A Just Cause by Jim; Bernard; Edgar Sieracki Page B

Louanner Peters on January 13, 2005, two days after receiving a bill from Ecosse (489). Further, the state negotiated supplying other governments with flu vaccine and increased its order with Ecosse to 773,000 doses, but no agreements with other governments ever came to fruition, so the state was left with a total liability of $8.2 million. A troubling aspect of the report, Holland related, was that high-ranking officials were aware that the vaccine would never be delivered, “even prior to being billed by the vendor and executing a contract” (468). Ecosse filed suit to recoup $2 million, and at the time of the impeachment hearings, the suit was still in litigation.
    A second section of the audit concerned the I-SaveRx program, set up by the governor to provide prescriptions from pharmacies in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. Holland testified that outreach activities for the I-SaveRx program were “primarily coordinated” by the governor’s office (470). The program had not been approved—in fact, the FDA had informed the governor in writing that it violated the law. But the governor ignored the FDA’s warning and expanded the program “to state employees and their dependents” (471).
    Franks again asked clarifying questions. He drew the committee’s attention to a visual timeline of the flu vaccine procurement and went over the events step by step. Franks asked for Holland’s confirmation of doses ordered, dates, and agreement that the governor’s office had signed the contract knowing the drugs would never be delivered. Holland concurred. Instead of seeking an avenue to be relieved of the contract, because it was illegal, the governor donated the $2 million worth of vaccines to the government of Pakistan, Franks claimed. Holland again agreed.
    Lou Lang continued with questions for the committee record. Concerning the flu vaccine procurement, “Where was the money to come from?” Holland answered, “One of the trust funds within the Department of PublicAid.” “Assuming all of the transactions were legal,” Lang asked, “would that have been appropriate?” Holland referred to a letter from Deputy Comptroller Keith Taylor to the governor’s chief of staff, Lon Monk, dated January 31, 2005. The letter expressed that the comptroller’s office did “not believe the Governor’s office can obligate . . . another agency’s appropriations to make payments for its own contract liabilities” (491–93).
    Holland entertained a few random questions from the committee, but his testimony was finished and the clarifying questions exhausted. The most powerful evidence for administrative cause had been presented. David Ellis and the committee had what they wanted—tangible evidence of administrative incompetence and a pattern of suspicious behavior that more than hinted at wrongdoing.
    The day was growing late, but one more set of witnesses was still to come before the committee. A growing concern throughout Blagojevich’s terms in office was the disregard of requests submitted by various government watchdog groups under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Several witnesses—Jay Stewart, executive director of the Better Government Association; Don Craven, appearing as a private citizen; and Paul Orfanedes, director of litigation for the conservative organization Judicial Watch—were to testify regarding the many FOIA requests, denials, and resultant ongoing litigation. But the hour was late and the committee members had expended their enthusiasm. Currie asked the witnesses to be brief. The witnesses reinforced a negative attitude toward the Blagojevich administration but provided no solid evidence. Although the FOIA denials displayed a pattern of reticent behavior, the court cases were not yet settled.
    It had been an exhausting day. After a few questions from committee members,