iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Scott Brown Silent On Obama's Call For Congress To Drop Stocks That May Cause Conflict Of Interest

Brown

First Posted: 01/25/2012 4:36 pm Updated: 01/26/2012 8:28 am

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) is touting President Barack Obama's call for legislation banning insider trading by members of Congress as a personal victory, having authored the Senate bill to stop such unscrupulous activity. But Brown is studiously ignoring a similar ethics reform Obama pushed during Tuesday's State of the Union speech -- perhaps because Brown himself has run afoul of it.

"Send me a bill that bans insider trading by members of Congress; I will sign it tomorrow," Obama pledged in his speech, an opening that Brown then used to press the president on his bill.

"My insider trading bill is on [Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s] desk right now. Tell him to get it out," Brown told Obama during a post-speech handshake, according to the Boston Globe. Obama appeared to agree: "I'm going to tell him. I’m going to tell him to get it done."

After the State of the Union, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters that he would send the STOCK Act to the Senate floor this year. "Well, I think people should have enough sense not to do it [insider trading] without legislation, but I will support legislation," he said.

Brown's proposed bill would limit stock trading by members of Congress to prevent abuses in which lawmakers profit from their own legislative favors or access to nonpublic economic information.

But during the State of the Union, Obama also called to "limit any elected official from owning stocks in industries they impact." And this kind of ownership would still be legal under the STOCK Act. Brown's bill focuses narrowly on information gained by members of Congress during hearings and meetings, but does not prevent them from holding long-term investments in companies that may benefit from their legislative actions. So long as lawmakers don't sell their holdings while in office, however, they're in the clear.

Brown himself performed major legislative favors for big banks during the final round of debate over 2010's Wall Street reform bill. According to Brown's latest personal financial disclosure form, the Massachusetts Republican owns up to $50,000 of Bank of America stock. As the financial overhaul approached passage, Brown was the deciding vote determining whether the bill would clear a filibuster in the Senate. He used that position to leverage several changes to the bill that helped large financial institutions, carving out an exemption to the Volcker Rule that allows big banks to continue placing risky bets in the securities markets with taxpayer money, provided they do so through private equity firms and hedge funds. Brown also saved Bank of America and others billions of dollars in up-front costs by axing a plan that would have required them to pay into an emergency fund to cover the costs of big bank failures.

Sen. Brown's office did not respond to requests for comment from The Huffington Post.

Faced with a Democratic challenge for his seat from consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren, Brown has repeatedly attempted to cast himself as a financial reformer. During Tuesday night's speech, he literally stood up for consumer protection as the sole Republican to rise and applaud Obama's mention of Richard Cordray, the new director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB was the brainchild of Warren, who set up the nascent agency before running for Senate.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) is touting President Barack Obama's call for legislation banning insider trading by members of Congress as a personal victory, having authored the Senate bill ...
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) is touting President Barack Obama's call for legislation banning insider trading by members of Congress as a personal victory, having authored the Senate bill ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 147
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:01 PM on 01/26/2012
Thank you Scott Brown for being an independent voice in Massachusetts. Here's why you'll win by 8%: The frequency of voting along party lines on contentious issues in 2011 by the Massachusetts Congressional delegation: (hint: The entire Mass delegation may as well be a rubber stamp.)

Senate
Scott Brown (R): 54%
John Kerry (D): 96%
House
1st District: John Olver (D): 99%
2nd District: Richard Neal (D): 98%
3rd District: Jim McGovern (D): 97%
4th District: Barney Frank (D): 96%
5th District: Niki Tsongas (D): 95%
6th District: John Tierney (D): 97%
7th District: Ed Markey (D): 98%
8th District: Mike Capuano (D): 97%
9th District: Steve Lynch (D): 93%
10th District: Bill Keating (D): 94%
02:58 PM on 02/01/2012
Consider that the majority of Republicans may agree with the Democratic position the same 95% + amount of time. The real test is not who is closer to 50%, but who is closer to the majority of people in Massachusetts.

The truth may be that for the Democrats, Their position = their party's position = the majority of their constituents' positions. This means that they rarely face the dilemma that Brown faces often - of having to vote against his party or against his state - and if he votes against the state too often, he will not be re-elected. There is no similar force that would move the Democrats to the right - the only thing that could is if they wanted to run as President.
04:20 PM on 01/26/2012
Activity of this type is why WE THE AMERICAN PUBLIC need term limits for all elected office holders.

MAV978
09:52 AM on 01/26/2012
Guess he, like Bush and Romney, will want to read the polls before making a firm commitment....he's a Republican after all!!
09:44 AM on 01/26/2012
Call on Congress to enforce the Code of Ethics for Government Service (Pages 20 and 436 of the House and Senate Ethics Manuals, respectively, at ethics.house.gov and ethics.senate.gov). Rule 8 addresses insider trading as a complement to the STOCK Act. The Code of Ethics for Government Service also addresses, among other things, the Taxpayer Protection Pledges (Rule 6).
09:54 AM on 01/26/2012
If Congress starts enforcing the Code of Ethics, most of the 1%ers holding office will be gone....and Newt won't ever be president!! Remember, he's already gone round one with Congress on his Ethics violations and thinks voters are dumb and we've forgotten that his own party couldn't get him out of the Speaker's job and out of the House fast enough!
04:56 AM on 01/26/2012
He is a stooge for democrats as he has taken their side since he was selected...He wants to keep his office so he will sell the people down the drain like they all do...
09:55 AM on 01/26/2012
He's a lame and waffling Republican, reading the polls first, afraid to make a commitment on his own, no original ideas, just wants to get elected regardless! And he'll lose....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Junaid Noori
01:00 AM on 01/26/2012
I really like this guy. Kudos to him.
12:41 AM on 01/26/2012
Government officials are privy to the most inside of insider information. They know long before even corporate executives do that legislation will -- or, just as importantly, will not -- be taken up that affects particular industries and companies. Trading on this information must be stopped.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nutzodriven
10:38 AM on 01/26/2012
Yes it does have to stop, But won't. Pelosi made a killing off the credit card bill she was working on. So has Reid and Franks and others.
09:38 PM on 01/25/2012
This boy better get all the feathers he can cuz come November he's history. Warren has already eaten his lunch.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PALEOLOGOS DRAGASH
I think, therefore you are wrong.
09:33 PM on 01/25/2012
And, on the Eighth Day, God created the Fifth Amendment...
jerryatthebeach
Till Death Do You Barrier Island...
08:48 PM on 01/25/2012
Very good bill and centrist-moderate....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rMatey
old, recovered Xtian, Liberal
08:47 PM on 01/25/2012
He may have gotten some rewards for his Koch-sucking activites.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PALEOLOGOS DRAGASH
I think, therefore you are wrong.
09:34 PM on 01/25/2012
Was he acting as a -sucker or a -suckee?
09:57 AM on 01/26/2012
He's another Congressman answering only to Grover Norquist and the Koch Bros.....NOT the voters who elected him. Hope the MA voters wise up this time around and vote him out. He's not effective.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nutzodriven
10:41 AM on 01/26/2012
you can say the same for the democrats. They don't even want to answer us. Mine wont even take my calls with concerns about some ot the pressing issues. Another office told me not to call anymore. so not listening works on both sides of the house. Not gonna start with the senate.
08:24 PM on 01/25/2012
I think when it comes to 'protecting/representing the people', anyone who tries to out-do Elizabeth Warren is setting themselves up for failure.
09:58 AM on 01/26/2012
She has more experience in consumer protection than anyone in Congress or in this administration and should be elected. She will protect consumers in ALLLL states, not just MA. I hope the voters of MA have more sense this election and vote for her!!
ChezMJ
Life is a shipwreck; sing in the lifeboats.
08:22 PM on 01/25/2012
Scott Brown hasn't finished ca$hing in yet! He can't be against conflicts of interest until then.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:17 PM on 01/25/2012
He was bought off cheap. Does he have already ave a contract for when he leaves his second job in the Senate?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VKoval
veteran of vietnam vacation '07
07:55 PM on 01/25/2012
there is nothing wrong with owning stocks
ChezMJ
Life is a shipwreck; sing in the lifeboats.
08:25 PM on 01/25/2012
No one is saying that there is. Did you READ the article?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pmoschetta
Where are the Jobs, Speaker Boehner?
03:43 AM on 01/26/2012
No, but there is something wrong with buying stocks when you know in advance that the company is about to recieve a major federal contract that will bring in oodles of money for them