celebrity news
Does Nancy Pelosi Insider Trading Have It in for Insider Trading Bill? Some Democrats Point Finger at Her
This week, a bipartisan effort to prohibit members of Congress from trading stocks failed to pass through the House of Representatives and Nancy Pelosi Insider Trading, effectively guaranteeing that no action will be taken on this issue until after the midterm elections – if at all.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Insider Trading had stated her goal of passing a bill before members returned for their extended recess, yet some within her party are now accusing her of creating multiple delays and unnecessary roadblocks.
Pelosi, who previously opposed a ban on congressional stock trading, surprised many by introducing her own lengthy ethics bill earlier this week.
Pelosi’s bill appears to be an expansive plan from the outset. It would ban virtually all senior government officials from trading stocks, not just those in Congress.
But the proposal contains several significant flaws that have alarmed ethics watchdogs, and critics contend that expanding the proposed ban to include executive and judicial branches appears designed to stir up new opposition and reduce its chances of passage.
On Tuesday, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer–the person responsible for scheduling bills that go to a vote–told reporters the proposal had come too late and introduced too many new issues for him to schedule a vote before the November midterms.
According to good-government groups and members of Congress, the bill was written without input from many key lawmakers in the ongoing campaign to ban congressional stock trades.
On Friday, Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA.), who introduced a ban with Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) in January 2021, took issue with Hoyer and Pelosi for proposing “a kitchen-sink package that they knew would fail”.
“I don’t believe this bill was written to pass the House,” she told Business Insider in another interview. In another statement, she called for new party leadership in Washington D.C.
“This bill was clearly designed to fail.”
Watchdogs shared her worry that Pelosi and Hoyer were actively working to thwart any chance for reform.
Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette, manager of government affairs for the Project on Government Oversight, declared “This bill was intentionally written not to pass.” Pelosi can be effective when she wants something done, but her approach was not meant to achieve results – rather it said simply ‘We tried!'”
Critics have expressed concern that the bill would eliminate the high standard for blind trusts in favor of one which allows government officials to hide their assets from the public.
“This bill is like a bomb to the executive branch ethics program,” said Walter Shaub, a senior ethics fellow at the Project on Government Oversight who ran the U.S. Office of Government Ethics until he publicly disagreed with former President Donald Trump’s administration.
Other critics noted that parts of the bill dealing with the judiciary are poorly written, including language which could potentially be unconstitutional.
Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court – an organization advocating for comprehensive ethics reform of the judiciary – warned that expanding this bill to federal judges could spark opposition from one of Washington’s most powerful lobbying groups: Judicial Conference. As policymaking bodies for federal courts, their opinions would likely not be shared widely.
“Simply raising the issue invites new opposition when we know that the legislative branch faces the most pressing problems,” he warned.
What’s more, Congress has already passed part of a package to reform ethics requirements for federal judges. A second bill that would extend these reforms to the Supreme Court still awaits a vote.
On Friday, Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), a co-author of those judicial reforms, took to Twitter to urge House leadership not to bring the Supreme Court ethics bill up for a vote.
Friday, Pelosi fired back against accusations her bill was intended to fail, asserting her proposal had taken Spanberger’s reforms and “made the bill stronger.”
“Whatever the members wish to do, I fully endorse,” she declared.
Unfortunately, however, pro-government groups are acknowledging that a congressional stock ban appears unlikely in the current Congress.
Kedric Payne, general counsel and senior director of ethics for the Campaign Legal Center, noted that many members of Congress do not support a ban because it would “please voters but hurt their wallets.” He concluded by noting that
Also, Read-:
