(MORNINGBREW) Anna Kim A bipartisan group of senators has taken “if at first you don’t succeed, try again” to heart with a new proposal aimed at cracking down on stock trades by members of Congress once and for all. The Ending Trading and Holdings in Congressional Stocks (ETHICS) Act, drawn up by five senators (four Democratic and one Republican), may have the teeth to make a difference on the Hill: It would require members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children to divest from their assets starting in 2027. Lawmakers would also be banned from trading for the 90 days after the bill becomes law. The penalty for breaking the law would be either a lawmaker’s monthly salary or 10% of the value of the asset in violation—whichever is bigger. The act requires divestment of assets even if put in a blind trust. New legislation is a long time coming The acronym experts over in Congress passed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act in 2012, which requires members and their spouses to disclose trades over $1,000 within 45 days. But that hasn’t had its intended effect, probably because the only deterrent to trading is a $200 fine if you don’t report it in time. No other proposals, of which there have been plenty, have gone far enough to reach a committee. On the bright side: The government’s failure to address politicians’ use of their positions for financial gain has fueled plenty of public criticism, driven in part by fintech putting access to privileged information in the spotlight. A pair of ETFs following Democratic and Republican politicians’ trades have outperformed the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average, respectively. The Autopilot app lets users copy trades of individuals like Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul (his tracker is up 45% this year). Looking ahead…the bill is expected to make its next step—heading to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee for markup—as soon as July 24.—CC
I am not in favor of banning them from trading individual stocks, ETFS, futures, options, etc. It wont be practical to enforce it. Let them trade and let it all be public record. The only thing its going to do is make it less transparent.
Irrelevant to this topic....What unfair edge do you think that judges have in trading stocks? You think judges have a direct line to Larry Fink or Ron O'Hanley?
In reference to term limits, which someone else brought up. And it is splitting hairs to talk of those in Congress taking advantage and leave out SC Justices doing the same even if one is trading on insider info and another trading preferable rulings for freebie private jet flights. The three types of government structure are supposed to be co-equal. The Supremes (current ones) trashed that idea, so if anything that is where the real focus should be.
I have no problem with term limits across the board No one should have a “lifetime” position anywhere