From the Tribune:

Endorsement pay called surprise

By Matt O'Connor and Rudolph Bush
Tribune staff reporters
Published November 17, 2005

A top organizer in former U.S. Sen. Philip Gramm's failed 1996 presidential campaign testified Wednesday that he had no inkling that former Gov. George Ryan shared in consulting fees from the campaign after he endorsed the Texas Republican.

Testifying at Ryan's corruption trial, John Weaver, a veteran of 250 political campaigns in the last quarter-century, said that in his experience, no other official who endorsed a candidate had ever been financially rewarded.

Weaver, in charge of field operations for the Gramm campaign, said he pored over the campaign's Illinois budget with Ryan's top political aides but was never told that a line item for consulting was to benefit Ryan.

"To your knowledge, did anyone at the Gramm campaign ever say or suggest that George Ryan should be paid in connection with his efforts on behalf of the Gramm campaign?" Assistant U.S. Atty. Patrick Collins asked.

"No," replied Weaver.

"Is there any doubt in your mind about that, sir?" Collins asked.

"None whatsoever," said Weaver, now a senior strategist to U.S. Sen. John McCain's political action committee.

Ryan and co-defendant Lawrence Warner, a close friend, are on trial on charges of enriching themselves principally while Ryan was secretary of state.

Richard Juliano, a top Ryan political aide, previously testified that Ryan personally came up with the idea of charging consulting fees to Gramm's campaign "so some people can make money."

Prosecutors allege Ryan, chief of staff Scott Fawell and Juliano split about $30,000 in Gramm campaign funds funneled through a company operated by a longtime Republican operative. Ryan allegedly passed on his share to four daughters even though they didn't do any work for the campaign.

Weaver said he knew Juliano was paid out of the Gramm budget because he had taken some time off his state job to assist the campaign. But he said he didn't know that money was going to Ryan, his family or Fawell.

Ryan's lawyers had tried to block the prosecution from asking Weaver if he had seen an official financially benefit from a political endorsement, but U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer allowed the question.

In arguing for permission, Collins alleged outside the jury's presence that Ryan had once told the Internal Revenue Service that the Gramm campaign wanted to pay him for his efforts. "That's absurd. It never happened," Collins said.

Weaver testified that Gramm badly needed Ryan's endorsement so his political machinery would help in the monumental task of gathering thousands of signatures on nominating petitions and a slate of delegates across Illinois.

Weaver said that Juliano told him the consulting fees would go to pay a firm to "recruit, train and oversee people collecting petitions for the Gramm campaign." The money was funneled through American Management Resources, which, unknown to Weaver, was owned by an associate of a close Ryan friend.

In March 1995 Ryan agreed to endorse Gramm but told him they had "to work out the details," Weaver said.

Later that month, at a downtown sports bar, Fawell and Juliano showed Weaver a proposed budget for running Gramm's primary campaign in Illinois, Weaver said. Listed among the usual costs for bumper stickers and office supplies was the line item for consulting totaling more than $100,000.

"I believe I said something along the lines of, This is really high. What's this for?" Weaver said. "Scott Fawell said, `This is the way we do things in Chicago. You have to understand this is the way we're going to do it.'"

In other testimony Wednesday, the former president of a Chicago company that produced license-plate stickers for the secretary of state' s office testified he feared losing the critical contract if he didn't pay Warner $5,000 a month.

James Motter, who ran American Decal & Manufacturing in 1994 and 1995, testified he felt he had no choice but to increase Warner's monthly fee from $3,000.

In a May 1994 meeting, Warner even claimed that 3M, American Decal's chief competitor, had contacted him to become its lobbyist, Motter said.

At the time, the state's specifications for the stickers contract required a mark "that made it almost a contract that no one else could get," Motter said.

In the meeting, Warner pointed out, though, that if the specifications were changed, 3M would be a threat to take away the contract, critical to American Decal's future, Motter said.

"I thought I had no options," Motter testified. "I viewed it as a threat to the business."

On cross-examination, Carolyn Gurland, a Warner lawyer, asked if Warner ever directly said American Decal would lose the contract if he wasn't retained. "It was implied," Motter said.

But Gurland pointed out that Motter had previously told federal authorities that Warner hadn't made the link.