A slew of politically vulnerable Republican lawmakers are backing a popular insider-trading bill days before it will be debated on the House floor.
Members have been racing to back the bill since a “60 Minutes” report in November highlighted members who have allegedly invested in stocks based on their knowledge of the inner workings of Congress.
Some members have been quicker to back the bill than others.
{mosads}The legislation, sponsored by Reps. Tim Walz (D-Minn.) and Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), now has an astounding 282 co-sponsors. It had fewer than 10 before the “60 Minutes” report.
The bill has so much momentum that lawmakers who have waited to formally co-sponsor the bill are now feeling pressure to back it.
Every House Democrat who faces a challenging race in November has endorsed the measure.
On the Republican side, there are still a number of politically vulnerable members who have not embraced it.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) thwarted a Financial Services committee markup on the Walz-Slaughter Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act (STOCK) late last year. The Senate on Thursday, meanwhile, passed its version of the bill 96-3.
Cantor has said both measures are too weak, indicating that the House will seek to expand its scope during floor deliberations this week.
Even though Cantor has criticized the Walz-Slaughter bill, Republicans have been rushing to add their name to the co-sponsor list. Failure to do so could hamper their reelection bids.
The Hill compiled all of the members who had not backed the bill, and cross checked it with independent political analyst Charlie Cook’s list of lawmakers who are in competitive races. The Hill then called those legislators to ask if they planned to back the bill.
Reps. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.), Scott Rigell (R-Va.), Joe Pitts (R-Pa.) noted this week they have recently co-sponsored the measure. (There is usually a lag of a day or two between when a member backs a bill and that endorsement shows up on the legislative website THOMAS.)
House Republican members who have not co-sponsored the bill and did not respond to requests for comment were Reps. Lou Barletta (Pa.), Dan Benishek (Mich.), Larry Bucshon (Ind.), Chip Cravaack (Minn.), Scott Garrett (N.J.), Bob Gibbs (Ohio), Richard Hanna (N.Y.), Nan Hayworth (N.Y.), Steve King (Iowa), Gary Miller (Calif.), Reid Ribble (Wis.) and Lee Terry (Neb.).
Others provided explanations for why they haven’t backed the bill.
Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.) said no member of Congress should be engaged in insider trading, claiming she is “looking forward to supporting the most effective [legislative] version possible.”
Rep. Robert Dold (R-Ill.) is pushing for his “No pensions for [congressional] felons” legislation in the STOCK Act, pointing out that the Senate version approved that language in an amendment last week offered by Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.).
The press secretary for Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.) noted her boss has introduced his own version of the STOCK Act. She claims that bill’s (H.R. 3550) provisions on transparency are significantly stronger than the STOCK Act.
A spokeswoman for Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) said the congressman “wants to support a strong and comprehensive piece of legislation, one that’s not filled with loopholes…”
In an emailed statement, Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Administration Committee, said he directed his staffers to research the issue: “It was their conclusion that insider trading was already in violation of the law and the rules of the House.” Lungren, the statement read, is “fully committed to ensuring that any potential gaps found in existing law or the STOCK Act are addressed.”
The spokeswoman for Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va.) said he supports an alternative measure backed by Rep. Richard Nugent (R-Fla.) that would require federally elected officials to place stocks in blind trusts.
In an email, Rep. Daniel Webster’s office (R-Fla.) stated that the congressman “believes that transparency and trust is important at all levels of government, which is why he would like to see the STOCK Act strengthened to apply to the executive branch.”