Vote Lugar for Senator ... of Virginia

Is Lugar Claiming A False Residence on His Federal and State Tax Forms?

Senator Richard Lugar

Senator Richard Lugar lives full-time in Virginia and has no Indiana residence. Yet he obtained Indiana license plates on his car by filling out documents for the the Bureau of Motor Vehicles saying he lives at 3200 Highwoods Court, Indianapolis, a house he sold 35 years ago.  The BMV has tried to mail him correspondence at that address which is returned because, of course, Lugar doesn't actually live there.  Certified Fraud Examiner Greg Wright obtained all the information to confirm these facts.

So Lugar is willing to lie to the BMV saying he lives 3200 Highwoods Court residence. What other government agencies is he lying to?  How about the tax agencies?  Does Lugar pay Indiana income taxes?  If so, does he put down the 3200 Highwoods Court address?  Does he put down 3200 Highwoods Court on his Indiana tax form?  Does he put it on his federal tax form?  Does he not know those documents are signed under threat of perjury?

For the record, Virginia, where Lugar lives, has a top income tax rate of 5.75%.   Indiana has a flat income tax rate of 3.4%.  Not that that would be Lugar's motivation for reporting the 3200 Highwoods Court address on his tax returns.  That motivation appears to be nothing more than arrogance and a belief he is above the law everyone else has to follow.

Fox News Reports Democrats Have Begun to Dig Into Expenses Associated with Lugar's Lack of Indiana Residence

Fox News reported on how Democrats have been digging into Sen. Richard Lugar's expense records.  It seems when you don't have a residence in the State, we taxpayers have to spend a lot of money on travel and putting the Senator up in hotel rooms:

Lugar Spokesman David Wilkie

..The Indiana Democratic party has combed through records going all the way back to Lugar's first year in the Senate, 1977.

The hundreds of pages of itemized travel expenses were passed along to Fox News. Among the findings offered by the party is that the six-term US Senator has spend almost $50,000 in travel expenses just visiting his home state.

The expenses are necessary, in part, because Lugar has no home in Indiana. The Indiana Senator lives in the Washington DC suburb of McLean, Virginia. So, virtually every time Lugar stays in Indiana there's an added cost."...

Another of the Indiana Democratic Party's findings puts a finer point on the issue. It says Lugar appears to have expensed 325 nights in Indiana over a 21-year period, from 1990 through 2011.

The suggestion is that Lugar's time in the state has been limited to less than a year over the course of two-plus decades. The Lugar campaign says that suggestion is completely false."(Senator Lugar) spends a quarter of the year, every year in the state," says campaign spokesman David Willkie.  Willkie notes from February 1st of 2011 and 2012, Lugar has spent 89-days in Indiana. And while Lugar is not "domiciled" in Indiana, he does own a farm in the state which he still manages....

The fact is we taxpayers put Sen. Lugar up in nice hotel rooms when he decides to come back to Indiana.   Willkie does not point to any other place Lugar stays while in Indiana.  Even Lugar has said he doesn't stay at the farm as it is "too rustic."  So Willkie's reference to that is nothing more than a disingenuous diversion.  If Lugar has spent more than 325 nights in Indiana over the last 21 years, Willkie he ought to be able to identify where the Senator was staying during that time.

It's shameful that we have a Senior Senator who "visits" Indiana instead of lives here.

Lugar Includes Phony Residence in Primary Filing; Senior Senator Exposes Republicans to Loss of the Seat Should He be Re-Elected

With all the fuss raised about Senator Richard Lugar voting using someone else's house as his Indiana "residence," a house he sold 35 year, one would think that smarter legal minds would have prevailed in his camp and the Senator would have identified property he or a family member actually own as his Indiana residence.  Apparently Lugar's arrogance though overrode that legal advice.  In filing for May's primary yesterday, Senator Lugar identified as his "complete residence address" 3200 Highwoods Court, Indianapolis, Indiana 46222, a house he sold 35 years ago and is currently occupied by the Hughes family.

Sen. Richard Lugar

In a CNN interview, Lugar indicated he "maintained" a home in Indianapolis for "political purposes." Really? Does Lugar contribute to the mortgage at 3200 Highwoods Court?  Does Lugar mow the grass?  Does Lugar take out the garbage?

Actually Lugar hasn't stepped in the house for some 30 plus years.   Yet he claims to "maintain" the house, signing documents under oath that he resides at that address, including absentee voter applications and other documents.  Former Secretary of State Charlie White gets seven felonies filed against him for doing one time what Lugar does as a matter of course every time he votes.  White is exactly correct.  The voter fraud statutes do not get applied to popular people like Lugar and Evan Bayh.  The Senators get a pass even though what they're doing by voting someplace where they clearly do not live, violates the same laws White was convicted of violating.  The application of our criminal laws should not depend on whether a person is liked or not.  But in this state shamefully it does.

In the form, Lugar declares that "I am a registered voter of Precinct 006 of Wayne (or of Ward 29 of the City or Town of Indianapolis), County of Marion, State of Indiana."  That of course is 3200 Highwoods Court.  Hopefully someone will challenge his and his wife's absentee ballot when they are received at that precinct in May.

Most importantly, Lugar has now opened up the Republican Party to a challenge that could cause the GOP to lose the seat. The Senate is exclusive determiner of the qualifications of its members.  If Lugar wins the primary and goes on to win the general election, it is very possible the Democrats, particularly if they still have a majority in the Senate, will challenge Lugar's qualifications to represent Indiana.  One of the qualifications in Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution is that a Senator be a resident of the state he or she is going to represent.  By arrogantly declaring 3200 Highwoods Court as his residence on a declaration of candidacy, a residence he clearly does not live at, Lugar has shut the door on claiming another, more appropriate address in Indiana as his residence.

Lugar's filing shows that he clearly believes he is above the law that others are required to follow.  For that alone, he does not deserve to be re-elected.

CNN Covers Lugar's Lack of Indiana Residency While Local Media Blackout Continues

Although the local media continues with the media blackout on the Lugar (lack of Indiana) residency story, it is started to be picked up by national news outlets.  As reported by CNN:

Senator Richard Lugar

Republican Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana responded Friday to recent reports that show he doesn’t live in the state he’s been representing for more than 35 years.

The longtime senator told CNN he maintains a residence for “political purposes” in Indianapolis but doesn’t live at the physical address-staying in hotels around the state, instead.

Lugar pointed to a loophole in Indiana law that protects his residency status while he lives and works in the Washington, D.C. area.

According to the state’s constitution, an absent individual does not lose residence as long as he or she is away “on the business of the State of Indiana or the United States.”

The longtime senator listed his voting address as 3200 Highwoods Court in Indianapolis but said his actual home is located in McLean, Virginia–a Washington suburb.

Brad King, co-director of the Indiana Election Division, said as long as an individual establishes residency before he or she leaves the state for work, the law permits that person to remain a resident, no matter how long that person is gone.

As for voting standards, King said voters must list a residence when they first register to vote, but they’re not required to show proof of residence.

If they move, they’re directed to indicate a change of address but, again, not required to prove the change.

The rest of the story can be read here.

Lugar claims he "maintains a residence for 'political purposes' in Indianapolis?"  Really?  Where is that residence?  The 3200 Highwoods Court, Indianapolis, Indiana address Lugar signs under is his residence when he goes to vote was sold 35 years ago and he hasn't stepped a foot in that house since then.  It is unclear where exactly this "residence" is that Lugar claims to be "maintaining" in Indiana and if he is doing so, why doesn't he list that address as his residence instead of someone else's home?

King's comments, while correct, could be confusing as reported.  First, you have residency as a qualification for U.S. Senate.  The U.S. Constitution requires that you be a resident of the State you are elected.  The Indiana Constitution and state says you don't lose that residence because of your service in public office.  That means if Lugar spends 11 months out of the year in D.C. he is not considered a D.C. resident instead of an Indiana residence.   That makes perfect sense.  But you can lose your Indiana residence for another reason besides your service in D.C....namely that you give up that Indiana residence, which is what Lugar did when he sold the home and didn't establish any other residence.  Lugar stays in hotel rooms when he comes to Indiana.  Further, it should be noted that it is highly questionable that Indiana law can somehow supplement or change a federal constitutional qualification provision regarding residency to serve as U.S. Senator. Past court decisions have not allowed states to supplement federal constitutional qualification provisions such as a state providing for term limits for their members of Congress.

The second concept is voter fraud/perjury.  King is right that a person only initially lists a residence when they register.  However, the absentee ballot application Lugar repeatedly filled out to vote specifically requires him to identify his residence under penalties of perjury.  And when Lugar voted, he had to affirm under oath he was still living at the address he registered using.  Lugar has repeatedly signed under penalties of perjury that he lives at 3200 Highwoods Court in Indianapolis when he has voted.  Lugar though knows perfectly well he hasn't lived at 3200 Highwoods Court in decades. 

There is nothing in the law that gives Lugar a pass on voter fraud and perjury, allowing him to falsify his residence under oath.  And there certainly is nothing that excuses his wife, Char, who has done the same thing.  What White was convicted of is jaywalking compared to the criminal charges Lugar and his wife could easily be charged with but aren't being charged because they, unlike White, are popular and powerful.

It's great that the national media is starting to cover this story.  It's shameful the Indianapolis Star and local television stations continue to be afraid to report a story, especially in light of the massive coverage given the White voter fraud charges.

Ogden on Poliltics Endorses Richard Mourdock in Race Against Richard Lugar

After giving it some thought, Ogden on Politics has decided to endorse Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock in his race against incumbent U.S. Senator Richard Lugar.

State Senator Richard Mourdock

While I have written several blog posts discussing Lugar's residency and his fraudulently using someone else's address as his own, I have not delved into the other issues in the U.S. Senate race.  At the outset, let me highlight one of them - immigration - an issue on which my position is a lot closer to Lugar's than Mourdock.  I believe an enforcement only approach is unrealistic.  As an attorney, who has dealt with some immigration clients, I have seen how horribly broken the current naturalization process is. We need comprehensive immigration reform.  We certainly don't need to punish law-abiding children of illegal immigrants who had nothing to do with their parents decision to enter our country illegally.

But on the other issues, Mourdock is the hands down winner in my book.  Let me hit some of them.

Senator Richard Lugar

• LUGAR IS NOT A RESIDENT OF INDIANA.  Lugar has a million dollar home in Virginia.  When Lugar comes to Indianapolis, he stays in hotels.  He has no residence in Indiana and for the last 35 years has been using someone else's address for registration and voting, signing documents under oath that he lives at that address.  What Charlie White is accused of doing is jaywalking compared to what Lugar admits to have been doing.  If Lugar wants to run for Senator for Virgina, I'm fine with that.  But he should not be using someone else's house, claiming it is his Indiana "residence." 
• LUGAR SUPPORTED CORPORATE BAILOUTS.  Lugar was 100% supportive of the corporate bailouts, preferring Wall Street over Main Street.  Lugar supported the GM and Chrysler bailouts.  Lugar supported Obama's $700 million TARP bailout of the financial industry which did nothing to avoid the recession.  Meanwhile the financial industry executives rewarded themselves with bonuses paid for with our tax dollars.
• LUGAR SUPPORTS EARMARKS.  Much of the problem with unnecessary spending would cease with ending the practice of "earmarks," burying pork barrel spending in the budget bill.  Lugar is fine with the current system.  Mourdock is not. 
• LUGAR DOES NOT SUPPORT SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. Lugar has supported gun control while in Congress, earning a D+ rating from the NRA and an F from the Gun Owners of America.  Mourdock meanwhile earned an A from the NRA.
• LUGAR VOTES FOR LIBERAL JUDICIAL NOMINEES.  Lugar takes the position that the U.S. Senate should not consider a nominee's judicial philosophy in deciding whether to confirm the nominee.  As a result, Lugar has voted for every liberal, activist Supreme Court justice, including Obama's appointment of Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.  He also voted for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, a Clinton appointee.  I do not believe in unilateral disarmament when it comes to considering appointees to the federal judiciary.  Democratic Senators are considering judicial philosophy and issues when deciding the fate of federal judicial appointees. Mourdock understands that Republican Senators should do the same.
• LUGAR HAS POOR CONSTITUENT SERVICES.  A few years ago, I had the need to contact federal and state officials about a problem my uncle was having with the overzealous Corp of Engineers who had cited him for using a bulldozer to push some dirt to shore up a creek bed wall that was collapsing on his farm.  The state officials were great.  Very helpful.  Then Sen. Bayh and then Congressman Baron Hill acknowledged the problem and tried to help.  The Lugar staffer was terrible.  He wouldn't even wait for me to outline the problem.  He immediately assumed my uncle had done something he shouldn't have done and concluded my uncle should spend tens of thousands of dollars complying with the Corp's ridiculous requests, including that my uncle plant certain weeds in the creek bed, kill other weeds that were not desirable, and hire a plane to fly over the creek bed and photograph the area.  I later called back Lugar's national office to complain about the staffer and was assured someone from Lugar's office would call me back to discuss it.  At least two years have passed and I'm still waiting for that phone call.  I don't know if Mourdock's constituent services will be better than Lugar's but most assuredly, they can't be any worse than Lugar's. 

Richard Mourdock has been a fine State Treasurer and seems much more in tune with Hoosiers on the issues than Virginia resident Richard Lugar.  I wholeheartedly endorse Mourdock for U.S. Senator.

Indianapolis Mayor Ballard Ignores Former Tea Party Supporters, Endorses Lugar in Race Against Mourdock

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard

Given he has governed as a RINO, I guess we shouldn't be surprised by Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard endorsing RINO Sen. Richard Lugar.  Still it is noteworth that Ballard actually began his political career as part of the movement that is now known as the Tea Party, a movement which strongly opposes Lugar and supports State Treasurer Richard Mourdock. Ballard has completed the sell out of those folks.  From Senator Lugar's press release announcing the endorsement.

INDIANAPOLIS (Jan. 23, 2012) - Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard this weekend endorsed U.S. Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN) in his bid for re-election. Ballard made his endorsement official Saturday when introducing Lugar at the annual Lincoln Day Dinner in Wayne Township on Marion County's Westside.

"President Reagan said, 'Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they have made a difference in the world, but the Marines don't have that problem,'" Ballard said. "Everyone knows I'm a Marine. But we have with us tonight a Navy man who doesn't have to wonder if he's made a difference in the world. He is making an incredible difference. That man is Dick Lugar." 

Ballard said Lugar's leadership and vision on the local, state and national level have always been "decades ahead of its time."

To see the rest of the press release, click here.

I guess next we can expect Mayor Ballard will endorse Mitt Romney.

Senator Lugar Falsified Residence in Presidential Candidacy Declaration

Sen. Richard Lugar

When Sen. Richard Lugar goes to vote, he signs documents under oath that he lives at 3200 Highwoods Court, Indianapolis.  As I noted last year, the Marion County Recorder's office shows the house at 3200 Highwoods Court, Indianapolis was deeded from a family named Gootee to David and Elizabeth Hughes in 1989.  Lugars' deeding of the property had to have taken place before the 1989 Gootee deed, most likely well before that.  I would have gotten those records when I researched the issue, but the Lugar transaction were paper only and preceded the computerized records in the office.  Nonetheless, Lugar admits he hasn't lived at the 3200 Highwoods Courts' house in decades. 

I am not sure what statute in the Indiana Code allows a sitting U.S. Senator and his wife to sign under oath they are living at someone's house in order to cast a ballot.  An investigation by Greg Wright, who filed a complaint with the State Election Commission against the Lugars for voting fraud, also uncovered that the Lugars have used the 3200 Highwoods Court address as their address with the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles and that BMV mail to that address was returned.

Now, Wright has uncovered more legal violations by Sen. Lugar.  In Lugar's 1995 Statement of Candidacy he signed when he ran for President, he stated that his address was 3200 Highwoods Court in Indianapolis. The document was signed with the warning that there could be penalties under federal law for submitting false information. Where is the exception in the federal law that allows Lugar to claim someone else's address as his own when running for President?

How Long Can the Mainstream Media Ignore Lugar's Voter Fraud Problem?; Will Charlie White Sit in Judgment of Lugar?

Yesterday I blogged about the fact that fraud investigator Greg Wright had filed an election fraud complaint against Richard Lugar and his wife, Charlene (Char), with the State Election Commission.   Blogger Diana Vice had first reported the story.

Lugar and his wife, Char, are registered to vote at a northwest side house near 38th and Kessler Boulevard.  They sold the Highwoods Court house decades ago and the house was sold again since then.  The current couple who live at the house are registered to vote there. They do not personally know Richard Lugar or his wife.

Senator Richard Lugar

Lugar admits that he doesn't live at the house.  He stays in hotels when he comes back to Indiana.  Yet when Lugar and his wife have voted, they continue to sign voter absentee and other forms UNDER OATH that they live at the Highwoods Court address.  They are voting in the Wayne Township precinct that they haven't lived in in decades.

There is no exception in the perjury laws or voter fraud laws that would allow Lugar or his wife to do this.  As a result, Lugar and his wife have committed multiple acts of perjury and voter fraud, all felonies.

What Secretary of State Charlie White is accused of  - one election using his ex-wife's address to cast a vote when he allegedly didn't live there (though White has evidence otherwise) - is peanuts compared to what Lugar and his wife have been doing for decades.  Yet when Charlie White failed to show up at a hearing, it is the leading story on the television news and on the front page of the Indianapolis Star. 

But how about Greg Wright's complaint against Richard Lugar.  Did the media pick up on it?  Nope.  The television stations ignored it as did the the Indianapolis Star. 

Ironically Charlie White is on the Commission and would be one of the three on the Election Board deciding the complaint against Lugar. Undoubtedly the Lugar people will press hard for White to step down because of the similarities the Lugar complaint has to the allegations against White.  (Of course that fact alone works against Lugar.)   The fact White could be setting in judgement of Lugar on a very similar voter fraud claim is an angle of the story the news media has thus far missed.

What is the difference between the two stories?  Well, for one the allegations against Lugar and his wife are far more serious than against Charlie White.  Further, they are far more easily proven.  Lugar readily admits the facts constituting multiple felonies, that he's signing documents under oath to vote using a residence he doesn't live at.  His wife is doing the same thing.

Secretary of State Charlie White

The only thing that mitigates against coverage of Senator Richard Lugar's residency flap is that Lugar is a powerful and popular politician.  Charlie White is not. White has been made a punching bag for the media.   There are, however, no consequences for the media attacking White. The media though fears consequences from reporting negatively about a long-time powerful politician like Lugar.

Last year when Fox59 considered breaking this story, the reporter had a meeting with Peter Rusthoven, a partner with Barnes & Thornburg, who also worked with Lugar and still supports him.  Rusthoven apparently went ballistic during their meeting.  I later pointed out to her why Rusthoven's legal positions was full of crap, but it didn't matter. The reporter was so shaken by her encounter with the angry Rusthoven she did not want to go forward with the story.

The news media should not refuse to cover a story for the sole reason that the story would reflect negatively on a popular, powerful politician.  Lugar is a sitting U.S. Senator who is signing documents under oath falsely stating that he resides at a house in which he has not lived in decades.  That is a story.  The media can only ignore it for so long.

Here are relevant documents:

Lugar Registration and Voter Application Record
Richard Lugar Fraud Complaint Page 1
Richard Lugar Fraud Complaint Page 2
Char Lugar Fraud Complaint Page 1
Char Lugar Fraud Complaint Page 2

See also Advance Indiana's take on the story.

Election Fraud Complaint Filed Against Senator Richard Lugar And His Wife For Falsely Stating They Reside At Someone Else's House to Vote in Indiana

We all knew it was coming.  Sen. Richard Lugar has for decades been identifying someone else's house as his residence and signing documents under oath falsely stating he resides there, when he admits he does not.  His situation is about a 1000 times worse than the voter fraud Charlie White is accused of.  Now Lugar has been hit with an election fraud complaint according to Diana Vice who thankfully has returned to the blogging scene:

Senator Richard Lugar

Greg Wright, an Indianapolis resident and Certified Fraud Examiner, filed an election fraud complaint with the Indiana Secretary of State on Wednesday against Senator Richard Lugar and his wife, Charlene Lugar.

Wright alleges that the senator and his wife may have committed multiple felonies for voting in a Marion county precinct, using an address for a home they reportedly do not own.

"It is my understanding that Senator Richard D. Lugar has voted using an 'absentee' ballot that used as his residence a home located at 3200 Highwoods Court, Indianapolis, Indiana 46222," wrote Wright

Wright contends the property "appears to be owned by Elizabeth Hughes" and deeded to David and Elizabeth Hughes in 1989 and quitclaimed from David Hughes to Elizabeth Hughes in 2003.

Wright claims he spoke with Elizabeth Hughes recently who reportedly told him that Senator Lugar "had not lived in the house for 33 years and had no ownership interest in the property.

"She appeared shocked that he used that address as his Indiana residence," wrote Wright while also noting that David and Elizabeth Hughes were also registered to vote using the same address.

To see the rest of the article, click here.

That Lugar was committing felonies by signing documents under oath claiming he resided at 3200 Highwoods Court is something I reported on earlier this year. I linked to Lugar's actual voter registration documents.

In response to my blog postings, some people have pointed to a statute that says you don't lose your residency because of your service in federal government.  The purpose of that statute is to ensure that people in federal government service won't have their residency challenged because they're spending most of their time living and working in the nation's capitol instead of at their Indiana home  Lugar though did not lose his residence in Indiana because of his service as a U.S. Senator.  He lost it because he completely gave up any residence in Indiana.  Lugar has no home in Indiana.  He lives in hotel rooms when he comes back to Indiana...to visit.

Consider this, even if the statute applies to allow Senator Lugar to sign documents under oath his residence is the Highwoods Court address, how does it apply to allow his wife, Char Lugar, to vote in Indiana using someone else's house as her residence?

See also:

Tuesday, March 8, 2011, Did Sen. Richard Lugar Commit Voter Fraud?; Senator Claims Residency At Home He Doesn't Appear to Have Owned for Years (w/Update)

Wednesday, March 9, 2011, Poking Holes in the Lugar Legal Argument; Why the Constitution and Statute Does Not Create a Loophole on Residency for Senator Lugar

Wednesday, March 9, 2011, Comparing Charlie White's Indictment to Senator Richard Lugar's Voting Practices; Did the Senior Senator Commit 24 Felonies?

Charlie White Asks Marion County Prosecutor to File Voter Fraud Charges Against Former Senator Evan Bayh

Secretary of State Charlie White

No matter what you think of Secretary of State Charlie White, the man is clearly being treated differently from other, more popular and powerful, politicians.

Earlier I reported on this blog how Senator Richard Lugar continues to use a northwest Indy house he sold decades ago as his voting residence.  Lugar does not dispute that he does not live at that house and that he hasn't for decades.  Lugar, in fact, lives in hotels when he comes back to Indiana.  Yet hecontinues to sign documents under oath that he is residing at that house every time he votes.  Is Lugar ever prosecuted for voter fraud and perjury which he is clearly committing?  Nope.  Lugar is too powerful.  (See columns linked below)

Today's target of Charlie White though is former Senator Evan Bayh.  Evan Bayh's situation in one way is actually better than Lugar's - he actually owns the Indianapolis townhouse he claims as his residence for voting.  Yet he clearly, by any sense of the term, does not "reside" at the $58,000 Indianapolis townhouse.  Rather he and his family live at a Washington, D.C. home valued at over $2 million dollars.

Despite the fact that Bayh is no longer in the Senate, he and his wife voted in the Democratic Primary in 2011 by absentee.  To do so they would have had to sign an affidavit that they are living at the Indianapolis townhouse.  Obviously they don't. Why aren't the Bayhs prosecuted?  They are too powerful.

In a press release White argues that his situation is like Bayh's.  Actually his situation is much more defensible.  Unlike Bayh, White actually has some evidence supporting the claim he was actually living at his ex-wifes, namely the testimony of four live witnesses.  Bayh, on the other hand, doesn't have any credible argument that he actually lives at the $58,000 Indianapolis condo instead of his Washington D.C. two million dollar home.  It is incredulous that the Bayh are not only voting at the condo but they are also claiming a homestead exemption on the Indianapolis townhouse. To claim that, you have to state under oath you are living at the property, which the Bayhs clearly aren't.

Here is White's press release:

Secretary of State Charlie White files criminal voter fraud and homestead fraud charges against Evan Bayh

Former U.S. Senator Evan Bayh

October 11, 2011 Indianapolis, IN - Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White filed a criminal complaint with the Marion County Prosecutor's office against Evan and Susan Bayh today for alleged voter and homestead fraud. "It is time for the Indiana Democrat Party's hypocrisy to stop with their persecution of me and my family for partisan gain," White said Tuesday," By Chairman Dan Parker's own definition, Evan and Susan Bayh unfortunately are alleged felons. I take no joy in filing this complaint, but the Democrats have opened themselves up for this and many future filings against others who show their blatant disregard for voting and homestead deduction laws. Evan Bayh, while living in a $2.3 million home in Washington, D.C. and making millions along with Mrs. Bayh, do not primarily reside in the $58,200 condominium in Indianapolis and should not have claimed a homestead nor should they have voted here in the Municipal Democratic Primary of 2011. He no longer serves in the U.S. Senate and no longer has legal immunity to vote here. Undoubtedly, he has claimed this residency so he can possibly run for Governor again someday, but by the Indiana Democrat Party’s definition of residency for me, Bayh’s residency does not add up. It is time for Evan and Susan Bayh and Charlie and Michelle White to be treated equally.”

“After the vicious attacks by the democrats and those in local media that refuse to report the whole story, I have to defend myself, my wife and my children's future from Dan Parker, Vop Osili and Indiana Democrats as they attempt to disenfranchise nearly 1 million Hoosiers who voted for me in 2010. The Indiana Democrats were the ones who brought a chainsaw instead of a racket to a tennis match because they knew they could not win. Their personal attacks do not help working families keep a roof over their heads and food on the table. Evan Bayh should show his alleged commitment to bi-partisanship, stop this madness and allow me and my wife to get on with our lives."

White also filed records showing Evan and Susan Bayh registering and each voting twice from Philip Lehmkuhler's (now Obama’s USDA Indiana Director) home in 2000 and registering at Fred Glass' (Now IU’s athletic director) house in December of 2000 until they purchased the $58,200 condominium the following year . "If Evan Bayh and at times Susan Bayh, who are both attorneys, are able to have voter-residency 'issues' in the 1980's, 2000's and now in 2011, why is it just or fair that my wife and I must suffer at the hands of his operatives and those in the media who are not fair and balanced.

Secretary White finally added, "While Democrats and the media have mocked my wife Michelle for having past financial problems like most Hoosiers in this recession before we were married last year, she works every bit as hard making an hourly wage at her part time job and trying to start a new business after her last two employers closed their doors as Susan Bayh does making millions sitting on several corporate boards. I thought Indiana Democrats would be compassionate toward struggling Hoosiers, but I guess they are not when it gets in the way of grasping for power. If Bayh will not do anything, I never want to hear about how he is above partisan politics as he likes to portray himself as a contributor on Fox News Channel in New York City. Before Bayh’s spokespeople respond by using words like “sour grapes", “smokescreen” or “diversion”, there is no ‘diverting’ from my family’s personal and political assassination at the hands of his cronies. Evan Bayh needs to not “distract” from his own voting and residency needs to answer these questions quickly. Struggling Hoosiers are fed up with people that ‘game’ the system and are granted titles of nobility in all but name.”

# # # # # # #

Contact information:

Charlie White
13086 Overview Drive
Fishers, Indiana 46037
cwhite@hamiltoncountygop.org

People like to pile on Charlie White and suggest I'm wrong for saying he's being treated unfairly. Yet when you ask those same people about Lugar and Bayh's voter fraud problems, they generally have no response.  The bottom line is that Lugar and Bayh are popular and powerful, and Charlie White is not.  That is why White is a target while Lugar and Bayh get a pass for what are clearly egregious voting fraud violations.

It is time to drop the political and selective prosecution of Charlie White.  The horse is dead. Stop beating it.

For my discussion of Lugar's voter fraud problems, see below:

Friday, Februay 18, 2011, Did Sen. Richard Lugar Commit A Felony By Voting From Precinct Where He Doesn't Live?


Tuesday, March 8, 2011, Did Sen. Richard Lugar Commit Voter Fraud?; Senator Claims Residency At Home He Doesn't Appear to Have Owned for Years (w/Update)


Wednesday, March 9, 2011, Poking Holes in the Lugar Legal Argument; Why the Constitution and Statute Does Not Create a Loophole on Residency for Senator Lugar

Poll Commissioned by Lugar Campaign Reveals 35-Year Senator's Re-Election Bid in Trouble

Senator Richard Lugar

The most recent \poll, commissioned by Sen. Richard Lugar's campaign committee and conducted by American Viewpoint, shows the 35 year incumbent leading State Treasurer Richard Mourdock 45% to 31% with 23% undecided.   It has a margin of error of +/- 4 points.

Those numbers reveal extraordinary vulnerability for Lugar.  Even though it is a poll commissioned by the Lugar people, he doesn't even score 50% in his own party despite 35 years in the Senate.  Lugar only gets 45% of the support despite having 100% name ID.  Also, the fact that 23% of Republican primary voters are "undecided" about his re-election is troublesome for the Senator.  The fourteen point lead is nothing given the election is nine months away.

What I find stunning is that the Lugar people actually feel this is a good poll for them and were eager to release it in light of the Basswood Research poll commissioned by the pro-Mourdock Club for Growth which showed Mourdock leading Lugar 34-32.  Any objective political analyst would look at that poll and conclude the 35 year incumbent was very vulnerable.

Mike O'Brien writing for the pro-Lugar Capitol and Washington blog, however, sums up the results this way:

Senator Lugar’s campaign is resonating with primary voters. His support and job approval have improved since the beginning of the year, even in light of a major attack ad campaign against him immediately preceding this poll.

State Treasurer Richard Mourdock

Mourdock’s campaign has garnered no momentum. His support equals Lugar’s negatives and has not grown beyond that point.

I'm sure Mike knows enough about politics to know that he is doing nothing but spin. That is clearly not a good poll for Lugar.

On his blog Advance Indiana, Gary Welsh further highlights how off the mark the pro-Lugar spin is, concluding:

Interestingly, Lugar's campaign is spinning the American Viewpoint numbers as an indication his message is resonating with voters even though his poll numbers have dropped markedly over those cited by his campaign just months ago. Before Mourdock launched his campaign, Lugar's campaign released poll numbers indicating that Lugar was more popular than virtually any Indiana politician, including Gov. Mitch Daniels, with 66% of all voters viewing him favorably and only 19% viewing him unfavorably.

Exactly.  Senator Richard Lugar is in trouble and his own poll reveals it.

New Poll Shows Mourdock and Sen. Lugar in Statistical Dead Heat

I've been reluctant to comment on this poll until I saw some of the methodology, but news organizations across the country are reporting it. This from Roll Call:

A new poll conducted for the Club for Growth showed Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.) and his primary challenger, state Treasurer Richard Mourdock, in a statistical dead heat.

Mourdock had a small advantage over Lugar, 34 percent to 32 percent, in the Basswood Research poll released Tuesday. But Mourdock’s 2-point lead is within the poll’s 4.4-point margin of error.

The conservative, anti-tax organization has not endorsed Mourdock, but the Club for Growth President Chris Chocola has frequently criticized Lugar’s record. Earlier this month, the club sponsored television advertisements blasting Lugar across Indiana.

“An incumbent who sits at 32 percent in his own party’s primary, and trails a much less known challenger, is in a world of trouble,” Chocola, a former Indiana Congressman, said in a statement. “Senator Lugar is a very decent man, but it’s clear from the poll that after 35 years, Hoosier Republicans are eager for a more conservative alternative.”

About one-third of those polled, 34 percent, said they were undecided about the GOP Senate primary field.

I have previously said I am not 100% sure Lugar will go to the post in 2012.  I think there is a decent chance that he will choose to retire gracefully than risk electoral defeat.  Of course, at Lugar's age there is an increased chance that health complications may suddenly put him on the sidelines.

Voter Fraud Double Standards: Media Goes After Charlie White While Ignoring Worse Legal Violations By Evan Bayh and Senator Richard Lugar

Former Senator Evan Bayh

Gary Welsh over at Advance Indiana, has an interesting story about Evan Bayh voting in the May 2011 Indiana primary, claiming Indiana residency, even though he lives in a $3 million Washington D.C. suburban home.

The media horns have been out to gore Secretary of State Charlie White over whether he broke Indiana election law by not voting in the correct precinct in his home county where nobody disputes he resided at all times. For that, Democrats are seeking to have him deemed ineligible to hold the office to which he was overwhelmingly elected by Indiana voters last year, and a special prosecutor has been successful in getting a grand jury to bring criminal charges against him. The media should be asking how former Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh could still be casting votes in Marion County if they truly believe White has committed such an egregious offense.

Bayh did not seek re-election to the Senate last year. He now works as a D.C. lawyer, a senior policy adviser for a New York-based private equity firm and a Fox News contributor. He and his wife, Susan, still live in a $3 million home in suburban Washington where they principally resided while he served in the U.S. Senate. Yet Bayh cast an absentee vote in Indiana's May 2011 municipal primary election using a residence for a cheap condo on Indianapolis' northside he claims as a principal residence, even though neighbors have never seen any sign he actually resides in the condo. According to Marion Co. tax records, the condominium located at 1142 Canterbury Square is valued at only $58,200. Because the Bayhs claim the condo as their principal residence and receive a homestead exemption on it, their annual property tax bill this year is only $274.22.

To see the rest of the Advance Indiana post, click here.

At least with Evan Bayh it is property he actually owns, although he obviously is not a resident of the Indianapolis condo, a fact Welsh documents.

Senator Richard Lugar

With Senator Richard Lugar, the situation is even worse as I documented in a post earlier this year.  He is claiming as his "residence" for voting purposes a house on the northwest side of Indianapolis that he admittedly hasn't owned or lived at for some 30 years.  The house has changed hands several times since he moved into the northwest neighborhood in 1960.  Sen. Lugar has been signing documents under oath that he resides at 3200 Highwoods Court, which his campaign admits is not true.  Sen. Lugar has clearly has committed voter fraud and perjury by doing what he did, yet he continues to get a pass from the media and prosecutors.  Why? Because he, like Bayh, is a popular politician.  Secretary of State Charlie White is not. 

Everyone is out to get Charlie White for one alleged incident of voter fraud.   Richard Lugar is Charlie White on steroids when it comes to voter fraud.  There is no comparison between the two.  Now we find out that former Sen. Even Bayh is also flouting the residency requirement, voting using an Indianapolis address where he clearly does not live.

If the law is not going to be applied equally to everyone, then it shouldn't be applied to anyone.  Voter fraud should not be used for a political prosecution of Charlie White, while ignoring much worse violations by Senator Richard Lugar and former Senator Evan Bayh.

Senator Richard Lugar Announces Sponsorship of "Fair Tax" Bill

Senator Richard Lugar

Perhaps feeling the heat of Republican county chairman and tea partiers, Sen. Richard Lugar today announced his support for the so-called "Fair Tax" WANE-TV from Fort Wayne reports:

INDIANAPOLIS (WANE) - U.S. Senator for Indiana Richard Lugar added his name to a list of members of Congress to cosponsor a current bill to advance the development of the Fair Tax.

The Fair Tax would do away with the current income tax and the IRS and replace it with a national consumption tax on final sales of goods and services.
...
Lugar said he called for the Fair Tax sixteen years ago when he was a Republican primary candidate for president and at the time, no senators and only a couple of house members supported the idea.

“I made the point at the time that Presidential leadership was required to improve our job creating economic growth prospects, and that pulling out the existing tax code by root and branch was the way to do it,” Lugar said in a statement released Thursday.

Lugar also said he feels the country is coming nearing a new opportunity to pass the Fair Tax.

‘Now, with election of a Republican House, and hopes in 2012 to gain Republican control of the Senate and the election of a Republican President, I believe that we have another chance to fundamentally change the tax code. This is extremely important because our current low growth era is accompanied by high deficits. We need to think creatively about achieving dynamic growth while simultaneously exercising fiscal restraint. A pro-growth tax code is the first and best step toward doing so,” said Lugar.

Lugar said the Fair Tax fundamentally alters our prospects as a nation.

“Savings will increase and therefore individuals and American companies will have more money to invest in job creating growth, and companies around the global will rush to invest here, as well. This dynamic economic growth will expand federal revenue without an increased tax burden on Americans,” said Lugar.

Lugar said the Fair Tax would eliminate hidden tax benefits to special interests and tax season aggravation and would ultimately save money for millions of families.

Lugar also pointed out that individuals who currently pay almost no Federal taxes, including foreign tourists, illegal aliens and criminals, would pay Federal taxes like every one else.

Lugar said the Fair Tax would also help low income workers since they would no longer have to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes currently withheld from their paychecks.

"The current tax code warps household and business decisions, discourages investment, is constantly evaded, is arduous to enforce, and is disconnected from economic realities. In short, it is fitting hand-in-glove with big government spending to punch the life out of our economy.

Many Americans fear that our country is going bankrupt and will lose our preeminent position in the world. This does not need to be so, and will not be, if we adopt the Fair Tax and end the inherently flawed federal income tax system, “ said Lugar.

If Lugar has supported the Fair Tax for so long, why did it take him so long to agree to be a co-sponsor of the bill? 

I haven't heard Lugar's opponent, Ricahrd Mourdock's position on the issue.  Hopefully he won't take the bait and endorse the concept.  While the "Fair Tax" is extraordinarily popular among Libertarians and many tea party types, others, including yours truly, view the concept as completely unworkable.  Although a 23% tax rate is suggested as sufficient to replace the federal income tax and payroll taxes such as Social Security and Medicare, a presidential commission suggested the tax would have to be as high as 34%...and that's before adding on state and local sales taxes.

The assumption of Fair Tax advocates is that because people have more money to spend without income taxes, they will voluntarily pay a much higher sales tax.  Balderdash. People will always want to avoid paying a tax and the bigger the tax the harder they will work at tax avoidance. The Fair Tax would end the Internal Revenue Service but cause it to be replaced with an agency every bit as large and intrusive so as to catch consumers buying on the black market to avoid sales tax and merchants who are pocketing the sales tax revenue rather than remitting it to the federal and state governmentsts.   The Fair Tax turns every merchant into an unpaid tax collector for the state, with the duty of monitoring and reporting every sale of goods and services to some federal agency.   And we think the IRS is intrusive.
A much better idea is the flat income tax, with few, if any, deductions. That wouldn't eliminate the IRS, but it would completely defang it without necessitating the creation of yet another large, nosy federal government agency.  Problems with people buying products on the  black market and merchants not remitting sales taxes, problems Fair Tax advocates overlook, are not a problem with a flat rate income tax.  While the Fair Tax has merit - chiefly that it would lead to people saving more - it will also lead to a huge drop in consumer spending which will result a drop in the sales tax revenue and require higher taxes.  Then you have the problem that we're likely to end up with the Fair Tax and an income tax, unless the 16th Amendment is repealed, no easy feat.

Lugar appears to be pandering to what he thinks the Tea Party folks want to hear.  That's not exactly leadership.

Miscellaneous Thoughts on Politics and the Law

Having been tied up the last couple days with a legal writing project I of course waited until the last minute to complete (well actually I had till midnight to file and finished at 7 pm, so I should get some credit), I thought I'd do some quick observations on things pertaining to politics and the law.  Feel free to jump in with comments.

Senator Richard Lugar

• Is everyone on Lugar's staff tone deaf when it comes to politics? Attacking Republican county chairmen, suggesting they are fools who are easily manipulated, doesn't seem to be the route to go to get party support. Lugar's political clock is running out. He'd be better off retiring with dignity rather than have to give a concession speech come election night.

• I really think Planned Parenthood made a mistake trying to get a preliminary injunction.  That requires a showing of "irreparable damage," an almost impossible hurdle to clear.  They probably would have been much better just shooting for the permanent injunction. Now their injunction is viewed as a loser in the public's eye when in fact that's not what a ruling against a temporary injunction means.
• It is amusing watching the Indianapolis Star, Jim Shella of WISH-TV and some of the other television stations try to spin the Rokita report on Charlie White into being another nail in the Secretary of State's political career coffin.  Did they even bother to read the report, or even the summary?  The Rokita report simply reviewed documents already made public and discussed how the law might be applied. The report was careful to reach no conclusions and to point out that any claim of legal violations could be refuted by evidence White might present.   That didn't fit with the media agenda of crucifying White so they simply made up their own conclusions. 
• Speaking of the Rokita report, did a single media outlet mention that White was cleared of any misconduct for reading the report?  If they did, they downplayed it.  There was nothing whatsoever confidential in the Rokita report and I would question why it was ever deemed as attorney work product when Rokita, as Secretary of State, had no power to conduct investigations into supposed election law violations.
• I've left the blogging about the Duke-IURC scandal to Advance Indiana's Gary Welsh who has followed it more closely and offers great commentary.  However, one thing I read in today's Star article jumped out at me.  Did I read correctly that an IURC official Michael Reed emailed a Duke official and suggest that that official talk to David Lee Hardy, then IURC Commissioner about the Edwardsport case pending before the IURC?   That would be ex parte communication by the Commissioner and it is a felony.  Maybe I just read it wrong.
• Dr. Eugene White has officially lost it.  The Star reports that he has a plan to prohibit studentts who switch to neighboring districts or charter schools from returning to IPS after September count day.  Such a policy would not even remotely be legal.  Apparently Dr. White thinks he is the law in the State of Indiana.
• I read Matthew Tully's puff piece on Sen. Richard Lugar and it got me to thinking...is there anything liberal reporters and columnists love more than Republicans who turn their backs on traditional conservative values?  The Star simply loves Lugar, Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard, and Carmel Mayor Jim Brainard.  Ballard and Brainard, in particular, are two of the most fiscally liberal mayors in the State of Indiana regardless of party. 

Thoughts?

Poking Holes in the Lugar Legal Argument; Why the Constitution and Statute Does Not Create a Loophole on Residency for Senator Lugar



Senator Richard Lugar

 In support of the claim that Lugar claimed residency at an address he hasn't lived at for years, Lugar's staff and others are citing to Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution which is outlined in IC 3-5-5-5:

Absence due to state or federal business



Sec. 5. As provided in Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana, a person is not considered to have lost residence in a precinct in Indiana by reason of the person's absence on the business of:

                                 (1) the state of Indiana; or
                                 (2) the United States.

Read the emboldened provision closely.  Lugar did not lose his residency at 3200 Highwoods Court because he was absent serving in the U.S. Senate.  Lugar lost his residency at 3200 Highwoods Court because he sold the home, moved out and another family moved in.  The provision does not apply.

Lugar can't claim 3200 Highwoods Court as his residence as he has been doing for the last 41 years. When he goes in and votes and signs absentee ballot applications claiming that address as his residence, he is committing a felony each time.

Comparing Charlie White's Indictment to Senator Richard Lugar's Voting Practices; Did the Senior Senator Commit 24 Felonies?

People still are confusing the issue of Sen. Richard Lugar's residency to be U.S. Senator with the Charlie White type voting offenses he appears to committed.  So I thought I would do a side by side comparison using White's actual indictment posted by the Indiana Legal Blog.

Secretary of State Charlie White

Count 1 (submission of a false voter registration), Count 3 (fraud on a financial institution regarding a claim of residency), Count 6 (perjury with regard to White's marriage application) and Count 7 (theft with regard to receiving pay as a member of the Fishers Town Board) are inapplicable to possible Lugar legal violations.  Let's examine the rest.

Count 2 (Perjury a Class D Felony, IC 35-44-2-1(a)(1)) of the White indictment says that he executed a form changing his 6994 Pintail Drive to 7527 Broad Leaf Lane, when he knew at the time of the statement he was residing at 13086 Overview Drive.

The details of Lugar's possible offense would be slightly different. When he submitted applications for absentee ballots, there is a perjury affidavit saying that he attests to the accuracy of the information on the form, including that he resides at 3200 Highwoods Court.

The statute of limitations on perjury, a Class D Felony is five years.  Lugar cast seven absentee ballots in the last five years, starting with the Mayor 2006 primary.  That means he would have committed seven separate acts of perjury during that time...assuming of course he doesn't actually live at 3200 Highwoods Court, which possibility is summarized below and was discussed in a previous blog post.

Count 4 (Voting in Other Precinct, a Class D Felony, IC 3-14-2-11) of the White indictment says that he committed the offense of "voting in Other Precinct, to wit: knowingly or intentionally voting in Delaware Township Precinct 12 indicating his residence was 7527 Broad Leaf Lane, Fishers, Indiana, when in fact he resided at the time at 13086 Overview Drive, Unit 5-B, Fishers, Indiana, which is locat3ed in Fishers, Fall Creek Township, Precinct 5.

Senator Richard Lugar

The statute of limitations on that felony is also five years.  Since May of 2006, Lugar voted 10 times using the 3200 Highwoods Court address, where he doesn't appear to have lived for decades.  That's 10 separate and distinct felonies.

Count 5 (Procuring, Casting or Tabulating a False, Fictitious or Fraudulent Ballot, a Class D Felony, IC 3-14-3-1.1(2)) of the White indictment says that he knowingly cast a vote in Delaware Township, Precinct 12 when he in fact lived in an address at 13086 Overview Drive which put him in Fall Creek Township, Precinct 5.

White used a residence he didn't live at to procure a ballot.  I checked...the law also applies to absentee ballots.  Unlike White who did it once, Lugar appears to have done it seven times during the 5 year applicable statute of limitations.

The final count:  7 + 10 + 7 = 24 felonies our senior senator would have committed if he does not live at his claimed residence of 3200 Highwoods Court listed on his voter registration form. As noted in a previous blog post, that is an address Lugar claimed on his registration form in 1969. For the past 41 years he has continued to vote using that house's address even though it appears to have been deeded away years ago, is currently owned by someone else, and there is another family registered at the address.

I am no fan of Charlie White.  Never met the man in my life.  But is it not important that our laws apply equally to people who are presently unpopular (Charlie White) as those who are presently popular (Richard Lugar)?  There is a term called the "rule of law" which applies to our judicial system.  It says that that the law should not be enforced differently depending on the person but that it should apply equally to all of us, regardless of whether we are rich or poor, famous or infamous.  It is an extremely important legal principle that I think we should all demand be upheld.