Recs

40

Ambush on Capitol Hill!

Watch stocks you care about

The single, easiest way to keep track of all the stocks that matter...

Your own personalized stock watchlist!

It's a 100% FREE Motley Fool service...

Click Here Now

Salary of members of the United States Congress: $174,000.

Average annual Civil Service Retirement System benefits for retired members as of 2007: $63,696.

Profits they can make by trading on inside information: Priceless.

Up on Capitol Hill, the STOCK Act's march toward becoming law has been swift, thanks largely to pressure that you, the Foolish community, have put on your elected representatives. This law, which would ban insider trading in Congress and require members to disclose their stock trades in a timely manner, is no longer "orphaned legislation." From a bare half-dozen supporters just one month ago, it's grown into a monster movement backed by 222 co-signing representatives today. Here's how the map looks:

anImage

But like they say in Congress: "Money talks." With individual members of Congress standing to make big bucks from trading on inside information under the status quo, you have to expect there will be bumps on the road to passage. Today, we hit one.

Cantor cracks the whip
On Tuesday, the STOCK Act received its first serious attention in Congress, when Congressman Spencer Bachus' House Financial Services Committee held a generally favorable committee hearing on the legislation. Surprisingly, Bachus -- who's caught some flak over allegations that he personally benefited from the lack of trading restrictions in Congress -- announced in Tuesday's meeting that he'll give the act a second hearing next week, then proceed to the House floor for open debate.

Then Cantor cracked the whip. As reported on Politico, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor smacked down his colleague for failing to seek approval from Republican brass. Perhaps that's not surprising. After all, disclosure filings from Cantor show he leads a pretty active trading lifestyle -- investing in everything from ethanol producer Archer Daniels Midland (NYSE: ADM  ) to utilities like Con Ed (NYSE: ED  ) and Georgia Power (NYSE: GAR  ) , to mining operations Cameco (NYSE: CCJ  ) , Newmont (NYSE: NEM  ) , and Rio Tinto (NYSE: RIO  ) . He's even alleged to have shorted the U.S. Treasury market in the middle of the financial crisis, trading shares of the ProShares Trust Ultrashort 20+ Year Treasury ETF (NYSE: TBT  ) . (Need I even say it? Rep. Cantor is not a co-signer on the bill.)

Whatever Cantor's motivations, though, after emerging from a closed-door meeting with his "boss," Bachus announced late Wednesday night that the STOCK Act will in fact not be receiving a second hearing -- nor will it be heading to the House floor anytime soon. Instead, he needs "additional time to study this issue before the committee moves forward with the markup that was announced for Dec. 14." And not just that, but the act now must run the gauntlet of "five other House committees" before it sees the light of day.

Unacceptable
This, dear Fools, must not stand. With apologies to our elected representatives for their creative efforts, I have to say: As stalling tactics go, this is pretty bald-faced. While there are certainly flaws in the STOCK Act as currently drafted, these flaws consist in the restrictions not being tough enough. For example, the act requires members of Congress to disclose their stock trades a mere four times a year, rather than disclosing an intent to trade before buying or selling stock -- the standard that we adhere to here at the Fool in all of our newsletter recommendations.

Could the bill be better? Sure. But let's be crystal clear: Some limitation on insider trading in Congress is better than no limits at all. And already, 222 members of Congress -- from both sides of the aisle, mind you -- have put their names and their reputations on the line, co-signing the STOCK Act and saying in effect: "Yes, we know the bill needs improvement. But no, don't kill it in committee again -- as you've done three times already, since the bill was first introduced in 2006. We want to take a look and make those improvements."

 Here at the Fool, we second that motion. This is going to sound trite, but I'm going to say it anyway: This is still a democracy, Mr. Cantor, and in a democracy, the majority's vote is supposed to count for something. Here at the Fool, we've heard from thousands of individual investors demanding passage of the STOCK Act. Up on Capitol Hill, 222 of your colleagues agree with us. 222 out of 435 voting representatives... unless my math is off, that adds up to a majority.

So do what the majority demands, Mr. Cantor. Release the STOCK Act from committee. Bring it to the floor. Allow America to vote.

What can you do to help? If you support the STOCK Act:

  • Send a blank email to imoscovitz@fool.com to let us know that trading on inside knowledge of upcoming laws in Congress is not OK with you. We'll keep you apprised of where the legislation's at, and what you can do to help move it forward.
  • And don't feel compelled to wait on us, either. Take direct action to get this law passed: Add your voice to the petition urging Congress to get off its keister and pass the STOCK Act now!

The Steve Jobs Betrayal
You may already know that in the final year of his life, Jobs revealed a stunning betrayal — and told his biographer, "I will spend my last dying breath... and every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank to right this wrong." What was it that made Jobs so irate — and why could it make a few in-the-know investors some major profits over the coming months and years?

Enter your email address below to find out what made Jobs so enraged!

Unlike certain members of Congress we could mention, Fool contributor Rich Smith does not own (or short) shares of any company named above. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of Dominion Resources. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.


Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On December 10, 2011, at 1:03 AM, Chemsoldier88 wrote:

    Keep up the good work Rich. I've already emailed my representatives.

  • Report this Comment On December 11, 2011, at 11:23 AM, JavaManOne wrote:

    If you haven't read the book by Peter Schweizer, "Throw Them All Out:" it's worth your reading, but be prepared to have your hackles raised.

    In a nutshell, what's good for the Goose is not good for the Gander. i.e. Us vs. Them.

    This book names names and demonstrates just how unlevel the playing field of investments is not.

  • Report this Comment On December 11, 2011, at 9:34 PM, Merton123 wrote:

    I don't believe that the STOCK Act is good legislation. For example Motley Fools Rich Smith asserts that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was using inside information when trading in Archer Daniels in the above article. Your proof sir?

    The Stock Act means that any innocent congressman making a trade of any stock could be accussed of insider trading just as Rich Smith has done. How do you prove a negative? How do you prove that Eric Cantor was not using insider information when trading recently in Archer Daniels?

    Yes - congress has been exempted from insider trading rules that applies to the rest of us for a variety of good reasons as Rich Smith unfounded allegations of insider trading demonstrate.

    Motley Fool has written several articles talking about the incredible stock picking skills of our congress. Okay - instead of being jealous why don't you start following them as you follow Warren Buffet every stock move?

  • Report this Comment On December 11, 2011, at 10:47 PM, NJMoneyMedic wrote:

    If that is truly the case Merton, if these elected officials are TRULY "innocent", as you seem to imply, then the Stock Act should be passed through with a resounding "Yes voting America! We want you to know we are innocent of insider trading, and we will prove it by passing this legislation that keeps the playing field level, AND keeps us above reproach."

    I am not jealous, as many others are not. I am not about judging men guilty without proof. But I AM damn tired of rhetoric. Action speaks, rhetoric just moves the air.

    Pass the Stock Act.

  • Report this Comment On December 11, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Bujutsu wrote:

    I agree. Pass the Stock Act. If there isn't any insider trading going on, then there is no need for our Congressmen to worry.

  • Report this Comment On December 12, 2011, at 1:10 AM, TMFDitty wrote:

    @Merton123: You ask why we do not "follow" the stock trades of Congressmen "like we follow Warren Buffett."

    The simple answer is that what you suggest is not possible. Congressmen (and a few of their most senior staffers) are only required to provide general financial information on their holdings, and only once per year. Mr. Buffett, in contrast, must file quarterly reports.

    The STOCK Act, as currently drafted, would require quarterly reports by Congressmen and their staffers.

    TMFDitty

  • Report this Comment On December 12, 2011, at 1:32 AM, ajner wrote:

    Merton:

    Stop apologizing for congress.

    In my work, I am repeatedly in situations that give me inside information, and I am expressly forbidden from trading on this information. Why should congress be treated with a different set of guidelines than the rest of us? Seriously, Merton, I want to watch you attempt an answer to that question.

    If congress were as good at working their jobs as they are at cashing in on them, then our country would certainly be better off. Let's take that profit motive away, and see if congress can do anything at all, other than admiring their portfolios. Given their terrible performance on capitol hill, most Americans are no longer inclined to look the other way.

    -AJner

  • Report this Comment On December 12, 2011, at 11:01 AM, atkinskd wrote:

    More importantly Congress holds the reigns that steer key indutries - so whether they inside trade or not they drive the directions and focus of the economy to the greater degree.

    Here's how this Should work -

    Trading: Illegal in it's entirely. Should a representative wish to resume trading then hopefully his/her term in office has lent itself to an improvement overall whereby once they have left office they may resume their regular practices.

    Compensation: Based on their constituents income or perhaps a multiple thereof.

    Pay Raises: See Compensation - if their constituents situations are not improved, well I'm sorry Mr(s) senator neither are yours.

    Retirement: None. With your skillset how much more fleecing must be endured. Enough is Enough. The Stock Act is but the pacifier we are being given and they are squawking about.

  • Report this Comment On December 12, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Merton123 wrote:

    Thankyou for your responses to my post.

    I remember reading a couple weeks past a MF article which quoted someone stating that Senators outperformed the market by X percent and Congressman outperformed the market by X percent. I wondered at that time why the Senators were outperforming the Congressman? How did that individual get the information to come up with those results.

    My understanding of the insider trading rules was to discourage people who have a fiduciary relationship (i.e., member of the Board of Directors and/or employee of a business) from trading on their company stocks without first disclosing the information. There is also a requirement for certain employees of a firm to disclose their purchases and sales of their own company stock.

    Does Congress have the same fiduciary responsibility that these individuals have? The rule making process is suppossed to be transparent and open to the general public. When a law is passed (that is a public event) anyone can determine who will win or lose by this regulation.

    Thankyou again for responding to my post. I am located on the West Coast so normally right after I post my opinion another main article is posted and I am usually the lost word about the old article

  • Report this Comment On December 12, 2011, at 7:20 PM, TMFDitty wrote:

    There appears to be no fiduciary duty, ascribed by law, that Congress owes. To whom would it be owed? After all, the Congressman does not work for the corporation (at least not officially ;-)

    And yes, once a law is passed, its passage is public knowledge. But Congressmen are privy to inside information about a law's chances for passage, about laws contemplated but not yet drafted, about investigations of companies that are planned, etc., etc., etc.

    That this knowledge is valuable can be inferred from the superior profits earned by those having access to it -- and not earned by those without.

    TMFDitty

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 1739496, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 5/26/2012 11:12:30 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Today's Market

updated 1 day ago Sponsored by:
DOW 12,454.83 -74.92 -0.60%
S&P 500 1,317.82 -2.86 -0.22%
NASD 2,837.53 -1.85 -0.07%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

5/25/2012 3:58 PM
GAR $26.29 Up +0.19 +0.73%
GEORGIA POWER CO. CAPS Rating: No stars
NEM $48.82 Up +0.19 +0.39%
Newmont Mining Cor… CAPS Rating: ***
RIO $43.95 Down -0.78 -1.74%
Rio Tinto plc (ADR… CAPS Rating: ****
ADM $32.25 Up +0.15 +0.47%
Archer Daniels Mid… CAPS Rating: ****
CCJ $19.17 Down -0.12 -0.62%
Cameco Corp (USA) CAPS Rating: *****
ED $59.61 Up +0.02 +0.03%
Consolidated Ediso… CAPS Rating: ****

Advertisement