Fine for violating Congressional Stock Act is $200 [pdf] | Hacker News Reader

Fine for violating Congressional Stock Act is $200 [pdf]

ethics.house.gov

54 pointsJimmc41420 comments

Kind of a misleading title. The $200 fine is specifically a late fee for filing a report more slowly than the 30-45 day window after a trade is made. The punishments for insider trading, although I don't think they've ever been handed out since the STOCK Act passed, are much more severe.

"Malinowski has violated the STOCK Act 145 times totaling at least $845,000 in shady stock transactions, according to Business Insider, and now they’re reporting that he’s only paid a $200 fine for his transgressions.

But that $200 only covers one STOCK Act violation, per guidance from the House Ethics Committee – and Malinowski has broken the law multiple times."

https://www.nrcc.org/2021/12/15/malinowski-will-pay-for-his-...

The punishments that have never been handed out are much more severe?

Yeah, potentially decades in prison and millions in fines, vs just $200

Also, no public records exist that track those who has violate the Stock Act.

If that was not enough congressional members are shielded from any questions that arise from congressional discussions per the Speech and Debate Privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_or_Debate_Clause

For reference, the maximum penalty US citizens face for violating insider trading laws is $5,000,000 and 20 years in jail.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/25743/00013871311300...

Nancy Pelosi's thoughts on trading stocks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7OLtVTs0eI Rules for thee, not for me.

> Rules for thee, not for me.

Many times I think how to arbitrage and profit from any situation. I am envy that certian people can, and I cannot! What can I do to deserve same humane treatment?

I propose to setup a Nancy Fund.

We pool our money and give it to her for management. She makes say 1000% guaranteed profit by insider trading, and by manipulating the stock prices by issuing appropriate legislation. This is all legal, as a part of the governmental framework.

Of course she can take hefty management fees -- I do not mind. My risk-free net profit will be still better than any other investment!

It can become huge -- anybody can invest and everyone will get rich.

For further scaling other members of congress can be utilized also. Just make sure they do not issuing contradicting laws and policies, else this would cancel our profits.

How about this?

Sounds like lobbying for the poor.

Anyone that thought having a choice between 2 parties is really a choice at all is blind.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton%27s_fork

Flat rates in law are useless and often don't affect the rich. It should be proportional to the profit they made, just like minimum wage should be a percentage base on living wage in your area and age-cap in politics should be output of a function of longevity and lifespan.

I hate the way we do government. It does not scale.

I really don't understand why this is the hill everyone wants to die on about Congress. We want smart people in politics yet with the current zeitgeist I'd never in a million years recommend politics for a young person. And that's why we get only extremists and crazy folks running for office.

These people are incredibly smart, but also incredibly selfish. Smart != morality.

Didn't know that owning stock makes you selfish but k.

I think that's a bit of a strawman.

If everything has a price, the potential to receive that price without much risk encourages your selfishness. Owning stock while being able to make policies that can immediately affect that stock incentivizes selfishness.

Politicians are not suppose to be in the game of maximizing their personal profits.

I believe it's more the rampant insider trading that illustrates their selfishness.

Owning stock is not, but buying stock based on private information is insider trading. Engaging in insider trading is most definitely selfish, and technically illegal.

Trading with non public information

I think that if influential government legislators, regulators, or judges trade stocks, they should basically let the public know in real time or the same day.

That's better than banning trades IMO.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com