There are some key differences between the two propositions: Osoff’s law would apply the restriction to any dependent children other than a spouse, whereas Hawley’s bill would not. In addition, Osoff’s law would have the Congressional Ethics Committee oversee the issue, while Hawley’s bill would have a Government Accountability Office audit.
And perhaps the biggest difference: Osoff’s law would fine lawbreakers from their pay, while Hawley’s wrongful law would require lawmakers to return their profits to the American people through the Treasury Department.
Virginia’s Democratic Rep. A similar bipartisan bill was introduced by the House, led by Abigail Spanberger and Texas Republican Rep. Chip Roy, that would require lawmakers to place their assets in qualified blind trusts upon entering office.
The issue of lawmakers trading shares has gained traction on Capitol Hill in recent weeks and enjoys widespread bipartisan support but is unlikely to get a vote in the House, while Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House due to her opposition to the law.
Pelosi said during a news conference last month that she does not think members or spouses of members should be banned from trading in individual shares while serving in Congress.
“No,” said the California Democrat when asked about the ban. “We have a responsibility to report on the stock. But I’m not familiar with that five-month review. But if people aren’t reporting, they should be.”
When pressed why members should not be barred from trades while serving in Congress, Pelosi dismissed the need for the ban, saying, “It’s a free market and the people—we’re a free market economy. Let them participate.” Must be able to take. Because of.”
The office of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer did not respond to CNN’s request for comment on the proposals.