Here is a link to the story http://www.thestatecolumn.com/articles/senate-passes-the-stock-act/ Reportedly, if a U.S. Senator or congressman or staffer indulges in insider trading for their own financial gain, and is convicted, they would also forfeit their pensions – which is a big deal as those are fat and juicy pensions that private jobs do not have. It has been scandalous that insider trading was rendered legal for Capitol hill. The 96 to 3 vote is a rare show of bipartisanship in the public interest, perhaps due to the current single digit approval rating of Congress. Of note, U.S. Senator Scott Brown reportedly is one of the two lead sponsers.
Let us see what the Republican House does. I dare them not to pass this ASAP.
There is a lot here to make Senators and Representatives “squirm” but some of it is long overdue: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/208177-stock-act-now-making-senators-squirm
And oh yes, THANKS Occupy for changing the conversation from cutting the social compact to social injustice and how to care for the vulnerable and make our economy work for the 99% http://99occupyonline.com/post/16954737623/breaking-news-the-stock-act-passed-senate
Brown is cosponsor and since I guess the powers that be want us to drop the fact that Brown came to this religion of government responsibility late, he finally has one up on Warren…BUT WAIT!
This past Tuesday in West Springfield (shameless self-promotion alert), Warren called on the Senate to make the bill stronger. Well, so what she’s not a Senator and this Brown’s moment in the sun. Indeed, it is, but not just one Brown.
Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio, called on the Senate to approve an amendment to ban Congressional ownership of stocks. While it was apparently not added to the STOCK Act, it was exactly the reform Warren called for. Suddenly, Brown’s big moment become another problem even if he never faces a vote on the issue.
The Sherrod Brown amendment was voted on last night and Scott Brown did vote for it, but it doesn’t change the arithmetic of the fact that Warren’s suggestion came before his vote on the matter. It basically puts the STOCK Act as a slight net benefit for Brown, but a muddled one that Warren can still campaign on.
The Sherrod Brown amendment was voted on last night (it failed) and Scott Brown did vote for it, but it doesn’t change the arithmetic of the fact that Warren’s suggestion came before his vote on the matter. It basically puts the STOCK Act as a slight net benefit for Brown, but a muddled one that Warren can still campaign on.
THIS STOCK ACT and why it matters is not about Elizabeth Warren or Scott Brown. Note that NEITHER are mentioned in my post – and yeah “All EW all the time” is no way to make the political sell with folks like me.
In fact, that tangent makes ME feel like my post was HIGH JACKED.
THIS post is about the power of social media – like the Kumen Foundation doing a 180 on allowing care for breast cancer surivivors where some folks go for abortions, and the whole political dialogue changing from “how many cuts can we get away with” to “how can we clean up Capitol Hill & Beacon Hill” AND reduce social inequality and FEED People.
No need to get touchy. Your point is well taken. BTW, my double post on an update was a mistake. I certainly was not trying to highjack or shove Warren down your throat.
Your post does mention Brown, BTW and has, in and of itself, no reference to social media. So please forgive me if I did not pick up on the thrust of your piece regardless.
I should not have to say that you are a valuable member of this community amberpaw, but please don’t hold it against me or anybody else if we comment about whatever we feel is relevant to the post at hand. Aside from the Occupy logo, there is nothing that would lead us to believe you were going in one direction or otherwise prohibiting the commentariat from moving in another. I get your point, but please, deep healing breaths and little bit of clarity can go a long way to prevent this, um, misunderstanding from going any further.
And remember, you can always delete & repost a posting whose comments go too far off the reservation.
Your dispatches on Occupy Boston were invaluable, and I mean that. Between your work and others on BMG and a friend I met at Netroots who was there, I always felt informed!
The reason for the graphic was that without Occupy and the relentless spotlight on the corruption of our government and political process via corporate money , and the publicizing of the reality that Capitol Hill, both parties voted for and have taken advantage of the legalization of insider trading for themselves alone to enrich and engorge themselves.
I think the graphic and the “wrap” paragraph in fact make this very very clear. And it is true, I am accustomed to speaking my mind and not worrying about being politically correct or hitch hiking up the political ladder (and am not saying that you are).
But as to Occupy, frankly, Elizabeth Warren has been no friend, really. See http://youtu.be/TKiw8S7SUk0
Reforming Washington is a bipartisan issues worth more than just a campaign, and its good the Senate finally realized it needs to clean its act up, banning ALL corporation contributions via amendment is the best way to move forward and bring permanent lasting reform. This is what they need to do.
you know what passes 96 to 3, a bill that does absolutely nothing. It’s window dressing. The bill should have been written with blind trust included but it wasn’t purposes and added as an amendment for cover. So Senators could say they voted for the amendment. This is a watered down worthless bill. I wouldn’t highlight it as an organization as an achievement.