Before a politician's name goes on the ballot . . .

...would it be a good idea that he/she have to disclose five year's income tax returns by Federal statute?

I think this is very reasonable. Romney, of course, brings this to mind. What is the down-side to the American people?

I don't think there is a down side. The "custom" of presidents doing so isn't enough. And why just presidents? How about senators/representatives? Mayors? Why not everyone? Why make it just a custom and why just for the presidency?

MaggieD said:

...would it be a good idea that he/she have to disclose five year's income tax returns by Federal statute?

I think this is very reasonable. Romney, of course, brings this to mind. What is the down-side to the American people?

I don't think there is a down side. The "custom" of presidents doing so isn't enough. And why just presidents? How about senators/representatives? Mayors? Why not everyone? Why make it just a custom and why just for the presidency?

Click to expand...

The more and more these liberals start to claim Romney hasn't paid his taxes and want to see his tax returns the more and more they start sounding like the birther-tards claiming Obama is not a natural born citizen and want to see his birth certificate.

MaggieD said:

...would it be a good idea that he/she have to disclose five year's income tax returns by Federal statute?

I think this is very reasonable. Romney, of course, brings this to mind. What is the down-side to the American people?

I don't think there is a down side. The "custom" of presidents doing so isn't enough. And why just presidents? How about senators/representatives? Mayors? Why not everyone? Why make it just a custom and why just for the presidency?

Click to expand...

I would oppose such a statute. Whether a candidate reveals his tax returns should be up to them. Not doing so, as we have seen this year, has it's own set of repercussions.

Redress said:

I would oppose such a statute. Whether a candidate reveals his tax returns should be up to them. Not doing so, as we have seen this year, has it's own set of repercussions.

Click to expand...

Why would you oppose it? Oh, maybe just because it's confidential? Why should how someone earns their money be confidential? I also believe that every sitting congressman (state and federal) should have to reveal their stock holdings and then put them in a blind trust.

Are we never going to demand complete transparency and accountability of those who run our nation?

MaggieD said:

Why would you oppose it? Oh, maybe just because it's confidential? Why should how someone earns their money be confidential? I also believe that every sitting congressman (state and federal) should have to reveal their stock holdings and then put them in a blind trust.

Are we never going to demand complete transparency and accountability of those who run our nation?

Click to expand...

Yeah, I can think of no reason why a candidate should be forced top reveal that kind of personal information, in the same way I don't think a candidate should be forced to reveal the name of all their sexual partners in their life, or the location of a birthmark. Tax returns are not a qualification to be president, so how much to reveal should be up to the candidate.

What can we learn from a tax return? It doesn't have to be the truth. It's just what you told the IRS and even then, you can always make a fake return UNLESS the IRS must verify the return you posted.

\Also, it's awkward. You know that my theory on Romney is that he's ashamed of his donations. Sure, I'm just guessing but if I'm right then he might feel that his base might disapprove. If he gave a lot to the Mormons, it'll ring up that silly religion issue. If he gave to Catholic Charities, the Protestants might be offended. Look at this Chick-Fil-A mess as an example of charity that bites you in the ass.

Just speculating....