U.S. Representative John Conyers, Jr. speaks on the House floor on STOCK Act.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Showing posts with label stock market. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stock market. Show all posts
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Conyers Calls on House and Senate to Move Quickly to Conference and Restore Political Intelligence Provision to Congressional Insider Trading Bill
**Follow Me On Twitter @HouseJudDems**
For Immediate Release
Date: Thursday, February 9, 2012
Contact: Matthew Morgan – 202-226-5543
Conyers Calls on House and Senate to Move Quickly to Conference and Restore Political Intelligence Provision to Congressional Insider Trading Bill
(WASHINGTON) – Today on the House Floor, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) called on the House of Representatives to move quickly to conference with the Senate in order to strengthen S. 2038, the “Stop Trading On Congressional Knowledge Act” (the STOCK Act), a bill that clarifies that Members of Congress, congressional staff, Executive Branch officials, and judicial officers are subject to the same insider trading rules as everyone else. Last week the Senate passed by a vote of 96-3 a strong version of the STOCK Act, which included provisions requiring certain political intelligence activities to be disclosed under the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
After months of pressure from Democrats, the Republican House Majority finally decided to take up similar legislation. However, last night House Republicans drafted a new, weaker version of the bill, refusing to consider a much stronger bipartisan House bill that is cosponsored by 285 members, including 99 Republicans. The House Republican version of the STOCK Act eliminates a provision requiring certain political intelligence activities to be disclosed under the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
The removal of this particular provision by House Republicans is so stunning that even their Senate counterparts took notice. In comments to The Hill Newspaper yesterday, Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) responded regarding the political intelligence provision’s deletion: "It’s astonishing and extremely disappointing that the House would fulfill Wall Street’s wishes by killing this provision. If Congress delays action, the political intelligence industry will stay in the shadows, just the way Wall Street likes it.”
Below is the text of Ranking Member Conyers floor statement calling on the House and Senate to move to conference in order to strengthen this important addition to government ethics law.
 |
| U.S. Representative John Conyers, Jr. |
“Unfortunately, the manner in which this bill has come to the floor today undercuts its importance. The Majority handed us this bill in the dead of night. We have had less than 48 hours to consider how they have amended—and weakened—the Senate-passed bill.
This issue deserves a thorough discussion and a full opportunity for Members to offer amendments that strengthen the bill.
“We owe it to our constituents to take up this measure quickly, but also thoughtfully and comprehensively. This process does not accomplish these goals.
“For instance, this amendment to the Senate bill omits a key provision—requiring certain political intelligence activities to be disclosed under the Lobbying Disclosure Act. Without that provision, there is little—if any—public disclosure of the interaction between Wall Street insiders and Members of Congress.
“This provision was supported by the 285 Members of the House—including 99 members of the Majority—who co-sponsored the original Slaughter-Walz bill. The provision was also supported by a bipartisan supermajority in the Senate. But, today, the Majority has stripped it from this bill without explanation.
“The ‘intelligence’ trade has grown into a multimillion-dollar industry. Hedge funds and other financial firms turn a profit by gathering information about pending legislation and investigations and selling it to the special interests they represent. These firms have no oversight—not by Congress, not by the executive branch, and not by the public.
“Under current law, these insiders have no obligation to identify themselves or disclose their clients. The public has a right to know who is paying for this access, and who in Congress is feeding inside information to Wall Street. We should not miss this chance to shed necessary sunlight on this industry.
“This is just one example of how this bill has been weakened by the Majority. A rushed process prevents us from making any attempt to improve it, and benefits only the special interests who profit off of the political intelligence trade.
“Although we continue to have reservations about the process imposed on us, I will support the bill today. I ask my colleagues to do the same.
“However, once we pass this bill in the House, I urge that we bring it to conference with the Senate bill as soon as possible. We have an opportunity to restore a measure of confidence in the Congress. We should do so by full measures, not half measures, and we should do so immediately.”
###
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Conyers, Jackson-Lee Outline Potential Harm and Systemic Risks of Proposed NYSE Mergers
Conyers, Jackson-Lee Outline Potential Harm and Systemic Risks of Proposed NYSE Mergers
Mergers Would Decrease Jobs and Consumer Choice---Unacceptable for Current Economic Climate
(Washington)—Today, at the Intellectual Property Subcommittee Hearing on “Competition and Consolidation in Financial Markets,” House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) and Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas) raised their concerns of the potential economic harm that would result from the proposed mergers of either the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) with Deutsche Boerse or the NYSE with the National Association of Securities Dealer Automated Quotation (NASDAQ).
We are generally against any mergers of this size. Mergers of this size must prove to the American people the immediate value they bring to job creation and stabilizing the economy. The potential for harm, systemic risks, outweigh any perceived gains in efficiency. Moreover, analysis of the consolidation in the financial exchange markets does not change relative to who the buyer is. We are against NYSE merger with Deutsche Boerse but we are equally against NYSE merging with NASDAQ. At a fundamental level, both mergers would result in fewer jobs and less choices for consumer and public traded companies.
Specific to a merger with Deutsche Boerse, the proposed merger would create massive transnational regulatory issues that the world has yet to create the infrastructure to regulate specifically which entity could effectively oversee and regulation a transnational combined company of this complexity and how much control would the US have over such transnational regulators? No entity exists right now to accomplish that necessary goal.
Merger between NYSE and NASDAQ would be akin to General Motors merging with Chrysler, such a horizontal merger in the United States should not take place, whether in the automobile industry or the financial services industry. Such a merger would result in a loss of jobs in New York and around the country, at a time when NY and the entire US cannot tolerate additional job losses. Moreover, the merger would lead to less choices for consumers in their investment choices and to companies seeking listings.
This is not a “failing industry” so that defense against competition concerns is not useful. This is simply about increasing profit by creating greater leverage for the financial exchanges.
Moreover, the question should be whether the mere existence of dollars to spend by the purchaser is sufficient enough to allow a merger to go forward. The determining factor should be an examination of the value it brings to the American people, and how anti-competitive it would ultimately be.
###
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)