Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Sen. Coburn Opposes Insider Trading Ban
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="bulbboy" data-source="post: 1711105" data-attributes="member: 11"><p>His words:</p><p></p><p>“I stand in opposition to this bill, not because I think we should have insider trading. As a physician, I am trained to fix the real problem and you're treating the symptoms. You know, several months ago, CBS did a series and showed some questionable but not necessarily insider trading stock trades which brought about, given our low level of confidence by the American public in this institution, has raised the question well, what about insider trading?”</p><p></p><p>“You know, I honestly believe everyone in our body is never going to use insider trading to advantage themselves over the best interests of the country, but the real problem is the confidence in the congress to do what is in the best long-term interest of the country, and the reason that the confidence isn't there doesn't have anything to do with insider trading, as we would normally think about it”</p><p></p><p>“Our system of law is built on the fact that we're innocent until we're proven guilty. And the assumption that the senate is undertaking now is that some of our colleagues are doing insider trading on the stock market”</p><p></p><p>On amendment 1473 (Requires all legislation to be reviewed before it is considered by the Senate to determine whether new duplicative and overlapping programs are being created):</p><p></p><p>“What this amendment says is every bill that comes before congress to be considered by the senate, we should determine whether it's duplicating something that's already happening in the federal government. It's common sense&#8230;The Congressional Research Service should be able to determine if the bill creates a new federal program, office, or initiative that would duplicate or overlap any existing federal program, any existing federal office or initiative with a similar mission, similar purpose, similar goal”</p><p></p><p>On Amendment 1474 (Requiring all legislation to be posted online at least 72 hour prior to a vote):</p><p></p><p>“What this amendment says is that before we vote on a bill, we're going to have at least 72 hours to read it. It just says it has to be online for 72 hours, in other words, we get the privilege of reading the bills we're voting on. <strong>And we also get the privilege of knowing the financial cost of the bills or at least an estimate of the financial cost that they will entail. </strong>This transparency is designed to make the senate better. You want a bill -- to build confidence with the American public? Then the way you build confidence is assure them that you knew exactly what you were doing when you cast a vote”</p><p></p><p>On amendment 1476 (Substitute to the STOCK Act):</p><p></p><p><strong>“This amendment would provide a complete substitute for the STOCK Act. It requires members and staff to certify that they have not used inside information for private financial profit. In other words, they're going to make an affirmative statement under the law that they have not violated section 10-b of the Securities and Exchange Act"</strong></p><p></p><p><strong>“The STOCK Act does not create new restrictions for congress against insider trading. We all know that. Those restrictions are there.</strong> We don't change the restrictions at all. The SEC has stated that the members of Congress and staff are already subject to insider trading laws. In fact, all Americans are subject to these laws including the senate, found primarily in section 10-b. This provision restricts anyone who trades stocks from using material nonpublic information to profit financially and Congress is no different than anybody else. The STOCK act was carefully written to apply simply reaffirm that Congress is not exempted. From these laws and I believe the Chairman stated that just a moment ago which we would include in this. As such, the bill brings new reforms to the table, nor does it create any real expectation that behavior will change.<strong> it just requires a paperwork filing"</strong></p><p></p><p>“Nobody in this chamber can name somebody right now who's trading on inside information. And yet we're changing the law not because anybody has done something wrong but because we're struggling to try to get people to think that we're doing things right. And there is nothing wrong with that as long as we're not going to entrap members of our colleagues"</p><p></p><p>- Dr. Coburn</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="bulbboy, post: 1711105, member: 11"] His words: “I stand in opposition to this bill, not because I think we should have insider trading. As a physician, I am trained to fix the real problem and you're treating the symptoms. You know, several months ago, CBS did a series and showed some questionable but not necessarily insider trading stock trades which brought about, given our low level of confidence by the American public in this institution, has raised the question well, what about insider trading?” “You know, I honestly believe everyone in our body is never going to use insider trading to advantage themselves over the best interests of the country, but the real problem is the confidence in the congress to do what is in the best long-term interest of the country, and the reason that the confidence isn't there doesn't have anything to do with insider trading, as we would normally think about it” “Our system of law is built on the fact that we're innocent until we're proven guilty. And the assumption that the senate is undertaking now is that some of our colleagues are doing insider trading on the stock market” On amendment 1473 (Requires all legislation to be reviewed before it is considered by the Senate to determine whether new duplicative and overlapping programs are being created): “What this amendment says is every bill that comes before congress to be considered by the senate, we should determine whether it's duplicating something that's already happening in the federal government. It's common sense…The Congressional Research Service should be able to determine if the bill creates a new federal program, office, or initiative that would duplicate or overlap any existing federal program, any existing federal office or initiative with a similar mission, similar purpose, similar goal” On Amendment 1474 (Requiring all legislation to be posted online at least 72 hour prior to a vote): “What this amendment says is that before we vote on a bill, we're going to have at least 72 hours to read it. It just says it has to be online for 72 hours, in other words, we get the privilege of reading the bills we're voting on. [B]And we also get the privilege of knowing the financial cost of the bills or at least an estimate of the financial cost that they will entail. [/B]This transparency is designed to make the senate better. You want a bill -- to build confidence with the American public? Then the way you build confidence is assure them that you knew exactly what you were doing when you cast a vote” On amendment 1476 (Substitute to the STOCK Act): [B]“This amendment would provide a complete substitute for the STOCK Act. It requires members and staff to certify that they have not used inside information for private financial profit. In other words, they're going to make an affirmative statement under the law that they have not violated section 10-b of the Securities and Exchange Act"[/B] [B]“The STOCK Act does not create new restrictions for congress against insider trading. We all know that. Those restrictions are there.[/B] We don't change the restrictions at all. The SEC has stated that the members of Congress and staff are already subject to insider trading laws. In fact, all Americans are subject to these laws including the senate, found primarily in section 10-b. This provision restricts anyone who trades stocks from using material nonpublic information to profit financially and Congress is no different than anybody else. The STOCK act was carefully written to apply simply reaffirm that Congress is not exempted. From these laws and I believe the Chairman stated that just a moment ago which we would include in this. As such, the bill brings new reforms to the table, nor does it create any real expectation that behavior will change.[B] it just requires a paperwork filing"[/B] “Nobody in this chamber can name somebody right now who's trading on inside information. And yet we're changing the law not because anybody has done something wrong but because we're struggling to try to get people to think that we're doing things right. And there is nothing wrong with that as long as we're not going to entrap members of our colleagues" - Dr. Coburn [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Sen. Coburn Opposes Insider Trading Ban
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom