WASHINGTON — House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries is promising to ban members of Congress from trading stocks when Democrats take control of both chambers in January.
It’s a familiar promise, one made by Democrats and Republicans in the past, but has yet to be enacted into law.
House Democrats will move to ban members of Congress from trading stock. pic.twitter.com/HZpJzLxQcB
— Hakeem Jeffries (@RepJeffries) November 9, 2026
During a November 8 appearance on ABC's This Week, Jeffries laid out an agenda focused on the 3 main topics that drove voters to the polls this cycle:
- Affordability;
- Government accountability; and
- Corruption.
Matt Shinners
"We're committed to cleaning up the mess wherever it's found," he said, before adding:
"That's why I strongly support banning members of Congress from being able to trade stock as one of the things that we'll need to do as soon as we're back in control."
The question is: Will there be follow through this time around?
In September, Change Research found that 88% of voters supported banning members of Congress from trading individual stocks while in office, including 86% of independents.
Both parties have had opportunities to advance such a ban, including in the current congressional session. But going into the midterms, neither party wanted to work with the other to get it done.
Members of Congress have also encountered resistance from party leadership, disagreements over what constitutes a genuine ban, and other disputes.
So again, the question is: Will anything be different this time around?
A Brief History of Banning Stock Trading in Congress
The current debate dates back at least to 2012, when President Barack Obama signed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act.
Put simply, the law makes it clear that members of Congress are subject to the same insider trading prohibitions that are put on Wall Street. It also requires certain trades to be reported within 45 days.
But the STOCK Act does not prohibit lawmakers from owning or trading individual stocks. It relies on transparency rules and existing laws to discourage abuse.
Here’s the thing: Members of Congress receive briefings, oversee industries, and write legislation that can influence financial markets. Under the law, there are ways they can trade without it technically being considered insider trading.
However, as more stock trading controversies emerged over the last few years, some lawmakers began proposing reforms that went beyond disclosure and prohibited trades outright.
Democrats Promised Action in 2022. It Never Came.
One of the most significant opportunities came in 2022, when Democrats controlled the House, Senate, and White House.
There were growing calls for a strict trading ban following controversial trades made during the COVID-19 pandemic:
- In early 2020, Republican Sen. Richard Burr, then-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, sold between $628,000 and $1.72 million in stocks shortly before financial markets crashed as the pandemic spread.
- Other senators, including Republicans Kelly Loeffler and James Inhofe and Democrat Dianne Feinstein also faced scrutiny over stock transactions made ahead of the market downturn.
Each of these senators received briefings not available to the public that likely guided their trading decisions. They knew about the emerging threat of COVID-19.
The DOJ launched an investigation into these lawmakers, but ultimately closed its inquiries without bringing charges.
Then came the effort in December 2021 to ban congressional stock trading.
Shawn Griffiths
At first, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opposed it. She defended lawmakers' ability to participate in financial markets, arguing the US was a free-market economy.
By February 2022, Pelosi shifted her stance. She said she would support a ban if that was what members wanted. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also expressed support for addressing the issue and called on Democrats to develop legislation.
There were several bipartisan proposals available, including legislation sponsored by Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger and Republican Rep. Chip Roy. Yet, a vote never happened.
There was disagreement over whether proposals went far enough, which officials and family members should be covered, and whether blind trusts should be permitted.
A Bipartisan Breakthrough in 2024 That Went Nowhere
In July 2024, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee advanced bipartisan legislation to prohibit congressional stock trading.
This was an effort that included Democratic Sens. Jeff Merkley, Gary Peters, and Jon Ossoff, along with Republican Sen. Josh Hawley.
Based on the Ending Trading and Holdings in Congressional Stocks (ETHICS) Act, it would have:
- Barred lawmakers from buying stocks immediately;
- Restricted sales; and
- Eventually required members of Congress, their spouses, and dependent children to divest covered investments.
It also included divestment requirements for the president and vice president.
It was the first time such legislation had been approved in a Senate committee. Yet, it never received a floor vote.
Cara Brown McCormick
Republicans Promised Reform, Too. Then Came The 2026 Election.
When Republicans controlled Congress in 2025 and 2026, the issue remained on the agenda.
Hawley reintroduced his stock trading ban in April 2025 with the name PELOSI Act, and President Donald Trump publicly indicated that he would sign such a bill. It advanced through a Senate committee but there wasn't a floor vote.
In February 2026, Trump called on lawmakers to pass the Stop Insider Trading Act during his State of the Union address.
On July 22, the House passed the bill, introduced by Republican Rep. Bryan Steil, 232-198. All 218 voting Republicans supported it, along with 13 Democrats and one independent. Another 198 Democrats opposed it.
Republicans delivered something Democrats had failed to accomplish in 2022: a House floor vote. However, the bill fell short of the comprehensive ban that many reform advocates had demanded.
It would prohibit lawmakers, spouses, and dependent children from buying new individual stocks, but it would allow them to retain existing investments and sell those holdings after providing advance public notice.
The bill also excluded the president and vice president.
But that's not all. House Republicans added voter ID provisions in their SAVE Act to the bill, which Democrats argued was a deliberate obstacle to passage, knowing they wouldn't support it.
After the bill failed to advance to a final floor vote in the Senate, the White House immediately accused Democrats of blocking congressional ethics reform.
Once again, another election cycle went by in which members of both parties campaigned on stock trading reform but failed to deliver on it.
Will Jeffries' Promise Be Any Different?
Democrats are preparing to take control of Congress in January. Another congressional stock trading bill has been promised. It is what voters want, but is it really what members of Congress want?
As IVN Editor Cara McCormick previously pointed out, several members of Congress own and trade stock. Current disclosure rules provide them political cover because they can trade and claim there is still transparency. And both parties want the credit for any reform passed.
At the same, they also want to humiliate the other side.
Something @HouseGOP already voted to do in July, when we passed the Stop Insider Trading Act.
— Congressman Pat Harrigan (@RepPatHarrigan) November 9, 2026
All 218 Republicans voted yes. 198 Democrats voted no, including you. https://t.co/JSxQ8xB9La
Republicans say, “we tried to pass a ban, but Democrats wouldn’t allow it.” Democrats will assert that their biggest obstacle has been Republicans who don’t want to go far enough.
And instead of working together, it is better for party politics for them to do nothing.
If there is any example that best shows why lasting solutions don’t get through Congress and the incentives the current political system creates for candidates and politicians to put party first, it is the continued promises of a congressional stock trading ban.
It is worth noting that no law actually needs to pass for Congress to police itself. The US House can adopt restrictions on its members through its rules without waiting for Senate approval or the president’s signature.
But it hasn’t happened.
CNN reported on November 3 that some House Democrats favor a standalone bill that would also restrict stock trading by Trump administration officials, rather than adopting new congressional rules immediately.
Such legislation would likely face a presidential veto.