A vote on the long-awaited — and some say direly needed — bill to ban members of Congress from being able to trade individual stocks will likely be delayed until at least after the midterm election in November, sources within House Democratic leadership say, drawing frustration from advocates who have been pushing for the bill to come to a vote for months.
According to Punchbowl News, some sources say that there is “very little chance” that the bill, kept secret by Democratic leadership for months and released this week, will come to a vote before the election.
Steny Hogue (D-Maryland), House Majority Leader has said that it’s likely the bill will not come to a vote this week, missing the Estimated time frame to voteNancy Pelosi (D.California), House Speaker, made the announcement at a press conference last Thursday. Hoyer is under firefor indicating in recent meetings that he was opposed to the proposal.
The legislation’s proponents have been asking the House to bring it up. to a vote sinceMembers began to introduce their members Own versionsThe proposal was submitted in the first quarter of this year. Despite this, the Democrats had delayed progress on legislation. rare bipartisan support for the proposal, and had even kept its contents secret from legislators who supported the bill until this week.
Now, the textThe legislation has been released. Democratic leaders have faced criticism once again over the elements of the bill. ethics experts sayEither make the bill too broad or too weak in its enforcement dooming the legislation from the startAlternatively, it can be rendered useless.
The bill’s current form would ban members of Congress, but also Supreme Court justices, high-ranking congressional and executive officers from trading stocks. This covers a wider range of officials than many of the other proposals made by lawmakers this year.
Experts in ethics say thatThe practice of trading individual stocks should be stopped by both the judiciary as well as the executive branches because it could lead to conflicts. Walter Shaub is a Project on Government Oversight Senior ethics Fellow. pointed out on Twitter that including such officials in the ban would be a “poison pill” for the bill, risking Republican opposition and likely dooming its chances in the Senate.
Meanwhile, government watchdogs are also taking issueThe meat of this bill: the mechanism through which government officials would give up control over stock portfolios.
The bill would require lawmakers to either divest from their stocks or place them into a blind trust — but the blind trust wouldn’t have to follow existing rules for a blind trust, allowing lawmakers to create a “fake” blind trust like the one used by former President Donald Trump, Shaub said on Twitter.
“Pelosi’s bill would eliminate all of these requirements by authorizing each ethics office to allow anything they want and call it a blind trust. Literally anything,” Shaub wroteOn Tuesday, a Twitter thread was started railing against the bill. There are no rules about what qualifies for a blind trust. experts sayThe legislature could trade stocks but not in its entirety. even more secretively than before.
“There’s plenty of reason to be concerned about throwing out the current strict uniform standard for blind trusts across the government,” Shaub continued. “For one thing, the House and Senate ethics committees are notoriously loose. They’ve spent the last ten years not enforcing the STOCK Act.”
Stock ban supporters We have suggestedIt is possible that Democratic leaders have introduced a bill different to what other lawmakers have submitted because they oppose it.
Pelosi, whose husband is a prolificStock trader, previously She expressed her oppositionto the proposal. Hoyer indicated that he will vote against the bill in the future during meetings. Zoe Lofgren (D–California), House Administration Committee Chair. wrote the bill, had According to reports, the temperature has cooledAfter the hearing, the committee voted in favor of the idea.