Scott Brown (R-MA) Introduces legislation to prohibit congress from insider trading

[FuelRod]

I bet if Martha Stewart had known this she would have run for Congress and won a long time ago.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I just watched Senator Brown on Fox with Gretchen. He's a breath of fresh air for Ma. I hope they re-elect Scott Brown. Way to step up the the plate Senator Brown.

Too little too late. He's already on record siding with the big oil lobby precisely 100% of the time. That is more than enough reason to vote his ass out of office.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112sjres27is/pdf/BILLS-112sjres27is.pdf <--- the resolution he voted for

U.S. GAO - Environmental Protection Agency: Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals, GAO-11-914R, August 17, 2011 <----the EPA mandated regulation the resolution was against

The reason brown voted to stop the rule? It gives a federal agency unconstitutional authority (via the 10th amendment) over the states rights to regulate themselves.


Take it however you want....if you want to think it means Scott brown is for big oil so be it, if you want to think it means he thinks state rights are sovereign so be it.

 

[Jarhead]

I personally had no idea this was allowed. I was absolutely stunned.

I hope this passes.

It actually goes beyond insider trading. Yes, rigtht now they are exempt from insider trading laws.....which boggles my mind..especially seeing as they are the ones that pass legislation that affects stock values...

But there are other trhings that are just as manipulative but no laws against...

For example...there is a rep who bought a piece of farmland in the middle of nowhere for a song.....it was valued at nearly nothing for it was so far off the beaten path, nop one could really do anything with it.

So what did the rep do? He put an earmark in some legislation that approved government funding to have a highway built that went alongside the property he bought. When the legislation was passed, his property doubled in value and he sold it.

And what do ourt reps have us doing while they make money?

They have us fighting each other over who is less ethical...the dems or the GOP.

 

[Sallow]

I personally had no idea this was allowed. I was absolutely stunned.

I hope this passes.

It actually goes beyond insider trading. Yes, rigtht now they are exempt from insider trading laws.....which boggles my mind..especially seeing as they are the ones that pass legislation that affects stock values...

But there are other trhings that are just as manipulative but no laws against...

For example...there is a rep who bought a piece of farmland in the middle of nowhere for a song.....it was valued at nearly nothing for it was so far off the beaten path, nop one could really do anything with it.

So what did the rep do? He put an earmark in some legislation that approved government funding to have a highway built that went alongside the property he bought. When the legislation was passed, his property doubled in value and he sold it.

And what do ourt reps have us doing while they make money?

They have us fighting each other over who is less ethical...the dems or the GOP.

I am still having a very hard time with this. It's just unbelievable.

 

[manifold]

I just watched Senator Brown on Fox with Gretchen. He's a breath of fresh air for Ma. I hope they re-elect Scott Brown. Way to step up the the plate Senator Brown.

Too little too late. He's already on record siding with the big oil lobby precisely 100% of the time. That is more than enough reason to vote his ass out of office.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112sjres27is/pdf/BILLS-112sjres27is.pdf <--- the resolution he voted for

U.S. GAO - Environmental Protection Agency: Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals, GAO-11-914R, August 17, 2011 <----the EPA mandated regulation the resolution was against

The reason brown voted to stop the rule? It gives a federal agency unconstitutional authority (via the 10th amendment) over the states rights to regulate themselves.


Take it however you want....if you want to think it means Scott brown is for big oil so be it, if you want to think it means he thinks state rights are sovereign so be it.

Thanks. I'm glad I have your permission to look past the rhetoric and read between the lines.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Too little too late. He's already on record siding with the big oil lobby precisely 100% of the time. That is more than enough reason to vote his ass out of office.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112sjres27is/pdf/BILLS-112sjres27is.pdf <--- the resolution he voted for

U.S. GAO - Environmental Protection Agency: Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals, GAO-11-914R, August 17, 2011 <----the EPA mandated regulation the resolution was against

The reason brown voted to stop the rule? It gives a federal agency unconstitutional authority (via the 10th amendment) over the states rights to regulate themselves.


Take it however you want....if you want to think it means Scott brown is for big oil so be it, if you want to think it means he thinks state rights are sovereign so be it.

Thanks. I'm glad I have your permission to look past the rhetoric and read between the lines.

No problem

 

[Newby]

Am I to believe that at present, it's legal for congressmen to engage in insider trading?

Yes, members of Congress are exempt from the laws regarding insider trading.

Yep, while one side of Pelosi's mouth is applauding the OWS 'movement' and their calling out the 'greedy Wall Street bastards', the other side is calling her fund manager with where to buy stock next from what information she has obtained by being a member of congress. From what I understand, she is one of the ones that has majorly profited from this little scheme. The hypocrisy never ends, yet idiots keep lapping up their talking points on the 'news' every night.

 

[Jarhead]

I personally had no idea this was allowed. I was absolutely stunned.

I hope this passes.

It actually goes beyond insider trading. Yes, rigtht now they are exempt from insider trading laws.....which boggles my mind..especially seeing as they are the ones that pass legislation that affects stock values...

But there are other trhings that are just as manipulative but no laws against...

For example...there is a rep who bought a piece of farmland in the middle of nowhere for a song.....it was valued at nearly nothing for it was so far off the beaten path, nop one could really do anything with it.

So what did the rep do? He put an earmark in some legislation that approved government funding to have a highway built that went alongside the property he bought. When the legislation was passed, his property doubled in value and he sold it.

And what do ourt reps have us doing while they make money?

They have us fighting each other over who is less ethical...the dems or the GOP.

I am still having a very hard time with this. It's just unbelievable.

and sadly?

Those DEM reps you protect on this forum and the GOP reps I protect on this forum?

They know all about it and now are asking us to believe that they never once capitalized on the fact that there was no law to prevent this......even though it on record that an earlier proposition to write a law was overwhelmingly denied by all of congress.

Why would thery deny the law if they were not capitalizing on the lack of a law?

Now that being said...enough of the Solyndra crap, and the Cain crap and the Perry crqap and the Palin crap and the Frank crap ...

I say we STOP looking at congress as two parties and taking sides as we fight each other...and instead look at congress as a single entity that is taking advantage of the people that put them there.

Anyone with me?

(probably not)

 

[kiwiman127]

Notice that when Elected Representatives are caught breaking the law they say "There is no governing authority" (Remember Algore and his donation scandal?) So what do they do? Introduce Legislation to fix it! It's what do!

Why don't they just investigate the alleged violations of Law first? Because they wanna' paper over their transgression before it all gets out and make it look like they've done something about it.

If you get pulled over for speeding you have to pay the ticket right? No one says "There should be Speeding Law Reform!" while your ticket gets ignored or thrown away. Should be the same for Congress.

An investigation is a good idea but who's going to do the investigating? It would have to be someone who isn't part of congress if it was to be a truly was a non-partial investigation, otherwise congress would be investigating itself!

 

[GHook93]

This should be a no-brainer for both sides, especially after the 60 minutes brillant story, however, I am skeptical that Reid will allow it to be up for vote.

Afterall how is Pelosi going to make her millions off insider trading?

 

[GHook93]

Am I to believe that at present, it's legal for congressmen to engage in insider trading?

Yes, members of Congress are exempt from the laws regarding insider trading.

Yep, while one side of Pelosi's mouth is applauding the OWS 'movement' and their calling out the 'greedy Wall Street bastards', the other side is calling her fund manager with where to buy stock next from what information she has obtained by being a member of congress. From what I understand, she is one of the ones that has majorly profited from this little scheme. The hypocrisy never ends, yet idiots keep lapping up their talking points on the 'news' every night.

Look at her congressional territory! It SF. Her territory is full of big government socialists (not surprisingly it's one of the most expensive place on the planet to live). She came out for the OWS for political gain, I am sure she will do it again.

 

[Jarhead]

Notice that when Elected Representatives are caught breaking the law they say "There is no governing authority" (Remember Algore and his donation scandal?) So what do they do? Introduce Legislation to fix it! It's what do!

Why don't they just investigate the alleged violations of Law first? Because they wanna' paper over their transgression before it all gets out and make it look like they've done something about it.

If you get pulled over for speeding you have to pay the ticket right? No one says "There should be Speeding Law Reform!" while your ticket gets ignored or thrown away. Should be the same for Congress.

An investigation is a good idea but who's going to do the investigating? It would have to be someone who isn't part of congress if it was to be a truly was a non-partial investigation, otherwise congress would be investigating itself!

We dont need an investigation.

All we need is a public advoicate to pull out the legislation from a while back that was said...and I paraphrase...

'a member of congress is not allowed to suggest any moves with his/her investment portfolio. It is to be held by an independant investor manager and the congressperson is to either say "make no moves" or "do as you deem best" to the indepndant investor on the day they are sworn into office"..

And when that legislation is pulled....those who voted against it should be announced publicly and ultimately voted out of office.

 

[kiwiman127]

This should be a no-brainer for both sides, especially after the 60 minutes brillant story, however, I am skeptical that Reid will allow it to be up for vote.

Afterall how is Pelosi going to make her millions off insider trading?

From what I understand, members of both parties have been involved in insider trading! I must be wrong.

 

[Jarhead]

This should be a no-brainer for both sides, especially after the 60 minutes brillant story, however, I am skeptical that Reid will allow it to be up for vote.

Afterall how is Pelosi going to make her millions off insider trading?

From what I understand, members of both parties have been involved in insider trading! I must be wrong.

to think that both parties are not involved would be foolish.
Human nature pretty mnuch urges people to do what is in their best interest as long as it is within the law....and ethics dictates that you do what is within the law as long as it doesnt hurt others.

And insider trading is a victimless crime for all intents and purposes...

So as I see it......congress was allowed to make extra money without breaking the law and without directly hurting people.

Which leads me to believe they ALL capitalized on it. Why wouldnt they?

Who on here wouldnt?

 

[Meister]

This should be a no-brainer for both sides, especially after the 60 minutes brillant story, however, I am skeptical that Reid will allow it to be up for vote.

Afterall how is Pelosi going to make her millions off insider trading?

From what I understand, members of both parties have been involved in insider trading! I must be wrong.

Yup, this isn't just a right side or just a left side issue. This is a politician issue.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

It actually goes beyond insider trading. Yes, rigtht now they are exempt from insider trading laws.....which boggles my mind..especially seeing as they are the ones that pass legislation that affects stock values...

But there are other trhings that are just as manipulative but no laws against...

For example...there is a rep who bought a piece of farmland in the middle of nowhere for a song.....it was valued at nearly nothing for it was so far off the beaten path, nop one could really do anything with it.

So what did the rep do? He put an earmark in some legislation that approved government funding to have a highway built that went alongside the property he bought. When the legislation was passed, his property doubled in value and he sold it.

And what do ourt reps have us doing while they make money?

They have us fighting each other over who is less ethical...the dems or the GOP.

I am still having a very hard time with this. It's just unbelievable.

and sadly?

Those DEM reps you protect on this forum and the GOP reps I protect on this forum?

They know all about it and now are asking us to believe that they never once capitalized on the fact that there was no law to prevent this......even though it on record that an earlier proposition to write a law was overwhelmingly denied by all of congress.

Why would thery deny the law if they were not capitalizing on the lack of a law?

Now that being said...enough of the Solyndra crap, and the Cain crap and the Perry crqap and the Palin crap and the Frank crap ...

I say we STOP looking at congress as two parties and taking sides as we fight each other...and instead look at congress as a single entity that is taking advantage of the people that put them there.

Anyone with me?

(probably not)

Well at least the poll in this thread would have you think people are capable of supporting something that the other party introduces that is good for everyone

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

This should be a no-brainer for both sides, especially after the 60 minutes brillant story, however, I am skeptical that Reid will allow it to be up for vote.

Afterall how is Pelosi going to make her millions off insider trading?

From what I understand, members of both parties have been involved in insider trading! I must be wrong.

Yup, this isn't just a right side or just a left side issue. This is a politician issue.

Both Pelosi and Boener have been implicated.

 

[manifold]

Am I to believe that at present, it's legal for congressmen to engage in insider trading?

Yes, members of Congress are exempt from the laws regarding insider trading.

Yep, while one side of Pelosi's mouth is applauding the OWS 'movement' and their calling out the 'greedy Wall Street bastards', the other side is calling her fund manager with where to buy stock next from what information she has obtained by being a member of congress. From what I understand, she is one of the ones that has majorly profited from this little scheme. The hypocrisy never ends, yet idiots keep lapping up their talking points on the 'news' every night.

Tool recorded a song about this...

[youtube]R2F_hGwD26g[/youtube]

"The Pot"

Who are you to wave your finger?
Ya' must have been out your head.
Eye hole deep in muddy waters.
You practically raised the dead.

Rob the grave, to snow the cradle.
Then burn the evidence down.
Soapbox, house of cards, and glass,
So don't go tossin' your stones around.

You must have been high.
You must have been high.
You must have been.

Foot in mouth, and head up asshole.
Whatcha talkin' 'bout?
Difficult to dance 'round this one
'til you pull it out, boy!

You must have been, so high.
You must have been, so high.

Steal, borrow, refer, save your shady inference.
kangaroo done hung the juror with the innocent.

Now you're weeping shades of cozened indigo
Got lemon juice up in your...EYE!

When you pissed all over my black kettle
You must have been HIGH, HIGH
You must have been HIGH, HIGH

Who are you to wave your finger?
So full of it.
Eyeballs deep in muddy waters
Fuckin' hypocrite.

Liar, lawyer, mirror, show me.
What's the difference?

kangaroo done hung the guilty with the innocent.

NOW!!
You'll weep or, change the cozened indigo.
Got lemon juice up in your high eye.
When you pissed all over my black kettle
You musta been!

So who are you to wave your finger?
Who are you to wave your fatty fingers at me?
You must, have been, out your, mind!

Weepin' shades of indigo
Shed without a reason
Weepin' shades of indigo

Liar, lawyer,
Mirror for ya,
What's the difference?
kangaroo be stoned
He's guilty as the government

NOW!!
Will you weep or, change the cozened indigo
Got lemon juice up in your, EYE!!
EYE!!

Now when you pissed all over my black kettle.
You musta been HIGH, HIGH, HIGH, HIGH.
Eyeballs deep in muddy waters
Your balls deep in muddy waters.
Ganja, please, you must have been out your MIND!!!

 

[Wry Catcher]

It really is a sad state of affairs when a Legislation has to be introduced requiring Congress people to obey the law.

Many, many laws passed by The Congress do not apply to them, and this is one of them.

How is it that a member of Congress can parlay his or her salary into estates worth millions of dollars in a few years in office?

 

[Montrovant]

Did anyone else glance at the thread title and see Scott Pilgrim?