logo
He said he'd ban stock trading in Congress. He's made more than 530 trades since taking office.

He said he'd ban stock trading in Congress. He's made more than 530 trades since taking office.

Rep. Rob Bresnahan said he would ban stock trading when he got to Congress. Since the Pennsylvania Republican took office in January, he's traded securities at least 530 times.
Forty of those trades, worth at least $166,000, were made after May 6, when he announced that he would move his assets into a blind trust.
Business Insider reviewed 11 periodic transaction reports that Bresnahan has filed since January. His investments run the gamut, from tech companies like Meta and Alphabet to energy companies like ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips.
Like fellow Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Bresnahan has said that he does not make those trades himself and that his portfolio is managed by an outside third party.
Bresnahan has apparently continued to allow that advisor to make trades on his behalf, even after his trades began to draw significant media scrutiny two months ago.
"As we've said repeatedly, Rob has no involvement in the stock trades made by his financial advisor," Hannah Pope, a spokeswoman for Bresnahan, told BI. "He's in the process of finalizing a blind trust which requires sign-off from the House Ethics Committee."
In March 2021, Bresnahan penned an op-ed in a local paper stating that if elected, he would co-sponsor legislation to ban stock trading in Congress.
"Some of the most prolific traders in the country serve in Congress," Bresnahan wrote. "Whether or not they have done something wrong, the idea that we can buy and sell stocks while voting on legislation that will have a direct impact on these companies is wrong and needs to come to an end immediately."
The Pennsylvania Republican has emerged as one of the House's most prolific traders. After the New York Times first reported on Bresnahan's trades, his office said he would introduce his own bill instead.
One month later, he did, introducing the "TRUST Act," a name that sounded similar to an existing stock ban bill, the TRUST in Congress Act.
"I think his staff should learn how to Google," Rep. Chip Roy, the GOP cosponsor of that bill, told NOTUS.
At the same time, Bresnahan said he would establish a blind trust.
"I have never traded my own stocks, but I want to guarantee accountability to my constituents," the congressman said in a May 6 press release. "That is why I am working with House Ethics to begin the process of enacting a blind trust. I want the people I represent to trust that I am in Congress to serve them, and them alone."
While the details of each blind trust is different, they generally allow individuals to retain the value of their assets, but they relinquish control over investment decisions to a third party. They also do not receive information about the contents of the trust until it is terminated.
Bresnahan isn't the only lawmaker who continues to trade stocks despite backing a stock trading ban. He's also not the only lawmaker who has continued to trade despite announcing plans for a blind trust.
In February 2022, Democratic Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey announced that he would set up a blind trust. Three years later, that still hasn't happened, and spokesman Tony Wen told BI on Monday that the congressman is still "awaiting approval" from the relevant ethics officials in Congress.
"In the meantime, he has taken the extra step of setting up an independent trust," Wen said.
Additionally, Republican Rep. Tom Kean of New Jersey announced just before he took office in January 2023 that he would be placing his assets into a blind trust. The congressman still has not disclosed doing so, and his office did not respond to a request for comment.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Republican Jim Carlin launches primary bid against U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst in week of campaign kickoffs
Republican Jim Carlin launches primary bid against U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst in week of campaign kickoffs

Yahoo

time25 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Republican Jim Carlin launches primary bid against U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst in week of campaign kickoffs

Former state Sen. Jim Carlin, shown here at a rally in October 2021, has launched a Republican campaign for U.S. senator. (Photo by Katie Akin/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Former state legislator Jim Carlin, a Republican, announced he is running for Iowa's U.S. Senate seat in the upcoming election — the latest candidate this week to announce their plans to run in 2026. Carlin, who served in the Iowa Senate from 2017 through 2023 and previously in the Iowa House, is running for the seat currently held by U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst. Since his time in the Iowa Legislature, Carlin went on to found the Iowa Liberty Network, an organization focused on recruiting and electing 'constitutional conservative' candidates in state government and other public offices. In an interview with the Iowa Capital Dispatch, Carlin said Ernst is not reflecting Iowa Republicans' values in Congress. He pointed to the Heritage Action scorecard for Ernst from the 2023 session, when she received a 42% score on how often her votes aligned with conservative goals. He pointed to her support for money to aid Ukraine in its war against Russia and her vote in favor of the Respect for Marriage Act as examples of Ernst not voting in line with conservative values. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Carlin said Ernst has not delivered on her commitment 'make 'em squeal' by cutting federal spending, as well as promises to work to repeal the Affordable Care Act and 2014 campaign statement that she would only serve two terms in the U.S. Senate. 'The people of Iowa can judge whether or not she's keeping those promises,' Carlin said. 'And I believe that when they … evaluate it, when they look at her voting record and the decisions she's made as a sitting senator, that they will come to the conclusion that she doesn't represent them well in terms of the things they want to see done and the things that they believe in.' Bryan Kraber, Ernst's 2026 campaign manager, pointed to Carlin's failed primary bid against U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley in the 2022 election. 'Good luck trying to take on this combat veteran,' Kraber said in a statement Friday. 'Senator Ernst has a proven record of conservative leadership—cutting waste, securing the border, and making Washington squeal to keep Iowans' hard-earned money in their own pockets. And she delivers for our families, farmers, and veterans. Iowans already saw through Carlin's last failed campaign, and they'll reject his desperate attempt at relevance again in 2026.' Though Carlin and Ernst are battling on conservative bonafides, much of the conversation centered on the upcoming race has focused on Ernst's town hall statement that 'we are all going to die' last week during talks on the funding cuts to Medicaid included in the budget reconciliation bill passed by the U.S. House. Carlin said he supports President Donald Trump's spending goals and believes cuts that should be made to federal programs but 'her handling of that showed a lack of judgment.' 'You don't flippantly say to people, 'well, we're all going to die,'' Carlin said. 'That actually kind of reminds me of Hillary Clinton's statement, 'what difference does it make,' on the other side of Benghazi when people died. I thought it was really inappropriate.' Iowa Rep. J.D. Scholten, D-Sioux City, announced Monday he would compete for the Democratic nomination, saying he 'just can't sit on the sidelines' following the Senator's comments. Scholten and Nathan Sage, a Mason City Democrat, are the only Democrats to have officially joined the race, but other potential Democratic candidates also weighed in on Ernst's comments this week. State Sen. Zach Wahls, D-Coralville, who has expressed interested in a run, said 'it is of course true that we are all going to die, but our Senators shouldn't be the ones killing us' in response to Ernst's comments. State Rep. Josh Turek, D-Council Bluffs, is also weighing a bid for the seat. Turek joined a call with Protect Our Care Iowa, an organization advocating for health care access through programs like Medicaid, on Thursday and said the proposal to reduce Medicaid spending by $625 billion in the next decade and implement work requirements will prevent more people with disabilities from accessing needed care. Republicans supporting the 'big, beautiful' tax and spending bill have repeatedly stated people with disabilities and complex medical conditions as well other protected populations, like minors, seniors, parents of dependent children and pregnant people will not be subject to work requirements or taken off the program. But Turek said as a person with a disability who has worked for an organization assessing and providing mobility devices, he has extensive experience with how funding cuts and moves like Iowa's Medicaid privatization have limited access to needed health care and services for Iowans with disabilities. The state legislator said he went to Washington, D.C., to speak with all members of Iowa's federal delegation about how the proposed changes will hurt people in need. 'I talked to them specifically about this bill and about the cuts to Medicaid, and additionally about what they're looking at doing on grant funding,' Turek said. 'And we're looking at 140 organizations and groups here in Iowa, disability services — beyond just Medicaid, that are looking at losing all of their funding in some cases, or 50%, 25%. They cannot plead ignorance. They know exactly what this bill is. It's a tax break to the richest, most wealthy Americans off the backs of the poorest and the most vulnerable.' Ernst's comment also led to another campaign launch for the Iowa House. India May, the 33-year-old from Charles City who sparked Ernst's comments on Medicaid during the Parkersburg town hall, is running for Iowa House District 58, currently represented by Republican Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City. May, the Ionia Public Library director, is a county death investigator for Chickasaw County and registered nurse. She shouted 'people will die' at Ernst during the public meeting. 'People are not — well, we all are going to die, so for heaven's sake,' Ernst responded. The day after the meeting, Ernst made an 'apology video' filmed in a cemetery where she said she 'made an incorrect assumption that everyone in the auditorium understood that, yes, we are all going to perish from this earth.' 'So I apologize, and I'm really, really glad that I did not have to bring up the subject of the tooth fairy as well,' Ernst said in the video. She also added that 'for those that would like to see eternal and everlasting life, I encourage you to embrace my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.' In a social media post responding to the video, May wrote that Ernst's apology was 'disingenuous and reinforced gaslighting and christofascism aimed toward her MAGA supporters.' She also used the platform to highlight her own run for office. 'In short, my response to Joni's phoney apology is this: I don't want to see another Iowan choose between medicine or food. It's already happening and this bill will make it worse,' May wrote. '… Joni may be disappointed to know that I will continue to email her every day with my concerns, and that it is my intention to run as a progressive Democrat for Iowa House District 58, to undo the damage caused by the incumbent, Charley Thomson, who recently made headlines for targeting a nonprofit organization.' May had referenced the directive sent by Thomson in his capacity as the House government oversight committee chair to the Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice, an immigrant rights organization, requesting information about the nonprofit organization's clients, donors and members. An attorney for Iowa MMJ rejected the request in April, saying it was not legally valid. Iowa Rep. Eddie Andrews launched his bid for Iowa governor Wednesday, running as a Republican for the seat that will be vacated by Gov. Kim Reynolds following the 2026 election. Andrews, a Johnston Republican first elected in 2020, is one of the first GOP candidates to officially run in what is expected to be a crowded field. Former state Rep. Brad Sherman had announced he is running as a Republican gubernatorial candidate before Reynolds left the race. U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra and Iowa Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeny, have both launched exploratory committees for a gubernatorial campaign, and other high-profile Iowa Republicans like Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird and House Speaker Pat Grassley have expressed interest but not made a decision on whether to run. In a news release on his run, Andrews said his work as a state lawmaker shows why Iowans should back his campaign — he highlighted his support for 'landowner rights' through supporting bills restricting the use of eminent domain in carbon sequestration pipeline projects, efforts to increase psychiatric residencies and provide more incentives to keep doctors in the state, as well as proposals to end sales tax on certain essential items. As governor, Andrews said he wants to focus on improving Iowa's education system, making mental health care more accessible, and pledged to 'destroy the human trafficking industry in our state.' 'Iowa deserves a Governor who listens and delivers,' Andrews said in a statement. 'My experience as a tech entrepreneur, minister and legislator prepares me to serve you.' Democrat Julie Stauch, a longtime Iowa political operative, also launched her campaign for governor this week. Iowa Auditor Rob Sand is considered the frontrunner in the Democratic gubernatorial primary, though Stauch alongside Democrat Paul Dahl will be competing against him in the primary June 2, 2026. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Democratic congressman steps up his work to pull Musk toward his party
Democratic congressman steps up his work to pull Musk toward his party

Yahoo

time25 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Democratic congressman steps up his work to pull Musk toward his party

Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., talked with one of Elon Musk's 'senior confidants' on Thursday about whether the ex-DOGE leader, now feuding with Donald Trump, might want to help the Democratic Party in the midterms. 'Having Elon speak out against the irrational tariff policy, against the deficit exploding Trump bill, and the anti-science and anti-immigrant agenda can help check Trump's unconstitutional administration,' Khanna told Semafor on Friday. 'I look forward to Elon turning his fire against MAGA Republicans instead of Democrats in 2026.' Khanna, who has known Musk for more than a decade, has long argued that Democrats unwisely pushed him away from their party. Now the world's wealthiest man, Musk benefited from the Obama administration's clean energy investments, defending them against Republican attacks in the 2012 election. He supported Democratic nominees for president until 2024, when he endorsed Trump for president — and spent more to help elect him than he had for any Democrat. Since Musk began attacking the Trump-backed GOP tax bill as an 'abomination' this week, Democrats in Congress have amplified his criticism and even adopted some of his language. But few besides Khanna have gone as far as talking about bringing Musk back into the Democratic tent; most Democrats are furious at Musk's DOGE work to dismantle parts of the federal government and are confident that he is a political liability for Trump. 'How great is it that that dipshit Elon Musk is out?' Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota said at last Friday's Democratic fish fry in South Carolina, after Musk left the administration. 'The decisions he was making were literally killing people, so he could dance around and act like he was doing something.' Musk was a 'historic villain' whose unpopularity had helped Wisconsin Democrats win the state's April 1 supreme court race by 10 points, said state Democratic Party chairman Ben Wikler. At their 'Fighting Oligarchy' rallies, the largest political events since Trump was sworn in, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., torched Musk as the embodiment of what Democrats and fair-minded Americans should be against. Some Democrats believe that Musk could have stayed in their coalition, had they paid him a little more respect — specifically, had Joe Biden invited Musk to the White House electric vehicle summit early in his presidency. Khanna is in that camp. Others counter that the party's overall shift leftward after 2016 alienated Musk, who was never coming back. He clashed with Elizabeth Warren ('Senator Karen') over the idea of a wealth tax, and with progressives over the 'woke mind virus' that he blamed for the gender transition of his third child. That's the camp where most Democrats are, although some — like Walz — see this as a political opportunity. Still, the idea of an irate multibillionaire making problems for Republicans is enticing to plenty of Democrats, who have not been above meddling in GOP primaries to help weaker candidates win nominations. What if Musk made Republicans burn money to defend their incumbents, as he slammed them with TV ads? That's all theoretical, as Musk said last month that he would do 'a lot less' political spending now that he'd achieved his goal of electing Trump. If Musk is sincere about the political views he posts about on X, he is completely at odds with the Democratic Party, and the best they could hope for is him making trouble for Republicans out of spite. In Politico, Holly Otterbein and Lisa Kashinsky about the Democrats who hoped that Musk would have a 'villain-to-hero' arc, and help them beat Trump. But Khanna was the only voice in the party who fully believed it could happen.

The Latest Escalation Between Russia and Ukraine Isn't Changing the Course of the War
The Latest Escalation Between Russia and Ukraine Isn't Changing the Course of the War

Yahoo

time25 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

The Latest Escalation Between Russia and Ukraine Isn't Changing the Course of the War

The empire strikes back. Last week, Ukrainian spies destroyed a large chunk of Russia's fearsome nuclear bomber fleet using small, smuggled drones. On Friday, Russia retaliated with some of the largest air raids against Ukraine to date. The Russian air raids killed eight Ukrainians and wounded 46. They also sent the message that, as Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday, the current round of peace talks is over. On the whole, however, neither the Ukrainian guerrilla operation nor the old-fashioned Russian retaliation changed the course of the war. Russia has a slight, but not decisive, advantage. Russian forces have been gaining ground in Ukraine at a slow rate and high cost. Although they have continued to suffer from manpower shortages, Ukrainian forces have managed to inflict greater losses on the Russian side. The human butchery on the front lines can continue for the time being. Of course, the attack on the Russian nuclear bomber fleet matters a lot for the global balance of power. And Ukraine has grown quite bold at attacking Russian interests outside of Ukraine. Ukrainian operatives have reportedly blown up the Nord Stream pipeline in the Baltic Sea, captured Russian mercenaries in Sudan, enabled Tuareg rebels to kill dozens more Russian mercenaries in Mali, and trained Syrian rebels to use drones against the former government of Bashar Assad, a Russian ally. Rather than changing the balance of forces on the battlefield, these moves serve two psychological purposes. On one hand, they blunt Putin's confidence that he can simply wait Ukraine out. U.S. President Donald Trump reportedly told European leaders last month that Putin doesn't want to end the war because he believes Russia is winning. On the other hand, Ukrainian operations help demonstrate Ukraine's usefulness to its foreign backers. Even more than having to justify the financial cost of U.S. aid, over $128 billion in total, Ukraine has to compete for scarce physical resources with other theaters of war. (Late last month, the U.S. military decided to move anti-drone proximity fuzes from Ukraine to American forces in the Middle East.) And Trump has made no secret of his belief that Ukraine is a freeloader that doesn't "have the cards." After the drone attack, Ukrainian spokespeople bragged that they do, in fact, hold "the cards." The Trump administration was reportedly very impressed by the "badass" Ukrainian attack. As one White House adviser told Axios, "you've got a chihuahua inflicting some real damage on a much bigger dog." Feats of reckless defiance might prove more effective than the half-baked scheme to market Ukraine's non-existent mineral wealth to Trump. Many political figures have misread Trump as someone who enjoys flattery. But he does not necessarily respect those who grovel before him, whether it's domestic politicians or allied heads of state, and he does enjoy winning over adversaries. Congress is also getting ready to impose new economic sanctions on Russia, something that Trump has threatened to do over the past few months. The Wall Street Journal reports that the White House is fighting to "water down" the legislation, but the dispute seems to be more about keeping the president's options open to lifting sanctions than the strength of the pressure. Unlike in the Middle East, where U.S. enemies are relatively weak and American partners are extremely reliant on U.S. support, the United States does not have an easy "off" switch for the Russian-Ukraine war. Europe provides Ukraine with slightly more aid than the United States. Although U.S. aid to Ukraine has been massive—and irreplaceable in the areas of air defense and intelligence—Ukraine can fight on for quite a while with European support and its own domestic capabilities. "Both sides are suffering before you pull them apart, before they're able to be pulled apart," Trump told reporters at the White House on Tuesday. "You see in hockey, you see it in sports. The referees let them go for a couple of seconds, let them go for a little while before you pull them apart." That's a lot of suffering in the meantime. A recent estimate put overall casualties of the war—which includes both wounded and killed—at 1.2 million troops since 2022. And the United Nations has recorded 45,000 civilian casualties in Ukraine throughout the war. Each of those numbers represents a family torn apart forever. However depressing the situation sounds, the fact that neither side has a clear path to victory means that they will both have to come back to the negotiating table. It's in America's interest for this war to end as quickly as possible, and as other conflicts show, the U.S. can do a lot of good as a distant but powerful mediator. The post The Latest Escalation Between Russia and Ukraine Isn't Changing the Course of the War appeared first on

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store