SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
corruption
House Democrats Who Want Stock Trading Ban 'Disappointed' by GOP Proposal
"Any bill that still allows members of Congress to own and trade stocks falls far short of what the American people want and deserve," said Reps. Pramila Jayapal, Seth Magaziner, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Jan 12, 2026
A trio of Democrats in the US House of Representatives leading the fight for a congressional stock trading ban ripped Republican leadership's proposal as an inadequate replacement in a Monday statement released ahead of a scheduled committee markup.
Politico reported last month that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Administration Committee Chair Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) briefed GOP lawmakers on their plan for a bill that would ban members of Congress from buying new stocks but let them keep what they already have.
Steil introduced the Stop Insider Trading Act on Monday and announced a Wednesday markup. Backed by Johnson and other GOP leaders, the legislation would also apply to lawmakers' spouses and dependent children, and require public notice a week before any of them sell stock.
However, Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Seth Magaziner (D-RI), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) argued in a joint statement that "any bill that still allows members of Congress to own and trade stocks falls far short of what the American people want and deserve."
"We are disappointed that the bill introduced by Republican leadership today fails to deliver the reform that is needed and instead protects the wealthiest members of Congress by allowing them to continue to hold and sell stock," said the original co-sponsors of the bipartisan Restore Trust in Congress Act.
House Republicans’ new legislation on Congressional stock trading falls far short of what the American people want and deserve. The House must move forward on our bipartisan consensus bill, the Restore Trust in Congress Act.My full statement with @magaziner.house.gov and @ocasio-cortez.house.gov:
[image or embed]
— Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (@jayapal.house.gov) January 12, 2026 at 12:23 PM
The Democrats stressed that "while this bill prohibits members from buying new stocks, it does nothing to remove the conflict of interest that arises from owning or selling existing stocks. Members can still act on legislation, investigations, and briefings that directly influence the value of their stocks for personal benefit."
"The American public deserves to know that members of Congress are making decisions in the public interest, not in the interest of their own pocketbooks. The only way to restore Americans' trust is to ban members of Congress from owning and trading stocks," the trio continued.
"We hope that Speaker Johnson will find the courage to move the Restore Trust in Congress Act, a bipartisan consensus bill that has wide support from members of both parties and will end the practice of members of Congress owning and trading stocks once and for all," they concluded.
The Restore Trust in Congress Act would ban members of Congress, plus spouses and children, from trading individual stocks. It would give them 180 days to sell anything they hold and require divestment before newly elected lawmakers are sworn in.
When that bill was introduced in September, Jamie Neikrie, legislative director at the political reform group Issue One, said that "members of Congress have a responsibility to hold themselves to the highest ethical standards, and passing the Restore Trust in Congress Act is how Congress shows it's serious about restoring trust and integrity in government."
As Politico detailed Monday:
Johnson and GOP leaders have been searching for a legislative compromise to appease Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and other rank-and-file House Republicans, who have for months been threatening to launch a discharge petition effort to circumvent leadership and force a floor vote on a full congressional stock trading ban.
Luna, in a promising sign for Johnson, said in an interview last week she supports the current legislation pending before the House Administration Committee because it would force a "disgorgement" period.
However, even if the new bill is able to get through the Republican-controlled House, it would face a GOP Senate majority so narrow that at least some Democratic support is required to advance most legislation to a final vote.
Last July, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) voted with all Democrats on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee to advance another bill that would bar federal politicians from holding or trading stocks. To win over Hawley, Democrats had to agree to a carveout for President Donald Trump. As Business Insider noted Monday, "It has yet to receive a floor vote."
Like the House Democrats, Christina Harvey, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, was critical of the lower chamber's GOP leadership on Monday, saying that "Speaker Johnson is trying to trick the American people into thinking House Republicans are actually doing something to stop corruption in Washington, but this proposal is a congressional stock trading ban in name only."
"If Speaker Johnson really cared about stopping members of Congress from using their offices for financial gain, he would bring the comprehensive, bipartisan Restore Trust in Congress Act to the floor," Harvey declared. "The American people should have confidence that their leaders are serving the public’s interests in every vote—not their wallets."
Campaign Legal Center vice president, general counsel, and senior director for ethics Kedric Payne similarly said that "any legislation that allows lawmakers to hold onto their existing stocks is too narrow to address Americans' real concern that elected lawmakers may make official decisions to benefit their pocketbooks instead of the public good. A bill that also bans trading by the president and vice president, meanwhile, is too broad because it undermines the chances of passing the reform voters care most about: stock trading by members of Congress."
"Thankfully, there is a proposal on the table that strikes the balance for this moment: the Restore Trust in Congress Act," Payne added. "This consensus legislation was crafted during months of negotiations by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. It has more than enough support to pass, and it would make a significant improvement to our nation’s government ethics laws. Campaign Legal Center calls on Congress to return its focus to this bipartisan bill and set an example for the other branches of our government."
This article was updated with comment from Stand Up America and the Campaign Legal Center.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Demands to Know If Trump Admin Colluded With Big Oil in Lead-Up to Venezuela Attack
"When government actions tied to foreign resources are preceded and followed by closed-door meetings with the world’s largest oil companies, transparency is not optional—it is essential."
Jan 07, 2026
A legal watchdog group is demanding information about the extent to which the Trump administration planned its attack on Venezuela last weekend with American oil companies, which are expected to profit royally from the takeover of the South American nation's oil reserves.
The group Democracy Forward filed a series of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests on Monday seeking records and information about the role of US oil companies in the planning of the attack, which killed an estimated 75 people and led to the US military's abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife.
President Donald Trump did not inform Congress of the operation, which is required under the War Powers Act of 1973, but he told reporters on Sunday that he'd tipped off oil company executives both "before and after" the strike.
According to reporting by the Wall Street Journal, he informed executives roughly a month before the strike to "get ready" because big changes were coming to the country, which had long held state control over the largest oil reserves in the world.
Since toppling Maduro, in an operation that international law experts have widely described as illegal, Trump has said his goal is to "get the oil flowing" to American oil companies to start "taking a tremendous amount of wealth out of the ground.”
On Tuesday, Trump said Venezuela's interim leaders—who he's threatened with more attacks if they don't do what he says—have agreed to hand over 30-50 million barrels of oil to be sold by the US, which will control how the profits are dispersed.
Trump and several members of his Cabinet, including Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, are expected to meet with oil executives on Friday at the White House to discuss "security guarantees" for their new spoils.
Democracy Forward has requested information about communications between senior officials at the US departments of Energy and the Interior and executives at top oil companies, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips, prior to the attack. This includes emails, attachments, and calendar invitations exchanged since December 2025.
The group has said it will seek to determine whether these companies were given "privileged access or influence" over the administration's policy toward Venezuela.
“The president couldn’t find time to brief members of Congress before kidnapping a foreign head of state, but appears to have prioritized discussions with Big Oil. When government actions tied to foreign resources are preceded and followed by closed-door meetings with the world’s largest oil companies, transparency is not optional—it is essential,” said Skye Perryman, the president and CEO of Democracy Forward. “The public deserves to know what interests are shaping decisions that have enormous consequences for global energy markets and democratic accountability.”
FOIA, which was passed in 1967, allows members of the public to request records from any federal agency. However, agencies have broad discretion to deny FOIA requests, including in cases involving national security or interagency communications.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Corruption, Pure and Simple': Probe Identifies Rich Donors Benefiting From Trump Presidency
“These people are not getting coerced. They are making business decisions,” said one former official who left the Trump White House to become a lobbyist.
Dec 22, 2025
A detailed investigation published Monday shows that many wealthy and powerful contributors to US President Donald Trump's staggering post-election fundraising haul—now at roughly $2 billion—have seen a return on their money in the form of pardons, corporate-friendly regulatory changes, government contracts, and dropped enforcement cases.
Drawing on campaign finance filings and previously unreported documents, the New York Times found that more than half of the 346 big donors it identified "have benefited, or are involved in an industry that has benefited, from the actions or statements of Mr. Trump, the White House, or federal agencies," including Palantir CEO Alex Karp, ExxonMobil, Amazon, Uber chief executive Dara Khosrowshahi, Dow Chemical, and Goldman Sachs.
“So many of you have been really, really generous,” Trump told ballroom donors at a recent dinner.
The Times investigation focused on corporations and individuals who have donated at least $250,000 through various channels, including Trump's inaugural committee, which raised nearly four times as much as former President Joe Biden's; his White House ballroom project; and pro-Trump political action committees and nonprofits.
"The astounding haul hints at a level of transactionalism for which it is difficult to find obvious comparisons in modern American history," the newspaper reported. "The identities of the donors behind much of the cash are not legally required to be, and have not been, publicly disclosed. In some cases, Mr. Trump’s team has offered donors anonymity."
Corruption, pure and simple. Trump is selling the presidency and our country. www.nytimes.com/interactive/... Hundreds of Big Post-Election Donors Have Benefited From Trump’s Return to Office
[image or embed]
— Zak Williams (@zakwilliamswzw.bsky.social) Dec 22, 2025 at 9:47 AM
Since winning a second White House term, Trump's political apparatus has reportedly raised more money than it did for the 2024 election campaign—an indication that corporations, their executives, and their armies of lobbyists saw in Trump's return to the Oval Office an enticing investment opportunity.
Harrison Fields, a former Trump administration official who left the White House earlier this year to become a lobbyist, told the Times that post-election donors to the president "are not getting coerced."
"They are making business decisions," Fields added.
The Times investigation outlines numerous ways in which Trump donors have benefited directly or indirectly from the administration's actions this year, while working-class Americans suffer the impacts of rising unemployment, tariff chaos, and a worsening cost-of-living crisis.
"While the donations far exceed most Americans’ means, the sums pale in comparison to the contracts being sought from the Trump administration," the outlet noted. "Take Mr. Trump’s 'Golden Dome' missile defense project, which could yield lucrative work for a number of contractors. Palantir has already held discussions about being involved. Firms including Lockheed Martin and Boeing also are expected to compete for pieces of the work; each company donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee."
The technology firm Palantir has, according to the Times, "secured federal contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, including to develop software to help Immigration and Customs Enforcement deport people." The company donated $10 million to the White House ballroom project.
Trump's post-election donors have also received ambassadorships, pardons for white-collar crimes, and industry-friendly policies.
"The crypto industry writ large has benefited from Mr. Trump’s cheerleading, as well as his championing and signing into law a bill creating the first federal rules for stablecoins," the Times reported. "Mr. Trump has also favored the fossil fuel industry, directing tens of billions of dollars in incentives to companies, allowing drilling in the Alaska wilderness, and repealing environmental regulations. About two dozen companies with interests in oil, gas, and coal donated at least $41 million."
While the Times emphasized that it is "not possible to prove that any of the donations directly led to favorable treatment from the Trump administration," the newspaper added that "many of the deep-pocketed individuals and corporations who have given large sums have a lot riding on the administration’s actions, raising questions about conflicts of interest."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular