logoalt Hacker News

grueztoday at 12:43 PM2 repliesview on HN

>and fiduciary duty not to trade and not to disclose information. The people working in the US government have that obligation

No they don't. They might have duties not to leak classified information, but not fiduciary duty.


Replies

selectodudetoday at 12:57 PM

Look, just come out and say you’re okay with them doing what they’re doing. Stop making arguments that are just verifiably untrue.

> Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to declare that such Members and employees owe a duty arising from a relationship of trust and confidence to Congress, the U.S. government, and U.S. citizens with respect to material, nonpublic information derived from their positions as Members or congressional employees or gained from performance of the individual's official responsibilities.

(Sec. 5) Amends the Commodity Exchange Act to apply to Members and congressional employees, or to judicial officers or employees its prohibitions against certain transactions, involving the purchase or sale of any commodity in interstate commerce, or for future delivery, or any swap.

Extends the meaning of "covered government person" (currently restricted to Members of Congress and congressional employees) to include the President, Vice President, an employee of the U.S. Postal Service or the Postal Regulatory Commission, or any other executive branch employee.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/senate-bill/203...

show 2 replies
arborescencetoday at 1:07 PM

They do not have a fiduciary duty that is enforceable in a court of law or equity. But the trusteeship model of representative government is basically how we've conceived of the duties of elected officials in liberal democratic republics since John Locke. As a normative matter, we feel that a public official who benefits their private interests at the expense of the public trust has violated their duties to the public. That just is what a fiduciary relationship looks like.