He starts a nonprofit call Operation Good Neighbor.
He solicits donations from lobbyists in exchange for federal favors. For example, Preferred Real Estate Inc. gave Santorum’s “charity” $25,000.
Separately, Santorum successfully earmarked $6 million in highway money to a project run by Preferred.
But, hey it’s a nonprofit, right? Sort of.
This nonprofit cuts checks to other groups, including the Urban Family Council, which sponsors churched based get out the vote drives. Said Family Council has also received more than $250,000 of Federal grant money, pushed through by Santorum. It is most famous locally for “…its aggressive efforts to try to block city benefits for the gay partners of Philadelphia municipal employees.”
Some allege that the Urban Family Council et al are, “…a backdoor way to funnel money to political supporters outside of the closely monitored campaign-finance system.”
This is getting complicated though. There sure are a lot of allegations to sift through.
For some reason Santorum voted against a proposal to establish an independent Congressional ethics office. The merits of such a group are debatable, though I would say that awarding hen-guarding duties to the vulpine-oriented community isn’t such a hot idea.
Actually, I don’t know what Santorum had in mind when he started the nonprofit in 2001.
He cuts a lot of $10,000 checks. Given existing evidence, I’d say that the operation is a convenient one. Like other nonprofits, they don’t have to report a donor list and contributions are tax deductable.
For anyone who believes Senator Santorum is no longer a resident of Pennsylvania… the law requires that a senator be a resident of the state he represents.
Now, I’m sure that Santorum’s opponent in the general election this fall believes he will win based on popular approval of his positions over those of Santorum… but I find it very difficult to believe that he would take the chance on losing, when could simply bring suit to declare that Rick Santorum is no longer legally qualified to be a US senator for Pennsylvania, based on his lack of residency.
So — if you honestly contend that Santorum is not a legal resident of Pennsylvania, what is your explanation for why his opponent will not dispose of Santorum’s candidacy by pointing out that fact?
All the PA Department of State says about residency requirements for Senate candidates is that they be over 30 years old, a US citizen, and a resident of the state for 9 years. (State cite: here)
Article I, Section 3 of the US Constitution lays out those requirements thus:
In my mind, Santorum’s actions are no different from using my parents’ address in Texas to vote in their elections on the basis that I visit for a week a few times a year. In fact, in this thread, I suggested such a thing and was promptly smacked down by a mod for it.
Casey doesn’t need to do such a thing. Santorum’s approval rating is somewhere near 40%, which doesn’t usually bode well for an incumbent. Also, his poll numbers are shockingly low. I found this Wikipedia article that sums all of this up. Most PA pundits are predicting a handy victory for Casey.
If he does not, why do you suppose his opponent, who presumably has a strong interest in unseating him, won’t simply bring a legal action to find Santorum not legally qualified for the seat?
Because, at this point, such a claim by the Casey campaign or the state Democratic party would cost money that could be used to defeat Santorum on the issues, as well as distract voters from what really matters. I mean, when you’re polling 18% higher than your opponent, whose approval ratings are in the toilet as it is because he insists on opening his mouth and getting himself tied up in situations involving questionable personal ethics, but your campaign has half the warchest, why would you spend money on a legal challenge?
So… better to spend money on your campaign to hopefully convince more voters to remove your opponent than to spend money on a court challenge that would definitvely remove your opponent?
Because you know damn well that going before a judge is a crapshoot, even if you’re convinced you’re 100% right and you’ve got the evidence to prove it. Why would any political organization dedicate limited resources for a challenge like that when they’re so far ahead to begin with?
Please don’t give me thought experiments. You’ve claimed that there is federal law that expressly grants residency to a Congressperson. Now you’re claiming that there must be because nobody has challenged Rick Santorum.
Hardly a compelling legal argument. Please cite the law you’ve claimed exists.
Or are you claiming that the fact that the Constitution says that a Senator shall be a resident means that Santorum must still be considered a resident.
Sad to say that this logic is exceptionally shoddy, and apparently based in no more particular legal expertise than my golden retriever/border collie mixed puppy possesses.
Please tell me that you’ve been puffing and pontificating with more bullets in your holster than “it’s legal because nobody has challenged it.”
On the other hand, I’d kind of like to see that turned into a campaign ad by the Santorum camp.
How about you jayjay? Is this the kind of narrow, unbiased legal argument you are so happy to receive?
Truthfully? I don’t give a flying fuck. I’m voting to toss the idiot out on his shiny right-wing ass in November even if it’s proven that he’s been giving all of his senatorial salary to orphanages caring for Katrina babies in Louisiana. All of this nitpickery is petty and unnecessary. There’s enough wrong with Santorum already that I don’t NEED another “outrage” to convince me. But we’re into parsing the meaning of “residence” and “domicile” and whether or not a senator can or should spend every waking moment that he’s not in session at “home” or not here and it’s USELESS! If Casey were to pursue this line of attack to the detriment of holding Santorum’s feet to the fire on all the other crap he’s been pulling and saying both in public and not, then Casey is wasting precious campaign time. If, at the time that the campaigns actually get going, this whole domicile business is clearer and detrimental to Santorum, fine. Casey should definitely use it. But what we know for certain now is basically nothing.
Simply put, I don’t. fucking. care. whether Santorum has ever even set foot in the Penn Hills house. I don’t. There’s already enough wrong with him that my vote’s already set.
What’s weird is that, being the lawyer that he is, I seriously doubt whether I’ve told Bricker anything new. He’s probably aware that residency definitions can vary even within the same state.
Yet he continues to dwell on arguments that are superficially defendable but have been repeatedly shown to be irrelevant.
So far its actually fairly straightforward. When his vacant PA house was mentioned, Santorum ran radio ads accusing his opponent of trespassing on his ¶ property and endangering his children. Remember: his kids are in Virginia.
Given this context, I think it matters that his vacant house is, well, vacant – and that media reports were sufficient to show this.
Well, I certainly do not endorse the argument that Santorum’s children were endangered by a physical trespass of his Pennsylvania home.
But as I review the thread, I really can’t see anyone really pushing that point prior to now.
As I see it, there were two issues in this thread that I’ve been arguing: (1) that Santorum, despite his non-use of the home he owns in Pennsylvania, is a resident of that home for the purpose of senate candidacy, and (2) that Santorum’s children are entitled to attend the “cyber school” at a cost born by the school district in which that home is placed.
I am not arguing or endorsing the argument that Santorum’s children were at risk based on a trespass of that home.
Actually, Bricker, you missed a rather large point. (3) Santorum is being hypocrite for doing the exact same thing he accused his opponent of doing the first time he ran for office. He suggested, I gather, that because his opponent no longer lived in Pennsylvania, he was not suited to serve as one of Pennsylvania’s senators. There’s also a minor matter of the character of the ads Mr. Santorum has been running about this issue which have been rather vicious.
This may be a minor point, but you’ve misread your cite, which says a PA Senator must be “Inhabitant of State, 9 yrs. Citizen.” In your cite, there’s a line break that makes this a little confusing, but it sets a minimum time requirment only for length of US citizenship, not length of PA residency.
In fact, if your reading were correct, the PA law would be unconstitutional. SCOTUS has ruled that states may not impose any eligibility requirments for elected federal offices beyond those that are specified in the constitution. One such ruling was in the context of the 1990s term limits movement. See this Slate article
On another point, wouldn’t the eligibility for tuition subsidies be based on the legal residence of the children. Is the residence of minor children always the same as that of the custodial parent?
Why even ask? You’ve already told us flatly that he does. Have you reconsidered?
Apparently you really *don’t * grasp that it’s a primarily political matter. Consider how it would look to the electorate either way - Casey would look like he doubted his ideas and proposals and personal qualifications were adequate to beat even Senator Shitfoam, and thought he could only win by a lawyer’s technicality. He takes a hit in the polls either way. If he loses the case, he may well lose the election. If he wins, it gives the GOP the opening they may well be hoping for to nominate a more-presentable replacement candidate. And that’s if the case gets heard before the election, which isn’t guaranteed at all. Casey is instead taking the most politically effective route, of pointing out Santorum’s hypocrisy (strong upside in a campaign any time you can do that) in using the charge himself, and leaving it at that (only a net downside, as explained).
But you can’t even conceive of considerations existing outside the realm of the law, can you? You’re actually astonished.
That’s the point. He’s not living in it. He obviously doesn’t go there even when he isn’t needed in Washington, which is only a few hours’ drive away at that. But he’s claiming it’s his residence anyway.