Is the Proposed ‘Pelosi Act’ Just an Effort in Futility?

The PELOSI Act introduced by Missouri Senator Josh Hawley has sparked a debate on the ethics of insider trading and conflicts of interest in government.

The bill, also known as the Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments Act, is aimed at preventing members of Congress and their families from engaging in conflicts of interest while in office.

One of Nancy Pelosi’s last acts before her loss of Speaker of the House, was selling $3 million in Google stocks before the Department of Justice announced an antitrust lawsuit against the tech giant.

This appears to be a regular event for Pelosi and other Congressional members who faced accusations of insider trading. Her husband, Paul Pelosi sold up to $5 million worth of a computer chipmaker ahead of a House vote on domestic chip manufacturing.

The bill will now go through the legislative process, where it will be subject to further debate and discussion before a vote is taken.

Both sides of the political spectrum, including some Democrats and progressives who publically agree with the bill’s intention to prevent conflicts of interest and insider trading.

Even former Ohio state Senator Nina Turner, who usually disagrees with Hawley, has publicly supported the bill, stating that “we should not fall so in love with politicians that we do not hold them accountable.”

Inevitably, the Pelosi Act bill faces criticism, with some arguing that it would place unnecessary restrictions on the personal financial choices of members of Congress and their spouses.

Some of us wonder if this is just an exercise in futility as some have argued that the bill does not address the underlying problem of money in politics and that more comprehensive reform is needed to address issues of corruption and influence in government.

The bill is garnering support from advocacy groups and organizations that promote ethics and transparency in government.

They argue that prohibiting members of Congress and their spouses from holding or trading stocks while in office would help prevent conflicts of interest and ensure that elected officials are making decisions in the best interest of their constituents, rather than their own financial gain.


In God We Trust

Thanks for supporting independent true journalism with a small tip. Dodie & Jack

We are thankful to our incredible sponsors!

Please Support These American Owned Businesses


Get Your Natural Vitamins A & D from the Sea!



For Information

Now Available CLICK Here!

History, Texas, Pioneers, Genealogy

From award-winning Texas author Cynthia Leal Massey.


CLICK: PARK LANE by Rebecca Taylor




  1. Enter congress a middle or upper middle class American and leave a multi-millionaire. That is the real dirty reason people run for office. Insider trading, tip-offs of upcoming legislation and all the other dirty information out there. Mean while, our stocks go to hell and theirs turn to gold. Pelosi may have benefited the most of all. Of course, all the Pubs and Dems do the same thing, so no one will ever face prosecution. Like George Carlin once said, ” it’s an exclusive club, and we ain’t in it.”

    Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.