And that would make the Globe a class collaborator despite all the crowing about civil rights, 'et al.
"Senate hopefuls should release their tax returns" March 16, 2013
GOP Senate candidate Dan Winslow recently promised to release 10 years of tax returns and called on his opponents to do likewise. But even in making good on that vow, Winslow showed the ambivalence that many candidates feel about financial disclosure; his campaign invited reporters to inspect documents late on Friday afternoon — the time of week when politicians put out information in the hopes of minimizing news coverage. Meanwhile, GOP rival Michael Sullivan has vowed to release his returns, but hasn’t said when; Gabriel Gomez has been noncommittal on the issue.
Globe enabled him because they had all week since and two weeks after to bring it up, and I've never seen a word (and I have been reading most of it lately).
In fact, all five Senate candidates, Republicans and Democrats, should provide tax information as a demonstration of openness. Voters should know how candidates for high public office are earning their money, and the financial disclosure forms that federal officeholders must complete provide too limited a picture.
Massachusetts politicians have not been consistent in releasing their tax returns. Ted Kennedy never did, no doubt protective of the vast array of Kennedy family trust funds, businesses, and investments. Deval Patrick hasn’t either.
What?
Former Michigan Governor George Romney set an admirable example when he ran for president in 1968, offering up a dozen years’ worth of returns — and making it all the more difficult for his son, Mitt, to shield his own returns 44 years later.
Like father, not like son, 'eh? Winslow a clone, or do Mormons forbid that?
Most often, candidates are afraid to reveal the full extent of their wealth; voters, the fear goes, won’t be able to relate.
Oh, now we are spreading fear if we can't relate to the obscene life$tyles of our wealthy masters.
What I can't relate to is a new$paper that is nothing more than a mouthpiece for $uch people, although I suppose they are only serving their few remaining readers.
Fewer than 1 percent of Americans are millionaires in total assets, but 40 to 50 percent of members of Congress are, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Over time, as campaigns become more expensive, and therefore attract more self-financing candidates seizing on their advantage, this gap will only continue to grow. When little-known business figures such as Gomez suddenly appear on the scene, detailed tax disclosures become even more important.
In a way I almost favor the rich guy over the lobbyist-bought crud. In this broken system the rich guy might show some independence (as long ago echos of JFK haunt the mind).
Promoting transparency shouldn’t be a partisan issue. Aides to Democratic candidates Ed Markey and Stephen Lynch note that both, as members of Congress, earn a base salary of $174,000 and must regularly report assets, liabilities, and financial transactions under congressional rules. Yet these don’t require, for instance, the amount of a spouse’s income, only the source. Tax information could fill in some missing details.
Voters need more than candidates’ personal assurances that neither they nor a spouse are receiving income from sources or in quantities that would create conflicts of interest. Candidates for high office should accept that public scrutiny of their finances is part of the job — and recognize that voters are bound to draw conclusions about candidates who resist that scrutiny.
--more--"
Related:
"Antitax activist to endorse Daniel Winslow" March 26, 2013
Barbara Anderson, a veteran antitax activist, said she is backing state Representative Daniel B. Winslow for US Senate over one of his rivals, Michael J. Sullivan, former US attorney, because even though both candidates are strong fiscal conservatives, Winslow’s support for abortion rights and gay marriage reflects her own views on those issues....
Oh, no, good old Barb is part of the s***-fooley political show. No wonder she makes the paper.
“The social issues are getting more important to me,” said Anderson. “I worry about social conservatives hurting our chances to save the country and the world.”
Woah, slow down. We are just electing a senator here. You can cut it with the megalomania.
--more--"
And sorry, folks, but I view social issues as a divisive distraction (why the AmeriKan media focuses on them so much). I guess women and minorities and gays and all the other wedge characteristics we are divided into aren't as affected by the s***ty health care $y$tem or the wars or the bank looting and frauds. I'm sure none of them have died on the altar of war lies or had their homes fraudulently foreclosed upon or had their savings cleaned out by health problems.
Yeah, let's look at something important:
"Former US attorney Michael J. Sullivan is ahead in the battle for the GOP nomination, according to a new WBUR poll released Tuesday. Sullivan leads with support from 28 percent of respondents who are likely voters, compared to 10 percent for state Representative Daniel B. Winslow, and 8 percent for Gabriel E. Gomez, a private equity investor and onetime Navy SEAL. Even more respondents — between 30 and 36 percent, depending on the candidate — said they had never heard of or were undecided about the GOP candidates."
Oh, no, Barb is going to be going ballistic! Winslow is way back!
