Talk:STOCK Act

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --68.32.4.30 (talk) 03:02, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

the stock act is a bill in which bans insider trading by member of congress which help eliminate the trust deficit.

In what way were member of Congress EVER exempt from insider trading laws?
There's nothing in the insider trading laws that existed prior to the STOCK Act that spelled out any exemption for Congressmen or their staff. The notion that such an exemption existed and needed to be removed seems to have been pulled out of thin air. 75.76.213.161 (talk) 03:42, 23 April 2013 (UTC)


 * According to what I've heard, there was such an exemption. I can't give details.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:21, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * See Insider_trading. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

potential violations related to SARS-2 non-public insider info, add?
At least four senators sold off millions of dollars’ worth of stocks just before the market dropped amid fears of the coronavirus pandemic.

Sens. Richard Burr and Kelly Loeffler sold off more than a million dollars each in stocks after attending private, senators-only briefings about the severity of the impending coronavirus crisis. Burr, who serves as the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, had been receiving daily updates from the intelligence community on threats to the U.S., including the coronavirus, before dumped up to $1.56 million on Feb. 13, days after he wrote an op-ed for Fox News arguing that the U.S. is “better prepared than ever before” when it comes to facing public health threats like COVID-19. Loeffler, who is married to the chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange Jeffrey Sprecher, and her husband sold up to $3.1 million in jointly owned stocks starting on Jan. 24, the same day the Senate Health Committee, on which she sits, briefed senators briefing about the coronavirus. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, also a member of the intelligence committee, and her husband sold up to $6 million worth of stock in Jan. and Feb. And, Sen. James Inhofe sold as much as $400,000 in January. Burr said he has asked the Senate Ethics Committee to review his sale. X1\ (talk) 23:56, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * https://www.propublica.org/article/senator-dumped-up-to-1-6-million-of-stock-after-reassuring-public-about-coronavirus-preparedness
 * https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sen-richard-burr-r-nc-says-he-has-asked-senate-ethics-committee-for-review-of-his-stock-sales/2020/03/20/43861396-6ab8-11ea-b313-df458622c2cc_story.html
 * https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/36806-burr-told-family-to-withdraw-everything-from-bank
 * https://www.npr.org/2020/03/19/818192535/burr-recording-sparks-questions-about-private-comments-on-covid-19
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/19/us/politics/richard-burr-coronavirus-stocks.html
 * https://www.axios.com/richard-burr-coronavirus-stock-7bd10426-de87-43d7-9939-8241d2ab08db.html
 * https://www.thedailybeast.com/sen-kelly-loeffler-dumped-millions-in-stock-after-coronavirus-briefing
 * https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/aoc-calls-senate-intel-chair-richard-burr-resign-stock-selloff-n1164401
 * https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/perdue-loeffler-among-senators-whose-stock-trading-during-coronavirus-raises-questions/YjEYsWqAVwZh52HTpl1EpL/
 * https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/20/republican-senators-sold-stocks-before-markets-plunged-on-coronavirus-fears-reports
 * https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-usa-intelligence/u-s-spy-agencies-monitor-coronavirus-spread-concerns-about-india-sources-idUSKCN20L37R

See Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. X1\ (talk) 02:41, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

An update: X1\ (talk) 04:02, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Tim Mak Justice Department Looking Into Senator's Stock Sell-Off March 31, 2020 NPR
 * https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/29/politics/justice-stock-trades-lawmakers-coronavirus/index.html
 * https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/senator-richard-burr-stock-trades-coronavirus-investigation/2020/03/30/36487df8-7298-11ea-87da-77a8136c1a6d_story.html
 * https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-investigating-lawmakers-for-possible-insider-trading-11585586365

Sen. Kelly Loeffler and her husband purchased and sold about $1.4 million in stocks and invested in a company that makes COVID-19 protective garments during the coronavirus market panic. Loeffler’s husband, Jeff Sprecher, is chairman of the New York Stock Exchange. X1\ (talk) 05:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Loeffler reports more stock sales, denies wrongdoing ajc.com April 1, 2020
 * Jamie Ross ''Sen. Loeffler Invested in Firm That Makes Protective Medical Garments, Says Report thedailybeast.com April 1, 2020
 * James V. Grimaldi, Lindsay Wise, and Tom McGinty Senator Reports $1.4 Million in Stock Trades During Coronavirus Panic; Georgia Republican Kelly Loeffler and her husband, New York Stock Exchange Chairman Jeffrey Sprecher, suffered losses but limited damage WSJ March 31, 2020

See 2020 Congressional insider trading scandal. X1\ (talk) 00:22, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Content / Tone / Quality

Upon review of this article, the information provided remains to stay on topic and be relevant to the STOCK Act. It contains appropriate and attention-getting headlines for the title and sub-sections. The right panel contains an appropriate logo, which is the U.S seal, along with the necessary information that includes the correct time this policy was enacted, it’s public law citation, and the series of dates in which it took to pass each portion of Congress throughout its process. The article begins with a brief explanation of when it was signed into law, the history of its similar events, and the significant persons of interest that assisted with this policy. It does repeat some of the basic information multiple times throughout the article in the initial paragraph, the ‘About STOCK’ subsection, and again in the ‘Amendment’ subsection. The information provided has a neutral tone and does not use any language that would signify any position of bias towards any political party and strictly states the facts of the process of this policy being passed.

Sources and References / Plaigarism

The explanation of the detailed STOCK Act of 2012 is outlined in the subsections ‘Section 3-19’. However, all sections have been plagiarized, and in some cases word for word per the publication hyperlinked in the opening paragraph. Prior to section headings, the author states “the following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service…”, and uses the exact wordage of the policy without using quotations, or citing the source. Aside from this, the author uses hyperlinks to direct the reader to important individuals, such as President Obama or other members of Congress, as well as linkage to publications needed. The links work properly, and are in correspondence to the information presented.

Talk Page

The talk page has a few responses regarding correcting some of the information. For instance, one user addresses previous status of Congress members in never being exempt from trading laws which contradicts the article. Another user simply adds to the discussion of potential violations regarding the recent SARS-2 public insider info, and adds some information about the issue. Overall, there is minimal discussion on this page, and just a few responses.

Overall Impressions

It’s difficult to give an overall status of this article, because of the fact that the section summary of the policy is completely plagiarized. The author gives a good introduction and lead discussion to the topic, however still in this regard is repetitive. The strengths of this article is providing adequate information of the STOCK Act, remaining unbiased, and gives additional insight through providing links that add to the information. The article can be improved in a number of ways, by rewording and paraphrasing the contents of the policy, as well as removing repetitive concepts of the policy. I believe this article is underdeveloped, and with more thought and attention can be improved to give the reader additional insight on the subject by examples of historical issues that resulted in the proclamation of this act. -Mahn 10:38 4/19/22 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JMahnPoli (talk • contribs) 05:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Reception Section
The reception section is lacking the publics view of the STOCK act. It is focused only on the reception of Congress and its two houses and the views of the sitting President Obama at the time and not really any other part of the executive branch, not at all considering more recent receptions. Both source links in this section are dead or no longer active, new sources are needed to back up the statements. Hderm (talk) 17:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)Hderm

Amendment Section
Reference number 15 is a dead link in this section and requires a new source to back the related statement. The statement supported by reference 16 seems redundant considering the information given in the first paragraph of this section already covers the same information. Hderm (talk) 17:54, 22 April 2022 (UTC)Hderm

About STOCK section
There are references at the end of the paragraph that relates to compliance with the act but no references are made for the summary of the act. Referencing in this section can be improved by re-writing parts of the paragraph and citing each statement. It may be useful to separate compliance from the short summary of the act into a new section. Hderm (talk) 18:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)Hderm