Separation of Corporate and Political through Buyout Clause

Economy
1

This policy aims to remove the unethical application and acceptance of corporate influences and contract acceptance from government entities in which members of political parties hold any vested interests to include all family members, and their representatives such as stocks and trades.

This policy would enforce a buyout clause on all stocks, a NoKickBack clause, on trade/stocks/investment interests for any company to receive a government fund or contract at the time of award and place a limit upon any political member, and their family members for 6 months to 1 year, after this contract is awarded to purchase stocks from that company.

This would be done lawfully by applying a mandatory submission of all members that hold stocks, silent investors or otherwise to be disclosed to the government prior to being awarded any government funds or contracts.

Companies can amend terms of agreement by requiring those that hold stocks/shares or any vested interests to disclose if they have in any way any affiliation with through family, marriage, employment to a politician.

Prior to the granting of funds, award of contract to any and all companies for any reason, severance must occur in which the company must buyout the designated shares/stocks/vested interests before any contract or funding is awarded. This is to ensure that ethical and fair governance is applied to the granting of funds and contracts and prevent political members from awarding contracts for their own profit gains.

This policy would also include a NoKickBack Clause. Where this company is restricted from purchasing from, donating, gifting or giving in any way shape or form to a political member, political party, or their family members and affiliates in any way, shape and form. This includes from a private third party representative. This restriction would last 8 years to ensure that no conflict of interest is applied, even by proxy.

This policy would include the following:

Identification of shares/stocks/investors with affiliation to any and all state and federal political party members, to include family, marriage, children’s spouses and family members, stock brokers, silent investors, essentially any and all connections must be identified.

Requiring companies to include this buyout severance clause to terms and conditions, or to agree to such severance and perform severance as a mandatory condition to being awarded any funds, or contract of any kind from the government.

An investment Barring of 6 months to 1 year to prevent profiteering from insider trading, tax embezzlement and other missuses and abuses presently found in the process of government funding and contract award

NoKickBack clause to prevent corporations purchasing from, donating, gifting or giving in any way shape or form to a political member, political party, or their family members and affiliates in any way, shape and form. This would include new affiliates, sister companies, shell companies, proxies, or new family members. As a means to prevent for profit contract and funding awards, and get rich quick schemes present in today’s political fund and contract awards.

There are other angles that are used and should also be applied but this is the basics of the policy and could once implemented be added to at a later time once those avenues are discovered in which political members and corporate companies launder money or transfer wealth and tax funds into their private holdings.

1 Like
2

Perhaps I’m late to the thread, but please explain to me what this initiative aims to do. Is it a proposed changed to federal law, a constitutional amendment . . . what?

Does it in any way thwart, diminish or stop the practice of members of congress having inside information that they use in making stock trades or other investment decisions?

3

It certainly could be applied to create a law, it most likely would be first applied through legislation, this legislative act would mandate effective changes to the policies of government funded issuance such as contracts ect, and through that legislation also begin the enforcement of the separation between corporate companies or organizations, if you read it you will understand a bit more, but you could make it a federal law as well.

If it was legislation to create a federal law that requires these functions to be enforced. That would be fine.

You asked…
Does it in any way thwart, diminish or stop the practice of members of congress having inside information that they use in making stock trades or other investment decisions?

The answer is yes, it would stop insider trading, and require a severance clause, no kick back clause, a buyoutclause, a nogiftclause, nodonateclause.

It would not restrict them outright from normal trade and stock investment, but when the government is applying funding, contracts, they are restricted from being first involved or owning stocks or interests in that company, this triggers severance clause which requires before all any and all kinds of funding or contracts be made or awarded a total severance is applied, then a time limit is placed and the awarded funding or contract is approved, that time limit is meant to prevent then from making decisions that they could profit from.

The nodonate clause prevents kickbacks, a nolobbyist clause would certainly be icing on the cake, its not identified as a no lobbysist clause but is included by the donation to political party as NOKICKBACK. The clauses would or could become federal law, I would suggest nobody even attempt to augment the constitution that would just piss people off. If they did that it would probably turn violent very fast. So just including no lobbyist clause as an addition is appropriate and easily done.