Republicans are outraged that after three years, Democrats may release Donald Trump’s taxes, which the House Ways and Means Committee received and has been examining since Tuesday afternoon at 3:00 PM.
But one Republican lawmaker was mocked after delivering a stern warning, insisting with no basis that should Democrats choose to release Trump’s taxes, that would open the floodgates, allowing the tax returns of ordinary citizens, or even the tax returns of Supreme Court justices to be made public.
“Going forward, the majority chair of the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee will have nearly unlimited power to target and make public the tax returns of private citizens. And not just private citizens. Political enemies, business and labor leaders, or even the returns of Supreme Court justices themselves,” U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, Republican of Texas, said, falsely.
“No party in Congress should have that power,” he added. “No individuals in Congress should have that power.”
But what Rep. Brady did not mention is for Congress to obtain and subsequently release tax returns, by law there must be a legitimate legislative purpose, and the House Ways and Means Committee is one of the very few committees allowed, by law, to obtain a tax return.
It took the Ways and Means Committee three years to obtain Trump’s taxes. But when the process was complete, even the U.S. Supreme Court chose to not block it from doing so.
On social media, given the historic unpopularity of this Supreme Court, many applauded the idea of its justices having their tax returns made public – something that likely would never happen
“Yes!” declared Carnegie Mellon University professor Uju Anya. “Tell us who bought and paid for the Supreme Court Justices. Please and thank you.”
“Great!” exclaimed Mother Jones editor-in-chief Clara Jeffery. “Let’s do that!”
Swedish economist and former Atlantic Council Senior Fellow Anders Åslund criticized Brady.
“Shameful! What the US lacks most of all is transparency. It should start with tax returns and be followed by campaign financing, now often dark money. Politicians who advocate financial secrecy effectively advocate corruption.”
Georgetown Law professor Josh Chafetz said, “Hadn’t even thought of this — that would be great!”
“Congress has had this authority for a long time,” noted retired journalist Dan Murphy. “If legitimate concerns arise that a member of the Supreme Court is abusing the office to enrich him or herself, as there are in the case of Trump, getting those returns would also be a good thing.”
“And that’s a bad thing?” mocked U.S. Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA).
“Don’t tempt me with a good time…” mocked journalist Walker Bragman, a theme repeated by dozens of other Twitter users.