Maggie Goodlander, a candidate in the increasingly tense Democratic primary for the seat of retiring Rep. Annie Kuster (DN.H.), filed a personal disclosure of finances This raises questions about the true value of their considerable wealth.
Goodlander, a former Justice Department official under President Biden who is married to national security adviser Jake Sullivan, is running for Kuster’s seat in New Hampshire’s 2nd Congressional District, a Democratic-leaning district that went to Biden by 9 percentage points in 2020. Her primary opponent, Colin Van Ostern, is endorsed by Kuster, while Goodlander has the backing of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and EMILY’s List, an abortion rights group. Whoever wins the primary will have a good chance of defeating the Republican nominee in November.
The questions surrounding Goodlander’s most recent disclosure of her personal finances, filed on August 12, come as the campaign heats up ahead of the September 10 primary, with Kuster herself jumping in to support Van Ostern despite recent polls showing Goodlander in the lead.
The disclosure has puzzled experts because it lists the value of several easily verifiable assets as “undetermined.” These include checking, retirement and investment accounts, Treasury bills, securities and several properties or land, even ones that are currently for sale, according to the report.
“To be quite honest, it was pretty bizarre,” said Danielle Caputo, ethics counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, regarding the revelation.
Examples of assets whose value was recorded as “undetermined” include a Fidelity Investments individual retirement account (IRA) and a Yale University retirement account.
These assets are not among the five options that the House Ethics Committee deemed appropriate The following are to be classified as “indeterminate” in terms of value: bonds, futures contracts, intellectual property rights, solar energy rights and certain options contracts.
“I can’t remember ever seeing ‘undetermined’ listed as an asset, let alone dozens of times,” Caputo said.
Members of Congress, federal candidates and senior congressional staff are among those required under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to file annual reports disclosing their personal assets, liabilities and outside income.
Goodlander – a legal adviser during former President Trump’s first impeachment trial – had sought a 90-day extension from the Secretary of the House in May, a routine option used by petitioners seeking more time to submit required information.
A Goodlander campaign spokesperson contacted by The Hill indicated that a change to asset disclosure is planned soon.
“The campaign has made the first disclosure of its finances using all the information it could obtain at the time,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
“As with many first-time candidates, the campaign team will submit an amendment once it receives the additional information requested.”
Candidates and members of Congress are required to disclose only scratchy ranges of the value of their assets when disclosing their finances, raising further questions about Goodlander’s wealth and her ability to be see-through about her personal finances.
Not only did Goodlander fail to disclose the value of most of her assets, but she also labeled each asset as “Other” instead of the specific codes for trusts, bank and retirement accounts, real estate and other assets, even in cases where it has disclosed a range of value for an asset.
Goodlander’s disclosure also did not include a breakdown of the underlying assets of certain retirement accounts, including 401(k) and IRA plans, as required by the House Ethics Committee.
“What is the point of omitting required information from your financial disclosure form if it only serves to keep the people you are trying to represent in the dark about who exactly you are and who you may or may not be beholden to,” Caputo said.
Goodlander, who has raised more money than Van Ostern, has been attacked by her opponents for her ties to the district, among other things. a recently published adKuster accused Goodlander of running a “misleading campaign to buy a seat in Congress” and accused her of donating “thousands to pro-life Republicans.”
The Goodlander campaign opposed the ad in a statement.
“Colin Van Ostern’s attacks suggesting that Maggie Goodlander will not fight for reproductive freedom are false, shameful and inappropriate,” a spokesperson for the campaign said. “He knows Maggie’s professional history in this fight and he knows that Maggie and her husband have fought their own painful battles for reproductive health.”
“Using this issue to gain political capital is just about the most despicable thing you can do,” the spokesman added.
The Goodlander campaign also released several ads addressing the issue of abortion and her residency. In an adGoodlander argued, “Colin Van Ostern is dishonest with you about my commitment to reproductive freedom. That is disgraceful.”
In another adDemocratic state Senator Cindy Rosenwald called the “lies” about Goodlander “outrageous.”
“To say she’s not from here – well, please,” Rosenwald says in the ad. “Maggie was born and raised in Nashua.”
Recent polls have shown Goodlander narrowly edging out Van Ostern. A poll by the University of New Hampshire Granite State published last week showed the former Biden administration official leading Van Ostern 34 percent to 28 percent, with 38 percent saying they didn’t know or were undecided.
The results are within the poll’s margin of error of 4.9 points, putting the two candidates virtually neck and neck.
A survey by the Saint Anselm College Survey Center published earlier this month Goodlander was ahead of Van Ostern by 41 percent to 31 percent, with 28 percent unsure.
The Cook Political Report rates the seat as “likely Democratic.”
