First there was Pelosi and now MTG. Both are leaving office with large stock market gains. I personally think Members of Congress should be prohibited from trading in the market. Thoughts??

Most seem to get insider information, much more than Martha Stewart had.

I think it’s kinda rampant.

I thought that was already the case? Yes it certainly should be.

Stock transactions of any kind should be limited to whatever, if anything, they hold prior to taking office. They can sit on it and collect the dividends, sell it or buy more after taking office, but only that stock. Additionally, if trading based on insider info is illegal for Joe Poorschmuck, it needs to be illegal for members of Congress.

You can’t tell people they can’t invest. You can force congress members to place their portfolios into blind trusts and they can’t input direction. That is fair and it is easy to implement.

What do you mean you can’t tell people not to invest?

Im 100% for Congress & Senate, or almost any political figure (state and local) not being able to invest! Wayyyy too easy to be used as bribery. $174,000 a year and somehow there’s a lot of millionaires in that business? Yeah, something is wrong!

There’s certain jobs out there that have requirements.
I can’t have anything to do with a licensed liquor establishment. It’s part of the job, and I knew that coming in.
Some poor E-3/E-4 with a security clearance can’t do certain things, or associate with certain people. But dimwitted kammalla harris has the ability to make words come out of her pie-hole? How much is she worth? AOC’s net value?

Sorry, but not buying the “can’t tell people not to invest” bit. They have access to information and are able to vote on matters that personally benefit their portfolio.

Yes, insider trading laws should ably to them. If you have knowledge of government reports or how funding is going to go before the public, you should not be able to trade any stocks/bonds affected by that.

You certainly should not be able to vote on funding, laws etc. that would affect stocks you own or have just sold. This compromises your abilities.

They should be able to invest but not into any single stocks. I’m fine if the choose an index or mutual fund. I wouldn’t even mind seeing an S&P 500 index fund just for that reason but also available to the general public.

I'm all for them investing, however they need to tell the world what they are buying/selling/shorting etc 3 days prior to executing a trade

That way we all know what to buy into, drive the price up before they get in at the bottom, or sell off before they can take a profit.

I just want the same insider scoop.

You can do this but they'll just put it in a trust and call their spouse to make the trade, so, disclosure prior to the trade being required for them or any family member trading any stock for any reason....

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

I just want the same insider scoop.

You can do this but they'll just put it in a trust and call their spouse to make the trade, so, disclosure prior to the trade being required for them or any family member trading any stock for any reason....

We ALL want the insider scoop!
Who doesn’t want to get rich quick!

Re- the spouse.
So I’m Congressman CPD SIG, I can’t get rich off of insider information, or one of the hundred other ways Im able to manipulate the stock / company/ market. Unfortunately, due to my occupation, nor should my wife & family.
If I don’t think it’s fair, well I should have been a plumber. Honestly, I really can’t think of a valid reason WHY to become a member of Congress/Senate… there’s not too many people who actually believe in the job. (As in actually doing it FOR the Country) It’s easy to regulate me and my family and their ability to trade.

Then there’s you.
Because you and I are best friends. BFF’s forever! We go back like two seats in a Cadillac. Best men at each others wedding, godfather to the kids… HRK & CPD are like Peanut Butter and Jelly.
And all of a sudden, YOU are making these amazing moves in the market.
I’m voting on some “green energy” bill and you dump a few thousand on some windmill company.
You pull out of Boeing because I’m going to a Defense Budget hearing about all of the recent Osprey crashes.

It’s just tooo damn easy for sensitive information that can result in serious money to be won or lost to be disseminated.

As dear old Dad used to say:
“You can satisfy need, but you can’t satisfy greed.”

Term limits is one good way to limit the graft. One term in the Senate, two terms in the House, but never a term in both. Add in the blind trust or the frozen trust, perhaps with a 1 or 2 year freeze continuing after they leave office.

Yes, they can still give tips secretly to a friend or relative, but the short limit on serving will greatly reduce the profit potential.

What I mean by that is that any attempt to tell anyone in America that they can’t invest in the stock market would immediately be deemed unconstitutional. Because it is. Everyone in America that’s employed, has a pension, or even an inkling of a thought to retire someday is investing.

Yea, you can’t tell them they can’t invest in the market. You can force them into non participation though, ie a blind trust.

Your goal is to avoid insider trading or the lure of an easy windfall. It is not to bankrupt an individual or not allow them the ability to save for the future.

Do you really think you can or should tell a congressman that if they are in office for 30 years they can’t invest in any manner? That’s fucking retarded.

Blind trust. Look it up. It’s easy. It’s already available. It solves all insider trading issues. Any contact beyond updates with the trustee are punishable by law. It might not be the answer you like but it would work.

Edited to add. Term limits are a necessity. It wouldn’t solve the insider trading graft though. As soon as you enter office you are separated from financial decisions. It also has the added benefit of making public office less enticing for those who just want to get rich. You might conceivably even get people running for office with pure motives. Whodathunk.

I'd have anyone elected, appointed, or employed by the USG in a policy-making position to be required to sell everything they own - business interests, stocks, real property other than one personal residence, etc. - and use 100% of the proceeds to buy - at the market price as of their taking office - a basket of US stocks (for argument say, a S&P 500 index fund) which they cannot sell while in office. When they leave office, they can then sell some or all of it. Meanwhile, they live off their Federal paycheck and dividends from the basket of stocks.

And, if they don't like that deal...easy-peasy: don't run for office and/or don't apply for a high-level federal job.

lol. You guys are hard core. Telling the kind of successful driven people we actually want to run our country that they have to pawn off their business that they built from scratch is a bit counter productive.

You want people getting elected for the right reasons. You don’t want to force them into poverty once they leave office because they had to sell everything and put it to an index fund. I do love the intensity though. lol.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Do you really think you can or should tell a congressman that if they are in office for 30 years they can’t invest in any manner? That’s fucking retarded.

Or. Or... it makes a fantastic incentive to not hold public office at that level for 30 years, which is arguably a bigger problem than the wealth they amass in that timeframe.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:


Your goal is to avoid insider trading or the lure of an easy windfall. It is not to bankrupt an individual or not allow them the ability to save for the future.

Do you really think you can or should tell a congressman that if they are in office for 30 years they can’t invest in any manner? That’s fucking retarded.


Edited to add. Term limits are a necessity. It wouldn’t solve the insider trading graft though… It also has the added benefit of making public office less enticing for those who just want to get rich…

Pedropcola, I don’t mean to prune your comment, but.

Yes, my goal is to avoid insider trading! Not to bankrupt an individual. While I do believe that EVERYONE should “technically” be able to invest their money in order to make money, maybe not Politicians.
Which brings me to your last point:
“Making public office less enticing for those who just want to get rich.”
Then don’t get into politics if you want to get rich.

Sorry, but that should be part of the job.
Something about “Public Service”, and not getting rich off of the public.
$174,000 a year for 4 years, and you’re a millionaire? That math aint mathing.
Way, way too many public officials seem to be making a whole lot more money than their annual salaries add up to. Being a Public Official shouldn’t be the easy way to becoming rich. I don’t think that’s retarded at all.

I know what a Blind Trust is, and even that, IMO, if you’re a politician, you should be limited in how much you can invest, if able to invest at all.
It may not be fair to them, but it goes back to- don’t get into politics if you want to get rich.

You have to admit, there’s not just Nancy Pelosi and her husband who make exceptional choices in what they invest in! There’s a whole slew of other politicians, their family and friends who seem to make really great investments at the right time.
Let’s follow AOC.
We know she’s a fuckin’ idiot. Probably not smart enough to even be a mediocre bartender, more or less a politician, but there she is…
In a few years, how much will she be worth? She might be able to pour a good beer, but Hedge Fund Manager? She’ll scream racism and think you want her to trim the bushes.

Oh, “Term limits”?
OH HELL YES! It will shorten the amount of time someone can game the system.
Or just give the people the opportunity to tar and feather them once in a while. Because THAT would sure as hell curtail the Tomfuckery!

I don’t know, maybe I’m way off base, maybe I’m unrealistic in my thinking, but shouldn’t Senators, Congressmen, and other elected officials work for us? Get into politics because they actually want to look out for our rights and interests, and not take the office to make a shit-load of money?

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
lol. You guys are hard core. Telling the kind of successful driven people we actually want to run our country that they have to pawn off their business that they built from scratch is a bit counter productive.

You want people getting elected for the right reasons. You don’t want to force them into poverty once they leave office because they had to sell everything and put it to an index fund. I do love the intensity though. lol.

Oh, I never said that.
DJT walked INTO this with a shit-load of $!
By all means, he should keep what he’s earned, and make money off of THAT. Not make money from being the President of the United States.
In that same vein, the exact same thing applies to my fat fuck of a governor, JB Pritzker and his net worth.

Just don’t abuse your power to enhance your wealth.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
First there was Pelosi and now MTG. Both are leaving office with large stock market gains. I personally think Members of Congress should be prohibited from trading in the market. Thoughts??

Nothing against you but my first thought was: does anyone really have to think about this?

On the other hand, what are you going to do about people like Trump who enters political office with sizable private business interests.

But it certainly stinks when Pelosi can have a track record envied by Wall Street Hedge Fund managers.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
You can’t tell people they can’t invest. You can force congress members to place their portfolios into blind trusts and they can’t input direction. That is fair and it is easy to implement.

THIS. I agree you cannot tell people they cannot invest, it's unconstitutional. Nobody would want to be a congressman. It's like telling someone that works for a bank, that they can never buy a house.

But a limit as to what they can invest in, such as mutual funds and things they have no direct control over which stocks are purchased.