DALLAS (AP) — After three terms in the U.S. House and two unsuccessful campaigns for the U.S. Senate, Colin Allred said he’s heard plenty about voters’ suspicions that politicians are just trying to make a buck in Washington.
“‘What about the stock trading in Congress? What about people getting rich in Congress?’” Allred said they ask him regularly. “And I have to say to them, you’re absolutely right about that, too. We need to be better.”
He’s challenging Rep. Julie Johnson in the Democratic runoff for a Dallas-area House seat on Tuesday, and he’s one of several candidates trying to harness populist anger over congressional stock trading. Allred has denounced Johnson for trades involving companies like Palantir, a data analytics firm with ties to President Donald Trump’s administration.
Johnson said her trades were handled by a financial manager, and she accused Allred of being “only out for himself.” She pointed to financial disclosures that showed Allred’s wealth nearly doubling during his own time in Congress, although Allred said his assets were in a blind trust and the money came from his wife’s income as a partner at a law firm.
“To be clear, the sum total I made on that trade was only $90,” Johnson said of her Palantir stock. “My opponent is trying to make it seem like it was hundreds or thousands.”
The bitter campaign is emblematic of broader debates within the Democratic Party over the role of money in politics. Long a refrain of strident progressives and good-government reformers, accusations that political rivals are self-dealing or bought by special interests have become a mainstay of Democratic primaries. The heightened criticism of lawmakers’ personal wealth comes as the party looks to sharpen its anti-corruption message against Trump and to develop a platform for overhauling Washington if Democrats take power in the midterms.
Some are tracking congressional stock trading
Trump campaigned on a promise to “drain the swamp,” capitalizing on Americans’ disdain for the Washington establishment. Now that his family is profiting while he’s back in the White House, Democrats are eager to regain the upper hand on an issue that could prove potent with voters.
“The difficulty is that right now, no party has the mantle on anti-corruption,” said Daniel Lobo-Lewis, a political consultant in Washington. “Many voters outside of the beltway see both parties as corrupt, because they see all politicians as bought by the donors or by their own self-interest.”
Lobo-Lewis and Nico Agosta founded the Political Integrity Project last year to track stock trading and corporate donations involving members of Congress.
The organization asks candidates to sign an “integrity pledge” to refrain from trading stocks or accepting corporate donations while in Congress and vow not to work as a lobbyist after they leave office. So far, about 90 challengers and seven sitting lawmakers have taken the pledge.
“If we want to, in any way, start rebuilding trust in our political institutions, it starts with no-brainer changes like this that have an approval rating above and beyond any other issue you could imagine,” Lobo-Lewis said.
Congress has yet to enact a stock trading ban for its members, though insider trading is already illegal for members just like it is for anyone else. There are multiple proposals on Capitol Hill, but none have gained traction.
A bipartisan bill to ban congressional stock trading stalled this year despite receiving Trump’s blessing during his State of the Union. And Democrats remain divided over the number of alleged loopholes in their competing proposals.
Anti-corruption messages spread in Democratic primaries
A crowded race in a Democratic-leaning Utah congressional seat has featured attacks over candidates’ personal wealth. State Sen. Nate Blouin criticized his main rival, former Rep. Ben McAdams, for having equity in a Utah data center firm, and excoriated others in the race for past investments and jobs.
McAdams said the equity of several thousand dollars was payment for a past contract completed by his government consulting firm while he was a private citizen. His campaign defended the data center project by saying it would use no water and run on clean energy.
A spokesperson for McAdams also claimed Blouin “is currently hiding his corporate donations” by removing them from campaign disclosure reports, which McAdams’ campaign claims “is not only deceitful, it breaks campaign finance law.”
In an interview, Blouin rejected the claim that he broke the law, and said that he removed the donations because he returned the money to each donor.
“It was actually quite uncomfortable to return some of those,” said Blouin, because some of the firms included local firms and clean energy companies. “But there is a perception that campaign contributions from lobbyists and companies influence votes, and I think there is some truth to that.”
In a New York City congressional district that includes both Wall Street and the Democratic Socialists of America’s headquarters, the city’s former comptroller, Brad Lander, has accused Rep. Dan Goldman of trying to buy another term by using his own wealth to match campaign contributions. Goldman, an heir to the Levi Strauss family fortune, says he entered all of his assets into a blind trust after taking office in 2023.
A spokesperson for Goldman said Lander is “running a deceitful campaign based on absurd lies that Dan is beholden to special interests” and that Goldman has raised more campaign funds than Lander “without taking a dime of corporate PAC money.” Goldman has spent his own money on the race, the spokesperson said: “To ensure that the NY-10 voters can be sure that he is beholden only to them and his principles.”
Lander said Goldman’s spending is “not illegal, but it is certainly anti-democratic when a quarter-billionaire like Dan Goldman not only dumps millions of his own inherited wealth into his elections but also solicits money from the same forces who are rigging the economy and worsening the affordability crisis.”
More candidates are fighting over stocks in California
Even representatives who support a ban on congressional stock trading are feeling the heat.
Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman of California is facing multiple primary challengers who have criticized the congressman for holding stocks while serving in Congress. Sherman does not trade individual stocks and supports a ban on stock trading.
“I only own three individual stocks, which I inherited from my mother when she passed away, which were originally acquired by my grandmother,” Sherman said. “I have never sold them because I made a promise to my constituents that I would not buy and sell individual stocks.”
One of Sherman’s primary challengers is Jake Levine, a former climate adviser to President Joe Biden, who signed the pledge from the Political Integrity Project. But Sherman said Levine “refuses to disclose key elements of his $18 million stock portfolio, and actively bought and sold stocks while serving on the National Security Council.” Levine has said he cannot disclose the portfolio because it is managed by his family and he has no oversight.
In the race to succeed former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California State Sen. Scott Wiener has critiqued his progressive opponent, Saikat Chakrabarti, over his personal wealth. Chakrabarti is a former software engineer who earned millions as an early employee at the tech firm Stripe. He later served as the first chief of staff to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.
Wiener said that Chakrabarti “has enormous investments” and “is trying to buy this seat” while “spreading bogus conspiracy theories” with his own wealth. He criticized Chakrabarti for not disclosing the last decade of his stock trades.
“If you’re making a ban on stock trades a central part of your campaign — as Saikat is doing, running around saying that everyone under the sun is corrupt — how about you tell the voters about your own stock trading history,” Wiener said.
Chakrabarti retorted that his wealth as a private citizen is not relevant to his future time in office and that he would place all of his assets into a blind trust should he be elected. He critiqued Wiener for being supported by super PACs funded by the AI firm Anthropic and other major corporations.
“This is all part of a larger problem, which is just the whole idea of corruption in our politics,” Chakrabarti said. “If you’re in Congress, you sit on committees that oversee a lot of these industries, and it’s unethical to be using that insider information, that knowledge to make stock trades. But that doesn’t apply to a private citizen.”
