Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Excruciating and mostly pointless
Next Post: Poll: Rein in the leaders
Posted in:
* From a press release…
On Thursday, David Hoffman, Democratic Candidate for the United States Senate, released his tax returns for the past five years, including schedules, and challenged his opponents to do the same. Hoffman also reiterated his pledge that, should he be elected to the U.S. Senate, he will place all of his financial holdings in a blind trust.
Each of his opponents has refused to take the challenge, or answer questions about whether they will provide this information to voters.
“The voters are entitled to know as much as possible about each candidate so they can be sure there are no conflicts-of-interest, improper dealings, or private agendas in play,” said Hoffman. “The silence from my opponents demonstrates the deep divide between their campaign rhetoric and their actions.”
The personal finances of each candidate should be of interest to voters, especially given the serious concerns that have been raised about the shareholders of Broadway Bank - 100 percent owned by the Giannoulias family - who pulled $70 million in dividends out of the bank just as increased loan defaults put the family’s bank on shaky financial ground according to a recently published report. Giannoulias, who is one of the bank’s owners, and who campaigned for treasurer based on his experience as a banker, has refused to answer questions about the propriety of the dividend withdrawal and whether the funds should be restored to the troubled bank - all according to the Crain’s article.
* The Question: Should Illinois pass a law requiring all candidates for every office to disclose income tax returns for the previous 2 years?
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 11:12 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Excruciating and mostly pointless
Next Post: Poll: Rein in the leaders
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
No these guys expose enough of their lives to public scrutiny and it’s going to get worse in the days of twitter, smartphone cameras ect.
another question for another day is that some states require candidates who release polls to release polls in their entirety so that they can be scrutinized. That would also be a question. some new england states do this.
Comment by shore Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 11:20 am
No, certainly not for all offices. Even office-holders have a right to some privacy. If there’s a lot of smoke, the federales certainly have the power to take a peak.
If the question were just for Governor and Senate, I might be able to be persuaded. But I think Hoffman’s tactic is just as effective.
If Hoffman plays his cards right, he could make this a dominant issue that won’t go away and allows him to say “Broadway Bank” over and over.
Now that Hoffman’s done it, all the candidates — particularly Alexi — will eventually have to do it. They’d be wise to do it sooner rather than later and take whatever hits are there now, and not in January.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 11:23 am
The current state financial disclosure law is a joke. Let’s fix that first before requiring disclosure of tax returns. I realize that this does not apply to the US Senate race because the federal disclosure is a lot more detailed. Nevertheless, I think it’s more important to fix the state disclosure for all candidates first.
Comment by the Other Anonymous Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 11:33 am
No law is necessary.
Candidates willing to disclose can always use their opponents’ failure to do so as an issue in the campaign.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 11:35 am
My concern is that it does not necessarily lead to the stated end of “no conflicts-of-interest, improper dealings, or private agendas in play”
Even with my schedule deductions- how exactly does that guarentee I don’t have a private agenda? It does- particularly in this case make for an interesting discussion. But required- not convinced it does what Hoffman claims it does.
Comment by Inish Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 12:12 pm
All candidates? No. At a certain level (statewide?), it may be illuminating. Requiring every single wannabe officeholder to release their income tax forms is rather silly. What does a Geneva alderman’s income tax form for the last two years tell me and why should I see it?
Statements of economic disclosure are required at the local level. That’s plenty, although very few people bother to look at them. I don’t even think anyone makes any attempt to verify them.
Let’s strengthen the weak campaign finance laws first and foremost. That system is a joke.
Comment by Stuck with Sen. CPA Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 12:14 pm
No, and this is one of the reasons that I don’t like Hoffman. He doesn’t seem to understand the difference between “clean government” and “big government.”
Comment by OdysseusVL Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 12:14 pm
yeah, then give out a prize for the most creative accountant/return…
Comment by Anonymous45 Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 12:34 pm
Yes for constitutional offices and senate. The power these positions contain calls for a greater ability to scrutinize the individuals
Comment by Ghost Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 12:41 pm
Yes…for all federal and state offices.
Comment by Louis Howe Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 2:13 pm
No. A candidate is pretty exposed already and loses a great deal of privacy. The Obama/McCain families can attest to that. So can U.S. Senators and State Governors to a lesser extent
Once candidates are forced to disclose, we may see a number of individuals not electing to run for fear of disclosing all of their personal finances, whether they are extremely wealthy, or embarrassed because they are not wealthy.
Not a good idea at all. Either way we lose out.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 2:39 pm
There shouldn’t be a law. Illinois candidates should feel some obligation to release tax returns. But, it’s up to the public. If the public doesn’t mind Alexi not releasing his personal tax information : there’s really nothing anyone can do. It becomes a statement on the public’s willingness to accept certain behavior from politicians.
Comment by Steve Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 2:42 pm
I’m as pro-ethics as it gets but I think a law is not required. Smart politics like this will take care of it.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 3:52 pm
No.
===“The voters are entitled to know as much as possible about each candidate so they can be sure there are no conflicts-of-interest, improper dealings, or private agendas in play,” said Hoffman.===
Like mandating the release of income tax returns (with schedules) will ensure voters know everything they need to know about a candidate. What a load of hooey.
(begin snark) What will Hoffman want next, DNA samples? Don’t you think voters should know if a candidate is really a blonde? Voters need to know each of a candidate’s dominant and recessive genes in order to cast an informed vote. Our democracy depends on it (end snark).
According to Hoffman, voters are going to need a crystal ball if they ever hope to know enough about hidden agendas.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 4:43 pm
47th, you have to admit, though, it was a great (if not obvious) move by Hoffman.
It’s not like Hoffman’s a regular Joe; he has more cash than the average bear. He’s betting that Alexi not only has much more, but that where it came from is much more interesting.
If Alexi balks, it’s a chronic negative; it will be a question at every press conference and event. If he releases them, everyone gets to crawl all over every line.
Maybe there’s nothing interesting there. How would I know? I don’t roll in that bracket. I can do my taxes on a bar napkin at 11:59 on April 15. I just have to stiff the bartender on the tip for stamp money.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 5:06 pm
You and me both Word,
When my accountant first asked me about schedules, I told him I already knew April 15th was the due date…If I didn’t buy a house, I’d be using the EZ form forever.
If Alexi is smart, he’ll make some strategic charitable donations to appease various groups. If you’re going to make it all public, use it to your advantage I say.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 5:29 pm
===he has more cash than the average bear===
More than the average Bear Stearns too.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 5:31 pm
NO.
What kind of wierdo thinks this is relevant?
What reasonable person would want to voluntarily disclose that information?
Comment by Bobs yer Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 7:04 pm
===he has more cash than the average bear===
More than the average Bear Stearns too.
- Show quoted text –
No doubt.
Hoffman’s rich. So is Alexi. We, the average schnooks, really can’t relate.
But I suspect Hoffman’s crew has Alexi in a real trick bag here and they know it.
If Alexi doesn’t release his returns, the questions never go away. If he does, he gives up a lot of privacy (and maybe reveals something he would rather not).
Hoffman’s thrown down the gauntlet (not gantlet, as the Trib educated us last week). He has the benefit of a lot of years hanging around the water cooler in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Northern District of Illinois. Lot of chatter about Broadway Bank there, I guarantee you.
Hoffman wouldn’t have volunteered his returns if he didn’t think there was some benefit to him. This ain’t a shot in the dark.
Alexi needs to get his returns out now, no matter what they say. It’s still the first quarter. Ride it out, and find a way to win in the fourth.
Welcome to the NFL.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Oct 19, 09 @ 7:58 pm