The group included darlings of the far right, the left, moderates and many in between. They gathered to promote a ban that polls well with voters and appears to be finding new momentum after stalling out in previous sessions of Congress.
Congress has discussed proposals for years to keep lawmakers from engaging in trading individual stocks, nodding to the idea that there’s a potential conflict of interest when they are often privy to information and decisions that can dramatically move markets.
Under current law, federal lawmakers are required to disclose their stock sales and purchases. The bill requiring disclosure, The Stock Act, was signed into law in 2012. At the time, lawmakers and government watchdogs predicted that public disclosure would shame lawmakers out of actively buying and selling stock. That hasn’t happened.
While the legislation would not allow lawmakers to own individual stocks and bonds, they would be allowed to own diversified mutual funds and ETFs and certain commodities. Lawmakers who currently own individual stocks and bonds would have 180 days to divest. New members would have 90 days to divest upon taking office.
The mood was celebratory at Wednesday’s unveiling, but even if the bill were to pass the House, it would face a more difficult climb in the Senate. At least 60 votes would be needed to advance the legislation in that chamber and some senators have expressed concerns about the concept.
Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-R.I., acknowledged that members opposed to banning stocks are “persistent.”
“Those of us who support banning stock trading in Congress are very vocal in our position, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t opponents,” Magaziner said.
Some members expressed urgency in moving the bill through the House. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., said they have “asked nicely for leadership to put this on the floor” and set a deadline for the end of the month before she would seek to force a vote.
“We do have insider trading laws. We have financial disclosure. Trust me, we have financial disclosure,” Johnson said. “So I don’t see the necessity of this.”
