Wednesday, March 07, 2007
What passes for ethics in the United States Senate
From this article in today's NYT on questionable stock transactions by St. Obama:
Senate ethics rules do not prohibit lawmakers from owning stocks — even in companies that do business with the federal government or could benefit from legislation they advance — and indeed other members of Congress have investments in government contractors. The rules say only that lawmakers should not take legislative actions whose primary purpose is to benefit themselves.
"Primary purpose"? Umm ... me smelleth a ratteth. So basically, this rule allows Congressmen to make legislative decisions that benefit themselves financially so long as that is not the "primary" purpose. So if it's my secondary purpose (the first being what's in the best interest of the American people, of course!!!), I'm OK under the ethics rules?
How about this -- Senators cannot own stock or otherwise enter into any financial arrangement with any entity that is likely to come before them in their legislative capacity? You know, avoid those nasty little conflicts of interest ... appearances of impropriety ... that sort of thing.
Chance of happening = ZERO.
[I'm glad to see that many Senators use blind trusts to manage their investments. A blind trust is a very good way to eliminate the ethics issues while also giving the Senators the ability to invest. However, it seems that nothing in the rules compels them to use blind trusts -- they do it out of their own initiative.]
|
Senate ethics rules do not prohibit lawmakers from owning stocks — even in companies that do business with the federal government or could benefit from legislation they advance — and indeed other members of Congress have investments in government contractors. The rules say only that lawmakers should not take legislative actions whose primary purpose is to benefit themselves.
"Primary purpose"? Umm ... me smelleth a ratteth. So basically, this rule allows Congressmen to make legislative decisions that benefit themselves financially so long as that is not the "primary" purpose. So if it's my secondary purpose (the first being what's in the best interest of the American people, of course!!!), I'm OK under the ethics rules?
How about this -- Senators cannot own stock or otherwise enter into any financial arrangement with any entity that is likely to come before them in their legislative capacity? You know, avoid those nasty little conflicts of interest ... appearances of impropriety ... that sort of thing.
Chance of happening = ZERO.
[I'm glad to see that many Senators use blind trusts to manage their investments. A blind trust is a very good way to eliminate the ethics issues while also giving the Senators the ability to invest. However, it seems that nothing in the rules compels them to use blind trusts -- they do it out of their own initiative.]
|
