Posted on 03/16/2017 11:42:32 PM PDT by Freedom56v2
After a fierce debate between Democrats and Republicans, a bill that would force presidential candidates -- including President Donald Trump -- to release their tax returns to receive a place on New Jersey's ballot gained final legislative approval Thursday.
Now it's up to Gov. Chris Christie, a longtime Trump ally and fellow Republican, to decide whether to sign the measure -- which Democrats said they introduced because Trump has repeatedly refused to make his tax returns public. Christie is widely expected to veto it.
The Democratic-controlled state Assembly voted mostly along party lines, 48-26, on Thursday to pass the bill, sending it to Christie's desk.
The state Senate, also controlled by Democrats, voted mostly along party lines, 24-11, in favor of the measure on Monday.
The legislation (S3048/A4520) would require candidates to release five years of their personal income tax returns. That would include Trump if he runs for re-election in 2020.
N.J.'s Pascrell tries new manuever to get Trump's tax returns
N.J.'s Pascrell tries new manuever to get Trump's tax returns
Though not required by law, every other major-party presidential nominee has made their returns public since 1976.
Critics argue the returns might show if Trump, a real estate mogul and former Atlantic City casino tycoon, has any conflicts of interests related to his business ties.
"This is an issue of national security as well as transparency," Assemblyman John McKeon (D-Essex), a main sponsor of the bill, said Thursday.
Lawmakers say New Jersey is one of 18 states -- including neighboring New York -- considering similar legislation but the first to actually pass it.
(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...
Is this a game of forcing someone to say "Uncle?" Like a bully?
Democrats and communists are good at blaming and name calling because they apparently have nothing else to offer.
Many people simply do not care what is in tax returns. It is boring stuff. And it is between the submitter and the IRS. What is all the fuss about besides gamesmanship?
Are the Democrats of New Jersey planning to be chronic losers? Does not New Jersey have more serious problems with crime, economy, public safety, etc.?
Ha! If he signs it, it’ll eventually hit the Dems in the ass.
If Hitlary runs for mayor in NYC, get her tax returns out in the open. She should be fair game.
People are fleeing New Jersey in droves because this is the kind of sh!t their government officials think is important ... while the place slides into fiscal insolvency.
Could say the same thing about ANY candidate for elected office!
IMO Christie should conditionally veto this but say that he'll sign it if they change it to apply to ALL candidates for ALL elected offices in the state.
Courts are likely the throw this out anyway, since if all the big blue states pass it, it would leave half the voters in the country unable to vote for an incumbent President.
The Democrats want to play political kabuki because they have nothing better to do with their time.
Why not also pass laws requiring male candidates to provide pictures of their dicks, to show the length, since that was also an issue in the last campaign?
“I don’t believe it even rises to the level of Unconstitutional. I think under existing Federal Law you cannot be forced to disclose your Federal taxes to the public record. States can’t make laws that violate the US Code.”
Interesting point. Is any candidate, for any office, anywhere in the country, required to release tax information to run for office.
Seems like one can open many cans of worms with this, and many that the Democrats won’t like. Such as requiring release of birth certificates, passport information, college transcripts, and the BIG ONE for Democrats - which Communist organizations they belonged to during college and beyond.
As others have likely posted, when was the last time a Republican Presidential Candidate won New Jersey?
I suspect the Supreme Court will declare the law unconstitutional as our Constitution is quite specific regarding the qualifications to be President.
Submitting a tax return is not one of those constitutional requirements.
People’s Republic Of New Jersey is just as much lost cause as Californication.He should tell the,state to FK off .Donut man should tell the legislators in Zoo Jersey the same thing and,throw,the legislation in a trash can.
Damn shame that these jackasses in NJ have nothing better to do to occupy their time!!!!!
In short, the Constitution does not so much as mention, let alone require, the states to select Electors by popular vote.
- Article II Section 1:
- Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Indeed, even though all states have used popular vote, AFAIK in all cases historically, there are two different ways which have been, and are being, used. 48 states elect their electors on a winner-take-all basis, statewide. Under the Nebraska Plan (also used by Maine) one Elector is elected by popular vote within each Congressional District in the State, while the remaining two Electors to which each state is entitled are elected statewide.
The states have plenary power to select their electors by their own lights, and if New Jersey wants to restrict access to its ballot for Electors to only those pledged to candidates who have published their own income tax returns, I don’t see where I would have standing to object. Even if I lived in New Jersey. In fact, if you object to NJ doing that, you are actually at risk of delegitimating the Electoral College as an institution. It is the states which elect the POTUS.
I wouldn’t get too exercised over this; only a blue state is likely to pass it. If you are a legislator in Michigan, do you actually want to go on record as being dissatisfied with the popular vote result for POTUS last year? Only a deep blue state would have a Democrat legislature and a Democrat governor at present, in any event. There are only five of them, unfortunately including California.
The topic of the constitutionality of the act being contemplated in NJ is actually close to home with me. Remember when we were wondering if Hillary had Parkinson’s Disease?My reaction to that question was to raise the issue of whether some purple states ought not to require a physical to screen out that sort of infirmity before candidates for Elector who were pledged to the presidential candidate were allowed on the ballot.
Of course the possibility of someone being that compromised and still running for POTUS normally seems remote - but then, with Hillary anything would, to us, seem possible.
It’s just Christie being his normal corrupt self.
Hardly. State law cannot overrule federal on this privacy issue.
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.