Lock Stock and Two Trading Morals

Ten years since the STOCK Act was signed... has anything really changed?

(Source: Getty Images)

Joel Bowman, writing this Sunday from Austin, Texas...

Overheard at a popular lobby bar on East 6th and Brazos St., Austin, TX. (Two women. Mid-40’s. Well-dressed. One slim. The other... less so.)

Less so: “It seems normal enough. I mean, not like Monterey or anything. But more or less normal... -ish.”

Slim: “Well, that’s because you’re in a bubble here. A little blue bubble.”

Less so: “I kept hearing all kinds of crazy stories. Like people carrying guns into the grocery store. That kind of thing.”

Slim: “Yeah, well... that’s West Texas. Not here. We’re a college town, mostly. Number one in the country. Very progressive.” 

Less so: “Maybe that’s why half of California seems to be moving here.”

Slim: “Yeah. Maybe...”

Welcome to another Sunday Session, dear reader, that time of the week when we pull up a virtual barstool and reckon over the worries and concerns facing mankind... one Tito’s Hill Country Sunrise at a time.  

This week, we sidestep the growing chasm dividing American voters and instead take a closer look at one of the vanishingly few areas in which folks from all sides of the political spectrum seem to agree... but which Congress appears unwilling and/or incapable of addressing. Hint: It has to do with insiders vs. outsiders (and if you’re reading this, you’re probably in the latter category.) 

Please enjoy today’s feature essay, below...

---

Lock Stock and Two Trading Morals

By Joel Bowman

“Politicians, like diapers, must be changed often... and for the same reason.”

~ Misattributed to Mark Twain

Poor ol’ Nancy Pelosi. The permanently-startled Speaker of the House just can’t seem to catch a break these days. First her husband, Paul Pelosi, gets himself slapped with a DUI after crashing his Porsche into another, no doubt lesser person’s vehicle on a rural road in Napa County, California. 

Then, President Biden puts the kibosh on her planned excursion to Taiwan, claiming Xi Jinping (ahem...) the US military had informed him “it is not a good idea right now.” Aw, no dumplings for Nance.

And just this week, as if only to add insult to injury, some upstart reporter had the temerity to question Madam Speaker about her husband’s perfectly explicable stock market clairvoyance. 

“Over the course of your career, has your husband ever made a stock purchase or sale based on information received from you?" the reporter asked, twice. 

Watch here as the Speaker plays for time, scoffs... then scuttles from the podium to throttle whichever soon-to-be-former aide had the bright idea to green light “one last question.”

Benny Johnson @bennyjohnson

REPORTER: "Has your husband ever made a stock purchase or sale based on information he's received from you?" PELOSI: "No, absolutely not"

Give or Take a Billion

We couldn’t say for sure, as the reporter’s question was general enough and could, theoretically, apply to any number of transactions... but he mi-i-i-ght have been referring to the fact that on June 17, 2022, Paul Pelosi loaded up on 20,000 shares of giant chip manufacturer, Nvidia, just weeks before Congress (where, as a gentle reminder, his wife has worked for the past 35 years) was due to vote on a bill that could hand chipmakers $52 billion in government subsidies. 

Of course, Madam Speaker’s lips were sealed... and hubby was no doubt still in the doghouse over the whole DUI thing (it’s not his first autocrash, alas; a joyride when he was still a teenager cost young Paul his brother’s life...) but the timing of the purchase has led some people to suspect the couple of insider trading. 

Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist for the left-wing think tank Public Citizen, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that “it certainly raises the specter that Paul Pelosi could have access to some insider legislative information.”

“This is the reason why there is a stock trading app that exclusively monitors Paul’s trading activity,” Holman said, “and then its followers do likewise.”

If you can’t beat ‘em, eh?

Mainstream news outlets were quick to not report the Pelosi-Nvidia story, preferring instead to focus on the passage of the bill itself, which landed on the Senate floor this week. And what do you know... senators from both sides of the aisle can agree on some things! From NBC News...

Senators are advancing a computer chips bill. They don’t know what’s in it yet.

Senators of both parties agree: Congress needs to pass something soon to counter China and try to address the global chip shortage. [...]

CHIPS-plus on Tuesday evening cleared its first procedural hurdle in a 64-34 vote, needing just 51 votes to advance. And key senators said they could pass the bill and send it to the House as early as this week. But they still haven’t agreed on what will be added into it and what will be shelved.

What they have agreed on is that this is an urgent matter. 

Two Snouts, One Trough

Predictably (for some) the closer the CHIPS-Plus bill got to Nancy’s House this week, the higher Nvidia’s share price rose. No doubt American voters – shouldering the highest inflation in four decades and enduring the worst first six months in the stock market in over half a century – are relieved to learn that the Pelosi’s multimillion dollar Nvidia punt has already landed them a comfortable 13% gain... even as the Computer and Technology sector as a whole fell by 11% over the same period. 

It’s uncanny insights like these that have helped the civic-minded Pelosi’s amass their modest, ~$135 million pile. And yet, according to OpenSecrets, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C. that tracks data on campaign finance and lobbying, Madam Speaker’s public service “windfall” barely qualifies her for Congress’s highly coveted Top 10 Rich List. (And yes... the centimillionaires on the ticket hail from both sides of the political trough aisle.)

Perhaps you’re wondering how our better angels, congressmen and women who earn $174,000 per year (slightly higher for Speak of the House, $223,500 and Majority and Minority Leaders of the House and President pro tempore of the Senate, $193,400) stumble with such regularity upon such uncommon wealth? Curious, no? 

After all, it’s been ten years since then-Vice President Joe Biden attended the ceremonial signing of the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act. The so-called STOCK Act was intended to close the “deficit of trust” between the public and elected officials caused by controversial stock trading by members of Congress. And yet...

Although the Act supposedly bans insider trading, it does not restrict lawmakers from owning individual stocks, including in companies that appear before their own committees or are directly impacted by congressional votes. 

Losing Face vs. Facing Losses

As Kedric Payne, vice president, general counsel, and senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center, writes...

Voters’ distrust of congressional stock trading spans beyond the perception of insider trading to genuine concern over the conflicts of interest that arise when lawmakers own stock in industries over which they hold influence.

Consequently, distrust increased when Congress began considering bailouts of industries during the early days of the pandemic while some members of Congress strategically bought stocks in companies that might see a boost during the crisis and sold stocks in industries likely to face losses.

Moreover, the STOCK Act relies on a fox-in-charge-of-the-henhouse brand of “self policing,” whereby, for congressional members found to have violated the Act, the penalty is usually a standard $200 fine... and even that’s sometimes waived by House or Senate ethics officials. Again, Mr. Payne...

Allegations of congressional insider trading and conflicts of interests have persisted over the past 10 years, but no member has been publicly disciplined for violating the STOCK Act under the self-policing enforcement mechanism.

Specifically, from 2020 to 2021, over 200 lawmakers and senior staff members have allegedly violated the reporting requirements of the STOCK Act without any indication from the House and Senate ethics committees of enforcement actions.

Rules for thee, you see...

It is precisely this kind of conflict of interest that piques one’s skepticism when Congress approves... oh, say... a $40 billion Ukrainian “aid package.” Especially when no fewer than 20 federal lawmakers (and/or their “highly intuitive” spouses) stand to profit personally from their investments in US defense contractors. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon Technologies, the companies that make all those Javelin and Stinger missiles (you know, the exact ones the Ukrainians just happen to need) are major beneficiaries of the bill... as are the congressmen who purchased shares in the companies, some of whom did so the very same week Russian tanks rolled across the border. 

It’s hard enough making tough decisions when it’s “only” the public’s interest that’s in play. Spare a thought then for Madam Speaker and her fellow congressmen, who have to manage their own insatiable appetites, too. 

Poor ol’ Nancy Pelosi, indeed.

---

And now for some more Fatal Conceits...

Did you miss Part I of our conversation with Byron King this past week, dear reader? Fear not! 

You can catch our entire podcast, in which we spoke about Russia’s impact on international energy markets, German’s looming “energy Stalingrad,” the ongoing financialization of the west’s economies and plenty more besides, right here... 

Byron King on Russia, Energy and Gold - Part I

There’s a full transcript on the post, available for Bonner Private Research members. (Not a member yet? Fix that, here.)

That’s all for us for another Sunday Session. Feel free to like, share, comment and all that good stuff below. 

Bill will be back with his regular missives tomorrow morning. Until then, enjoy the rest of your weekend...

Cheers,

Joel Bowman