On Wednesday, a bipartisan, bicameral group of legislators introduced a bill that would ban members of Congress and their spouses from owning and trading stocks.
The Bipartisan Ban on Congressional Stock Ownership Act is the first bipartisan stock trading ban to be introduced in the Senate. The bill was introduced by Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) and Steve Daines (R-Montana) and Representatives Pramila Jayapal (D-Washington) and Matt Rosendale (R-Montana). Two Senate Republicans have also cosponsored the bill.
The proposal goes further than previous bills, forcing members of Congress and their spouses to divest from all stocks other than widely held, diversified investment funds like mutual funds. Such investments could still be traded as long as there are no conflicts of interest. If members are found violating the law, they would be fined up to $50,000 per infraction.
This legislation goes a step further than the bill introduced by Senators Jon Ossoff (D-Georgia) and Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) last month, which bans stock trading for lawmakers and their families but allows them to retain ownership of their stock portfolios as long as they are put in a blind trust while lawmakers are in office. If a lawmaker is familiar with their portfolio, in other words, they could still influence their stocks even if they aren’t in direct control of them.
The bipartisan bill’s sponsors emphasized that the proposal is a critical measure to increase transparency and trust in Congress.
“No one should ever have to wonder whether their Member of Congress is working for the public interest or their own financial interest,” Warren said.
Jayapal said that the bill could reduce corruption in the legislative branch. “Members of Congress were elected to serve the people, not their personal financial interests. But as long as members and spouses are allowed to hold and trade stocks, we keep the door open to corruption – and that cannot stand,” she said. “It’s good policy, and it’s simply the right thing to do.”
The Project On Government Oversight (POGO), a government watchdog, praised the bill, noting that stock trading within Congress is an ethical concern. “Capitalizing on their privileged positions and their access to nonpublic information through inappropriate stock trading is one glaring example of this problem,” said Danielle Brian, POGO’s executive director.
Warren has previously introduced legislation that would also bar top federal officials like judges from trading stocks, but currently, bans on stock trading for members of Congress have the most momentum. Congress has had its fair share of stock trading scandals in the past few years, and reporting has found that members of Congress regularly violate existing stock transparency laws.
With rare bipartisan support in the House and the Senate, and support from the leaders of both chambers, the bill or legislation like it may have a shot at being passed. On Wednesday, Pelosi instructed members of Congress to draft a bill for the ban that she would bring to a vote soon.
Still, the legislation could face a few hurdles. The idea appears to have the support of most Democrats and some Republicans in the House, but Senate Republicans are split on the matter. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) has said that he hasn’t decided either way on the issue, though far right Republican firebrands like Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) have signaled their support for a ban. The bill would need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster in the Senate.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.