A Republican congressman introduces a bill to prevent lawmakers from making suspicious stock trades, targeting what many see as systemic corruption in Washington’s halls of power.
At a Glance
- Rep. Mark Alford (R-MO) introduced the PELOSI Act to ban stock trading by lawmakers and their spouses while in office
- The bill permits alternative investments including mutual funds, ETFs, and Treasury bonds
- Violations would result in returning profits to the Treasury plus a 10% fine per transaction
- The legislation has gained bipartisan support, including from Speaker Mike Johnson and former President Trump
- Current lawmakers would have 180 days to comply with the new regulations if passed
Closing Congressional Trading Loopholes
Missouri Republican Representative Mark Alford has introduced legislation aimed at preventing members of Congress and their spouses from trading individual stocks while in office. The bill, officially named the PELOSI Act, targets what critics have described as “suspicious stock trades” that have allowed lawmakers to potentially profit from privileged information. The legislation represents the latest attempt to address concerns about congressional insider trading and restore public trust in elected officials. Senator Josh Hawley, also from Missouri, has introduced a companion version of the bill in the Senate.
Alford’s bill still allows lawmakers to invest their money, but redirects them toward diversified financial products that don’t create the same conflicts of interest. Members of Congress would be permitted to invest in diversified mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, and U.S. Treasury bonds. The legislation establishes clear penalties for those who violate its provisions, requiring the return of any profits to the U.S. Treasury along with a fine of ten percent per wrongful transaction.
— Rep. Mark Alford (@RepMarkAlford) May 14, 2025
Bipartisan Support for Trading Restrictions
The push to ban congressional stock trading has gained notable support from both sides of the political aisle. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has endorsed the concept, acknowledging that public trust in Congress has been damaged by “a few bad actors.” House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) has also signaled openness to supporting such restrictions. The bill would give current lawmakers 180 days to comply with its provisions once enacted, while newly elected officials would have the same timeframe after taking office.
“As public servants, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard and avoid the mere appearance of corruption. Unfortunately, too many members of Congress are engaging in suspicious stock trades based on non-public information to enrich themselves.”, said Rep. Mark Alford
Former President Donald Trump has also weighed in on the issue, expressing support for stock trading restrictions. During his presidential campaign, Trump specifically cited concerns about Nancy Pelosi’s trading activities, which have drawn significant scrutiny from critics who claim her husband’s successful stock trades may have benefited from her position and access to information. The bill’s naming appears to reference these controversies, though it would apply equally to members of both parties.
Building on Previous Ethics Reforms
The PELOSI Act builds upon the foundation established by the 2012 STOCK Act, which currently requires public disclosure of stock trades over $1,000 made by members of Congress or their spouses. That earlier legislation was influenced by Peter Schweizer’s book “Throw Them All Out,” which exposed numerous instances of congressional insider trading. The book’s revelations led to significant political consequences, including the decision by then-House Financial Services Committee Chairman Spencer Bachus (R-AL) not to seek reelection.
“You want me to tell you my honest opinion on that? I’m in favor of that, because I don’t think we should have any appearance of impropriety here.”, Speaker Mike Johnson said.
Proponents of stronger trading restrictions argue that the STOCK Act’s disclosure requirements haven’t sufficiently addressed the underlying ethical issues. They point to continued instances of suspiciously timed trades by legislators from both parties who serve on committees overseeing industries in which they invest. The PELOSI Act represents a more aggressive approach to the problem by prohibiting individual stock ownership entirely rather than simply requiring disclosure after trades are made.
