Advertisement

July 28, 2014

House Leadership Backed by Securities & Investment Firms Omit Political Intelligence Disclosure from STOCK Act

 

The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on Thursday on its version of the STOCK Act, which omits disclosure requirements for "political intelligence" workers that were included in the version of the bill passed by the Senate last week (S 2038). The STOCK Act explicitly bars members of Congress from profiting from investment decisions based on non-public or privileged information.

The House version of the bill (an amendment to S 2038) is notable for its omission of an amendment proposed by Sen. Chuck Grassley, which would require those working in the so-called “political intelligence” trade to register as lobbyists under theLobbyist Disclosure Act (LDA). A previously little-known industry outside of Washington, political intelligence agencies specialize in collecting and selling inside information about upcoming legislation and regulations. This political intelligence is especially valuable to the Securities & investment industry, such as hedge fundsprivate equity, and investment banks, which leverage their access to political information for financial gain. Some firms reported to be recipients of this political intelligence include investment bank Goldman Sachs and hedge funds Third Point and Viking Global Investors.

Interest groups from both Wall Street and K Street are opposed to the amendment. House Republican leadership wrote their version of the bill without any input from longtime sponsors of the bill, Reps. Tim Walz and Louise Slaughter, even though Slaughter has introduced multiple versions of the bill since 2006. Eric Cantor and House Speaker John Boehner are the two largest recipients of contributions from Securities & investment interest groups in the House of Representatives. Both are also amongst the top 5 recipients of campaign contributions connected to Goldman Sachs in the House of Representatives.

Securities & investment is one of the largest contributing interest groups to congressional campaigns. MapLight has conducted an analysis of campaign contributions to members of Congress from interest groups representing Securities & investments.

  • Click here to download a spreadsheet of contributions from Securities & Investment to all lawmakers.

U.S. House of Representatives (July 1, 2009  June 30, 2011)

  • Interest groups representing the Securities & investment industry have given a total of $18,780,724 to members of the U.S. House of Representatives. 
  • Republican House members received a combined $11,367,220 in contributions connected to Securities & investment interest groups while Democrats have received $7,413,504.
  • House Majority Leader Eric Cantor received $629,350; House Speaker John Boehner received $830,700; House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi received $157,800; and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer received $136,150.

U.S. Senate (July 1, 2005  June 30, 2011)

  • Interest groups representing the Securities & investment industry have given $52,462,797 to current members of the U.S. Senate.
  • Democratic and Independent senators received a total of $25,917,187 in contributions connected to Securities & investment interest groups while their Republican counterparts totaled $26,545,610.

 

Submitted by Chris Gorin on Feb 9, 2012

METHODOLOGY: MapLight analysis of reported contributions to congressional and presidential campaigns of current House and Senate members, from Security brokers & investment companiesPrivate Equity & Investment FirmsInvestment bankingHedge FundsVenture capitalCommodity brokers/dealersSecurities, commodities & investmentStock exchanges. July 1, 2009 – June 30, 2011 for House members and July 1, 2005 – June 30, 2011 for senators. Campaign contributions data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org).

© Copyright MapLight

About the Author

MapLight is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, research organization that reveals money's influence on politics.

Elected officials collect large sums of money to run their campaigns, and they often pay back campaign contributors with special access and favorable laws. This common practice is contrary to the public interest, yet legal.

MapLight connects data on campaign contributions, politicians, votes, industries, companies, and more to show patterns of influence that could never be seen before. 

We currently research money and influence in the...

510-868-0894

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.