John Hickenlooper, Scott McInnis disclose parts of their income histories

Over the weekend, Democrat bloggers mocked Republican Scott McInnis for not disclosing his income tax returns even though he gave the Denver Post a look at the first couple of pages of his returns. McInnis said he was not opening his tax returns because the information in them would be used against him, and he wanted to protect the privacy of friends and family who had done deals with him over the years.

What will Democrats say about Denver’s Democrat Mayor John Hickenlooper, also a candidate for governor, who this morning released parts of his tax returns for all but one of the last 23 years while keeping sections secret to protect the privacy of friends and family who had done deals with him over the years?

There is no question that Hickenlooper is being more open than McInnis is. But will voters care that Hickenlooper is more open and transparent than McInnis as long as the latter provides some information? Will the Democrats and the media be able to pry more information out of either candidate by making an issue of their selective disclosures?

Simply put, both Hickenlooper and McInnis are rags to riches stories except when they aren’t.

Hickenlooper, for example, came to Colorado with a master’s degree, got good jobs, got laid off and apparently still had enough money to buy 37% of his first brewpub. In his second year in business, he received dividends of $9,464. That means either that the brewpub paid a nice 20% to 30% dividend on an investment of $47,320 to $31,547 or he earned a dividend of, say, 3% on a portfolio of about $315,466. Another scenario could be that because he was the idea guy, he got 37% of the business without putting up much money and other investors put up all of the cash and collateral.

Hickenlooper used his smarts, charm and community organizing skills to get rich.

Same goes for McInnis. He had a law degree and practice by the time he was in his mid to late 20s, and he married a smart lady who just happened to be the daughter of the owner of a big old storied ranch in northwest Colorado.

McInnis used his smarts, charm and political connections to get rich.

The point is that someone who starts his career with a college degree or masters degree is not a rags to riches story. When you’re born into a family and environment that encourages you to get an education and you are healthy, energetic, ambitious and smart enough to get advanced degrees, you’re born lucky and rich.

Both guys are pretty much self-made, hard workers and luckier than 99% of the people they want to govern.

So, who do you want for governor? Will you vote for a rich Obama Democrat who doesn’t mind paying high taxes and taxing people not as fortunate as he is, or will you vote for a rich conservative Republican who believes in keeping taxes low so that big and small businesses will grow and bring new jobs to Colorado?

LINKS:

McInnis’ public disclosures show broad income, investments, by Karen E. Crummy.

Returns show rags-to-riches rise of Denver Mayor, by Karen E. Crummy.

1. I love the differences in the titles of the two stories. McInnis:  Shock! Wealth has grown since 1993. I would hope so. If not, I sure wouldn’t want him as governor.

   Then Hick: Rags-to-Riches, Horatio Algier story.

   I thought McInnis’ rationale for not providing the other pages was legit.

   Posted by Laura Victoria  on  04/26/2010  at  05:10 PM

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

<< Back to main