Last Thursday, in a bid to force President Trump to turn over his tax returns, the California State Senate approved Bill 27, the Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act. 

If the bill should become law, all presidential candidates will be required to submit their income tax returns from the past five years before their name can appear on the ballot. “The act would require the Secretary of State, within five days of receiving the returns, to make redacted versions of the returns available to the public on the Secretary of State’s internet website. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.”

The bill has been submitted to the California State House for consideration, and if it passes, it will go to Governor Gavin Newsom for his signature. However, his approval is not guaranteed.

According to the L.A. Times, the California State Senate and House passed an identical bill in 2017 which was vetoed by then-Governor Jerry Brown. He told state lawmakers it would likely be overturned in the courts.

In his veto message, Brown wrote, “The proposal could have led to other litmus tests for candidates. Today we require tax returns, but what would be next? Five years of health records? A certified birth certificate? High school report cards? And will these requirements vary depending on which political party is in power?”

For the sake of argument, let’s assume it becomes law in the state.

Such laws actually demonstrate why our founders saw the need to set up the electoral college.

The National Review’s Dan McLaughlin makes the case better than most, and he does so with flair.

His response to a California political official’s tweet set off a twitterstorm that has liberal heads exploding.

I’ve included the entire thread, but it’s not necessary to read the whole thing to get the gist of it.

Dan McLaughlin: @baseballcrank