7 Comments
User's avatar
MPT's avatar

Seems like a reasonable alternative tobanning stock trading. It's unfortunate that congress is so slimy in people's perception that they can't raise their pay without crushing their own political careers. But republicans would certainly have a tough time justifying pay increases as they slash subsidies for health ins., cut SNAP aid to children, and slash Medicaid spending to the most vulnerable. Maybe congress could base its pay increases/cuts to the overall wage growth. That might encourage some of the lower life forms in confress to fight to increase the wages of workers and not just their own selfish, inconsiderate, corporate supported selves.

Expand full comment
Bright America πŸ”†'s avatar

Performance pay sure works elsewhere in our economy... not sure it could ever fly, but it would be an interesting experiment!

Expand full comment
MPT's avatar

If polls were any indication of performance, congress would be working for minimum wage, which hasn't been increased in more than a decade. Any avenue to tie congressional pay to performace is better than sleazy insider trading scams that stuff cash into underserving members of congress.

Expand full comment
James Gillen's avatar

This is the same information everyone else had, so I don't see why it took longer to reach the same conclusion everyone else did.

Expand full comment
Kevin Walsh's avatar

Those who commit these crimes hurt us all.

Expand full comment
Jeff's avatar

Gee, whatever was the argument that members of Congress should be allowed to trade stocks?! I worked awhile in the 80s in DC in the D of Health and Human Services and was privy to new medical technologies. Had I traded on that information I would have been busted for insider trading! You mean Waxman and Kennedy were trading based on the information I gave them?!!

Expand full comment
Becoming Human's avatar

Politically, yours makes sense.

Realistically, it should be total divestment outside managed funds.

If you don’t want to do that, don’t join congress. Large asset-owners cannot help but protect those assets, which means they will never represent people.

Expand full comment