Skip to content
Bramble

Politics

Senate Democrats block House-passed congressional stock trading bill, 53-47

The Senate failed, 53-47, to reach the 60 votes needed to advance the Stop Insider Trading Act, which restricts stock trading by lawmakers and includes a voter ID provision. Democrats called the bill too weak and the ID language a poison pill.

5 outlets · 1L · 1C · 3R First reported Account updated

Updated (version 2). New coverage since the last version from Newsweek.

Image: Washington Examiner
Image: Newsweek
Image: CBS News
Image: Just the News
Image: New York Post

1 / 5

The story, neutrally told

On Wednesday 30 September the Senate voted 53-47 on a bill restricting stock trading by members of Congress, short of the 60 votes needed to advance it. The Stop Insider Trading Act, introduced by Nebraska Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts, had passed the House with the support of 13 Democrats. It would bar members, spouses and dependent children from buying new stocks and require public notice of 7 to 14 days before intended sales, with a penalty of $2,000 or 10 percent of the investment value.

The bill also carries a voter ID requirement, which Democrats called a "poison pill"; Sen. Jack Reed called the bill a "sham" with voter suppression language. Democrats also said the bill does not go far enough, pointing to exemptions for the president and vice president and to lawmakers keeping stocks they already own. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called it "Swiss-cheese legislating" with loopholes, such as allowing trades in privately held companies.

Majority Leader John Thune called it a "common sense" measure, and Sen. Dave McCormick said voter ID and stock trading limits are both common sense. Just the News said Democratic opposition appeared driven mostly by the voter ID language and that the vote effectively ends the bill's chances before the midterms, less than five weeks away. Newsweek said Congress could revisit a ban in the post-midterm lame-duck session or next year, and cited polls showing large majorities oppose lawmakers trading stocks.

Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on.

Left1 outlet

Framing
CBS leads on Democrats' argument that the bill is too weak alongside the voter ID objection, calling it a Republican-led effort that fell short.
Emphasis
Democratic objections and the campaign-season context.
Leaves out or plays down
Less on Republican arguments that voter ID should not be controversial.
For example
“A Republican-led effort to approve a House-passed stock trading bill fell short in the Senate, with Democrats saying the restrictions don't go far enough” — CBS News

Centre1 outlet

Framing
Newsweek explains why Democrats voted no, giving both parties' quotes, then polling and what comes next.
Emphasis
Schumer's loophole critique, Republican 'common sense' replies, polls showing public opposition to lawmaker trading, and the midterm context.
Leaves out or plays down
Little on the Republican effort to attach voter ID to other bills.
Charged language
“Swiss-cheese legislating”
For example
“Senator Chuck Schumer accused Republicans of "Swiss-cheese legislating" as Democrats opposed a bill to ban stock trading.” — Newsweek

Right3 outlets

Framing
Outlets lead on Democrats blocking a stock trading ban, with voter ID as the main reason; Just the News says opposition was driven mostly by a 'largely unrelated' ID requirement.
Emphasis
Voter ID, the filibuster, Republicans' broader push on the SAVE America Act, and the party-line vote.
Leaves out or plays down
Just the News gives little of Democrats' argument that the bill is too weak or has loopholes.
Charged language
“Senate Dems block ban”“largely unrelated”“poison pill”
For example
“Democratic opposition appeared to be driven mostly by the inclusion of a largely unrelated voter ID requirement.” — Just the News
“Senate Democrats block congressional stock trading ban over voter ID ‘poison pill’” — Washington Examiner