Without going to far out on a limb, I think that it is fair to say that a joint concern of both the Occupy and Tea Party movements is a search for ways to limit or end greed and corruption in public office. Not too surprising are recent revelations that folks in Congress are many degrees of magnitude wealthier than average citizens with the top ten wealthiest individuals in the House alone having net worths between $40,000,000 and $310,000,000. Again not too surprisingly is the fact that without exception a member of Congress sees their wealth grow dramatically during the time that they are elected and this is an issue for both the Democrats and the Republicans. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20075586-503544.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody
One of the reasons for this increasing wealth is a huge gap in current law. Insider Trader rules prohibit everyone from trading stocks with non public corporate information about the stock. Not covered under current law is non public legislative information. So, for instance, if a lawmaker learns an upcoming bill will grant a company a large government contract, which could boost that company’s stock, he or she is free to buy that stock ahead of the bill’s public introduction. This form of “insider trading” is one of the reasons why there are so many wealthy members of Congress, CBSNews.com reported earlier this year. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57325280-503544/senators-introduce-stock-act-to-stop-insider-trading-in-congress/
Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., today introduced the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2011, which would prohibit members or employees of Congress, as well as executive branch employees, from using nonpublic information obtained through their public service for investing or any attempt at personal financial gain. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., is introducing a slightly different version of the legislation on Wednesday.
“Members of Congress should live under the same laws as everyone else,” Brown said in a statement today. “If they trade on inside knowledge to line their own pockets, they should be punished. Serving the public is a privilege and honor, not an opportunity for personal gain.” The legislation would also require members of Congress and employees to report the purchase, sale or exchange of any stock, bond, or commodities future transaction in excess of $1,000 within 90 days. Gillibrand’s legislation would, in addition to enabling the Securities and Exchange Commission to prosecute cases of insider trading by members of Congress, also make such trading a violation of the House and Senate rules. Out of 975 federal entities, Congress and the Supreme Court are the only two that have no rules or laws prohibiting them from trading securities based on nonpublic information.
Congressmen can get away with “the type of insider trading that would send Martha Stewart to prison,” Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for the consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen, told CBSNews.com in June. “They go into hearings and confidential meetings with business interests, understanding new legislation is going to come out next week,” and are free to trade on that information.
The Stock Act is not a new idea and has been floating around for some time. Until this weekend’s 60Minutes report about congressional insider trading the bill had never been able to garner enough sponsorship to find its way to a committee hearing. Leadership of both parties have always been reluctant to kill the golden goose, and this inside information is just one of those sacred cows that have brought many benefits with little or no cost. Heightened publicity this time around may be a game changer this time around.
I would hope that this would be one of those issues that both the Occupy movement and the Tea Party movement could rally behind. It is one of those measures that is a real no brainer to anyone but members of Congress that stand to lose their investing advantage.
.
.
I think that is CLEARLY an issue that both movements can rally behind. But…
“Without going to far out on a limb, I think that it is fair to say that a joint concern of both the Occupy and Tea Party movements is a search for ways to limit or end greed and corruption in public office.”
I would point out an important distinction in that statement; while the Occupy movement tends to want to address greed and corruption in the public AND private sectors, the Tea Party tends to focus almost exclusively on Congress.
As proven by your very posts.
Tea Party does focus on Congress because it’s Congress’s actions or inactions that allow and even demand corporate corruption. As far as greed is concerned, that’s another matter entirely. But glad to know you agree that OWS should be on board with this bill.
Oh really? And corporate lobbyists don’t have anything to do with that dynamic?
Puh-leeze.
Sounds good to me. What counterarguments have been made?
Nothing yet, just resentful dead silence from leadership of both parties.
Congress is owned by Wall Street. Put the cart on the other side of the horse please. Scott Brown’s plea is a distraction and he is being paid by Wall Street to do it. We can act like patriots all we want by pretending to fight trading by congressmen and women, but that is not the problem. You have to GET THE MONEY OUT of the whole ELECTION PROCESS. I’m glad to see that you at least recognize the bipartisan dead silence though Geoff.
At the end of the day, all these Congress people think. “My God, such an achiever I am. And how worthy of my own power and wealth I am! God Bless America, and thank God I am not flipping hamburgers like Geoff thinks I should be doing for that special sense of self worth that he wants me to have.
The Tea Party believes in smaller government. Since taxes feed the monster, they stand behind their slogan, Taxed Enough Already. While Congress continues to ignore the will of the people, the people will be heard. This is the commonality between the Tea Party and OWS.
So much for Geoff’s attempt to get a single post that everyone on here can get behind. I suspected some nattering nabobs of negativism from the left would be unable to resist the urge to be civilized.
Please point out a SINGLE uncivil comment here.
“At the end of the day, all these Congress people think. “My God, such an achiever I am. And how worthy of my own power and wealth I am! God Bless America, and thank God I am not flipping hamburgers like Geoff thinks I should be doing for that special sense of self worth that he wants me to have.”
There’s absolutely nothing uncivil about that statement. You’re really straining here.
Is it uncivil to say that this is a nice idea, but relatively small beans in the grand scheme of things? If so, color me uncivil. I’ll take it, but I’m not going to pretend that it’s something greater than it is.
They both want money out of politics…….the difference being that the Tea Party accepts Millions of dollars from the Oligarchs.
Want the money out of politics? Check out these websites;
http://www.getmoneyout.com/
http://jimmcgovern.com/corporatepersonhood/
On a somewhat tangential issue, since when is it necessary to propose spending almost a million dollars undermining a movement composed of a bunch of “losers” and “slackers”?
http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/19/8884405-lobbying-firms-memo-spells-out-plan-to-undermine-occupy-wall-street
Yeah, that is more than a little tangential.
Well thank you for that very significant contribution to the discussion.
Here’s something less tangential — I’d like to know where Geoff came up with this grand story idea, because I’ve seen this story pushed in three independent (or apparently so) places aside from this in the past few days.
If the lesson we’re supposed to take from this is that this is the hugest — or even among the 1000 hugest — problems with our economic policy right now, I think that it’s misdirected. I’m all for holding everyone (insofar as is practicable) to the same standards regarding insider trading, but that’s just not remotely the most important thing to focus on right now.
It’s as if the entire Orange County basin was in danger of being flooded and the Occupy Movement was calling for action to save the county and the Tea Party were calling for action to save Corona del Mar. Yes, there is “overlap” between the decisions — we all want Corona del Mar to be saved — but there is a difference in priorities and urgency.
Not even worth a response.
Oh, do tell, Counselor!
How about this, then: this proposal (which seems to have garnered a disproportionate amount of attention over the past week) addresses a relatively small problem. I can get behind it, but I won’t pretend that it deserves more than a relatively small amount attention — and when it gets more than that, it looks to me as if it has become “playing politics.”
Also “not worth a response,” I’m sure.
First, this story was done to try and show common ground between all people wanting less corrupt government – evidently some are so far gone that they are looking for the political pony just because there is a room full of horse manure. Second, I watched 60 Minutes, read a little and then came up with the story the next day at the suggestion of my wife that told me it would be good to do some positive stories leading up the Thanksgiving. So yes, I am heavily “playing politics” here – other that attacking ALL members of congress on both sides of the aisle, not sure how this story can be twisted into a left/right issue at all.
Awful lot of misdirected hostility there Mr. Diamond. I think that the quality of the dialogue has dipped substantially since you have been added to the contributors here.
I agree with Geoff on ” I think that the quality of the dialogue has dipped substantially since you have been added to the contributors here” refering to Mr Diamond.
Geoff’s story on “Man Arrested When Shape Shifting Hooker Turns Into Donkey” is a prime example.
As to the quality of the dialogue, Geoff, if you pay Fiala I’m sure that he will come back. Personally, I enjoy the contributions of Vern, Gericault, anon, Anonster, Anonsterster, Anonanonsterster, and many others.
Last I had checked into OJB (aside from looking at stories where Vern quoted me) was during the ancien regime where Pedroza had sidebars slamming Santa Ana and Lib OC people for, among other things, going through bankruptcy. I retched and ran. So if by “quality of dialogue” you mean vitriolic calumny, that has indeed dipped. If you mean “refusal or inability to challenge Geoff Willis’s arguments,” I would not be surprised if that had dipped too. I’d love to read examples of the good old days, though, if you want to point out some choice ones.
As for the Scott Brown story — well, you’ll be happy to know that over the next day or two, several other conservative commentators tried to smudge the issues by pretending that a primary financial regulatory problem in the country is legislative insider trading. I think that it’s a problem. I also think that anyone who thinks it’s a problem while not thinking that giving in to the beseeching of lobbyists for special deals and protections for the financial services industry is a much, much bigger problem — one on which the Tea Party ought to join with OWS, but generally does not — is being disingenuous.
Demagogue, “Shape-Shifting Hookers” has kept this site well into the black for the past month. No one should criticize “Shape-Shifting Hookers!” I just wish that there were more such stories — they’re the kind of thing that could bring the Tea Party and Occupy movement together!
No one on this site objected to Martha Stewart going to jail for insider trading.
If only she could have shape shifted into a donkey, or a congressman.
You are worthy Geoff. You flip hamburgers don’t you?
I worked for two years as a bus boy, was a 411 operator, worked at the Wherehouse, shrink wrapped scantron cards and the like – I did more than my share of burger flipping.