Disclosure forms aren't the sexist thing in politics. Yet this admittedly dry topic may land Stevens in jail and could be one of the factors that cost Palin a shot at being Vice President. Full Story »
Posted by Kaizar Campwala
The short article provides little information, but advocates for continued financial disclosure requirements.
This piece effectively makes the case for meaningful disclosure in government by citing Steven's recent conviction and Sarah Palin's clothes. That said, Palin's wardrobe disclsosure and Stevens conviction for omitting the receipt of thousands in gifts are hardly in the same league. In Palin's case, it's not clear that the decision to spend $150K on clothes was even hers.
The disclosure that someone spent $150k on clothes for Palin is at least as important as that of a $400 haircut.
A good point made. Disclosures help keep our government transparent-- More on the Palin Clothinggate seems to be forthcoming from Newsweek.
Not especially, it builds the story around two well publicised issues, but adds little to our understanding of them. The first casee regarding Senatore Steven is straight forward and is a strong case for disclosure laws and their enforcement. The second however is muych more questionable; "Without this type of detailed disclosure, the public would have no way of knowing whether she scrimped and bought a suit on her own frugal dime from a consignment store or whether her political handlers had broken the bank dressing her up in haute couture." - so what? The primaries and presidential campaigns cost $billions against this $150,000 is insignificant and anyway no-one added up anyone elses clothes bills - neither candidates ... More »
Disclosure laws when they become as trivial as the clothes bill, serve no good purpose, but may discourage people from participating in public life. Frankly from my point of view as a non-voting outsider I would have thought Sarah Palin's words and performance were sufficient to condemn her.
Retrieving Comments
