Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Cindy McCain Sells Sudan Investments; Renews Tax Return Debate

Posted by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report at 8:25 AM on May 15, 2008.


Voters deserve a closer look at how Cindy McCain made - and keeps - her fortune.
sudan

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Election 2008 in your
mailbox!

 

Given the mystery surrounding John McCain’s wife’s finances, stories like these are not going to help matters.

Cindy McCain, the wife of the Republican presumptive nominee for president, has sold off at least $2 million she held in funds with investments in Sudan businesses.

The mutual funds — American Funds Europacific Growth and American Funds Capital World Growth and Income — have investments in companies with business in Sudan, according to the Sudan Divestment Task Force, an advocacy organization that has been working to persuade states, universities and other organizations to divest.

“As soon as she was made aware, she sold it,” said Brian Rogers, a spokesman for the McCain campaign. “Senator and Mrs. McCain are committed to doing everything possible to end the genocide in Darfur.”

Both funds were listed by her husband, Senator John McCain, on his financial disclosure forms. The investments and the divestiture were first reported by The Associated Press, and confirmed by the McCain campaign.

This issue came up briefly a year ago, when four presidential candidates — Sam Brownback, John Edwards, Rudy Giuliani, and Barack Obama — learned of their Sudan-related holdings and quickly divested themselves. For John McCain, who seems to have very few assets of his own, this didn’t come up until now.

In light of Cindy McCain’s rather indignant remarks last week about keeping her finances private, these $2 million dollars in Sudanese investments just won’t do.

Here’s a WaPo editorial on the subject published yesterday:

“It won’t do.” That was our bottom line in 1984 when Rep. Geraldine Ferraro of New York, Democratic vice presidential candidate, balked at releasing her husband’s income tax returns. Ms. Ferraro ultimately relented. It was our bottom line four years ago, when Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of the Democratic nominee, refused to release her returns; Ms. Kerry relented as well. And it is just as apt now with regard to Cindy McCain’s tax returns.

For a candidate who puts a premium on transparency and ethics, John McCain has been slow and grudging in releasing tax information. He did not commit to doing so until after he had secured the nomination, and then he disclosed only two years of taxes, far less than his Democratic rivals. Mr. McCain’s wife, the heir to a liquor and beer distributorship, declined to release her returns, citing — as Ms. Heinz Kerry did — her children’s privacy. Releasing tax information entails intrusion, but, as we wrote four years ago, presidential candidates and their spouses “relinquish a significant measure of privacy. Meanwhile, tax returns provide information not contained in financial disclosure forms, such as charitable contributions and the use of tax shelters.” For Mrs. McCain to say, as she did on NBC’s “Today” show this week, that she would never release her tax returns, not even if she were to become first lady, is unacceptable. “This is a privacy issue,” she said. “My husband is the candidate.”

The candidate should get his wife to reconsider. The last thing the country needs in a new president is more secrecy.

And this was before the revelations about the Sudanese investments.

This story isn’t going away.


Bipartisan Concern About the Dangers of McPalin’s Hate-Mongering
"I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate ..."
Post by Emptywheel. October 10, 2008.
McCain-Palin Rally Attendees Say Incredible, Ridiculous Things
File this one under the "give 'em enough rope" column.
Post by Seth Colter Walls. October 10, 2008.
McCain's Camp Divided Over Dirty Attacks on Obama
The Wall Street Journal reports today that inside the McCain campaign, there's division over the bloodthirsty tactics.
Post by Steve Benen. October 10, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
1-800-GENOCIDE
Posted by: fanny666 on May 15, 2008 8:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Simple call you can make that will give you talking points and then connect you with the proper reps, so you can advocate for the people of Sudan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Funds aren't an issue. Tax returns are
Posted by: dedalus on May 15, 2008 4:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The issue of owning mutual funds which "have investments in companies with business in Sudan" is an absolute non-starter. By purchasing a mutual fund, one is paying others to create a portfolio of dozens to hundreds of stocks--and in a global economy, I'm sure that you or I might take issue with one or more investments held by ANY mutual fund out there. (Everybody with an IRA or 401(k) or pension who knows all the companies they're directly or indirectly invested in, and all of the countries in which they operate, please raise your hands now. . . . I thought so.) The McCains did not directly, purposefully support the Sudanese genocide by their mutual fund investments.

The release of tax returns is another matter. Looking at these documents would give some insight into the beliefs and ethics of the McCains. Follow the money!

Perhaps a letter campaign to the Wall Street Journal would be helpful, asking why they felt it was so important four years ago for candidate Kerry's wife to release her tax returns (as she ultimately did), while they've been silent on the issue of candidate McCain's wife's finances on this go-round.

However, the WSJ probably wouldn't publish such letters. Perhaps an ad placed in the journal, raising the question (how much did the Petraeus ads cost MoveOn.org?) The irony is delicious and bidirectional--paying the Tool for Capitalists to ask them why they're being such a capitalist tool!

But again--forget about funds investing fractions of fractions in Sudan. Focus on the tax returns.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]