14 April 2015 – Washington, DC – Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez leads an Equal Pay Day Discussion with Representative Nancy Pelosi. Also delivering remarks is Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, White House Advisor Valerie Jarrett and Women’s Bureau Director Latifa Lyles.
(Official Department of Labor Photograph)
When the topic of insider trading in Congress comes up, Democrats are quick to accuse Republicans of corruption. Yet when the violations involve one of their own, the outrage disappears.
The STOCK Act, passed in 2012, was intended to prohibit lawmakers from trading stocks using inside information gained through their official duties. It requires members of Congress, their spouses, and senior staff to report certain financial transactions over $1,000 within 45 days.
In theory, that makes it harder for lawmakers to conceal suspicious trades. In practice, the penalty for violating the law is $200—an amount so trivial it might as well be nothing.
In 2023, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA11) nearly tripled the S&P 500’s returns. That performance alone drew public criticism. But Pelosi is not unique. Many in Congress are guilty of similar behavior—and the most revealing cases are the ones where the democrats stays silent.
One of the clearest examples came when Democrat Rep. Tom Suozzi of New York repeatedly failed to file his transaction reports on time. Across nearly 300 personal financial transactions worth at least $3.2 million, Suozzi ignored the STOCK Act’s deadlines. When asked whether he paid fines for the violations, Suozzi either refused to comment or simply didn’t respond.
The independent Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) investigated and unanimously concluded there was “substantial reason to believe” Suozzi violated the STOCK Act. But when the case reached the House Committee on Ethics, the outcome was predictable.
The committee ruled there was not “clear evidence” that he had committed “knowing or willful” violations, effectively dismissing the charges.
This is where the bipartisan silence becomes obvious. Republicans, who regularly criticize Democrats for corruption, had little to say about Suozzi’s violations. Likewise, Democrats remain quiet when a Republican is accused of doing the same thing.
Going after the other party would mean admitting the problem is bipartisan — and that could bring unwanted scrutiny to their own financial dealings.
The STOCK Act’s failure is rooted in its lack of real consequences. A $200 fine for a violation is meaningless to lawmakers who can make thousands, or even millions, through trades that benefit from nonpublic information.
There is no significant escalation in penalty for repeat offenses, no loss of committee assignments, and no threat to their seats in Congress. For many members, breaking the law is simply a cost of doing business.
If a corporate executive engaged in similar behavior—trading on nonpublic information and delaying required disclosures—they could face significant prison time, multimillion-dollar fines, and a lifetime ban from holding an executive position in a public company.
In Congress, the same conduct is treated as a minor paperwork issue.
This arrangement suits both parties. Democrats can point to Pelosi’s critics as partisan attacks, while Republicans can downplay violations within their own ranks to avoid public embarrassment.
Each side protects the other because the moment they start enforcing the rules on opponents, they open themselves up to the same standard.
Pelosi’s case is important because it draws public attention, but it is far from the whole story. Suozzi’s violations are just one of many examples showing how little the law actually matters when both parties have an incentive to ignore it.
The silence is deliberate. It is the result of an unspoken agreement that ethics enforcement in Congress should never threaten the careers of those in power, regardless of party affiliation.
Until there are more substantial penalties, independent enforcement free from political influence, and a genuine commitment to transparency, members of Congress will continue to trade in the shadows, disclose information late, and evade accountability.
Pelosi may be the most famous name tied to congressional insider trading, but she is far from the only one—and the lack of criticism across party lines proves it.
The post Pelosi Is Just the Tip of the Democrats’ Insider Trading Iceberg appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.