The STOCK Act

[Gaspar]

In President Obama's state of the union, he promised to sign a bill that would put a stop to members of congress making a fortune by trading on insider information.  

The STOCK act was actually introduced to the Senate back in November by Senator Brown from MA.  It was read once and like almost all other important bills, Mr. Reid sent it to committee to die.  Unfortunately, for Senator Reid, the president mentioned his willingness to sign such a bill in the State of The Union speech, so the bill will be re-introduced.  

It is a very simple common sense bill that I doubt anyone would have a problem with (except for Pelosi, Reid, Bohner, or any other congress person that makes millions from insider trading).

Here is it's text: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1871is/pdf/BILLS-112s1871is.pdf

You may want to do what you can to educate your friends in other states who may have congress members with less scruples. The president is campaigning on this, the legislation is waiting, and the only thing that stands in the way is the Senate (as usual).  Lets help our president by supporting this effort.  Lets make sure that Congress sends this bill to his desk as requested.

[Conan71]

In President Obama's state of the union, he promised to sign a bill that would put a stop to members of congress making a fortune by trading on insider information.  

The STOCK act was actually introduced to the Senate back in November by Senator Brown from MA.  It was read once and like almost all other important bills, Mr. Reid sent it to committee to die.  Unfortunately, for Senator Reid, the president mentioned his willingness to sign such a bill in the State of The Union speech, so the bill will be re-introduced.  

It is a very simple common sense bill that I doubt anyone would have a problem with (except for Pelosi, Reid, Bohner, or any other congress person that makes millions from insider trading).

Here is it's text: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1871is/pdf/BILLS-112s1871is.pdf

While our Oklahoma Senators support this action, you may want to do what you can to educate your friends in other states who may have congress members with less scruples. The president is campaigning on this, the legislation is waiting, and the only thing that stands in the way is the Senate (as usual).  Lets help our president by supporting this effort.  Lets make sure that Congress sends this bill to his desk as requested.

Oh yeah, those do nothing Repugs are blocking it, I'm sure.

[Gaspar]

Statement Yesterday from Jay Carney:

Statement by the Press Secretary

In the State of the Union Address, the President laid out a blueprint for an economy built to last, where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules – especially those who have been sent here to serve the American people.

Last week, the President called on Congress to pass a bill that makes clear that Members of Congress may not engage in insider trading.  No one should be able to trade stocks based on nonpublic information gleaned on Capitol Hill. So we are pleased the Senate is one step closer to passing the STOCK Act. While there's more work to be done to eliminate the corrosive influence of money in politics, this is an important step to repair the deficit of trust between Washington and the American people. We urge Congress to pass this bill, and the President will sign it right away.

Statement yesterday by Eric Cantor:

"Insider trading by members of Congress is unacceptable, and the public needs to know that the same rules apply to elected officials as everyone else. The STOCK Act rightfully attempts to ensure that members of Congress do not use insider information to profit personally, and it is imperative that people trust that Members of Congress aren't using public office for personal gain.

"I was pleased to see the Senate signal that it will take up an expanded version of the STOCK Act. While the current Senate bill is a step in the right direction, there are other areas where it can be strengthened such as applying disclosure requirements to the Executive Branch and their employees in a position to gain from insider information. We will closely monitor the Senate's progress as the measure is strengthened during the amendment process, and will ensure action on legislation that meets the underlying goals of the STOCK Act in the most timely manner possible."

[Gaspar]

Oh yeah, those do nothing Repugs are blocking it, I'm sure.

Apparently my estimation of support was incorrect.  Tom Coburn was one of only two that voted against bringing the bill up for debate.  I'll try to find out why.  Either way, the motion passed, and the bill will go to the floor.

[Gaspar]

7 Amendments have been tacked to it, but we won't know what they are until they are introduced for consideration.

1. S.AMDT.1470 to S.2038 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (introduced 1/30/2012)      Cosponsors (6)
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2012 Senate amendment submitted

2. S.AMDT.1471 to S.2038 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen McCain, John [AZ] (introduced 1/30/2012)      Cosponsors (7)
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2012 Senate amendment submitted

3. S.AMDT.1472 to S.2038 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Toomey, Pat [PA] (introduced 1/30/2012)      Cosponsors (
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2012 Senate amendment submitted

4. S.AMDT.1473 to S.2038 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/30/2012)      Cosponsors (5)
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2012 Senate amendment submitted

5. S.AMDT.1474 to S.2038 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/30/2012)      Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2012 Senate amendment submitted

6. S.AMDT.1475 to S.2038 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/30/2012)      Cosponsors (2)
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2012 Senate amendment submitted

7. S.AMDT.1476 to S.2038 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
Sponsor: Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] (introduced 1/30/2012)      Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2012 Senate amendment submitted

[Gaspar]

It looks like one of Coburn's amendments was to give the bill influence over the trading of spouses and children of congress members.  That's smart.  Cuts off Pelosi at the knees.

[Breadburner]

It looks like one of Coburn's amendments was to give the bill influence over the trading of spouses and children of congress members.  That's smart.  Cuts off Pelosi at the knees.

She better hold her boobs up....!

[Gaspar]

Here was Coburn's initial objection.  He did't think a law was necessary.

"There's nothing in current law preventing the Securities and Exchange Commission from enforcing other insider-trading laws against members of Congress."  They just choose not to.

UH. . .therefore a law to require the SEC to enforce the law.  While I'm not a fan of new laws, I disagree with Coburn. 

This law is necessary if we want public servants instead of opportunists.

[Conan71]

Here was Coburn's initial objection.  He did't think a law was necessary.

"There's nothing in current law preventing the Securities and Exchange Commission from enforcing other insider-trading laws against members of Congress."  They just choose not to.

UH. . .therefore a law to require the SEC to enforce the law.  While I'm not a fan of new laws, I disagree with Coburn. 

This law is necessary if we want public servants instead of opportunists.

There went my get rich quick scheme.

[Gaspar]

That didn't take long.  The Obama Campaign is already trying to spin this on the sheeple.  They just sent out this campaign letter.  I had to add the red text.  Way to attempt to polarize a bi-partisan issue Mr. President.


Right now, members of Congress can make personal investment decisions based on confidential information they get in the course of regulating industries and doing their work.

It's kind of unbelievable that this isn't already illegal. President Obama wants to make it illegal once and for all — no one should profit from inside information about the very businesses they're supposed to be regulating.

Today, the Democratic leadership in the Senate voted to move forward on a bill introduced by the Republicans to extend to Congress the same strict rules that apply to anyone else whose job gives them access to sensitive information about businesses. This legislation is expected to pass the Senate with bipartisan support later this week.

But Republicans in the House have yet to move on it. . . .because it is still in the senate.

There aren't a lot of good reasons to disagree with this bill. So the question here isn't how many people we have to persuade, but simply how loudly we can speak up to prevent the House Republicans from dodging this issue.  You have to pitch before someone can dodge.

Say you support the President on banning insider trading in Congress:
http://my.barackobama.com/Ban-Insider-Trading-in-Congress

Thanks, and stay tuned,

James
James Kvaal
National Policy Director
Obama for America

[Gaspar]

Good Lord!  For once can't we just have some productive activity in Washington. 

Yesterday Sen. Reid issued a statement concerning his cloture filing on the bill saying that "he had to do it or Republicans were going to filibuster the bill." 

Republicans were in support of the bill, it was their GD bill, and they've tried to get Reid to move on it since the last session. 

What an asshat!

Why don't you just re-introduce the last 26 energy and jobs bills you voted into committee and take credit for those too!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Here is an interesting history...

http://insidertrading.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002391

Also interesting how this act was introduced in Jan 26, 2009.  By a couple of Democrats.  And re-introduced last May by another Democrat.


Gaspar, you really ought to come visit reality just once in a while....

[Conan71]

Here is an interesting history...

http://insidertrading.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002391

Also interesting how this act was introduced in Jan 26, 2009.  By a couple of Democrats.  And re-introduced last May by another Democrat.


Gaspar, you really ought to come visit reality just once in a while....

And it still went nowhere with a Democrat majority in the House and Senate in '09, now did it?

[Townsend]

And it still went nowhere with a Democrat majority in the House and Senate in '09, now did it?

"Members of Congress and their aides would be banned from making securities trades using information they gained through their jobs under legislation its sponsors say has taken on new urgency as the government spends billions bailing out companies.

The bill [STOCK Act] proposed by Democratic Reps. Louise Slaughter of New York and Brian Baird of Washington would require lawmakers and their staff to disclose within 90 days the purchase or sale of stocks, bonds or commodity futures exceeding $1,000, except for transactions in blind trusts or mutual funds. Members of Congress currently must report their financial holdings and securities transactions in ranges of amounts once a year.

Slaughter and Baird testified on the proposal at a hearing  (3.75 MB) Monday [July 13, 2009] of the House Financial Services subcommittee on oversight...

Prospects for the legislation, which the two lawmakers first proposed in 2006, are unclear."

[Editor's Note: The STOCK Act died in committee.]

Crazy how they "die in committee" isn't it?

[heironymouspasparagus]

And it still went nowhere with a Democrat majority in the House and Senate in '09, now did it?

Yes.  And now, in 2011 and 2012, it is back.  Again, by Democrats.

Also, the lapse of the Bush tax cuts went no where with Democrat majorities due to obstructionism from guess who...  And even Coburn is against it now, so everyone has an ox to be gored in this rodeo.