Share

Members of US House Financial Services Committee Snapped Up or Dumped Bank Stocks as Bottom Fell Out of Market

by: Stephen Koff and Sabrina Eaton  |  The Cleveland Plain Dealer

photo
The day before the House passed the financial rescue package, Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida grabbed up Citigroup stock. (Photo: Getty Images)

    Washington - As financial markets tumbled and the government worked to stave off panic by pumping billions of dollars into banks last fall, several members of Congress who oversee the banking industry were grabbing up or dumping bank stocks.

    Anticipating bargains or profits or just trying to unload before the bottom fell out, these members of the House Financial Services Committee or brokers on their behalf were buying and selling stocks including Bank of America and Citigroup - some of the very corporations their committee would later rap for greed, a Plain Dealer examination of congressional stock market transactions shows.

    Financial disclosure records show that some of these Financial Services Committee members, including Ohio Rep. Charlie Wilson, made bank stock trades on the same day the banks were getting a government bailout from a program Congress approved. The transactions may not have been illegal or against congressional rules, but securities attorneys and congressional watchdog groups say they raise flags about the appearance of conflicts of interest.

    "I don't think that any of these people should be owning these types of financial instruments," said Brian Biggins, a Cleveland securities lawyer and former stock brokerage manager. "I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the stock market. But if they're on the banking committee and trading in these kinds of stocks, I don't think that's right."

    For example, Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, a Florida Republican, bought Citigroup stock valued between $1,001 and $15,000 on Oct. 2, the day before the House passed the financial rescue bill and President George W. Bush signed it into law, records show. She opposed the bill.

    Eleven days later, she bought $1,001 to $15,000 worth of Bank of America stock. It was on the same day that then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told leading banks that he expected them to accept billions in bailout money to prevent a financial meltdown.

    Brown-Waite, who has since left the committee to join the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, and her spokeswoman would not comment for this article. The precise value of her investments is not publicly known because financial disclosure reports provide only broad ranges, although some members include detailed brokerage reports.

    Wilson, a Democrat from the eastern Ohio town of Bridgeport, sold between $15,001 and $50,000 worth of Huntington Bancshares stock on Nov. 14, the same day Huntington got $1.4 billion in bailout money from the federal Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, records show. Wilson's transactions over the course of last autumn also included Bank of America and BB&T, both beneficiaries of the bank rescue program that Treasury implemented after congressional passage.

    Wilson's spokeswoman said the congressman did not personally pick these trades because he leaves day-to-day investment decisions to a money manager who uses a proprietary model in selecting securities to buy or sell.

    "To be clear, Mr. Wilson doesn't know about the trades ahead of time or even as they're being made," said spokeswoman Hillary Wicai Viers.

    A spokesman for Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, a New York Democrat also on the Financial Services Committee, said she similarly leaves transactions solely to the discretion of account managers. McCarthy's trades included a $2,275 purchase of bailout recipient J.P. Morgan Chase while Congress was still hammering out its rescue bill.

    Another member of the Financial Services Committee, Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier of California, said on a recent financial disclosure report that she bought up to $15,000 in Citigroup stock on Nov. 7. That was 10 days after the bank got a $25 billion bailout.

    Her office now says the report was filed in error, the transaction should have been listed as her husband's - and she wishes he had not made it.

    "When I brought it up with her, she said it was Barry's purchase and she didn't know about it but she would have disagreed with it at the time had she known about it," Speier spokesman Mike Larsen said.

    Her husband wasn't the only committee spouse trading on bank stocks.

    The stockbroker husband of West Virginia's Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican, sold more than $100,000 in Citigroup stock in several transactions late last year. His brokerage firm was owned by Citigroup and his compensation included Citigroup stock. A Capito spokesman said the House Ethics Committee gave her verbal approval to join the committee despite her husband's job.

    Another committee member, Illinois Republican Judith Biggert, whose husband sold Wells Fargo stock while Congress was helping to shape the rescue bill, said she does not discuss stock transactions with her spouse.

    "I wouldn't have the vaguest idea" why he sold at that time "because we don't discuss our stocks," said Biggert. "We have a financial group in Chicago, and they take care of all of that."

    Some of these stock sales enabled committee members or their families to cut losses before the market continued its slide. Other trades proved to be particularly ill-timed. Citigroup stock, for example, closed at $22.50 per share the day Brown-Waite bought it. Now it's hovering around $3.

    Many details about the massive financial bailout last fall were widely known outside Capitol Hill. Yet members of the Financial Services Committee were privy to closed-door discussions, staff briefings and political horse-trading decisions between political parties, Congress and the White House. Banks lobbied Congress and the administration heavily.

    Banks that received bailout money spent $77 million on lobbying and $37 million on federal campaign contributions last year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The center found that the banks spending the heaviest got the biggest rescue packages.

    There has been no direct evidence that this allowed members to engage in insider trading. But when lawmakers overseeing banks also buy and sell bank stocks, it can create "the appearance of a problem," said Anthony J. Hartman, a Cleveland securities attorney.

    "I do a lot of different types of litigation, and I just don't think anybody ought to be putting themselves in a situation where as an elected official, I can be suspect of what they are doing," Hartman said.

    The issue of appearances is complicated, said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility in Ethics in Washington, because "we can't say that because you're a member of Congress you can't buy or sell any stocks at all."

    But she added, "I do think it's more troubling on an oversight committee, particularly Financial Services."

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

Should anyone be surprised

Should anyone be surprised when the political arm of the robber-baron class helps themselves while pulling the strings to their own advantage? I'm glad that these people have been exposed, and we must demand accountability, but our system and its elite handlers are crooked and we should know that by now. Only the people can end this Ponzi scheme.

I saw the crash coming to

I saw the crash coming to the week, as far back as 2007 and called Obama and Durbin, as did my broker a VP at his firm, to ask for a meeting before Obama took office. The VP broker was a witness to my call a year in advance the week of the "crash" through 8,000 on the DOW (I said it would come between August 19th through October 15th '08) I took my money out of stocks in March '08 and into Money Market funds in August '08 and paper-shorted the market all the way to the middle of October, then again in late February through 6600 shorted the DIA, SPYDERS and Builders indicators. So, Obama instead of listening to me, listens to those who were caught napping. In November '08 GM's 611 million outstanding shares were selling for $1.27 cents or $1.5 billion so I suggested buying all shares rather than lending them 12 times it's value. Then replacing the fools at GM and pumping up the stock and selling it when it rebounded and placing the profits into the Treasury to fund Healthcare. FDR did a similar thing to my suggestion in the 1930's successfully. I told them if they lent GM the money they would blow it in 3 months and still go bankrupt, which they did. I don't care who the president is anymore they are all one of a kind and we will never, unfortunately see another FDR.

This is chicken feed - the

This is chicken feed - the Federal Reserve Bank doesn't HAVE the inside scoop, it IS the inside scoop. It's beneficiaries have been milking us dry for almost a hundred years with this incredibly unfair advantage. It is time to audit the FRB. Call your congressman and ask him to co-sponsor HR 1207 to audit the FRB.

Lobbying walks a fine line

Lobbying walks a fine line between advocacy/education and legalized bribery. Perhaps with more coverage like this article offers, people will begin to see clearly that 'big government' and 'big business' are not two separate spheres; they are in bed together, and have always been so. There is no "wall" separating private enterprise from public lawmaking. The 'private' verses 'public' polemic is a lie used for partisan rabble-rousing. This is why the true "public" (all of us) must continuously demand over-sight, accountability and transparency(freedom of information) in government...even though, what we get will be some watered-down version...eventually, enough of the 'truth' will out to scare the pols into doing the right thing, some of the time... ...the price of liberty is eternal vigilance....

Here's an idea: No one

Here's an idea: No one holding elective office can own more than $10,000 work of stock in any one company. That would 1) keep elected reps from participating in conflict-of-interest crap like this; and 2) keep those interested in lining their pockets at the electorate's expense from running for office -- there'd be no profit in it for them! Just sayin'...

Corruption: the 'American

Corruption: the 'American Way' nobody is willing to recognize. Isn't it funny that whenever people reference the **ample** evidence of institutionalized corruption, Americans **persistently** refer to these behaviours as 'aberations'. sure it is. that's why the US is singularly responsible for TWO -count 2!- global economic collapses in under a century... what does the US have to sell? death, corruption, abuses, & high-language of 'values, ethics & standards' propagandized as 'the American Way'... when the Truth is soooo far from this crafted bullshit that is being pandered... it would be hilarious if it weren't so often gobbled up like crack by an eager 'we're better than the rest of you' social epidemic of xenophobia, narcissism & downright ignorance. damn, but the ignorance is palpable.

Has anyone mentioned this to

Has anyone mentioned this to Martha Stewart?

My impression: this story

My impression: this story is overblown and a waste of time. No huge sums of money. No real evidence of intentional conflict of interest. The Plain Dealer should spend more time on important stuff than trying to invent scandals.

(typo

(typo corrected) >Congressman, are you an f'n crook? >>Well if I was on Fox I could answer that question. >Congresswoman, are you an f'n crook? >>Oh, aren't we all? >This is Dwight Notsobreit live from Capitol Hill saying "goodnight" ... "from Capitol Hill"

It looks as though some

It looks as though some members of our Financial Services Committee are taking the, "Appalachian trail,"a new metaphor for telling a lie. What a wacky world!

Come on! This a simple no

Come on! This a simple no brainer...if you are on a committee like banking, then you don't get to own banking stock! Any other stock is OK!

What about Durbin in the

What about Durbin in the Senate? Read "Durbin Cashed Out" http://www.suntimes.com/news/1620776,CST-NWS-durbin13.article

insider trading rules apply

insider trading rules apply don't they?... shouldn't these sideshow politicals be dragged before the court to answer for these illegal gains at our expense? how is this any diffrent then what Conrad Black is imprisoned for?

Corruption in America and

Corruption in America and Europe is so endemic it has become an ART. Hence no one can point to the war in Iraq Afghanistan and Somalia. The more they legislate the trickier and slimier they pend their artful skills at lying thievery and war mongering to the point where Legislators and enforcement have lost their bearings as to where the demarcation ends. Western creativity and ability to deny is as monstrous as the effects of a nuclear implosion waiting to happen, only this one starts and ends with economic and financial nuclear greed. We are our own enemy.

What else is new? We have

What else is new? We have the best government that money can buy.

I think it is a great idea

I think it is a great idea to prohibit any kind of stock or securities trading while holding a high office in the Federal government. This might get many of the corrupt out of government and allow some service oriented people to get a toe in the door of elected office. Greedy, amoral, self-serving scumbags would not so assiduously seek high office if they were not allowed to profit so easily by pretending to serve. They could hold stock, or sell before taking the oath of office, but no trading for them or their spouses while holding office. I think it is time to start looking at a Green Party/Libertarian coalition in Congress for 2010. Those folks have integrity and would likely cooperate to pass laws freeing the nation from the oligarchs as neither party takes money from corporations. While each party has its strengths and weaknesses, Greens and Libertarians could provide actual checks on each other's excesses and would pass progressive legislation, especially if the Greens had the majority. Libertarians would put fiscal brakes on the coalition and ground the discussion in personal liberty and responsibility. Both parties have much common ground on the environment, especially at the grassroots level. Short of an influx of people like Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul, the Democrats and Republicans will never serve anyone but the large corporations. We need to dump them in the compost pile of history to feed a new system that looks out for the common welfare.

I think it would be

I think it would be appropriate for elected officials and presidential appointees to put all their investments in Treasury Bonds while in office. No one is forcing them to run for office.

"we can't say that

"we can't say that because you're a member of Congress you can't buy or sell any stocks at all." Why not?????????????????

The least that should be

The least that should be expected is that they put their investments in a blind trust when they are involved in decisions that affect the companies that they own. As a an IRS agent I was prohibited from auditing companies I own stock in. Why should we expect any less from those who actually wrote the laws?

I am a lowly employee

I am a lowly employee working for a Federal agency (one that has Nothing to do with banking or finance) and all employees of this agency are limited in the kinds of stocks and fund they can invest in. The list is extensive! And I can imagine easily (and unwittingly) owning shares of one of the absolutely prohibited funds. I guess our esteemed elected officials are not held to a basic ethics standard for investments? Or, once again, laws and ethics just don't apply to those in high places?