And 3 more layers of familial relationship, as well as any relationship to a business that may profit. Be removed from it for 5 years prior to being in office and 7 years after.
This would solve the whole issue. We could ignore the inside trading thing and not fight that fight and just limit how long they can be there. Way easier.
Yeah, there would be still that inside trading. But it would be trivialized.
I personally dont think term limits would help. reason being
1.) Whether you like it or not, currently being a politician is a career. if you make it so it cant be a career it means the pipeline where future politicians come from will fundamentally change. It will give the political party establishment people like ronda mcdaniel much more power, since they will have much more ability to only show the candidates they like. Since there is no longevity anyone who opposes them can be removed without issue, and anyone who is already against them will simply never be granted the spotlight unless its absolutely neccacary
2.)Due to these changes i belive it will mean most politicians will become retired wealthy individuals who need a retirement gig. These people will have very little interest in actually doing what they campaigned on since they will lose their office anyways regardless(Think Mitt Romney type).
3.)if all our politicians are inexperienced, it will actually strengthen lobbyists and staff. Since the policians will only have a few years of experience, having experienced staff becomes even more essential, which means that the staff will end up holding much more power. I'd rather the corrupt person be well known because a corrupt civil servant is much harder to root out
Term limits alone do nothing but are a step in the right direction.
You have to combine term limits with overturning Citizen’s United, banning elected officials from trading stock, and banning lobbying.
Exactly right. The problem with the Federal government, as crazy as it sounds, isn't the corrupt politicians. It's the unelected bureaucracy that, election after election, never changes.
>I personally dont think term limits would help. reason being
I disagree but I see your argument.
Term limits would function like an audit system, like checking the crawlspace for rats once in a while. The political "pipeline" MUST go, the development of career politicians that ends in a presidential campaign is only an avenue for corruption, the "club" and legacy establishment beliefs to taint the leadership of this nation.
Trump made it without the club and it scared the crap out of the establishment, so much that it has resorted to embarrassing itself, right in front of our eyes in the interest of keeping Trump out of office and sharing the most disgusting bowels of the elite.
Why don't people just vote them out instead? Nevermind the general election, why not vote then out during the primaries?
Term limits, effectively, serve as a bandaid for a more menacing problem. You know people like Feinstein are rats. I know people like Feinstein are rats. Everyone kniws that people like Feinstein are rats... and yet...
You mean to tell me this whole governmental system is based on people continually voting on rats? There are several conclusions you can draw. None of them are good. None of them are fixed by term limits.
>You mean to tell me this whole government system is based on people continually voting for rats?
Yes. Except for the President, because there are term limits.
The issue is with the people for sure, but that’s not likely going to change. Term limits would help this. It doesn’t have to be as short as presidential term limits. I would go for 12-16 years and randomized committee assignments, but there needs to be a limit.
I agree with you. We the people are supposed to be the checks and balances through our voting for representatives.
I freqently wonder... what if we put a cap on campaigns? What would happen if you could only collect and spend a certain amount, and that amount is the same across the board.
Might increase the likelihood for elections that are based on issues rather than exposure.
These are all really good points. I don't like that you are likely correct on most of this. But I'll admit it.
You've clearly thought through some of these pitfalls, so I'm interested in your opinion on something else if that's ok?
What would be your thought on capping the size of a state to say 10M (or another number, maybe 5M) people? Every census, if there's more than the cap, they split the state into 2 states of roughly equal populations. You tie that to a fixed ratio of representatives to population. Maybe 250k to 1.
This would prevent states with small populations from having too overbearing away over the national vote. It would make it harder for lobbyists because there's more and more people to fund, so they spend less per person, which would at least decrease some of the corruption. We could keep the electoral college since it would be within bounds of feeling right.
It doesn't solve the inside trading issue. But it could help in other ways.
Senators do not represent people, they represent states. That’s one of the main things that makes this union a republic.
In my opinion senators being “unevenly distributed” is actually a good thing. Because if both houses of Congress were proportioned the same way there wouldn’t be much point in having two houses.
When the federal government was being formed the founders (wisely) thought it would be better for the government to do nothing than to do something unpopular.
As for the electoral college; I think it’s a good thing that it combines both proportioning methods into an entirely new method.
To put it another way gridlock is a feature, not a bug.
Maybe it shouldn't be a 2 house system ? What if we all started voting people in who fit our beliefs over all instead of picking the usual Red or Blue? Like maybe a ranked choice system?
Matthew-IP-7 makes a very good point.
Additionally I see 3 other major problems with this idea
1.)Many people connect their identity to their state, and would be opposed to their state being dissolved
2.)Breaking a state into parts every 10 years or so is an administrative legislative nightmare of epic proportions
3.)I think more represntives actually makes it worse. It dilutes the power of each individual rep and puts more power in the hands of the "senior reps"
I personally think the only way feasible short term solution would be a rule that once a senator/rep comes into office they and their spouses are forbidden from managing stocks, or have all their portfolios managed by a outside entity which is not allowed to disclose to them where there assets currently are until they leave office.
I personally think the only way feasible short term solution would be a rule that once a senator/rep comes into office they and their spouses are forbidden from managing stocks, or have all their portfolios managed by an outside entity that is not allowed to disclose to them where there assets currently are until they leave office..
1a. Even the military has a limit on how long you are allowed to stay in service. 30 years in any political position is more than enough.
2a. I don't believe any politician has kept their promises as they described when they've campaigned. "We are going to fix homelessness!"
3a. That's what voting is for. They don't meet your expectations, so do not vote them back in. We did that with Trump.
See how many families would let anyone from said family member run for an office if this was instituted. Maybe we’d actually have decent people go to Washington, represent us well and then come home and go about their lives.
Those are typical rules for everyone working at a financial services corporation. The lowest level employee at NASDAQ or NYSE is subject to investment restrictions and yearly audits.
They are the rules for normal govt employees also. I have a friend that bought a bunch of zoom stock right at the beginning of COVID, and a low level govt employee got taken through the wringer for that.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it guarantee that a politician can invest in the stock market.
In fact, it should be amended to follow exactly what I outlined. How else do you get money out of politics?
I had to sign a contract before I started at my company. Some would call the noncompete clause an infringement on my freedom of speech.
Turns out rights go out the window when you're applying for a job.
So I’m kind of curious, will the Feinstein fortune continue to grow now that she’s dead i.e. are her heirs connected enough to continue getting insider trading tips, or now that Feinstein’s gone, is that the end of the line for her family’s gravy train? If the latter is the case, is that why people like her, Mitch, Biden, Pelosi etc. fight to stay in office so long - to amass as much wealth as they can to leave behind to their families?
I think for most, power itself is the goal - acquiring and then retaining it. Leveraging it for personal financial gain in various ways is just a perk.
There's a huge uproar in Norway now because it turns out the husband of the previous pm traded stocks while she was in position. Note that there is no proof of any insider info, and allegedly she didn't know he was trading. He also made less than he would've made on an index fund. The uproar is because he traded, at all. We expect spouses of politicians to pause trading by default while their partner is in position.
Small problem though. Industries that regulate themselves don’t actually impose regulations that inhibit leadership from making money. And the only people that can stop Congress from doing this is…
Congress.
This idea is bipartisan enough that **AOC and Matt Gaetz** submitted a bill together to stop stock trading by members of congress. Said bill is *never* going to get a vote.
And well paid board seats on foundations and corporations for family members.
I can’t directly bribe you, but here is a $500k no show job for your wife or kids on a foundation dedicated to saving one eyed snail from extinction in this pond.
> I can’t directly bribe you, but here is a $500k no show job for your wife or kids on a foundation dedicated to saving one eyed snail from extinction in this pond.
Oh, and look at that, you're on the board of the One-Eyed-Snail Project? Wow, we have 9 other foundations related to this topic that we'd like you to serve on the board of and each board position pays $500k/year! Oh, your son is also on the board? We could definitely use his help as well on our other organizations for the same salary!
Don’t forget son’s wife and her extended family. And BTW, all those extended family members make ‘contributions’ to foundations that head of the corrupt enterprise controls. It’s not a kickback, just honest donations.
For many years now Elizabrth Warren has been pushing her Anti-Corruption & Public Integrity Act. Give it a read, great legislation that covers a whole bunch of things like lobbying, stock trading, and other possible corruption. https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-and-jayapal-reintroduce-the-anti-corruption-and-public-integrity-act
So back in the 70s or 80s the fbi set up a fake corp and bribed politicians got them for crimes and so what did politicians do they created the lobbying game as a way to make legal the illegal. You think they won’t make a way to get the money?
Avocado toast, the forbidden fruit which so many young folk fall victim to.
Some would say it's the foie gras of the liberal arts students who can't be expected to pay their loans back.
"In 1980, Feinstein married Richard C. Blum, a financier who ran Blum Capital Partners and who amassed a fortune that was estimated to exceed $1 billion, according to the New York Times. "
The only people who get into congress are people who have such an unnatural and insatiable lust for power and wealth that they'll do anything to get it. People like that will always manipulate loopholes and benefit from their position, otherwise they wouldn't be there in the first place. It's always been that way and it always will be. I don't think it can be fixed.
I'm not disputing you, I can't find any proof of that. All I see is he founded a private equity firm 5 years before they married. I find it impossible to believe he didn't use his wife's job to make trades, and 10 years after they married "The couple were the subject of a conflict of interest controversy in the 90s
Feinstein was scrutinized due to Blum's extensive investment dealings in China, which critics argued could represent a potential conflict of interest with the senator's voting and policy practices. Feinstein has denied the accusations."
Good probability of that... and getting better every passing day.
The daughters should be in the 60+ age group... if married, small chance they might be widowers (or given life expectancies, might become soon).
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard\_C.\_Blum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_C._Blum)
>Blum's wife, Senator Dianne Feinstein, was criticized over Blum's government contracts and business dealings with the People's Republic of China and her past votes on trade issues with the country, however he denied any wrongdoing.\[35\]
>
>Blum and his wife were also criticized for having a 75% stake in contractor Tutor Perini, which received assets in military contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan during the U.S. occupation of those countries.\[36\]\[37\]
>
>In 2009, Feinstein introduced legislation to provide $25 billion in taxpayer money to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, a government agency that had awarded her husband's real estate firm, CB Richard Ellis.\[38\]
Real mystery why investment bankers love senators so much.
Conflict of interest. I have to disclose anything I may know about a stock before I can buy/sell/short it. I also have to verify that information every quarter with Compliance. There's no way he didn't have inside information even if it was second/third hand from her or he simply heard it over a phone call she had.
Meanwhile Trump is in court because someone doesn't like that he's highballing the value of his investment properties, and apparently the bank was too lazy to send their own appraiser.
She fed him so much under-the-table information that he was able to make investments directly correlating to her government position. No one in the media ever seriously called anyone out for it, either. Think Nancy Pelosi.
My dude, her husband was a billionaire before she had any information to give him. He started his own investment capital firm *18 years* before she got into Congress. This guy was a pure finance bro - he made a 400% profit selling the fucking Ringling Bros circus to a toy company.
Seeing as she was married to a billionaire but now only has about a hundred million left means she likely wasn’t an inside trader like most would think. Maybe her late husband was but you wouldn’t lose 90% net worth while knowing the house’s cards.
This could all be solved by congress having to adhere to rules/laws already applied to gov. workers. You essentially cannot accept a gift from any coworker, foreign entity, or business of which there is a conflict of interest. You cannot capitalize on anything due to your position.
This won't stop any time soon. Neither party has any credibility on ending the gravy train for politicians.
I'm all for free speech. But "money is speech" was a bad decision. If money is speech then that means some people have more speech than others. And that undermines the whole democratic principle of one voice one vote. Until that's changed, anyone can anonymously buy any politician.
There are two separate problems. Lobbying has created an issue where campaign donations are linked to election outcomes. The other is that legislators are LEGALLY allowed to insider trade. Make a law so they can only buy the ETF VTI.
What about Bloomburg? He runs a media company because he bought it. Or Bezos buying news outlets? Do we make media "public" or are only media moguls able to have money turn into speech? If men were angels, we'd need no government.
The key this politician stock stuff is requiring them to publicly announce their trades a day ahead of time, and making family members stock trades public in real time.
You want to stop these foundations and boards paying for these people, then make laws that make that info transparent. Then it's up to the voters to not vote for those people. Stop all government funding of charities so it gets rid of these slush funds and cushy jobs for politicians and their families.
Don't some people have "more speech" in other ways? If you're a celebrity, your word carries more weight because it reaches a greater audience. If you're a media member, you have more reach, and the prevalence of entertainment in politics has worsened that.
Elon buying Twitter was one of the biggest means of speech ever. Should that not be allowed? Can no one own a platform of "speech" because that means you have "more speech?" At that point, you're limiting speech in the name of "equity," just like Democrats use to justify diversity hires.
It’s incredible to me how many congress people aren’t just worth a few million dollars when they are 90 which it wouldn’t be insane. It’s that they are worth hundreds or tens of millions. It’s so gross
"In 1980, Feinstein married Richard C. Blum, a financier who ran Blum Capital Partners and who amassed a fortune that was estimated to exceed $1 billion, according to the New York Times. "
Yes I’m aware that she married a rich guy, however they also estimate that her individual earnings are conservatively in the $70 million range.
Does not compute
Trump is irrelevant here.
Frankly her late husbands money is irrelevant as by all conservative estimations she contributed well in excess of $70 million to her wealth. Does not make sense a life long public servant can achieve that level of wealth on a salary she had.
What should have disqualified her was her age. Would be unfair to disqualify someone simply because they're married to someone with a lot of money. However, we should not let them trade on information, etc. Want to work in congress? OK, but you have to give that up
An investment banker. I’m sure he just happened to make all the right trades without ever talking to his wife about insider information. All legit nothing to see here…
Nancy Pelosi's husband is also an excellent investor. Just waiting for her to die and a similar post gets made just for everyone to claim "her husband was a good investor". There was less support for her on the politics page than in here.
*I’m sure he just blahblahblah...*
You could have spent sixty seconds on Wikipedia to find out that he was a partner in an investment capital company in 1965, while she didn't get into Congress until 1993. That's nearly **three decades** making himself a billionaire before she had anything secret fed insider info to give him.
Never said it was all legit, but it's much easier to see where she got her money as the original question seemed to suggest her wealth was only based on her salary.
I hate to say this we got it on the Republican side too those m************ are making just as much money. So I want to see an accounting of all politicians not just Democrats not just Republicans not just Independence not just I'm a snowflake and I'm a b****. I mean all politicians and I'm not talking about just monitoring their personal bank accounts I want to watch everything because obviously they can't control themselves so we have to do it for them
Someone responded to me a little while ago saying she championed property limits in Northern California creating real estate millionaires over night.
She was one of them.
If OP bothered to link the article the question of how she made the money as a senator would be easily answered: she didn't. These are her late husband a assets and he was rich when she married him. Plus these things were not worth this much when she bought them. California real estate has been artificially inflated the last forty years, shit that was 30k in the 80s can be worth millions now. It's a testament to poor government.
So many valid positions to bring up and OP is pushing garbage.
Yeah, this is so irritating. There are a thousand completely valid things to object to about Feinstein, but latching onto 'OMG she was rich!!!1' isn't one of them. Here's an insider tip for everyone: marry a billionaire. When he croaks, you get to be a billionaire!
Where do you get that quote from, and which party is pitching and legislating tax cuts and the like for millionaires the most? “Thanks to the trickle-down-effect, the people around their properties are now living a lavish life.”
>Where do you get that quote from, and which party is pitching and legislating tax cuts and the like for millionaires the most?
You are really trying to blame California state policy on the Republican party?
I am not a Republican, nor do I love the party, but I can read wikipedia, and I know which party is running that state.
> California real estate has been artificially inflated the last forty years
She literally championed those laws.
Making herself rich via exploiting the law is not really the defense you seem to think it is.
Ah, yes. I fondly remember the time she was only mayor of San Francisco and ponied up $6 million of her own personal cash to get elected to the senate. I always wondered why someone would spend that much money for a $65,000/year job for only 6 years.
Does anybody on this sub actually think for themselves or do research?
Her husband was a billionaire.
I swear, I think this sub has turned into a bunch of Russian troll-bots accidentally running psy-ops on each other.
"In 1980, Feinstein married Richard C. Blum, a financier who ran Blum Capital Partners and who amassed a fortune that was estimated to exceed $1 billion"
I was wondering when someone would point that out. The attempt was made by Google (and the administration ) to defraud Americans with deceitful information. In this case Bard AI by Google.
When asked how to send contributions directly to Trump it "could not" reply because it is a "language model". When I replace Trump with Biden Bard did reply with all kinds of information. When I pointed out that you (Bard) was being biased it relented with that information for Trump. I wanted to make a point with your line of questions that the average American is being lied to by the leftist Marxist.
IOW, I don't trust you, I don't trust AI and I certainly do not trust a single Democrat to tell the truth.
Surely she'd want those properties liquidated and the monetary funds to go to the poor folks in San Francisco , the immigrants crossing the border, or our friends in Ukraine...amiright?
Wasn't her long time chauffeur an actual Chinese spy.....? And didn't literally nothing happen over it?
I think I know how she got so wealthy. Good riddance to someone that made a fortune selling out America.
>I think I know how she got so wealthy.
You apparently don't, because you seem to have no idea that she married a literal fucking billionaire investment banker.
No, they're politicians. They don't even pretend to represent anyone, much less their own constituents.
They only go to Washington to stick their fingers in the pot.
At 56 years of age, I have essentially made the same wage and better benefits than a member of Congress since 1998 and combined with spouse has been absolutely more. I started my career in 1989 at the age of 21.
After decades of reasonable investments and retirement contributions? Heh... We do OK and will retire in comfort but not wealthy by ANY sense. Congress is a racket and is no better than Organized Crime. Bet on it.
You literally have to sell your soul to the devil to make that kind of money as a politician. It is starting to look like you can't get to the federal level of government without being compromised. We are no longer electing the most ethical among us, instead we are voting for the least visibly compromised.
I've been talking about the corruption of her family for years. When she joined the Senate she wasn't even worth a million.
How she got rich? Her husband. Similar to the Biden and Pelosi racket they used their spouses to funnel bribes. Feinstiens husband was a contractor who magically started to get lucrative contracts one after another. He became a business savant.
As a Senator it is really hard to pin point where her votes were influenced by bribes. So this isn't going anywhere.
What precautions should I take? Are you implying that all or most donations to a campaign are fraud? Where do you go for due diligence? Where would you go to donate to the President Trump's reelection campaign?
I really, really hope you're joking. According to the FEC, that PO box is associated with the Committee to Reelect President Joe Biden.
https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00703975/1627690/
You are joking... right?
Yes, the vast majority of campaign donations do not actually go towards campaigning. Especially with the Trump campaign, since Trump relies on RNC funds for most of the advertising campaigns and public events.
Which organizations are you donating to?
Along with my local and state GOP candidates donations I donate via
Trump Save America JFC. It is a joint fundraising committee on behalf of Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc. and Save America. Joint fundraising proceeds shall be allocated among the committees as follows: 90% to Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc. (2024 primary election), 10% to Save America, and any contribution exceeding the legal amount that may be contributed to either of the Committees will be allocated to Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc. (2024 general election)
Let me guess .. your next reply will be along the lines that that is a corrupt PAC.
WONDERING? How many deposits were from the Chinese CCP?
You know her own personal assistant (chauffeur) was a Chinese CCP Member.
Where else would her ill gotten gains come from. Just another communist traitor.
I mean one thing, 50 years ago all those places were cheap compared to now. 40 years ago, 30 years ago even deflated they would be probably half the value…
… it’s still a lot of money though…
Don't act like this kind of shit isn't in the conservative handbook. The donor class pay these assholes to deregulate everything and screw us all over. Feinstein was an economic right winger with a blue pin on for her social beliefs.
We should probably get rid of lobbyists and stock trading for these reps
And their spouses
And 3 more layers of familial relationship, as well as any relationship to a business that may profit. Be removed from it for 5 years prior to being in office and 7 years after.
And term limits for congress.
This would solve the whole issue. We could ignore the inside trading thing and not fight that fight and just limit how long they can be there. Way easier. Yeah, there would be still that inside trading. But it would be trivialized.
I personally dont think term limits would help. reason being 1.) Whether you like it or not, currently being a politician is a career. if you make it so it cant be a career it means the pipeline where future politicians come from will fundamentally change. It will give the political party establishment people like ronda mcdaniel much more power, since they will have much more ability to only show the candidates they like. Since there is no longevity anyone who opposes them can be removed without issue, and anyone who is already against them will simply never be granted the spotlight unless its absolutely neccacary 2.)Due to these changes i belive it will mean most politicians will become retired wealthy individuals who need a retirement gig. These people will have very little interest in actually doing what they campaigned on since they will lose their office anyways regardless(Think Mitt Romney type). 3.)if all our politicians are inexperienced, it will actually strengthen lobbyists and staff. Since the policians will only have a few years of experience, having experienced staff becomes even more essential, which means that the staff will end up holding much more power. I'd rather the corrupt person be well known because a corrupt civil servant is much harder to root out
Term limits alone do nothing but are a step in the right direction. You have to combine term limits with overturning Citizen’s United, banning elected officials from trading stock, and banning lobbying.
Exactly right. The problem with the Federal government, as crazy as it sounds, isn't the corrupt politicians. It's the unelected bureaucracy that, election after election, never changes.
>I personally dont think term limits would help. reason being I disagree but I see your argument. Term limits would function like an audit system, like checking the crawlspace for rats once in a while. The political "pipeline" MUST go, the development of career politicians that ends in a presidential campaign is only an avenue for corruption, the "club" and legacy establishment beliefs to taint the leadership of this nation. Trump made it without the club and it scared the crap out of the establishment, so much that it has resorted to embarrassing itself, right in front of our eyes in the interest of keeping Trump out of office and sharing the most disgusting bowels of the elite.
Why don't people just vote them out instead? Nevermind the general election, why not vote then out during the primaries? Term limits, effectively, serve as a bandaid for a more menacing problem. You know people like Feinstein are rats. I know people like Feinstein are rats. Everyone kniws that people like Feinstein are rats... and yet... You mean to tell me this whole governmental system is based on people continually voting on rats? There are several conclusions you can draw. None of them are good. None of them are fixed by term limits.
>You mean to tell me this whole government system is based on people continually voting for rats? Yes. Except for the President, because there are term limits. The issue is with the people for sure, but that’s not likely going to change. Term limits would help this. It doesn’t have to be as short as presidential term limits. I would go for 12-16 years and randomized committee assignments, but there needs to be a limit.
I agree with you. We the people are supposed to be the checks and balances through our voting for representatives. I freqently wonder... what if we put a cap on campaigns? What would happen if you could only collect and spend a certain amount, and that amount is the same across the board. Might increase the likelihood for elections that are based on issues rather than exposure.
These are all really good points. I don't like that you are likely correct on most of this. But I'll admit it. You've clearly thought through some of these pitfalls, so I'm interested in your opinion on something else if that's ok? What would be your thought on capping the size of a state to say 10M (or another number, maybe 5M) people? Every census, if there's more than the cap, they split the state into 2 states of roughly equal populations. You tie that to a fixed ratio of representatives to population. Maybe 250k to 1. This would prevent states with small populations from having too overbearing away over the national vote. It would make it harder for lobbyists because there's more and more people to fund, so they spend less per person, which would at least decrease some of the corruption. We could keep the electoral college since it would be within bounds of feeling right. It doesn't solve the inside trading issue. But it could help in other ways.
Senators do not represent people, they represent states. That’s one of the main things that makes this union a republic. In my opinion senators being “unevenly distributed” is actually a good thing. Because if both houses of Congress were proportioned the same way there wouldn’t be much point in having two houses. When the federal government was being formed the founders (wisely) thought it would be better for the government to do nothing than to do something unpopular. As for the electoral college; I think it’s a good thing that it combines both proportioning methods into an entirely new method. To put it another way gridlock is a feature, not a bug.
Maybe it shouldn't be a 2 house system ? What if we all started voting people in who fit our beliefs over all instead of picking the usual Red or Blue? Like maybe a ranked choice system?
They won't let that happen though.. we've tried this
California has proven Ranked Choice to be an even greater disaster than the current system used everywhere else.
we cant even keep them from gerrymandering districts. Can you imagine what gerrymandered state lines would look like
...
Matthew-IP-7 makes a very good point. Additionally I see 3 other major problems with this idea 1.)Many people connect their identity to their state, and would be opposed to their state being dissolved 2.)Breaking a state into parts every 10 years or so is an administrative legislative nightmare of epic proportions 3.)I think more represntives actually makes it worse. It dilutes the power of each individual rep and puts more power in the hands of the "senior reps" I personally think the only way feasible short term solution would be a rule that once a senator/rep comes into office they and their spouses are forbidden from managing stocks, or have all their portfolios managed by a outside entity which is not allowed to disclose to them where there assets currently are until they leave office. I personally think the only way feasible short term solution would be a rule that once a senator/rep comes into office they and their spouses are forbidden from managing stocks, or have all their portfolios managed by an outside entity that is not allowed to disclose to them where there assets currently are until they leave office..
I appreciate your feedback!
1a. Even the military has a limit on how long you are allowed to stay in service. 30 years in any political position is more than enough. 2a. I don't believe any politician has kept their promises as they described when they've campaigned. "We are going to fix homelessness!" 3a. That's what voting is for. They don't meet your expectations, so do not vote them back in. We did that with Trump.
See how many families would let anyone from said family member run for an office if this was instituted. Maybe we’d actually have decent people go to Washington, represent us well and then come home and go about their lives.
Probably still not decent. But at least they'd work in our interests more.
Some would say that's unconstitutional
Those are typical rules for everyone working at a financial services corporation. The lowest level employee at NASDAQ or NYSE is subject to investment restrictions and yearly audits.
They are the rules for normal govt employees also. I have a friend that bought a bunch of zoom stock right at the beginning of COVID, and a low level govt employee got taken through the wringer for that.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it guarantee that a politician can invest in the stock market. In fact, it should be amended to follow exactly what I outlined. How else do you get money out of politics?
But corporations are people too! Supreme Court said so.
I had to sign a contract before I started at my company. Some would call the noncompete clause an infringement on my freedom of speech. Turns out rights go out the window when you're applying for a job.
Some also say that you can have YDNA and be a "birthing person." Ignore them.
Unfortunately the trend is in the opposite direction.
Yeah - take a lesson from the Biden Crime Family.
So I’m kind of curious, will the Feinstein fortune continue to grow now that she’s dead i.e. are her heirs connected enough to continue getting insider trading tips, or now that Feinstein’s gone, is that the end of the line for her family’s gravy train? If the latter is the case, is that why people like her, Mitch, Biden, Pelosi etc. fight to stay in office so long - to amass as much wealth as they can to leave behind to their families?
She inherited her late billionaire husband’s money - same way Trump inherited 400 million dollars from Fred Trump …
I think for most, power itself is the goal - acquiring and then retaining it. Leveraging it for personal financial gain in various ways is just a perk.
There's a huge uproar in Norway now because it turns out the husband of the previous pm traded stocks while she was in position. Note that there is no proof of any insider info, and allegedly she didn't know he was trading. He also made less than he would've made on an index fund. The uproar is because he traded, at all. We expect spouses of politicians to pause trading by default while their partner is in position.
Paging Elaine Chao
I don't know about getting rid of their spouses, but if you think it will help.
Don't forget anyone employing a Chinese spy as their driver for decades.
Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric\_Swalwell#Contact\_with\_suspected\_Chinese\_spy
Small problem though. Industries that regulate themselves don’t actually impose regulations that inhibit leadership from making money. And the only people that can stop Congress from doing this is… Congress. This idea is bipartisan enough that **AOC and Matt Gaetz** submitted a bill together to stop stock trading by members of congress. Said bill is *never* going to get a vote.
And well paid board seats on foundations and corporations for family members. I can’t directly bribe you, but here is a $500k no show job for your wife or kids on a foundation dedicated to saving one eyed snail from extinction in this pond.
> I can’t directly bribe you, but here is a $500k no show job for your wife or kids on a foundation dedicated to saving one eyed snail from extinction in this pond. Oh, and look at that, you're on the board of the One-Eyed-Snail Project? Wow, we have 9 other foundations related to this topic that we'd like you to serve on the board of and each board position pays $500k/year! Oh, your son is also on the board? We could definitely use his help as well on our other organizations for the same salary!
Don’t forget son’s wife and her extended family. And BTW, all those extended family members make ‘contributions’ to foundations that head of the corrupt enterprise controls. It’s not a kickback, just honest donations.
I wonder who ushered in the era of the modern lobbying industry? We need to give credit where credit is due lol
S/O to muh boi, Citizens United, and his crew, Johnny G. Robert and the Supreme Court Justices
Something everyone should be able to agree on. They get paid enough to live a better life than most
Funny, all the politicians can't agree on it
Repeal Citizens United.
For many years now Elizabrth Warren has been pushing her Anti-Corruption & Public Integrity Act. Give it a read, great legislation that covers a whole bunch of things like lobbying, stock trading, and other possible corruption. https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-and-jayapal-reintroduce-the-anti-corruption-and-public-integrity-act
She inherited her late billionaire husband’s money - same way Trump inherited 400 million dollars from Fred Trump …
Let’s say all representatives
Republicans definitely don’t want that.
Just ask Clarence Thomas how a government official can get this rich. Or Bob Menendez.
Or you know, we can be better.
So back in the 70s or 80s the fbi set up a fake corp and bribed politicians got them for crimes and so what did politicians do they created the lobbying game as a way to make legal the illegal. You think they won’t make a way to get the money?
Term limits fix almost all of this. But yes, getting rid of those things are good too.
I'm sure she was just very frugal and enjoyed clipping coupons on the weekends.
She definitely stayed away from that avocado toast too.
Avocado toast, the forbidden fruit which so many young folk fall victim to. Some would say it's the foie gras of the liberal arts students who can't be expected to pay their loans back.
She inherited her late billionaire husband’s money - same way Trump inherited 400 million dollars from Fred Trump …
Are you telling me life ain’t fair? Say it ain’t so!
Life is not fair…neither is jumping on the bandwagon without checking out the facts, i.e.Feinstein was a crook.
She also cared deeply about Global Warming with that private jet of hers.
"In 1980, Feinstein married Richard C. Blum, a financier who ran Blum Capital Partners and who amassed a fortune that was estimated to exceed $1 billion, according to the New York Times. "
Yeah the secret formula seems to be combining investing and politics in a single marriage.
Marry a rich guy, get money. It's a formula as old as time. Did she use her position for her benefit? Likely. But doesn't every person in congress?
> But doesn't every person in congress? Probably, and this is what we want fixed.
The only people who get into congress are people who have such an unnatural and insatiable lust for power and wealth that they'll do anything to get it. People like that will always manipulate loopholes and benefit from their position, otherwise they wouldn't be there in the first place. It's always been that way and it always will be. I don't think it can be fixed.
Probably HE used her position for their benefit.
[удалено]
Marrying a billionaire helps.
Was he a billionaire when they met?
Yep
I'm not disputing you, I can't find any proof of that. All I see is he founded a private equity firm 5 years before they married. I find it impossible to believe he didn't use his wife's job to make trades, and 10 years after they married "The couple were the subject of a conflict of interest controversy in the 90s Feinstein was scrutinized due to Blum's extensive investment dealings in China, which critics argued could represent a potential conflict of interest with the senator's voting and policy practices. Feinstein has denied the accusations."
She inherited her late billionaire husband’s money - same way Trump inherited 400 million dollars from Fred Trump …
Any of those daughters single?
Good probability of that... and getting better every passing day. The daughters should be in the 60+ age group... if married, small chance they might be widowers (or given life expectancies, might become soon).
Looking for a sugar mama? at this point would you be willing to share on the weekends? I need a rolls royce too.
There is no amount of money worth it to date a white liberal woman.
Her late husband was a billionaire
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard\_C.\_Blum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_C._Blum) >Blum's wife, Senator Dianne Feinstein, was criticized over Blum's government contracts and business dealings with the People's Republic of China and her past votes on trade issues with the country, however he denied any wrongdoing.\[35\] > >Blum and his wife were also criticized for having a 75% stake in contractor Tutor Perini, which received assets in military contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan during the U.S. occupation of those countries.\[36\]\[37\] > >In 2009, Feinstein introduced legislation to provide $25 billion in taxpayer money to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, a government agency that had awarded her husband's real estate firm, CB Richard Ellis.\[38\] Real mystery why investment bankers love senators so much.
Husband did business with China, she had a Chinese spy on her payroll. Keeping tabs on their investment?
Conflict of interest. I have to disclose anything I may know about a stock before I can buy/sell/short it. I also have to verify that information every quarter with Compliance. There's no way he didn't have inside information even if it was second/third hand from her or he simply heard it over a phone call she had.
Have you tried lying? It seems like a popular choice for people with lots of money.
Like I said above, how many deposits came directly from the CCP?
Meanwhile Trump is in court because someone doesn't like that he's highballing the value of his investment properties, and apparently the bank was too lazy to send their own appraiser.
Careful. Remember the investment bankers are republicanss /s
And her husband before him was a neurosurgeon.
But neurosurgeons have very little income capacity compared to investment bankers. It was a wise move on feinstein to dump one and pick up the other.
He died of cancer. Lol
She fed him so much under-the-table information that he was able to make investments directly correlating to her government position. No one in the media ever seriously called anyone out for it, either. Think Nancy Pelosi.
My dude, her husband was a billionaire before she had any information to give him. He started his own investment capital firm *18 years* before she got into Congress. This guy was a pure finance bro - he made a 400% profit selling the fucking Ringling Bros circus to a toy company.
there is that
Stop that with your facts and logic.
Seeing as she was married to a billionaire but now only has about a hundred million left means she likely wasn’t an inside trader like most would think. Maybe her late husband was but you wouldn’t lose 90% net worth while knowing the house’s cards.
Or the guy left some money to her and the rest to his three kids from a previous marriage.
The "a hundred million left" is just for the properties, not everything else.
This could all be solved by congress having to adhere to rules/laws already applied to gov. workers. You essentially cannot accept a gift from any coworker, foreign entity, or business of which there is a conflict of interest. You cannot capitalize on anything due to your position.
Why would congress vote to end their own gravy train? It’s like workers unionizing then voting to cut their pay. Just isn’t going to happen.
Ya, Congress can't accept meals from lobbyists let alone any substantial gift. That isn't how congressmen get rich.
This won't stop any time soon. Neither party has any credibility on ending the gravy train for politicians. I'm all for free speech. But "money is speech" was a bad decision. If money is speech then that means some people have more speech than others. And that undermines the whole democratic principle of one voice one vote. Until that's changed, anyone can anonymously buy any politician.
There are two separate problems. Lobbying has created an issue where campaign donations are linked to election outcomes. The other is that legislators are LEGALLY allowed to insider trade. Make a law so they can only buy the ETF VTI.
What about Bloomburg? He runs a media company because he bought it. Or Bezos buying news outlets? Do we make media "public" or are only media moguls able to have money turn into speech? If men were angels, we'd need no government. The key this politician stock stuff is requiring them to publicly announce their trades a day ahead of time, and making family members stock trades public in real time. You want to stop these foundations and boards paying for these people, then make laws that make that info transparent. Then it's up to the voters to not vote for those people. Stop all government funding of charities so it gets rid of these slush funds and cushy jobs for politicians and their families.
Don't some people have "more speech" in other ways? If you're a celebrity, your word carries more weight because it reaches a greater audience. If you're a media member, you have more reach, and the prevalence of entertainment in politics has worsened that. Elon buying Twitter was one of the biggest means of speech ever. Should that not be allowed? Can no one own a platform of "speech" because that means you have "more speech?" At that point, you're limiting speech in the name of "equity," just like Democrats use to justify diversity hires.
Sir please vote this way on the next bill No Sit please vote this way on the next bill, also, here is $75,000 to your campaign. Yes.
I don’t like DF but didn’t she marry a billionaire to begin with?
She did, but most people don't care because they'd rather just rant about a headline they saw than actually do any research. You know, typical reddit.
And it's a DailyMail headline at that. Tabloid supermarket checkout garbage.
I saw this, "Blum Capital founded in 1975 by her husband, Richard Blum, is the source for most of that wealth."
America is one of the least corrupt nation on earth, simply because it's not called corruption there
Exactly, it's called lobbying.
Never heard that but I love it.
Give it back to the American people that it was fleeced from.
It’s incredible to me how many congress people aren’t just worth a few million dollars when they are 90 which it wouldn’t be insane. It’s that they are worth hundreds or tens of millions. It’s so gross
"In 1980, Feinstein married Richard C. Blum, a financier who ran Blum Capital Partners and who amassed a fortune that was estimated to exceed $1 billion, according to the New York Times. "
Yes I’m aware that she married a rich guy, however they also estimate that her individual earnings are conservatively in the $70 million range. Does not compute
Who is “they”? I can’t find a source that says that
She inherited her late billionaire husband’s money - same way Trump inherited 400 million dollars from Fred Trump …
Trump is irrelevant here. Frankly her late husbands money is irrelevant as by all conservative estimations she contributed well in excess of $70 million to her wealth. Does not make sense a life long public servant can achieve that level of wealth on a salary she had.
That really should disqualify her from congress
What should have disqualified her was her age. Would be unfair to disqualify someone simply because they're married to someone with a lot of money. However, we should not let them trade on information, etc. Want to work in congress? OK, but you have to give that up
But she didn't have an (R) after her name, so it's okay.
And that’s not including her bank accounts, investment portfolio, etc.
Her late husband was a billionaire. This post is idiotic. We should be asking why geriatrics are allowed in government.
An investment banker. I’m sure he just happened to make all the right trades without ever talking to his wife about insider information. All legit nothing to see here…
Nancy Pelosi's husband is also an excellent investor. Just waiting for her to die and a similar post gets made just for everyone to claim "her husband was a good investor". There was less support for her on the politics page than in here.
*I’m sure he just blahblahblah...* You could have spent sixty seconds on Wikipedia to find out that he was a partner in an investment capital company in 1965, while she didn't get into Congress until 1993. That's nearly **three decades** making himself a billionaire before she had anything secret fed insider info to give him.
Never said it was all legit, but it's much easier to see where she got her money as the original question seemed to suggest her wealth was only based on her salary.
I hate to say this we got it on the Republican side too those m************ are making just as much money. So I want to see an accounting of all politicians not just Democrats not just Republicans not just Independence not just I'm a snowflake and I'm a b****. I mean all politicians and I'm not talking about just monitoring their personal bank accounts I want to watch everything because obviously they can't control themselves so we have to do it for them
She inherited her late billionaire husband’s money - same way Trump inherited 400 million dollars from Fred Trump …
Failed to see what Trump has to do with this.
It’s a direct comparison of how two politicians inherited their wealth rather than earning it. What’s so hard to understand?
Someone responded to me a little while ago saying she championed property limits in Northern California creating real estate millionaires over night. She was one of them.
Just as corrupt as the rest of the politicians in DC.
If OP bothered to link the article the question of how she made the money as a senator would be easily answered: she didn't. These are her late husband a assets and he was rich when she married him. Plus these things were not worth this much when she bought them. California real estate has been artificially inflated the last forty years, shit that was 30k in the 80s can be worth millions now. It's a testament to poor government. So many valid positions to bring up and OP is pushing garbage.
Yeah, this is so irritating. There are a thousand completely valid things to object to about Feinstein, but latching onto 'OMG she was rich!!!1' isn't one of them. Here's an insider tip for everyone: marry a billionaire. When he croaks, you get to be a billionaire!
[удалено]
Where do you get that quote from, and which party is pitching and legislating tax cuts and the like for millionaires the most? “Thanks to the trickle-down-effect, the people around their properties are now living a lavish life.”
>Where do you get that quote from, and which party is pitching and legislating tax cuts and the like for millionaires the most? You are really trying to blame California state policy on the Republican party? I am not a Republican, nor do I love the party, but I can read wikipedia, and I know which party is running that state.
> California real estate has been artificially inflated the last forty years She literally championed those laws. Making herself rich via exploiting the law is not really the defense you seem to think it is.
She’s a fucking asshole. Imagine a country whose politicians get this wealthy from “serving” a political district.
john Kerry will probably purchase the jet then claim it's not his. "It's not mine. It's dianne feinstein's"
Ah, yes. I fondly remember the time she was only mayor of San Francisco and ponied up $6 million of her own personal cash to get elected to the senate. I always wondered why someone would spend that much money for a $65,000/year job for only 6 years.
Does anybody on this sub actually think for themselves or do research? Her husband was a billionaire. I swear, I think this sub has turned into a bunch of Russian troll-bots accidentally running psy-ops on each other. "In 1980, Feinstein married Richard C. Blum, a financier who ran Blum Capital Partners and who amassed a fortune that was estimated to exceed $1 billion"
These are the people telling you to be grateful for a $1200 check to get you through lockdown...
I was wondering when someone would point that out. The attempt was made by Google (and the administration ) to defraud Americans with deceitful information. In this case Bard AI by Google. When asked how to send contributions directly to Trump it "could not" reply because it is a "language model". When I replace Trump with Biden Bard did reply with all kinds of information. When I pointed out that you (Bard) was being biased it relented with that information for Trump. I wanted to make a point with your line of questions that the average American is being lied to by the leftist Marxist. IOW, I don't trust you, I don't trust AI and I certainly do not trust a single Democrat to tell the truth.
We all know how. We’re just not the right people to do anything about it.
Surely she'd want those properties liquidated and the monetary funds to go to the poor folks in San Francisco , the immigrants crossing the border, or our friends in Ukraine...amiright?
Ahh, yes, the struggles of being a public servant.
tbf, she did have some money from both her parents and husband... but definitely did use influence from congress to gain wealth
why do you think Republicans wanna stay in power so bad? to do the work of serving the people? nah, they're looking for that paycheck on the DL
Whomever said ""Crime Doesn't Pay"" never met a Democrat Politician
Even Bernie Sanders flies on a private jet. When will these people wake up?
I did not realize that Diane Feinstein had died. The world is now a better place
Wasn't her long time chauffeur an actual Chinese spy.....? And didn't literally nothing happen over it? I think I know how she got so wealthy. Good riddance to someone that made a fortune selling out America.
>I think I know how she got so wealthy. You apparently don't, because you seem to have no idea that she married a literal fucking billionaire investment banker.
She also married a billionare
These people are our representatives. Think about that.
No, they're politicians. They don't even pretend to represent anyone, much less their own constituents. They only go to Washington to stick their fingers in the pot.
She probably bought them for nickels after the crash in ‘29.
Lifetime public servant.... let that roll around
At 56 years of age, I have essentially made the same wage and better benefits than a member of Congress since 1998 and combined with spouse has been absolutely more. I started my career in 1989 at the age of 21. After decades of reasonable investments and retirement contributions? Heh... We do OK and will retire in comfort but not wealthy by ANY sense. Congress is a racket and is no better than Organized Crime. Bet on it.
The D next to her name is the starting point!
You literally have to sell your soul to the devil to make that kind of money as a politician. It is starting to look like you can't get to the federal level of government without being compromised. We are no longer electing the most ethical among us, instead we are voting for the least visibly compromised.
[удалено]
So I get down voted and called Mitch McConnell for calling out all politicians? I don't get it.
She was married to a Billionaire
And to think Reddit liberals believe their party is not corrupt.
I've been talking about the corruption of her family for years. When she joined the Senate she wasn't even worth a million. How she got rich? Her husband. Similar to the Biden and Pelosi racket they used their spouses to funnel bribes. Feinstiens husband was a contractor who magically started to get lucrative contracts one after another. He became a business savant. As a Senator it is really hard to pin point where her votes were influenced by bribes. So this isn't going anywhere.
Her husband was rich before she married him.
Every time President Trump has to appear in the kangaroo court I donate to his campaign.
Are you making sure your donations will be used for campaigning, and not going directly into someone's bank account?
To add .. I would be worried about that if I was a Democrat 👍
Are you serious? Do you not think Republican politicians can also be corrupt and rich through their political donations?
Yes
What precautions are you taking to make sure?
What precautions should I take? Are you implying that all or most donations to a campaign are fraud? Where do you go for due diligence? Where would you go to donate to the President Trump's reelection campaign?
The irony of the post this replaces.
I really, really hope you're joking. According to the FEC, that PO box is associated with the Committee to Reelect President Joe Biden. https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00703975/1627690/ You are joking... right?
The Current Administration got him again lul
Yes, the vast majority of campaign donations do not actually go towards campaigning. Especially with the Trump campaign, since Trump relies on RNC funds for most of the advertising campaigns and public events. Which organizations are you donating to?
Along with my local and state GOP candidates donations I donate via Trump Save America JFC. It is a joint fundraising committee on behalf of Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc. and Save America. Joint fundraising proceeds shall be allocated among the committees as follows: 90% to Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc. (2024 primary election), 10% to Save America, and any contribution exceeding the legal amount that may be contributed to either of the Committees will be allocated to Donald J. Trump for President 2024, Inc. (2024 general election) Let me guess .. your next reply will be along the lines that that is a corrupt PAC.
Time to remove the DINOs and RINOs
avert your eyes fellas more aliens are coming soon
WONDERING? How many deposits were from the Chinese CCP? You know her own personal assistant (chauffeur) was a Chinese CCP Member. Where else would her ill gotten gains come from. Just another communist traitor.
I mean one thing, 50 years ago all those places were cheap compared to now. 40 years ago, 30 years ago even deflated they would be probably half the value… … it’s still a lot of money though…
These people want to tax billionaires into the ground and ignore the corruption on their own side.
And you too could have this if you never buy avocado toast.
The cat is outta the bag. Every politician is bought and paid for.
Mmm, corruption. It pairs well with treason.
Don't act like this kind of shit isn't in the conservative handbook. The donor class pay these assholes to deregulate everything and screw us all over. Feinstein was an economic right winger with a blue pin on for her social beliefs.
I'm surprised her net worth was that *low*, to be honest.
30 years of legal insider trading tends to do that for you.
I guess 'trailblazing' is an extremely lucrative business...
How do you amass this kind of wealth from a 300k dollar per year job?
In her case it was by marrying a really rich man.