It should come as no surprise that New Jersey lawmakers believe what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander. The goose in this instance is President Trump. State legislators have sought to make placement of his name and that of other presidential candidates on the 2020 election ballot in New Jersey contingent on releasing their tax returns. The gander are the legislators who refuse to release their own returns.

As reported last week by Staff Writers Stacey Barchenger and Ashley Balczerak of the Trenton bureau of USA TODAY NETWORK New Jersey, only two of 119 legislators who were asked to release their tax returns complied.

I wasn't the least bit surprised, either by their refusal to make their tax returns public or by their hypocrisy in arguing it was important for presidential candidates to release them, but not for themselves.

[ Want more election news and updates? Download the Asbury Park Press app today. ]

Assembly Minority Leader Jon Bramnick, who leads the lower house's delegation of 26 Republicans, backed bills in 2017 and 2018 requiring candidates for legislative seats to release their tax returns. Nonetheless, he declined to release his own until other lawmakers agreed to do so. Hardly a courageous display of leadership on his part.

"Let's put all the cards on the table and there won’t be any guess work here," Bramnick said. Sure. But only if the guys across the table show their hands first.

It should be noted that only one state, Vermont, requires candidates for governor and other statewide offices to disclose their tax returns. However, New Jersey needs to do much more to provide the public with information about officials' sources of income and the amounts, and potential conflicts of interest.

New Jersey has separate disclosure forms for the state executive branch, legislators and local officials. The form for the executive branch is the most detailed. The form for state lawmakers is sorely lacking. And the form for local officials is almost laughable.

We look out for you, your wallet and your quality of life. Whether it’s ticket-fixing judges, police misconduct, or Little League officials' questionable finances, we're here for you. Stay with APP.com or consider a subscription today.

The four-page form for state lawmakers requires that they reveal their sources of income from jobs, investments and real estate holdings, as well as liabilities. But they are not required to report the specific amounts for each. The form includes only four income ranges, with the highest $50,000 or more. That fails to give the public a clear idea of the significance of each income source.

The executive branch disclosure form has seven income ranges, with the top $500,000 or more. New York State provides 108 income ranges, with the highest $10 million or more. Good government groups have criticized New Jersey for the vagueness of their disclosure requirements.

The 11/2-page disclosure form for municipal, county officials is virtually worthless. It seems aimed more at protecting officials' financial privacy than providing the public with useful information. If you want to know if any of your elected officials, planning or zoning board members, or professional staff are directly profiting from their public service, beyond any compensation they may be receiving in the form of salary and benefits, you won't be much the wiser after reading the disclosure forms.

Officials are required to list the name and address of each source of income, earned and unearned, in excess of $2,000. It doesn't matter if the amount is $2,001, $50,000 or more than $100,000. It's all treated the same. There also is no need to report income from any publicly traded securities unless the official or an immediate family member has an interest in the business organization.

The form doesn't even require officials to disclose their occupation. Simply stating that they are "self-employed" covers them. They don't need to indicate what they do for a living or who they may be doing business with. The form also makes it optional for the official to list a home address.

Local officials, of course, are only divulging the information state lawmakers have required them to provide. If legislators started trying to put real teeth into their disclosure requirements, local officials would no doubt demand that the transparency standards in Trenton be raised as well. If legislators started trying to put real teeth into the local disclosure requirements, local officials would no doubt demand that the transparency standards in Trenton be raised as well.

Which brings me to my final point: There is an election coming up next week. All 80 seats in the state Assembly are up for grabs. This is an ideal time to ask the candidates, incumbents and challengers alike, whether they would support legislation requiring the strengthening of financial disclosure requirements for legislators and local officials.

Should it be a litmus test? Yes, if you want to elect representatives who care more about you than themselves.

Randy Bergmann, a Westfield native and lifelong resident of New Jersey, has been covering the state as a reporter, editor and opinion page editor for four decades. Contact him at rbergmann@app.com or 732-643-4034.