Obama V. Clinton- the Tax Documents

The latest round of political warfare between front runners in the Democratic Party is over releasing tax documents. While candidates are not required to release tax information, they often do so as a way of being vetted by the people voting for them. Today Barack Obama released his 2000-2006 tax returns on his website and is pressuring Hillary Clinton to do the same. Clinton told reporters that she hoped her returns would be available by next week.

But that has not put an end to the rivalry between the two presidential candidates. Clinton is returning fire by requesting that Obama make more tax documents public. She wants him to "...release his records from being in the state Senate and any other information that the public and the press need to know."¹ Clinton's spokesman, Phil Singer, said that Clinton has already released more than 20 years in tax returns and thousands of documents from when she was the First Lady. Obama's camp is not satisfied. He is looking for more recent returns (since 2001) because of a $5 million loan to her campaign. And he wants information on her husband, Bill Clinton's income from an investment company which is headed by Ron Burkle, a major contributor to her campaign. Ron Burkle also invests in tax shelters. Spokesman for Barack Obama, Ron Gibbs, said in a statement, "Senator Clinton can't claim to be vetted until she allows the public the opportunity to see her finances -- particularly with respect to any investment in tax shelters."²

This poses a question for many voters- Does releasing tax documents make any difference in a campaign? Should it?

When one campaigns for the highest elected office in our nation, you can expect there will scrutiny on every aspect of your life. The Clintons discovered this in their personal lives with the Monica Lewinsky scandal. The Obamas have discovered this with the spotlight on their religious lives thanks to their scandal-prone pastor, Jeremiah Wright. As citizens, we do have the right to know who we are electing. But do we have the right to scrutinize their finances? Not under our current laws but should the candidate be open enough to make their tax returns public, by all means, examine them. It is one of those issues that if you have nothing to hide and you share it, then you gain the trust of potential voters.

Even though she does not have to share her tax returns, by not doing it Clinton appears to be hiding something. It is a nice little political trick which she and Obama are trying to play against each other. By releasing her early returns, she hopes to cast doubt on Obama because he is not sharing anything prior to 2000. Obama is doing just the opposite, wanting current returns from Clinton.

Should this then affect their campaigns? Yes and no. Current laws, as I mentioned, do not force candidates to reveal their tax returns. As a taxpayer, I would not care to have my returns splashed all over the public either. But again, when you run for the highest office in the land, you need to be accountable to the people. My personal belief is that they should be released to the public. How one handles his or her own money can be a very clear picture on how they will handle the business of the country.

Our very wise fourth president, James Madison, once said, "The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted."³ In other words, let us, as citizens, vet the people seeking power, for then we only have ourselves to blame once that person is in office.

Sources:

¹ http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080325/pl_nm/usa_politics_records_dc_2

² http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080325/pl_nm/usa_politics_records_dc_2

³http://ezinearticles.com/?15-Leadership-Quotes-for-Presidents-Day&id=455345

www.barackobama.com