STOCK ACT to stop insider trading
February 1st, 2012
02:27 PM ET
2 years ago

STOCK ACT to stop insider trading

Washington (CNN) - The president will not oppose a Republican-proposed change to the STOCK Act (Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge), a senior administration official tells CNN. The bill would make clear that insider trading of stocks and other securities by members of Congress, their spouses and staffs are illegal.

Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) are pushing for the bill to apply to the executive branch as well.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Congress • White House
soundoff (13 Responses)
  1. Mikey

    Of course it should apply to the Executive Branch. I certainly hope that anyone covered by this act who diseminates inside information to family members, business partners, friends, or any other third party would also be subject to penalties equivalent to any inside trading violatoins in the market.

    February 1, 2012 02:45 pm at 2:45 pm |
  2. Al-NY,NY

    Of course, the 2 who opposed it in the Senate were..............

    wait for it..........

    Republicans!!!!
    -----
    "While Republicans and Democrats agree the executive branch should also be scrutinized, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell suggested the likelihood of wrongdoing was greater among administration officials than members of Congress."
    -----

    and what exactly is your proof of this Mumbles? Would you say that if Mittens becomes (not gonna happen) or when Duh Duh Duh-bya was president?

    February 1, 2012 02:48 pm at 2:48 pm |
  3. GonzoinHouston

    I don't think congressmen change their votes to benefit their portfolios, but I do think they change their portfolios based on what they hear in committee meetings. This law is appropriate and overdue.

    February 1, 2012 02:48 pm at 2:48 pm |
  4. GROVER NORQUIST IS A ENEMY OF THE STATE

    OMG! Congress is actually trying to pass something meaningful.

    February 1, 2012 02:48 pm at 2:48 pm |
  5. Sniffit

    "Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) are pushing for the bill to apply to the executive branch as well."

    Translation: They hoped to insist on adding something that would get Obama to oppose the bill and make him take the heat for it not passing, beacuse they don't actually want it to pass, but it didn't work. Anyone want to take a guess at how quickly they find another excuse for blocking the bill?

    February 1, 2012 02:54 pm at 2:54 pm |
  6. LacrosseMom(real one)

    Yes, STOP insider trading! Its illegal, why has it been okay for Congress?

    February 1, 2012 02:58 pm at 2:58 pm |
  7. michaelam

    @Sniffit-You mean the President is playing "Rope-a-Dope" again?
    When are these GOPers going to grasp that President Obama WILL outsmart them all of the time!

    February 1, 2012 03:07 pm at 3:07 pm |
  8. Rudy NYC

    Can the Congress pass legislation that restricts the powers of the Executive Branch? Or does it take an amendment?

    February 1, 2012 03:37 pm at 3:37 pm |
  9. MTATL67

    Be sure to check if Mr. Keystone aka Speaker Boehner's cut of this oil pipeline is not against the law.

    February 1, 2012 03:47 pm at 3:47 pm |
  10. Sniffit

    "Can the Congress pass legislation that restricts the powers of the Executive Branch? Or does it take an amendment?"

    That's not really what they'd be doing. This is in the vein of legislating criminal activity and commerce and would not touch upon the Executive Branch's Constitutional authorities and powers. In particular, the POTUS's investment behavior is a personal matter not within the scope of his employment as POTUS, etc. To the extent that it did in some weird situation down the road cause some conflict between Exec and Legislative powers (altho I can't really imagine a scenario in which it would), then I think the legislation would stand but be interpreted as inapplicable in that situation for some reason. Of course, the SCOTUS would decide, so it would probably depend heavily on which party that POTUS belonged to, because the conservatives on the Court right now would certainly take their cues from what would be most beneficial to the GOP and invent their decision accordingly.

    February 1, 2012 03:50 pm at 3:50 pm |
  11. A Texan

    Bout time, however, now that the Supreme Court decided corporation are people too, no need for insider info as they have a much bigger "stash of cash" to draw from........... corporations ... DUH !!!!

    February 1, 2012 03:53 pm at 3:53 pm |
  12. Four and The Door

    Sniffit
    "Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) are pushing for the bill to apply to the executive branch as well."
    Translation: They hoped to insist on adding something that would get Obama to oppose the bill and make him take the heat for it not passing, beacuse they don't actually want it to pass, but it didn't work.
    ________________________________________________________________________________________________
    I think you missed the boat on your translation. In reality, Obama threw this out there in his State of the Union as if he invented it ( which he did not ) and he was clamping down. ( By the way, Pelosi making $50,000 on VISA was the worst offender ). So if Obama wants to take credit for it he should also abide by it, don't you think?

    February 1, 2012 04:14 pm at 4:14 pm |
  13. gg

    i,ll believe corp are people when texas executes one

    February 1, 2012 04:21 pm at 4:21 pm |