South Dakota Politics

Gannon on Daschle's defeat

Jeff Gannon, resident DC expert on South Dakota politics, recently wrote an article headlined "Opposition to Death Tax Repeal Helped Topple Daschle."  You can read Gannon's complete coverage of the 2004 Senate race in South Dakota HERE.

Daschle campaign leader: Ordinary South Dakotans "not nice people"

The Northern Valley Beacon, purportedly representative of the Brown County Democrats in Aberdeen, SD, offers a rare glimpse of outrage at Rep. Stephanie Herseth "undercutting" Sen. Daschle's positions during the 2004 campaign.  The blog also quotes a Daschle campaign "leader" who said that ordinary South Dakotans "are not nice people" and questioned why anyone would want to live among them.  Could it be Dan Pfeiffer (quoted during the campaign as saying John Thune is not a nice guy from Murdo) who said that?  Anyway, here's an excerpt from a particularly rich post dated Saturday, November 13, 2004:

People who were active in the Daschle campaign knew that the Senator's hired campaign staff were furious with the way Stephanie Herseth took positions on gay marriage, gun control, and the kind of support she would pledge to President Bush. As David Kranz said at the [Dollar]-A-Month Club, her position left Tom Daschle and the Democrats who support him to walk the plank. She undercut his position in trying to define her own. If there were to be a primary in South Dakota today for the House seat, the Daschle Democrats would vote for someone else. Many Democrats would vote against Herseth's position on the issues for the same reason they voted against the position of the Republican candidate. The campaign staff for Sen. Daschle is particularly bitter, and as they return to their home states and, particularly, to Washington, D.C., they indicate that Rep. Herseth has greatly reduced the amount of support and cooperation she can expect from her fellow Democrats in Congress. ...  In the minds of many Democrats, Herseth played to the anti-Daschle ads. Two years is probably not enough time for people to forget her stances in relation to what was one of the most expensive and bitter campaigns to be conducted at the senatorial level against her fellow party member. The 2006 election may be a test of the South Dakota Democratic Party's ability to cohere around candidates and issues.

Then there's the following passage from a post dated November 12, 2004:

Aberdeen is the site of much post-election analysis today. The Farmers Union is holding a convention, and the Brown County Democrats are meeting over lunch. Argus Leader writer David Kranz is speaking at both meetings, sharing information and insights into why Tom Daschle lost and what is taking place in state politics.

There is habit in South Dakota to chide anyone who tries to find out who is accountable for failures. People warn not get caught in the blame-placing game. But very often when things go badly, someone is to blame. Problems cannot be solved unless and until they are carefully defined and examined.

One of the things that political leaders share among themselves is that the South Dakota Democratic Party is in a state of disarray. Campaign staffers from the Daschle and Herseth campaigns have admitted they did not want the state party to chime in on their campaigns. It may have done damage. The mishandling of the food tax repeal is one of the specific examples cited. The state Republican efforts to spin for their candidates were not particularly effective or even intelligent, but there was no one out there to counteract the spin. So, the Republican message was largely unopposed.

However, it is also time for people to take a good, hard look at its citizens. People involved in the Daschle campaign said they became alarmed during the last month preceding the election at the downright viciousness and hatred exhibited by ordinary people. One campaign leader said, "The fact is that these are not nice people. Why would anyone want to live among them?" Again, South Dakotans tend to mouth all the cliches about the clean and crime-free way of life they cherish while some of the meanest and most bigoted people in the nation are setting a malicious and perfidious tone to everything they touch. It is time to address what some of the citizens of South Dakota are really like.

That right there is the contempt and condescension that Daschle and his supporters had for South Dakotans.  No doubt that contempt and condescension were factors in his defeat.

The Great Seal

A reader sent along the following image:

Quote of the Day

"In some of [Daschle's] ads it sounded like South Dakota wouldn't be able to function without him.  It was like somehow the state would fall apart, and we owed him our votes. There was something patronizing about the way Daschle ran his campaign, like he was saying, 'You people need me in order to survive out there in the sticks of South Dakota.'" - Northern State University political science professor Jon Schaaf, quoted in an AP story today headlined "Daschle's political demise also marks the end for others."

Daschle farewell

The AP has published this photo taken at the conclusion of Senator Daschle's farewell remarks.  You can access a transcript of the tribute to Tom Daschle by his colleagues by clicking HERE.

Daschle to deliver farewell on Senate floor this afternoon

Senator Daschle will deliver his farewell address to the Senate sometime this afternoon, which you can view on C-Span2.

Daschle lawyer removed from polling place

The belligerant Daschle lawyer at the McLaughlin Community Center on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation has been removed from the polling place by the Corson County Sheriff. DVT has more.

Daschle operative: "F--k you, do something about it"

DVT:

At the McLaughlin Community Center on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, a Daschle operative (a male lawyer in his 50s) has taken over part of the election table and is interfering with the election workers' duties in violation of SDCL 12-18-3, 9.1 (9.2 gives authority to have the person removed and arrested). The election worker feels intimidated by the Daschle operative and feels that the man is interfering with the process. When told this was illegal, he responded "F--k you, do something about it." These sorts of reports are coming in regularly. It's a nice summary of the Daschle campaign's attitude toward the election process.

UPDATE: The auditor has just sent the sheriff out to the polling location.

Daschle contesting Republican absentee ballots

DVT reports: Daschle and his lawyer army are trying to prevent the counting of Republican absentee ballots in Rapid City.

BOMBSHELL: THE DEATH RATTLE OF DASCHLE'S POLITICAL CAREER

DVT reports that Senator Daschle, in a last-ditch attempt to salvage his political career, has gone to federal court to steal votes and eliminate Republican poll watchers. Below is the press release from the Thune campaign:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday, November 1, 2004

Contact: Dick Wadhams, John Wood

(605) 221-1010

INTERVENTION TO HEAD OFF ELECTION LOSS

DASCHLE LAWYERS GO TO FEDERAL COURT AT 8:00 PM TONIGHT TO STEAL VOTES, ELIMINATE REPUBLICAN POLL WATCHERS

SIOUX FALLS – Anticipating a loss to Republican challenger John Thune tomorrow ending his 26-year congressional career, Senator Tom Daschle will seek federal judicial intervention in the election process tonight, Monday, November 1 during an emergency hearing in federal court in Sioux Falls at 8:00 PM.

The hearing will be before Federal Judge Larry Piersol who was appointed by Daschle to federal court and served as Daschle’s personal legal counsel in 1978.

“This is nothing short of an attempt to steal an election Tom Daschle knows he is about to lose tomorrow,” said Thune for Senate campaign manager Dick Wadhams. “Daschle’s goon lawyers will seek to get Republican poll watchers removed from reservations and for voters to lose their right to vote.”

Lawyers representing Tom Daschle successfully called for the hearing tonight in front of Daschle-appointed Judge Piersol.

The Pennington County Auditor was informed earlier today that Daschle lawyers will seek to ban the counting of legitimate absentee ballot requests in Pennington County tomorrow, Election Day, morning.

Jay Reding on "faith-whips" for Daschle

Jay Reding has some excellent observations on the latest pro-Daschle push-polling tactics: "You Want Dirty Tricks? I'll Give You Dirty Tricks." Excerpt:

I think these "ministers" are referring to this, which appears to be an ad campaign aimed at pointing out the conflict presented by Ms. Linda being a lobbyist in the House while her husband is in a leadership position the Senate. (There's a point there, but an indirect one: Lobbying in the House is for a bill her husband would have to vote on, and organize for, in the Senate, eventually.)

My problem with this isn't calling Thune on going after Linda Daschle: There's something there that may be off bounds, unless it directly impacts his ability to govern. It's using a "minister" who may or may not be in-state as a sort of faith-whip I find objectionable. Granted, I find lots of things objectionable about Tom Daschle, but for a man with a tenuous grip on his own religion (a paucity of grip shared by his Presidential nominee), this seems pretty bald-faced.

Daschle dirty tricks

Power Line has the scoop from a Brookings correspondent who reports that someone posing as a pastor is calling South Dakotans and trashing John Thune:

The Daschle campaign is having people claiming to be pastors and ministers calling local South Dakotans asking them whether the fact the "John Thune is attacking Linda Daschle" bothers them or makes them uncomfortable. When one constituent peppered the "pastor" with questions about his hometown, where he lived - it was apparent this "pastor" was not from South Dakota at all.

Also, John Hinderaker predicts a Thune win.

Daschle discusses absentee ballot flap

The Yankton Press & Dakotan has a story today that quotes Senator Daschle talking about the absentee ballot application flap that instigated the resignations of six state GOP workers:

When asked about the investigation into absentee ballots, Daschle said the ballots in question are a small percentage of total votes cast. He said he didn't believe the ballots would affect the election outcome.

"By and large, it's been a pretty straightforward campaign," he said. "I don't see many problems, especially when you factor in that 380,000 people cast their ballots."

Interestingly, a week ago, the Daschle campaign was howling for a "more aggressive" investigation into the absentee ballot application flap. Unsurprisingly, it was synthetic outrage.

Daschle Mansion

Be sure to visit www.daschlemansion.com. Here's a print ad that has appeared in South Dakota recently:

WaPo: Lobbyists "flocking" to SD for Daschle

A Washington Post reported a story yesterday headlined "Out of the Comfort Zone: Lobbyists Hit the Campaign Trail to Protect Their Livelihoods." Excerpt:

Democratic lobbyists are just as dedicated and are flocking to the same places, especially South Dakota, where Daschle is running neck-and-neck with former Republican U.S. Rep. John Thune. In addition to Fazio, independent lobbyist Frederick H. Graefe and Julie Domenick, who directs the D.C. office of Loeffler Jonas & Tuggey LLP, have flown to Sioux Falls. So has the youngest of Graefe's four daughters, who is now on Daschle's campaign staff.

Daschle using religion for political purposes

"I think there are those who try to use religion for political purposes. I would hope that wouldn't happen. I think one's religious beliefs are generally between you and God." - Senator Tom Daschle, according to a recent AP story headlined "Religion plays prominent role in South Dakota's Senate race."

Today, Daschle has an auto-dial message from a clergy member being sent out across the state. Below is the transcript of the message:

Hi this is Pastor Don Niedringhaus. [Retired ELCA pastor and former employee of Augustana College]

I’ve never spoken out like this before but because my friend is getting unfairly attacked I thought it was too important to stay quiet. Senator Tom Daschle has done a lot for our state and he is a good and decent man, in fact he’s one of the most genuine and finest people I know. I’ve known Tom for a long time, and I know he shares our values. He is a man of faith, honor and integrity and he cares deeply about people and especially the people of our state. The lessons he learned growing up in Aberdeen as an alter boy attending Sacred Heart School and serving in the Air Force continue to guide him every day as a father, grandfather, and servant leader of the people of South Dakota. I hope you’ll join me and other people, of faith, all across this state and voting for Tom Daschle on Tuesday. A vote for Tom Daschle is a vote for a good decent man who will always do what is right for South Dakota. Thank you for listening.

AP: vote buying alleged

The AP is reporting: "Observer alleges vote buying; worker says he never went to Pine Ridge." Excerpt:

[The GOP] provided to The Associated Press a copy of two affidavits signed by Paul Brenner, who said he lives in Virginia and is in South Dakota as a volunteer election monitor.

Brenner stated he talked with people on the Rosebud Indian Reservation who indicated that Four Directions was paying voters.

On Thursday, while seated next to a poll watcher for Sen. Tom Daschle and New York lawyer Greg Lembrich, two women asked when they would get paid, according to one of the affidavits.

Abderdeen newspaper explores Mansiongate

The Aberdeen American News has a report in today's edition headlined "Daschle resident status explored." Excerpt:

Daschle campaign official Dan Pfeiffer said the senator is "first and foremost" a South Dakotan. He said Thune's repeated assertion that Daschle declared Washington, D.C., as his primary residence is "flatly false."

Don't listen to what he says, look at the record. Below is the legal document Daschle signed declaring DC to be his "principal place of residence":

But when a pesky reporter started investigating this document, the Daschle camp amended the legal document to reflect Linda Daschle's signature, rather than Tom's.

The Aberdeen American News article continues:

House in Aberdeen: Their Aberdeen house is taxed as owner-occupied property, meaning it gets a 30 percent break on property taxes. State regulations allow owner-occupied status to be given to a home in which the owner's parents live. Daschle's mother lives in the Aberdeen house and previously owned it.

The owner-occupied rate saved the Daschles more than $400 a year on taxes for the Aberdeen house.

Interestingly, South Dakota regulation 64:04:01:13.03 reads in part:

If the dwelling is occupied by a parent of the owner, the parent is considered the owner and occupant of the single-family dwelling.

It would seem that Tom Daschle is not considered the "owner" of the Aberdeen house for tax purposes, according to the regulation above.

Daschle camp's treatment of respected author is telling

Tim Drake, a respected Catholic author and journalist, got mauled by the Daschle camp when he tried to get to the bottom of the Emily's List controversy that has become an issue in the Senate campaign. You can get Mr. Drake's version of events on his blog.

Tom Daschle: A strong voice for K Street

Earlier this week, the Center for Public Integrity reported that Senator Daschle has received the most money from lobbyists of any senator seeking re-election this year. The bar graph accompanying the report shows Daschle almost off the chart:

Knowing that Daschle is the biggest recipient of lobbyist money of any senator running for re-election this year, it's interesting to note that the National Journal is reporting today that "a number of lobbyists with ties to Daschle have flown in [to South Dakota] to lend a hand." Gee, could there be some kind of quid pro quo going on here?

Of course, the Argus Leader has ignored this report on Daschle from the Center for Public Integrity. But, in scanning today's edition of the Argus Leader, I see that the Center for Public Integrity is cited in a story that places Republicans in a negative light. That story, of course, is written by David Kranz, the dean of South Dakota political reporters. Here's the relevant excerpt from the story headlined "USD student defends mailings for GOP to elderly":

According to the Times, the [College Republicans were] criticized in 2003 by the Center for Public Integrity of Washington, D.C., in a report asserting that several elderly donors who were contacted did not appear to know to whom they had given money.

Can there be a better example of straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel? Once again, the old Argus Leader double standard is at play. Ignore the huge story about the lobbying money Daschle receives reported by the Center for Public Integrity only two days ago, but make a big deal out of a Center for Public Integrity report last year about some Republican college kids. The Argus Leader's double standard really is indefensible.

Mansiongate reported in Mitchell newspaper

The Mitchell Daily Republic has a front page story today headlined "Daschle took tax breaks on both houses." The story even has pictures of Senator Daschle's DC mansion:

Quentin weighs in on Daschle's third party pledge hypocrisy

Quentin has written an "I told you so" post noting that he predicted Senator Daschle would use his phony third party ban pledge as a sword and a shield. Quentin also notes the following post from the Daschle campaign's blog written when it was still fashionable to prattle about how the Daschle campaign was "keeping out" third-party groups:

Now, of course, the "Daschle Campaign" is saying "As Thune has said all along, we don’t have direct control over these groups.” It boggles the mind how shameless these people are.

I love the smell of projection in the morning

The term "projection" in the field of psychology means "the attribution of one's own attitudes, feelings, or suppositions to others." With that in mind, let's turn to what Dan Pfieffer, Senator Daschle's alter ego, had to say today about John Thune in an Aberdeen American News story today headlined "Daschle Reneges on outside help pledge":

[Pfeiffer] said Thune is not a nice guy from Murdo, rather a desperate candidate filled with "anger and hatred."

More on Mansiongate

Jeff Gannon, resident DC expert on South Dakota politics, has another report on the burgeoning scandal over Senator Daschle's residency status headlined "Daschles Double Dipping Property Tax Breaks in DC, South Dakota." Meanwhile, DVT points to a new website, www.daschlemansion.com, that contains more details about the Daschle DC mansion at the epicenter of Mansiongate.

Daschle receives the most lobbyist cash

The Center for Public Integrity is reporting that "Senate Minority Leader Thomas Daschle, Democrat of South Dakota, received $260,000 from lobbyists, the most of any senator seeking re-election this year." More:

One reason that these donations concern campaign finance experts is that they create the potential for apparent conflicts of interest. In fact, the Center found that lobbyists sometimes made personal contributions to the very lawmakers they sought to influence....

...Sen. Daschle's campaign received more money—$13,650—from lobbyists associated with Patton Boggs than from lobbyists at any other firm. Patton Boggs' second largest client during the last six years was the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, which over that period paid the high-powered lobbying firm $5.8 million. One of ATLA's top priorities was to ward off limits on awards in medical malpractice suits. In July 2003, Daschle spearheaded a successful effort to block such proposed limits.

(Emphasis added.) What's most intriguing about this report is the accompanying chart. Daschle is almost off the chart with the amount of money he receives from lobbyists.

The Daschle dual residency exception

Click HERE to read a PDF copy of the letter referred to in Jeff Gannon's story today about Daschle's dual residency, sent by a South Dakota resident to the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks. The text of the letter follows:

Rapid City Journal: Daschle exaggerating his role in saving Ellsworth AFB

Rapid City Journal political reporter Denise Ross has a report today headlined "Daschle: Recusal from BRAC panel not an issue." Ellsworth Air Force Base is a huge economic engine for West River South Dakota, and Daschle has spent this campaign demagoguing the prospect of Ellsworth's closure, saying he's the only one with enough clout to save Ellsworth. Well, it turns out that if the past is any guide, Daschle's clout won't matter, because those who sit on the base closing commission are obligated to act fairly and impartially when making decisions about base closings. Excerpt from the RCJ report:

Six days before the three-term incumbent stands for re-election in a close race against Republican John Thune, Daschle touted how his job as leader of the Senate Democrats would give him a voice in the membership of a new base-closing commission.

Daschle told reporters and supporters that as the newly minted Senate minority leader in 1995, he nominated Rapid City businessman Al Cornella to the Defense Department's Base Realignment and Closure Commission.

"It is critical that we have our voice this time just as we did last time," Daschle said.

About a decade ago, Daschle's nomination of Cornella drew fire from then-House Majority Leader Dick Armey, credited with designing the base-closure process.

"I assume this is a joke," Armey said of Cornella, who was then chairman of the local committee to save Ellsworth. "A parochial advocate should be testifying before the commission, not sitting on it."

During his confirmation hearings before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Cornella pledged to stay out of any deliberations dealing with Ellsworth.

"I will conduct myself in a fair and impartial manner," Cornella told the committee.

The report goes on to note that the evidence suggests (surprise!) Daschle has been exaggerating his role in the last round of base closings. Well, Daschle has been known to take credit for the sunrise, so I suppose it's not that shocking that he would take credit for "saving" Ellsworth.

The Daschle dual residency exception

The burgeoning scandal over Daschle's residency status (dubbed "Mansiongate") is reviewed today with a report by Jeff Gannon headlined "Daschle 'Dual Residency' Benefit Sought By College Student." Excerpt:

A South Dakota college student is citing what has been referred to as the "Daschle dual residency exception" in order to retain his residency privileges while he attends a Colorado university. Ben Folsland, a 22 year old student at Colorado Christian University is considering declaring Colorado as his "primary place of residence" so he can take advantage of an "in-state" tuition rate that would be substantially less than what he is paying now.

In a letter to the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks, the Rapid City student asked Secretary John Cooper if he would be permitted to retain his in-state hunting license if he were to become a Colorado resident.

Folsland explained that his inquiry was prompted by the controversy involving Sen. Tom Daschle, who has claimed residency in both South Dakota and Washington, DC. Daschle is registered to vote in South Dakota but last year declared himself to be a resident of the District of Columbia when signing an affidavit to get a tax break on the $1.9 million home he purchased there.

Folsland proudly considers himself to be a South Dakotan, returning from college each summer to work. But he also recognizes that if he were to declare himself a resident of Colorado, he could qualify for reduced tuition when he enrolled in a Masters' degree program and the University of Colorado. Still, he is hesitant to give up the privileges he enjoys as a resident of South Dakota, one of them being his hunting license.

Folsland told Talon News Tuesday that he found a solution to his dilemma while reading Internet news reports about Daschle's homestead tax exemption. Several web sites in the South Dakota Bloggers' Alliance picked up the Talon News investigative report two weeks ago.

There you have it. The Dakota Blog Alliance offers solutions to your dilemmas.

Daschle breaks pledge to ban third party ads

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is purchasing $600,000 worth of ads in South Dakota. KDLT, a local television station, has the story under the headline "Outside Ads":

The South Dakota Senate Campaign could get even nastier, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee plans to start advertising tomorrow.

You might remember, Senator Tom Daschle had asked all outside groups to stay out of South Dakota, which includes the DSCC.

So far they have.

Jake Maas, with the Daschle Campaign, says this is the first he's heard of the DSCC's ads, due to campaign finance laws, candidates aren't allowed to coordinate with outside groups.

He plans to reserve comment until he's seen the ads.

The DSCC ads will start airing tomorrow, for the next seven days.

The statement from Jake Maas about candidates not being allowed to coordinate with outside groups is particularly rich, because Daschle himself said only last month that he is "directly responsible" for the DSCC:

Daschle disputes that candidates have so little influence over their own supporters. He said his own campaign proves just the opposite.

"Not one group has come in on my behalf," Daschle said. "In fact, three outside groups that ran ads in 2002 have specifically stated they'll respect my request - the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters. We are directly responsible for these groups.

(Emphasis added.) Daschle made the issue of third party ads the centerpiece of his campaign, and to reverse course now, when it suits his interests, underscores how lame and deeply cynical Daschle and his campaign truly are.

Daschle questions Thune's character

DVT discusses the "issue of the other half," in other words, the troubling fact that corporations can legally put money in Senator Daschle's bank account because of his wife's position as a "lobbyist." John Hinderaker of Power Line made the point more succinctly: Linda Daschle describes herself as a "lobbyist," but her value as such derives from her ability to deposit checks into Daschle's bank account.

Last Wednesday, Daschle released an ad implying Thune lobbied for big drug companies. On Saturday, Thune responded with a print ad in the Argus Leader by pointing out that Senator Daschle is the only candidate in this race who has personally profited from big drug companies (Daschle's wife has lobbied for Schering Plough). In response, Daschle has released an ad questioning John Thune's character:

Tom Daschle: I’m Tom Daschle and I approve of this message.

Male Voice: What does it say about a man’s character when he attacks another man’s wife? John Thune’s lying about Linda Daschle to hide his own record as a Washington lobbyist.

Once again, don't listen to what Daschle says, just look at the record. Thune pointed out that Daschle is the only candidate in this race who has personally profited from big drug companies. That's the truth. Here's a photo of the official document showing Linda Daschle lobbied for Schering Plough, taken from the Senate Office of Public Records website:

Obviously, Thune's not lying about Linda Daschle getting paid by Schering Plough. The Daschle ad then goes on to say that "Thune’s firm helped the pharmaceutical industry stop efforts to lower drug prices." Thune himself did not lobby on behalf of the pharmacuetical industry. Again, Daschle is the only candidate in this race who has personally profited from big drug companies. There's no getting around that fact. Daschle is the one who instigated the brouhaha over lobbying by falsely implying that Thune lobbied for big drug companies. Nothing he can do can obscure the fact that he is the only candidate who has had money placed in his bank account by Schering Plough.

Tom Daschle: A Strong Voice for Bell Atlantic

Here's something interesting I hadn't heard about before. Apparently, Senator Daschle didn't like it that his cell phone would cut out when he commuted through Rock Creek Park in Washington, DC. So he rammed through an amendment that allowed Bell Atlantic to erect two cell phone towers in the middle of Rock Creek Park, effectively circumventing six separate federal statutes and regulations and precluding judicial review. It seems Daschle uses his "clout" for Bell Atlantic, not South Dakota. Whose side is Daschle on, anyway?

You can read about Daschle's strong voice for Bell Atlantic HERE, HERE, and HERE.

And, of course, the Argus Leader never reported this story. Can you imagine what the AL would have done if Senator Pressler had done something like this? Look at how the Argus Leader covered Pressler's attempt to get a zoning variance for his house from the DC government back in 1990 (complete with a helpful map):

Mansiongate coverup?

Jeff Gannon, resident DC expert on South Dakota politics, has a new report out today headlined "Daschle Staff, DC Officials Replace Homestead Tax Document Following Investigative Report."

Quote of the Day

"As one of the two leaders of the US Senate, I have the opportunity to sit at one of the most powerful desks in the country, if not the world. And I believe the sun will continue to rise over our state as long as I continue to sit at that desk." - Senator Tom Daschle, taking credit for the sunrise, according to The Independent.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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:

Congressional Research Service on "inhabitancy"

Wow. The following passage from the Congressional Research Service is simply stunning, in light of today's disclosure that Senator Daschle signed a document stating Washington, DC is his "principal place of residence":

The existing constitutional qualifications do require one to be an “inhabitant” of the State from which chosen “when elected.”
[...]
Congressional precedents, as well as the provision’s enactment history, indicate that “inhabitancy” is not to be interpreted in an overly strict or legalistic sense, but rather was meant to assure a real connection to the State from which elected. The development of the concept of “inhabitancy” in House qualifications cases indicates that the term appears to be somewhat akin to the legal concept of “domicile,” encompassing not only actions taken which evidence the establishment of a principal “home” in a State, but also recognizing a person’s intent. Physical presence in the State at the time of election is, of course, a significant factor for consideration, but is not necessarily the determining factor.

It would seem that, by signing a document stating Washington DC is his "principal place of residence" Daschle has taken actions which evidence the establishment of a principal home in Washington, DC. Also, Daschle signing such a document indicates his intent to make Washington, DC his principal place of residence.

(CRS document via Power Line.)

Power Line picks up the scent

Power Line:

This is not an area of the law in which I am an expert, and I haven't tried to do any extensive research, but there are suggestions, at least, that having his primary residence outside of South Dakota may be incompatible with the Constitutional requirement that he be an "inhabitant" of that state.

This whole development over Senator Daschle signing a document stating that Washington, DC is his "principal place of residence" keeps getting curiouser and curiouser.

Daschle Homestead Deduction coverup?

After the curious revelation that Senator Daschle has signed a document stating that Washington, DC is his "principal place of residence" it seems that Daschle's friends in the DC government are scrambling to cover for him. Yesterday, a check of the DC tax website showed that Daschle was "not receiving the Homestead deduction." This raised eyebrows, because only a few weeks ago, I checked the same website and it showed that Daschle was "currently receiving the Homestead Deduction." A check of that website today, however, shows that Daschle is again "currently receiving the Homestead Deduction."

It seems that Daschle's friends in DC are frantically trying to cover for him. If nothing else, there's something fishy about this. When scrutiny is being applied, there's some kind of movement in the DC tax office. It smells like a coverup to me. Below is a copy of the DC tax office's website made last March, when it stated that Daschle was "currently receiving the Homestead Deduction."

Then, yesterday, a visit to the same website stated that Daschle was "not receiving the Homestead Deduction." Below is a copy made of the DC tax office's website just yesterday:

Curiously, today the DC Tax Office's website shows that Daschle is "currently receiving the Homestead Deduction." Below is a screen capture of the website today:

As I said at the beginning, something's going on here, and it smacks of a coverup.

Daschle questioned Bush's Guard service

In looking through my archives, I came across this quote from Senator Daschle made on the Tavis Smiley show on PBS on February 9, 2004:

"We also don't know the circumstances involving his time in the National Guard, and I think that has to be clarified as well."

Q: How did Daschle camp get my cell number?

Quentin reports that the Daschle camp called his private cell number last night, and it's a number he doesn't publish willy-nilly:

Last night I received a phone call from the Daschle for Senate office. That would normally not be something out of the ordinary, except it was on my cell phone and I don't give that number out to people. I asked the caller where he got my number but he refused to tell me other than that he got my number from a list. I couldn't get him to tell me where the list came from though. Today, I talked with some members of my law school class and found they had received the same calls on their cell phones as well. It would appear that somebody in law school provided the Daschle campaign with a list of all our personal information including phone numbers. Hopefully I can figure out where the Daschle campaign got the information from and put a stop to it. It is one thing to get information from a person's voter registration cards but quite another to acquire a number that is supposed to be private information.

Oklahoma Dem distances himself from Daschle

Quentin notes a piece from MSNBC headlined "Voters face fiscal clash in Oklahoma Senate battle" which reports that the Democratic Senate candidate in Oklahoma is declaring he will not be an "enabler" for Tom Daschle. Excerpt:

In his small town campaign tour, Carson tried to reassure his audiences that he is not a Hillary-Clinton-Tom Daschle Democrat....

Would Carson be an “enabler” for the likes of Clinton and Daschle?

“Is John Breaux an ‘enabler’ of Tom Daschle? I don’t think so,” replied Carson. “Far from being an enabler, what I hope to do is restrain the more wild-eyed impulses of some people in my own party, while also being a fair-minded broker.”