Former state lawmaker tells jury more about Madigan’s power as testimony in ‘ComEd Four’ trial continues – Chicago Tribune

A former Illinois state representative returned to the witness stand Thursday in the “ComEd Four” trial, where she has been describing what it was like working in the General Assembly under powerful Speaker Michael Madigan.

Former state Rep. Carol Sente, a Democrat from Vernon Hills who left the legislature in 2019, was the first witness called by prosecutors in the hot-button case alleging four Madigan associates conspired to bribe the speaker on behalf of Commonwealth Edison.

Sente testified Thursday she lost the chairmanship of a committee when she introduced a bill to set 14-year term limit on legislative leaders and confronted the long-serving Speaker Michael Madigan over it.

Sente spent most of her time on the witness stand describing for prosecutors Madigan’s overall power and control over the legislative process.

Sente is one of several witnesses prosecutors plan to call to educate the jury on the political process of politics and lobbying in Springfield, a world that Madigan lorded over for decades during his record-breaking run as speaker.

The four defendants are McClain, 75, an ex-ComEd lobbyist; former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore, 64; ex-ComEd lobbyist John Hooker, 73; and Jay Doherty, 69, a lobbyist and consultant who formerly led the City Club of Chicago. All four have pleaded not guilty to bribery conspiracy and other charges alleging they covered up illegal payments on ComEd’s books.

Sente said she entered Madigan’s Capitol office after her bill to set term limits on the four legislative leaders in control of each partisan. She said Madigan showed her a copy of the legislation and asked “if I could explain the bill, and why I was running it.”

She recalled that Madigan, who eventually served a national record 36 years as speaker, suggested it takes a while to get things organized.

She said she responded: “35 years?”

At about that point, Sente said, the “meeting was largely concluded,” saying Madigan thanked her and got up from his chair. It reflected a style often used by Madigan’s mentor, Mayor Richard J. Daley. Sente introduced the term-limit bill twice, but it died in the House Rules Committee, an elite panel of Madigan’s loyalist members.

In a demonstration of Madigan’s style, Sente learned that she lost her chairmanship of the small business committee she’d run when the panel “disappeared” from the legislative web site.

Sente said she arranged for a meeting with Madigan to talk about losing the committee and chairmanship–a job that comes with an extra $8,000 to $10,000 annual stipend. “But no meeting took place,” Sente said.

She said she lost the committee chairmanship for 10 months before it was restored and eventually was given chairmanship of a separate committee.

Pressed by a defense attorney, she was asked if Madigan actually told her he was punishing her. “He did not,” she said.

She testified about a bill addressing a constituent interest in “predatory lending.” But when that bill was also blocked, she asked Madigan about it while on the House floor.

Madigan, who had dealt with predatory lending legislation over the years, was “visibly upset,” saying, “Don’t bring that bill up again. It’s not moving forward.”

On another bill, she testified about a budget-related bill that she introduced but in which she suddenly was removed as the sponsor, replaced by Madigan, and told by him the bill would not move unless it had an amendment he wanted on it.

She said she went along, was returned as the chief sponsor of the bill, and the legislation passed. She said she did not think it would have passed without the amendment that Madigan wanted.

Sente on Wednesday testified that Madigan’s power, particularly in her own party, was almost absolute in the House, where he set the rules, decided who served on the various committees, and deployed a team of people who constantly pressured members to vote a certain way.

When asked if she found it challenging to vote in an independent way that she felt was in her district’s best interest, Sente answered, “Very much so.”

“We were told if we voted the wrong way, it could be used for campaign fodder in the next election,” she said. “… It was rather strong.”

Madigan, meanwhile, has pleaded not guilty to a separate racketeering indictment accusing him of an array of corrupt schemes, including the ComEd bribery plot. McClain is also charged in that case, which is scheduled to go to trial in April 2024.

[ [Don’t miss] ‘ComEd Four’ bribery trial: What you need to know ]

[ [Don’t miss]A Madigan confidant. A popular executive. An insider lobbyist. A political consultant. Who are the ‘ComEd Four’? ]

Testimony began Wednesday in U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber’s courtroom after a jury of six men and six women was selected to hear the case, which is expected to last up to eight weeks.

In her opening statement, Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah Streicker said ComEd poured $1.3 million into payments funneled to ghost “subcontractors” who were actually Madigan’s cronies, put a Madigan-backed person on the ComEd board, and gave coveted internships to families in his 13th Ward, all part of an elaborate scheme to keep the speaker happy.

And, it worked, Streicker said, because over the eight years of the scheme, Madigan helped ComEd win three lucrative pieces of legislation, including the “Smart Grid” bill in 2011 and another bill in 2016 that held a rate structure in place and extended the life of two of the company’s nuclear plants.

The defendants’ attorneys, meanwhile, all contended that the so-called scheme was nothing more than legal lobbying, part of the state’s high-stakes, often-messy politics where myriad interest groups and stakeholders compete for access to lawmakers.

“It’s not a crime, and it’s not a conspiracy,” said Patrick Cotter, who represents McClain. “And you know what? It’s not even suspicious. It’s a profession.”

Cotter also accused “overzealous” investigators of developing tunnel vision in their zeal to bring down a big political target in Madigan, which in the end led to them getting it “terribly, tragically wrong.”

jmeisner@chicagotribune.com