What do you mean "horrible optics"? It's outright corrupt. The issue here isn't "Nancy Pelosi supporting local businesses". The issue is her husband acting on private information to reap enormous profits.
Before I start, I lean Dem and I like Nancy. However ...
she has famously said that "you have to pass the bill before you see it" - not an hyperbole, the obamacare bill was being negotiated forever and changing but at one point of time they had to force the vote first even if the version was not read by everyone.
that kind of story applies to a lot of bills. I may be able to sneak in a paragraph just before the vote that says "3 billion dollars of government subsidies for drought stricken cashew farmers in California" and if someone can find that out before it is published on their websites, would you not think it is a private information?
We do have to credit Nancy for bringing so much attention to this issue through her flagrant actions. Probably not intentional, but credit where credit is due.
I'd guess there are other members of congress who did/do exactly the same thing (but much more low key and out of sight) who are not very happy about it being potentially ruined for everyone else.
What does this mean? Other reps do exactly the same thing as Pelosi and are required to report their trades in the same way. Pelosi is the target of attention due to reporting about exclusively Pelosi's actions
Don’t you think that they are getting a lot of information before you get it or can influence certain decisions in their favor?
In my view they need to out their money into a blind trust. If they don’t want to do that they shouldn’t run for office and a nice side effect would be that congress isn’t full of millionaires.
I agree that they should have more simple investment limits. Like index fund or whatever.
But even your first sentence is some hypothesis, not based on any facts or timeline of events. Looks like her husband who has his own investment firm was writing some clever option contracts and such on big name companies like Roblox.
Everybody in the market is risking it on these types of companies these days.
What bills will be brought to the floor. What bills have the votes to pass. What bills do not. Access to confidential information which has not been released to the public. Etc. etc.
I'm honestly not sure what you want me to say. You're welcome to Google the issue for yourself and make a determination.
> I'm just saying if you levy a huge accusation like "she gets private insider information" then you need to back it up with factual evidence.
Nancy Pelosi's husband regularly beats the market by large margins. You can find it suspicious or not. I've given my opinion. She knows her own mind, she has access to market-moving-information prior to the public, and she likes to buy stock.
She doesn't need to receive information (though she can). She just needs to generate it (which is her job). When you are in a position to move the market, you should not be buying options.
Getting huge gains the past 2 years has not been hard. Everybody is making 20% or more a year easily.
Plus they're already rich, which means they can invest a good chunk in higher risk. Higher risk has paid dividends bigly in the past decade and especially last 2 years.
Anyway, need some proof. But I 100% agree that senators should be held to a very high standard, and would welcome strict laws that allow them only general investments in the US economy.