People that can officially call it insider trading are the ones doing it.
This is incorrect. The STOCK Act banned insider trading by members of Congress in 2012 [1]. Disclosure requirements for staffers were amended in 2013 [2], but prohibitions on Congressmen remain in force [3].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act#Amendment
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_congressional_insider_tra...
Is it really "in force" when, despite much ado, no charges were brought in the linked scandal [1][2]? I don't really have a horse in this race, I just took issue with the particular example you referenced.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/26/us/politics/senators-stoc...
[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/19/doj-will-not-charge-sen-rich...
A Senator’s phone was subpoenaed by the FBI. That’s substantial. (The allegation was Burr had insider information on broad market movements. Absent direct evidence he misappropriated privileged information, that’s a tough charge to bring. Had he bought e.g. Moderna shares, prosecutors may have had a case.)
The whole thing, moreover, came to light because of the STOCK Act. There are now calls for bans on individual stock trading by Congressmen as a result of the evidence from these scandals.
I’m not defending the status quo. But it’s definitely improving and not a free for all.