It doesn't sit right with me either. That would be like a union voting to lower wages.

I wonder what else is in this piece of legislature that might not be obvious. You know how they like to bundle stuff...

So who enforces this law?

Since when congress follow the laws they pass?

I mean, they pass drug laws, I'm sure most of them take drugs.

They pass laws against bribery, they get bribes every single days.

They say an oath to preserve the constitution, every single bill they pass violates it.

Sorry but unless the FBI/Cops do their FREAKING JOBS AND ENFORCE THE LAWS nothing will change.

It was funny when Obama brought it up in the SOTU address. The legislature didn't seem to know to stand or sit or clap or scowl.

I don't trust anything they do - I'd have to read it.

Originally posted by Ghost375
So who enforces this law?

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Does it just get put on the books to look good, but be ignored?

Kind of hard to enforce something like this when we haven't even jailed a big banker yet.

President asked for this bill to be sent to his desk and he would sign it immediately, but I thought he said it knowing there is no way in Hades that it would ever make it to his desk..

This news makes it a distinct possibility, especially with the 98-2 approval..

On to the House... I wonder who will stand up opposed to making sure that member's of Congress fall under "insider trading" laws they legislate for the rest of us? Election year tells me that if you hear of any, they will most likely be ones that aren't seeking reelection?..

Wonder if there is any built in loopholes within this one? I doubt that there will be any retroactive deal, this will be going forward (if passed and signed into law).


Thanks to 60 Minutes for bringing this once again to the folks attention, they sure acted quickly in reaction..

Now if they would only pass a budget! it's going on what? 3+ years? Perhaps a bill stating that until Congress passes the year's budget, they receive ZERO pay.. and they do not receive back pay once they do..

Who were the 3 to vote against it is my question?

In my excitement that this passed 93-2, I overlooked that ...

the Senate agreed to proceed with debate on the Stop Trading On Congressional Knowledge, or STOCK Act. The legislation specifically prohibits federal lawmakers from trading stocks based on nonpublic information they have obtained in the course of their congressional work.

Guess this means that it will now be part of their next legislative session?

House plans..

A House Republican leadership aide told CBS News that lawmakers will take up their version of the STOCK Act by the end of February. House Republicans plan to expand the legislation beyond the Senate bill to include non-stock investments and also include executive branch officials and employees.

** both quotes from OP sourced article..


Still good news, though not as good as I originally thought, still time for Congress to do their magic shell trick and leave this on the table..

While this is something that needs to come to an end, this is the least of my worries. Why not end congressional lobbying, for a start, and get our politicians out of the wallets of big-business? IMHO we should do away with all politicians, and replace them with philosophers, because philosophers actually understand the concepts that are involved in government, as well as know the occurrences of the past. Our congressmen don't even know what they are signing most of the time, so does anyone think that they are doing anything close to pondering the essence of our problems? I don't.

Since when was insider trader ever legal to begin with?