The move would extend her 36-year House career and continue to freeze her would-be California successors in a long-standing holding pattern.

  • foggy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    She did not oppose her ability to trade in the stock market despite enacting laws that helped enrich her estate.

    I am a very liberal person. She did a lot of good, but I absolutely would not want to see her keep her position.

    That and I’d rather see someone ~36 years old fill the seat than someone whose had it for 36 years.

    • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are zero politicians who don’t own stock. I really don’t understand why she’s held to some special standard on this specific issue

      • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Holding stock: not a problem

        Having your husband trade stock specifically to exploit ethics rules grey-areas: Problem.

        Hopefully now you understand why it’s a problem, and should note that she’s not alone on this, just a poster-senior for it.