'PELOSI Act' Gains Momentum: Congressional Stock Trading Ban Inches Closer to Law

A major push to end insider enrichment on Capitol Hill is gaining serious traction this week, as Rep. Mark Alford (R-MO) is set to introduce legislation mirroring Senator Josh Hawley’s “PELOSI Act”, aimed at banning stock trading by members of Congress and their spouses while in office.

The House version, expected to be filed Wednesday, would prohibit lawmakers and their spouses from buying, selling, or holding individual stocks. Instead, they would be limited to diversified mutual funds, ETFs, or U.S. Treasury bonds — investment tools less prone to abuse. Lawmakers currently in office would have 180 days to comply, as would newly elected officials.

“As public servants, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard and avoid the mere appearance of corruption,” Alford stated.

“Unfortunately, too many members of Congress are engaging in suspicious stock trades based on non-public information to enrich themselves.”
“These gross violations of the public trust make clear: we must finally take action to ban members and their spouses from owning or selling individual stocks,” he added.

Under the bill, violators would be forced to surrender their ill-gotten profits to the U.S. Treasury, and could face a 10% fine per transaction imposed by House or Senate ethics committees.

The legislation comes on the heels of renewed outrage over long-standing allegations that members of Congress — particularly former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her husband, Paul Pelosi — have gamed the stock market using insider knowledge. Despite years of denial, the Pelosis’ trades have consistently outperformed the market, and their net worth is now estimated at over $230 million.

In one notable case, Paul Pelosi purchased up to $5 million in semiconductor stocks just days before Congress announced a $52 billion subsidy package for the industry. After public scrutiny, the stocks were quietly sold — but not before raising red flags nationwide.

Even President Donald Trump has weighed in on the issue, giving the proposal a firm endorsement during an interview with Time magazine last month.

“I watched Nancy Pelosi get rich through insider information, and I would be okay with it. If they send that to me, I would do it,” Trump said.
“You’ll sign it?” the reporter asked.
“Absolutely,” Trump replied.

Though named after Pelosi, the bill targets unethical behavior across the board. The Senate version of the legislation, also backed by Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand, would extend the trading ban to members of Congress, their staff, the president, vice president, and executive branch officials.

“It is critical that the American people know that their elected leaders are putting the public first,” Gillibrand told the Wall Street Journal, “not looking for ways to line their own pockets.”
“Members of Congress and their spouses shouldn’t be using their position to get rich on the stock market,” added Hawley.

Even far-left Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has joined the effort, co-sponsoring the Bipartisan Restoring Faith in Government Act alongside Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), and Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL).

“The ability to individually trade stock erodes the public’s trust in government,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “When members have access to classified information, we should not be trading in the stock market on it. It’s really that simple.”

While Pelosi has long maintained her innocence, the numbers tell a different story. According to multiple reports, the Pelosi family has racked up investment returns of over 720% in the past decade — success that far exceeds what even seasoned hedge fund managers consider normal.

With bipartisan support mounting, and President Trump ready to sign, the only remaining question is whether the political class will finally vote to end one of its most deeply corrupt and self-serving privileges.

Subscribe to Lib Fails

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe