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
stock trading ban
Watchdogs Welcome House Introduction of Congressional Stock Trading Ban
"As long as sitting lawmakers are allowed to trade stocks connected to the industries they oversee, the public will question whether they are prioritizing their own personal profits," said one campaigner.
Sep 03, 2025
Government watchdog groups on Wednesday cheered the bipartisan introduction of the Restore Trust in Congress Act, which would ban federal lawmakers, along with their spouses and children, from trading individual stocks.
"The legislation would require lawmakers to sell all individual stocks within 180 days," according to NPR. "Newly elected members of Congress would also have to divest of individual stock holdings before being sworn in. Members who fail to divest would face a fine equivalent to 10% of the value of the stock."
The bill's lead supporters in the House of Representatives span the full ideological spectrum: Reps. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.), Seth Magaziner (D-Pa.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), and Chip Roy (R-Texas).
"In a strong display of bipartisanship, leaders from both sides of the aisle in the House have worked together to produce a comprehensive and commonsense legislative measure to ban congressional stock trading," said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist with the group Public Citizen, which is endorsing the bill.
"These members worked for months in drafting a strong consensus bill that addresses all the key elements of an effective ban on congressional stock trading," he continued, welcoming that the prohibition applies to immediate family members and "covers a wide range of investments, including cryptocurrency, and is fortified with strong enforcement measures."
Brett Edkins, managing director of policy and political affairs at the progressive advocacy group Stand Up America, also applauded the bill, highlighting that "our representatives in Washington have access to an enormous amount of information about our economy that isn't available to the public."
"They should not be allowed to use what they learn in the course of their legislative duties to gain an unfair advantage and enrich themselves," he said. "It's time to ban sitting members of Congress from buying and selling stocks. Members of Congress cannot be trusted to police themselves, and existing ethics laws do not go far enough to prevent members from using their insider knowledge for personal gain."
Lawmakers behind this new proposal have long advocated for a full ban, arguing that existing protections—including those in the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2012—are inadequate.
Advocacy groups, including the Campaign Legal Center, have also "been fighting for years to improve laws regulating the way members of Congress trade stocks," noted Kedric Payne, CLC's vice president, general counsel, and senior director for ethics.
"As long as sitting lawmakers are allowed to trade stocks connected to the industries they oversee, the public will question whether they are prioritizing their own personal profits over the public interest," Payne said. "We applaud this bipartisan legislation that incorporates the key provisions of stock act reform CLC has fought to advance—a ban on stock ownership that is enforceable and holds lawmakers accountable."
Jamie Neikrie, legislative director at the political reform group Issue One, pointed out Wednesday that "three years have passed since House leadership made a commitment to bring a congressional stock trading ban bill to the floor for a vote."
"It's time to get this much-needed reform across the finish line—no more excuses," Neikrie declared. "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."
"Today is a critical step for a more transparent and stronger institution," he added, urging "leadership in both chambers to seize this moment" and send the bill to President Donald Trump's desk.
Earlier this summer, Trump lashed out at Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who worked with Democrats to advance out of committee a stock trading ban, claiming that "he is playing right into the dirty hands of the Democrats."
Hawley initially called his proposal the Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments (PELOSI) Act—a nod to former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), whose husband's stock trading has drawn scrutiny. After Hawley worked with Democrats on the bill, it was renamed the Halting Ownership and Non-Ethical Stock Transactions (HONEST) Act.
After the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee's July vote, Pelosi said that "while I appreciate the creativity of my Republican colleagues in drafting legislative acronyms, I welcome any serious effort to raise ethical standards in public service. The HONEST Act, as amended, rightly applies its stock trading ban not only to Members of Congress, but now to the president and vice president as well. I strongly support this legislation and look forward to voting for it on the floor of the House."
Meanwhile, Fox News' Jesse Watters at the time asked Hawley about Trump lashing out at him. The Senate Republican responded, "I had a good chat with the president earlier this evening, and he reiterated to me he wants to see a ban on stock trading by people like Nancy Pelosi and members of Congress, which is what we passed today."
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP Congressman Cashed Out Hospital Investments Before Voting for Biggest Medicaid Cut in History
"Congressman Bresnahan didn't just vote to gut Pennsylvania hospitals. He looked out for his own bottom line before doing it," said one advocate.
Aug 18, 2025
Congressman Rob Bresnahan, a Republican who campaigned on banning stock trading by lawmakers only to make at least 626 stock trades since taking office in January, was under scrutiny Monday for a particular sale he made just before he voted for the largest Medicaid cut in US history.
Soon after a report showed that 10 rural hospitals in Bresnahan's state of Pennsylvania were at risk of being shut down, the congressman sold between $100,001 and $250,000 in bonds issued by the Allegheny County Hospital Development Authority for the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.
The New York Times reported on the sale a month after it was revealed that Bresnahan sold up to $15,000 of stock he held in Centene Corporation, the largest Medicaid provider in the country. When President Donald Trump signed the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law last month, Centene's stock plummeted by 40%.
Bresnahan repeatedly said he would not vote to cut the safety net before he voted in favor of the bill.
The law is expected to cut $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next decade, with 10-15 million people projected to lose health coverage through the safety net program, according to one recent analysis. More than 700 hospitals, particularly those in rural areas, are likely to close due to a loss of Medicaid funding.
"His prolific stock trading is more than just a broken promise," said Cousin. "It's political malpractice and a scandal of his own making."
The economic justice group Unrig the Economy said that despite Bresnahan's introduction of a bill in May to bar members of Congress from buying and selling stocks—with the caveat that they could keep stocks they held before starting their terms in a blind trust—the congressman is "the one doing the selling... out of Pennsylvania hospitals."
"Congressman Bresnahan didn't just vote to gut Pennsylvania hospitals. He looked out for his own bottom line before doing it," said Unrig Our Economy campaign director Leor Tal. "Hospitals across Pennsylvania could close thanks to his vote, forcing families to drive long distances and experience longer wait times for critical care."
"Not everyone has a secret helicopter they can use whenever they want," added Tal, referring to recent reports that the multi-millionaire congressman owns a helicopter worth as much as $1.5 million, which he purchased through a limited liability company he set up.
Eli Cousin, a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told the Times that Bresnahan's stock trading "will define his time in Washington and be a major reason why he will lose his seat."
"His prolific stock trading is more than just a broken promise," said Cousin. "It's political malpractice and a scandal of his own making."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate Advances Bill Banning Politicians From Stock Trading—While Giving Trump a Big Carveout
"Voters have a right to know that their elected representatives are acting in the public's best interest and are not motivated by their personal financial interests," said the general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center.
Jul 30, 2025
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday narrowly voted in favor of advancing a bill that bars politicians at the federal level from trading stocks—with one highly notable exception.
As reported by Politico, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) joined with all Democrats on the committee to advance a bill to ban stock trading by elected officials. However, to get Hawley's vote, Democrats had to agree to create a carveout for U.S. President Donald Trump and to apply the stock-trading ban only to future presidents.
Business Insider reported that, as written, the legislation "would ban members of members of Congress, the president, and the vice president from buying stocks immediately upon enactment, and would block them from selling stocks beginning 90 days after that."
"It would then require lawmakers to divest entirely from their stock holdings at the beginning of their next term, and it would require the president and vice president to do so beginning in 2029—after President Donald Trump's current term," the outlet explained.
Hawley took heat from fellow Republicans on the committee for advancing the legislation, including Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who accused his Missouri colleague of demonizing the wealthy.
"I don't know when in this country it became a negative to make money," said Scott. "How many of you don’t want to make money? Anybody want to be poor?"
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) said that she wished that the law didn't have a carveout for Trump, but nonetheless supported advancing the bill and she described herself as "willing to make the good work instead of waiting for the perfect."
The bill's advancement out of committee earned plaudits from some government reform advocates. Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist with Public Citizen, encouraged the full U.S. Senate to take up a vote on the package while also explaining the proposed legislation's importance.
"Members of Congress frequently have access to nonpublic information about economic and business trends and are in a position of power to influence those trends," he said. "That is why the American public—Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike—has called for this type of legislation ever since a series of insider trading scandals erupted over the last several years."
Kedric Payne, the vice president and general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center (CLC), similarly praised the bill's advancement while also explaining why current transparency rules were no longer adequate.
"To prevent corruption and conflicts of interest, CLC has long called on Congress to update the STOCK Act, which merely requires members to disclose their transactions, and fully ban stock trading by sitting legislators," said Payne. "In the absence of these stronger rules, we've seen congressional stock trading proliferate. This has led to repeated examples of ethical violations and questionable financial activity, including during global health emergencies and times of great economic uncertainty."
Payne further emphasized that "voters have a right to know that their elected representatives are acting in the public's best interest and are not motivated by their personal financial interests."
The legislation advanced by Hawley and the Democrats was originally named after Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the former speaker whose highly profitable stock trades have come under scrutiny in recent years.
Even though the bill has now made its way out of committee, it still faces an uncertain future in the full U.S. Senate where Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority and where Democrats would need to win over some additional Republican converts on top of Hawley. And even should it pass the Senate, it's uncertain whether the legislation would be able to pass the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular