Referred to the Committee on Ethics, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Spe…
This resolution amends House Rule XXIII to bar Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, officers, and employees of the House from entering agreements, contracts, swaps, or transactions that pay out based on the occurrence or nonoccurrence of a specific event tied to an “excluded commodity” as defined in 7 U.S.C. 1a.
The rule exempts ordinary insurance where the insured holds a lawful insurable interest.
The resolution also expresses the Sense of the House that the executive and judicial branches should adopt similar restrictions.
As a narrow House-rule amendment it has a reasonable chance of adoption in the House; it does not require statutory enactment, but adoption depends on House priorities and any intra-Chamber objections.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and directly amends House rules to prohibit covered persons from entering into certain event-contingent transactions, relying on an existing statutory term and providing a narrow exemption for insurance. It is explicit about what is disallowed but provides little procedural or enforcement detail.
Liberals stress anti‑corruption and trust protections
Liberals stress anti‑corruption and trust protections
Likely supportive as an anti‑corruption and conflict‑of‑interest measure that reduces incentives to trade on official action.
Views the bright‑line prohibition as protecting democratic norms and public trust in representatives.
Probably cautiously supportive but concerned about drafting clarity and unintended consequences.
Sees value in preventing abuse, but wants precise definitions, narrow scope, and clear enforcement mechanisms.
Wary or somewhat opposed: supports preventing corruption but worries about overreach, imprecise drafting, and curtailing lawful financial activity.
Prefers narrower, targeted rules or transparency instead of broad bans.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
As a narrow House-rule amendment it has a reasonable chance of adoption in the House; it does not require statutory enactment, but adoption depends on House priorities and any intra-Chamber objections.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals stress anti‑corruption and trust protections
As a narrow House-rule amendment it has a reasonable chance of adoption in the House; it does not require statutory enactment, but adoption…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and directly amends House rules to prohibit covered persons from entering into certain event-contingent transactions, relying on an existing statutory term an…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.