Congress won't subject analysts to lobbyists' rules

The Senate wants a report on the ins and outs of political intelligence activities before defining them in its congressional insider trading bill.

The Senate passed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act (S. 2038) by unanimous consent on March 22.. The bill’s aim is to stop insider trading by senior government officials. However, unlike the Senate’s original, this bill didn’t include a provision that would have required analysts to register as lobbyists. The House’s version of the STOCK Act would have the Government Accountability Office assess the use of “political intelligence” first and then make recommendations on narrowing the definitions.

The change pleased industry groups that were concerned private-sector business analysts might be deemed lobbyists. The Acquisition Reform Working Group, a conglomeration of eight industry groups, sent letters Feb. 16 to members of Congress, urging them to rework a broad definition of “political intelligence consultants.”

“Congress clearly heard our warnings of the potential negative implications,” said Trey Hodgkins, senior vice president of national security and federal procurement policy at the TechAmerica, a member of the Acquisition Reform Working Group.

Based on the earlier version of the Senate’s bill, a political intelligence contact would be any communication to or from certain officials that is intended for use in informing investment decisions.

Hodgkins said in a previous interview that congressional staff members had analysts at hedge funds in mind, not business analysts.

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), ranking member of the Finance Committee, said during a floor speech March 22 he  disagreed with removing the provision.

“They took a common sense provision supported by a majority of both houses of Congress, and they simply erased it," he said.

He spoke about claims that “an unnamed House Republican” forced the Senate into passing the STOCK Act without the definition by threatening to object to a conference regarding the bill.

When both chambers pass similar legislation, they use a conference committee to iron out the differences in order to send the president one bill.

The bill has passed through Congress. Now, it will go to the White House for President Barack Obama’ signature. In January, the Obama administration showed support for the bill.

About the Author

Matthew Weigelt is a freelance journalist who writes about acquisition and procurement.

Featured

  • FCW PERSPECTIVES
    sensor network (agsandrew/Shutterstock.com)

    Are agencies really ready for EIS?

    The telecom contract has the potential to reinvent IT infrastructure, but finding the bandwidth to take full advantage could prove difficult.

  • People
    Dave Powner, GAO

    Dave Powner audits the state of federal IT

    The GAO director of information technology issues is leaving government after 16 years. On his way out the door, Dave Powner details how far govtech has come in the past two decades and flags the most critical issues he sees facing federal IT leaders.

  • FCW Illustration.  Original Images: Shutterstock, Airbnb

    Should federal contracting be more like Airbnb?

    Steve Kelman believes a lighter touch and a bit more trust could transform today's compliance culture.

Stay Connected

FCW Update

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.