Maggie Goodlander, a candidate in the increasingly tense Democratic primary for retiring Rep. Annie Kuster’s (D-N.H.) seat, filed a personal financial disclosure that has raised questions over the actual value of sizable assets she holds.
Goodlander, a former Justice Department official under President Biden who’s married to national security adviser Jake Sullivan, is running to fill Kuster’s seat in New Hampshire’s 2nd Congressional District, a Democratic-leaning area that went for Biden by 9 points in 2020. Her primary opponent, Colin Van Ostern, is backed by Kuster, while Goodlander has the support of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and EMILY’s List, an abortion-rights group. Whoever wins the primary is favored to defeat the GOP nominee in November.
The questions surrounding Goodlander’s recent personal financial disclosure, which was filed Aug. 12, come as the race turns bitter in the lead-up to the Sept. 10 primary, with Kuster herself wading in to boost Van Ostern as recent polls show Goodlander leading.
The disclosure has puzzled experts because it lists the value of multiple easily verifiable assets as “undetermined,” including checking, retirement and investment accounts; treasury notes; cash bonds; and several properties or pieces of land, even those the report indicates are currently for sale.
“To be perfectly honest, this was pretty bizarre,” said Danielle Caputo, legal counsel for ethics at the Campaign Legal Center, referring to the disclosure.
Examples of assets in which the value was noted as “undetermined” include an individual retirement account (IRA) from Fidelity Investments and a retirement savings account from Yale University.
These assets are not among the five options the House Ethics Committee has deemed appropriate to mark as “undetermined” in value: pensions, futures contracts, intellectual property rights, solar energy rights and certain options contracts.
“I can’t remember a time where I saw ‘undetermined’ listed as a value of asset, let alone dozens of times,” Caputo said.
Members of Congress, federal candidates and senior congressional staff are among those who are required to file annual reports disclosing their personal assets, liabilities and outside income under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978.
Goodlander — a counsel during former President Trump’s first impeachment — had secured a 90-day extension from the clerk of the House of Representatives in May, a routine option taken by filers who request more time to complete the required disclosures.
Contacted by The Hill, a Goodlander campaign spokesperson suggested an amendment to the asset disclosure is forthcoming.
“The campaign completed the initial financial disclosure with all the information it was able to obtain at the time,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
“Like with many first-time candidates, the campaign will file an amendment once it receives the additional information it requested.”
Candidates and members of Congress filing financial disclosures only need to disclose broad ranges on the value of the asset, raising further questions about Goodlander’s assets and her ability to provide transparency into her personal finances.
Goodlander not only failed to specify the value of most of her assets, but she also marked each asset as “Other” rather than use the specific codes for trusts, bank and retirement accounts, real estate and other assets, even in cases where she did disclose a value range for an asset.
Goodlander’s disclosure also failed to break out the underlying assets of certain retirement accounts including 401(k)s and IRAs, as required by the House Ethics Committee.
“What is the purpose of omitting required details on your financial disclosure form, which only serves to put the people you’re trying to represent in the dark about who you are exactly and who you may or may not be beholden to,” Caputo said.
Goodlander, who has outraised Van Ostern, has fielded attacks from her opponents over her ties to the district, among other issues. In an ad released recently, Kuster accused Goodlander of running a “deceptive campaign to buy a seat in Congress” and accused her of giving “thousands to pro-life Republicans.”
The Goodlander campaign pushed back against the ad in a statement.
“Colin Van Ostern’s attacks suggesting that Maggie Goodlander won’t fight for reproductive freedom is false, shameful, and out of bounds,” a campaign spokesperson said. “He knows Maggie’s professional record in this fight and he knows that Maggie and her husband have fought their own painful battles with reproductive health.”
“To use this issue to try and score political points is about as low as it gets,” the spokesperson added.
The Goodlander campaign also released several ads addressing the issue of abortion and her residency. In one ad, Goodlander argued that “Colin Van Ostern is being dishonest with you about my commitment to reproductive freedom. It’s disgraceful.”
In another ad, state Sen. Cindy Rosenwald (D) called the “lies” about Goodlander “outrageous.”
“To suggest she’s not from here — come on,” Rosenwald says in the ad. “Maggie was born and raised in Nashua.”
Recent polling has shown Goodlander edging out Van Ostern. A University of New Hampshire Granite State Poll released last week showed the former Biden administration official leading the Van Ostern 34 percent to 28 percent, with 38 percent saying they did not know or were undecided.
A Saint Anselm College Survey Center poll released earlier this month found Goodlander ahead of Van Ostern 41 percent to 31 percent, with 28 percent unsure.
The Cook Political Report rates the seat as “likely Democrat.”
