New 'NO STOCK' Resolution: Congress Must Sell All Individual Stocks Within 180 Days

This resolution, officially dubbed the NO STOCK Resolution, is pretty straightforward: it aims to stop members of Congress and certain high-level officials from trading or owning individual stocks while they are in office. The core idea is to eliminate the appearance—and the reality—of conflicts of interest that arise when lawmakers are making policy decisions that can directly affect their personal portfolios.

The New Rule: Diversify or Divest

If you’re a covered official under this resolution, you can no longer buy, sell, or hold individual stocks, bonds, futures, or options. Think of it like this: if you’re writing the rules for the highway, you shouldn't personally own shares in the concrete company that wins the contract. The resolution requires officials who currently own these assets to get rid of them within 180 days of the law taking effect. This isn't a suggestion; it’s a mandate to sell off individual company stock.

Instead of picking winners and losers, officials must move their money into diversified investment vehicles, such as mutual funds or broad exchange-traded funds (ETFs). The text emphasizes that these funds cannot focus on a single company or sector that might create a conflict. This is the policy equivalent of putting your investments on autopilot—you still invest, but you lose the ability to make targeted, potentially self-serving trades. The only major exception is for those who already use a qualified blind trust, provided that trust meets strict new compliance rules going forward.

Why This Matters to You

Why should the average person—the software developer, the electrician, the small business owner—care about how politicians invest? Because when lawmakers are focused on their stock returns, they might not be focused on the public good. This resolution attempts to clean up the process by demanding impartiality. It ensures that when Congress debates, say, a massive infrastructure bill or new regulations for the tech sector, the outcome isn't secretly influenced by an official’s personal stake in a handful of companies.

For example, if a Representative owns a large block of stock in a pharmaceutical company, they might be tempted to vote against a bill that caps drug prices, even if that bill benefits millions of constituents struggling with healthcare costs. The NO STOCK Resolution removes that temptation by removing the asset itself. It’s a move intended to increase public trust, which, frankly, is running pretty low these days.

The Teeth: Penalties Are Serious

This resolution doesn't rely on the honor system. The penalties for violating these new rules are substantial and designed to sting. If a covered official fails to sell their individual stocks within the 180-day deadline, or if they are caught trading illegally, they face a fine equal to their entire annual salary. On top of that, knowingly violating the rules can incur additional civil penalties of up to $100,000 per violation. This is a serious deterrent, making it clear that compliance is mandatory, not optional.

One thing to watch is the 180-day divestment window. While the goal is ethical reform, forcing a large number of officials to sell potentially large amounts of stock in a short period could, in some cases, force them to sell at a loss or create a brief flurry of trading activity as they restructure their finances. Also, the rule about ensuring new diversified funds “can’t invest in individual stocks that might create a conflict of interest” is a bit vague and will need clear regulatory definitions to prevent officials from simply moving money into slightly less obvious, but still conflicted, funds.