The REAL reason Nancy Pelosi wants to keep trading individual stocks

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is fighting to preserve her right to negotiate stocks despite the blatant conflict of interest, and the reason is obvious: she and her husband have followed the current rules. Very Good.

As the Post’s Lydia Moynihan and Theo Wayt report, the speaker – estimated to be worth more than $ 100 million – and her husband Paul Pelosi have raised up to $ 30 million through Big Tech’s stock trading, even though she is supposed to regulate the industry.

Rules protect against conflicts of interest on the part of Congress Staff, and some lawmakers recognize the conflict (for themselves as well as for it) and want to prohibit lawmakers and their families from negotiating stocks. Yet Pelosi defends the practice. “It’s a free market,” she said last month. “We are a free market economy and [lawmakers] should be able to participate.

Imagine: Nancy Pelosi, champion of free enterprise!

From 2007 to 2020, the speaker and his wife made between $ 5.6 million and $ 30.4 million (the rules don’t even require exact disclosure) from five big tech companies: Facebook, Google, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft.

It doesn’t matter whether corporate fortunes depend on what laws Congress may or may not pass. As The Post, for example, also noted, Pelosi blocked legislation prohibiting internet companies from promoting their own products in search results. It might be a coincidence that she and her husband also bet on Google, but it certainly makes you wonder.

Also, keep in mind that lawmakers are aware of information the public doesn’t see, so they may have an advantage when trading stocks. (Perhaps this is why the Pelosis have generally outperformed the market so well?)

Letting pol’s trade in individual stocks, rather than investing only in index funds, raises questions such as whether they “have access to inside information” or whether their transactions will “have an impact on policymaking.” , warns Jeff Hauser of the Revolving Door Project.

Pelosi’s claim that her actions are in her husband’s name and that they did not conduct any transactions with inside acquaintances also does not hold up: Former Office of Government Ethics boss Walter Shaub, calls it a “red herring”; Unless members of Congress are prepared to “wear microphones around the clock,” he jokes, “the public has no way of knowing what information they have intentionally or inadvertently shared.”

By now, most people know that Pelosi considers himself above everyone else. Remember how she repeatedly flouted the mask rules? But seeking to continue to accumulate tens of millions, despite the blatant conflict of interest, raises the prospect of outright corruption.

This is a strong argument for completely banning stock trading by lawmakers and their families. Let them put their holdings in a mutual fund or blind trust. It’s a smarter investment anyway (unless you have, unfairly, inside information). And if they don’t like it, well, consider that as the cost of representing voters in Congress.

Comments are closed.