My state, or more accurately, the state I reside in, Washington, has joined New Jersey in trying to keep President Trump off the 2020 ballot. For righteous reasons, no doubt, since mainly Democrats voted for the measure, and we all know how righteous they are. Washington’s state Senate passed a bill this week that would drop President Trump from the state’s 2020 presidential ballot until he releases his tax returns. The bill, which advanced Tuesday to the state’s House of Representatives, according to CBS News, would require any candidate on the ballot for president in the state to release five years of tax returns before appearing in a general or primary election. A similar bill recently advanced in New Jersey’s state Senate and is currently sitting in the state’s General Assembly.
Democrats who supported the bill said the provision was necessary to force a return to norms surrounding the release of presidential candidates’ tax returns. “Although releasing tax returns has been the norm for about the last 40 years in presidential elections, unfortunately we’ve seen that norm broken,” said Sen. Patty Kuderer (D), who sponsored the bill, according to CBS. Don’t we all know how much Democrats really want a return to norms? Other than keeping Trump off the ballot, raise your hands, Dems, if you also want a return to norms in the cultural arena. Didn’t think so.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, there are 17 states as of Feb. 11 that have had bills introduced that are similar to Oregon’s. Trump won five of those states (see above map). While most of the bills are sponsored by Democrats, two Republicans have sponsored bills in Kansas and Minnesota.
Releasing tax information is often a part of campaign strategy, usually to force other candidates to reveal their finances. Jeb Bush released 33 years of tax returns in 2015, Bob Dole was second with 29 years of returns. The next highest number of releases was Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who released a total of 20 years of returns: five years worth of returns in April 2004, adding to 15 years of returns he had revealed in prior Senate races. Critics of Kerry’s campaign were more concerned that his independently wealthy wife, millionaire Teresa Heinz Kerry, wouldn’t give out her returns. (She eventually provided two pages of her 2003 return.) I wonder how often the wife’s family is wealthier than the candidate???
So, if this sudden concern with “returning to norms” an indication of how much Dems respect our values, or something else? If the recent H.R. 1, the For The People Act illustrates the profound respect (throat-clearing sounds) that Democrats have for freedom, then I would say the proposed legislation in the various state senates is more about something else. The editors of National Review have this to say about H.R. 1: “The alleged purpose of the bill, H.R. 1, is to ‘expand Americans’ access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, and strengthen ethics rules for public servants.’ In reality, the bill represents an extraordinary federal power grab. At every turn, it grants federal regulators more power. Time and again, it renders federal election law more complex — creating a chilling effect on political communication through sheer uncertainty and confusion. The free-speech problems are so obvious that free-speech organizations on the left and right are united in opposition. Comprehensive analyses from the Institute for Free Speech and the American Civil Liberties Union are worth reading in their entirety and raise remarkably similar concerns.”
Further, “In addition to controlling political speech, the bill would transform the federal government into the sugar daddy of American politics by dramatically increasing federal funding of campaigns. Are Democrats truly worried about the influence of “big money” over politicians, or do they simply want to ensure that the government is the donor? The bill would also strip from the states the ability to draw their own congressional districts (requiring instead that they be drawn by an independent commission) and the ability to engage in prudent, constitutionally appropriate measures to ensure the accuracy of their voter rolls. Moreover, it directly contradicts the text of the 14th Amendment, which grants states the ability to prohibit or restrict the voting rights of felons. Therefore, it directly contradicts two foundational virtues of the American constitution: its protection of political speech and its respect for federalism.“
Summing up, hatred of Trump reveals the anti-democratic core of the Democrat party.