Republican Politicians Making Record Profits Off Trumpcare Vote

>“As an objective matter, it seems like an awful lot of money in one industry that has a lot of regulation and that these members are directly dealing with legislation on,” said Larry Noble, a former Federal Elections Commission lawyer who now works for the Campaign Legal Center.

>The tens of millions in investments are far from illegal, said Richard Painter, the lead ethics lawyer in George W. Bush’s White House, but raise conflict of interest concerns.

>“Knowing that health care is so sensitive, and that one of the core issues in the debate is how much money is going to the companies and how much is going to patient care, I think this shows lack of sensitivity by members of Congress to be going and investing heavily into these companies,” Painter told The Daily Beast. “I think they’re arrogant and they don’t understand that the public is sick and tired of this problem.”

>Among the influential members with significant investments is Rep. Thomas MacArthur of New Jersey, who held between $834,000 and $2.3 million in health-care company investments in 2015. MacArthur made between $142,000 and $472,000 in capital gains and dividends on those investments, according to his disclosure forms.

>MacArthur authored an amendment to the AHCA that allows insurance companies to deny coverage to some people with pre-existing conditions. The amendment won over critical support from the right-wing Freedom Caucus, allowing the bill to narrowly pass the House. MacArthur ranks seventh among the 40 AHCA supporters who owned the most health-care stock.

>Rep. Chris Collins of New York holds the most investments, with $6.5 million in stock in two medical-device companies, ZeptoMetrix and Audubon Machinery Corp. Collins serves as a director at ZeptoMetrix and is one of the founders of Audubon Machinery. (The Office of Government Ethics is investigating Collins’ investments in an Australian pharmaceutical company.) The New York congressman was responsible for an amendment in the AHCA that requires states to pay more into Medicaid at the expense of counties, saving rural areas like his native Buffalo millions of dollars.

>Collins’ amendment flipped at least one “no” vote to a “yes,” when Rep. Claudia Tenney of New York announced her support in March.

>Another influential Republican with significant investments is Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan, who holds between $400,000 and $700,000 in health-care shares. Upton wrote an amendment providing up to $8 billion for states to fund “high-risk pools” for patients with pre-existing conditions. Upton’s amendment eased fears that MacArthur’s amendment would make it impossible for such patients to buy insurance. The $8 billion Upton proposed won’t be nearly enough to pay for all the necessary care, industry analysts say, but it was enough to push the AHCA over the finish line.

>Besides MacArthur, Collins, and Upton, the other lawmakers with at least $500,000 in health-care company shares are: Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas (at least $6 million); Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey (at least $2.2 million); Rep. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin (at least $2.1 million); Rep. Keith Rothfus of Pennsylvania (at least $1.2 million); Rep. Kenny Marchant of Texas (at least $922,000); Rep. James Renacci of Pennsylvania (at least $663,000); and Rep. Rod Blum of Iowa (at least $531,000).

>Eighteen pro-AHCA representatives held at least $10,000 in health-care investments in 2015; the remaining 12 held at least a single dollar’s worth of investments.

>Staff of several of the representatives did not reply to questions for this story. Camille Gallo, spokesperson for Rep. MacArthur, provided the following statement:

>“Congressman MacArthur has divested from all holdings in companies that are affected by his committee appointments. This is not required, nor was he asked to do so. Anyone who is alleging that Tom entered public service to make money is embarrassing themselves and needs to find a new witch to hunt.”

>Gallo did not say whether MacArthur has consulted ethics officials regarding his significant health-care investments and large role in the AHCA, something both Noble and Painter say should occur for all members of Congress who are doing more than simply voting on legislation.

>A spokesperson for McCaul said that the congressman “has zero participation or knowledge of the transactions” made as part of his millions of dollars in health-care investments, which are held mostly in family trusts controlled by McCaul’s wife, who is the daughter of the billionaire head of Clear Channel Communications.

>“He is legally precluded from having any involvement or knowledge of the specific investment decisions made with regard to securities listed as his wife’s separate property, which are disclosed in his annual personal financial disclosure,” spokesperson Lizzie Litzow said of McCaul.

>Spokespeople for Renacci and Upton said their investments are similarly controlled as part of family trusts or managed portfolios. A spokesperson for Sensenbrenner said his investments are “irrelevant to his vote to repeal and replace Obamacare, a disastrous law that he has opposed since it was signed into law—long before specific details of its replacement were released.” A spokesperson for Rothfus said his vote on the AHCA and other bills are “wholly compliant with the requirements of House ethics rules.”

>Michael Kracker, a spokesperson for Collins, blamed “partisan attacks” for scrutiny of his investments.

>“Congressman Collins has followed all congressional ethical guidelines related to his personal finances during his time in the House and will continue to do so,” Kracker said in a statement.

>Spokespersons for Frelinghuysen, Blum, and Marchant did not respond to requests for comment.

>Members of Congress aren’t expressly prohibited from owning stocks in individual companies, Painter said, unlike employees of federal agencies and members of the Executive Branch. As a White House ethics lawyer, Painter said he routinely advised aides and other employees of the Executive Branch to either completely divest from investments in individual companies or shift their assets to diversified mutual funds in order to comply with ethics rules.

>“I don’t understand why members of Congress don’t do that,” Painter said. “The bottom line is that these folks are supposed to be in Congress to represent their constituents, not maximize their wealth. It’s fine if you want to be a stock picker, but go be a stock picker, not a member of Congress.”

>>a provision of the bill that doesn’t reflect a violation of ethics rules because it will have a broad effect across health-care industries, ethics experts said.

So it's not unethical if everybody is unethical? I'm confused.

>>144944
>Obamacare was literally written by Citibank and the Insurance Lobbyists

You didn't seem to bitch when your boi was fucking over the American people for a fat check

>>144944
It's Ryancare. Trump had almost no input in drafting the bill so it shouldn't be named after him.

>>144986

he has had nothing but praise for it and has been proactive in convincing, sometimes threatening other congressmembers to vote for the bill. He also has the power of veto.

It's Trumpcare even if he doesn't give a shit except to sign whatever congressional republicans put in front of him. Nobody is responsible for that apathy but him.

>>144997
Meh you just don't like Trump.

>>145008

Ha! Epic retort bro! You sure got him!

Socialist Lies.

>>145019
He stays rent free in your head, always

>>145033

As long as we're rent free in your head to the point you're here on news ;)

>>145037
The thought of insecure leftist shills getting stomped gets me goin

>>145031
Could you address us a particular falshehood please?

>>145086

It works both ways ;)

>>145088
The article says this:
1. 40 congress members have shares in medical companies like 3M, Johnson and Johnson, and Pfzier. (understandable, most wealthy people invest and most members of Congress/senate are wealthy)

2. The American Healthcare Act will benefit these companies, and make their stocks go up. Doesn't describe how this is done, but assumedly it can be anything like reduction in overhead, taxes, paperwork (admin) and the like in the bill.

3. The 40 congressmens stock will increase in value at an estimate of a certain range depending on such

I don't see the issue here as long as what they're doing is not illegal and the bill is well written. It may as well benefit everyone, it may not.

>>145106
But don't you think there's a conflict of interest for public servants there? They can pass a flawed bill knowing that it will personally enrich them, whereas otherwise they might be more attentive to the faults in its design? Even overlooking a tiny flaw in the construction of a healthcare bill can affect literally millions of people.

>>145117
It's absolutely a concern - but my point is that most of every congressman / senator / high ranking politician has wealth invested somewhere, and you're dealing with law and regulation writing daily.

That's why they declare their investments prior. You can't really prevent them from investing, so as long as they aren't doing anything illegal then it's the way it is.

I also don't think this is new to this bill.

>>145106
>I don't see the issue here as long as what they're doing is not illegal
Then you don't understand what "conflict of interest" is.
Even if it's not illegal or immoral, they're being paid to serve interests other than the American people's.

>>145128

See
>>145118

Lol don't pretend like this is new or just related to one side of the aisle. That's the definition of dissonance

>>145147
>it's not new
>everybody in politics does it
Neither of these things make this right. It's wrong, and the AHCA is a pile of shit

>>145152
Ok. Just be sure to scream when your team does it too or noone will think you're sincere

>>145161
Oh I will, and I have. There's so much stupid shit going on on both sides of the aisle, but people are so quick to defend people just cuz they're a Democrat or Republican

>>145171
I genuinely hate both parties. I think there's room for discussion on the right and left, but first the DNC and GOP need to be abolished

Politicians enacted policies that benefited them financially due to their ties to the parties affected by those policies. How is this new? Here in America that's what we call freedom.

>>145019
>him
You pussy

>>145147
>Lol don't pretend like this is new or just related to one side of the aisle
That's a complete strawman.
My only point was that this represents a conflict of interest, despite this poster's (>>145106) belief that it can't be a conflict if he personally doesn't object to the results.

>>145180
Absofuckinglutely. If you want to get to the heart of the matter, look at who donates to both sides of the aisle, such as AIPAC and Wall St. banksters. It is their interests being served, not ours. A centrist party with sound populist principles drawn from both parties but rejecting the extremist ends of the political spectrum could draw enough votes to win in 2020.

>The majority of the companies in which lawmakers own stock represent the giants of the pharmaceutical and medical-device industries. Republicans owned between $1.3 million and $4.9 million in shares of Abbott Labs, Johnson & Johnson, and 3M, three of the country’s largest medical-device manufacturers. They also owned between $2.7 million and $5.5 million in pharmaceutical giants Merck, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Shire.

Was Obama not already making record profits for these companies under Obamacare? Johnson and Johnson investment? 3M? Fucking diabolical they would pick safe companies to privately invest in. I wish I had thought of it sooner!

>>145263
Good fucking luck with that. People in the US are so ingrained into the Democrat v Republican mindset that they can't notice a middle ground between them. It doesn't help that the parties are for the most part centrist and only differ on a few key talking points. The only way your proposed third party would be competitive would be to take the outcasts from each party, the Bernouts, the Alt-right, the libertarians, the communists and unite them under a single banner and even then you would only encompass about 10-15% of the vote.

The only way to get change is to make it from the inside. Get enough people in and force a paradigm shift. Otherwise you are just a dog trying to pick a fight with a lion.

>>145309
I would support whichever major party that was willing to admit it's own corruption and punish the traitors. HAHAHAHAHA! That isn't happening.
it's always the other guys who are the baddies, you can trust us!