Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

California Assembly passes bill that requires Trump to release his tax returns to be on 2020 ballot

Thursday, July 11, 2019

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- California legislation that would require presidential and state gubernatorial candidates to release their tax returns in order to appear on the state's ballot cleared a significant hurdle, passing the State Assembly with an overwhelming majority vote.

SB 27, co-authored by Senators Mike McGuire and Scott Wiener, was approved by the State Assembly Monday with a 57-17 vote, according to McGuire's office. It will be heard again in the State Senate this week, and if approved, will head to Gov. Gavin Newsom for his signature.

"Presidential candidates need to put their own interests aside in the name of transparency," McGuire's office said in a written statement. "So far, our current President has done the opposite and it's time that President Trump steps up, stops with the obstruction, and follows through with 40 years of time-honored tradition that has made this nation's democracy stronger. This commonsense legislation applies equally to all candidates, from all political parties, including the Governor of California."

In May, McGuire and Wiener amended the legislation to extend the transparency rules to the office of the Governor of California, as well as presidential candidates.

The Presidential Tax Transparency & Accountability Act will require basic tax information to be shared with California residents, and require that all presidential and gubernatorial candidates release the last five years of their tax returns in order to appear on the state ballot. The returns will be made available to the public on the Secretary of State's website, according to McGuire's office.

The measure also includes an urgency clause, which would allow the legislation to take effect immediately, prior to the filing deadline for 2020 presidential candidates.

Meanwhile, Trump's New York tax returns could be given to Congress under a new law in his home state that was signed Monday by the Democratic governor and dismissed by Republicans as a partisan game that wouldn't stand up in court.

The measure signed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo directs state tax officials to share state returns of certain elected and appointed officials upon written request from the chairpersons of one of three committees: House Ways and Means, Senate Finance or Joint Committee on Taxation.

Designed to give Congress a way around the Republican president's refusal to release his returns, the new law is expected to face legal challenges. And it's unclear whether Congress will request access to Trump's state returns, which tax experts say would include many of the same details as his federal return.

Trump has long filed taxes in New York as a resident of the state. He is the first president since Watergate to decline to make his returns public, often claiming that he would release them if he were not under audit.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 27July 11, 2019 11:54 PM

Genuine question: does it even matter if he's not on the ballot in California? He's not going to campaign there anyway.

How many votes did he get there in 2016, does anyone know?

by Anonymousreply 1July 11, 2019 10:10 PM

it's unconstitutional

by Anonymousreply 2July 11, 2019 10:12 PM

R1, it wouldn't effect the electoral college since he will lose California anyway, but it would drastically reduce his popular vote since he would lose millions of votes.

by Anonymousreply 3July 11, 2019 10:14 PM

[quote], but it would drastically reduce his popular vote since he would lose millions of votes.

Ehehehe, you know that would kill him.

by Anonymousreply 4July 11, 2019 10:16 PM

R2, I agree, although I would love to see this happen! Any legal eagles able to weigh in?

by Anonymousreply 5July 11, 2019 10:18 PM

r4 Doubt it. He obviously wasn't embarrassed at all that Hillary beat him in the popular vote, but rather kept telling the world leaders how much he beat her by in the swing states.

by Anonymousreply 6July 11, 2019 10:19 PM

it would also hurt rethugs in downballot races, like the 7 or so remaining house districts, if the MAGAts don't show up.

by Anonymousreply 7July 11, 2019 10:20 PM

R6, it does bother Trump that he lost the popular vote, otherwise he wouldn't lie and say that he won it.

by Anonymousreply 8July 11, 2019 10:22 PM

r7 Thanks, that's exactly what I was wondering. Hope Californians have a plan to flush those turds out regardless of whether Trump is on the ballot or not.

by Anonymousreply 9July 11, 2019 10:22 PM

individual states can't add on to things required the Constitution to qualify for POTUS

by Anonymousreply 10July 11, 2019 10:23 PM

[quote]individual states can't add on to things required the Constitution to qualify for POTUS

And who is going to stop them?

They are only following Trumps lead.

by Anonymousreply 11July 11, 2019 10:28 PM

[quote]And who is going to stop them?

Roberts, that's who.

by Anonymousreply 12July 11, 2019 10:30 PM

They're not adding to the list of qualifications, though. They are adding to the qualifications to be listed on the ballot in THEIR state. Individual states have always done this and they have differing criteria for getting listed on a printed ballot. If the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional suddenly, it will be a big loss for state's rights.

by Anonymousreply 13July 11, 2019 10:33 PM

this isn't a states right's issue

by Anonymousreply 14July 11, 2019 10:35 PM

r14 if you're suddenly taking away a right states have had for ages, it's a states' rights issue. The right wing/libertarians ostensibly hate things that reduce states' rights.

by Anonymousreply 15July 11, 2019 10:38 PM

I wish Wisconsin or Pennsylvania or some state like that would follow suit.

by Anonymousreply 16July 11, 2019 10:38 PM

This is definitely a state rights issue. Too bad, so sad for Trump.

by Anonymousreply 17July 11, 2019 10:39 PM

Here's information on requirements for Presidential candidates to be listed on the ballots in a state - for party primaries and for the general election. Note the varying different requirements per state.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18July 11, 2019 10:41 PM

The rule of law is a bit passé, don’t you think?

by Anonymousreply 19July 11, 2019 10:41 PM

[quote]individual states can't add on to things required the Constitution to qualify for POTUS

Trump brought this on himself.

And several other states are doing this, too.

by Anonymousreply 20July 11, 2019 10:49 PM

Jerry Brown even questioned whether it was constitutional

by Anonymousreply 21July 11, 2019 10:49 PM

Jerry Brown is no longer Governor.

by Anonymousreply 22July 11, 2019 10:50 PM

r21 just go away, you aren't contributing.

by Anonymousreply 23July 11, 2019 10:51 PM

Ok, Jerry Brown WAS a governor of the state, and he’s a Democrat, so his opinion shouldn’t be dismissed.

by Anonymousreply 24July 11, 2019 10:56 PM

r24 ok. We'll consider his opinion. Happy?

by Anonymousreply 25July 11, 2019 10:59 PM

Nope. Gavin Newsom is the governor of California and quite cocky at that, he'll have no problem signing the new bill into law. His word is what matters not Jerry's...

Sorry Trumpsters, we learned from the best.

by Anonymousreply 26July 11, 2019 11:01 PM

R2 No it isn’t. The Secretary of State of each state has the constitutional authority for determining which candidates appear on that state’s ballots. It’s not determined by the federal government, and each candidate must qualify in each state where they wish to compete.

That’s one of the chief complaints of third-party candidates: the complexity and cost for mounting a national campaign in all 50 states.

by Anonymousreply 27July 11, 2019 11:54 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!