U.S. Senator Hawley Reintroduced The PELOSI Act to Restrict Elected Members of Congress From Trading Stocks

US Senator Josh Hawley (R-mo.) Reintroduced the Avoiding elected leaders from the owner of Securities and Investments (PELOSI) ActA bill aimed at preventing members of Congress and their wives from handling or trading individual stocks in their office time. The law, named to reference to the former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, aims to address concerns about lawmakers who will potentially benefit from insider information obtained in their positions.

Provisions of Pelosi Act

Congress members and their spouse are prohibited from holding, buying, or selling individual stocks while in office. Investments are allowed in different funds by one another, funds exchanged (ETF), or US Treasury bonds. Current lawmakers need to comply within 180 days of passing the bill, including newly elected members who have been given the same time to climb.

Communicated revenues from violations will be returned to American taxpayers through the US Treasury, with additional fines possible through congressional ethical committees. Requires a Office of Government Liability (GAO) Auding the following two years after the implementation.

The bill responds to public concerns about conflicts of interest, as lawmakers have access to non -public information that can influence decisions in the stock market. For example, a 2022 New York Times The study found that 44 of the 50 most active Congress businessmen bought or sell security to companies that could be influenced by their committee -education.

High-profile cases, such as lawmakers' trading activity during the Covid-19 Pandmia that was short-lived in early 2020, fuel calls for reform. The Pelosi Act was named Nancy Pelosi because of her husband Paul Pelosi, as an active stock businessman, with trade such as those in the semiconductor stock raising questions about the potential benefits of the insider, though sold at a loss to avoid the inappropriate.

Hawley initially introduced the Pelosi Act in 2023, but did not pass the -118 Congress, which ended in January 2025. Other Bipartisan measures, such as Ethics Act (2024) and the Ban Stock Trading for Government Act officials (2023), which aims to tighten the Congress stock trading but faces the advancement of challenges. Public support for such a prohibition is powerful, with polls showing 86% of Americans favoring restrictions on lawmakers who trade individual stocks.

The Stock Act of 2012 prohibits insider trading based on non -public information, but the $ 200 fine for violations is seen as inadequate, and poor implementation. The Reintroduced Pelosi Act is a modified push, which was boosted by President Trump's statement in April 2025 that he would sign the bill if passed. However, Bipartisan support remains unsure, as some lawmakers objected to restrictions, citing free market participation or recruitment challenges for candidates. The Pelosi Act reflects on the ongoing efforts to prevent detected conflicts of interest in Congress, but its passage depends on the overcome of obstacles to legislative and resistance from lawmakers accustomed to active trading.

The Pelosi Act, if passed, will have significant implications for members of Congress, financial markets, public trust, and dynamic legislative. Lawmakers and their spouse will lose the ability to actively exchange individual stocks, limiting opportunities to vary or adjust to market trends. They can be confined to various Treasury funds or bonds, which will potentially reduce portfolio growth compared to active trading.

The 180-day divestment period can force the rapid sale of property, which is potentially in unpleasant market prices, and requires complex financial repair for lawmakers with significant stock handling. Some argue that the ban can impede rich or financial candidates running for the office, as they will lose control of personal investments. However, others believe that it can attract candidates to prioritize public service to personal gain.

Congress trading has been evaluated for transferring markets, as lawmakers access to non -public information can signal investment opportunities. A prohibition can reduce such distortion, especially in sectors such as tech, health care, or defense, where congress trading is often clustered. Limiting the ability of lawmakers to act on privileged information can reduce volatility in specific stocks tied to legislative actions or administration of the committee.

Polls show strong public support (86%) for banning Congress's stock trading, as it addresses self-awareness perception. The passage can strengthen the confidence in the motion of the lawmakers, counting the narratives of select corruption. The law will strengthen the Stock Act (2012), which addresses weak implementation and low penalties. The fines and disgorgers of the Treasury revenue impede violations, the responsibility of the signal.

While the bipartisan in intent, the provocative name of the bill Nancy Pelosi And sponsorship by a polarizing figure like Josh Hawley can deepen the partisan divides, complex passage. Lawmakers may approach the law with less personal financial bias, especially in areas such as tax policy, health care, or contracting defense, where stock ownership is often overlay to committee duties.

Some lawmakers may be pushed back, citing free market rights or suggesting exceptions (for example, blind trust, which critics are focusing on). Implementation mechanisms, such as GAO audits, will be critical to prevent workarounds. Success can motivate similar restrictions for other officers (for example, members of the Federal Reserve or Executive Branch employees), which rearrange ethical standards throughout the government.

Without stable administration, lawmakers can exploit loopholes, such as transferring property to family members or using proxies. GAO's role will be pivotal but intensive resources. Bipartisan support exists in principle, but measures competing (for example, ethics act) and resistance from trading-active lawmakers can stall development, as seen in previous Congress.

Forced divestitures can flood markets with certain stocks, temporarily depressed prices, or push lawmakers to less transparent investments such as private equity. The Pelosi Act can enhance public confidence and reduce conflicts of interest, which aligns with public service incentives.

However, its success depends on the overcome political resistance, ensuring strict implementation, and responding to accidental impact on the market. If passed, it will mark a significant step toward ethical management, even though its long-term impact on Congress and Dynamics in the market will remain unsure.