SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) speaks during a Senate Finance Committee hearing on February 23, 2021 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Greg Nash/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)
'Time for Congress to Act': Watchdog Groups Urge Passage of Stock Trade Ban
The groups' letter to congressional leaders points to "routine and bipartisan failures" to comply with existing law.
Mar 29, 2022
Citing reports of "suspicious stock trades" at the start of the pandemic and a "crisis of institutional legitimacy," a diverse group of 19 organizations on Monday urged Congress to pass legislation banning individual stock trading by federal lawmakers.
The demand was delivered in a letter to U.S. House leaders from organizations including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Public Citizen, and the Revolving Door Project. It was sent amid growing momentum for such a ban--a prohibition that the groups frame as clearly needed in light of "the routine and bipartisan failures to comply with the STOCK Act."
That 2012 law--designed to prevent insider trading by lawmakers--was violated by over 50 members of Congress during 2020 and 2021, according to a recent investigation.
Addressing this problem, the groups argue, necessitates "a blanket ban on trading or owning any individual stocks, bonds, commodities, futures, derivatives, options, or other similar financial assets, except widely held investment funds." A blind trust would only work if the beneficiary does not know what assets the trust holds, they wrote.
Numerous related legislative proposals have already been put forth, including a bipartisan measure led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Steve Daines (R-Mont.) and the Ban Congressional Stock Trading Act introduced by Sens. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).
Ethics watchdogs have pointed to questionable stock transactions by lawmakers at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as trades by the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), as evidence current law isn't doing enough to promote transparency and accountability.
While some lawmakers, including Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), have expressed support for a stock trading ban but said it should not cover spouses, the groups behind the letter reject such a carve-out for close family.
Not extending the ban to spouses as well as dependent children "would undermine much of the purpose of the legislation and allow the conflicts of interest presented to remain. A spouse or dependent child who appears to profit from a member's actions or knowledge of the market is just as damaging to the public's perception of our government as a member profiting themselves," the letter states.
The groups added that a stock trading ban needs to have teeth if it's to function as any sort of deterrent, meaning there must be a threat of "punishment or civil penalties" in case of violations.
An additional key feature, according to the groups, is that the legislation must not have "an exclusive intent standard that would make enforcement of the legislation unworkable or unlikely."
The letter argues that "a standard requiring proof that a member 'knowingly' violated the act would make a very high bar for any enforcement and accountability for unethical conduct" and as such "would defeat the purpose of the legislation, as it would likely result in members believing that they can escape discipline and even potentially retain the benefits of trades made in violation of the law."
Citing broad public support for such a ban shown by polling, the groups told House leaders that "by adopting the policies that we have set out above, you can help to end this problem that is eroding public trust in our government and undermining Congress' legitimacy."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Citing reports of "suspicious stock trades" at the start of the pandemic and a "crisis of institutional legitimacy," a diverse group of 19 organizations on Monday urged Congress to pass legislation banning individual stock trading by federal lawmakers.
The demand was delivered in a letter to U.S. House leaders from organizations including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Public Citizen, and the Revolving Door Project. It was sent amid growing momentum for such a ban--a prohibition that the groups frame as clearly needed in light of "the routine and bipartisan failures to comply with the STOCK Act."
That 2012 law--designed to prevent insider trading by lawmakers--was violated by over 50 members of Congress during 2020 and 2021, according to a recent investigation.
Addressing this problem, the groups argue, necessitates "a blanket ban on trading or owning any individual stocks, bonds, commodities, futures, derivatives, options, or other similar financial assets, except widely held investment funds." A blind trust would only work if the beneficiary does not know what assets the trust holds, they wrote.
Numerous related legislative proposals have already been put forth, including a bipartisan measure led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Steve Daines (R-Mont.) and the Ban Congressional Stock Trading Act introduced by Sens. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).
Ethics watchdogs have pointed to questionable stock transactions by lawmakers at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as trades by the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), as evidence current law isn't doing enough to promote transparency and accountability.
While some lawmakers, including Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), have expressed support for a stock trading ban but said it should not cover spouses, the groups behind the letter reject such a carve-out for close family.
Not extending the ban to spouses as well as dependent children "would undermine much of the purpose of the legislation and allow the conflicts of interest presented to remain. A spouse or dependent child who appears to profit from a member's actions or knowledge of the market is just as damaging to the public's perception of our government as a member profiting themselves," the letter states.
The groups added that a stock trading ban needs to have teeth if it's to function as any sort of deterrent, meaning there must be a threat of "punishment or civil penalties" in case of violations.
An additional key feature, according to the groups, is that the legislation must not have "an exclusive intent standard that would make enforcement of the legislation unworkable or unlikely."
The letter argues that "a standard requiring proof that a member 'knowingly' violated the act would make a very high bar for any enforcement and accountability for unethical conduct" and as such "would defeat the purpose of the legislation, as it would likely result in members believing that they can escape discipline and even potentially retain the benefits of trades made in violation of the law."
Citing broad public support for such a ban shown by polling, the groups told House leaders that "by adopting the policies that we have set out above, you can help to end this problem that is eroding public trust in our government and undermining Congress' legitimacy."
Citing reports of "suspicious stock trades" at the start of the pandemic and a "crisis of institutional legitimacy," a diverse group of 19 organizations on Monday urged Congress to pass legislation banning individual stock trading by federal lawmakers.
The demand was delivered in a letter to U.S. House leaders from organizations including Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Public Citizen, and the Revolving Door Project. It was sent amid growing momentum for such a ban--a prohibition that the groups frame as clearly needed in light of "the routine and bipartisan failures to comply with the STOCK Act."
That 2012 law--designed to prevent insider trading by lawmakers--was violated by over 50 members of Congress during 2020 and 2021, according to a recent investigation.
Addressing this problem, the groups argue, necessitates "a blanket ban on trading or owning any individual stocks, bonds, commodities, futures, derivatives, options, or other similar financial assets, except widely held investment funds." A blind trust would only work if the beneficiary does not know what assets the trust holds, they wrote.
Numerous related legislative proposals have already been put forth, including a bipartisan measure led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Steve Daines (R-Mont.) and the Ban Congressional Stock Trading Act introduced by Sens. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.).
Ethics watchdogs have pointed to questionable stock transactions by lawmakers at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as trades by the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), as evidence current law isn't doing enough to promote transparency and accountability.
While some lawmakers, including Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), have expressed support for a stock trading ban but said it should not cover spouses, the groups behind the letter reject such a carve-out for close family.
Not extending the ban to spouses as well as dependent children "would undermine much of the purpose of the legislation and allow the conflicts of interest presented to remain. A spouse or dependent child who appears to profit from a member's actions or knowledge of the market is just as damaging to the public's perception of our government as a member profiting themselves," the letter states.
The groups added that a stock trading ban needs to have teeth if it's to function as any sort of deterrent, meaning there must be a threat of "punishment or civil penalties" in case of violations.
An additional key feature, according to the groups, is that the legislation must not have "an exclusive intent standard that would make enforcement of the legislation unworkable or unlikely."
The letter argues that "a standard requiring proof that a member 'knowingly' violated the act would make a very high bar for any enforcement and accountability for unethical conduct" and as such "would defeat the purpose of the legislation, as it would likely result in members believing that they can escape discipline and even potentially retain the benefits of trades made in violation of the law."
Citing broad public support for such a ban shown by polling, the groups told House leaders that "by adopting the policies that we have set out above, you can help to end this problem that is eroding public trust in our government and undermining Congress' legitimacy."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.