Tag:Congress
$47 for the 47th Presidency: Musk Tests Super PAC Limits with Payouts for Swing State Voter Referrals
On October 7, 2024, Elon Musk’s pro-Trump Super PAC, America PAC, announced it would disburse $47 payments to residents of certain swing states who refer other swing state voters to sign a petition pledging support for the First and Second Amendments. Musk said on his social media platform, X, “ For every person you refer who is a swing state voter, you get $47! Easy money.” Eligibility is limited to registered voters in seven key battleground states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Musk’s goal is to reach 1 million signatures, which would amount to $47 million in payments to signatories.
Congress Needs to Pass a Nationwide NIL Law
Matthew Sluka, starting quarterback for the then-undefeated University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) football team, elected to use his redshirt designation and sit out for the rest of the 2024-25 football season, claiming that he was not paid the entirety of the $100,000 NIL deal he was recruited on. Sluka is now the first player to sit out in-season because of NIL disputes. However, it is very likely he will not be the last. Sluka claims that he was promised the $100,000 by the offensive coordinator. The school and team dispute the claims by Sluka, saying they had never promised him any money and the $3,000 he had received was for honoring a separate NIL engagement that summer. UNLV is claiming that Sluka and his representation’s financial demands to keep playing are against NCAA rules and Nevada state law. NCAA rules and Nevada law stipulate that a player cannot receive NIL just to play for or attend a school, there must be quid pro quo, (sign autographs, meet and greets, etc.) in order to profit from their name, image or likeness. Regardless of the underlying truth, Sluka’s situation has highlighted exactly why the NCAA cannot regulate NIL anymore.
Boeing’s Missteps Lead to Heavier Congressional Oversight
Boeing’s controversial history including the publicized suicide of one of its whistleblowers shortly before his deposition to TikTok videos of panels blowing off mid-air or planes catching fire have prompted public scrutiny. These events, mainly the latter, have raised also questions about Boeing’s compliance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations the Department of Justice (DOJ) rulings. However, this is not the first time these concerns have come to light.
Turbulent Times: Boeing’s Ongoing Struggles with Safety and Compliance
Boeing is the world’s largest aerospace company, and the leading manufacturer of commercial jetliners. Its reputation as a highly profitable and respected corporation has dwindled over the last couple of years, and 2024 appears to be its worst year yet. Safety incidents involving particular Boeing models have triggered immediate safety concerns and have unearthed significant cultural and ethical challenges within the company. Actions of regulatory bodies tasked with ensuring company safety compliance and accident prevention have revealed a larger-scale issue with aviation industry safety, and the lack of meaningful reform by the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Justice for Murder Victims Act: Abolishing the ‘Year and a Day Rule’ and the Effects on Federal Homicide Prosecutions
Picture this: A friends loved one is violently attacked one day. Doctors inform the family that there is a high likelihood they will die without a life support technique. The patient is put on life support and for months, despite no progress, friends and family remain hopeful. Around the one-year anniversary of the attack, the family learns of the “year-and-a-day” rule. The “ ” rule is a rule providing that a defendant cannot be convicted of homicide if their victim dies more than a year and a day after the act occurred. With this in mind, what decision should the family make? Do they abandon the hope they keep or forgo an opportunity to hold the perpetrator liable? This is an impossible decision to make and an unfair one to force upon grieving families. The “year-and-a-day” rule has been frequently criticized as due to the advancements in modern medicine that allow victims to live for an extended period of time after the actions against them. Several but it has not been eradicated at a federal level. Putting an end to the “year-and-a-day” rule would have wide-reaching effects on federal prosecution of violent offenders.
Politicians Allowed to Serve Long After the Retirement Age
With the recent death of trailblazing Congresswoman Diane Feinstein, discussion of whether Congress members, and politicians in general, should be allowed to serve long after the retirement age are becoming even more prevalent. This conversation is important as people who hold opposite opinions have valid arguments that must be considered. On one hand, the United States has banned age discrimination in the workplace. On the other hand, keeping people who have declining physical or cognitive health may pose a safety concern for our nation, especially when we are discussing high ranking officials. Ultimately, we are a nation for the people and by the people. Thus, we decide whether we place age limitations on our elected officials or not by going to the polls.
Senate Enjoys Rare Bipartisan Moment, Seeks to Punish Silicon Valley Bank Executives
n March 17, 2023, following the second-largest bank collapse in U.S. history, President Biden released a statement urging Congress to allow financial regulators to impose tougher penalties on the executives of failed banks. Encouragingly, on March 29–just twelve days later–the Senate proposed bipartisan legislation, dubbed the Failed Bank Executives Clawback Act (FBECA), which would grant the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) clawback authority to confiscate all or part of the compensation received by bank executives in the five years leading up a bank’s failure.
Crypto Platforms Under Scrutiny by Various U.S. Agencies
Since the beginning of 2023, the cryptocurrency market has faced legal action from multiple U.S. agencies in efforts to control a sector that, until recently, mostly operated beyond the bounds of conventional financial regulation. As a result of the executive order issued by the Biden Administration in March 2022, various federal agencies examined the risk and benefits of cryptocurrencies and have issued official reports. These reports have led to coordinated action against the crypto market. The administration aims to “ensure that cryptocurrencies cannot undermine financial stability, to protect investors, and to hold bad actors accountable.” In their attempts to promote regulation, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a bureau of the U.S. Department of Treasury, have acted against the crypto market on several fronts, frightening off bank allies, suing crypto firms for violating investor protection laws, and targeting exchanges connected to money laundering.
Congress Trades on Trust
When Nancy Pelosi releases financial disclosures related to stock trades, those disclosures are filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives. The Clerk publishes all financial disclosures on clerk.house.gov under the “disclosures” tab. Shortly thereafter, Pelosi’s stock trading disclosures are re-published on TikTok and Reddit where Zoomers and Millennials are copying all of her trades. According to a Pelosi spokesperson, she does not “personally own any stocks and that the transactions are made by her husband”. The Stock Act requires Pelosi to disclose these transactions within 45 days due to the fact that they are made by a member of her immediate family.
Agency Officials Trade Stock in Companies their Agencies Oversee
More than 2,500 government officials ranging from the Commerce Department to the Treasury Department reported owning stock in companies whose share prices correspond to decisions made by their respective agencies. With obvious conflicts of interest arising, what has happened, and what are some major takeaways from this investigative report?