Support Free Republic, Folks!
Posted on 01/23/2018 4:39:34 PM PST by jazusamo
Donald Trump was the first presidential candidate since Richard Nixon not to reveal his federal income tax return. Some Oregon Democrats want to try to make him the last.
A bill introduced Monday in Salem would require candidates for president and vice president to give a copy of their most recent tax return to the Oregon Secretary of State with written permission that the document can be made public. Alternatively, the candidate could fill out Oregon’s standard income disclosure form for public officials.
The requirement would apply to candidates on primary and general election ballots and those wishing to be in the voters’ pamphlet.
At least one political bigwig is already on board: Gov. Kate Brown.
“Governor Brown supports the principle of a financial disclosure requirement for presidential candidates,” said Bryan Hockaday, a spokesman for the governor.
Senate Majority Leader Ginny Burdick is the author of the bill introduced Monday. She said releasing tax returns is a time-honored tradition of transparency among presidential candidates. Trump changed everything, she said.
“He really challenged the custom and I think we need to take a fresh look at it,” Burdick said in a phone interview.
Burdick chairs the Senate Rules Committee, where Monday’s bill was introduced. She sponsored a similar bill last year and testified at its hearing that it would affirm “a long-standing tradition of financial disclosure” among presidential candidates. Most candidates for high office, including president, governor and members of Congress, voluntarily release their tax returns.
“Without this vital information, Oregon voters cannot accurately assess whether a conflict exists between a candidate’s financial interests and duties of the president or vice president of the United States,” Burdick testified.
The bill died in committee without a vote. Burdick said she thinks the “chances are pretty good” that her rewritten bill can pass with the requirement that, at a minimum, candidates must fill out an economic disclosure. Keeping the wording that would force candidates to reveal their tax returns is “a heavier lift,” she said.
Burdick added, “It’s hard to say where the discussion will lead.”
The Democrat-controlled Oregon Legislature could face legal troubles if it does pass an income tax disclosure requirement.
Former Sen. Ted Ferrioli, the Senate Minority Leader at the time a similar bill was debated last year, submitted as testimony an opinion from the Legislature’s legal office saying the concept “raises serious constitutional questions that do not have clear answers.”
It’s unclear how much power states have to regulate when presidential candidates can appear on ballots, a legislative attorney said in the opinion. A court could strike down Oregon’s attempt to change the rules, they cautioned.
Sal Peralta, secretary of the Independent Party of Oregon, testified on last year’s bill that it is “unlikely that states can add conditions to running for president.” The U.S. Constitution lists three requirements to run for president: be at least 35 years old, have lived in the United States for 14 years and be a “natural born citizen.”
Burdick said she does not think her bill would run into constitutional problems because it does not technically redefine the qualifications for president.
“It just applies to the people that the secretary of state can put on the ballot,” she said.
At least 23 states have introduced similar bills similar to the one Oregon has considered. New Jersey became the first to pass one, in 2017.
Last year, the California Legislature passed a forced-disclosure bill. But Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed it. At the time, he said the bill went too far despite its “political attractiveness.”
Brown said there are “political perils” to states regulating what presidential candidates must disclose to appear on ballots.
“Today we require tax returns, but what would be next? Five years of health records? A certified birth certificate? High school report cards? And will these requirements vary depending on which political party is in power?" Brown said in a veto message in October 2017.
That Trump did not make public his tax information has rankled his critics, some of whom suspect the documents would show that the president is not as wealthy as he portends, or that he has financial ties which leave him vulnerable to blackmail.
As a candidate, Trump said he would release his return when he is no longer under IRS audit. As president, he has said he might release the documents once he is no longer in office.
WOW!! The President might lose Oregon !!
Demonstrably unconstitutional as it establishes an additional test for the office of President.
He’s not going to win Oregon anyway. But I don’t think Oregon can constitutionally do that.
Demonstrably unconstitutional as it establishes an additional test for the office of President.
Ding, ding. We have a winner.
My thought also.
Would not hold up in court. At least the SC.
Otherwise, every state can make some odd litmus test
to be on the ballot.
I want to see Ginny Burdick’s tax return...now...what an idiot.
Oregon ping
I want to see Ginny Burdick’s tax return...now...what an idiot.
Oregon ping
Don’t know if this is OR ping worthy.
Funny. The left went in hysterics when proof of the kenyan’s citizenship was requested -even as it IS a constitutional requirement, yet the extremists think they can legislatively amend the Constitutional presidential requirements.
The sanctuaries will be destitute and screaming for Trump Salvation by 2020
Wow...a state legislature wants to dictate that a Federal tax return be required for a Federal election...neither of which is called for by the Federal Constitution.
Excellent point! :-)
Support Free Republic, Folks!
A State can now overturn Federal election law?
Um... I don’t think so Tim.
Sorry sugar but a state has no standing to make demands on a federal candidate.
Otherwise I am going to propose that all federal candidates be subject to public interrogation while under Sodium Pentothal.
They can’t do this. A few years ago the Supreme Court struck down congressional term limits that had been enacted in several states, saying states cannot add requirements not in the constitution.
Since the candidate himself is not being elected, there should be no reason to compel HIS tax forms in order to place someone else on the ballot.
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.