Illinois at center of “As the Smart Grid Turns” controversy

This Illinois smart grid struggle is starting to look a bit like a daytime drama.

Hopefully, Commonwealth Edison (ComEd) and Ameren aren’t holding their corporate, collective baited breath on that legislative stamp of approval for their smart grid programs. The Illinois smart grid bill is unlikely to be resuscitated anytime soon. Unlike soap characters, bills rarely rise from the dead.

And, the handful of senators and representatives who beat the drum for an overturn of Gov. Pat Quinn’s veto may be laying low for awhile since the Chicago Sun Times and the Better Government Association laid out a lot of links this week---links between campaign donations and politicians who approached the smart grid bill favorably in the last session.

Now, the appearance of impropriety isn’t proof of impropriety, it’s true. But, it often muddies the picture.

A bit of history may be in order. Back in September, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn vetoed Senate Bill 1652, set to raise electric consumer rates in increments over the next decade to pay for system upgrades, resulting in approximately a $3 billion cash pool.

At the time Quinn vetoed the bill, he called it a “sweetheart deal” that basically erased all accountability for “big utilities.” The veto was supported by various organizations ranging from AARP to the Environmental Law and Policy Center. ComEd was, of course, disappointed at the veto, releasing a statement that the bill, despite Quinn’s description, “does not guarantee profits.”

Some politicians had discussed overturning the veto at the next legislative session, but that was before the big reveal this week.

The Better Government Association (BGA) released information through the Chicago Sun Times that ComEd and Ameren gave more than $1.3 million in campaign funds in the state. That cash was distributed, according to BGA, between January 2010 and the end of May 2011. More money came along over the summer, pushing the total to near $1.5 million. Both the politicians and power players have said that the money didn’t influence, and wasn’t intended to influence, the vote on the smart grid bill that passed in May.

BGA pointed out, however, that House supporters of the bill received six times more cash than opponents of the bill. Senate supporters came in at three times more.

Overall, however, there are 177 legislators in the Illinois chambers. Only 20 of them didn’t receive donations from ComEd and Ameren during the period recorded by BGA. Ninety-eight people voted for that bill, with eight of those not receiving a dime, leaving a whole lot of people who did get some campaign cash voting against, despite the money rolling in.

Once again, though, we’re back to the appearance of things. While the rights of corporations to freely spend political capital has been upheld by the Supreme Court, the average ComEd customer will still wonder if utilities giving cash to politicians was the only reason 1652 existed. And the benefits of smart grid will be lost in the hunt for meaning in the donation trail.

It’s human nature to assume a tit-for-tat response, though. When given a gift by a relative or friend we didn’t plan for at the holidays, how many of us run out and buy return gifts? They’ve given us something; we feel the urge to give something back.

ComEd and Ameren gave a lot of gifts to Illinois politicians. Did a few of those politicians feel the need to reciprocate with a legislative gift? That’s not something that can ever be proven or disproven, really. Money’s written down and accounted for. Good and bad intentions usually are not.

In the end, though, it appears that Illinois’ smart grid portrait is growing increasingly more Dorian Gray than traditional, stately over-the-fireplace staple. Impropriety, cash, anger and consumer backlash may end up making that portrait unrecognizable, with its owners covering it up and hiding it away.

Whether the sins of the portrait are real or imagined, it’s still the appearance that appears to matter most.