Insider trading is illegal and morally wrong. Unless of course if you are a member of Congress. Then it is just “honest graft” which sounds innocent enough. Honest graft allows members of Congress to enrich themselves in a way that is legal and for which a politician would say is nothing more than taking advantage of the money-making opportunities that might arise while holding public office. Honest graft is as much an oxymoron as “harmless embezzlement.”

Should we allow college athletes to bet and gamble on games in which they are playing? Is it acceptable for Tiger Woods to wager on PGA tournaments in which he is competing? Of course not. It would undermine the integrity of the game. People would scream with outrage that these athletes have a stake in the outcome and staggering financial conflicts of interest. But this is exactly what we are allowing politicians in Washington to do. Currently, members of Congress are allowed to introduce a piece of legislation and then trade on the company’s stock that will benefit or be hurt by this legislation. Insider trading in Congress is not only routine but apparently legal. Committee members frequently participate in sweetheart IPOs and make trades in stocks on the companies they regulate.

If you are a federal judge who owns more than $25 worth of stock in a company, you are required to recuse yourself from any case involving your company because of a possible conflict of interest or lack of impartiality. Yet, we allow members of Congress who own millions of dollars of healthcare or energy companies to write bills that affect their respective industries they regulate and subsequently make trades based on what’s in these bills before this information is released to the public.

Two or three lines in an energy bill can have a massive effect on a company’s stock price. If politicians possess this information and are allowed to trade on it before anyone else, they have an unfair and powerful advantage. It damages the integrity of the markets; it undermines any sense of fairness; and it puts the average investor at an extreme disadvantage.

The much ballyhooed (by politicians) “Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge” (STOCK) Act would be an attempt at prohibiting Members of Congress, employees of Congress, and all federal employees from using any nonpublic information derived from the individual’s position as a Member of Congress or employee of Congress.

Both chambers almost unanimously passed the STOCK Act, but there is still no law. And according to experts even if it becomes law there appears to be sufficient holes in the STOCK Act such that those who wish to circumvent it will be able to do so. For instance, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor stripped a provision requiring those that collect financial information and sell it to Wall Street to register the same way lobbyists do, which means it’s still okay to provide insider legislative knowledge to ultra-high-net worth investors.

With a Congress like this who needs Bernie Madoff?