NYT profiles SD Senate race

The New York Times has an article in tomorrow's edition headlined "Chasing a Coveted Democratic Prize Across the Plains." Excerpt:

This is the other big race of 2004. While Americans are focused on the campaign for the presidency, the second most important political contest is playing out in the rural towns and sparsely populated cities of South Dakota, a heavily Republican state where Mr. Daschle, the Democratic leader, is fighting for survival in a race that could well determine the balance of power in the Senate.

Dusty Johnson on the campaign trail

Dusty Johnson, a candidate for the Public Utilities Commission, and a good friend of SDP, was campaigning on 41st Street in Sioux Falls today. Here are some pictures:

Dusty's working hard, and I know he'll work even harder as a PUC commissioner. Dusty cares passionately about South Dakota, and his expertise in rural development is badly needed at the PUC. Dusty's one of the smartest blokes I know, and he's certainly the most energetic bloke I know. Plus he's just a good guy. He deserves your vote on November 2.

UPDATE: The AP has a report headlined "Dusty Johnson vows to attend all meetings." Naturally, this report has never made it into the Argus Leader.

Daschle: "I'm a DC resident"

You can now view an internet stream of Thune's ad entitled "In His Own Words" which shows video footage of Daschle saying, among other things, "I'm a DC resident." To see the ad, click HERE.

UPDATE: To better understand the brouhaha over Daschle's residency status, which has been dubbed "Mansiongate" click HERE.

Below is a picture of Daschle's French colonial mansion in one of Washington, DC's most exclusive neighborhoods, the epicenter of Mansiongate:

Former South Dakota GOP workers charged with misdemeanor

The Argus Leader has a report today headlined "6 former workers for GOP charged." These workers were charged with a misdemeanor (a crime less serious than a felony), but that rather salient fact isn't even in the lead paragraph of the story. One has to read much further to find that the crime these people committed "carries a maximum penalty of 30 days in jail and a $200 fine." Such a crime pales in comparison to a crime like forging signatures on registration applications. 277 South Dakotans swore under oath in 2002 that their signature had been forged on registration applications. Forgery is a felony with a maximum punishment of 5 years in prison and a $5000 fine. While there was no conviction in 2002, even the Argus Leader editorial board thought it was fishy that despite several people swearing under oath that their signatures on voter registration applications were forged, the state's handwriting "expert" determined their signatures were NOT forged. For more on what happened in 2002, be sure to read the chapter on the 2002 election in South Dakota in John Fund's new book "Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy." You can read a pdf copy of the South Dakota chapter by clicking HERE.

Daschle's response to "I'm a DC resident" ad: "I saved our water projects"

Daschle has responded to an ad showing video footage of Daschle saying things like "I'm a DC resident" and "we will not surrender sacred ground, and that includes a woman’s constitutional right to choose." His response? "You can edit someone's words to say anything" and then an announcer says that "Daschle saved our water projects." Once again, don't listen to what Daschle says, look at the record. For a transcript of Daschle's "sacred ground" remark click HERE. For a transcript of Daschle's "I'm a DC resident" remark click HERE.

NRO on a roll today

The National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez has a piece on NRO today headlined "A Kerry-League Play; Tom Daschle tries to have it both ways on abortion and marriage." Excerpt:

Tom Daschle's strategy seems to be to lie and hope for the best. John Kerry, likewise, is expected to give his personal summa nonsensical theologica this weekend, explaining in a speech how one can be an apple and an orange at the same time — Catholic and have a perfect abortion-advocacy voting record in the Senate. Good luck, guys. Meanwhile, bloggers and groups such as the Ave Maria List are going to be pounding at dishonesty right on through to Election Day. The Ave Maria List has set up a detailed website with all the 411, where South Dakotans can see primary documents and videos for themselves. Unfortunately for Tom Daschle and John Kerry — and fortunately for voters — there's a whole world wide web out there and their records are all over it.

NRO on the matter of Daschle's DC "Homestead Deduction"

The National Review's Meghan Clyne has an excellent piece today headlined "Home Is Where the Tax Break Is; Tom Daschle declared D.C. his primary residence." Excerpt:

Whether there is, in fact, "something more" to the Daschle story ought to be the target of legal inquiry, says New York attorney Mark Smith. "Where there's smoke, there's fire," he explains. "If Tom Daschle represented under the penalty of perjury that he was a resident of the District of Columbia when in fact he was not, that could be a basis for civil and possibly even criminal penalties.... When you sign a document concerning your tax status that you know is false, then you have a problem. You're not supposed to lie to the government."

Smith adds that, while it's unclear what the outcome of a legal inquiry into Mansiongate would be, "if there's a dispute or a controversy as to whether he's a resident of South Dakota, someone needs to look into it." Although Daschle may claim he is a South Dakotan publicly, Smith argues, the tax records are statements of fact — and fact-finders should be dispatched to determine definitively where Daschle "domiciles" (and whether he has committed any kind of fraud). "This is clearly a legitimate question that people ought to be asking, and it would be nice to have an answer before the election."

Read the whole thing.

DVT appears on Laura Ingraham show today

DVT appeared on Laura Ingraham's radio show today to discuss, among other things, the fact that the Argus Leader and David Kranz, the AL's lead political reporter, are completely in the tank for Daschle. Today's Laura Ingraham show will be broadcast on KELO-AM 1320 tonight at 6.

Howler of the Day

"Given the way media works today, anything you say in Washington is heard almost instantaneously in South Dakota. So it would be impossible to say one thing in Washington, and say something else in South Dakota. People in our state just would never let anybody get away with that." - Tom Daschle, quoted in the October 20, 2004 edition of the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. The Argus Leader, South Dakota's dominant newspaper, has ignored or buried 66 stories that show Tom Daschle says one thing in South Dakota, and does its 180 degree opposite in Washington.

Wall Street Journal editorial board to discuss SD Senate race

The Wall Street Journal's editorial board will be discussing the South Dakota Senate race on the local PBS affiliate this Sunday, October 24, at 4PM. It will also air on October 31 at 4PM. The Wall Street Journal's editorial board is acutely aware of the Daschle boosterism of the Argus Leader (Kranz's shilling for Dems in the guise of "journalist", Beck's bullying, Lalley's "evil Republicans" remark, and the 66 stories about Daschle skipped by the Argus Leader). It should be interesting to watch.

Mansiongate summary

Today has been a big day on the issue of Senator Daschle having signed a legal document stating that Washington, DC is his "principal place of residence." For those who are trying to figure out all of the threads to this story, here's the deal:

This story began in April of 2003, when Forbes magazine, in its column on who's buying and selling in the world of high-end real estate, reported that Senator Daschle had purchased a $1.9 million French colonial mansion in one of Washington, DC's most exclusive neighborhoods. This purchase raised some eyebrows back in South Dakota, and raised concerns about how Daschle could afford such a home on his six-figure senator's salary. Also, we now know that on April 28, 2003, Senator Daschle signed an application for the DC "Homestead Deduction," declaring that Washington, DC was his "primary place of residence (domicile)."

In August of 2003, the Club for Growth began running a television ad in South Dakota about Daschle's new mansion (you can view the ad by clicking HERE). The Washington Post published an article headlined "D.C. House Is a Topic On Daschle's Home Turf."

Shortly after the Club for Growth ads began running, Jeff Gannon, a conservative investigative reporter in Washington, DC, reported on August 13, 2003, that an investigation into DC property records indicated that Senator Daschle was receiving DC's "homestead tax credit" a credit given only to those whose "principal place of residence (domicile)" is in DC. Soon, Bob Novak followed up with a brief report. Then the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call published a thorough report of the matter under the headlined "Daschle hit on tax break; wife claims 'homestead' exemption."

We now know that on August 14, 2003, the day AFTER Jeff Gannon broke the story about Tom Daschle receiving the homestead deduction, the application for the deduction was amended so that Linda Daschle's signature appeared on the application rather than her husband's signature. This amendment to the application enabled the Daschle camp to tell Roll Call that it was Linda Daschle who was eligible to receive this homestead tax on behalf of the Daschles. Of course, the Daschle camp neglected to tell Roll Call that the application had been amended to show only Linda Daschle's signature only four days before, and that it was Tom Daschle's signature that had appeared on the application until a pesky reporter started sniffing around.

In early September, Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth wrote a column for NRO under the headline "Tom’s House Is a Very, Very, Very Nice House" noting the irony of Senator Daschle taking steps to avoid paying taxes while "fighting like a pit bull" to prevent the Bush tax cuts.

Of course, none of this activity was so much as mentioned in the Argus Leader, or any of the South Dakota press, until this week. This story percolated for over a year, until the indefatigable Jeff Gannon once again did some investigative work on the matter, making a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for a copy of the Daschles' application for the DC homestead deduction. Gannon made the FOIA request on September 29, 2004. When he received a copy of the application for the homestead deduction, it had only Tom Daschle's signature on it. The DC government did not thoroughly respond to the FOIA request, because Gannon did not receive the amended application showing only Linda Daschle's signature. Armed with the information that Tom Daschle, and not Linda Daschle, had signed the application, Gannon published a report on October 15, 2004, headlined "Daschle's South Dakota Residency In Question."

At the end of Gannon's story reporting the findings in his FOIA request, Gannon noted that an intriguing action had been taken by the DC government. "Since the FOIA request was filed on September 29, 2004," Gannon reported, "the DC Tax and Revenue web site has been updated to indicate that the Daschle property is "Not receiving the Homestead Deduction." But in a fascinating twist, the very next day the DC Tax and Revenue web site reflected that Daschle was "currently receiving the Homestead Deduction." Gannon followed up this fact with a new story headlined "Daschle Residency Question Grows Murkier." Excerpt:

Last week, Talon News obtained a document through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that indicated Daschle made Washington, DC his "primary place of residence" when he applied for a property tax exemption in April 2003.

On Friday, the District of Columbia's Office of Tax and Revenue (OTR) told Talon News that on September 29, 2004, the homestead tax credit was removed. That determination was made by a senior assessor the same day it received the FOIA request. A day later, on September 30, the OTR legal staff reinstated the credit.

You can see the documented evidence of what smacks as an attempted coverup HERE.

On Tuesday of this week, a former clerk for a federal appellate judge sent along a compelling legal analysis concluding that by claiming the DC homestead deduction, Daschle "legally declared that he had 'no fixed and definite intent to return' to South Dakota, his former domicile."

Yesterday, after Senator Daschle tried to generate publicity by voting absentee, the Thune campaign issued a press release pointing out that Daschle had signed a legal document declaring Washington, DC to be his "principal place of residence." This press release was the impetus for the story that appeared in today's edition of the Argus Leader headlined "Thune: D.C. tax break shows Daschle out of touch." The Aberdeen American News also carried a report on the matter today.

Finally, Jeff Gannon reported today that the DC government is investigating whether Sen. Tom Daschle is entitled to the homestead deduction.

That pretty much brings you up to date. There's likely to be more developments on this matter, so keep reading the blogs of the Dakota Alliance.

The epicenter of Mansiongate

The GOP mailer mentioned below contained a picture of Senator Daschle's $1.9 million home on Foxhall Road. Below is the picture of the house at the epicenter of Mansiongate.

Mail piece on Linda Daschle

DVT says he's received a mail piece today about some of Linda Daschle's controversial lobbying activities. I got it in the mail today too. It's a four page piece sent out by the South Dakota Republican Party. I took a picture of each page, and the pages are shown below:

The last page points to a piece written in the liberal Washington Monthly by Stephanie Mencimer headlined "Tom Daschle's Hillary problem" as well as to an article in the USA Today headlined "Daschle, lobbyist wife vow to keep careers separate."

Aberdeen American News reports on Mansiongate

The Aberdeen American News has a report on the escalating brouhaha over Senator Daschle signing a legal document declaring Washington, DC to be his "principal place of residence" headlined "Daschle's state of residency questioned." The article notes that Linda Daschle "has been registered to vote in the state since the 1970s, although she's never lived in the state."

More on the Argus Leader's report on Mansiongate

The Argus Leader's story today on Mansiongate headlined "Thune: D.C. tax break shows Daschle out of touch" covers many of the issues involved in the story, but it misses one key issue in light of the following passage from the story:

The Roll Call article in question quotes a Daschle campaign staff member saying Linda Daschle's status made the couple eligible for the tax break but does not say she signed the application.

Additionally, the Daschle campaign supplied records Wednesday, dated Aug. 14, 2003, showing that a box indicating "principal place of residence" was checked "yes," but it was part of an updated application signed by Linda Daschle, not the senator.

Daschle said Wednesday night that he signed "typical closing papers" on the house in April 2003, including the homestead deduction application.

"Only one signature is required for all the closing papers. This was in those papers. They provided Linda with the new form, and she signed it. They've eliminated the form I signed. Now on record is Linda's signature."

A natural follow-up to this would be to ask WHY Linda signed an "updated" form in August. I rather doubt that every homeowner in Washington signed a new form at that time. As DVT observes, the chronology of this matter raises even more questions:

"So when Talon News and Roll Call started poking around, the Daschle campaign went into crisis management mode, started saying that Linda "qualified" for the tax exemption, had the DC Mayor's office cover for them, and then quickly had her execute new documents. They never actually admitted, however, that Daschle had been the one to originally sign the form. But when Talon News sent in a Freedom of Information Act request, the DC tax office sent out the original tax exemption form signed by Tom Daschle (but they didn't send out the new Linda forms). They also started changing around his tax status on their website and having decisions reversed by lawyers and generally stonewalling the press. It seems to me that a big part of the story is what is happening/happened in the DC tax office."

Indeed.

The Argus Leader reports on Mansiongate

Well, fourteen months after the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported on Senator Daschle's DC "Homestead Deduction" controversy, the Argus Leader finally reports the story under the headline "Thune: D.C. tax break shows Daschle out of touch." Better late than never, though. Excerpt:

"Republican candidate John Thune said Wednesday that Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle's participation in a tax break on housing in Washington, D.C., shows that his opponent has lost touch with South Dakota. 'It ties in to the very theme of the campaign all along,' Thune said in a phone interview from Garretson. 'Tom Daschle is a lot more about Washington than he is about South Dakota. He's willing to declare Washington his principal place of residence for a $288 tax break.' Daschle said Thune is drawing a false conclusion from inaccurate information....

Their dispute centers on what is called a 'homestead deduction' for the $1.9 million home Daschle and his wife, Linda, bought in spring 2003. It became an issue within the past week as the two campaigns provided paperwork and conflicting accounts on the Daschles' application for the deduction. The local government of Washington, D.C., offers the deduction to residents who own a home and pay the city income tax. Members of Congress are exempt from the local income tax but are eligible for the deduction if their spouses do pay it. That is the case with Daschles, because Linda pays the local tax on her earnings as a Washington lobbyist. Records supplied by the Thune campaign show that Sen. Daschle signed an application for the homestead deduction on April 30, 2003. An attached list of rules from the district tax office says the property in question must be the 'principal residence' of the applicant.

The Daschles' tax bill, also attached, shows an assessment of $1,445,830, a total tax due for the year at $12,397 and a $288 homestead deduction."

FLASHBACK

Senator Daschle in an election year: "My home is 1615 South First Street, Aberdeen, South Dakota, and I'm very proud of it." - Aberdeen American News, Oct. 20, 2004.

Senator Daschle when an election isn't looming: "The Senate is my home." - Newsweek, January 20, 2003.

Daschle: "I'm a DC resident"

There's a new ad running on TV that shows footage of Senator Daschle telling an interviewer "I'm a DC resident" and giving an affirmative nod. This adds to the present brouhaha here in South Dakota over the revelation that Senator Daschle has signed a document under penalty of perjury stating DC is his "principal place of residence."

New developments on Daschle's "Homestead Deduction"

The indefatigable Jeff Gannon, resident DC expert on South Dakota politics, reports the latest developments in the rapidly growing furor surrounding Senator Daschle's "principal place of residence" in a story headlined "Daschle Tax Exemption Under Investigation."

AP reports on Daschle's DC "Homestead Deduction"

[Note: Important update appended.]

The AP has a report headlined "Daschle takes advantage of chance to vote absentee." Excerpt:

Dick Wadhams, Thune's campaign manager, said Thune had not yet decided whether to vote on Election Day or by absentee.

But Wadhams said Thune took issue with Daschle voting in Aberdeen after receiving a special tax break that required him to declare Washington, D.C., as his main residence.

"It is terribly ironic that Sen. Daschle would vote by absentee in South Dakota when he has declared his 'principal place of residence' as Washington, D.C.," Thune said Wednesday in a prepared statement.

Daschle said Thune's charge was inaccurate because all taxpayers in Washington, D.C., get the same treatment on their property taxes.

"My home is 1615 South First Street, Aberdeen, South Dakota, and I'm very proud of it," Daschle said.

It's amazing how Daschle's story keeps changing on this matter. First, the Daschle camp said the reason he received the DC "Homestead Deduction" is because his wife Linda qualified for it. When it became known that Tom Daschle himself had signed the application for the Homestead Deduction, not Linda, the Daschle camp changed their story and said "the house" qualified for the tax break, rather than any person. Today, Daschle says "all Washington, DC taxpayers" get the same treatment on their property taxes. No, only Washington, DC taxpayers who make the conscious action of applying for the Homestead Deduction by stating under penalty of perjury that DC is their "principal place of residence" get the same treatment on their property taxes. Moreover, in the Roll Call report on this matter last year, headlined "Daschle Hit On Tax Break; Wife Claims ‘Homestead’ Exemption", a DC government official was quoted as saying “Ninety-eight percent of the time it would be impossible for [a Member of Congress] to qualify" for the Homestead Deduction. The story goes on to say that Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina no longer qualified for the deduction when the Homestead Deduction statute was changed to require DC to be the applicant's domicile.

What's really curious about this whole matter is the fact that Senator Daschle's cronies in the DC government actually changed his Homestead Deduction status from "currently receiving the Homestead Deduction" to "not receiving the Homestead Deduction" when a FOIA request was made for a copy of Senator Daschle's application for the Homestead Deduction. You'd think this kind of activity is exactly the kind of activity a newspaper like the Argus Leader, with an editor who constantly prattles on about being a "watchdog" of the government, would be interested in pursuing. But if you thought that, you'd be wrong.

UPDATE: Note too, that Daschle says it's "inaccurate" that he has declared DC to be his principal place of residence. Except that it is accurate. As John Thune would say, don't listen to what Daschle says, just look at the record. Daschle has signed a document stating DC is his principal place of residence, and that document is readily available for scrutiny. All you have to do to get it is make a FOIA request to the DC government.

Sharon Gray to appear on "Straight Talk" next hour

Sharon Gray will be appearing on Greg Belfrage's radio show at 4:30PM today to discuss, among other things, her past support for Senator Daschle and why she is working to defeat him now. Be sure to listen in.

Thune camp issues press release on Daschle's DC "Homestead Deduction"

The Thune camp has issued a press release headlined "Daschle votes 'absentee' after declaring Washington, DC as 'principal residence'" The subhead reads "Daschle sought and received 'homestead' tax break on Washington, D.C. mansion." The entire text of the press release is below:

South Dakota Republican Senate candidate John Thune today criticized Senator Tom Daschle for voting absentee after receiving a special tax break that required him to declare his Washington, D.C. mansion as his “principal place of residence.”

“It is terribly ironic that Senator Daschle would vote by absentee in South Dakota when he has declared his ‘principal place of residence’ as Washington, D.C.,” Thune said. “Tom Daschle apparently thinks the $288 tax break he received by declaring Washington his ‘principal residence’ was worth it.”

Daschle and his wife, Linda Daschle, a Washington, D.C. lobbyist for the pharmaceutical giant Schering-Plough and other clients, voted by absentee in Aberdeen today. Linda Daschle has never lived in South Dakota.

Tom and Linda Daschle purchased a mansion in Washington, D.C. along fashionable Foxhall Road for $1.9 million in April 2003. Thy applied for and received a “homestead” tax break made available to those who declare their home to be their “principal place of residence” under District of Columbia law.

The Daschles received a $288 tax break in exchange for declaring their Washington, D.C. mansion as their “principal place of residence.”

Sharon Gray responds to Daschle camp's comments

[Note: Correction appended]

Below is a letter Sharon Gray, a college professor from Vermillion, SD, sent to Dan Pfeiffer, Senator Daschle's deputy campaign manager, in response to his comments reported in today's edition of the Aberdeen American News and the Rapid City Journal:

Dear Dan Pfiefer,

I'm writing to take issue with your comments relating Daschle's "pro-life" record as quoted in the Aberdeen American News and the Rapid City Journal.

"The Ave Marie group is a shadowy group based out of state," said Dan Pfeiffer, deputy campaign manager for Daschle. "Their sole purpose is to distort Sen. Daschle's beliefs. Daschle is opposed to abortion and believes every abortion is a tragedy." Aberdeen American News

First, the Ave Maria group is no more nor less shadowy than any of the other special interest groups serving a very NECESSARY purpose in this post-McCain/Feingold era. They allow individuals to pool their resources and have their small voices heard above the cacaphony and din of political rhetoric. In a perfect world, if the press and media were truly un-biased, perhaps McCain/Feingold wouldn't have had as serious an effect on free speech as it has. But we do not live in a perfect world. And so I, therefore, am grateful for groups such as Ave Maria who to allow those of us with a strong view on particular issues to have our voices heard.

"To assert, as Ave Maria does, that receiving a contribution from a group is a de-facto endorsement of all of that group's policies is absurd....DASHPAC's contributions to EMILY's List were part of Daschle's efforts as Democratic leader in the Senate to elect Democrats, Pfeiffer said." Rapid City Journal

As you well know, Emily's list does not give money to ANY candidate who is not pro-choice. True, they have a three-prong test: Only 1) pro-choice, 2) Democratic, 3) female candidates can receive Emily's list endorsement. But, the ONLY time I have seen an Emily's list candidate have her endorsement pulled is IF she fails to vote pro-choice. So, clearly, that is a requirement: she must vote pro-choice. So, for Daschle to have given $10,000 to Emily's list, he is supporting their mission: to elect pro-choice, Democratic women.

Additionally, neither NARAL nor Emily's List would ever dream of inviting a "pro-life" individual to 1) write a letter on their letterhead (regardless of whether it was for Naral or indirectly for Jean Carnahan) or 2) address them at a fundraising gathering (as Daschle did in the video clips (which, by the way, are no longer available at the DashPac website. Is Daschle ashamed of that alliance?)

That brings me to my final point. Anyone who cares strongly about life issues and follows the voting (and writes letters on bills and gets back placating replies) KNOWS that Daschle voted pro-choice 75 out of 83 times. And the 8 "pro-life" votes were only when it was politically expedient to do so. When he voted for the partial birth abortion ban, he voted for the "life or health of the mother" exemption. This even AFTER abortion provider experts testified that the particular procedure is NEVER necessary to protect the life or health of the mother, that it is almost ALWAYS done on healthy fetuses of healthy mothers. In fact, a pro-abortion doctor is quoted as saying he would argue that normal childbirth itself is sometimes dangerous and life-threatening, and therefore would provide the exception that swallows the rule. Daschle voted for the Feinstein amendment which would have effectively gutted the partial birth abortion ban and finally ONLY voted for the ban as we now have it because he knew it was going to pass with or without his vote, and it would NOT resonate well with the voters back in South Dakota if he were unable to "show" that he voted for the ban. That is disingenuous.

I really don't care how a candidate feels "personally" about the issue of abortion. I care how he or she votes. A pro-life candidate is one who votes pro-life and a pro-choice candidate is one who votes pro-choice. Daschle is clearly a pro-choice candidate. His 100% rating from NARAL is irrefutable evidence of that.

I ask that you be forthright with the voters about Daschle's pro-choice voting record. Do not continue to misrepresent Daschle as a "pro-life" candidate when he most certainly is not. His 0% rating from National Right to Life is evidence of that.

Sincerely,

Sharon Gray

CORRECTION: Sharon Gray is a college "instructor," not a college "professor." I regret the error.

Daschle's abortion record

Yesterday, the Ave Maria List held press conferences around the state to point out Senator Daschle's doublespeak on abortion. Today, the Rapid City Journal and the Aberdeen American News both have reports. Predictably, there's no report in the Argus Leader.

Rapid City Journal briefly covers Daschle's DC "Homestead Deduction"

Today's edition of the Rapid City Journal contains a brief report on the fact that Senator Daschle has signed a document under penalty of perjury stating Washington, DC is his "principal place of residence":

Homestead exemption

A tax break claimed by Daschle on the Washington, D.C., house he and his wife, Linda, own is drawing fire from Thune.

To claim the District of Columbia's homestead exemption worth a few hundred bucks off his property taxes, Daschle signed a document declaring the D.C. house his primary residence.

The Web-based conservative Talon news obtained the document Daschle signed to get that tax break through a Freedom of Information Act request to the District of Columbia.

Talon's report last week cited a state law outlining South Dakota's residency requirements for those seeking elected office. That law applies to state-level candidates but not to federal-level candidates. That was the case when term limits passed in several states about a decade ago. State lawmakers are living under those limits, but federal lawmakers aren't.

In August 2003, Daschle campaign manager Steve Hildebrand said it was Linda Daschle who was claiming the tax break.

"Linda Daschle pays income taxes in Washington, D.C. That makes Linda Daschle eligible to receive this homestead tax on behalf of the Daschles," Hildebrand told Roll Call.

The newly released documents bearing Tom Daschle's signature belie that explanation. Now, Daschle campaign officials say it is "the house" that qualifies for the tax break rather than any person.

Thune says Daschle's signature belies "where his heart and head and priorities are." That being Washington, D.C., if you ask Thune.

"It's symbolic. It's a window into the soul of his priorities," Thune said.

For the record, the Daschles own a house in Aberdeen, where Tom Daschle's mother lives.

It's interesting how Daschle's story keeps changing the more the facts are uncovered. First it was Linda who qualified for the deduction, and now that we know Senator Daschle himself signed the document, they say "the house" qualifies. Yes, the house qualifies because Daschle stated the house was his "principal place of residence (domicile)." As explained earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that to be “domiciled” in the District of Columbia, one must “live here and have no fixed and definite intent to return and make their homes where they were formerly domiciled.” The argument about "the house" qualifying for the deduction on its own is a non-starter. Whether the house qualifies for the homestead deduction depends on the actions of the house's owner/occupant. To get the deduction, Daschle had to act of his own volition by filling out an application to receive it. If he hadn't made the affirmative act of filling out and signing the application for the homestead deduction, he wouldn't be receiving the homestead deduction.

One thing stands out in this whole mess. Daschle has been in Washington too long, and he has been taking advantage of the South Dakotan desire to believe the best about everyone for too long. It's time for a change.

Ave Maria List press conferences

DVT has a report on the Sioux Falls press conference held by the Ave Maria List today to announce a new website, "www.daschledocuments.com" that illustrates Senator Daschle's doublespeak on the issue of abortion. Among those speaking at the press conference was Sharon Gray, who has written a piece about her support for Senator Daschle early in his career when he was a pro-life candidate.

More on Daschle's South Dakota residency status

A highly intelligent lawyer friend of mine (a former clerk for a federal appellate court) sends along the following brief analysis of Senator Daschle's residency debacle:

On April 28, 2003, Thomas A. Daschle signed a legal document with the government of Washington, D.C. in which he asserted that he was qualified to claim a “Homestead Exemption” for his home there.

In order to be eligible for such an exemption, one must be “domiciled” in the District of Columbia. See D.C. Code Section 47-850 (“For purposes of levying the real property tax during a tax year, the Mayor shall deduct $38,000 from the estimated market value of real property which qualifies as a homestead.”); Section 47-849 (defining “homestead” to mean the principal place of residence of an individual who is “domiciled in the District.”)

The Supreme Court has held that to be “domiciled” in the District of Columbia, one must “live here and have no fixed and definite intent to return and make their homes where they were formerly domiciled.” See D.C. v. Murphy, 314 U.S. 441, 454-55 (1941). This has been consistently cited as the criteria for determining residency/domiciliary status in Washington, D.C. See, e.g., Lane-Burslem v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 659 F.2d 209, 211 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (discussing evidence showing whether appellant has “the firm, unconditional intent to return necessary to claim she has not renounced her Louisiana domicile”).

Thus, in order to claim a Homestead Exemption, Thomas A. Daschle legally declared that he had “no fixed and definite intent to return” to South Dakota, his former domicile.

If this statement is false, Thomas A. Daschle committed perjury. According to the form he signed any false statement thereon would subject the signer to fines up to $1000 and imprisonment up to 180 days. See D.C. Code Section 22-2514.

But if it is true, under South Dakota law Thomas A. Daschle is no longer a resident, because to be a resident one must have “the intent of remaining here." See In re Forman, 21 N.W.2d 57 (S.D. 1945); see also Martinez v. Bynum, 461 U.S. 321 (1983) (citing Forman as an example of the “classic” test used nearly everywhere “as a minimum standard in a wide range of contexts time and time again”).

This intent is also a minimum requirement under South Dakota’s Constitution and statutes for the specific determination of residency for voting purposes. See S.D. Const. Art. 7 §2. Simply put, if one does not intend to make South Dakota one’s home, one may not register to vote here. SDCL §12-1-4 (“If a person moves to another state, or to any of the other territories, with the intention of making it his or her permanent home, the person thereby loses residence in this state.)

Importantly, under South Dakota law, as soon as one forms the intention to make another location his or her permanent home, one automatically loses residence in South Dakota. SDCL §12-1-4 (“If a person moves to another state, or to any of the other territories, with the intention of making it his or her permanent home, the person thereby loses residence in this state.)

If indeed Thomas A. Daschle is domiciled in Washington, he therefore is not a legal resident of South Dakota. Whether this means he may serve as an elected official or be nominated for election is unclear. But it is certain that if he is not a legal resident of South Dakota, he is not eligible to register to vote here.

You'd think a story about Daschle's residency problems would be jumped on by the South Dakota press. But if you thought that, you'd be wrong.

Debate roundup

The Argus Leader has a story headlined "Abortion at core of debate" that accompanies the photo above.

The AP has a story appearing in the Rapid City Journal headlined "Clout, religion debated."

Elsewhere in the Rapid City Journal is a story by Denise Ross headlined "Thune's record on Indians at issue in debates."

KSFY, the host of last night's debate, has an article headlined "Candidates Meet for Final Debate."

UPDATE: Ryne McClaren also has a good roundup of last night's debate.

Daschle: "There are times you vote for and against things"

Last night's debate was witness to Tom Daschle's "I voted for it before I voted against it" moment. When the issue of Tom Daschle's conflicting votes on partial-birth abortion came up, Daschle actually said "there are times when you vote for and against things." Amazing. Daschle seemed to actually be saying he was both for and against the partial-birth abortion ban.

Throughout the six debates between Thune and Daschle this year, one thing stands out. Daschle is overconfident. He can't quite believe that he might actually lose this thing. He's been noticeably less prepared than Thune in every debate, and Thune has scored many more points than Daschle has throughout the debates. Even the liberal Manchester (UK) Guardian has conceded that Thune has been "a nimble and aggressive debater, arguably stronger than the soft-spoken senator." Perhaps much of the reason Thune has scored more points than Daschle is because Daschle's record is incredibly target rich, while Thune's record is not so target rich. I've been told by those in the know that Daschle has continually showed up late to the debates, and when they're over, can't duck out of there fast enough.

The best moment in the Senate debate last night was Thune's response to Daschle's assertion that his test for every bill is whether it's good for South Dakota. Thune responded by pointing to a story in the November 26, 1991 edition of the Washington Post quoting Daschle as saying the following:

"I dare say the first thing that comes to my mind in a vote is: Can it [the issue] pass the 30-second test, how successful will my opponent be in applying it to a 30-second ad? It's a screen that comes up whenever there is a vote," said Sen. Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.).

It was devastating. All Daschle could do was say he couldn't believe Thune would say that. That's a microcosm of the Daschle psychology: he can't believe someone would actually scrutinize the things he's said and done in the past, much less bring them up in a campaign.

Finally, for this last debate, it seems Daschle's opposition research people finally did their homework. Daschle got a good whack in tonight by pulling out a letter Thune had written to Daschle asking him to pass country of origin labeling (COOL) after Thune had been unable to get the provision in the House.

Still, there were many instances where Thune pointed out Daschle's record on a host of issues that Daschle simply did not respond to, not even bothering to mutter his trademark "that's not true, John, and you know it's not true." When Thune brought up the fact of Daschle's mass fundraising e-mail on behalf of NARAL, during which Thune said Daschle was a "poster-boy for NARAL," Daschle just let it go.

DVT has much more under a post headlined "Somebody Stop the Fight!", and thinks Daschle took a pounding in this debate.

Ave Maria List to hold press conferences tomorrow

The Ave Maria List, a pro-life advocacy group, will be holding press conferences around the state tomorrow. You can read the schedule for the press conferences to be held by clicking HERE.

Can Tom Daschle even legally vote in South Dakota?

Last year, Roll Call, a Capital Hill publication, published a story headlined "Daschle Hit On Tax Break; Wife Claims ‘Homestead’ Exemption'" noting the controversy over Tom and Linda Daschle applying for and receiving the "Homestead Deduction" for their $1.9 million home in Washington, DC. Excerpt from Roll Call:

Public records show that Daschle is in fact receiving the $30,000 tax deduction that reduces his property tax bill by a few hundred dollars annually as long as the property is the principal residence of the owner....

Talon News, a conservative Web-based publication that first reported the charges last week, suggested in its story that Daschle “may not even qualify for the tax credit, since one of the requirements is that the property must be the owner’s primary residence.”

But both Daschle aides and a spokesman for Williams dismissed the charges as baseless, partisan attacks and said the South Dakota Democrat is in complete compliance with the law because his wife, Linda, qualifies for the tax break.

“The Daschles are most definitely entitled to the homestead deduction, just as I am,” Williams’ spokesman Tony Bullock said, adding that the notion that the tax break is somehow a targeted program for low-income households is erroneous.

“It’s available to all homeowners in the District, regardless of the value of their property or their level of income,” Bullock continued. “The reason the Daschles’ are entitled to it has everything to do with Mrs. Daschle and nothing to do with Mr. Daschle. She pays District income taxes, so she qualifies.”

The relevant statute for the "homestead deduction" in the District of Columbia code is 47-850 which provides in part:

(a) For purposes of levying the real property tax during a tax year, the Mayor shall deduct $38,000 from the estimated market value of real property which qualifies as a homestead. The deduction shall be apportioned equally between each installment during a tax year and shall not be carried forward or carried back.

(b) To qualify the homestead and receive the deduction, the individual shall complete and file with the Mayor an application in a form prescribed by the Mayor. The individual shall certify, under penalty of perjury, the information provided on the application form and the application form shall be filed in the manner prescribed by the Mayor. The Mayor may require the individual to provide any information which the Mayor considers necessary, including all taxpayer identification numbers of the individual, any other owner, any person with legal or equitable title, and any person in the household of the individual. The Mayor may also require the individual, any other owner, any person with legal or equitable title, and any person in the household of the individual to supply information after the homestead has been granted to determine whether the real property remains a homestead and entitled to the deduction.

Section 47-849 of the DC code defines the terms "residence" and "homestead":

For purposes of §§ 47-850 through 47-850.04, the term:

(1) "Residence" means the principal place of residence within the District of an individual, shareholder, or member, who is domiciled in the District.

(2) "Homestead" means:

(A) In the case of real property improved by a house or a condominium, an individual's residence that:

(i) Comprises a dwelling unit;

(ii) Is Class 1 Property, as defined in § 47-813, that contains not more than 5 dwelling units therein; and

(iii) Is owned in whole or in part by the individual.

(B) In the case of real property owned by a cooperative housing association that is Class 1 Property, as defined under § 47-813, a shareholder's or member's residence that:

(i) Comprises a dwelling unit; and

(ii) By reason of his ownership of stock or membership certificate, a proprietary lease, or other evidence of membership, is occupied by right by the shareholder or member.

Clearly, the only reason Senator Daschle qualified for the homestead deduction is because his "principal place of residence" is within the District, and he is "domiciled" there. Note too that the Roll Call story quotes a DC official as saying 98% of congressional members wouldn't qualify for the deduction.

Since Tom Daschle's principal place of residence is in DC, can he even legally vote in South Dakota? The relevant statute defining residency for voting purposes in South Dakota is SDCL 12-1-4, which reads:

Criteria for determining voting residence. For the purposes of this title, the term, residence, means the place in which a person has fixed his or her habitation and to which the person, whenever absent, intends to return.

A person who has left home and gone into another state or territory or county of this state for a temporary purpose only has not changed his or her residence.

A person is considered to have gained a residence in any county or municipality of this state in which the person actually lives, if the person has no present intention of leaving.

If a person moves to another state, or to any of the other territories, with the intention of making it his or her permanent home, the person thereby loses residence in this state.

It would seem that since Daschle applied for and received the Homestead Deduction which requires him to declare that the district is his "primary residence," he has shown his intent of making DC his permanent home and has thereby lost his residency status in the state of South Dakota.

South Dakota Supreme Court caselaw has provided that "A residence is established by personal presence in a fixed and permanent abode, with the intent of remaining there." Appeal of Lawrence County (In re Forman), 21 N.W.2d 57, (1945). In re Forman has been cited by the United States Supreme Court as authority for the "classic two-part definition of residence [which] has been recognized as a minimum standard in a wide range of contexts time and time again." Martinez v. Bynum, 461 U.S. 321, 331 (1983). Senator Daschle has established a personal presence in a fixed and permanent abode, and clearly stated his intent to remain in his $1.9 million home in Washington, DC by applying for and receiving the District's "Homestead Deduction" which requires the District to be one's "primary" residence.

While there are unresolved questions about whether Senator Daschle can legally vote in South Dakota, cursory research shows that Senator Daschle has voted in South Dakota as recently as the special election in June of 2004. An Aberdeen American News article dated November 6, 2002, and headlined "Election workers report heavy voter turnout" shows a picture of Tom and Linda Daschle arriving to vote at an Aberdeen precinct.

Daschle has voted in South Dakota as recently as June. It would seem, from a legal standpoint, that he cannot legally vote in South Dakota in 2004 because of the purchase of a $1.9 million home in DC after which he promptly applied for and received the Homestead Deduction.

By the way, this story has never been reported by the Argus Leader. The AL only reports Roll Call stories that reflect negatively on John Thune. Tom Daschle gets a pass.

Tonight's debate to be broadcast on C-Span

The last Senate debate in South Dakota will be held tonight. It will be broadcast live on C-Span at 8:00PM Eastern time. You can view last night's debate, which included the reunion of Senator Daschle and David Kranz, by clicking HERE.

Campaign manager on Daschle's residency

When the Roll Call story headlined "Daschle Hit on Tax Break; Wife Claims 'Homestead' exemption" was reported in the Capitol Hill publication Roll Call last year, letters to the editor started appearing in South Dakota newspapers questioning Daschle's South Dakota residency. (Of course, no South Dakota newspaper actually reported the story.) Nevertheless, Steve Hildebrand, Senator Daschle's campaign manager, felt it was necessary to respond to these letters himself. One such letter to the editor written by Steve Hildebrand appeared in the September 1, 2003 edition of the Argus Leader:

"Doug Clark is absolutely wrong about his attack on Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D. Tom and Linda Daschle own a home in Aberdeen. They pay property taxes on that home each year. Daschle has a South Dakota driver's license and is registered to vote here. No credible person has ever questioned his South Dakota residency and his qualifications to run for the U.S. Senate.

Clark is quoting from a right-wing attack story that was filled with false information. The homestead deduction is available to any homeowner in Washington, D.C., who qualifies, and because Linda Daschle pays Washington, D.C. income taxes, she qualifies on behalf of the Daschles. This does not disqualify Daschle in any way.

Clark was doing nothing more than making a partisan political attack against Daschle. Otherwise, he would have told readers that Republican senators like Kay Bailey Hutchinson, a millionaire senator from Texas, has also taken the homestead deduction. Why doesn't he criticize her, too?"

First, things like voter registration and driver's licenses are not evidence of residency, they're what's at issue. There are two simple standards for residency: 1) physical presence and 2) intent to return when absent. Daschle's intent is what's at issue here.

Of course, we now know that Hildebrand was lying when he said it was Linda Daschle who qualified for the homestead deduction. Last week, it was discovered that the application for the homestead deduction was signed by Tom Daschle, not Linda Daschle. Moreover, Hildebrand simply ignores the fact that the only way a homeowner in Washington, DC can qualify for the homestead deduction is if that person's "principal place of residence" is Washington, DC. According to the DC Office of Tax and Revenue's website, there are three criteria for qualifying for the homestead deduction:

1. An application must be on file with the Office of Tax and Revenue;
2. The property must be occupied by the owner/applicant and contain no more than 5 dwelling units (including the unit occupied by the owner);
3. The property must be the principal residence (domicile) of the owner/applicant.

(Emphasis original.) These requirements are dictated by the DC Code, Sections 47-849 and 47-850. Section 47-849 of the DC code reads:

For purposes of §§ 47-850 through 47-850.04, the term:

(1) "Residence" means the principal place of residence within the District of an individual, shareholder, or member, who is domiciled in the District.

(2) "Homestead" means:

(A) In the case of real property improved by a house or a condominium, an individual's residence that:

(i) Comprises a dwelling unit;

(ii) Is Class 1 Property, as defined in § 47-813, that contains not more than 5 dwelling units therein; and

(iii) Is owned in whole or in part by the individual.

(Emphasis added.) It would seem that by signing an application declaring that Washington, DC is his "principal place of residence," Daschle has made a voluntary action to abandon his domicile and establish residency in the District of Columbia. The Congressional Research Service has written a report on the issue of "Inhabitancy in the State from Which Elected" noting the case of John Bailey in the 18th Congress which shares some remarkable similarities to Senator Daschle's situation:

In the case of John Bailey in the 18th Congress, for example, the House of Representatives found a Member-elect from Massachusetts not to be an “inhabitant” of that State, when he had left the State to work for the Federal Government and reside in the District of Columbia for a number of years. Even in this seemingly strict interpretation, however, the Committee and the House noted that it was a voluntary action on the part of Bailey to “abandon” his domicile and establish residency in the District of Columbia, that he had lived “exclusively” in the District for a period ofover 6 years, that he had in the District “married a wife and established a family of his own, thereby leaving his natural or original domicile in his father’s house,” and that, significantly, “Mr. Bailey had no domestic establishment or estate in Massachusetts.” Noting that one “may acquire inhabitancy in the District of Columbia in the same way as in any of the States,” the House and Committee on Elections, as reported in Hinds’ Precedents, specifically concluded:

If the residence of Mr. Bailey here [the District of Columbia] had been transient and not uniform; had he left a dwelling house in Massachusetts in which his family resided a part of the year; had he left there any of the insignia of a household establishment; there would be indication that his domicile in Massachusetts had not been abandoned. It had been urged that the expressed intention to return to Massachusetts should govern. But the law ascertained intention in such a case by deducing from facts. ... The committee did not contend that a Member must be actually residing in a State at the time of his election.

One can discern Daschle's intention to make DC his principal place of residency by deducing it from the fact that he has declared DC to be his "principal place of residence" in his application for the DC "homestead deduction."

The next question that arises is whether Senator Daschle can legally vote in South Dakota if his principal place of residence is in DC. More on that later.

More on Daschle's residency

More is being reported on the question of whether Senator Daschle is actually a resident of South Dakota: "Daschle Residency Question Grows Murkier." Interestingly, the report notes that Kentucky Democrats managed to get a candidate for lieutenant governor declared ineligible to run because he was a resident of Washington, DC. Excerpt:

In 2003, a Kentucky judge ruled that Hunter Bates, a Republican candidate for Lt. Governor was ineligible to run because of that state's residency requirements. Bates worked for Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) in Washington from 1997 to 2002. The judge decided that Bates maintained his Kentucky citizenship, but not his residency, while he lived in Alexandria, Va., from 1995 to 2002.

Democrats have also attempted to disqualify Dick Cheney to run for Vice President due to residency problems, and attempted to disqualify current Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney from running for governor by challenging his residency status.

Howler of the Day

"I'm not in favor of raising anybody's income taxes." - Senator Tom Daschle in tonight's debate on KELO. Daschle has voted to raise taxes 350 times during his political career. He voted for the Clinton tax increase of 1993 and against the Bush tax cuts of 2001. Daschle made this howler after Thune whipped out the pledge not to raise taxes that Daschle signed in 1986. A copy of the pledge that Daschle signed is below:

Last debate tomorrow night

The last debate in the Senate campaign is tomorrow night, sponsored by KSFY and KOTA. You can submit proposed questions for the debate by sending an e-mail to debate@ksfy.com or by clicking HERE.

KELO debate tonight may be streamed on Internet

I'm not completely certain, but you may be able to watch a live internet stream of tonight's Daschle v. Thune debate at keloland.com. It should be starting momentarily. It will be heartwarming to see the Kranz-Daschle reunion live.

Sibby to picket the Argus Leader

Sibby is going to be picketing at the site of tonight's debate at 5 p.m. today. The placard he'll be carrying says it all.

The Argus Leader: A Strong Voice for Tom Daschle

DVT:

[T]he Argus Leader's systematic campaign to deprive the public of information critical to a fully-informed judgment in the Senate race degrades the democratic process. Now, in one final insult to the public's intelligence, the Argus Leader is sending their reporter and Daschle's "publicity chairman" from the 1960s to moderate the big debate tonight between Daschle and Thune. It's a fine coda to this race, actually. It says it all. In one day, the Argus endorsed Daschle, wrote a puffy "bio" piece about him which left out all the contradictions central to his career, and sent their reporter/Daschle "publicity chairman" to lob softballs at Daschle in the debate tonight.

DVT is referring to David Kranz, the dean of South Dakota political reporters. Not only will Kranz be lobbing softballs at Daschle tonight, he'll also attempt to skewer Thune. Why couldn't the Argus Leader have chosen someone more like KELO's Steve Hemmingsen, who skewers both sides equally?

A poll about the Argus Leader?

DVT wonders what a poll asking people if they thought the Argus was biased would show.

Argus Leader endorses Daschle

As predicted, the Argus Leader has endorsed Senator Daschle. Once again, the Argus Leader stands with the establishment and for the status quo.