Thread: taxes: Conflict of interest?
August 5th, 2012, 02:59 PM #1
taxes: Conflict of interest?
With all of the noise over Romney's taxes I was wondering...
Why aren't all elected officials required to file their taxes/funding? After all, the possibility of conflict of interest is very real.
But how often do you hear about a Congressman removing themselves from a vote do to conflict of interest? Yet judges and prosecutors are required to remove themselves due to conflict of interest. I personally think that Congress should be held to this same standard.
But on the flip side, a person with interest in a subject is likely to be better informed on the subject. Example: Big oil; The congressmen that have years of experience in the oil industry know more on this subject than those that have no past experience in the oil industry. This lack of inside knowledge could lead to bigger problems than lack of conflict of interest.
Would disclosure of taxes/work history/other (making conflict of interest obvious and public) help or hurt government?
August 5th, 2012, 03:05 PM #2
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Blog Entries
I see no problems with it
Congress Votes to Delay Deadline for Reports on Insider Trading - Businessweek
What do you expect from these group of people? What's good for the goose isnt good for the gander!
August 5th, 2012, 03:21 PM #3
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- Joplin, MO
- Blog Entries
I'm all for publicly elected officials at all levels of government being required to be transparent with all their financial dealings. The problem is, I don't think it would do all that much. The entire point of under-the-table deals which we're so concerned about is that they are designed not to be traced. You aren't going to find a donation to Candidate X from Corporation Y to do a deal and pass a bill. They'll meet for lunch, and then Y sets up a PAC to push the issue and X votes for it. All done "separately."
The bigger issue is we need to reform how we elect candidates and the contribution methods.Good job, friend-of-friends!
August 5th, 2012, 04:05 PM #4
Tony: I agree that campaign funding needs change, however I would rather go into that seperately.
On this topic, transparency in government is needed for an informed electorate. I agree that it is only one step, and not a complete solution.
Regarding PAC's: Perhaps such transparency in all government related (things?) (Not sure of correct wording) would be another step in the solution.
August 5th, 2012, 07:16 PM #5
August 5th, 2012, 08:21 PM #6
Pickel: You should meet mine...
But the thought I original had was that elected government officials would be required to log such things as investments, tax returns and job history's with the government so that if a conflict of interest was to occur it would already be part of the public record. Not something that would require an investigation to uncover.
August 5th, 2012, 11:36 PM #7
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By mad1 in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 1Last Post: March 28th, 2011, 11:18 AM
By Chuckiechan in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 1Last Post: October 4th, 2008, 10:14 PM
By The Real Bingo in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 14Last Post: August 14th, 2008, 09:36 PM
By mad1 in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 2Last Post: November 4th, 2005, 09:57 AM
By ClubMed in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 2Last Post: July 9th, 2002, 05:38 AM