Rick probably does not know that insider trading is illegal and anyone can be sent to jail for participating. Oops.

@Steven B

Washington, DC is a cesspool. All of our career politicians need to be booted out.

its this kind of cynicism that perpetuates bad politicians. 'throwing the bums out' without examining what those bums have done just ensures that there is no clear path to progress.

you cant develop and execute a plan for anything in 2, 4 or even 6 years. perhaps 10. but throwing the bums out at every opportunity will just make it impossible to have any sort of consistent policy in any domain of government.

at the very least, we ought to play a game of binary where we repeatedly throw out the worst and not the best along with them.

you see, i havent resigned myself to not paying attention to what politicians are doing like you seem to have. there are some that are better than others.

you may be shocked to learn this, but most of them are human like you and me who go to work everyday and do try to do a good job.

Okay, Rick. But first we have to pass the law that makes it illegal for Congress to do it.

Or weren't you listening?

Right now they are specifically exempted, which also answers your point ir12.

Now tell me how you plan to get the votes to make it illegal, considering who will be doing the voting.

Actually they are both correct. Insider trading is illegal, and there is also an exception for congress which means that law doesn't apply to members of congress. I would say a first good step is to get rid of the exception.

This coming from the most corrupt Governor in the United States? What an hypocrite!

Yes spider, even a neo-con should know that insider trading is against the law.

Most of this insider trading is being done by the T-Retards, they are out to destroy the GOP name. Joe Walsh said this is how I pay my child support and my rent. Joe is Americas #1 Dad. Good work Joe, nice job ?

Most of the insider trading is being done by most congress people. This is an old story and, as the program pointed out, it is odd how a job paying $174,000 per year nets millions for the congressperson. It's not just insider trading, its knowing what laws and pork will go where so that the congressman can either buy large commodities, land or commercial property.

Note that insider trading IS against the law...for everybody EXCEPT for those in congress. How convenient. Asking congress to police itself is like asking a drug addict to stop doing drugs.

Here is a link to the 60 minute program:

http://cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7388130n&tags=pop;videos

from the most corrupt Governor in the United States?

Sorry, Joe. Illinois Governors have that title wrapped up.

Yes, insider trading is against the law, except for politicians. This is the first smart thing Perry has said in weeks. Unfortunately, he is probably guilty too in one way or another.

Pelosi's husband is an investment banker and she has made him millions, but do those in her district care? No. She will keep getting reelected because they don't care as long as their witch is a dem.

It is almost funny how the ones who want positive change in congress always blame others but keep electing the same trash they despise.

Perry will say just about anything for votes. Yes he's right that anyone involved in Insider Trading should be prosecuted and jailed, but doesn't he even realize he's part of it himself.

I forget, that 2.8 gpa will be his excuse for not knowing.

Ir12

It's illegal for everyone!!! Except Congress!! Ooops!!

No! I'm not a fan of Perry! I'm not a fan of anyone that can pass a law for the rest of us and exempt the legislative body!! Obama care comes to mind also!!

I agree Bob......what a suggestion from the governor who has spent the last 10 years lining his pocket with political kick-backs....which are also against the law......except for certain politicians apparently.

Seems that you libs are all over the board here - one wants to pass a law to make insider trading illegal for members of congress, and another says the law already exists.......which is it?????

What it says is that liberals can think for themselves and will often have different opinions, while conservatives are puppets following their masters where ever they go.

I am not a member of an organized political party. I am a democrat.

- Will Rogers

Hey, Zarsuki! Who Brainwashed you? HA, HA, HA, LOL

Does Perry truly believe that he has fooled the American people?

If a law that demanded jail time for members of congress who engaged in insider trading came to fruition - Perry would alienate too many of his wealthy scheming GOP Pals.

This candidate is hoping to possibly wean some political support from the populace - to save his failed campaign.

This political trick by this Texan - will not work.

Some posters here have made mention that it is not technically illegal for Federal Legislators to trade on the information they learn while conducting their duties. At the 3 minute mark or there abouts of the link below the interviewee says that our leaders were getting out of the market in 2008 before most Americans knew there was a problem with the market.

Technically that is okay, but is it legal for our politicians to tell their constituents that the economy is healthy, when they know that is not true? Isn't that what the folks at Enron were convicted of, selling their personal Enron stocks knowing they were trash, while stopping their employees from selling the same stock, and telling their stockholders the stock was healthy? (Trust me I'm very aware that the odds of any of them ever slipping up and telling Americans "Every things peachy, nothing to see here" are slim to none, when was the last time any of them told us the truth?)

Seriously, our law enforcement agencies have been blocked, and/or reassigned, and/or underfunded from ever investigating what happened to our economy in 2008. Maybe nothing happened, and it was all just an unfortunate set of circumstances that lead to the collapse of our economy. So be it, but what about just looking into the situation?

What is amazing is anyone in the MSM is reporting this at all.

Disclaimer: I do not support either corrupt political party. Vote out the incumbents.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7388130n&tag=contentMain;contentAux

I agree with Perry and I agree with him to the very point that I believe he should be wholely investigated for his role in making the Gardasil vaccine mandatory in his state for 12 year old girls. If he made a single cent off it then he belongs in jail as well.

You folks can speculate all you want or go to opensecrets.org and read every elected personal financial disclosures. If only they would actually disclose the entire truth.

Here's President Obama's, Most of his money is in T Bills. The guy's clean. Now, look at your own Senator or House Member. My Senator has much to explain. He made money at the same time on the same stocks that I lost on.

Assets

OrganizationValue

Bright Directions 529 9 to 12 yrs
$100,001 to $250,000

Bright Directions 529 Newborn to 8 yrs
$100,001 to $250,000

Hawaiian Tax Free Trust
$0 to $1,000

Morgan Chase Private Client Asset Mgmt
$250,001 to $501,000

Northern Trust/Checking
$1,001 to $15,000

State of Illinois General Assembly Def
$50,001 to $100,000

US Treasury Bill
$100,001 to $250,000

US Treasury Bills
$1,000,001 to $5,000,000

US Treasury Notes
$500,001 to $1,000,000

Vanguard 500 Index
$150,003 to $300,000

Vanguard FTSE Social Index
$0 to $3,000

1. In Thailand any Politician or their wife while holding public office, can not earn any outside income...

Of the last 5 Prime Ministers in Thailand (14+years) - 3 have been removed from office because they violated this law. One had appeared on a cooking show and received money for his expenses. Another was removed from office/convicted when their wife purchased property in a public auction, even though she later lost money on the transaction...

2. In Australia any assets or money gained from supposed ILLEGAL transactions is confiscated by the Government. You then have to prove they were obtain legally & taxes were paid. This also includes money transferred into Australia, when you move there...

flowervalley1 @ 1.17

"Hey, Zarsuki! Who Brainwashed you? HA, HA, HA, LOL"

The guy writes a reasonable, thoughtful post (@1.2) and this is the kind of response it gets.

It's like trying to reason with a 2 year old throwing a tantrum.

Rick Perry should probably keep his mouth shut before we start investigating HIS finances and HIS possible (rolling eyes) kickbacks.

But yes! Let's investigate ALL of them. Bet if it were an independent investigation THEY'D ALL GO TO JAIL!

ir12...you missed one point in your statement..congress sees itself as above the law. They accept bribe money now from every lobbyist with money in his or her hand....and telling the truth about insider trading or anything else will never happen....and no one on wall street would admit to handing out that info..unless you catch them at it. And no one in congress would ever admit to making bills or laws that benefit those lobbyist with the cash. I actually have little doubt that Perry has not done some of the same things himself as governor of Texas.

Now I get it...the democrats, socialists, and communists tell you to hate the rich all the making the elites in power wealthy. Great scam!!!

Rick Perry's Death Insurance Scheme....on your life!

Here are the broad strokes, as reported by The Huffington Post’s Zach Carter and Jason Cherkis:

…the Perry administration wanted to help Wall Street investors gamble on how long retired Texas teachers would live. Perry was promising the state big money in exchange for helping Swiss banking giant UBS set up a business of teacher death speculation.
All they had to do was convince retirees to let UBS buy life insurance policies on them. When the retirees died, those policies would pay out benefits to Wall Street speculators, and the state, supposedly, would get paid for arranging the bets. The families of the deceased former teachers would get nothing.

Technically, they wouldn’t get “nothing,” as the article goes on to explain that reluctant retirees would be enticed into this arrangement with $50-$100 in extremely cold cash. The details only get more ghoulish from there, but as a former insurance consultant, the thing that leapt out at me was how such a thing could possibly be legal.

Even a layperson would have to wonder how an uninterested third party could take out life insurance on some random person. Surely, there’s something to prevent life insurance from becoming a back-alley dice game for anyone who can afford to bet on a stranger’s death. As a matter of fact, there is: state regulations.

In this case, “insurable interest” regulations, which are foundational to the entire life insurance industry: (emphasis mine)

“Insurable interest” is a key principle in life insurance law. It is the requirement imposed by law (and by insurers) to prevent a “gaming” or “wagering” by one party on the life of another through insurance. Simply put, to insure the life of an individual, the applicant must have an insurable interest, i.e., a greater concern in the insured’s living than dying. Courts (and insurers) look for “a reasonable ground … to expect some benefit or advantage from the continuance of the [insured].” Stated in another manner, the public has an interest in preventing the contract of insurance where the applicant has no interest in the continuation of the insured’s life other than the prospect of profiting from the insured’s early demise.

This is what prevents your neighbor from eyeing a big payday when he sees you out back, grilling bacon-basted ribs.

Insurable interest regulations vary from state to state, which has, in the past, permitted some Perry-esque twisting of the concept, such as the 90′s Wal-Mart case, where the company was secretly taking out policies on even its low-level employees, and pocketing the proceeds of their deaths. The worst of the so-called “Dead Peasants Insurance” was done away with by federal regulations that require companies to disclose to, and get consent from, any employee it attempts to insure. The new federal regs also restrict such policies to those in the top 35% of earners at a company, in keeping with the original intent of such “key employee” policies.

As ghoulish as it was, at least Wal-Mart had a fig-leaf of insurable interest, in that they could actually point to costs associated with the loss of an employee, even if they didn’t amount to what the policies paid out. In the case of the Texas life insurance scheme, the holders of these policies would have no concern in the insured’s living, and every interest in their dying.

The Huffington Post article goes on to explain that the Texas scheme was dependent on Texas’ insurance commissioner waiving insurable interest regulations. This is what Perry is talking about when he compares the struggles of corporations with the Civil Rights movement: your freedom to have your death become a casino game for Swiss bankers.

This is what Mitt Romney means when he says “corporations are people,” that their right to gamble on your life is equal to your right to live that life.

This is what Michele Bachmann means when she says that “slavery is horrible, and economic slavery is horrible, too,” that corporations must submit to the cruel whip of regulations that prevent them from turning you and your family into so many dice, or doing anything else they want to do.

We’ve all had experience with a regulation that we thought was stupid, or a stack of forms that we don’t see a purpose for, and that makes it easy for Republicans to demonize them. If the Republicans said they were against “excessive criminal laws,” they wouldn’t get this kind of traction, yet the consequences of “under-regulation” are often more dire than that.

Eric Cantor would never vote for the Stock Act, he wouldn't be able to make money by shorting US Treasuries as he and his TeaThuglican cohorts do everything possible to drive down the US credit rating.

Come on people, we all know this is not going to happen ever because these people think they are above the law and so far they have proven this beyond a shadow of a doubt for the most part except for the sexual stuff and even these clowns are getting away with some of this today. When you have BONER and PELOSI caught like deer in the headlights just how much longer do you think we will here about it? Two weeks maybe at most then it will fall away like it was never talked about because when your getting in these bought and paid for slimeball senators and congressmen/women absolutely this will not happen and just like them you can take that to the bank. Might want to try voting all of these corrupt POS out of office but unfortunately to many cannot read or do homework so were just plain screwed and I do mean we, rethugs and democraps both.

Yes, Rick, it should be illegal, but why are you doing the same thing in Texas.

http://www.designdvd.com/web-design-award-winning/why-is-texas-governor-rick-perry-giving-texas-roads-to-private-foreign-corporations-is-this-part-of-the-spp

Just a couple of questions: Is a Congressional position considered a fiduciary position. I know a trustee position is and in the trustee position you, as a trustee cannot personally benefit from knowledge obtained from that position of trustee. If they are in a fiduciary position, then I believe the laws HAVE been broken. But, just as in the AIG and financial debacle, is the Congress too big to fail? Just a couple of questions. Thanks for any input.

People in Congress are not above the law, they write the laws just so they won't ever have to break them. In many cases, they specifically exempt members of congress (and their staffs, sometimes.)

Weather report... "Hot as Hell"... but I would advise you not to stand to close to Mr. Perry because he just might spontaneity combust if he really thinks nobody is watching him and all of his deals down there in Texas, ironically where he's been practicing for when he does go to the REAL Hell.

I'm with you Al. Hell must be freezing over - I agree with Perry on this one.

Perry should take his own advice:

"Texas Governor Rick Perry’s attendance at this year’s Bilderberg meeting was reported today by the Dallas Morning News and confirmed by the Governor’s Press Office as he left Austin for Istanbul– where the exclusive and private meeting of elites from throughout the Western world will take place. The trip could be in violation of the Logan Act which prevents U.S. citizens from unauthorized negotiations with foreign entities .
While the agenda of the meeting is kept secret, the overlap in interests between Governor Perry and Bilderberg are clear, as Texas becomes increasingly overrun by international firms taking control over land, roads and newly privatized utilities– seizing Texas in a manner similar to IMF takeover of third world nations.
Rick Perry has not only been instrumental in the contentious development of the Trans-Texas Corridor– often argued to be necessary infrastructure for regional government under C.F.R. plans for a North American Community and the Security & Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP.gov) signed by President Bush– Rick Perry has also privatized TxU (Texas Utilities) , handing it off to global investment firms and private control who are heavily invovled in the Bilderberg group."

http://www.designdvd.com/web-design-award-winning/why-is-texas-governor-rick-perry-giving-texas-roads-to-private-foreign-corporations-is-this-part-of-the-spp

All of that and MORE Eric! Thanks.

While the law prohibits anyone from profitting from insider trading....when was the last time anyone saw any politician brought up on charges for violating this??? Joe the Plumber can go to trial and go to jail, but not Sammy the Senator or Calvin the Congressman.....I agree, it is high time that the politicos did not view themselves as priveleged and above the laws that they enact. Maybe they would be more careful about what they tried to pass into law, if they actually had to live under it.

No kidding... it's no secret here in Texas how much he's profited from being Governor. Of course, he was careful to say "senators and congressmen" in his statement rather than just politicians in general.

It is no secret outside of Texas, either. Perry is frantically trying to put his 'oops' moment behind him, and I don't blame him. It pretty much killed his chances at the nomination if he had any chance before.

He would have never made it to the primary regardless. I just can't help wonder why the Koch bros. would throw so much money at him when they KNEW this. This article is something I had been saving but maybe Mr. Perry can answer it this upcoming debate:

Here are the broad strokes, as reported by The Huffington Post's Zach Carter and Jason Cherkis:

…the Perry administration wanted to help Wall Street investors gamble on how long retired Texas teachers would live. Perry was promising the state big money in exchange for helping Swiss banking giant UBS set up a business of teacher death speculation.
All they had to do was convince retirees to let UBS buy life insurance policies on them. When the retirees died, those policies would pay out benefits to Wall Street speculators, and the state, supposedly, would get paid for arranging the bets. The families of the deceased former teachers would get nothing.

Technically, they wouldn't get "nothing," as the article goes on to explain that reluctant retirees would be enticed into this arrangement with $50-$100 in extremely cold cash. The details only get more ghoulish from there, but as a former insurance consultant, the thing that leapt out at me was how such a thing could possibly be legal.

Even a layperson would have to wonder how an uninterested third party could take out life insurance on some random person. Surely, there's something to prevent life insurance from becoming a back-alley dice game for anyone who can afford to bet on a stranger's death. As a matter of fact, there is: state regulations.

In this case, "insurable interest" regulations, which are foundational to the entire life insurance industry: (emphasis mine)

"Insurable interest" is a key principle in life insurance law. It is the requirement imposed by law (and by insurers) to prevent a "gaming" or "wagering" by one party on the life of another through insurance. Simply put, to insure the life of an individual, the applicant must have an insurable interest, i.e., a greater concern in the insured's living than dying. Courts (and insurers) look for "a reasonable ground … to expect some benefit or advantage from the continuance of the [insured]." Stated in another manner, the public has an interest in preventing the contract of insurance where the applicant has no interest in the continuation of the insured's life other than the prospect of profiting from the insured's early demise.

This is what prevents your neighbor from eyeing a big payday when he sees you out back, grilling bacon-basted ribs.

Insurable interest regulations vary from state to state, which has, in the past, permitted some Perry-esque twisting of the concept, such as the 90′s Wal-Mart case, where the company was secretly taking out policies on even its low-level employees, and pocketing the proceeds of their deaths. The worst of the so-called "Dead Peasants Insurance" was done away with by federal regulations that require companies to disclose to, and get consent from, any employee it attempts to insure. The new federal regs also restrict such policies to those in the top 35% of earners at a company, in keeping with the original intent of such "key employee" policies.

As ghoulish as it was, at least Wal-Mart had a fig-leaf of insurable interest, in that they could actually point to costs associated with the loss of an employee, even if they didn't amount to what the policies paid out. In the case of the Texas life insurance scheme, the holders of these policies would have no concern in the insured's living, and every interest in their dying.

The Huffington Post article goes on to explain that the Texas scheme was dependent on Texas' insurance commissioner waiving insurable interest regulations. This is what Perry is talking about when he compares the struggles of corporations with the Civil Rights movement: your freedom to have your death become a casino game for Swiss bankers.

This is what Mitt Romney means when he says "corporations are people," that their right to gamble on your life is equal to your right to live that life.

This is what Michele Bachmann means when she says that "slavery is horrible, and economic slavery is horrible, too," that corporations must submit to the cruel whip of regulations that prevent them from turning you and your family into so many dice, or doing anything else they want to do.

We've all had experience with a regulation that we thought was stupid, or a stack of forms that we don't see a purpose for, and that makes it easy for Republicans to demonize them. If the Republicans said they were against "excessive criminal laws," they wouldn't get this kind of traction, yet the consequences of "under-regulation" are often more dire than that.

P.S. If some of you chose to take this off I'll just post it two more times. It's easy I have a copy!

Didn't Cantor have a short position in the overall market the whole time the US was on the verge of defaulting on its debt last summer? Talk about a conflict of interest.

Houston!

The bill did pass a bit later in 2008. Proves she wasn't interested in insider trading by her actions don't you think?

Al in Visalia CA... as did "Bone-r" and Bachus.

Obviously, there is a segment of the US population that is not smart enough to figure that out. They vote Republican and just know she was up to something illegal.

She may not have profited from this, but then please explain to me how since she's been in office her personal worth has grown as much as it has. This is the case for many other politicians, as well. They take office and miraculously become millionaires.

60 Minutes did a story on this that aired last night. It's not something they would air if they didn't have enough proof or suspicion to back it up. Why does it always have to be Rep vs. Dem for you people? The law is the same for all of us...well, except for the members of Congress. They don't have to be subjected to Obamacare, either, and after only 5 years in office they are eligible to receive a pension. Is that fair? I don't think so. These people also vote on their own salary increases. Isn't that just the rooster guarding the henhouse. They work, technically, for us, yet they're the ones making off like bandits.

Ir12

Last time I checked pelosi was a democrat. She's as guilty as the rest. Obama care is good for eveyone but congress!! Right!??

Anybody, for the "WALLSTREET JOURNAL ?"

Houston, I think you need to re-read the article;

"The report said Pelosi and her husband participated in a 2008 IPO involving Visa even as legislation that would have hurt credit card companies was being considered in the House. Pelosi was speaker at the time and the legislation failed to pass in that session."

It was not her bill, she was in charge when the bill got killed. It was passed later when she was no longer in charge.

All of them are corrupt. Demand a correction to the existing bill to include those in Congress, the Executive Branch and the Judiciary, including all relatives and business partners as well. Then vote them out of office. Otherwise those newly elected will only continue the same practice. Disclosure is not sufficient in stopping this, Congress will only continue the same.

Dems aren't the only ones check out Paul Ryan's disclosure.

Reform Immunity laws, reform Ethics laws, and reform Campaign Finance laws.

gaylep, The President, Congress and all federal employess will get their health insurance from the exchanges under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act(Obamacare) in 2014.

http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/

In the meantime, they go along as they always have with better insurance than most Americans, and will still be under a separate system once 2014 comes along.......sorry, that is not fair, or equitable to the American people.

Oh, it's simple enough, really. The republicans really only know one trick besides blatantly lying to your face: misdirection. He's doing everything he can to divert attention away from the tapes showing that he doesn't have enough firing neurons to remember 3 government agencies. Oops.

Yes, everyone is going to agree with this. That's what makes it a great red herring. 1) Congress is not going to change the law to put restrictions on themselves, so he's safe, even if he wants to run for congress. 2) It gets people looking the other way. Oops. 3) Um, hmmm. EPA.

Good point. Perry's goose is cooked. Sorry, Texas, you get him back.

That's a funny delusion. We (assuming you mean 'the people') have no authority to prosecute any member of congress for anything. The police can't even legally search their chambers. What happens in congress stays in congress, and if you get caught, a stern slap on the wrist is what you get. The DOJ can prosecute them for Federal crimes, and that happens about once a decade at best. I can't think of another congressman doing time besides Delay.

Quite. When the bread runs out, the circuses are not much fun.

Why stop there? Extend it to legislators and city coucil.

Again I restate the same opinion:

Those caught & convicted of the abuse of power or profiting from their position as an elected representative & those caught financially influencing elections or bribing elected officials illegally SHAL BE stripped of ALL of their financial resources, personal property, passport & citizenship & DEPORTED as criminals & never allowed to set foot on US soil again no burial either !

Want to see political corruption come to an overnight halt...?

THERE is your answer !

Write your US Rep & ask that this be written as a Bill, there is not one single Rep. who could vote against it & survive the following election....

We elect them & they hold our blind trust, misuse of that demands all but the ultimate punishment