Walter Shaub, the head of the "Office of Government Ethics" said yesterday that Donald Trump's plans for removing himself from his businesses is "wholly inadequate." This is completely ridiculous.
What Shaub and the Democrats would really like to have is a law that says that anyone who is a successful business person should not be permitted to hold high office. That's what they really mean.
Notice that Hillary Clinton's regular use of her office at the State Department to line her pockets and that of her foundation by trading American influence for cold, hard cash never bothered Walter Shaub or his Democratic cronies. That was A-Okay. But for a businessman to keep his business running. That is not A-Okay.
So, maybe if Trump just sold influence to foreign countries and received cash in direct payment, as Clinton did, Shaub would relax as he did during the Clinton cash-grab.
What an absurdity.
The right answer is full disclosure.
Full disclosure solves all problems and would have solved the obvious Clinton conflict of interest. (Now we know the real reason for the private server used by Hillary Clinton. It made it easier to hide the sale of US government influence for cash). Instead, hiding behind partisan agencies, such as the "Office of Government Ethics," just turns conflict of interest policy into a partisan rule that prohibits successful business folks from holding higher office.
No one holding high political office should have to divest of anything. They should not be required to set up blind trusts either. They should merely have to fully disclose any transactions of significance while in office. That's it. If the voters don't like it, they can throw the bums out (as they implicitly did last November). Having bureaucrats weigh in on this is ridiculous. Bureaucrats don't understand successful people and would prefer that successful people would be unsuccessful people.