N※N

Bipartisan 'RESTRICT Act' Aims to Ban Congressional Stock Trading

  //stocks-investing.news-articles.net/content/202 .. act-aims-to-ban-congressional-stock-trading.html
  Published in Stocks and Investing on Saturday, February 21st 2026 at 22:44 GMT by Dayton Daily News
      Locales: Washington, UNITED STATES

WASHINGTON (February 22nd, 2026) - What began as a rising tide of public discontent and investigative journalism has swelled into a significant legislative effort. A bipartisan group of senators has formally introduced the "RESTRICT Act" (Restricting Enhancements to Stop Trading by Congressional Insiders and Create Transparency), aiming to finally prohibit members of Congress, their spouses, and dependent children from trading individual stocks. The bill, gaining momentum as of today, represents a potentially seismic shift in the ethics of American lawmaking, and addresses growing concerns about conflicts of interest and unfair advantages enjoyed by those in power.

For years, reports have surfaced detailing instances of lawmakers seemingly benefiting from their access to non-public information. While legal under existing rules - often reliant on self-reporting and limited enforcement - these trades have fueled public cynicism and eroded trust in government. Critics argue that even the appearance of impropriety is damaging, especially when coupled with the increasing economic anxieties faced by average Americans. The timing of this legislative push, two years after the initial surge in attention to the issue, is significant. Several high-profile investigations conducted by independent news organizations and government watchdogs over the past 24 months further solidified public demand for reform.

The RESTRICT Act, as proposed, goes further than previous attempts at addressing the issue. Unlike earlier proposals focused solely on limiting trading activity, this bill establishes a comprehensive ban on individual stock ownership and trading by a broad range of legislative branch employees. This includes not just senators and representatives, but also senior staffers and others with access to potentially market-moving information. A 45-day divestiture window is included, giving affected individuals time to liquidate their holdings before the ban takes effect. This provision aims to minimize disruption while ensuring swift compliance.

However, the devil is always in the details. The proposed penalties for violations are substantial, ranging from significant financial fines to potential imprisonment, particularly for repeated or egregious offenses. Crucially, the bill also establishes an independent enforcement mechanism, removing oversight from internal congressional bodies and handing it to a dedicated, impartial authority. This addresses a key criticism of previous efforts - the lack of robust enforcement and the potential for self-regulation to be ineffective.

Senator Josh Hawley (R-Missouri), a leading voice behind the legislation, argues that the ban is a matter of basic fairness. "American families are working harder than ever to make ends meet, and it's unacceptable that their representatives are potentially using inside information to line their own pockets," he stated in a press conference earlier this week. Senator Angus King (I-Maine), also a key sponsor, echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the need to restore public trust in government. "The American people deserve to know that their elected officials are acting in their best interests, not chasing personal profit," he asserted.

The momentum behind the RESTRICT Act is notable, given the historically divisive climate in Washington. The bipartisan support demonstrates a recognition that ethical reforms can, and should, transcend partisan lines. However, the bill is not without its potential challenges. Some critics argue that a complete ban is overly broad and could discourage qualified individuals from entering public service, fearing limitations on their financial freedom. There have also been suggestions for alternative solutions, such as blind trusts or increased transparency requirements, although these options have generally been seen as insufficient to address the core concerns.

Furthermore, the debate extends beyond just stock trading. Concerns regarding the financial activities of lawmakers now encompass cryptocurrency investments, real estate transactions, and participation in private equity funds. The RESTRICT Act currently focuses primarily on individual stocks, but future iterations of the bill could potentially expand its scope to address these broader issues.

Several states, including California, Florida, and New York, have already taken steps to restrict stock trading by state-level officials, serving as a potential model for federal legislation. The growing trend at the state level underscores the national appetite for greater accountability and ethical conduct in government. Whether the RESTRICT Act will ultimately pass remains to be seen, but the current level of bipartisan support and public pressure suggests a strong possibility. If enacted, it would represent a landmark achievement in the ongoing effort to reform the ethics of American lawmaking.