4 ms·

Doesn't the STOCK Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act) explicitly ban Congresspeople from insider trading? The

by martey 11y ago

Doesn't the STOCK Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act) explicitly ban Congresspeople from insider trading? The only study on the performance on Congressional stock portfolios is from 2004 [1]. Do you know of any post-STOCK studies? [1]: Ziobrowski, A.J., Cheng, P.X., Boyd, J.W., and Ziobrowski, B.J. (2004) “Abnormal Returns from the Common Stock Investments of Members of the United States Senate.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp. 661-676. (http://www.walkerd.people.cofc.edu/400/Sobel/P-04.%20Ziobrowski%20-%20Abnormal%20Returns%20US%20Senate.pdf http://www.walkerd.people.cofc.edu/400/Sobel/P-04.%20Ziobrow...)

bsbechtel 11y ago
I'm pretty sure the key provisions of the STOCK Act were repealed the same weekend as the Boston Marathon Bombings. See the amendment section of the Wikipedia article you linked to.
- martey 11y ago
  The amendment makes it significantly more difficult to detect insider trading (since financial disclosure reports are not available online), but I wouldn't describe it as a repeal of the law's "key provisions". See http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/16/177496734/how-congress-quietly-overhauled-its-insider-trading-law http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/16/177496... : "Still, two major elements of the law remain. Insider trading is illegal, even for members of Congress and the executive branch. And for those who are covered by the now-narrower law, disclosures of large stock trades are required within 45 days."
  - tzs 11y ago
    > The amendment makes it significantly more difficult to detect insider trading (since financial disclosure reports are not available online) That's only for staff. The reports for Congress members are still required to be available online. They are here [1]. [1] http://clerk.house.gov/public_disc/financial.aspx http://clerk.house.gov/public_disc/financial.aspx
uptown 11y ago
NOPE! "Congress Quickly And Quietly Rolls Back Insider Trading Rules For Itself" "It was such a national risk that Congress did the whole thing quietly, with no debate. The bill was introduced in the Senate on Thursday and quickly voted on late that night when no one was paying attention. Friday afternoon (the best time to sneak through news), the House picked it up by unanimous consent. The House ignored its own promise to give Congress three days to read a bill before holding a vote, because this kind of thing is too important to let anyone read the bill before Congress had to pass it." https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130416/08344222725/congress-quickly-quietly-rolls-back-insider-trading-rules-itself.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130416/08344222725/congr...
- martey 11y ago
  I already explained this in my reply to bsbechtel's comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10045388 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10045388). The amendment makes retrieving disclosure reports more difficult, but does not repeal the STOCK Act's explicit prohibition on insider trading by politicians.

by martey 11y ago

bsbechtel 11y ago

I'm pretty sure the key provisions of the STOCK Act were repealed the same weekend as the Boston Marathon Bombings. See the amendment section of the Wikipedia article you linked to.

martey 11y ago
The amendment makes it significantly more difficult to detect insider trading (since financial disclosure reports are not available online), but I wouldn't describe it as a repeal of the law's "key provisions". See http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/16/177496734/how-congress-quietly-overhauled-its-insider-trading-law http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/16/177496... : "Still, two major elements of the law remain. Insider trading is illegal, even for members of Congress and the executive branch. And for those who are covered by the now-narrower law, disclosures of large stock trades are required within 45 days."
- tzs 11y ago
  > The amendment makes it significantly more difficult to detect insider trading (since financial disclosure reports are not available online) That's only for staff. The reports for Congress members are still required to be available online. They are here [1]. [1] http://clerk.house.gov/public_disc/financial.aspx http://clerk.house.gov/public_disc/financial.aspx

uptown 11y ago

NOPE! "Congress Quickly And Quietly Rolls Back Insider Trading Rules For Itself" "It was such a national risk that Congress did the whole thing quietly, with no debate. The bill was introduced in the Senate on Thursday and quickly voted on late that night when no one was paying attention. Friday afternoon (the best time to sneak through news), the House picked it up by unanimous consent. The House ignored its own promise to give Congress three days to read a bill before holding a vote, because this kind of thing is too important to let anyone read the bill before Congress had to pass it." https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130416/08344222725/congress-quickly-quietly-rolls-back-insider-trading-rules-itself.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130416/08344222725/congr...

martey 11y ago
I already explained this in my reply to bsbechtel's comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10045388 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10045388). The amendment makes retrieving disclosure reports more difficult, but does not repeal the STOCK Act's explicit prohibition on insider trading by politicians.