Democratic leadership in<\/u> the House of Representatives tanked an opportunity to pass a key ethics reform Thursday, according to several Democratic and Republican staffers involved in bipartisan efforts to ban stock trading by members of Congress. Those staffers say leadership\u2019s move appears crafted to head off broad bipartisan support for reform.<\/p>\n
After House leaders introduced a bill<\/a> to curtail stock trading by federal officials on Tuesday, Democrats and Republicans pointed out the discrepancies between the leadership-approved version and the carefully negotiated bipartisan bills that predated it. Those discrepancies led to several members saying they could not vote on the measure without reviewing the text and determining whether the bill could draw enough votes in both chambers to become law.<\/p>\n When backlash to the leadership version of the bill emerged, leaders pulled it from the schedule. The decision to punt further action until after the midterm elections imperils the odds that any version of the ban will pass the House and Senate. Several sources close to bipartisan negotiations on the subject tell The Intercept that may have been the point.\u00a0On Friday, Rep. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., called it<\/a> \u201ca kitchen-sink package that they knew would immediately crash upon arrival.\u201d<\/p>\n The \u201cnon-starters\u201d in the leadership\u2019s legislation, according to one Democratic staffer, included issues around the structure of qualified blind trusts, the inclusion of dependent children in the ban, and a measure expanding the ethics rules to members of the judiciary \u2014 sticking points that negotiators addressed in bipartisan reforms hashed out earlier this year. \u201cThe qualified blind trusts are kind of fake and are not an appropriate safeguard to really ensure that we have, you know, real divestiture from conflicting interests,\u201d the staffer, who was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter, said.<\/p>\n\n Several Democratic and Republican staffers involved in earlier bipartisan efforts say House leadership made no effort to consult them on what sort of framework might pass. In particular, the process ignored a version of the legislation co-authored<\/a> by Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., and Rep. Matt Rosendale, R-Mont. That measure also has bipartisan support in the Senate, where Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Steve Daines, R-Mont., have introduced a corresponding bill. Rosendale\u2019s chief of staff, Trevor Whetstone, told The Intercept his office has long believed that package has the votes to pass both chambers.<\/p>\n \u201cIt wasn\u2019t a real process,\u201d one Democratic staffer told The Intercept. \u201cThere were all these things thrown in here that on the surface look good, but make it so expansive, that, you know, it’s not going to make it to the President’s desk.\u201d<\/p>\n Those sources claim that the leadership\u2019s introduction \u2014 and quick scuttling \u2014 of legislative text on the issue make sense only if viewed as a calculated play to kill efforts at reform. \u201cSeveral of the key issues that were worked out in some of the bipartisan efforts just weren\u2019t addressed,\u201d a Republican staffer told The Intercept. \u201cThere\u2019s a lot of overwhelming consensus here, a lot of work that\u2019s been done to achieve that. You don\u2019t completely ignore all that on accident.\u201d<\/p>\n Representatives for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer did not respond to requests for comment. Christiana Stephenson, the communications director for House Democratic Caucus Chair Hakeem Jeffries, did not address the substance of the questions, instead referring The Intercept to Jeffries\u2019s public comments<\/a> on the scuttling of the stock trade ban earlier Thursday, where Jeffries deflected responsibility to Hoyer, who controls the floor schedule. Hoyer has expressed varying levels of hostility<\/a> to any potential reform for months. Pelosi, one of the wealthiest members of Congress, has mostly declined to speak at length on the issue since declaring<\/a> members of Congress have a right to participate in the \u201cfree market\u201d in December of last year.<\/p>\n The CFTC is considering the approval of two ETFs that would allow consumers to buy a product mirroring the holdings of senior members of congress. The proposed tickers are NANC and KRUZ, for Ted Cruz and Nancy Pelosi. https:\/\/t.co\/qXGS0nNllm<\/a><\/p>\n — Daniel Boguslaw (@DRBoguslaw) September 28, 2022<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n\n