WASHINGTON — All four of Iowa’s Republican congressmen voted Wednesday, July 22, 2026, to prohibit members of Congress and their immediate families from purchasing individual stocks, delivering unanimous Iowa support for a long-awaited crackdown on a practice widely viewed as a glaring conflict of interest.
Republican Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Ashley Hinson, Zach Nunn and Randy Feenstra all voted for H.R. 7008, the Stop Insider Trading Act.
The measure passed the House 232-198, with all 218 Republicans, 13 Democrats and one independent voting yes, according to the official House roll call.
Nunn, who represents Iowa’s 3rd Congressional District, helped introduce the legislation and has pushed restrictions on congressional stock trading since shortly after taking office.
“When people watch politicians come to Washington and serve their stock portfolios instead of the public, they stop believing the system is fair,” Nunn said in an update to Iowans. “That mistrust is the root behind so much of what feels broken.”
Nunn said the House vote represented major progress after years of congressional leaders from both parties refusing to confront the issue.
“This is a big step forward, but the job isn’t finished until this ban is signed into law,” Nunn said. “Iowa didn’t send me here to talk about cleaning up Congress. You sent me here to get it done.”
Nunn says he sold his individual stock holdings after entering Congress and has not bought or traded individual stocks while serving in Washington.
What the House bill would do
The Stop Insider Trading Act would prohibit members of Congress, their spouses and dependent children from purchasing securities issued by publicly traded companies.
Lawmakers and their families could retain stocks they already own and could still sell them. However, they would have to publicly disclose an intended sale between seven and 14 days before completing it.
Violators would face a penalty of $2,000 or 10% of the investment’s value, whichever is greater. They would also be required to surrender profits generated by a prohibited transaction.
Congressional office funds and campaign money could not be used to pay the penalties.
Diversified investments, including widely held mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, would remain permissible.
The legislation would impose considerably stronger penalties than the current $200 fee for failing to comply with the 2012 STOCK Act’s financial-disclosure deadlines.
That $200 amount is sometimes mistakenly described as the punishment for insider trading. Insider trading itself is illegal and may bring substantial civil and criminal penalties. The $200 fee applies when lawmakers fail to report covered transactions on time—a requirement critics say has been poorly enforced.
Bill falls short of complete divestment
Although supporters describe the legislation as a stock-trading ban, it would not force lawmakers to sell individual stocks they already own.
Members could continue holding shares in companies directly affected by legislation, federal spending, investigations and regulatory decisions. Critics say those existing investments would preserve some of the very conflicts the legislation is supposed to eliminate.
Nunn previously supported a more sweeping proposal.
In September 2025, Nunn helped introduce the bipartisan Restore Trust in Congress Act. That legislation would have prohibited lawmakers and their immediate families from owning or trading individual stocks, securities, commodities and futures.
Current members would have been required to divest covered investments within 180 days.
Nunn also signed a discharge petition in December 2025 to force House leaders to allow a vote after more than a decade of inaction.
Hinson, Miller-Meeks and Feenstra join Nunn
Hinson, who represents Northern Iowa in the 2nd Congressional District, said the legislation would help strengthen Americans’ confidence in the federal government.
Miller-Meeks said she has long supported prohibiting congressional stock trading because lawmakers have access to information unavailable to ordinary investors.
Feenstra also voted yes, completing a unanimous vote from Iowa’s all-Republican House delegation.
The Iowa votes came as congressional trading continued to draw intense scrutiny.
An analysis cited by Reuters found that members of Congress executed 13,324 trades valued at approximately $635.6 million during 2025. That figure represents the total value of the transactions, not lawmakers’ profits.
Nunn has separately cited figures showing congressional investors producing more than $200 million in market gains during 2024. Congressional portfolios were heavily invested in technology, financial services and energy—industries regularly affected by legislation and federal regulation.
An overwhelming 86% of Americans supported prohibiting members of Congress from trading individual stocks in a University of Maryland public-consultation survey. Support included 87% of Republicans, 88% of Democrats and 81% of independents.
Voter ID language complicates Senate path
The stock-trading legislation was combined with a requirement that voters present photo identification when casting ballots in federal elections.
Republicans say both measures would restore public confidence in government and elections. Democrats accused Republicans of attaching a “poison pill” to an otherwise bipartisan ethics proposal.
Only 13 House Democrats ultimately supported the combined package.
The voter ID provision creates a serious obstacle in the Senate, where most legislation requires 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. Republicans hold 53 seats, meaning at least seven Democrats would likely be needed even if every Republican supported the bill.
The Senate already has several competing stock-trading proposals.
Republican Sens. Pete Ricketts of Nebraska and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana introduced a Senate version of the Stop Insider Trading Act in March. Its stock provisions closely resemble the House measure.
Republican Sen. Ashley Moody of Florida and Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York introduced a tougher bipartisan bill that would require lawmakers and their families to divest individual stocks.
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee approved another sweeping proposal, the HONEST Act, in July 2025. It would eventually require members of Congress, the president, vice president and their families to divest covered investments.
Despite advancing through committee, that bill has never received a final Senate vote.
Iowa Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst could now help decide whether the House action advances or becomes another popular congressional ethics proposal quietly buried in the Senate.
Nunn said he intends to keep applying pressure.
“I’ll keep fighting to move this bill through the Senate and onto the president’s desk,” he said.