The editors of the Washington Post are highly critical of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s remarks supportive of elected officials trading in stocks during their tenure in office:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stunned a lot of Americans this past week when she ardently defended the right of lawmakers — and their spouses — to buy and sell stocks while they serve in Congress.
“We’re a free-market economy. They should be able to participate in that,†Ms. Pelosi told reporters.
She should have advocated for tighter scrutiny on congressional trading. Even better would be a full ban on individual stock trades for members of Congress.
There’s a big catch to Ms. Pelosi’s “free-market economy†claim: U.S. representatives and senators have access to a lot of confidential, nonpublic information. That gives them an unfair advantage in trading.
Walter Shaub, former director of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, put it this way in a tweet: “It’s a ridiculous comment! She might as well have said ‘let them eat cake.’ Sure, it’s a free-market economy. But your average schmuck doesn’t get confidential briefings from government experts chock full of nonpublic information directly related to the price of stocks.â€
Let me acquaint them with the realities of the psychology of holding elective office. They believe that trading in stocks based on insider knowledge, influence peddling, and becoming wealthier while in office than their wages as House representatives or senators would accomplish are perks of the job. Not only that but they believe that their election (and re-election ad infinitum) is necessary for the public good. It’s a cushy gig.
I agree with all of this, but why is it an issue now? This has been going on for years. Why limit it to stocks? Politicians have entire companies being run by family while they are in office. Who, besides the cult members, actually believe that politicians dont benefit from that also?
Steve
“Not only that but they believe that their election (and re-election ad infinitum) is necessary for the public good.”
Heh. No shit. No windmills in my back yard, though.
“Who, besides the cult members, actually believe that politicians dont benefit from that also?”
Care to provide concrete examples? Careful, Hunter Biden’s affiliations and laptop info is now public.
If you want to get real. I don’t manage my own money. But every quarter I have to file a certificate saying I don’t trade in stocks (or other securities) that I might have first hand knowledge of market dynamics (through the Firm) that might have a beneficial effects on public security trading.
It is to laugh. Our $50MM revenue pie and cake company, which sells to Wal-Mart is going to move Wal-Mart stock? Our $100MM hydraulics equipment repair business is going to move Caterpillar’s stock price? Yeah. I’m just itching to trade it.
Hunter Biden? His firm, with one LP – the Chinese Government – bought a Michigan company with military equipment expertise the Chinese wanted. Nary a peep. Not politically convenient.
Fuck you, steve. You are a moron who has absolutely no clue what is really going on.
What I was trying to get at with that observation was an aspect of the psychology of holding office that is not sufficiently appreciated. What I think that Speaker Pelosi’s remark, President Biden’s conduct, and the Clintons’ conduct all exemplify is that they see no distinction between the public good and their own private benefit. They are completely conflated.