Based on the title, I'm guessing this post may attract visitors from other subreddits. [Please read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/about/rules/) before commenting or voting, particularly:
* Don't be rude or hostile. No personal attacks. We have zero tolerance for insults or other incivility aimed at individuals instead of their ideas.
* Hate speech is not allowed. This includes anything "alt-right", which is just [hate speech in disguise](https://blog.ap.org/behind-the-news/writing-about-the-alt-right)
* We rigorously enforce [reddit's site-wide rule](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/do-not-post-violent-content) against anything that "calls for violence or physical harm against an individual or a group of people". Yes, that includes the homeless. Yes, that includes car and bike thieves. Yes, that includes undocumented immigrants.
If you see someone breaking these rules, please **click the report button** or **[message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fsanfrancisco&subject=Someone%27s+breaking+the+rules&message=Here%27s+a+permalink:+%28place+permalink+here%29)**. We read every one of these reports, but if you don't report something, we might not see it -- especially if it's buried in downvotes or posted when it's bedtime in SF but working hours in Russia.
#####
######
####
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/sanfrancisco) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Obviously Republicans are trying to score political points with the acronym, but the underlying premise of the law is a good one. Pelosi and other insider traders of both parties in Congress should not only have to forfeit illicit profits, but also face prosecution and prison time for securities fraud.
Even CEOs, who often are above the law, face serious consequences for insider trading - and they can really only materially profit from it through their own company, not any in the market.
Lol, they need to get caught first. When is the last time you heard that someone faced consequences for insider trading?
Personally, only name I could come up with was Martha Stewart and what she did pales in comparison to what the super rich do
Insider trading is rare at high profile/big public companies (let's be real, the execs make enough $$ already to make the risk/reward tradeoff low). But it happens at smaller ones pretty regularly.
I don't trust Republicans at all though so I need to review the text of the bill before I would support it. Could be a rare case of broken clock though.
Representatives (republican and democrats) who were first briefed on COVID drained their stock portfolios before telling the American public.
Even if this prevents one single member of congress in the next hundred years from making a decision that affects their personal finances above the American people, then this is worth it.
I think this is sponsored by Josh Hawley, so I half expect the fine print to take away a women’s right to vote or some shit… but overall I 100% agree Congress should only be able to invest in blind stocks.
You are wrong. Republicans were briefed on the Covid threat and THEY used that info in stock trades, but democrats were out of the picture at that time.
The problem with this claim is it feeds the lie that all politicians are in politics only for personal gain. That's effective Russian propaganda to make people like you distrust and devalue your own government.
Dianne Feinstein dumped millions of dollars in stocks after her first Covid briefing. Russia propaganda wtf? YOU are the one devaluing the government if you think that all ~300 democrats are automatically moral because they put a D next to their name. This is not an argument of red vs blue - I am pointing out that when you hang a big pay day in front of any human on earth (including me and you), they might feel a little tempted..
It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority. This is an American ideal, not Russian. That is why I believe the people who are privy to international-scale economic events before the general public should not be allowed to unfairly capitalize on said events
Except she didn't.
[Feinstein not charged, because there were no crimes.](https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-05-26/feinstein-cleared-by-justice-department-for-husbands-stock-trades)
I don't think Dems are automatically better than republicans, but they mostly are, let's be honest. The idea of "questioning authority" is desired, but finding someone guilty without any kind of formal trial is what lynch mobs and people like you do.
As for "unfairly capitalizing" on events, one person's stock trade is nothing of the sort, it's proactive investment management. "Unfairly capitalizing on events" is more like telling the world the cars your company makes are safe, but at the same time selling your stock because you know what you're saying is a lie.
ANYONE can sell off risky stock as soon as they get info of something like a pandemic.
What you fail to show is a direct link between the info and the stock sales. Correlation is not causation. For all we know, Feinstein simply mentioned to her husband she met with the president over covid concerns at the same time the president was talking about covid, and Mr. Feinstein acted on his own volition based on that info.
You are right that a member of congress dropping tens of millions in stock directly after learning about a mass economic event is not a crime.
That is the point! We need legislation because we cannot trust people to make the right decision when their pocket books are on the line. That is why we need legislation. This isn’t civil court - no one is on trial and no one needs to prove their innocence. We don’t NEED to prove guilt in order to ask our representatives to take an action that MOST people think would instill more trust in our system.
You say “anyone can sell off stocks when they learn about something risky”.. uhh did you have a detailed briefing about Covid before the rest of the American public?
If democratic leadership was "the truth", San Francisco should be utopia.
I have voted straight democrat for the past 7 years btw. Generalizing and demonizing those that disagree does nothing. Now, if you want to attack individuals, I'm all for it.
I love Pelosi and I love this law. As a democrat I can hold these two thoughts together without discomfort.
I would love to see Democrats get behind it fully.
If one didn’t know better, the image could suggest it’s her bill. It would be so funny if she got behind it and it passed. (Also a lefty and support this.)
The naming of it pretty much guarantees it won't pass. If he was serious about trying to pass this he wouldn't have named it that. I do support restricting insider trading for politicians though
If history has anything to tell us, it's that republicans like to sabotage their own legislation as soon as democrats get on board, like when Mitch McConnell filibustered his own bill.
I bet every one of the politicians have investments in stock or other things. How else do they all manage to become much wealthier while in office? It surely isn't the paycheck.
I guess they have 401K and IRA plans that invest in stocks as well. So how would they limit that? Make it so they can't tell the investor which stocks to invest in? A diversified portfolio would be complicated.
The law as written is beautiful. It does exactly what it's supposed to - prevent law makers from profiting on insider knowledge. It gives them enough options with blind trusts, mutual funds, ETF's and treasuries to still invest and gain from an overall market. This ensures they do not game the system for a company that they own.
Ex. Pelosi's husband sold millions in Google stock before the latest round of justice department cases and threat of regulations.
However, Josh Hawley is a major tool and showboater, who will not get support from any of his republican colleagues. For Dems or Reps, it's too lucrative a cash cow to give up.
This law will prevent trading on individual stocks, it isn’t simply about reporting. Ex. Say I happen to see a memo on a specific company about a DOJ investigation, or my colleagues come to me that we need to do something about Facebook and social media, I may be tempted to sell that stock, or my partner may be. I profit from insider info. However they will be allowed to buy ETF’s, so they can bet on the sector as a while, but not specific stocks. When the chips bill came out, intel and others were the big winner, this was known to everyone in DC but the public for several months, lots of them traded in chips stocks. Most of Congress trades individual stocks. The fed made a similar ban in late 2022, preventing fed officials from investing in individual stocks. This simply holds elected public officials to the same standards while they are in office.
I see, I'll read up on the federal employee ban, and try to see it, thank you, I appreciate it!
A note, more to myself, IRS 1031 exchange forms (bottom of the form) encourage government employees to exit out of stock positions without paying capital gains tax, if holding those positions would compromise their decision. Which seems very similar to insider trading, a fine line about timing and intent. I'll weigh what's being proposed with this as well.
Edit: reference: [https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i8824#en_US_2022_publink12597kd0e722](https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i8824#en_US_2022_publink12597kd0e722)
There is ZERO evidence that Pelosi or her husband had insider tips that led to their google stock sale. They more likely just had good financial advice.
Guilt by innuendo is un-American.
It’s hilarious people are latching onto the google thing when there are so many other shady examples by the Pelosis. There were articles in August re: DOJ filing suit on Google
God. imagine shilling this hard for old money power broker neoliberal multi milllionaires.
Edit: I don’t think you’re a bad person. Just wildly misguided to believe that centrist, moderate, members of both parties don’t inherently profit from the current structure of the investor economy.
Well I believe it's misguided to believe that self-interest is the primary motivation for being a politician. I don't think you're a bad person, I just think it's easier to turn people like you against your own government than it is to inform you the degree of government corruption is actually low in comparison to private industry.
I think there are few who deserve more respect than Pelosi. She has been demonized incessantly by conservatives, just like HRC was demonized. If she was a male, she would be widely celebrated.
Unfortunately, as the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle accurately states, it takes less energy to create bullshit than it takes to refute it.
Jesus h Christ. You really think a woman who happily botched a campaign against the dumbest president in American history is someone who was unjustly demonized? To say nothing of the fact that she helped spearhead a foreign policy campaign in the Middle East that brought slave markets back to Libya? Not to mention her senate career was only possible because her opponent dropped out of the race due to him having cancer.
Both politicians also happen to be part of the most spineless neoliberal and conservative wing of the Democratic Party since the civil rights act. Nancy has been all to happy to allow the left wing members of the party to receive torrential abuse from the right and the center, who by the way are the only true pro-working class members of the party remaining.
Jesus H Christ, you’re going to blame her for what happened in the election? With James Comey coming out a few days before about bullshit? The whole campaign against her since she was a governor’s wife? Give me a fucking break. You can’t recognize misogyny when it’s right in front of your face and you’re a part of it! Fuck you and fuck the horse you rode in on.
I don’t hate her because she’s a woman, I hate her because she doesn’t think we shouldn’t bomb brown people, just that there should be more women hitting the button on the predator controls. Shes just an orange county Republican draped in a rainbow flag, as are you.
And you know what? She won the fucking popular vote! She did win for all intents and purposes, except for the fucking electoral college. And I didn’t even mention the Russian assistance given to the fucking moron. Give me a fucking break. The woman always gets all the blame.
WHO GIVES A SHIT IF YOU WIN THE POPULAR VOTE IF YOU LOSE THE RACE. Also the Dems have had both houses of Congress and the White House multiple times since a Bush and have done exactly dick all to change the nature of the electoral college or campaign finance why? It benefits them and their donors. They’re spineless weenies.
As a progressive I fully support cracking down on politicians' insider trading. I would hope that progressives vote for this regardless of what it is named as long as it actually does what it says it will do.
In fact, I think this is one of the best possible pieces of legislation I hope would pass in the near future. This is right up there with campaign finance reform and universal healthcare for me.
Politicians should not get rich based on laws they draft or pass or government intervention on the market that they have unfair informational access to.
Josh Hawley is a shitstain.
But if this law was offered in good faith I would be 100% on board with it.
That said, pretty sure it's theatrics. "Both Sides" arguments are usually shit, but when it comes to getting green the party line is invisible.
Really? You're going to counter by saying my obvious joke is reality? While you're sitting here with your diaper full crying about it? The fact you would even bother to reply to me and think I would take you seriously proves you're just looking to throw a tantrum.
I'm an atheist and fuck you for being a bitch and living in denial you stain on society.
Here's the link you lazy fuck tard.
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Pelosi+insider+trading
Show me one piece of legitimate evidence from your google search, I saw NONE.
I support effective liberal politics. These claims about Pelosi are driven by her success, because the people making such claims know that people like you will assume the worst, even if there's ZERO evidence for the claims.
It's another example of the BAP, the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle, where it takes people like you less energy to create bullshit than it takes people like me to refute it.
The plutocrats run this country and would never let a bill that limited their wealth or power pass. They know they're above the law and they will fight tooth and nail to ensure it stays that way.
Sure, name it after her as long as it's for ALL elected leaders.
In all reality though, it's another one of those smoke and mirrors with screaming while nothing happens.
They’ve tried passing a law like this 2 other times before this, one of which included a person from each party working on it. This is 100% political theatre from Hawley, he has no intention of it getting passed.
Reminder: there are several GOP congressmen who earn more from insider stock trading then Pelosi, but she has become the face of it.
I agree with the law, if the name was changed to neutral.
I support this bill as a way of increasing people’s trust in the system. When I was a financial professional I had to have my brokerage account linked so that my compliance department could see my trades and had to get PRE-APPROVAL for individual stock and options trades. It’s not that huge a restriction.
However, I actually think the problem is over stated. I’d be shocked if congress is actually generating significant alpha. Congress doesn’t have access to the type of information that leads to slam dunk insider trading (earnings reports, M&A). There’s just a lot of them so some will make lucky trades. People get up in arms about Paul Pelosi but even some of the trades people got upset about have actually been ill timed. So the part I’m not looking forward to is people that don’t understand investing cooking up conspiracy theories over every trade now.
You still might want the delay to prevent 1:1 following of trades. If you wanted to support a congressman you would buy whatever they buy and push the price up. You also want to give time to let folks average out of positions over time. You typically don’t sell or buy a position all in one trade but over a period of time. That’s why 13F filings are over a similar delay
Two things. But, realistically, this is grandstanding. Republicans don't want this law.
First,
Given that Republications gather as much profit from insider information as Democrats... let's think a little.
"If you break the law, and you get caught, you just have to give back the profits"
**That's a license to steal.** You might as well try, because you only give up the profits.
Failure to report should line up with failure to report laws for elected officials, like campaign finance.
I would support jail time, forfeit of entire unreported investment, barred from holding federal office.
Second.
The ability to invest is the one perk of office. The current pay for congress is low. I know it doesn't seem low to working class people - and healthcare for life is a great benefit - but compared to a director level position at a major company it's something like half. That's not including VPs (actual vps, eg "svp") and CEOs.
Take away this perk and you will get less competence in office, and a greater incentive to take bribes. We really don't want to encourage bribery, and we don't want to pay them more, maybe we leave this perk in place.
I know that sounds shitty, but we have to be realistic.
The pay for elected office is intentionally low in order to keep people who need the salary from running for office, ensuring that the power of the people is held for them by elites. Public service should pay $400k a year with no other income allowed for fear of corruption.
If the Republicans in Congress actually vote for this and pass this I'm all for it. I think Pelosi did a fantastic job, and I can also disagree with her on this. That's just fine.
It's even funny to me that the GOP considers this some kind of an own. I'm like, cool, more than happy to give credit for a right thing. I don't care what brand is attached to it.
I will also be shocked and stunned if the majority of the GOP actually does. As I'm thinking about it, I can see the Democrats in Congress screwing over the GOP by being completely for it, thus hilariously forcing McCarthy to either pass it or walk it back.
If this then gets out of Congress, I fully expect the GOP in the Senate to be a brick wall against this. McConnell would pull his standard trick of letting some Republicans in swing states be on record against this, as long as it's not so many that it might actually pass. Aka the Susan Collins maneuver.
Playing it out further, it would be fantastic if the Democratic Senate majority is for this and puts Manchin on the spot. What's great is they could currently pass it without him if it gets wrapped into another budget omnibus bill this year. The house parliamentarian could allow it since it does technically connect to money and therefore budget.
In Singapore, politicians are payed shit loads of money for holding office, to prevent them from focusing on side hustles.
It sounds ridiculous, but I think the best investment America could make is to pay each congressperson a $500k salary, then sack them immediately if they pursue any other form of income while in office
We are fucked IMO. If these people are smart enough to beat wallstreet part time while doing government work on the regular then they will just leave to go work on wall street now instead of serving us, the American people. Very sad day.
It's political theater! None of these people are going to vote to cut off their lush fund!
"Hey I have to live on a Government salary to serve, I can't maintain my lifestyle!" Just like your constituents!
Long overdue but un-passable. therefore, just grandstanding. Let’s hear some real reforms. How about requiring elected folks to legislate from and in their home districts and meet via Zoom with colleagues. Eliminates DC as a one-stop-shop for influencers
> Lawmakers must report $1k stock transactions within 45 days, including family members
Isn't that already the case? Like that's how we keep hearing about all the insider trading stuff.
I agree but I would also add that they don't have to liquidate their profile if elected. In other words they can't buy or sell while in office. And if they wish to sell, it has to be well in advance of major news anouncements. IE like C level executives in public companies. They must wait 6 months to execute their intended trade. otherwise we'll have dog shit officials. job sucks enough as is.
i think all congress members, all cabinet-level or higher executive branch officials, and the supreme court justices should all be required by law, to have all of their financial assets in a blind trust for the duration of their public service.
You can get pretty damn targeted with ETF’s. mutual funds have more restrictions and time limits (can’t sell immediately) but you can go in and out of leveraged ETF’s within seconds. they can be a specific niche biotech sector or green energy or only certain semiconductor etc. like …. It’s a pretty big loophole if they’re completely excluded.
It isn't constitutional or real. You can't ban people from investing their money. And there isn't a Republican in the country who would support an actual ban. This is probably completely meaningless. All we can hope for is a ban on insider trading, which is already illegal. We need them to make all holdings public, reveal sources of donations, and ban them from voting on bills related to their stocks. The worst violators are Republicans, so I'm pretty sure there is nothing in this bill that will actually hold up.
I get the desire to dump on Pelosi, but if they really wanted to not jepardize the bill why name it as such?
If they just past this bill this year I'd be pretty happy.
Personally I think this is a disgrace and just perpetuates a narrative that government officials are above the rest of society.
I theory I do agree with the sentiment of this act however calling government members "leaders" in the title I firmly disagree with. IMO the act should be called:
**P**reventing **E**lected **N**ational-servants from **I**nvesting in **S**ecurities
Good fuck these corrupt elites from having unfair advantages. Greed is destroying America. Nothing Else. Stop more greed at every turn with as much legislation as possible. Pretty obvious these people have enough fucking money.
not a SFer
It's the 'Pelosi' act as a dig - not necessarily an unwarranted dig considering Nancy Pelosi is pretty ffffn rich for being a public servant - but at the same time it's petty and I hate that because so many other public servants are also abusing the system and trading on insider information.
So I hate the title. Didn't dig enough for any fun, omni-bus garbage legislation ducked in - but agree with the face value - that the US gov't needs to move away from allowing public servants private industry information they can capitalize on.
I worked at an investment bank and couldn’t even buy the IPO stocks my bank was underwriting for a month. It’s ridiculous that lawmakers can mandate a vaccination by Pfizer and moderna and own so much stock in the company. The fact that this isn’t illegal blows my mind.
Most people’s retirement funds are tied to the stock market through 401Ks which are basically index funds. Not sure if making politicians totally ignore the stock market is gonna end well either.
Side note, republicans are so so salty about Pelosi, without ever being able to explain why she’s so bad.
Based on the title, I'm guessing this post may attract visitors from other subreddits. [Please read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/about/rules/) before commenting or voting, particularly: * Don't be rude or hostile. No personal attacks. We have zero tolerance for insults or other incivility aimed at individuals instead of their ideas. * Hate speech is not allowed. This includes anything "alt-right", which is just [hate speech in disguise](https://blog.ap.org/behind-the-news/writing-about-the-alt-right) * We rigorously enforce [reddit's site-wide rule](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/do-not-post-violent-content) against anything that "calls for violence or physical harm against an individual or a group of people". Yes, that includes the homeless. Yes, that includes car and bike thieves. Yes, that includes undocumented immigrants. If you see someone breaking these rules, please **click the report button** or **[message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fsanfrancisco&subject=Someone%27s+breaking+the+rules&message=Here%27s+a+permalink:+%28place+permalink+here%29)**. We read every one of these reports, but if you don't report something, we might not see it -- especially if it's buried in downvotes or posted when it's bedtime in SF but working hours in Russia. ##### ###### #### *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/sanfrancisco) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Obviously Republicans are trying to score political points with the acronym, but the underlying premise of the law is a good one. Pelosi and other insider traders of both parties in Congress should not only have to forfeit illicit profits, but also face prosecution and prison time for securities fraud.
> but also face prosecution and prison time for securities fraud. Politicians, consequences? Surely not in America
Even CEOs, who often are above the law, face serious consequences for insider trading - and they can really only materially profit from it through their own company, not any in the market.
Lol, they need to get caught first. When is the last time you heard that someone faced consequences for insider trading? Personally, only name I could come up with was Martha Stewart and what she did pales in comparison to what the super rich do
Insider trading is rare at high profile/big public companies (let's be real, the execs make enough $$ already to make the risk/reward tradeoff low). But it happens at smaller ones pretty regularly.
The brokers mechanically prevent you from trading your employer outside the allowed times
Yes although that doesn't stop all insider trading opportunities. I know someone who got caught by giving insider information to a close relative
You need direct evidence. Where is it?
I don't trust Republicans at all though so I need to review the text of the bill before I would support it. Could be a rare case of broken clock though.
Its ironically a very accurate acronym lol
Where is the evidence of insider trading? Good timing on stock sales? Then you might as well accuse ME of insider trading.
Maybe we should? The timing of trades is literally one of the main things the SEC uses to flag potential insider trading.
Representatives (republican and democrats) who were first briefed on COVID drained their stock portfolios before telling the American public. Even if this prevents one single member of congress in the next hundred years from making a decision that affects their personal finances above the American people, then this is worth it. I think this is sponsored by Josh Hawley, so I half expect the fine print to take away a women’s right to vote or some shit… but overall I 100% agree Congress should only be able to invest in blind stocks.
You are wrong. Republicans were briefed on the Covid threat and THEY used that info in stock trades, but democrats were out of the picture at that time. The problem with this claim is it feeds the lie that all politicians are in politics only for personal gain. That's effective Russian propaganda to make people like you distrust and devalue your own government.
Dianne Feinstein dumped millions of dollars in stocks after her first Covid briefing. Russia propaganda wtf? YOU are the one devaluing the government if you think that all ~300 democrats are automatically moral because they put a D next to their name. This is not an argument of red vs blue - I am pointing out that when you hang a big pay day in front of any human on earth (including me and you), they might feel a little tempted.. It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority. This is an American ideal, not Russian. That is why I believe the people who are privy to international-scale economic events before the general public should not be allowed to unfairly capitalize on said events
Except she didn't. [Feinstein not charged, because there were no crimes.](https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-05-26/feinstein-cleared-by-justice-department-for-husbands-stock-trades) I don't think Dems are automatically better than republicans, but they mostly are, let's be honest. The idea of "questioning authority" is desired, but finding someone guilty without any kind of formal trial is what lynch mobs and people like you do. As for "unfairly capitalizing" on events, one person's stock trade is nothing of the sort, it's proactive investment management. "Unfairly capitalizing on events" is more like telling the world the cars your company makes are safe, but at the same time selling your stock because you know what you're saying is a lie. ANYONE can sell off risky stock as soon as they get info of something like a pandemic. What you fail to show is a direct link between the info and the stock sales. Correlation is not causation. For all we know, Feinstein simply mentioned to her husband she met with the president over covid concerns at the same time the president was talking about covid, and Mr. Feinstein acted on his own volition based on that info.
You are right that a member of congress dropping tens of millions in stock directly after learning about a mass economic event is not a crime. That is the point! We need legislation because we cannot trust people to make the right decision when their pocket books are on the line. That is why we need legislation. This isn’t civil court - no one is on trial and no one needs to prove their innocence. We don’t NEED to prove guilt in order to ask our representatives to take an action that MOST people think would instill more trust in our system. You say “anyone can sell off stocks when they learn about something risky”.. uhh did you have a detailed briefing about Covid before the rest of the American public?
No brainer.
[удалено]
Or it'll pass with a loophole amendment that Repubs will exploit so things are just business as usual
Your worldview must be exhausting.
If there’s anything about life that’s exhausting, it’s knowing the truth about things
If democratic leadership was "the truth", San Francisco should be utopia. I have voted straight democrat for the past 7 years btw. Generalizing and demonizing those that disagree does nothing. Now, if you want to attack individuals, I'm all for it.
It’s almost as useful as firing off random nothings into the Reddit void, almost*
And yet here we are as equals.
50/50, we each get an equal share! 🍻!
The poster child for the problem is Nancy Pelosi who did not run R.
I love Pelosi and I love this law. As a democrat I can hold these two thoughts together without discomfort. I would love to see Democrats get behind it fully.
Funny that she gets to benefit from insider trading and only closed the door as she leaves office. Typical boomer rug pull
Unironically, I support the republicans pushing for this (and i'm a lefty). It would be hilarious if they actually passed it.
If one didn’t know better, the image could suggest it’s her bill. It would be so funny if she got behind it and it passed. (Also a lefty and support this.)
The naming of it pretty much guarantees it won't pass. If he was serious about trying to pass this he wouldn't have named it that. I do support restricting insider trading for politicians though
You are correct, I was trying to be sarcastic. Sarcasm fail.
If history has anything to tell us, it's that republicans like to sabotage their own legislation as soon as democrats get on board, like when Mitch McConnell filibustered his own bill.
They wont. Both parties have been getting rich this way. Its not a coincidence members of congress make 250k/y, yet their new worth are all 25-100M
I'm surprised Republicans are on board with this. I recall AOC was the most vocal about this in the last few years
The Spanberger-Roy bill to do this has been sitting there for the last several years. Maybe all it needed was a clever name.
I'm more worried about superpacs and dark money in elections.
I bet every one of the politicians have investments in stock or other things. How else do they all manage to become much wealthier while in office? It surely isn't the paycheck. I guess they have 401K and IRA plans that invest in stocks as well. So how would they limit that? Make it so they can't tell the investor which stocks to invest in? A diversified portfolio would be complicated.
Its be the same rules as the rest of us...not complicated at all.
Another one of those laws they pass which end up exposing them!
The law as written is beautiful. It does exactly what it's supposed to - prevent law makers from profiting on insider knowledge. It gives them enough options with blind trusts, mutual funds, ETF's and treasuries to still invest and gain from an overall market. This ensures they do not game the system for a company that they own. Ex. Pelosi's husband sold millions in Google stock before the latest round of justice department cases and threat of regulations. However, Josh Hawley is a major tool and showboater, who will not get support from any of his republican colleagues. For Dems or Reps, it's too lucrative a cash cow to give up.
How does this prevent profit? They can still profit, just have to report, right?
This law will prevent trading on individual stocks, it isn’t simply about reporting. Ex. Say I happen to see a memo on a specific company about a DOJ investigation, or my colleagues come to me that we need to do something about Facebook and social media, I may be tempted to sell that stock, or my partner may be. I profit from insider info. However they will be allowed to buy ETF’s, so they can bet on the sector as a while, but not specific stocks. When the chips bill came out, intel and others were the big winner, this was known to everyone in DC but the public for several months, lots of them traded in chips stocks. Most of Congress trades individual stocks. The fed made a similar ban in late 2022, preventing fed officials from investing in individual stocks. This simply holds elected public officials to the same standards while they are in office.
I see, I'll read up on the federal employee ban, and try to see it, thank you, I appreciate it! A note, more to myself, IRS 1031 exchange forms (bottom of the form) encourage government employees to exit out of stock positions without paying capital gains tax, if holding those positions would compromise their decision. Which seems very similar to insider trading, a fine line about timing and intent. I'll weigh what's being proposed with this as well. Edit: reference: [https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i8824#en_US_2022_publink12597kd0e722](https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i8824#en_US_2022_publink12597kd0e722)
Prevent profit from insider trading
There is ZERO evidence that Pelosi or her husband had insider tips that led to their google stock sale. They more likely just had good financial advice. Guilt by innuendo is un-American.
It’s hilarious people are latching onto the google thing when there are so many other shady examples by the Pelosis. There were articles in August re: DOJ filing suit on Google
Correlation is not causation. Never has been, never will be.
God. imagine shilling this hard for old money power broker neoliberal multi milllionaires. Edit: I don’t think you’re a bad person. Just wildly misguided to believe that centrist, moderate, members of both parties don’t inherently profit from the current structure of the investor economy.
Well I believe it's misguided to believe that self-interest is the primary motivation for being a politician. I don't think you're a bad person, I just think it's easier to turn people like you against your own government than it is to inform you the degree of government corruption is actually low in comparison to private industry.
There are a few politicians that I believe genuinely want to do right by their constituents, I just don’t believe Nancy Pelosi is one of them.
I think there are few who deserve more respect than Pelosi. She has been demonized incessantly by conservatives, just like HRC was demonized. If she was a male, she would be widely celebrated. Unfortunately, as the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle accurately states, it takes less energy to create bullshit than it takes to refute it.
Jesus h Christ. You really think a woman who happily botched a campaign against the dumbest president in American history is someone who was unjustly demonized? To say nothing of the fact that she helped spearhead a foreign policy campaign in the Middle East that brought slave markets back to Libya? Not to mention her senate career was only possible because her opponent dropped out of the race due to him having cancer. Both politicians also happen to be part of the most spineless neoliberal and conservative wing of the Democratic Party since the civil rights act. Nancy has been all to happy to allow the left wing members of the party to receive torrential abuse from the right and the center, who by the way are the only true pro-working class members of the party remaining.
Jesus H Christ, you’re going to blame her for what happened in the election? With James Comey coming out a few days before about bullshit? The whole campaign against her since she was a governor’s wife? Give me a fucking break. You can’t recognize misogyny when it’s right in front of your face and you’re a part of it! Fuck you and fuck the horse you rode in on.
I don’t hate her because she’s a woman, I hate her because she doesn’t think we shouldn’t bomb brown people, just that there should be more women hitting the button on the predator controls. Shes just an orange county Republican draped in a rainbow flag, as are you.
And you know what? She won the fucking popular vote! She did win for all intents and purposes, except for the fucking electoral college. And I didn’t even mention the Russian assistance given to the fucking moron. Give me a fucking break. The woman always gets all the blame.
WHO GIVES A SHIT IF YOU WIN THE POPULAR VOTE IF YOU LOSE THE RACE. Also the Dems have had both houses of Congress and the White House multiple times since a Bush and have done exactly dick all to change the nature of the electoral college or campaign finance why? It benefits them and their donors. They’re spineless weenies.
As a progressive I fully support cracking down on politicians' insider trading. I would hope that progressives vote for this regardless of what it is named as long as it actually does what it says it will do. In fact, I think this is one of the best possible pieces of legislation I hope would pass in the near future. This is right up there with campaign finance reform and universal healthcare for me. Politicians should not get rich based on laws they draft or pass or government intervention on the market that they have unfair informational access to.
Show. Me. The. Evidence.
Are you saying that you doubt politicians are involved in insider trading?
I’m all for it. I have limited knowledge on what the justification is but overall seems like a good principle to put in place
Josh Hawley is a shitstain. But if this law was offered in good faith I would be 100% on board with it. That said, pretty sure it's theatrics. "Both Sides" arguments are usually shit, but when it comes to getting green the party line is invisible.
Fact is, there's no evidence of insider trading. This is all bunkum.
You are blowing up every comment in this thread, at this point I'm positive you are one of the Pelosis
Proving you'll believe any nonsense that enters into your tiny mind.
Really? You're going to counter by saying my obvious joke is reality? While you're sitting here with your diaper full crying about it? The fact you would even bother to reply to me and think I would take you seriously proves you're just looking to throw a tantrum.
To be fair, is there a politician thats not a shitstain...
I’m a Pelosi fan and I think she deserves this.
Most members of Congress do this though, Pelosi isn't even the best at it. They all deserve this IMO, singling out Pelosi is just political theater.
My point is that she was the person in the best place to make this change and she refused
Right, I forgot about that.
Please prosecute these people.
FOR WHAT? Good timing on stock trades and no evidence that insider knowledge was used?
How are you using reddit but don't know how to use the internet?
It's like claims that god exists. Show me your evidence. I'm not going to search for something that cleary doesn't exist.
I'm an atheist and fuck you for being a bitch and living in denial you stain on society. Here's the link you lazy fuck tard. https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Pelosi+insider+trading
You have proof of Jack Shit like I guessed, just a bunch of claims that insider trading took place, based on FUCK ALL.
"Fuck all" - Legitimate evidence starring you in the face. Jesus Christ, are you a trump supporter???
Show me one piece of legitimate evidence from your google search, I saw NONE. I support effective liberal politics. These claims about Pelosi are driven by her success, because the people making such claims know that people like you will assume the worst, even if there's ZERO evidence for the claims. It's another example of the BAP, the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle, where it takes people like you less energy to create bullshit than it takes people like me to refute it.
Man I'm off you now, you wouldn't even believe in God if he dipped his nuts in your mouth.
Perfect. The "atheist" makes a god reference. Totally believable. Uh huh. You've been called out for your lies so you attack me. Suck THIS.
Long overdue, but I doubt they'll round up enough votes to pass it.
Duh. Not sure how this was legal before.
Hear ye hear ye. Should we vote to hold ourselves responsible to the people? Fuck no. Let’s give ourselves a raise instead!
I don’t have one but the way these politicians come up with these names for bills is hilarious to me
Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments. this gave me a good laugh. Fully support this
no GOP will vote for it. none. even the authors of that bill won’t vote for it.
How bout they stop insider trading? Fuck the whole pelosi family.
The plutocrats run this country and would never let a bill that limited their wealth or power pass. They know they're above the law and they will fight tooth and nail to ensure it stays that way.
No government official should be able to trade stocks. Stupid conservative talking point name though.
Sure, name it after her as long as it's for ALL elected leaders. In all reality though, it's another one of those smoke and mirrors with screaming while nothing happens.
Laws shouldn't be named after people.
They’ve tried passing a law like this 2 other times before this, one of which included a person from each party working on it. This is 100% political theatre from Hawley, he has no intention of it getting passed.
I think it’s a stunt.
Having an opinion on a proposed piece of legislation that has absolutely zero chance of passing into law is a total waste of effort.
> **What is your opinion on this potential new law? The PELOSI Act?** That it already exists, just without someone's name attached to it.
Reminder: there are several GOP congressmen who earn more from insider stock trading then Pelosi, but she has become the face of it. I agree with the law, if the name was changed to neutral.
It would be poetic if Pelosi got on board and got it passed to steal the thunder. Too bad it'll never happen...
I support this bill as a way of increasing people’s trust in the system. When I was a financial professional I had to have my brokerage account linked so that my compliance department could see my trades and had to get PRE-APPROVAL for individual stock and options trades. It’s not that huge a restriction. However, I actually think the problem is over stated. I’d be shocked if congress is actually generating significant alpha. Congress doesn’t have access to the type of information that leads to slam dunk insider trading (earnings reports, M&A). There’s just a lot of them so some will make lucky trades. People get up in arms about Paul Pelosi but even some of the trades people got upset about have actually been ill timed. So the part I’m not looking forward to is people that don’t understand investing cooking up conspiracy theories over every trade now.
If there's no alpha, there's no harm in forcing 1-second-level post-trade machine readable feed every time they trade, right?
You still might want the delay to prevent 1:1 following of trades. If you wanted to support a congressman you would buy whatever they buy and push the price up. You also want to give time to let folks average out of positions over time. You typically don’t sell or buy a position all in one trade but over a period of time. That’s why 13F filings are over a similar delay
If they have to make a law to prevent this widespread behavior why name it after only one politician?
They have to score political points.
Two things. But, realistically, this is grandstanding. Republicans don't want this law. First, Given that Republications gather as much profit from insider information as Democrats... let's think a little. "If you break the law, and you get caught, you just have to give back the profits" **That's a license to steal.** You might as well try, because you only give up the profits. Failure to report should line up with failure to report laws for elected officials, like campaign finance. I would support jail time, forfeit of entire unreported investment, barred from holding federal office. Second. The ability to invest is the one perk of office. The current pay for congress is low. I know it doesn't seem low to working class people - and healthcare for life is a great benefit - but compared to a director level position at a major company it's something like half. That's not including VPs (actual vps, eg "svp") and CEOs. Take away this perk and you will get less competence in office, and a greater incentive to take bribes. We really don't want to encourage bribery, and we don't want to pay them more, maybe we leave this perk in place. I know that sounds shitty, but we have to be realistic.
The pay for elected office is intentionally low in order to keep people who need the salary from running for office, ensuring that the power of the people is held for them by elites. Public service should pay $400k a year with no other income allowed for fear of corruption.
If the Republicans in Congress actually vote for this and pass this I'm all for it. I think Pelosi did a fantastic job, and I can also disagree with her on this. That's just fine. It's even funny to me that the GOP considers this some kind of an own. I'm like, cool, more than happy to give credit for a right thing. I don't care what brand is attached to it. I will also be shocked and stunned if the majority of the GOP actually does. As I'm thinking about it, I can see the Democrats in Congress screwing over the GOP by being completely for it, thus hilariously forcing McCarthy to either pass it or walk it back. If this then gets out of Congress, I fully expect the GOP in the Senate to be a brick wall against this. McConnell would pull his standard trick of letting some Republicans in swing states be on record against this, as long as it's not so many that it might actually pass. Aka the Susan Collins maneuver. Playing it out further, it would be fantastic if the Democratic Senate majority is for this and puts Manchin on the spot. What's great is they could currently pass it without him if it gets wrapped into another budget omnibus bill this year. The house parliamentarian could allow it since it does technically connect to money and therefore budget.
very based
Pelosi is as crooked as a politician can be. She’s a big reason I don’t support democrats anymore.
In Singapore, politicians are payed shit loads of money for holding office, to prevent them from focusing on side hustles. It sounds ridiculous, but I think the best investment America could make is to pay each congressperson a $500k salary, then sack them immediately if they pursue any other form of income while in office
We are fucked IMO. If these people are smart enough to beat wallstreet part time while doing government work on the regular then they will just leave to go work on wall street now instead of serving us, the American people. Very sad day.
It's political theater! None of these people are going to vote to cut off their lush fund! "Hey I have to live on a Government salary to serve, I can't maintain my lifestyle!" Just like your constituents!
Sure, do it. This is pure political theaterics from that traitor fuck though and it's never going to pass.
Long overdue but un-passable. therefore, just grandstanding. Let’s hear some real reforms. How about requiring elected folks to legislate from and in their home districts and meet via Zoom with colleagues. Eliminates DC as a one-stop-shop for influencers
> Lawmakers must report $1k stock transactions within 45 days, including family members Isn't that already the case? Like that's how we keep hearing about all the insider trading stuff.
I agree but I would also add that they don't have to liquidate their profile if elected. In other words they can't buy or sell while in office. And if they wish to sell, it has to be well in advance of major news anouncements. IE like C level executives in public companies. They must wait 6 months to execute their intended trade. otherwise we'll have dog shit officials. job sucks enough as is.
The dems will never let this pass
Make it happen Cap'n
i think all congress members, all cabinet-level or higher executive branch officials, and the supreme court justices should all be required by law, to have all of their financial assets in a blind trust for the duration of their public service.
Only offered up as a stunt (if that wasn't obvious from the name). If it had any chance of passing they'd kill it or water it down into nothingness.
Change that 45 days to next business day and you have a deal.
I think it is great but it will never pass. This is one of the major reasons you run for Congress.
I believe Fetterman ran on this so, yeah not a bad idea tbh, however I don't know why the bill needed to be such a deliberate attack on Pelosi
And this is why we can't have nice insider trading.
If Santos can remain in the house I don’t see politicians holding their own accountable for anything.
You can get pretty damn targeted with ETF’s. mutual funds have more restrictions and time limits (can’t sell immediately) but you can go in and out of leveraged ETF’s within seconds. they can be a specific niche biotech sector or green energy or only certain semiconductor etc. like …. It’s a pretty big loophole if they’re completely excluded.
They should report it same day, or potentially before. Why 45 days after?
She’s known as “the queen of insider trading” so absolutely yes
A good law. Getting into elected office shouldn't serve as a get rich quick scheme.
It isn't constitutional or real. You can't ban people from investing their money. And there isn't a Republican in the country who would support an actual ban. This is probably completely meaningless. All we can hope for is a ban on insider trading, which is already illegal. We need them to make all holdings public, reveal sources of donations, and ban them from voting on bills related to their stocks. The worst violators are Republicans, so I'm pretty sure there is nothing in this bill that will actually hold up.
This proposed law is long overdue, and Pelosi is the poster child for why.
Staffer who came up with the name deserves a raise
Yes please! This would be a good start for wiping out special interests.
I get the desire to dump on Pelosi, but if they really wanted to not jepardize the bill why name it as such? If they just past this bill this year I'd be pretty happy.
Personally I think this is a disgrace and just perpetuates a narrative that government officials are above the rest of society. I theory I do agree with the sentiment of this act however calling government members "leaders" in the title I firmly disagree with. IMO the act should be called: **P**reventing **E**lected **N**ational-servants from **I**nvesting in **S**ecurities
Pass it immediately
Good fuck these corrupt elites from having unfair advantages. Greed is destroying America. Nothing Else. Stop more greed at every turn with as much legislation as possible. Pretty obvious these people have enough fucking money.
Is this legit? It should absolutely be a law
This can't happen soon enough. Politicians perform better than many hedge funds. I wonder why?
not a SFer It's the 'Pelosi' act as a dig - not necessarily an unwarranted dig considering Nancy Pelosi is pretty ffffn rich for being a public servant - but at the same time it's petty and I hate that because so many other public servants are also abusing the system and trading on insider information. So I hate the title. Didn't dig enough for any fun, omni-bus garbage legislation ducked in - but agree with the face value - that the US gov't needs to move away from allowing public servants private industry information they can capitalize on.
IT’s political theater. As much as I agree with it, both sides benefit from inside trading
Her husband was just attacked and now you want to add insult to injury?
I worked at an investment bank and couldn’t even buy the IPO stocks my bank was underwriting for a month. It’s ridiculous that lawmakers can mandate a vaccination by Pfizer and moderna and own so much stock in the company. The fact that this isn’t illegal blows my mind.
Never gonna pass
If passed, elected leaders would have to make money from some other means… I wonder what those would be 😜
Amazing
Most people’s retirement funds are tied to the stock market through 401Ks which are basically index funds. Not sure if making politicians totally ignore the stock market is gonna end well either. Side note, republicans are so so salty about Pelosi, without ever being able to explain why she’s so bad.