rita met with the speaker in his office in 2013, where Madigan told Rita that Rita would sponsor a major gaming bill. When the meeting ended, Madigan walked Rita out of his office and McClain was standing near the doorway.
Madigan pointed to McClain and said “he will guide you,” according to the feds.
U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber barred prosecutors Monday from getting into the topic of gaming at the request of defense attorneys, though. Rita is also likely to testify about the influence that McClain — a ComEd lobbyist —Â had on the passage of another bill Rita sponsored: the Future Energy Jobs Act, or FEJA.
FEJA is one of the key pieces of legislation at issue in the trial.
Rita did testify about the “he will guide you” quote today, without mentioning the gaming connection.
* Today on FEJA…
Rita says he grew "frustrated" that he wasn't more involved in more meetings about the legislation, which were being run by Heather Wier Vaught. "I was looking forwqrd to being more involved in the process."
— Jason Meisner (@jmetr22b) March 21, 2023
Rita also told jurors, "I knew Mike [McClain] wouldn't give me bad advice, or have me do something that was not in line with Speaker Madigan."
— Jon Seidel (@SeidelContent) March 21, 2023
Cotter asks about Rita's conversations with McClain, during which McClain called Madigan "our friend."
Cotter asks whether they were "ever talking about crime? Was he and you talking about committing crimes?"
"No," Rita says.
— Jon Seidel (@SeidelContent) March 21, 2023
* Speaking of “our friend,” this is from a federal transcript introduced yesterday where McClain is explaining why he refers to Madigan that way…
I generally never refer to the speaker. I just say our friend. […]
—its uh, it’s just more, it’s easier because um, um I’ll never forget there’s one time one of the ComEd people were at a coffee shop, and it was the Speaker this, and the Speaker that, and the Speaker this, the Speaker that and the, right next to her at the table was Tiffany Madigan. […]
And so suffice it to say, about two weeks later she was no longer working for ComEd. […]
(Laughs.) And so um, the um, so if you just say our friend, no one really knows what we’re talking about so. So, uh that’s the way I’m gonna talk, if that’s okay?
…Adding… Ken Dunkin was mentioned in the trial yesterday as an example of Madigan’s power. Dunkin was again a topic today during cross-examination…
The Madigan-led Democratic Party of Illinois successfully ran a candidate against Dunkin.
"And that's politics. That's politics, isn't it sir," Cotter asks.
Rita: "yes."
— Jon Seidel (@SeidelContent) March 21, 2023
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 11:10 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Kia and Hyundai really need to fix this problem now
Next Post: Illinois Credit Unions Oppose Regulatory Fee Increase
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
===You did not want to be on the receiving end of that sort of message. Whew.
My understanding from others is that Madigan would then just look at Cullerton and that was the most uncomfortable look one could receive.
Thanks to the 19 for ridding Illinois of him.
Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 11:31 am
Who doesn’t say Dunkin’s name with disdain? I get what Cotter is trying to get at and maybe it makes sense given the jury doesn’t understand the Dunkin situation, but wow is that a bad example given Dunkin had virtually no friends left in the party.
Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 11:36 am
I love Ray Long but that was one of the issues I had w the article. They make it out to seem that it was just a matter of Dunkin did something Madigan didnt like so MJM ran a candidate against him.
They completely miss the context. Dunkin alienated everyone in the Dem party and the progressive movement as a whole. Everyone. Especially after Rep Golar came back from the hospital to override the Rauner veto and Dunkin still allied himself w the governor.
Comment by low level Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 11:52 am
I think I know why Cullerton resigned when he did.
Avoid the mud slinging in the air please.
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:00 pm
Low Level:
Do you remember who brought Dunkin into the legislature?
I’ll wait for your response.
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:02 pm
==Do you remember who brought Dunkin into the legislature?==
Yes. He won a primary in 2002 against Howard Kenner and was known to be Jesse White’s candidate. Dunkin managed to alienated Jesse White as well.
What’s your point?
Comment by low level Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:05 pm
Ken decided he didn’t need to play by the rules and became his own agent that went down in flames bucking Madigan.
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:09 pm
With the trial spelling so much of this out, I wonder what cost Mike Madigan had in terms of the people that left, avoided, or were in some way ostracized from Democratic politics because they didn’t want to engage in a system where the corruption was so apparent.
We certainly learned a lot about Mike Madigan when he refused to take action to stop sexual harassment in his organization.
I just can’t help but wonder what we’ve lost because of his hideous specter.
Comment by Candy Dogood Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:09 pm
===became his own agent===
Hardly. He was working hand in glove with Rauner, who was thoroughly despised by everyone in that caucus.
Also, there’s the Golar consequence.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:12 pm
==Ken decided he didn’t need to play by the rules and became his own agent that went down in flames bucking Madigan.==
Are you trying to tell us Ken Dunkin was a reformer type?
Comment by low level Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:13 pm
Com Ed looks like a better trader than even Bears GM Ryan Poles who has the #1 free agent class so far according to Sporting News
Who wouldn’t trade a 200 million dollar fine for 1.8 billion?
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:14 pm
Point taken Rich.
The fact that has gone unmentioned thus far is that
the IL Attorney General who should have been looking out for
the citizens of IL when ComEd was pushing its rate increases
and Smart Grid bills through the Legislature and the ICC,
was his adopted daughter.
Can we question her loyalty?
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:17 pm
Lucky Pierre:
No, Ken was just enamored of his own ego.
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:19 pm
=== The fact that has gone unmentioned thus far is that
the IL Attorney General who should have been looking out for
the citizens of IL when ComEd was pushing its rate increases
and Smart Grid bills through the Legislature and the ICC,
was his adopted daughter. ===
Nobody has questioned Lisa’s actions or ethics related to this. Keep your conspiracy theories to yourself.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:21 pm
Are the federal prosecutors and FBI agents going to say Obama was afraid of Madigan for this? /s
https://youtu.be/0QScPpAxDIo?t=27
Comment by Anyone Remember Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:25 pm
===Can we question her loyalty?===
Lisa Madigan’s association with Mike Madigan is pretty hard to miss. I don’t think one needs permission to engage in something that has been the condition of the field her entire political career.
There probably isn’t much there given the scope and length of this FBI investigation. One can eat a lot of steak without meeting the butcher.
Comment by Candy Dogood Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:25 pm
=== With the trial spelling so much of this out, I wonder what cost Mike Madigan had in terms of the people that left, avoided, or were in some way ostracized from Democratic politics because they didn’t want to engage in a system where the corruption was so apparent.
We certainly learned a lot about Mike Madigan when he refused to take action to stop sexual harassment in his organization.
I just can’t help but wonder what we’ve lost because of his hideous specter. ===
Your anti-Madigan bias is oozing out more than usual. Name one person that left the General Assembly or was “ostracized from Democratic politics” because they wanted to get away from Mike Madigan’s “corruption that was so apparent to everyone”.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:27 pm
Hannibal:
Please ask the legitimate candidates for office that were denied
a fair election after Madigan sponsored candidates split the votes six ways to Sunday.
You’re right, there’s no conspiracy, and the Feds are hard up for work.
Please bite me.
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:36 pm
=== Please bite me. ===
Please be careful who you say that to. My handle is Hannibal Lecter after all. Lol
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 12:43 pm
I’m glad you caught the irony. LOL!
Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 1:02 pm
Regarding Lisa Madigan…
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 2:33 pm
Thanks, Rich. I hope this quiets some of the conspiracy minded individuals on this thread.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 2:55 pm
Lucky Pierre- You couldn’t be more right about ComEd’s $200 million dollar fine and avoiding prosecution. They were given the equivalent of a parking ticket which the consumer ultimately pays.
Comment by Our Friend’s friend Tuesday, Mar 21, 23 @ 5:42 pm
The AG’s office (when Lisa Madigan was AG) was also the only one complaining about this when FEJA was being negotiated:
–But what likely accounts for the surprisingly lucrative aspect of FEJA for ComEd is that it was allowed for the first time to profit on its investments in energy efficiency — programs designed to help households and businesses use less power. Those programs existed before FEJA, but the charges to ratepayers were mere pass-throughs and included no profit kickers. […] –
Comment by oxfordian Wednesday, Mar 22, 23 @ 12:26 pm