Trending
Iowa voters have spent this fall hearing two men who want to be the next governor call each other rich, rootless and dishonest. What Iowans have not seen, however, are documents that would settle much of the argument.
Neither Zach Lahn nor Rob Sand has released his tax returns, and Iowa journalists, in interviews, debates and editorials, have failed to press the candidates to do so.
The candidates themselves made their opponent's money and home the subjects of this race.
Lahn's August television ad called Sand a billionaire, and Lahn's campaign says Sand's political career has been financed by his father-in-law's chemical fortune.
Sand's campaign says Lahn spends more time in Kansas than in Iowa. And at their first debate, the two accused each other of lying about residency and family wealth.
The Des Moines Register deserves credit for reporting in May that Lahn maintains a home in Kansas and flies his personal airplane there often. The Kansas Reflector reported that Lahn voted in Kansas elections in 2018, 2020 and 2022 before registering to vote in Iowa in October 2024. The New York Times reported last month that he voted in Iowa in November 2024 but asked that his ballot be mailed to him in Kansas.
KCRG-TV found no public evidence that Sand himself is a billionaire. His state ethics disclosure lists one source of income, his $103,000 state auditor's salary. But Iowa's disclosure law asks for sources of income, not for amounts.
The candidates' tax returns would not reveal their net worth, but they would show their income and where it comes from. They would show whether a candidate filed as an Iowa resident or a nonresident. They also would show charitable giving.
Five years of returns would tell voters whether Sand lives on an auditor's salary or on family money. They would tell voters whether Lahn has been paying taxes as an Iowan or a Kansan.
Disclosure of this kind by top politicians used to be routine.
Terry Branstad released his returns in his first race for governor in 1982. His opponent, Roxanne Conlin, followed suit. Her returns showed that she and her husband paid no Iowa income tax in 1981, in large part because of tax shelters.
In 1998, Tom Vilsack released five years of returns. In 2002, he called for a state law requiring candidates for governor to release their tax and net worth records. No law passed, and release of these records remains voluntary.
In 2010, Chet Culver released his tax information, as he had in 2006. Branstad showed reporters a year of returns, then released them annually while governor.
In 2018, Kim Reynolds posted 10 years of returns online and challenged Fred Hubbell to match her. Hubbell almost did. After months of promises, his campaign let reporters view summaries of one year's returns but provided no copies.
The returns showed more than $3 million in income but not where it came from. Pressed on the matter, a Hubbell adviser pointed elsewhere: "Donald Trump has refused to do anything," the aide said.
That exchange marked the beginning of the darkness that hangs over campaigns today.
Trump, by refusing in 2016 to release returns as every modern presidential nominee before him had done, showed that a candidate could say no and pay no price. Hubbell showed Iowa candidates that they could promise, stall and deliver less.
Iowa is not alone.
The Boston Globe's editorial board wrote in June that politicians have felt emboldened since 2016 to keep their finances secret. All three major candidates for Massachusetts governor refused the Globe's request for five years of returns.
In Maryland, Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, and Republican Dan Cox refused a Baltimore television station's request for three years of returns.
The difference is that newsrooms in those states asked, and their readers and viewers know the answer.
Next door to Iowa, asking still works.
In Illinois, billionaire Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, released portions of his 2025 returns on October 15, as he has every year since 2017. Reporters then asked Republican Darren Bailey's campaign whether he would follow suit and reported that Bailey had not.
Four years ago, Bailey told the Chicago Sun-Times he saw no reason to release his returns. Eleven weeks later, he released the first two pages of five years of returns to take the issue off the table.
The norm of politicians releasing their returns never rested on a legal requirement. It rested on journalists' unceasing demands and candidate acknowledgement that disclosures to voters are important.
This fall in Iowa, Sand and Lahn met in three televised debates. None of the published accounts shows a debate moderator asking either man for his tax returns.
This is a meek press.
Fact-checking an ad that calls a man a billionaire is worthwhile. Asking for the documents that would settle the question, then sharing the candidates' responses, or non-responses, is better.
The winners of this game of silence are the campaigns. Both get to keep slinging mud without fear that a tax document will wash it off.
The losers are Iowa voters, who will choose a governor without the facts that could answer the questions and allegations.
Randy Evans is the executive director of the Iowa Freedom of Information Council. He can be reached at DMREvans2810@gmail.com.