Senate Democrats rejected the Stop Insider Trading Act on Sept. 30, even though the measure had already passed the House with Democratic votes. The bill would have barred members of Congress, their spouses and their dependent children from buying new stock in public companies while in office, and would have required public notice before lawmakers could sell holdings they already own. Every Democrat in the Senate voted no.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., argued that Republicans had loaded the bill with intentional "poison pills" designed to ensure it would never become law. He also described the measure as toothless and said it did not go far enough. Democrats also objected to a provision requiring voters to show identification at the polls, a requirement the commentary notes is supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans and is required by nearly every other first-world country.
The vote has renewed attention on the broader question of congressional stock trading, which a recent CNBC poll cited in the commentary suggests is a major voter concern. According to that poll, 36% of voters ranked political corruption as the top issue facing the country, and 93% said members of Congress and the president should not own or trade stock in companies that hold federal contracts. Democrats held a four-point edge, 35% to 31%, on which party would better handle political corruption, the poll found.
The commentary, written by a Fox News opinion contributor, also points to a 2024 sale of 2,000 shares of Visa by the household of House Speaker emerita Nancy Pelosi, worth between $500,000 and $1 million, on July 1, 2024. The author notes that less than three months later the Justice Department filed an antitrust lawsuit against Visa, and that the stock dropped after the filing. The piece also cites a 2022 purchase by Paul Pelosi of more than $1 million in Nvidia call options weeks before Congress voted on major subsidies for the chip industry. Those transactions were presented in the piece as evidence of the need for a stronger ban; the Pelosi household has not been shown in the source to have acted unlawfully.
The Senate is out of session until after the midterm elections. The author argues that when Congress returns for the lame-duck session, it should take up the bill again before the end of the year, and that Senate Democrats have an opportunity to change their position at that time.