Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hawley introduces Pelosi Act banning lawmakers from trading stocks ('PELOSI ACT', cue Hah-hah kid)
The Hill ^ | 1/24/23 | Stephen Neukam

Posted on 01/25/2023 7:04:15 AM PST by C210N

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has introduced a bill that would ban members of Congress from trading and owning stocks, using the name of his legislation to take a jab at Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Hawley on Tuesday introduced the Pelosi Act — or the Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments Act — renewing a legislative push to curtail stock trading by lawmakers that has failed over the last few years.

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; US: California; US: Missouri
KEYWORDS: california; google; joshhawley; missouri; nancypelosi; pelosi; stephenneukam; thehill
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last
Using the Trumpian style of naming things and people.
1 posted on 01/25/2023 7:04:15 AM PST by C210N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Pelosi “ “I got mine . . hahahaha”.


2 posted on 01/25/2023 7:05:01 AM PST by BipolarBob (The rumor has not been confirmed until the FBI officially denies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N

P. E. L. O. S. I. Act.
Perfect!


3 posted on 01/25/2023 7:08:51 AM PST by milagro (There is no peace in appeasement! There)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N
a bill that would ban members of Congress from trading and owning stocks

Does nothing for their spouses,and is ridiculous on the face of it.

If I had a decent portfolio and decided to run for office, if I won I would have to divest all of my stocks?

That's just another nail in the coffin of honest, decent Americans running for office and leaves it all to the swamp monsters.

4 posted on 01/25/2023 7:09:38 AM PST by grobdriver (The CDC can KMA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N

Completely useless unless you ban family members and any organizations (charitable or otherwise) that they may have formed, or sit on the board of.


5 posted on 01/25/2023 7:10:21 AM PST by z3n (Kakistocracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N

I’d like Mitch to pledge passage in 2024.


6 posted on 01/25/2023 7:10:48 AM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: z3n

Yep, it has a monster loophole.

But, if for no other reason than being highlighted in a news cycle or two for its name and cause to wake up sheeple, it is worth it.

The whole congress needs to collapse from its swamp weight, but there are some sparks of light - this Act is one. Another is McCarthy’s interview where he lambasts a nutty reporter and answers why Shiffty and Swallow-well will not be on the intelligence committee - worth a view if you have not already seen it.


7 posted on 01/25/2023 7:15:51 AM PST by C210N (Everything will be okay in the end. If it’s not okay, it’s not the end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: C210N
Preventing Elected Leaders From Owning Securities And Investments
8 posted on 01/25/2023 7:16:20 AM PST by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N
Love it!

Even if the MSM objects, they can't ignore the title.

9 posted on 01/25/2023 7:18:16 AM PST by G Larry ( "woke" means 'stupid enough to fall for the promotion of every human weakness into a virtue')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N

Meaningless.

They are already forbidden to engage in insider trading.

So now their relatives get the sweet deals ... what pure coincidence!


10 posted on 01/25/2023 7:20:57 AM PST by Rurudyne (Standup Philosopher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N

Isn’t that what the STOCK Act was for?

If this passes, it should but it won’t, what will folks like Crenshaw do?


11 posted on 01/25/2023 7:21:34 AM PST by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N
Problem: It was her husband and Feinstein's husband who handled the stock deals. Would the spouse's be included?
12 posted on 01/25/2023 7:21:35 AM PST by Michael.SF. ( The problem today: people are more concerned about feelings than responsibility)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

An anti-capitalist solution is not gonna be a solution.

Better to make their trades public.


13 posted on 01/25/2023 7:22:30 AM PST by Rurudyne (Standup Philosopher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: C210N

They get caught...so what, nothing is going to happen to them, laws have to have some consequences behind them to be effective and currently, US law is an absolute JOKE.


14 posted on 01/25/2023 7:22:49 AM PST by The Louiswu (- .-. ..- -- .--. / ..--- ----- ..--- ....-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C210N; All

There is a giant loophole, but some of that information would be coming from briefings about certain things. Stuff that the general public may or may not privy to.

No different than how classified information is supposed to be treated.

The problem with the whole this thing and the STOCK Act, is enforcing it. Enforce it for one, enforce it for all.

We all, would have no problem with it, but with Congress it’s ‘honor among thieves’ and they aren’t going to snitch on their pals.


15 posted on 01/25/2023 7:24:33 AM PST by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rurudyne

Good point


16 posted on 01/25/2023 7:26:08 AM PST by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver

It includes spouses.

https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2023-01/LEW23036.pdf

‘‘(a) PROHIBITION.—Except as provided in sub-24
section (b), a Member of Congress, or any spouse of a25
4
LEW23036 MPH S.L.C.
Member of Congress, may not, during the term of service1
of the Member of Congress, hold, purchase, or sell any2
covered financial instrument.3
‘‘(b) EXCEPTIONS.—The prohibition under sub-4
section (a) shall not apply to—5
‘‘(1) a sale by a Member of Congress, or a6
spouse of a Member of Congress, that is completed7
by the date that is—8
‘‘(A) for a Member of Congress serving on9
the date of enactment of the Preventing Elected10
Leaders from Owning Securities and Invest-11
ments (PELOSI) Act, 180 days after that date12
of enactment; and13
‘‘(B) for any Member of Congress who14
commences service as a Member of Congress15
after the date of enactment of the Preventing16
Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and17
Investments (PELOSI) Act, 180 days after the18
first date of the initial term of service; or19
‘‘(2) a covered financial instrument held in a20
qualified blind trust operated on behalf of, or for the21
benefit of, the Member of Congress or spouse of the22
Member of Congress


17 posted on 01/25/2023 7:29:03 AM PST by clockwise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: C210N

Preventing
Elected
Leaders from
Owning
Securities and
Investments
Act

Lovin’ it!

Especially since this witch really seemed to love pushing destructive bills with these innocuous sounding names.

The DREAM Act was one. Can’t recall all the others at the moment.

I must have blocked them out of my mind, just to retain my sanity.


18 posted on 01/25/2023 7:29:25 AM PST by Subcutaneous Fishstick Blues
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Biden says he doesn’t need any stinking stocks to be rich.

Paper can be worth millions.


19 posted on 01/25/2023 7:31:08 AM PST by Vaduz (LAWYERS )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BipolarBob

Exactly. Other than the personal dig, she’s already made her fortune with insider trading. As well as many others.


20 posted on 01/25/2023 7:32:26 AM PST by sjmjax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson