Once again, members of the US Congress have managed to outpace Wall Street. According to a recent report from Unusual Whales, a financial watchdog group, dozens of lawmakers from both parties beat the S&P 500 last year—some by a wide margin. While the benchmark index posted an impressive 25% gain last year, the average Democratic lawmaker saw returns of 31%, while Republicans weren’t far behind with 26% gains. That’s not just impressive, but intriguing.
The report, which analyzes public filings mandated under the STOCK Act, tracked trades disclosed between the last day of 2023 and the final date of 2024. Though it only covers active, trackable positions and not the lawmakers’ full financial holdings, the data still paints a revealing picture: elected officials continue to achieve impressive success in markets they also help shape and define.
Some lawmakers show consistent gains while maintaining relatively passive portfolios. In this sense, the study highlight cases as the representative David Rouzer, a Republican from North Carolina, that topped the performance chart with a staggering 104.1% return last year. Interestingly, Rouzer didn’t achieve that through day trade: he mostly held on to ETFs loaded with tech giants like Nvidia, which soared over the past year.
But others appear to make frequent trades around key policy decisions, raising red flags. Representative Dan Crenshaw, for instance. In October 2022, he bought $15,000 in Wynn Resorts stock—just days before Houston billionaire Tilman Fertitta quietly acquired a 6.1% stake in the company. Fertitta’s purchase wasn’t disclosed until five days later, after which Wynn shares jumped 10% and continued to climb. Crenshaw, who still holds the position, has seen the stock rise over 56% since his entry.
This scenario highlights a controversial constant in US politics: both Democrats and Republicans appear united in their love for stock trading. That unity stands in sharp contrast to the political antagonism that typically defines Congress. While they clash over everything from immigration to infrastructure, when it comes to equities, lawmakers on both sides seem to play the same game—with enviable results to the average citizen.
Critics argue this dynamic creates an unacceptable conflict of interest. After all, lawmakers regularly sit in closed-door meetings, access privileged data, and shape regulations that can move entire industries. It’s no wonder, then, that the public overwhelmingly supports banning stock trades by elected officials. Recent polling shows that Americans (regardless of political leanings) view congressional trading as an abuse of trust.
The 2012 STOCK Act was supposed to rein in this behavior by requiring public disclosure of trades from politicians. But the law’s teeth are dull. The fine for filing late or incorrectly is a mere $200, not even a fraction of the average gains in those portfolios. It’s also worth noting that enforcement is inconsistent, and the disclosures are often filed months after the trades.
Despite the growing scrutiny, legislative attempts to ban congressional trading have repeatedly stalled. The White House has seen multiple proposals, but none have made it through. Some lawmakers argue that a full ban could dissuade talented people from running for office, while others quietly benefit from the current system. Meanwhile, watchdog groups continue to shine light on the data, hoping public pressure will tip the scales.
