Congress Could Finally Ban Its Members From Trading Stocks—and Not a Moment Too Soon

Congress Could Finally Ban Its Members From Trading Stocks—and Not a Moment Too Soon

Congress Could Finally Ban Its Members From Trading Stocks—and Not a Moment Too Soon

Ending a thousand conflicts of interest can begin with a single step.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

EDITOR’S NOTE: Each week we cross-post an excerpt from Katrina vanden Heuvel’s column at the WashingtonPost.com. Read the full text of Katrina’s column here.

One year into the bitterly divided 117th Congress, Democrats and Republicans in both chambers have shown rare signs of agreement on an overwhelmingly popular issue. And even more unusual: It’s a push to hold themselves accountable. Earlier this month, lawmakers from both parties in both the House and Senate introduced bills that would stop federal legislators (and, in some cases, their immediate family members) from trading individual stocks while in office.

The legislation comes not a moment too soon. More than 40 percent of members of Congress own individual stock shares, amounting to $225 million in assets. And one of the few things that Americans approve of less than Congress itself is the idea that its members can play the stock market. In one survey, just 5 percent of voters said they believe that members of Congress should be allowed to trade stocks.

It’s no surprise: In recent years, there have been highly publicized, troubling instances of lawmakers getting rich off trading. Like when then-Senator Kelly Loeffler unloaded millions in stock within days of a January 2020 briefing on the coronavirus—and shortly thereafter, picked up between $100,000 and $250,000 in stock in a remote-work software company.

Read the full text of Katrina’s column here.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x