I came across an article a couple years ago on infowars.com Basically the article discussed how much money congress and the executive branch were making from the wars.
My question is: Should it be illegal for members of congress and those in the executive branch to own stock in companies that they subsidize or can choose to subsidize?
Personally, I think so for a few reasons.
1. Congress members investing in the private sector have intimate knowledge of who is going to get contracts where. If they have owned the stocks for a while, so as to not make it obvious, it seems like they can argue that subsidies are necessary and try and get them dispersed.
2. Unlike a normal investor who may buy the products of a company with their OWN money because they like the product (like if I bought stock in GLOCK because i think they make fantastic inexpensive reliable guns) Congress is spending money that really isn't theirs.
3. It leads to decisions being made that go against any logic. Case in point = Ethanol Subsidies (I haven't heard a good argument for these yet). Companies like ADM and ConAgra probably don't need subsidies because they are so large that they have more stability than the target group that initially was supposed to receive the benefits.
What do you think? Should congress members have to give up investments in a company if they subsidize them? Do you think we would see more rational use of government funds? I don't care how honest a politician pretends they are - with that sort of power it IS being abused.
