Chattanooga Times Free Press

CALIFORNIA TAX LAW JUST PETTY POLITICS

-

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Gov. Jerry Brown was right. His successor Gavin Newsom isn’t — at least about whether a state should be allowed to dictate qualificat­ions for a presidenti­al candidate.

States should butt out and defer to the U.S. Constituti­on. It spells out simple criteria that have worked for 232 years: A president must be a natural-born citizen — meaning born a U.S. citizen — have lived in the country 14 years and be at least 35.

California’s Democrat-controlled state legislatur­e passed a spiteful “gotcha” bill last month that was clearly meant to punch Republican President Donald Trump in the nose. It decrees that unless a presidenti­al contender publicly releases five years of federal income tax returns, the candidate can’t run on the state’s primary election ballot. Newsom gleefully signed it.

“I agree with the Legislatur­e that ‘the State of California has a strong interest in ensuring that its voters make informed, educated choices in the voting booth,’” he wrote in his signing message. “… California has a special responsibi­lity to require this informatio­n of presidenti­al and gubernator­ial candidates.”

The new law also requires candidates for governor to disclose their taxes, as Newsom did when he ran in 2018.

“States have a legal and moral duty,” Newsom continued, “to do everything in their power to ensure leaders seeking the highest offices meet minimal standards and restore public confidence.” Balderdash.

States have only one responsibi­lity: to hold honest elections so citizens can vote for the presidenti­al candidate they desire.

Two years ago, the legislatur­e passed a similar bill despite a warning by its legal counsel the measure was unconstitu­tional. Brown vetoed the bill. Some perspectiv­e about Brown: When he ran for president in 1992, he refused to release his taxes. Same thing when he ran for governor in 2010 and 2014. (Of course, fellow Democrats never squawked about that.) So, naturally, Brown vetoed the 2017 bill, even though it didn’t require disclosure of a gubernator­ial candidate’s taxes.

That aside, Brown’s veto message was straight on target. “While I recognize the political attractive­ness — even the merits — of getting President Trump’s tax returns,” Brown wrote, “I worry about the political perils of individual states seeking to regulate presidenti­al elections in this matter.

“First, it may not be constituti­onal. “Second, it sets a ‘slippery slope’ precedent. 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?” Exactly.

Newsom said in his signing message: “The disclosure required by this bill will shed light on conflicts of interest, self-dealing or influence from domestic and foreign business interests.”

But such informatio­n already is publicly available. That’s because a post-Watergate law requires the president and members of Congress — and candidates for those offices — to annually disclose details of their personal finances.

Democrats repeatedly stress every president since Richard Nixon — except Gerald Ford and Trump — have released their income tax returns. (Ford supplied a summary.) But those releases were voluntary. No state threatened to bar a candidate from its ballot.

Let’s be honest: The governor’s and the legislatur­e’s actions were merely gratuitous partisan provocatio­ns against a president who is highly unpopular in California. Democrats were smacking their favorite piñata.

And the legislatur­e was hypocritic­al. If tax returns are so vital for voters’ decision-making, why don’t the lawmakers require them for all candidates running for any partisan office?

If the law withstands lawsuits — which is doubtful — it won’t hurt Trump. He’d still be on the general election ballot in November, assuming he’s renominate­d.

Several suits have been filed by the Trump campaign and Republican Party challengin­g the bill’s constituti­onality.

Hopefully some court will reject this petty politics.

 ??  ?? George Skelton
George Skelton

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States