Once Pete Olson was Chief of Staff to Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn, a standard new-right Neanderthal (with a side order of stoopid) who is in grave danger of becoming the first Republican to lose a Texas US Senate race since 1986. Now Olson’s running as the Republican for the House in TX-22, trying to win it back from Democrat Nick Lampson.
Only thing is, Olson might have inherited the Curse of Tom DeLay. DeLay is still under indictment for campaign financing fraud stemming from how he funded the Texas Republican Party’s redistricting efforts in 2003. In fact, after winning the 2006 nomination in TX-22 DeLay resigned, fearing a loss to Lampson. But DeLay miscalculated election law again and as a result the Republican line was empty for the fall, leading to Lampson’s election.
The district is the most Republican-leaning of any represented by a House Democrat, so the Republicans salivated over the 2008 race. In May 2007 Olson left Cornyn’s office to campaign for the Republican nomination in TX-22. At the same time he moved into Fort Bend County TX from Fairfax County VA, the DC suburb in which he had lived from 1996 onward while working, first for former Texas Senator Phil (Financial Institutions Deregulator) Gramm, and then for Cornyn.
The race has remained neck and neck, with Lampson having built a good constituent-service operation and a centrist voting record, which Olson has ridiculed as being not nearly right-wing enough. But it seems Olson’s once bright chances may have been clouded by his own difficulties with miscalculating election law. Shades of Tom DeLay.
John Pape, a reporter at the community site fortbendnow.com, has reported that
Fairfax County, Va., prosecutor Raymond Morrogh has confirmed that his office has received the criminal vote fraud complaint filed against Texas Congressional District 22 GOP challenger Pete Olson, and is conducting an investigation into the charges.
Morrogh [...] did not comment on the specifics of the allegations, but his office confirmed that an investigation had been initiated.
Last week, the Lone Star Project, a D.C.-based political action committee, filed the complaint seeking felony charges against Olson for allegedly voting in both Virginia and Connecticut.
Through campaign spokesperson Amy Goldstein, Olson has repeatedly denied the allegations. His campaign also released a Senate travel voucher showing Olson was traveling on the day of the Connecticut election.
Yep. Seems like Olson likes voting so much, in 1993 he did it twice at his Virginia address and once at his parents’ address in Newtown CT, all within 5 months of one another.
Here’s the timeline from documents attached to the Lone Star complaint to Fairfax County, documents obtained from official sources at Fairfield CT and Fairfax County VA.
Fairfax VA voter database output shows he voted in the general election there from 1998-2006, plus primaries in 2000, 3, 5.
8/12/03 Newtown CT voter sheet shows Olson voted.
2/27/05 tells Newtown CT he moved on 2/27/98.
8/15/07 registers to vote in Ft Bend Co TX.
The Lampson campaign put out an email yesterday asking,
Did Pete Olson commit a felony? All signs point to yes but the criminal investigation that was opened in Fairfax County this week will decide.
Prosecutors were quick to move on a felony complaint that was filed after evidence was discovered showing Pete Olson (with the same addresses and signature of candidate Olson) voted and maintained voter registration in Connecticut and Virginia. Voter fraud is a felony in both states.
The Lone Star Project site’s story on the filing is full of barely suppressed glee. But why would you suppress glee at finding a Republican involved in his own personal overvote scandal? Just as DeLay is charged with overfunding Texas redistricting, Olson faces evidence of voting in two different jurisdictions in the same political season. Even though the Connecticut race was a special election, and he can claim not to have voted for the same candidate(s) twice in 2003, such distinctions are beneath the notice of the law.
Noting that Olson bizarrely blames an imposter or look-alike as his defense, the Lone Star Project states:
Olson has deep roots in both Virginia and Connecticut. He only recently moved to Texas, arriving in August 2007, just in time to file for the District 22 Congressional race against highly respected incumbent Congressman Nick Lampson. (Source: The Houston Chronicle, February 10, 2008)
The Lone Star Project made Olson’s apparent violation public in a report released on October 1, 2008 , which provided the new Texas resident an opportunity to give a credible answer for his double registration and voting. However, instead of demonstrating that he had officially changed residences and switched his voter registration or showing proof that the documents are somehow incorrect, Olson’s campaign made the bizarre and implausible claim that although a Peter G. Olson may have voted in the August 2003 special election, "it was not candidate Olson." (National Journal’s House Race Hotline, October 6, 2008)
In making this fantastic claim, Olson did not say if he has alerted authorities to look for and apprehend his alleged imposter.
Before notifying authorities, the Lone Star Project asked Virginia attorney and election law expert, Jack Young, to examine the documents and the law. Mr. Young said, "It’s against the law in Virginia to register and to vote from more than one residence. It certainly appears that Pete Olson broke the law, so an investigation by Virginia authorities is warranted."
Yesterday kossack marndar posted a brief diary on the subject after I had begun working on this diary. One of his/her commentors noted that the Houston Chronicle should be all over a documented case of voter fraud.
I checked out chron.com. Nope, nothing. (The Austin American-Statesman had a detailed AP story which cannot, of course, be quoted.)
So I called up the Chronicle’s political reporter Alan Bernstein, who has written several other stories on the Lampson/Olson race. I told him I was an expatriate Texan living in Washington DC (as I am) and asked him, "Have you heard anything on how a felony conviction in Virginia would affect Olson’s eligibility to serve if elected?"
He said he hadn’t, which didn’t surprise me. But that was my own attempt to influence the corporate media. My own personal "push-poll" question. Plant the notion that serious people had best look at the consequences if it turns out Olson gets elected and then gets indicted and convicted.
I knew Bernstein was on deadline and was grateful that he spoke to me at all. So I asked him only one more question. "Have Olson or his campaign spokespeople moved off the impersonation claim to explain the Connecticut vote?" Again he said, "No," adding, "Now that Lampson made it an issue, and the DCCC has gotten involved, we’re looking at it. I have a pile of documents to go through." I said, "I look forward to seeing anything you get in the paper about this," very polite. And exaggerating my Texas accent just a little bit.
I did wonder about the DCCC remark, since a quick look at their site shows nothing on the issue, but perhaps Bernstein believes that Lone Star Project is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DCCC. This would not be correct, but it would equally not be a surprise for a Chronicle reporter to get it wrong about Democratic sources. Saying nothing against Bernstein personally, it is nonetheless true that, despite endorsing Obama and even Lampson, the Chronicle’s reportage has historically always been in the pocket of the power structure, just as if it were still a small town paper in a small town. Of course, it may also be that Bernstein as a media gatekeeper knows something about the DCCC's plans that I don't.
There could be another shoe to drop. Olson hasn’t apparently voted anywhere else since registering in Texas. Maybe he just hasn’t had time yet. But he voted in Connecticut after the date he later submitted to Newtown as the date he moved away. So, by voting that township election, didn’t Olson effectively commit voter fraud in Connecticut as well? Prosecutors in Newtown borough, Fairfield County, and the State of Connecticut might all prove interested. The AP, which cannot be quoted, is apparently not pursuing that angle despite its farflung resources across jurisdictional lines.