Frist - Insider Trading?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Max Power, Sep 22, 2005.

  1. Max Power
    Online

    Max Power Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...5/09/20/AR2005092001767.html?nav=rss_politics

    So, Frist was criticized for holding stock in health care while dealing with health care legislation, so 11 years later, and right before the company (owned by his family) issues a disappointing earnings report, he decides to sell it, "to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest?"

    That's a lot to swallow.
     
  2. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    If you have proof--convict his ass.
     
  3. Max Power
    Online

    Max Power Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    It looks like he did everything by the book, which incidentally is somewhat easier when you're the one writing the book.

    Anyway, hopefully this will keep him off the ticket in '08.
     
  4. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    You mean you just figured out that politicians write laws to benefit themselves?
     
  5. Max Power
    Online

    Max Power Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    :scratch:
     
  6. ProudDem
    Online

    ProudDem Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I hope something comes out of it. It seem a major coincidence that he would sell all of his families' stock right before a serious announcement.....
     
  7. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    And we are hoping he gets nailed because he's---------- ??????
     
  8. theim
    Offline

    theim Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,628
    Thanks Received:
    234
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings:
    +234
    Ted Kennedy killed a woman and he's still in the Senate. Stranger things have happened.
     
  9. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,568
    Thanks Received:
    8,171
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,205
    So let me get this straight:

    While he owned the stock, he was being critisized that him owning stock would create a conflict of interest.

    So he sells the stock and now he is getting critisized that he was just selling the stock because he knew it would go down.

    Sounds like a classic example of: Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.
     
  10. ProudDem
    Online

    ProudDem Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I hadn't read that that was the reason he sold his stock. Where did you see that?

    Alright Avatar, this is in today's Washington Post. Yeah, he was selling them because of a conflict of interest? Initially, he argued that it's not a conflict of interest, but then suddenly, after 10 years, he sees the light? Riiiiiiiiight.

    Mr. Frist's Curious Timing

    Friday, September 23, 2005; A22

    TENNESSEE Republican Bill Frist has been a senator for almost 11 years now, majority leader for three. During his tenure, Mr. Frist, a heart surgeon, has worked on -- and often taken a leading role in -- such health care issues as the Medicare prescription drug bill, limits on medical malpractice awards and managed-care legislation.

    Throughout that time, Mr. Frist rebuffed suggestions that his extensive holdings in HCA, the giant hospital chain founded by his family, posed any ethical problem. When Democrats denounced this as a "blatant conflict of interest" during his run for a second term, Mr. Frist dismissed those concerns, brandishing opinions from the Senate's Select Committee on Ethics stating that he was free to vote on health care matters despite millions of dollars in HCA holdings. Indeed, Mr. Frist insisted, he had gone the extra ethical mile of putting his holdings in a blind trust.

    So it's more than a little curious that Mr. Frist, who will end his Senate career next year, has chosen this time to decide to heed ethics concerns and sell off his HCA holdings. The senator's blind trust turns out to allow for a little peek-a-boo, and Mr. Frist instructed the trustees in June to get rid of the stock. That was good timing: The company's stock price fell 9 percent the next month, after it disclosed lower-than-expected second-quarter profits.

    Mr. Frist's spokeswoman, Amy Call, said the move was based "purely on wanting to avoid any future appearances of conflict." But, of course, if that was a problem, why did it take the senator more than a decade to figure it out? After all, any such perception didn't seem to bother Mr. Frist this year, when he championed medical malpractice caps even as his family's hospital empire included a large malpractice insurer.

    One possible explanation for Mr. Frist's action is that he is weighing a presidential run and wanted to get any potential ethical issue out of the way. A more conspiratorial explanation comes to mind, as well, which is that Mr. Frist had some advance knowledge of the company's impending bad news. Mr. Frist's brother is HCA's largest individual shareholder, its chairman emeritus and a member of the company's board. There's no evidence that Mr. Frist had inside information or traded on it, though Ms. Call's careful phrasing -- that the senator "did not have any conversations with HCA executives about HCA stock when he was making the decision to divest" -- is curious.

    Still, Mr. Frist's sudden and well-timed change of mind about his ethical obligations at least warrants further inquiry; this is the kind of thing the Securities and Exchange Commission does routinely. It ought to do so in this case, too -- if only to clear the senator of the worse of two unflattering possibilities.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/22/AR2005092202022_pf.html
     

Share This Page