A Senate panel is set to vote Wednesday on whether to advance a bill introduced by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) that would ban members of Congress from stock trades.
“Members of Congress should be fighting for the people they were elected to serve—not day trading at the expense of their constituents,” stated Hawley in April when he originally introduced the bill. “Americans have seen politician after politician turn a profit using information not available to the general public. It’s time we ban all members of Congress from trading and holding stocks and restore Americans’ trust in our nation’s legislative body.”
The PELOSI Act would prohibit members of Congress and their spouses from buying, selling, or holding individual stocks while serving in office. Instead, lawmakers would be permitted to invest in diversified mutual funds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), or U.S. Treasury bonds.
If enacted, current members of Congress would have 180 days to comply with the new rules, while newly elected lawmakers would be required to do so within 180 days of taking office.
Those who fail to comply with the PELOSI Act would be required to surrender any stock profits to the U.S. Department of the Treasury and could face financial penalties from the House and Senate ethics committees, according to Hawley’s office.
However, the legislation has run into a bit of a snag, according to Punchbowl News.
The outlet reported Tuesday that the Trump White House now may have some issues with it following some changes to language insisted upon by various parties to include certain stock trading bans for the president and vice president, as well — which Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Chairman Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) opposes.
Afterward, the White House Office of Legislative Affairs issued a statement clarifying why there were concerns with the changes.
“This was a last-minute deal struck to include the Executive Branch equities without touching base with the White House to discuss potential Article II concerns,” an official from the office told Punchbowl News. “Any pause comes purely from potential Article II infringement, not the Congressional ban.”
Paul reaffirmed to Axios his opposition to the legislation, arguing that it could block individuals like Trump from becoming president and create yet another barrier for those contemplating a run for public office.
Pressed over why he would then schedule a vote on it in his committee, Paul hinted at a potential deal, saying it was “to get two bills that I want passed through without being beleaguered by amendments.”
The Kentucky senator was enigmatic when pressed about whether the alluded-to filibuster would come from Hawley: “I’ll just leave it at that.”
In the past, President Trump has expressed an openness to the PELOSI Act. “A similar bipartisan bill passed the committee last year, which also would have forced the president and VP to divest from certain investments,” Axios pointed out.
The outlet added: “It’s this language from last year’s bill that is expected to replace the PELOSI Act ahead of the committee markup — though negotiations are still in flux. In response to White House pushback, Hawley also plans to make the ban effective only at the start of a member’s or elected official’s next term, per a source familiar with the plans.”
The name of the bill is purposeful. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has long been suspected of using insider information to inform her husband’s stock trades, which have been hugely successful over the past decade, especially.
That said, Pelosi has never been formally charged with the crime, nor has any evidence been presented to indicate illicit trading activities.
