The topic of this diary is a parochial one, perhaps of little interest to those outside Illinois' 6th Congressional District where Democrat Tammy Duckworth is running for retiring Henry Hyde's seat against the christofacist Peter Roskam.
One of the few truthful accusations that the Roskam campaign has leveled at Duckworth is the fact that she does not live in the district. This also seems to be one of the accusations that district voters are taking to heart. "She doesn't even live in the district."
In a race as difficult as this one is going to be, in a district traditionally Republican, it is inexcusable to allow the opposition such an advantage.
Illinois is particularly sensitive to the issue of political carpetbaggers. In 2004, the Republicans lost their collective marbles and brought in carpetbagger Alan Keyes to run for the Senate, which is why we are now represented there by Barack Obama. When the Roskam campaign accuses Duckworth of being a carpetbagger, the voters remember Keyes. And Roskam, as his ads continue to point out, is a longtime resident of District 6.
Duckworth's residency was an issue in the primary, when she was opposed by two longtime District residents. Her campaign should have known this would become an issue in the general election.
When the subject comes up, the Duckworth campaign always responds by noting that her home in the 8th District was just recently remodeled to accomodate her physical handicap caused by the loss of both legs in service in Iraq. They suggest that it would be unreasonable for her to move just a few miles away just to establish residency in District 6.
This is an inexcusable mistake. YES, Duckworth absolutely should have moved. The day after the primary, a FOR SALE sign should have appeared on the lawn of her house. Her failure to do so sends the signal to the voters that she doesn't care enough about the district to live there, that she doesn't care enough to move.
This is not an unreasonable requirement. Every day, people have to move in order to take a new job. Duckworth is no exception. The House ought to be worth a house. Her present home is not the only one that could accomodate her. If she could not find one already suitable, another one could have been remodeled. If necessary, she could have continued to reside in her current home while the new one was remodeled to suit her. It would have been enough that she had purchased it, that she had already made the move by buying a new home in the District.
The advantage this move would have given to her campaign is considerable. Instead of Roskam's charge: "She doesn't even live in the District," Duckworth's supporters would be able to say: "She cares so much for this district that she gave up the house that was just remodeled to accomodate her." "She sacrificed her home for the chance to represent us."
As it is, however, voters can only think: "She doesn't care enough for this district that she would move here." "She cares more for a house than the chance to represent us."
If Duckworth loses this election, her failure to make this move may well prove to be the decisive factor. All for the sake of a house.