She’s co-sponsoring a bill to make it illegal for members of congress to trade stocks while serving. I totally agree. They make an excellent salary, their retirement benefits are superb. I believe they have a pension and a 401k. And nearly every one of them leaves office filthy rich.
“We are here to serve the people, not to profiteer.”
Put your financial interests on hold for a few years while you serve. Delay your greed for a while. I like it it.
She doesn’t have any stocks. Horrible plan.
She’s in congress. She has a 401k. And a pension. And a fat salary. They don’t all go in to congress rich, but they all come out rich. They all know this before they are sworn in. The last thing I am worrying about is the financial security of congress. They will do fine. They need to focus on service.
They are citizens.
I generally agree but how can they prevent spouses from doing stock trades in their name instead? It’s a big loophole.
What difference does it make?
But they are not subject to the same laws as citizens. As citizens, have they pledged to accept “medicare for all for themselves?” They have also given themselves the right to use inside information to trade stocks. Why do you suppose they all come out worth millions?
You make an excellent point. Close the loophole. How would you do it?
Why?
…
Have they?
I dont know how politicians go in without alot of wealth n always seem to get filthy rich working for government, (I have an idea how it happens, n its sleazy. They have the morals of alley cats), but I’m getting pretty tired of them getting filthy rich n looking down on us “peasants” whom they work for n telling us how they will spend our money.
This “stimulus” shouldn’t have earmarks for special interests, on EITHER SIDE. Oversight, yes, especially concerning big company bailouts…no stock buy- backs, etc. But insisting on “Green New Deal” provisions is just wrong. The people have the right to vote on things going in that direction n them trying to force it during this sort of crisis shows where their true intentions lie. Some folks are really hurting for money to feed their kids, buy prescriptions, etc… n to say “sorry u need money, but we arent gonna let it be given if u dont fund our pet political projects” is as sleazy as it gets.
So they can focus on service not profiteering.
Bottom line is this. The bill will never see the light of day. Congress will not allow anything to get between them and their enrichment.
Great illustration of the fair/cheating moral foundation as espoused by Haight.
Vote him out.
They aren’t there to “serve”.
Apparently they are “close” to reaching a deal. If it’s something that Schumer agrees to. It’s probably a garbage filled, hyper political ■■■■ show.
Ridiculous. Congresspeople don’t give up their rights when they get elected, they should be able to invest like anyone else. And like anyone else, they should be subject to rigorous oversight and held accountable when they break the rules.
Well one works there so would theoretically have to comply under employment rules. The spouse however isn’t employed and has no reason to comply. I’m all for preventing unfair enrichment thru skeezy stock trading but it feels like parts of any proposal will be doomed. I haven’t read it yet. I’ll be back afterwards.
Sure they are. They serve themselves.
Ok…
I’m not a big fan of ANY politician.
