Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
A Senate committee on Wednesday narrowly approved legislation banning members of Congress, the president, vice president, and their immediate families from trading or owning individual stocks and other financial assets, escalating a partisan clash over political ethics and Donald Trump’s financial interests.
The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted 8-7 to advance the measure, authored by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), despite vocal opposition from nearly every other Republican on the panel.
The bill — originally dubbed the “PELOSI Act” — targets lawmakers’ use of non-public information for financial gain. It would prohibit elected officials and their spouses and dependents from holding individual stocks, commodities, cryptocurrencies, futures contracts, or corporate bonds while in office. Mutual funds, ETFs, and U.S. Treasury securities would still be allowed.
A substitute amendment, also approved 8-7, expanded the bill’s reach to include the president and vice president but delayed enforcement until after the current term of those already elected. That means President Donald Trump, who cannot run for a third term, would be exempt — a carveout that infuriated some Republicans.
“I will oppose the substitute change because I think it should apply to everybody or nobody,” said Committee Chair Rand Paul (R-Ky.). “You will be voting to protect Donald Trump if you vote for this substitute. If this is a great bill … it should apply to Donald Trump.”
Paul slammed the bill as “a solution looking for publicity” and called the exemption “a really crummy” flaw.
Trump, for his part, offered tepid support, saying he “conceptually” backed the measure — but blasted Hawley for siding with Democrats in defeating a proposed amendment by Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) that would have required a review of 25 years of stock trades by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her husband.
Democrats supported the underlying measure, emphasizing public distrust in Congress.
“People don’t believe that we are here for the right reasons,” said Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.). “We have a problem.”
Sen. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) added, “If mutual funds are not good enough for you, then maybe this is not the right job for you.”
Hawley defended the bill’s scope and emphasized that insider trading laws don’t apply to the confidential briefings lawmakers regularly receive. “Nobody believes that the information we get isn’t valuable. It is quite valuable,” he said.
The legislation would give current lawmakers until the end of their present term to divest. House members, for example, would have until 2027. Newly elected officials after the law’s enactment would have 90 days to sell restricted assets.
The substitute amendment also stripped the bill’s original co-sponsor, Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who derided the effort as “a publicity show.”
Hawley further defended the bill’s ban on blind trusts, calling them a “workaround” with “very loose” rules. That sparked a heated exchange with Senate Ethics Committee Chair James Lankford (R-Okla.), who accused Hawley of mischaracterizing the committee’s oversight role.
“Well, thank you very much,” Lankford said sarcastically. “The Ethics Committee does police that. So thanks for telling me what I don’t do.”
Hawley shot back that he practices what he preaches, noting, “I don’t have individual stocks. I don’t trade in stocks. I’m not a millionaire, unlike others on this committee.”
Among those in opposition were several of the Senate’s wealthiest members — including Scott, Moreno, and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) — who criticized the bill as anti-business and unnecessary.
“I think it’s disgusting, what’s going on here,” said Scott, whose net worth exceeds $500 million.
The measure now heads to the full Senate, where it faces an uncertain future amid broader Republican resistance and Trump’s escalating attacks.
