Why We Need Hawley’s Stock Trade Ban

(DCNF)—Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley deserves applause for recently advancing his congressional stock trading ban from committee to the full Senate.

Notably, every Democrat on the committee voted in favor of the bill.

It’s obvious why we need this law; it would ban members of Congress, future presidents, and vice presidents, as well as their spouses, from trading or holding individual stocks while they’re in office.

We’ve all seen reports of lawmakers who vastly increase their wealth while in office, while making just $174,000 a year. But we all know who the number one offender is: former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Her household’s net worth reportedly exceeds $400 million, roughly equivalent to saving every penny of her salary since the year Alexander the Great died.

As recently as last July, her husband, Paul, sold at least $500,000 worth of Visa stock. His timing was impeccable. Paul Pelosi offloaded his shares just three weeks before Biden’s Department of Justice sued the company for allegedly monopolizing debit transactions.

The lawsuit itself was bogus and unnecessary as Visa does not have a monopoly. Consumers have numerous ways to pay for things; they do not have to use Visa. But while investors lost $30 billion when news of the lawsuit broke, well-connected individuals like Pelosi managed to save face.

So, how did Paul know when to sell his shares? Good question. There’s no clear answer, but there’s a reason Hawley originally called his bill the Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments (PELOSI) Act.

Unfortunately, despite the apparent risks of allowing lawmakers with insider knowledge to buy and sell stocks, and despite the ineffectiveness of existing disclosure requirements, some have lined up to attack Hawley’s bill.

One critic suggested that Hawley’s populism had crossed the line into a Bernie Sanders-style vilification of wealth.

“He made a reference to billionaires, okay?” Florida Sen. Rick Scott said. “I don’t know when in this country it became a negative to make money. But somehow, if you’ve made money, you’re supposedly — I think Senator Hawley suggests — you shouldn’t be serving, because you might trade stocks.”

Another senator critical of Hawley’s bill, Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, said the ban would “dissuade the exact kind of people you want serving in government — people who know the private sector, understand how harmful government is to it.”

While their criticisms are misplaced, the principled objections they raise are worth considering.

James Madison made it clear that there would be no “qualification of wealth” for office. Still, he acknowledged that Congress would likely attract ambitious, talented, locally prominent men “fit to comprehend and pursue great and national objects.” These qualities correlate strongly with wealth.

As governor of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson pushed for education and property reforms to ensure that both wealth and political power accrued in the hands of what he called a “natural aristocracy” of the talented and the virtuous.

So, yes, wealthy Americans often make great leaders and lawmakers. Just look at President Trump, whose net worth exceeds that of all previous presidents combined.

That said, Madison also called on his countrymen to elect “representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice.”

Trading individual stocks will always put the lawmaker’s individual interest in conflict with the common good and lead to the “schemes of injustice” Madison warned us about.

And honestly, not trading individual stocks isn’t a huge ask. Perhaps a one-term congressman who trades stocks and picks up tips at classified briefings could turn $10 million into $20 million during their term. Alternatively, he could invest the money in two-year Treasury notes and net around $750,000 by the time his term ends.

A 7.5% rate of return isn’t great compared to the alternative, but it’s not like we’re asking these guys to freeze their toes off at Valley Forge.

Anyone who shows up to Congress expecting to get substantially wealthier while in office is there for the wrong reasons. Public service should require sacrifice.

Haley Kennington (@LadyKennington) is an investigative journalist and conservative commentator. She served as the Research Director & Story Editor for “2020:The Plot Against the President” and Research/Archive Editor for “What Is a Woman?“

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].