From the outset of her congressional bid, Scranton’s Democratic mayor Paige Cognetti has made the extensive stock trading of Republican incumbent Rob Bresnahan Jr. of Pennsylvania a core part of her voter appeal.
“He’s already executed about 600 trades this year,” Cognetti said in her September campaign launch video. “He dumped Chinese shares ahead of a tariff announcement, snapped up missile‑related stocks before a conflict, bought airline shares before a major contract, and, when overseeing crypto legislation, purchased crypto assets before a vote.”
The issue resonates especially strongly in this district. Democratic ads accuse Bresnahan of profiting from a data‑center project by trading related stocks, and recent polling gives Cognetti a slight edge. Yet she is far from the only candidate using congressional stock trading as a powerful attack line in this midterm cycle.
Bresnahan, a wealthy former CEO of an electrical‑contracting firm, mirrors many legislators who actively trade stocks; he says he delegates all decisions to a financial advisor and claims he has no prior knowledge of when or what trades occur.
The Bresnahan campaign dismissed Cognetti’s claims as false, asserting that he has undertaken legitimate measures to prohibit stock trading by members of Congress.
Nevertheless, amid widespread economic strain and growing voter belief that the system is rigged, even the appearance of lawmakers profiting from their office has turned into a politically toxic issue.
About one‑quarter of current lawmakers have traded individual stocks this session, with some moving millions of dollars in shares. From January 2025 onward, members and their families have collectively traded between $160 million and $664 million in individual stocks, per a New York Times analysis of required financial disclosures compiled by analytics firm 2iQ Research.
Voters across parties overwhelmingly distrust congressional stock trading and favor a ban; this backlash has spurred bipartisan attempts—so far unsuccessful—to pass legislation prohibiting the practice.
In the interim, both parties are exploiting the issue in their battle for congressional control.
Democrats and Republicans are turning incumbents’ stock trades into campaign weapons, especially when they can suggest a conflict of interest, and featuring them prominently in ads and attacks in the nation’s most competitive districts—a tactic aimed at framing opponents as corrupt and detached from ordinary Americans’ financial concerns.
In New Jersey’s competitive 7th District, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is focusing on Rep. Thomas H. Kean Jr., who continued trading stocks while absent for over 100 votes during a leave he said was for depression treatment. Kean’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
In Virginia, Democrats are challenging Rep. Rob Wittman for trading over $2.5 million in stocks between 2015 and 2023 while in office, noting purchases of defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin and Honeywell while he served on the Armed Services Committee.
A caption accompanying a campaign video posted by Wittman’s opponent, prosecutor Shannon Taylor, reads: “Politicians trade stocks in the sectors they oversee, then shield those interests instead of the public. Let’s end congressional stock trading for good.”
(An outside group backing Wittman apparently sees merit in this attack: this week it launched an ad spotlighting his vote for a diluted stock‑trading bill that cleared the House in July, claiming he moved to end the “greed and corruption” of “fat‑cat” legislators.) Wittman’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
Republicans have also found the issue resonates with their base.
In New York’s competitive 3rd District on Long Island, Republican former state assemblyman Michael J. LiPetri Jr. repeatedly accuses Democratic incumbent Tom Suozzi of pocketing millions from congressional stock trades.
Suozzi executed nearly 600 trades across 161 firms worth up to $24 million during his 2017‑2023 congressional tenure, per public filings. In 2021 an ethics probe examined his failure to report roughly 300 trades within the mandated 45‑day period; the House Ethics Committee ultimately cleared him, determining the lapse was inadvertent, not intentional.
A Suozzi spokesperson said his broker made all purchase decisions without his direct involvement, noting that he has ceased buying stocks since his return to Congress in 2024, though he has sold some holdings.
In Nevada, Trump‑endorsed Republican Marty O’Donnell, challenging Democratic Rep. Susie Lee, frequently points to her stock trades, alleging she leverages her office for privileged profit, and vows, “Unlike Susie, I will not trade stocks while representing Nevada in Congress.”
Lee, formerly married to the CEO of Full House Resorts—a casino operator—has divested up to $2.8 million in stock since her 2024 divorce.
A Lee spokesperson explained that pre‑divorce trades were handled by a money manager or her former husband; after the divorce, Lee obtained stocks as part of the settlement and pledged to sell them, reinvesting the proceeds in permissible vehicles such as ETFs and mutual funds.
In a case where a former legislator seeks to reclaim her old seat, the incumbent is adopting the attack strategy usually used by challengers.
Virginia Republican Rep. Jen Kiggans repeatedly claims her Democratic challenger, former Rep. Elaine Luria, engaged in illegal insider stock trading during her four‑year congressional stint; Kiggans’s team offered no evidence of wrongdoing when questioned.
Rather, the campaign stressed Luria’s earlier opposition to a congressional stock‑trading ban (she now backs one) and noted her holding of $5 million to $25 million in NVIDIA shares at the time she voted for the 2022 $280 billion industrial‑policy law that funneled tens of billions into semiconductor research and manufacturing.
A Luria spokesperson labeled Kiggans’s claims “false,” asserting the legislation did not boost her stock holdings, and said, “Elaine backs banning congressional stock trading and stopping politicians from exploiting public office for private gain.”
The campaign focus arrives as House Republicans have advanced a bill that places limited restrictions on legislators’ stock trading, falling short of the stricter ban favored by a bipartisan group.
New York Democrat Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, vowed to bring the bipartisan alternative to the floor should Democrats regain House control next year.
Donald K. Sherman, CEO of the Democratic‑aligned watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, remarked that bipartisan criticism of stock trading is unsurprising given the issue’s heightened prominence relative to other governance concerns.
“You don’t need to be an ethics expert to grasp it,” Sherman said. “A single lawmaker can sway a stock’s price—through pointed questions at a hearing, oversight work, or the confirmation of a cabinet secretary.”
Former New Jersey Rep. Tom Malinowski, whose career faltered after he failed to disclose dozens of stock trades, argued that a ban on congressional trading would hardly tackle the deeper problems undermining public faith in leaders.
“Congressional stock trading ought to be prohibited,” Malinowski said in an interview, “but it’s a weak substitute for tackling Washington’s true corruption drivers—unlimited dark money and Trump’s open sale of the presidency. Those are far larger issues, yet candidates have latched onto stock trading as a catch‑all excuse for graft.”
Reporting was contributed by Olivia Diaz and Andrea Fuller.
