Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) is running for governor of California and has run into a little spot of trouble. According to opposition research performed by his top Democrat rival for governor, billionaire Tom Steyer, Swalwell rents a room inside a Livermore, Calif., home owned by a family of three and lists that address as his residence.
Steyer is also considering changing his address to Sacramento as governor and argues that Swalwell’s arrangement exists mainly on paper, allowing him to claim California residency while spending most of his time in Washington, D.C.
To nobody’s surprise, Swalwell’s campaign disputes the claim, saying the rental arrangement has existed for years and includes personal belongings and regular mail delivery.
In response, a declaration was filed on March 6 by Swalwell’s attorneys from his landlord, Mrzywka.
In it, she states that “under penalty of perjury,” that “I entered a lease agreement with Eric and Brittany Swalwell in June 2017 for a property that I own in Livermore, California. Mr. and Mrs. Swalwell have leased the property from me since June 2017.”
“From June 2017 to present, I have lived in Livermore, California. I am registered to vote in California. I have a California Driver’s License. I am a licensed attorney with the California State Bar, and my license has remained active since I was admitted to the Bar in 2006.7.8. I own a business (“non-manager”) in California. I have filed income tax returns in California since tax year 2006.”
In a sworn declaration filed by Swalwell’s landlord, the congressman’s counterclaim against Steyer is true, stating that Swalwell has rented the room since 2017, has stored personal items there, and receives official correspondence at the address.
This follows the playbook that politicians have been accused of for years: the incumbent is accused of “A,” while their opponents offer evidence proving “A” exists. It looks more like a technical compliance maneuver than the daily reality expected from someone asking Californians to trust him with the governor’s office.
Tom Steyer has framed the situation as evidence that Swalwell spends far more time in Washington than in the state he wants to govern.
Residency questions in politics rarely remain isolated incidents. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) faced scrutiny after mortgage filings listed both a Maryland home and a Burbank property as primary residences for years. Mortgage filings allowed refinancing at favorable rates tied to primary residence status. Schiff, of course, denied wrongdoing and stated that lawmakers often maintain homes near Washington while also keeping residences in their states. Federal authorities reviewed the situation, and no charges were filed.
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-bat-guano crazy) also drew criticism over her living arrangements; she lives in a multimillion-dollar home outside the district she represents, far from the lower-income communities in that district. Waters has continued her work in Congress while defending her residence as legal and appropriate.
The residency game is bipartisan; several lawmakers across multiple states register addresses outside their districts. State legislative controversies in Wisconsin and Texas have raised similar questions about whether elected officials maintain meaningful ties to the voters they represent. Some states have responded by creating independent redistricting commissions to remove partisan control over map drawing. Arizona and Michigan implemented commissions aimed at reducing district manipulation and residency games that follow changes to political maps.
Eric Swalwell’s career has already carried a heavy load of political controversy long before this residency debate. The most widely known episode involving Christine Fang, better known as Fang Fang, a suspected Chinese intelligence operative who cultivated relationships with several California politicians.
Fang helped organize fundraising events for Swalwell during his early congressional campaigns and placed an intern inside his office. The FBI briefed Swalwell about Fang in 2015, after which he ended all contact, but Swalwell was never accused of criminal wrongdoing. Swalwell’s episode remains one of the most unusual security controversies involving a sitting member of Congress.
Another moment that connects to Swalwell like flies on stink was Fart-Gate, when, during a 2019 television interview, a loud “noise” interrupted his speech. That noise became gold on social media, fueling days of ridicule—and a missed chance for a new cologné line: Flatulenté. Swalwell denied making the noise, blaming studio equipment.
It’s an episode that became a viral moment that critics still cite when discussing Swalwell’s public persona.
Swalwell also remains one of the most combative figures on Capitol Hill during congressional hearings, frequently engaging in aggressive questioning of witnesses and sharp exchanges with fellow lawmakers.
His exchanges draw a mixture of critiques. There may be people who believe him to be an ardent supporter of democracy, while I believe him to be a terrible Shakespearean actor using Congress as his stage.
California voters now face a familiar question when evaluating political candidates. Leadership demands judgment, steadiness, and a sense of seriousness that survives public scrutiny. Swalwell’s career contains moments that leave many voters wondering whether each headline represents bad luck or a repeating pattern of poor decisions.
In Eric Swalwell’s case — ooo, just thought of the name for his new cologné: eau de Fàng — the list continues to grow.
PJ Media VIP members help keep independent voices alive while legacy media narratives collapse under their own contradictions. Join today and receive 60% off a VIP membership when using promo code FIGHT.
