house Bill H.R. 6340
Should the President and Vice President Have to Put Their Assets In a Blind Trust?
Argument in favor
The president and vice president should be legally required to either put their assets in a blind trust or make a disclosure every time government business creates a conflict of interest with their finances. Just because recent presidents have used blind trusts doesn’t mean all will willingly do so.
11/22/2016
It's literally in Article 2 of the Constitution that the president is to receive a flat salary and NO other compensations. Trump must put his assets into a blind trust or he's acting unconstitutionally.
···
11/22/2016
Donald Trump has spend his entire life making business decisions that affect his own well-being, frequently at the expense of the contractors that he has hired and the local economies that depend on his business. While capitalism has rewarded his actions as a businessperson, he cannot receive the same rewards from his role in the federal government. To do so would take advantage of the American people as well as the US and world economy. Supporting this bill is in the interest of every American who wants to see the president act toward the benefit of his constituents without thinking selfishly. Such is the purpose of civic service.
···
11/22/2016
Separation of public and private interests has been a hot topic throughout the election season. Even if only to err on the side of caution, Donald Trump should be required to establish a blind trust--with no immediate family members involved. Thank you for your time.
Argument opposed
Avoiding conflicts of interest is a desirable goal, but Congress shouldn’t be placing restrictions on how the president and vice president manage their financial assets. Besides, the number of genuine conflicts of interest that could arise because of actions taken by the president is small.
11/24/2016
Despite my personal feelings regarding Donald Trump, with the way this bill is drafted I have to dissent from the majority. The sticking point for me is that this bill would affect not just Donald Trump and Mike Pence, but all future presidents and vice presidents. The idea of a blind trust only sounds perfect right now because most voting in favor of it do not believe for a second that Trump will follow any of the promises he is currently making. He is already showing inability to separate lines just from the examples on Countable (Ivanka in a meeting with the Japanese PM and Trump in a meeting with his Indian business partners). However, a blind trust wouldn't mean just taking control from Trump and immediate family; first step is selling off all assets and reallocating to new investments, meaning everything that he has spent his life building (those god-awful towers) sold, most likely at a loss, and then that money reinvested into "blind assets." Doing this takes away the identity of the man just declared president-elect, a main reason I assume most of his supporters associate with him. A recent Washington Post article by David B. Rivkin, Jr. and Lee A. Casey who practice appellate and constitutional law in the District states, "Moreover, requiring Trump to liquidate his holdings would discourage other entrepreneurs from seeking the presidency, leaving the field clear for professional politicians and investors. Given that the American people have made clear their disgust with Washington’s elite, creating a disincentive for businesspeople to seek the presidency is not in the public interest." This is not something I am interested in doing. It was an error to elect Trump, who is human garbage in my opinion, but he was elected nonetheless. I am not hopeless that, in the future, someone of Trump's wealth but without his lying, lack of empathy nature would come forward and want to lead. I would not want this bill to deter them. Career politicians do lead to some of the stagnation we see in politics I believe. Also, Obama did not use a blind trust for reasons of his own, yet because of the nature of his wealth and, I believe, the general opinion that he would not willfully screw over the whole country for his own self gain, it was not a matter that was pressed. A bill focusing on stricter financial guidelines for presidents who opt not to use a blind trusts, such as what interactions they are allowed to have and how often, when they reveal financial statements, and implementing a neutral monitoring party of lawyers and regulators (not this ridiculous Reince Priebus promising to behave), etc. would make more sense and be more beneficial.
···
11/23/2016
Congressman & Senators own property and businesses they are not forced to put that into a blind trust. Quit being cry babies and grow up, this beneath you. Until this law applies equally to ALL elected officials it is nothing more than pathetic excuse to hurt the man (and his family) who prevented Crooked Hillary from being President.
···
11/22/2016
Why can't his children take care of his business for him? I believe that he should have control of his assets as President but I believe that his children should be able to run his businesses. He should not have to lose everything to a stranger. A Blind Trust would force him to sell some of his assets to a complete stranger, and that is not right.
It's literally in Article 2 of the Constitution that the president is to receive a flat salary and NO other compensations. Trump must put his assets into a blind trust or he's acting unconstitutionally.
Despite my personal feelings regarding Donald Trump, with the way this bill is drafted I have to dissent from the majority. The sticking point for me is that this bill would affect not just Donald Trump and Mike Pence, but all future presidents and vice presidents. The idea of a blind trust only sounds perfect right now because most voting in favor of it do not believe for a second that Trump will follow any of the promises he is currently making. He is already showing inability to separate lines just from the examples on Countable (Ivanka in a meeting with the Japanese PM and Trump in a meeting with his Indian business partners). However, a blind trust wouldn't mean just taking control from Trump and immediate family; first step is selling off all assets and reallocating to new investments, meaning everything that he has spent his life building (those god-awful towers) sold, most likely at a loss, and then that money reinvested into "blind assets." Doing this takes away the identity of the man just declared president-elect, a main reason I assume most of his supporters associate with him. A recent Washington Post article by David B. Rivkin, Jr. and Lee A. Casey who practice appellate and constitutional law in the District states, "Moreover, requiring Trump to liquidate his holdings would discourage other entrepreneurs from seeking the presidency, leaving the field clear for professional politicians and investors. Given that the American people have made clear their disgust with Washington’s elite, creating a disincentive for businesspeople to seek the presidency is not in the public interest." This is not something I am interested in doing. It was an error to elect Trump, who is human garbage in my opinion, but he was elected nonetheless. I am not hopeless that, in the future, someone of Trump's wealth but without his lying, lack of empathy nature would come forward and want to lead. I would not want this bill to deter them. Career politicians do lead to some of the stagnation we see in politics I believe. Also, Obama did not use a blind trust for reasons of his own, yet because of the nature of his wealth and, I believe, the general opinion that he would not willfully screw over the whole country for his own self gain, it was not a matter that was pressed. A bill focusing on stricter financial guidelines for presidents who opt not to use a blind trusts, such as what interactions they are allowed to have and how often, when they reveal financial statements, and implementing a neutral monitoring party of lawyers and regulators (not this ridiculous Reince Priebus promising to behave), etc. would make more sense and be more beneficial.
Donald Trump has spend his entire life making business decisions that affect his own well-being, frequently at the expense of the contractors that he has hired and the local economies that depend on his business. While capitalism has rewarded his actions as a businessperson, he cannot receive the same rewards from his role in the federal government. To do so would take advantage of the American people as well as the US and world economy. Supporting this bill is in the interest of every American who wants to see the president act toward the benefit of his constituents without thinking selfishly. Such is the purpose of civic service.
Separation of public and private interests has been a hot topic throughout the election season. Even if only to err on the side of caution, Donald Trump should be required to establish a blind trust--with no immediate family members involved. Thank you for your time.
If others in the executive branch are required to put assets in blind trust, president should too.
This whole situation is ridiculous. This bill needs to pass immediately.
I'd like to see Mr. Trump's potential conflicts of interest be seriously and thoroughly investigated. He seems to be pretty ill-informed about just how big a deal this actually is and why it's a bad precedent to set.
We have to be sure the president is focused on our needs, more than his own. If he needs to focus so on his private affairs, he should have remained a private citizen.
Presidential candidates should be required to disclose income taxes in order to run for office.
I strongly urge you to vote in favor of this bill! For our President-Elect to continue his direct or indirect involvement in his Personal Business Enterprise is unprecedented, unconscionable, and essentially contradicts what he promised to the American people before he was elected. As a representative of the people you serve you are not bound by party affiliation and ideology to ignore this blatant conflict of interest. Make the ethical, if not moral, choice in favor of this measure.
Congressman & Senators own property and businesses they are not forced to put that into a blind trust. Quit being cry babies and grow up, this beneath you. Until this law applies equally to ALL elected officials it is nothing more than pathetic excuse to hurt the man (and his family) who prevented Crooked Hillary from being President.
Anything less calls all domestic and foreign policy initiatives into question-- is it for the benefit of the US Or the Executive?
Absolutely. I feel that if you want to be President, your investments take a backseat.
This is an unprecedented situation where a billionaire with global business relationships is the president. We, as a country must do what we can to insure that his position as a PUBLIC servant does not directly benefit his PRIVATE business interests.
We need keep their business separate from being leaders of the free world. This would remove the possibility no matter what their best intentions are.
How can one govern for ALL and not themselves without disentangling their interests?
Of course - how do you ensure conflicts of interests -- look at what this guy did with Trump U -- look what he did about not paying taxes for 20 years -- this man will take advantage of anything he can -- think congress people ought to do the same thing
Trump has proved untrustworthy. If he's so sure that there will be no conflict, then there should be no reason not to do this.
There should be no temptation of the president using their power to further their interests over the American people.
Why can't his children take care of his business for him? I believe that he should have control of his assets as President but I believe that his children should be able to run his businesses. He should not have to lose everything to a stranger. A Blind Trust would force him to sell some of his assets to a complete stranger, and that is not right.