Jon Ossoff will introduce a bill banning members of Congress from trading stocks and close the

[tblue37]

spousal loophole.

Link to tweet

Text

Jon Ossoff will introduce a bill that bans members of Congress from trading stocks and closes the spouse loophole. This is why we need more millennials in office.

[aocommunalpunch]

1. k & r n/t

[leftstreet]

2. What?! No. I was planning to marry a congressperson

DURec

And good on him!

[BlueTsunami2018]

3. That has no chance of passing.

That’s how these bastards all get rich.

[Mr.Bill]

6. Yep, it's the reason many of them are there.

[SheltieLover]

7. Feeding at the federal trough is the only reason qpukes "serve"

[roody]

63. Many Dems will not support it either.

[ShazzieB]

40. What he's doing still has value.

If nothing else, it will draw attention to the issue and make more people aware of it.

[DENVERPOPS]

47. Beyond the stock market

and insider trading, the Corporations directly and indirectly take care of them in the shadows. While they are in office, or after they retire.
Why else would someone give millions and millions to take a job that pays under a 200K a year??????????
Biden could care less about the money, that's why they detest him..........He doesn't have their values.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

4. Nice. Though it's not a loophole, it's a feature,

[wendyb-NC]

5. Good on you, Jon

He's a keeper.

[SheltieLover]

8. K&R!

[Walleye]

9. I think Joe Biden never owned stock the whole time he was in the Senate. He got by OK

[JohnSJ]

12. While Biden does not have "direct ownership" of a stock or bond, he has paid money into

into retirement funds that are themselves invested in the stock market.

[Walleye]

13. I think that's different, it doesn't really present a conflict of interest

[JohnSJ]

14. I agree

[former9thward]

17. How is it different?

If you vote on something which will cause the market to go up or down it means the retirement fund will do the same.

[littlemissmartypants]

18. Do you have a retirement fund?

[former9thward]

22. Yes.

[littlemissmartypants]

37. If it's a 401K it is possible you are investing in stocks. nt

[former9thward]

41. No doubt.

Your point?

[littlemissmartypants]

46. Judge not lest ye be judged? ❤

[Hortensis]

49. :) The point to make is that Biden has avoided personal stock

market involvement for literally 50 years for the specific reason of avoiding any appearance of conflict of interest or being influenced. He made that decision when he was about 29 and stuck to it though it's cost him the fortunes that were being made all around him during this era of enormous wealth growth.

An honest and honorable man.

[littlemissmartypants]

54. ❤

[Walleye]

25. It's different from doing something that will make a particular stock go up because you own it.

Nobody knows what stocks are in their retirement funds. The point is not to show favoritism. I think most people want to see the stock market go up, they just don’t want to see corruption

[Rebl2]

27. Correct

[Walleye]

31. I'm thinking like if you own stock in a coal company and vote against the green new deal.

Or you know there’s a serious pandemic coming up and you dump your stock in carnival cruise. Entirely different.

[spooky3]

42. Please provide citations to research documenting this.

I don’t believe the evidence supports this statement, nor would it be consistent with theory.

[Scrivener7]

43. Not true at all.

[paleotn]

45. Like what for instance?? Vote on what specifically??

[druidity33]

48. You don't choose the stocks...

you choose funds or a strategy. The financial advisor chooses the stocks and other investments. That seems pretty different to me.

[spanone]

10. K&R

[JohnSJ]

11. I was watching an interview of Larry Summers on Bloomberg saying that allowing members of

Congress to trade securities needs to be banned.

As for the comment in the tweet, “that is why we need more millennials”, ignores that just being a millennial does not mean they do the right thing, as saying being older means they do the wrong thing

[tblue37]

16. Liz Warren introduced a similar bill at one time, & she's no millennial.

[JohnSJ]

19. Exactly, and I don't believe Bernie Sanders is a millennial either

[AndyS]

26. She did and it passed which is why congress critters cannot own stocks.

However during markup it was changed to allow Spouses & children to invest which is the 'loop hole' that needs fixing.

[LisaM]

33. I know, it is not just a millennial thing.

What a silly comment.

[Ponietz]

36. +1

Madison Cawthorn is a millennial. Tom Udall and others have perennially endorsed a constitutional amendment stating corporations are not people and money is not speech (the most effective way, I think, to repair our government.) 43 patriotic Senators who love their country signed one year during *’s stint.

[JohnSJ]

38. +++

[mjvpi]

15. I hope they make each Senator vote on this. Should be used to embarrass those who don't support

But then the media needs to cover the issue. I’m 64. We can always hope. I’m calling my Senators tomorrow.

These are the kind of issues that need to be driving en home to blue collar workers.

[JohnSJ]

20. Sine this will first happen in the House, it may never get to the Senate. It will be interesting

to see if it does

[former9thward]

21. The bill will go nowhere.

Speaker Pelosi has already said people in Congress should be able to trade stocks.

Nancy Pelosi says federal lawmakers should be able to trade stock in office: ‘This is a free market’

Despite bipartisan support for prohibiting members of Congress from buying and holding individual stocks in office, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Wednesday that lawmakers should be allowed to make trades while serving.

“We’re a free market economy,” Pelosi told reporters during a news conference. “They should be able to participate in that.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/16/nancy-pelosi-federal-lawmakers-should-be-able-to-trade-stock.html

[NCjack]

23. but if it does, please add coal and pharmaceuticals

[Celerity]

24. I wonder what Speaker Pelosi thinks about this.

Last edited Sun Jan 9, 2022, 09:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Definitely her worst moment (and a huge exception from a brilliant career) as Speaker, by far IMHO:

Pelosi said it’s fine for lawmakers to trade stocks. She’s wrong.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/12/21/nancy-pelosi-wrong-lawmakers-trade-stocks/



House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stunned a lot of Americans this past week when she ardently defended the right of lawmakers — and their spouses — to buy and sell stocks while they serve in Congress. “We’re a free-market economy. They should be able to participate in that,” Ms. Pelosi told reporters.

She should have advocated for tighter scrutiny on congressional trading. Even better would be a full ban on individual stock trades for members of Congress. There’s a big catch to Ms. Pelosi’s “free-market economy” claim: U.S. representatives and senators have access to a lot of confidential, nonpublic information. That gives them an unfair advantage in trading.

Walter Shaub, former director of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, put it this way in a tweet: “It’s a ridiculous comment! She might as well have said ‘let them eat cake.’ Sure, it’s a free-market economy. But your average [person] doesn’t get confidential briefings from government experts chock full of nonpublic information directly related to the price of stocks.”

When members of the general public trade on nonpublic information, they go to jail for it. It’s theoretically possible to go after members of Congress for trading on insider information as well, but that has proved extremely difficult.

Link to tweet

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Loads Call Options In Alphabet, Micron, Roblox, Salesforce And Disney

Dec 30, 2021

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-loads-call-options-in-alphabet-micron-roblox-salesforce-and-disney/ar-AASi0jt

The Democratic majority leader seems to be keeping busy while Congress is in recess for the holidays. U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi purchased millions of dollars worth of call options between Dec. 17 and Dec. 21.

Pelosi bought call options in Alphabet Inc (NASDAQ: GOOG), Micron Technology Inc (NASDAQ: MU), Roblox Corp (NYSE: RBLX), Salesforce.com Inc (NYSE: CRM) and The Walt Disney Co (NYSE: DIS), according to financial disclosures published Thursday.

Pelosi has repeatedly insisted that members of Congress should be allowed to trade individual stocks.

It's something that she has benefited from in the past, most notably through her purchase of Tesla Inc (NASDAQ: TSLA) call options at the beginning of the year.

snip

[crickets]

30. I have loads of respect for Nancy Pelosi, but on this issue I agree that she is so wrong.

Thanks for the links.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

34. +1

[harumph]

35. I support Nancy - but she's wrong on this one.

It's more of a free market/kleptocracy.

[AngryOldDem]

44. They should not be doing this.

Ossoff is correct in introducing this legislation.

[Old Okie]

53. Stocks

Federal employees are not allowed to buy stocks in industries they regulate so why should Congress be allowed to own individual stocks since the actions they take impact everything and they get classified briefings on issues (like covid19) which the general public does not have access. We have had too many cases of insider trading by politicians (such as the one he replaced) and they don't always get held accountable. It better to remove the potential for corruption rather than depending on the strong moral fiber of politicians.

[crickets]

29. John Ossof is right about this issue, and it needs more push from constituents.

Tweet disappeared, found links.

https://www.businessinsider.com/jon-ossoff-stock-trade-ban-members-of-congress-pelosi-2022-1

The ethics bill — which the 34-year-old freshman Democratic senator reportedly hopes to file once he has a Republican cosponsor — would tackle legislative conflicts of interest by banning members and their families from trading stocks, according to a source in Washington DC with knowledge of the matter.

In addition, the legislation would likely mandate that lawmakers place their financial assets in blind trusts — an action that Ossoff took himself after being elected to the Senate in a January 2021 runoff election. [snip]

According to a December survey conducted by the conservative group Convention of States Action, 76 percent of voters give a thumbs down to lawmakers and their spouses trading stocks — with the opinion that those individuals have garnered an "unfair advantage" in the stock market — while only 5 percent of voters were fine with the practice.

You don't think Ossoff will find a Repub co-sponsor? He just might.

https://nypost.com/2022/01/08/jon-ossoff-could-snub-nancy-pelosi-with-ban-on-congress-stock-trades/

Ossoff’s forthcoming bill would be stricter by closing the spouse loophole, the source said. That would put the new bill more in line with a bipartisan House proposal called the TRUST In Congress Act, which would ban close family members from trading and is supported by Democrats including Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA), Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY) and Karen Bass (D-Calif.), as well as Republicans like Roy, Cloud, Scott Perry (R-Pa.) and Fred Keller (R-Pa.). [snip]

Insiders say that Republicans in the Senate could fold and support an Ossoff-style bill if they feel political pressure. One person applying such pressure is Arizona Republican Senate primary candidate Blake Masters, who says both Pelosi and Senate Republicans are “wrong” about the issue.

“These lawmakers are just out of touch with how normal people view the situation,” Masters told The Post. “Members of Congress should not be buying call options on Big Tech companies they’re in charge of regulating, that is ludicrous.” [snip]

“David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler lost their seats, I think, because of the allegations of insider trading,” Holman told The Post. “Had those allegations not happened, I suspect the Republicans would’ve held onto the senate.”

https://www.businessinsider.com/conflicted-congress-key-findings-stock-act-finances-investing-2021-12

But in Washington, DC, a bipartisan phenomenon is thriving. Numerous members of Congress, both liberal and conservative, are united in their demonstrated indifference toward a law designed to quash corruption and curb conflicts-of-interest.

Insider's new investigative reporting project, "Conflicted Congress," chronicles the myriad ways members of the US House and Senate have eviscerated their own ethical standards, avoided consequences, and blinded Americans to the many moments when lawmakers' personal finances clash with their public duties. [snip]

Insider's "Conflicted Congress" is also rating every member of Congress on their financial conflicts and commitment to financial transparency. Thirteen senators and House members have received a red "danger" rating on our three-tier stoplight scale, while 113 get a yellow "borderline" rating.

Finally, Insider published an exclusive, searchable, and sortable database of all members of Congress' personal finances, including their assets, debts, and sources of outside income. (Data geeks rejoice!)

[druidity33]

50. That's an excellent link...

https://www.businessinsider.com/financial-conflicts-congress-members-rated-2021-12

There are not a small number of dems on that list...

[BeckyDem]

52. Thank you!

[tblue37]

56. Thanks. nt

[doughb]

57. Might be of interest...

Tracking stock trading on Capitol Hill

https://twitter.com/QuiverCongress

[crickets]

59. Wow. Great find. nt

Links to website for non Twitter folks:

https://www.quiverquant.com/sources/housetrading
https://www.quiverquant.com/sources/senatetrading

[ecstatic]

66. That is the part of his platform that I was most excited about

Without reform in this area, the stock market is mostly a criminal enterprise.

[oldsoftie]

32. Gee, why hasnt this happened before 2022???

[JohnSJ]

39. It has. Someone mentioned Elizabeth Warren introduced something like this previously, but it didn't

pass

[marieo1]

51. Hooray for Jon Ossoff.............

Thank you, Jon Ossoff........if someone thinks this is the same as a mandated retirement fund, they are crazy. I worked for the state for many years and always paid into a retirement fund. I am retired now and with health problems am so glad I did. Some people are so mean!!

[Prospero1]

55. This has always bothered me.

Lawyers and judges must avoid conflicts of interest when administering the law. Shouldn't those who MAKE the laws be held to at least the same standard?

[cstanleytech]

58. Also need a law making it a criminal offense for them to be engaged in

knowingly committing insider trading by passing on information that has not been revealed to the public beforehand to anyone for financial gain.

[bucolic_frolic]

60. There are ETF's, mutual funds, arm's length advisors, and blind trusts for public servants

to invest in. Would greatly reduce the incentive for trading on privileged info. Maybe Congress should have its own financial refuge for Capitol Hill assets?

[azureblue]

61. Repubs been trading for decades

Even blatant insider trading, and no one said squat. But the Goopers think they can use a half truth to attack Pelosi.
This will not pass because insider trading and bribery makes GOP congress critters rich..

[Pinback]

62. Good! Proud of my Senator. And

this is a good reminder that both of Georgia’s previous Republican Senators were crooks who benefited from insider trading while in office. And now one of those assholes wants to be our governor.

[mahina]

64. On its face it sounds reasonable but then when you think about it

There are some obvious downsides too.

It would shrink the pool of people who will be willing to do the work. Why should they be excluded win or if? They could have it run in a blind trust or some other way that precludes inside dealing

[Emile]

65. This will never make the floor!