Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

laffingriver t1_j5wogz9 wrote

way i heard it was he didnt fully support other versions because it banned members, immediate family/spouses and secondary relatives.

this bill doesnt say anything about secondary family members.

so he could still have his brother in law trade on whatever.

3

turbulance4 OP t1_j5zbgaw wrote

Where did you hear that from?

1

laffingriver t1_j5zuhc0 wrote

i think it was him speaking to a media scrum at the capitol or maybe on the floor in response to the previous bill. it may have been someone at his office when i called about it. but i remember him talking about how he felt a secondary family member ban was going to far. ill see of i can find it but i have a life to live too.

i read his bill from the link provided by the hill and it says only immediate family members.

it doesnt specify any rules regarding a blind trust other than referencing another law, which is likely full of loopholes and that will need to be addressed too.

the point being this is a gesture in bad faith that im sure a lot of americans would support but its dead on arrival because he and other members make too much money off it, or their wall street friends who make a percentage on the trades wont make campaign donations. cant let that well dry up.

3

turbulance4 OP t1_j5zvc7q wrote

Is it better to have some restrictions (with possible loopholes), or no restrictions?

0

laffingriver t1_j60315u wrote

if the restriction has loopholes written into the law by the peopleset to benefit from the loophole is it really a restriction?

if the law is in place but has no teeth, is it worth the paper its written on?

congressional corruption is bigger than their abilities to trade stocks. so the solution needs to be bigger than that.

and again this bill is performative bs, everyone sees it, he is clearly trolling, its going nowhere so why even take it seriously?

2

turbulance4 OP t1_j607hih wrote

Allowing the congress person to personally do the inside trading vs forcing the to recruit their family does add some friction to the corruption.

0

turbulance4 OP t1_j5zwglz wrote

I understand the issue you getting at, but I also see the other perspective. For example, if my dad became a senator I'd def feel a little strange that I now was barred from interacting with the stock market.

−1