William A. Alexander – 5/29/06

This page was last updated on May 29, 2006.

‘Anybody but Santorum’; William A. Alexander; Beaver County Times; May 29, 2006. Though it appeared in the print edition of the Times, this letter was not posted on the Times website at the time I wrote this critique.

This is at least Mr. Alexander’s third rant on this bogus subject. The previous two were entitled “Don’t buy Santorum’s pitch” and “Santorum tricks the people”. Rather than transcribe the whole thing, I’ll transcribe only the couple of paragraphs I want to comment about. Overall, Mr. Alexander has written at least 13 letters since December 2004, and they all bashed Republicans for something.

Below is a detailed critique of the letter.

“Apparently his [Santorum’s] wife heard about a local resident saying, ‘No one lives there, there are no curtains and no furniture in the house.’”

[RWC] First, the “local resident” was a local Democrat party activist (and husband of the Penn Hills Democrat chairwoman) trying to resurrect the bogus residency issue. The chairwoman was the one who pressed the Penn Hills school district to challenge Mr. Santorum’s eligibility.

Second, the comment was made on a KDKA-TV broadcast, pretty much putting out a welcome mat to any would-be burglars and robbers.

“This bilked the Penn Hills taxpayers and the people of Pennsylvania out of more than $100,000. Then, when they got caught, they determined that since the statue [sic] of limitations had expired they did not have to reimburse the money.”

[RWC] See the critiques referenced above regarding the residency issue.

Regarding the “statue [sic] of limitations,” not exactly. The PA’s Office of General Counsel ruled Penn Hills “had to file a complaint within seven days of the Santorums’ notifying the district that their children would attend the charter school.” The hearing officer stated, “Penn Hills’ inexplicable failure to object within the statutorily mandated timeline, or even within a reasonable approximation of that timeline, nullifies its tardy objection.”¹

How long did Penn Hills wait to complain at the behest of the Democrat party chairwoman? The Santorum children were registered during July 2003 and June 2004 and had been enrolled in the cyber school since 2000. Penn Hills didn’t challenge the children’s residency until December 8, 2004.

Regarding the “when they got caught” comment, according to a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article, “School officials noted the Santorums never lied in their tuition application and provided documentation of their residency, such as driver’s licenses and utility bills.”² The Santorums continue to vote in Penn Hills.

As a reminder, the Santorum’s now home school their children.

“And this is the same guy that preaches family values and morals.”

[RWC] Does Mr. Alexander expect a “guy that preaches family values and morals” to leave his family alone at home for a huge chunk of the year? If anything, Mr. Santorum’s actions back up his statements.

“Or maybe Santorum is planning on this being the Santorum Ranch when he is president, similar to what Reagan did.”

[RWC] Regarding Mr. Santorum, I doubt a residential lot in Penn Hills qualifies as a ranch.

Regarding President Reagan, he bought Rancho del Cielo (The Reagan Ranch) in 1974, six years before he was elected president. At 688 acres, I believe that counts as a real ranch. At about 1,600 acres, I believe President Bush’s Prairie Chapel Ranch also qualifies as a ranch.

1. Penn Hills loses Santorum cyber school tuition fight; Amy McConnell Schaarsmith; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; July 11, 2005.

2. Santorum tuition refund denied; David Conti and Reid R. Frazier; Pittsburgh Tribune-Review; July 12, 2005.