Texas U.S. Representative Dan Crenshaw has reportedly violated a federal insider trading transparency law by failing to disclose several stock-option trades. The case has sparked outrage among Texas voters, as many criticized both Crenshaw and the Republican Party over the reported conduct.
According to NOTUS, new congressional financial filings indicate that Crenshaw violated the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act for the second time by failing to disclose $15,000 worth of stock-option trades involving Facebook parent company Meta. The filings state that he purchased the options on April 28 and sold them at a higher price on May 5.
Since 2012, the STOCK Act has required lawmakers to disclose certain financial transactions within 45 days. The penalties for failing to comply are relatively minor, however, as the standard fine is only $200, which the House and Senate ethics committees can waive.
Dan Crenshaw Criticized by Texas Residents
Residents on Reddit’s r/Texas were angry to discover that Crenshaw had allegedly failed to follow the disclosure rules. One user condemned his behavior, saying, “In my last job, I had to report all investments and could only invest in certain stocks greenlit by my company due to my conflict of interest. Congress has no limitations and can just invest in everything before giving deals to private companies.”
Others argued that “Any elected official who benefits from trading stock or options based on insider knowledge should be forced to repay gains into the employees’ retirement fund. The employees of a publicly traded company were the victims.”
What seemed to frustrate many Texas residents most was their belief that the Republican politician would likely face few consequences. As one user put it, “Zero consequences will arise.” Others joked bitterly: “It’s like Republicans are incapable of following the law.”
Someone else claimed, “This is why Republicans have made such a big stink about fraud and insider trading the last 20 years. So they, the worst offenders, can continue to do it without consequences and downplay it to their base.”
The controversy is likely to continue, however, as many people in the discussion argued that the potential $200 fine amounts to little more than a slap on the wrist.
