Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Senate clears the way for vote on insider trading bill.

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 31, 2012, 5:19 p.m. EST by Kirby (104)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

This article made the back page in today's Minneapolis Star Tribune

18 Comments

18 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by enough (589) 2 years ago

The watered down Insider Trading Bill is a step in the right direction. We need this Congressional Reform Bill, which isn't even on the table yet.

  1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
  2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.
  3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
  4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
  5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
  6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
  7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.
[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Sound very reasonable to me.

[-] 1 points by rpc972 (628) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

One of many accomplishments Dems and Obama have made, Cons have fought or ignored, and corporate media buries or omits.

And you wonder why Cons and the conned think Dems and Obama have abandoned us?

Pay attention people, and apprise your uninformed friends.

also: IN DEPTH: Who The Hell Is Saul Alinsky? He's not the man Newt Gingrich - and many of the right-wing extremists - think he was.

Read more: http://www.randirhodes.com/pages/rrnews.html?feed=393046&article=9687222#ixzz1l5Z67AkC

[-] 0 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 2 years ago

There have been more Dems than Repubs promoting the legislation, I'll give you that, but it hasn't solely been Dems. In fact, the first Senate bill was sponsored by a Republican, the current bill by an Independent.

Judging by the history of the legislation, I primarily credit 60 Minutes with getting the legislation moving. It was after their story in November, (which featured huge insider trading $ made by Democratic House Minority Leader Pelosi BTW) that everyone started jumping on the bandwagon.

http://insidertrading.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004520

[-] 1 points by rpc972 (628) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

Representative Louise M. Slaughter, Democrat of New York, who has been pushing such legislation since 2006, urged House Republican leaders to stop their “continued stalling.” Having rushed to show their willingness to sign on (in the new limelight of the 60 Minutes segment and especially Obama's condemnation of the practice in his SOTU speech) Republicans wanted to "continue working" on the bill.

Buffet Rule: Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, introduced the bill codifying the principle that the top earners should pay at least the tax rate of middle-class workers.

Mr. Whitehouse said he might press his legislation as a stand-alone bill or try to attach it to other legislation.

“In theory,” Mr. Whitehouse said, “we have a progressive tax code in which the more successful you are, the more money you make, the greater rate you pay in taxation. Unfortunately what turns out to be the fact, in practice, is that you have these huge exceptions.”

Mr. Whitehouse noted that the billionaire investor Warren E. Buffett had often asserted that he pays a lower percentage of his income in taxes than his secretary does.

The bill, following the rough contours suggested by Mr. Obama, creates what would be an alternative minimum tax for the most affluent.

Households with adjusted annual gross incomes over $1 million would prepare their taxes as they do now, with all the deductions, credits and loopholes intact. They would also calculate what 30 percent of their adjusted gross income amounts to. They would then pay whichever amount was larger.

Republicans showed no sign of coming to the table on the Buffett Rule legislation. Senator Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said he had breakfast with Mr. Buffett on Sunday, but rejected his personal entreaties. He cited an estimate by the liberal-leaning Citizens for Tax Justice that the proposal would raise $50 billion a year, a small percentage of a budget deficit that will probably top $1 trillion. More Republican stalling.

[-] -3 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

We will have to see if it passes the house. Then it will be bi- partisan. Will Obama sign it? Alinsky was who he was. A socialist agitator. Btw, Pelosi on 60 minutes denied any wrong doing. It was funny as hell to watch her squirm!

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21297) 2 years ago

It looks like Eric Cantor is already making trouble. He wants his own version of the bill. Says it isn't "strong enough." I don't trust that guy.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/01/cantor-suggests-senates-insider-trading-bill-not-strong-enough.html

[-] 0 points by Scout (729) 2 years ago

I don't trust any of them! Not a single one

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21297) 2 years ago

Me neither.

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

I don't know much about him, but I sure would like to see the same "rule"s apply to the law makers as they do to everyone else. This is the kind of thing that infuriates the hell out of me. These people need to be slapped back in line and be reminded who is providing their paycheck.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21297) 2 years ago

We agree again, Kirby. Eric Cantor is one of the lowest forms of life in the Congress. I have written to him many times to tell him so.

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Do you get a response. I mean besides the regular form letters?

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21297) 2 years ago

No. I'm not in his district and I'm not really supposed to write to him. The emails went through but I never heard anything back. Maybe he never got them. That would be sad. They were quite scathing.

I always hear back from my own guys.

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Look up a zip code that is from his district. I have done that before, to write people outside of my district, even though it is technically wrong, I figure their vote still effects me, so I don't much care. I hear back from my guys too, and even get invited to their town hall gatherings.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21297) 2 years ago

You're devious, Kirby. That's a great idea.

[-] -2 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Hahahaha.

[-] 0 points by Scout (729) 2 years ago

too little too late

[-] 1 points by ohmygoodness (158) 2 years ago

Spot on.