If Teresa Heinz won't trust presidential candidate John Kerry with her money, why should American voters trust Kerry with their country?
You can read this article on Slate.
"Much of Teresa Heinz's inheritance was no doubt tied up in trusts, but a substantial sum must have been unencumbered, because she had Sen. Kerry sign a pre-nuptial agreement. "Everybody has a prenup," Heinz explained to Lisa DiPaulo, who profiled her sympathetically in Elle.
You have to have a prenup. You've got three kids with somebody else, you've got to have a prenup. You could be as generous or as sensitive as you want. But you have to have a prenup."
"The only way Heinz Kerry could now give substantial money to Kerry's campaign would be to tear up her pre-nup and kill herself.
This leads us to the inevitable question of whether these circumstances could have been foreseen by Teresa Heinz Kerry--if not when she married John Kerry, then anytime prior to his entry into the 2004 presidential race. Back then, she could have transferred assets for him to tap in his campaign. At the very least, she could have established a pattern of making substantial monetary "gifts of a personal nature" so that she could legally continue this practice after he became a candidate. But she didn't. Even the prenup seems less than entirely necessary when you consider Heinz Kerry's age--she's 65--and the near-certainty that her children's future prosperity is well protected by trust funds set up long before John Heinz's death. While it's probably true that most very rich people prefer to draw up prenups before they marry, not all of them do. Paul McCartney, for instance, reportedly declined his second wife Heather Mills' offer to sign one."