Texas Senate Bill SB111

Texas 2015 - 84th Regular

• Filed: 11/10/14

Caption

Relating to the criminal penalties for insider trading and other misuse of official information by public servants.

Impact

The impact of SB111 on state law is significant, as it enhances the penal consequences for public servants who engage in insider trading or misuse of official information. By introducing a tiered penalty system, this legislation is expected to deter potential misconduct by imposing stricter consequences for higher levels of financial gain. Additionally, it clarifies the application of these penalties, which may streamline enforcement and prosecution efforts by law enforcement agencies. This means that public servants, who are entrusted with sensitive information, will face more serious repercussions should they abuse their positions for personal financial gain.

Summary

SB111 relates to amendments in the Penal Code concerning the criminal penalties for insider trading and misuse of official information by public servants. The bill amends Section 39.06 of the Penal Code to stipulate that the severity of the offense will depend on the net pecuniary gain resulting from the misconduct. Specifically, it categorizes the offense into three tiers based on the amount of financial gain: a third-degree felony for gains less than $100,000, a second-degree felony for gains between $100,000 and $200,000, and a first-degree felony for gains of $200,000 or more. This graduated approach aims to provide a more proportional response to varying levels of financial misconduct by public officials.

Contention

Despite the apparent benefits of increasing penalties, there could be concerns regarding the potential for misapplication or overreach in the enforcement of these laws. Critics may argue that the subjective nature of determining 'pecuniary gain' and the corresponding degree of felony could lead to inconsistencies in prosecution. Further, discussions around the appropriate level of punishment for public officials might spark debates about fairness and justice, especially in cases where the motivations behind actions may not be solely financially driven. The revisited legislation may thus invoke broader discussions about ethics and accountability in public service.