...shares of health-related companies over the past four years while sponsoring and advocating legislation as a Congressman that potentially could affect those companies’ stocks.  In August, Price bought between $50,000 and $100,000 of an Australian biomedical firm, Innate Immunotherapeutics Inc.  The stock has since doubled in price.

"Allegations of abusive trading by members of Congress in recent years led to a 2012 law—the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act—that bars members and employees of Congress from using “any nonpublic information derived from the individual’s position…or gained from performance of the individual’s duties, for personal benefit.” The law also requires members to report their trades within 45 days."

In 2015 and 2016, Price received about $730,000 in campaign donations from health professionals, insurers and drug companies, more than from any other industry.  Over his six terms, he has raised about $15 million, and about $4.8 million came from the health sector.

Yep, Trump's draining the swamp...and putting them in his Cabinet.

END OF MESSAGE

So he is “guilty” of “sponsoring and advocating legislation” that could affect health care stocks?  Once “legislation” reaches the form that it is introduced as a bill in Congress it is …drum roll… public information.

          I bought United Healthcare right after the election after reading Price’s wacky ACA replacement bills and any Congressman who didn’t is an idiot. Of course, they are going to thrive when the cap on insurer profits is lifted, they are allowed to cap payouts,  they are relieved at least in part of the pre-existing condition burden, and when the demise of the ACA marketplace makes it hard to compare plans. The mandate was not helping them anyway. That is why you see endless commercials on Medicare Advantage plans but few if any on Obamacare plans- they are simply not profitable now that the risk corridor provisions have expired.

        Unless it turns out that he traded on nonpublic info, there is no story here.
As for the “appearance” of a conflict of interest, get over it. With Trump’s election, all that goes out the window. Even if Ivanka is put in charge of a “blond trust” with all his assets, there is going to be the appearance of a conflict every time he makes a decision, given the breath of his holdings. -- Modified on 12/23/2016 5:04:53 AM

Good to see he made a good choice for investment. A doctor makes an excellent choice to run hhs.  If he is put in charge of the agency rules will limit him on how he can trade health care stocks. More restrictions than the general public. He is required to take training about it.

The big one is Dem governors "bargaining" with public unions. No, no conflicts their and libs seem to love those conflicts. lol

Dems really didn't give a shit about Bubba meeting with Loretta Lynch on her plane just days before a decision handed down about his wife. Again, liberal crickets.

And of course all the COI re: the Clinton foundation and then SecState.

Of course I am actually concerned about Trump's COI's but Dems have given him so much cover, he will drive a Mack truck through the lane they have created

just another in a long line of lapdogs..

except to loser libs

there are many examples on this board

so very confused and wrong

so wrong that it's not worth replying

not even well-written fantasy

maybe you can take hope in the fact that your team might regain some measure of power . . . .  

in your lifetime!

that's just GOTTA smart!  lol